OX F O R D C L A S S I C A L M O N O G R A P H S

Published under the supervision of a Committee of the Faculty of Classics

in the University of Oxford
The aim of the Oxford Classical Monograph series (which replaces the Oxford
Classical and Philosophical Monographs) is to publish books based on
the best theses on Greek and Latin literature, ancient history, and ancient
philosophy examined by the Faculty Board of Classics.
Imperial Mines and
Quarries in the
Roman World
Organizational Aspects 27 bc ad 235

ALFRED MICHAEL HIRT

1
 3
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford ox2 6dp
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the Universitys objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide in
Oxford New York
Auckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong Karachi
Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi
New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto
With oYces in
Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece
Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore
South Korea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam
Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press
in the UK and in certain other countries
Published in the United States
by Oxford University Press Inc., New York
# Alfred Michael Hirt 2010
The moral rights of the author have been asserted
Database right Oxford University Press (maker)
First published 2010
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,
without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press,
or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate
reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction
outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department,
Oxford University Press, at the address above
You must not circulate this book in any other binding or cover
and you must impose the same condition on any acquirer
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Library of Congress Control Number: 2009938800
Typeset by SPI Publisher Services, Pondicherry, India
Printed in Great Britain
on acid-free paper by
CPI Antony Rowe, Chippenham, Wiltshire

ISBN 9780199572878

1 3 5 7 9 10 8 6 4 2
Fur Mueter u Vater, Gotte u Gotti, fur e Michael u dr Heinz
This page intentionally left blank
 Preface

Roman mines and quarries have emerged in recent years as a topic of study by
scholars interested in the Roman economy. Archaeologists in particular have
directed their attention to specific mining sites like Las Medulas, Ro sia
Montana, and Dolaucothi, or offered detailed analysis of quarrying sites
such as Gebel Dokhan, Gebel Fatirah, or Chemtou. These archaeological
studies set aside, numerous finds of Latin and Greek inscriptions on stone
monuments, quarried items, ingots, or bronze tablets, as well as writing
tablets, ostraca, and papyri provide additional insights but have been pub-
lished disparately. The main aim of this study is to unite the various snippets
of information with respect to their archaeological and historical context in
order to gain an overview of various aspects of the internal organization of
mining and quarrying ventures under imperial control and their place within
the administrative framework of the Roman empire.
An initial version of this study was submitted as a DPhil thesis at Oxford
University in 2004. The thesis as a whole was reworked in the following years
in order to include additional material and completed in late 2007. The study
owes much to numerous discussions with Michael A. Speidel who freely
shared his profound insights into the workings of the Roman empire; and
to Heinz E. Herzig who at the University of Berne created the ideal academic
environment and supported this endeavour from the beginning. At Oxford,
my supervisor Andrew Wilson pointed the reluctant ancient historian to-
wards the relevancy of the archaeological data and offered superb advice on
many of its aspects. Many more at Oxford contributed (knowingly or not) to
the genesis of this study. Alan Bowman and David Mattingly provided helpful
comments on the thesis and encouraged publication of the work, Alan taking
on the time-consuming task of correcting a draft version. Further thanks must
go to J. J. Coulton and Nicholas Purcell, Bill Leadbetter, Adam Bulow-
Jacobsen, Michael Crawford, Peter Herz, Stefanie Martin-Kilcher, for advice
and bits and pieces of helpful information. Caillan Davenport, Caroline
Brehaut, Charlotte Walden, Lesley Cousins, and, last but not least, Oskar
Kaelin, read the texts at different stages and improved it by eradicating various
remnants of my Helvetic syntax. Galina Rusak and Colin Hughes helped me
with the index and Kathleen Fearn and Abigail Coulson at OUP turned the
submitted text into the typescript presented here. Any remaining mistakes are
of course mine. Adam Bulow-Jacobsens Mons Claudianus Ostraca graeca et
latina IV (2009) was published too late to be included in this survey.
viii Preface

My stay at Oxford was made possible by generous grants by the Swiss

National Fund, the Janggen-Poehn Stiftung in St Gallen, Switzerland, the
Karman-Stiftung of the University of Berne, Switzerland.
Finally, I would wish to thank my parents, the extended Hirt-Bolliger clan,
and my friends who endured my gravamina and offered their encouragement
and support.
A.M.H.
 Contents

List of Illustrations xi
List of Abbreviations xii

1. Introduction 1
2. Geological Constraints and Organizational Implications 10
2.1 Imperial Quarries 10
2.2 Imperial Mines 32
2.3 Summary 46
3. Mining and Quarrying Districts 48
3.1 Metallum and territoria metallorum 48
3.2 Mining and Quarrying Districts 51
3.3 The Legal Nature of metalla and territoria metallorum 82
3.4 Summary 106
4. Imperial Officials and Extractive Operations 107
4.1 Procurators 107
4.2 Subaltern Officials 149
4.3 Headquarters of Imperial Extractive Operations 159
4.4 Summary 165
5. The Roman Army and Imperial Extractive Operations 168
5.1 The Roman Army and Imperial Quarries 168
5.2 The Roman Army and Imperial Mines 185
5.3 The Roman Army and Extractive Operations 196
6. Imperial Officials and the Allocation of Responsibilities 202
6.1 Procurators 202
6.2 Subaltern Staff 251
6.3 The Function of Procurators and Imperial Personnel 258
7. Private Partners to Imperial Operations: Occupatores/Coloni
and Conductores 261
7.1 Mines, occupatores/coloni and conductores 261
7.2 Quarry Labels and Quarrying Contractors 290
x Contents

8. The Emperor and Imperial Extractive Operations 332

8.1 Metalla and Imperial Interventions 332
8.2 Palatine Bureaux and Extractive Operations 342
9. Imperial Mining and Quarrying Administration: A Conclusion 357

Appendix 370
Bibliography 446
Index of Sources 484
General Index 520
 List of Illustrations

1. Principal mines and quarries in the Roman empire 11

2. Imperial quarries in the Eastern Egyptian Desert (after Maxfield
& Peacock 2001b: fig. 1.2) 12
3. Mons Claudianus, overall map (after Peacock & Maxfield
1997: fig. 1.2) 13
4. Mons Claudianus, fort (after Peacock & Maxfield 1997: fig. 2.14) 14
5. Mons Claudianus, hydreuma (after Peacock & Maxfield
1997: fig. 3.3) 15
6. Mons Porphyrites, overall map (after Maxfield & Peacock
2001a: fig. 1.2) 17
7. Mons Porphyrites, central complex (after Maxfield & Peacock
2001a: figs. 2.1, 2.4, 2.7) 18
8. Mons Porphyrites, fort and temple of Isis (after Maxfield & Peacock
2001a: figs. 2.4, 2.7) 19
9. Simitthus, overall map (after Mackensen 2000: Abb.1) 26
10. Dokimeion/Bacakale, overall map (after Roder 1971: Abb.10) 28
11. Dolaucothi, overall map (after Burnham & Burnham 2004: fig. 1.2) 37
12. Cabezas de los Pastos, overall map (after Domergue 1990: fig. 18) 40
13. Ro sia Montana, overall map (after Damian 2003: fig. 12 and maps;
Wollmann 1996: plate lxxxviii) 42
14. Mines in Noricum 54
15. Mines in Dalmatia, Pannonia, and Moesia Superior 61
16. Mines in Moesia Superior 62
17. Mines in Dalmatia 63
18. Mines in Dacia 75
19. Mines in northwestern Spain 77
20. Mines in Baetica and Lusitania 78
21. Mines in Sardinia 79
22. Mines in Britain (after Jones & Mattingly 1990: map 6.2) 80
23. Rome (after Maischberger 1997: Abb. 17) 347
 List of Abbreviations

AE Annee Epigraphique.
AIJ V. Hoffiller and B. Saria, Antike Inschriften aus Jugoslawien, 1.
Noricum und Pannonia Superior, Zagreb 1938.
CBFIR E. Schallmayer et al (eds.), Corpus der griechischen und lateinischen
Beneficiarier-Inschriften des Romischen Reiches, Stuttgart 1990.
CIG Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum, Berlin 182877.
CIL Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum.
CILA Corpus de Inscripciones Latinas de Andaluca, Sevilla.
Corinth VIII/III J. H. Kent, The Inscriptions 19261950 (Corinth 8/3), Princeton
1966.
EAstorga T. Mananes Perez, Epigrafia y numismatica de Astorga romana y su
entorno (Acta Salmanticensia. Filosofia y Letras 134), Salamance
1982.
Eph. ep. Ephemeris epigraphica. Corpus inscriptionum Latinarum supple-
mentum, Berlin 1, 18729, 190313.
FIRA Fontes iuris Romani anteiustiniani, Florentiae 19403.
HEp Hispania Epigraphica
I. Akoris E. Bernand, Les Inscriptions Grecques et Latines dAkoris, Cairo
1988.
IDR Inscriptiones Dacicae Romanae, Bucarest.
IG Inscriptiones Graecae, Berlin.
IGBulg G. Mihailov, Inscriptiones Graecae in Bulgaria repertae, Sofia
195897.
IGLS Inscriptions Grecques et Latines de la Syrie, Beyrouth & Paris.
IGRR R. Cagnat et al., Inscriptiones Graecae ad Res Romanas pertinentes,
Paris 190627.
IGUR L. Moretti, Inscriptiones Graecae Urbis Romae, Roma 196890.
IK Inschriften griechischer Stadte aus Kleinasien, Bonn.
I. Ko.Ko. A. Bernand, De Koptos a Kosseir, Leyden 1972.
ILAfr R. Cagnat, A. Merlin, and L. Chatelain, Inscriptions Latines
dAfrique (Tripolitaine, Tunisie et Maroc), Paris 1923.
ILA Vell. B. Remy, Vellaves (Inscriptions latines dAquitaine 3), Bordeaux
1995.
 List of Abbreviations xiii

ILER J. Vives, Inscripciones latinas de la Espana romana: antaloga de

6 800 textos, Barcelona 19712.
ILJug Inscriptiones Latinae quae in Iugoslavia inter annos MCMII et
MCMLXX repertae et editae sunt, Ljubliana.
ILLPRON Inscriptionum lapidariarum Latinarum provinciae Noriciusque ad
annum MCMLXXXIV repertarum indices, Berlin.
ILS H. Dessau, Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae, Berlin 18921916.
ILTun A. Merlin, Inscriptions latines de la Tunisie, Paris 1944.
I. Memnon A. Bernand and E. Bernand, Les inscriptions grecques et latines du
Colosse de Memnon, Cairo 1960.
I. Metr. E. Bernand, Inscriptions Metriques de lEgypte grecoromaine.
Recherches sur la poesie epigrammatique des Grecs en Egypte, Paris
1969.
IMS Inscriptions de la Mesie Superieure, Beograd.
Insc.It. Inscriptiones Italiae.
Inscr. Aqu. J. B. Brusin, Inscriptiones Aquileiae, Udine 19913.
I. Pan A. Bernand, Pan du Desert, Leyden 1977.
I. Portes A. Bernand, Les portes du desert. Recueil des inscriptions grecques
dAntinooupolis, Tentyris, Koptos, Apollonopolis Parva et Apollono-
polis Magna, Paris 1984.
IRC I G. Fabre et al., Barcelone (Inscriptions romaines de Catalogne 1),
Paris & Bordeaux 1984.
IRLeon F. Diego Santos, Inscripciones romanas de la provincia de Leon,
Leon 1986.
IRPac J. dEncarnacao, Inscricoes romanas do Conventus Pacensis:
subsidios para o estudo da romanizacao, Coimbra 1984.
IRPL F. Arias Vilas, P. Le Roux, and A. Tranoy, Inscriptions Romaines de
la Province de Lugo, Paris 1979.
IRT J. M. Reynolds and J. B. Ward-Perkins, The Inscriptions of Roman
Tripolitania, Rome 1952.
IScM Inscriptiones Scythiae Minoris graecae et latinae.
I.Th.Sy. A. Bernand, De Thebes a Syene, Paris 1989.
LGPN A Lexicon of Greek Personal Names, Oxford.
LMD lex metallis dicta
LMV lex metalli Vipascensis
MAMA Monumenta Asiae Minoris Antiqua, Manchester.
O.Claud. Mons Claudianus. Ostraca Graeca et Latina, Cairo.
OGIS W. Dittenberger, Orientis graeci inscriptiones selectae, Leipzig 19035.
xiv List of Abbreviations

PIR Prosopographia Imperii Romani, Berlin.

RIB Roman Inscriptions of Britain.
SB Sammelbuch der griechischen Urkunden aus Aegypten.
SEG Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum.
Supp.It. Supplementa Italica, Roma.
Syll.3 W. Dittenberger, Sylloge inscriptionum graecarum, Leipzig
191524.
TAM Tituli Asiae Minoris, Vienna.
TIR Tabula Imperii Romani.
TLL Thesaurus Linguae Latinae, Leipzig.

For Papyri and Ostraca, cf. Checklist of Editions of Greek, Latin, Demotic and
Coptic Papyri, Ostraca and Tablets (http://scriptorium.lib.duke.edu/papyrus/texts/
clist_ostraca.html, 21 February 2009).
 1
Introduction

Modern visitors to Chemtou in the Tunisian Medjerda Valley or Las Medulas

in northwestern Spain are easily overawed by the grand scale of opencast
quarrying or mining operations. The massive impact of Roman engineering
on nature is still strikingly visible at these sites, even though much of their
original contexts has withered away. These landscape monuments to Roman
ingenuity reXect the purpose of their formation. The control over marble or
metal resources was undoubtedly of high signiWcance to Rome; the command
of marble was not merely a luxury but central to the representation of
imperial wealth and power, and uninhibited access to metal was vital for the
economic and political survival of the Roman empire. The relevance of this
study on Roman mines and quarries, however, lies not in the analysis of
stimuli for the demand for these raw materials, but in the examination of the
organizational measures Rome devised to ensure their continued extraction.
In the wider context of the administration of the Roman empire this particu-
lar focus gains in substance: the study of administrative conWgurations and
hierarchies, its control and command of human and material resources, and
the organizational procedures set in place to ensure its continued existence
may provide a partial insight into the sources of the strength and longevity of
the Roman empire. The present study, thus, strives to analyse the organiza-
tional measures devised for the extraction of metals and marble. It is
restricted to the examination of evidence from imperial mines and quarries.
These are hereby deWned as extractive operations where the presence of
imperial oYcials i.e. members of the familia Caesaris or equestrians, and/or
Roman army personnel, are documented in the epigraphic record of the
mine/quarry. In consequence, imperial mines and quarries are part of a
wider organization, the administration of the Roman empire under the
ultimate control of the Roman emperor and his Palatine bureaux. The main
epigraphic evidence for imperial mines and quarries limits this study to the
period from the Wrst to the third century ad.
Organizational aspects have not exactly been at the heart of the scholarly
discussion on Roman extractive operations. The majority of papers and studies
centre on the archaeological data and written evidence emerging from
2 Introduction

individual mines and quarries and rarely have a general conspectus in mind.
Roman mining and quarrying management was usually dealt with summarily
in extensive studies on the administration of the Roman empire, in particular
Otto Hirschfelds work on the Kaiserliche Verwaltung or Michael Rostovt-
zeVs Geschichte der Staatspacht, whereas evidence on procuratorial posts
and imperial personnel responsible for imperial mines and quarries is scat-
tered throughout the works of Hans-Georg PXaum and Gerard Boulvert.1 In
his concise chapter on the administration of Roman extractive operations
mines and quarries were subsumed under the same heading, Bergwerke
Hirschfeld presented a detailed overview of the written evidence available at
his time. The topics covered by Hirschfeld ranged from the question of
ownership of mines, over the responsibilities of mining oYcials i.e. procur-
atores, their position within the provincial administration and the system of
exploitation, to the Wscal connections between mining operations and Rome.
Hirschfeld had identiWed mining ventures under imperial control as being
owned by the Roman state, but did not exclude the possibility of private
individuals or municipalities continuously owning mines throughout the
Principate. In this opinion he was not followed by most scholars; in fact,
the preponderant opinion sees Roman mines as the private property of the
emperor (cf. 3.3.1).2 According to Hirschfeld, the administration of a certain
type of (gold, silver, or iron) mine in one, rarely in two provinces was dealt
with by a freedman or equestrian procuratora task which, he believed,
required profound knowledge of mining technology.3 As regards further
responsibilities of procurators, Hirschfeld observed that the mining laws
for Vipasca/mod. Aljustrel in Portugal described judicial and other powers of
the mining procurator in charge comparable to those of municipal author-
ities.4 Most inXuential was his view on the system (or mode) of exploitation
of mines by the central authorities: he assumed that during the Principate
most mines were farmed out to small-scale lessees, Kleinpachter, in return
for rent collected by conductores or large-scale lessees, Grosspachter. By the
later second century these conductores were replaced by imperial procurators
who now dealt directly with the small-scale lessees. This view was followed by
Michael RostovtzeV, Ulf Tackholm, and others.5 Tackholm, however, did point

1
Marquardt 1884; RostovtzeV 1904; Hirschfeld 1905; PXaum 19601; Boulvert 1970; PXaum
1982; Brunt 1990b; Brunt 1990c; Eck 1997a; Eich 2005.
2
Hirschfeld 1905: 14550, 158 f.
3
Hirschfeld 1905: 174.
4
Hirschfeld 1905: 160 f.
5
RostovtzeV 1904: 446; Hirschfeld 1905: 152; Tackholm 1937: 109. In the light of the
abundant written evidence for convicts condemned to the mines Hirschfeld (1905: 162) does
not exclude the possibility of a more direct control of exploitation by the Roman state.
 Introduction 3

out that the use of conductores may have been restricted to iron mines only
and he acknowledged the possibility that modes of exploitation and admin-
strative systems were perhaps not as uniform as Hirschfeld and RostovtzeV
suggested.6 Peter Brunt set a diVerent tone by oVering an alternative view: he
argued that conductores set in place either for the collection of rent or the
exploitation of a mine were supervised by procurators with similar geograph-
ical circumscriptions and thus coexisted simultaneously.7 With regard to
mining procurators, Stanisaw Mrozek analysed their titles throughout the
empire and noted the diVerence in geographical extent of their jurisdiction
which he believed to be dependent upon the social status of the freedmen or
equestrian incumbents. He furthermore observed that the administration of
silver mines both in Pannonia and Dalmatia was merged perhaps under
Marcus Aurelius. Mrozek tried to assess the position of equestrian mining
procuratorships within equestrian careers and outline their administrative
responsibilities.8 Brunts astute analysis of procuratorial judicial powers in
general added to the picture provided by the Vipasca mining regulations.9
Both were combined by Danielle Capanelli in order to outline the judicial and
other responsibilities of mining procurators.10 As for the geographical extent
of procuratorial jurisdiction, Geza Alfoldy gave an original impetus by iden-
tifying a vast economic district, the patrimonium regni Norici, at the heart of
the province of Noricum. Based on Alfoldys method Slobodan Dusanic and
Christoph Noeske wished to identify and outline further mining districts
throughout the Danube provinces and Dacia.11 The study by Christoph
Noeske on Ampelum/mod. Zlatna and on Alburnus Maior/mod. Ros ia
Montana oVered primarily a survey of both mining communities, but also
dealt with the freedmen and equestrian procurators responsible for the gold
mines, and detailed the functions of their staV. Noeske believed that during
the later second century the freedmen procurators at Ampelum were subor-
dinate to their equestrian colleaguesan arrangement Hans-Georg PXaum
termed collegialite inegale.12 As for the tasks of these procurators, Noeske
assumed thatbesides the general responsibilities of a procuratorthe
Vipasca mining laws applied to the Dacian gold mines as well.13 The

6
Tackholm 1937: 10913.
7
Andreau 1989: 99 f.; Brunt 1990c.
8
Mrozek 1968. In addition, Jeno Fitz (1972) provided an improved chronological compil-
ation of equestrian mining procuratorships for Pannonia and Dalmatia in support of Mrozeks
view.
9
Brunt 1990b.
10
Capanelli 1989.
11
Alfoldy 1970; Dusanic 1977; Noeske 1977.
12
Noeske 1977: 300 f.
13
Noeske 1977: 301.
4 Introduction

ubiquitous application of the Vipasca tablets, however, was questioned by

Claude Domergue who pointed out the speciWc geological conditions to
which they apply.14 The unique early second-century ad mining laws from
the mines of Vipasca/mod. Aljustrel in Portugal have received special atten-
tion since their discovery in the late nineteenth century. These incomplete
tablets provide a rare insight into the organization of a mining district and
have spawned numerous papers and monographs discussing their content.
The majority of scholars understood the Vipasca tablets to regulate the lease
of mines to interested parties, small-scale lessees (Kleinpachter), by the
Roman state in return for part of the extracted ore.15 Stamped lead ingots
from Spain, Britain, and, most recently, from the Augustan provincia Ger-
mania were understood to reXect similar mining arrangements with the
mining lessee or the owner of the mine being named on the ingot.16 A recent
study by Antonio Mateo, however, suggests that mining plots at Vipasca were
sold to interested personnel.17 Besides the regie indirecte, it was argued that a
regie directe, the direct involvement of the Roman state in the exploitation of
mines, occurred as well.18 This is assumed to be the case with vast opencast
mining sites such as Las Medulas in north-western Spain. Recent archaeo-
logical surveys of mining landscapes in the same region appear to corroborate
the picture drawn by written sources. In this context it has been argued by
Claude Domergue, Ines Sastre-Prats, Almudena Orejas, and others that the
indigenous population was forcibly resettled in order to work in the mines.19
Besides locals being coerced to mining work, written sources give information
on the condemnation of convicts to imperial metalla, a Weld of study that has
met renewed interest.20 Free labour in an imperial mining context is docu-
mented at Ros ia Montana in Romania and in the light of the new evidence
from the quarries at Mons Claudianus in Egypt has also drawn fresh atten-
tion.21 The role of the Roman army in mining administration was emphasized
early on by Hirschfeld and othersan aspect which Pascal Le Roux dealt with
in greater detail.22
14
Domergue 1983: 146 f. Tackholm (1937: 103) likewise refuted the universal validity of the
Vipasca regulations for all imperial mining operations albeit without providing any explanation.
15
See Flach 1979 with older bibliography; Domergue 1983; Lazzarini 2001.
16
Domergue 1990: 25377; RIB II/1; Rothenhofer 2003; Eck 2004b.
17
Mateo 2001; Domergue 2004.
18
Domergue 1990: 303.
19
Domergue & Sillieres 1977; Domergue & Martin 1977; Domergue & Herail 1978; Orejas
1994; Orejas 1996; Sastre Prats 1998; Orejas & Sastre Prats 1999; Orejas & Sanchez-Palencia
2002.
20
Mommsen 1899: 47 f., 9603; Geerlings 1983; Millar 1984; Gustafson 1994; Lassandro
1995; Peacock 1995; Gustafson 1997; Salerno 2003.
21
Mrozek 1969; Mrozek 1977: 1026; Noeske 1977: 33645; Andreau 1990: 89 f.; Cuvigny
1996a.
22
Hirschfeld 1905: 172 f.; Tackholm 1937: 138; LeRoux 1989.
 Introduction 5

A number of studies focused on Roman mining administration in a speciWc

region or province.23 Perhaps the most comprehensive analysis of a mining
region to date is Claude Domergues work on ancient mining in Spain and
Portugal which deals in part with questions pertaining to the administration
of mining operations. Although the study is limited to Roman Iberia, he
identiWes and discusses the relevant issues, i.e. the duties of provincial
authorities (Wnancial and patrimonial procurators) in mining administration;
the varying functions of a procurator within a mining district in the contexts
of a direct or indirect regime of exploitation; the position of these procurators
within the imperial administration, in particular their linkage with the Pal-
atine bureaux at Rome; the role of their staV; and the relevance of techno-
logical challenges in organizing mining operations.24 The latter issue has been
particularly emphasized in recent years, not least as a result of the archaeo-
logical (re)examination of various mining sites, such as Dolaucothi in Wales,
Tresminas and Las Medulas in north-western Spain, or Ros ia Montana.25 In a
concise report on Roman mining Jean Andreau attempted to widen the ambit
by discussing recent research on ownership of mines, the modes of exploit-
ation, the workforce, and technologies employed in mining operations
throughout the empire. ReXecting scholarly discourse, administrative aspects
of mining operations per se were not discussed extensively: The question of
collegialite inegale in the procuratorship of Asturia and Callaecia set aside,
Andreau brieXy explored the relationship between imperial personnel and
modes of exploitation as well as the role of the Roman army in mining
operations. Nonetheless, Andreau did stress the role of the Roman state in
deciding the modes of exploitation and the use of work forcewithout
identifying the parties to the decision process.26 Recent papers have again
presented arguments for a centralized administrative bureau in Rome respon-
sible for mining ventures.27
Given the scarcity of written evidence, insights into the organization of
quarrying operations were provided predominantly by labels on quarried
products emerging from Pietro Ercole Viscontis excavations of Romes mar-
ble yards between 1868 and 1870 and published by Luigi Bruzza in 1870.
Based on these quarry labels, Otto Hirschfeld, followed by Michael Rostovt-
zeV, Charles Dubois, and Ulf Tackholm, argued that quarries must have been
contracted out to private entrepreneurs who had produced a certain amount

23
Gaul: Sablayrolles 1989. Dacia: Wollmann 1996. Illyricum: Dusanic 1977; rsted 1985;
Dusanic 1989; Skegro 2000; Dusanic 2004b. For a general overview, cf. Blazquez Martnez 1989.
24
Domergue 1990: 279303, esp. 294 f.
25
Damian 2003; Burnham & Burnham 2004.
26
Andreau 1989: esp. 96100; Andreau 1990.
27
Dusanic 1989; Cuvigny 1996a.
6 Introduction

of marble in return for a payment.28 Kurt Fitzler, however, believed the

quarries in Roman Egypt to have been farmed out to interested lessees who
were allowed to keep the produce in return for a rent. Moreover, Fitzler
argued for direct exploitation of quarries by the Roman state through the
use of convicts and prisoners.29 As for the administration of imperial quar-
ries, Hirschfeld and others assumed that imperial freedmen, or less frequently
equestrians, ran these operations as procurators, supported by probatores and
military oYcers as technical experts.30 In recent years quarry labels were
studied more intensively as the available data was dramatically expanded by
new material from Bacakale, Simitthus, Mons Claudianus, and elsewhere,
allowing for reWned interpretations of the modes of exploitation (cf. 7.2).31
Given the dissemination of Latin terminology in quarry labels, J. Clayton Fant
argued that this suggested the quarries whence the inscribed marble origin-
ated were under imperial control. This observation and the evidence for a
statio marmorum at Rome were seen by Fant to suggest a centralized admin-
istration of imperial quarrying aVairs.32 The internal organization of quarries
was reconstructed predominantly on the basis of these labels (cf. 7.2).33 The
administrative personnel involved in quarrying organizations and the work-
force present has in recent decades not received the attention it deserves
primarily a result of a scanty evidential basis. With the abundant written and
archaeological material yielded by excavations at quarries in the Egyptian
Eastern Desert in the late 1990s the organizational mechanisms and structures
of a quarrying community have moved to the centre of interest. The wealth of
ostraca has, as yet, not been examined and analysed in full within the context
of imperial administration.34
In the light of the abundance of written material emerging particularly
from quarrying sites under imperial control, the special focus on the internal
organization and administration of mines and quarries is warranted. Study-
ing the administration of mines and quarries jointly is not least called for by
the application of the term metallum or
 to quarries as well as mines.
28
RostovtzeV 1904: 454; Hirschfeld 1905: 166; Dubois 1908: xxviii; Tackholm 1937: 118 f.
29
Fitzler 1910: 116 f., 119 f.
30
Hirschfeld 1905: 171. On the administration of quarries, cf. also: Dubois 1908: xxxxxiv;
Fitzler 1910: 12535; Tackholm 1937: 117 f.
31
The foundation for the research on quarry labels was basically laid by Luigi Bruzza in 1870
who published the labels inscribed on to blocks at the Marmorata in Rome. For Bacakale, cf.
Fant 1989a; Christol & Drew-Bear 1986, 1987, 1991; Drew-Bear 1994; Drew-Bear & Eck 1976;
for Simitthus, cf. Kraus 1993a; for Mons Claudianus, cf. Peacock & MaxWeld 1997.
32
Fant1993a: 15760; cf. also Maischberger 1997: 19 f.; contra Hirschfeld 1905: 176; Dubois
1908: xxxviii.
33
Dodge 1988; Dodge 1991; Ward-Perkins 1992a; Ward-Perkins 1992b; Fant 1989b; Fant
1993a; Fant 1993b; Maischberger 1997.
34
Bingen et al. 1992; Bingen et al. 1997; Cuvigny 2000a.
 Introduction 7

The basis for comparison is predominantly provided by the similarity of these

extractive operations, particularly the common nature of organizational
constraints faced by the authorities set in charge of running these ventures.
The issues addressed by earlier research on quarries or mines have remained
much the same: the issue of ownership, the modes of exploitation, the
technology and workforce employed, the relation between imperial author-
ities and extractive operations, the function of administrative and military
personnel involved, and the position of mines and quarries within the pro-
vincial administration. Nonetheless, the comprehensive collection and analy-
sis of these issues from a strictly organizational/administrative viewpoint, that
is, from the perspective of the imperial authorities responsible for mines or
quarries in its control has not been attempted since the works of Hirschfeld
and Tackholm.
An appropriate starting point of a study on organizational aspects of
imperial mines and quarries is the deWnition of the term organization: any
organization can be deWned as the totality of measures directed towards the
achievement of goals and/or the fulWlment of a purpose. These measures
structure any social collective resulting in a division of labour, and arrange the
activities of its members, the use of assets, as well as the processing of
information. As a result of these processes, behavioural expectations or
rules are deliberately set for the members of the system: the interactions
amongst individuals within an organization are formalized. These formalized
rules are shaped in order to achieve certain objectives and form the basis of
membership within the system.35 Consequently, the members of an organ-
ization can be reasonably well distinguished from non-members; internal
forms (buildings, machines, information, types of behaviour) are diVerent
from external ones. The clear distinction of the organizational domain is
closely tied to the deWnition of membership of an organization. Members are
either employed by the organization, or are contributing towards the purpose
of the organization.36Structures within an organization may hence be deWned
as the arrangement of members of the organized social collective and of the
stable relationships among them. The order of functional activities and
procedures of the organizations members or actors are described as operative
processes (work procedures) and directive processes (planning and controlling
of assets and goals, direction of human resources etc.).37 Any organization is
embedded in an environment or context. This organizational environment
not only provides input to the organization in the form of human resources,

35
Hill, Felbaum, & Ulrich 1994: 17, 24 f.
36
Sorge 2002: 4, 8.
37
Hill, Felbaum, & Ulrich 1994: 26.
8 Introduction

raw materials, information, and technology, but also receives the output of an
organization, such as its produce, goods, and experienced personnel. The
organizational environment sets limits to an organization through constraints
such as legal and socio-cultural restrictions, or the scarcity of raw material.38
This very generalized deWnition of the term organization oVers a rudi-
mentary idea of what the analysis of Roman mining and quarrying organiza-
tions might entail. However, not all aspects of the organization of Roman
extractive operations can be explored to their fullest extent. This is due to the
fragmentary and unbalanced state of our literary and epigraphic material,
which hinders any attempt at a full description of the imperial extractive
industry in the kind of detail a study of a modern organization would permit.
Given the ramiWcations of our evidential basis, the analysis of the organiza-
tional structure and content of Roman imperial mines and quarries is limited
to a few areas. Yet, unlike other branches of the Roman administration, the
physical remains of mines and quarries and their spatial arrangement in
relation to technical, geological, topographical, and geographical constraints
render a rather clear idea of potential organizational tasks at hand. Any study
on organizational aspects of imperial extractive operations thus has to com-
mence by detailing organizational measures innate to any quarrying or
mining venture. Against this backdrop the measures taken by Roman author-
ities can be set into the appropriate context and the variety of solutions
applied to substantial problems recognized to its full extent. Based on this
foundation, we can attempt to deWne the responsibilities within the directive
and operative processes (e.g. recruitment and pay of a work force, manage-
ment of work procedures, etc.) and their allocation to numerous functions,
i.e. incumbents of civilian or military posts (procurators, centurions, civil
engineers, etc.), documented in the epigraphic records of mines and quarries.
In view of the evidential basis, any precise allocation of all administrative
responsibilities to individual functions remains fraught with diYculties. The
scope of most relevant written materials is rarely wide enough to allow for a
glimpse beyond the structure of a quarrying or mining district. Most records
of information exchange between mines/quarries and the upper echelons of
the imperial administration or the provincial authorities have perished or
have yet to be recovered. This basically rules out a clear-cut reconstruction of
the decision-making process and the position of imperial mining and quarry-
ing organizations within the framework of Roman provincial administration.
Nevertheless, the connections between quarrying/mining administrations,
provincial governors, and the emperor/Palatine bureaux in Rome have left
traces in the written sources which shall be explored further below.

38
Hill, Felbaum, & Ulrich 1994: 20, 31966 with Wg. II/39; Sorge 2002: 57.
 Introduction 9

The present study thus revolves around the core elements of (a) determin-
ing the elementary constraints and challenges faced by the quarrying/mining
organization, (b) identifying the key Wgures in organizing extractive oper-
ations under imperial control, (c) allocating organizational tasks and respon-
sibilities to these key Wgures, (d) evaluating their solutions for the main
organizational challenges at hand, and (e) delimiting their position within
a wider administrative framework. The study is structured accordingly: the
determination of technical, as well as geological, topographical, and geo-
graphical constraints and of the organizational challenges for Roman mining
and quarrying ventures deriving from these constraints (Ch. 2), are followed
by the deWnition of mining or quarrying districts and their status by legal and
other sources (Ch. 3). This is followed by a study of hierarchical structures of
imperial oYcials and their staV (Ch. 4); the role of the Roman army in mining
and quarrying operations (Ch. 5); the assignment of administrative and
organizational responsibilities to imperial oYcials and staV members
(Ch. 6); and the use of a non-imperial workforce and civilian partners in
exploiting extractive ventures (Ch. 7). Finally, the position of mining or
quarrying organizations within the framework of the imperial administration
and the connections between the emperor/Palatine bureaux and the mining
and quarrying administrations will be explored (Ch. 8).
 2
Geological Constraints and
Organizational Implications

The geology and topography of marble outcrops and ore deposits dictate to a
large degree the technology which can be used and the scale of extractive
operations. Consequently, these restrictions significantly influence the organ-
izational structures and, together with the geographical location, determine
the organizational challenges faced by the heads of these extractive oper-
ations. Moreover, the geology and topography of a mining or quarrying
district also determine the spatial arrangement of operative (work proced-
ures) and directive processes (planning and controlling of assets and goals,
direction of human resources, etc.). This is best exemplified by the topo-
graphical layout of building structures, transport facilities, and extractive
locations within imperial mining and quarrying districts.

2 . 1 . I M P E R I A L Q UA R R I E S

The archaeological remains of extractive activity such as roads, slipways,

loading ramps, huts, forts, towers, wells, and so forth allow us to outline
the immediate effects of geology, topography, and technology, as well as the
geographical location of organizational structures and do reflect major dif-
ferences amongst individual quarries. Owing to their remoteness and the
unique conditions for preservation in the Egyptian Eastern Desert, the im-
perial quarries at Mons Claudianus, Mons Porphyrites, Mons Ophiates, and
Tiberiane provide us with the most complete archaeological record. While the
quarries and the administrative centre at Simitthus/Chemtou are similarly
well documented, most other imperial quarries such as Karystos, Dokimeion,
or Luna/Carrara have not yielded the same amount of information, mainly
because some of these quarries have been in use over the centuries.
Figure 1. Principal mines and quarries in the Roman empire
12 Geological and Organizational Implications

Figure 2. Imperial quarries in the Eastern Egyptian Desert (after Maxfield & Peacock
2001b: fig. 1.2)

2.1.1. Mons Claudianus/mod. Gebel Fatirah

As the name suggests, the quarries at Mons Claudianus/mod. Gebel Fatirah in
Roman Egypt presumably supplied granodiorite stone from the reign of
Claudius onwards. The earliest firm date for a permanent quarrying settle-
ment at Mons Claudianus is given by an ostracon from the reign of Nero (ad
68). It was found at the Hydreuma, an early quarry settlement. The occupa-
tion of the site appears to end before the mid-third century ad. This date is
provided by a dedication of a cohors II Ituraeorum to Zeus Helios Sarapis
during the reign of Severus Alexander (ad 22235).1 The site saw its heyday
during the first half of the second century ad, as most inscriptions and ostraca
date to this period.2

1
O.Claud.inv. 7363, cf. Peacock 1992: 9.
2
For dating of ostraca, cf. Bingen 1996: 2938.
 Geological and Organizational Implications 13

Figure 3. Mons Claudianus overall map (after Peacock & Maxfield 1997: fig. 1.2)

The central architectural features in Wadi Umm Hussein consist of a fort, a

grain storage facility adjacent to animal lines, a private housing area with a
bath, and the temple for Zeus Helios Sarapis. The fort with its irregular layout
and interior division is presumably not a genuine military structure, but is
likely to reflect a mixed population consisting of civilians and military person-
nel.3 Moreover, the examination of the rubbish dump (sebakh) directly south of
the fort revealed numerous ostraca (c.4,000) and coins, suggesting that the
majority of administrative activity within the quarry took place in this area.

3
Peacock & Maxfield 1997: 50, 42 f., 846; Maxfield & Peacock 2001b: 1719, 31, 5976.
14 Geological and Organizational Implications

Figure 4. Mons Claudianus, fort (after Peacock & Maxfield 1997: fig. 2.14)

The adjacent animal lines, a feature common to most forts along the road from
Kaine to Mons Claudianus or Mons Porphyrites, were enclosed by a low wall,
housing camels, donkeys, and horses.4 This structure should probably be iden-
tified with the stables mentioned in the ostraca.5 A storage facility was built and a
well sunk next to the animal lines.6 From the Wadi floor a stairway led up to a
temple structure for the god Sarapis. The temple was furnished with three
inscriptions, which provide a date of construction around ad 118, with rooms
added at a later date.7 Next to the stairs up to the temple, a residential and bath-
house complex was built, perhaps housing high officials of the quarrying

4
Peacock & Maxfield 1997: 91 f., with fig. 2.56.
5
O.Claud.inv. 2921, 4155.
6
Peacock & Maxfield 1997: 86101.
7
I.Pan 37, 39, 42, cf. J.-M. Carrie, in Maxfield & Peacock 2001b: 1426.
 Geological and Organizational Implications 15

Figure 5. Mons Claudianus, hydreuma (after Peacock & Maxfield 1997: fig. 3.3)

administration. A graveyard or cemetery was also discovered but has yet to yield
any information on the ancient inhabitants.8
South from the main complex in a tributary Wadi to Wadi Umm Hussein
stands a building structure, the Hydreuma. The site probably saw two phases
of occupation during the reigns of Claudius(?) and Nero.9 It consisted of a
small fort with a water tank and stone troughs outside the enclosure to
provide water for animals, as well as a house for the commanding officer
and a workers village. The ostraca discovered there, which date to the Trajanic
period, document the same place name, Mons Claudianus, and an ostracon
found below the rubbish dump (sebakh) in the workers village dates to the
reign of Nero (ad 68). This complex was probably the first structure housing
the quarry administration and a garrison of roughly fifty soldiers. It presum-
ably was replaced under Domitian by the fort at Wadi Umm Hussein. From
the central complex at Wadi Umm Hussein, all 130 quarries at Mons Clau-
dianus could be easily accessed from the Wadi floors or by short slipways, the
longest being c.500 m. Stone cairns along the slipways provided material for
the maintenance of the slipway surfaces. Blocks and columns were left lying

8
Peacock & Maxfield 1997: 11834, 137 f.
9
J.-M. Carrie, in Maxfield & Peacock 2001b: 166 f.
16 Geological and Organizational Implications

on loading ramps at the end of the slipways. The ramps generally were 510 m
in length and 0.60.9 m in height, and obviously were meant to allow the
quarried produce to be loaded from sledge or rollers onto wagons. Near Bab
el-Mukheniq tracks on the routes leading from Mons Claudianus or Mons
Porphyrites to the Nile Valley usually had gauges of 2.7 m and 2.4 m. In the
Naq el Teir plain, a very large gauge of 3.5 m was measured.10 What these
carts looked like is unknown, but they must have been able to carry columns
weighing up to 200 tons. Owing to the lack of bovine bones at Mons
Claudianus, oxen have been ruled out as draught-animals. Valerie Maxfield
argues for the use of camels or donkeys as work animals.11
The abundant outcrop of granodiorite allowed the extractive operations to
spread out over c.9 km2. Most quarries were to be found north or north-east
of the fort in Wadi Umm Hussein. In comparison to other imperial quarries
in the Roman empire, these quarries with a width of 2030 m resemble small
scoops into the hillsides. Within some of these quarries columns and blocks
in different shapes and sizes with engraved or painted inscriptions can still be
found (cf. 7.2.3). Huts were discovered in fifty-three quarries, which might
have functioned as resting places during work hours or perhaps were used for
permanent housing. Apart from pottery, twenty-four huts yielded deposits of
ash and iron slag. Four huts were thoroughly excavated, revealing not only
water-tanks, but furnaces, ash, slag, pottery, and depressions for bellows.12
Throughout the Mons Claudianus quarrying territory, seventeen  
or watchtowers were discovered. The location of these watchtowers within the
quarrying district excludes their construction for security purposes, as none
of the towers overlooks the approaches to the site. Separated from each other
by a distance of c.650 m, they allowed visual communication between the
quarries and the fort at Wadi Umm Hussein. These factors suggest that the
towers were either manned for the purpose of internal communication, or to
guard convict labour (cf. 6.1.2.6).13

2.1.2. Mons Porphyrites/mod. Gebel Dokhan

The quarrying district of Mons Porphyrites spreads out over an area of
c. 9 km2 and consists of several quarries and a central complex.14 Geological

10
Peacock & Maxfield 1997: 1408, 177253, 2613, 287314.
11
Peacock & Maxfield 1997: 263 f.; Adams 2001: 1838; Maxfield 2001: 159.
12
Peacock & Maxfield 1997: 14 with fig. 1.2, 2335, 2468.
13
Peacock 1992: 18.
14
Kraus, Roder, & Muller-Wiener 1967; Sidebotham & Zitterkopf 1991: 575 f.; Maxfield
19945; Brown & Harrell 1995; Maxfield & Peacock 1996; Maxfield & Peacock 1997; Maxfield &
Peacock 1998a; Maxfield & Peacock 1998b; Maxfield & Peacock 2001a; Maxfield 2001.
 Geological and Organizational Implications 17

Figure 6. Mons Porphyrites, overall map (after Maxfield & Peacock 2001a: fig. 1.2)

constraints, however, complicated the pursuit of extractive procedures. The

porphyry outcrops were not close to the Wadi floor: the stone had to be
quarried some 500 m up the hillside and transported down on long slipways.
The adverse topography determined the settlement pattern. Unlike Mons
Claudianus, where settlements are clustered together around the administra-
tive focal point at Wadi Umm Hussein, the workers villages at Porphyrites
tend to be dispersed along the routes leading from the central complex at
Wadi Abu Maamel (630 m above sea-level) to the Lykabettus (1109 m),
Lepsius (954 m), Rammius (1438 m), the North-West (1000 m) and the
Bradford quarries (c.750 m).15

15
Klemm & Klemm 1992: 82, Abb. 432.; Maxfield & Peacock 2001a: 2.
18 Geological and Organizational Implications

Figure 7. Mons Porphyrites, central complex (after Maxfield & Peacock 2001a:
figs. 2.1, 2.4, 2.7)

The central complex of the Wadi Abu Maamel consists of a fort, a workers
village, two temples (for Sarapis and Isis), a bath-building and a cemetery.16
The fort, hugging the hillside on a ridge above the Wadi floor, contained a
large water tank for storage.17 Excavations at the entrance of the fort yielded
glass fragments, pottery, a substantial amount of woven textiles, as well as 165
ostraca. The range of documents included letters concerned with the purchase
and transport of food or tools, lists of names and personnel (civilian and
military), as well as tituli picti. One ostracon was dated to 13 August, ad 157,
giving a rough date for the rubbish heap at the entrance. Another dump
revealed 200 ostraca, mostly containing orders for bread. The interior layout
of the fort is far less complex than at Mons Claudianus. Its main function was
16
Maxfield & Peacock 2001a: 1256.
17
Maxfield & Peacock 2001a: 17 f.
 Geological and Organizational Implications 19

Figure 8. Mons Porphyrites, fort and temple of Isis (after Maxfield & Peacock 2001a:
figs. 2.4, 2.7)
20 Geological and Organizational Implications

not only to provide shelter for the military garrison, but also to house
administrative offices and officials.18
Close to the gate of the fort a building structure was discovered andbased
on the large number of burnt tiles of a hypocaust found therehas been
interpreted as a bath, or a house equipped with a heating system. From the
Wadi floor a stairway led up to a simple and small rectangular building,
the temple of Isis Megiste, dated by an inscription to the year ad 113.19
A collection of huts follows to the south, which has been interpreted as a
workers village. Traces of smithing and particularly a layer of slag and
charcoal, as well as random wedge holes cut for practice purposes, imply
that quarrying tools were either produced or their quality tested there. At least
two slipways lead up from the fort to the Lepsius quarries. North-west of the
fort lies a necropolis and burials, consisting of simple mausolea (probably for
more important individuals), cairn graves and pit graves.20 South of the fort
the once neatly sculpted tetrastyle temple of Sarapis, again dated by an
inscription to the years ad 11719, stands on a rocky knoll, accessible by a
stairway.21 A further rectangular temple was built across the Wadi on another
hillside. According to an inscription found near the spot, the small temple
might have been dedicated to Isis Myrionyma in ad 137/8.22 Two wells
guaranteed the supply of water, one north-east of the fort and one directly
on the Wadi floor.23
Besides the central complex on the Wadi floor, further workers villages
were located close to the quarries and along the steep slipways. Bradford
village lies in the immediate vicinity of the black porphyry quarry of the same
name, and consists of seven huts. An inscription naming a Cominius Leugas
dates to the year ad 18, and probably makes the village one of the earliest focal
points within the quarrying complex. The inscription itself was found in a
small niched hut, probably a Paneion. The quarries and the village were
connected by a slipway to the Wadi floor, the slipway ending in a flat pedestal
and loading ramp littered with black porphyry chippings.24 Leading up from
a side Wadi of the Wadi Abu Maamel, a slipway reached the so-called Foot
village and its quarries, while another slipway led up from the same loading

18
Kraus, Roder, & Muller-Wiener 1967: 170; Maxfield & Peacock 1996: 18; Maxfield &
Peacock 1997; Maxfield & Peacock 1998a: 184; Maxfield & Peacock 2001a: 1219.
19
I.Pan 20; Maxfield & Peacock 2001a: 1923.
20
Maxfield & Peacock 2001a: 25 f., 13551, 2636.
21
I.Pan 21, cf. Kraus, Roder, & Muller-Wiener 1967: 1713; Maxfield & Peacock 2001a: 368.
22
I.Pan 22, cf. Maxfield & Peacock 1998a: 190; Maxfield & Peacock 2001a: 3942.
23
Kraus, Roder, & Muller-Wiener 1967: 181 f.; Maxfield & Peacock 2001a: 4255.
24
Maxfield & Peacock 2001a: 5862. 134.
 Geological and Organizational Implications 21

ramp to the North-West quarries. The North-West village was located on the
slipway, closer to the Wadi floor than to the North-West quarries. The village
consisted of five discernable houses or blocks and, based on the pottery and
coinage finds, these buildings were probably occupied from the mid-first to
the end of the second century ad. An inscription most likely originating from
the North-West village dates to ad 27.25 The North-West quarries might have
seen two periods of extractive operations. While the small-scale quarries are
understood to be of an earlier date, the larger quarries are late Roman.
Quarries nos. 4 and 9 appear to be particularly vast: no. 4 reaches c.100 m
in both height and width, whereas no. 9 displays the four faces of a monolithic
cube of purple porphyry left standing.26
The Foot village consists of sixteen huts, the pottery of which dates it to
Tiberius reign. While fifteen huts are grouped in a circle on one side of the
slipway leading up to the adjacent quarries, one rectangular hut was built on
the other side. The faces of the two quarries vary from 3 to 15 m (Foot 1) i.e.
from 1.5 to 3 m (Foot 1a). The South-West village was situated at the lower
end of a slipway running down from the Rammius quarries and terminating in
the Wadi Abu Maamel. The assemblage of buildings includes a contubernium-
like structure of seven uniform rooms, a rectangular building with an apsis, a
long stretched L-shaped building with a large number of rooms, and an
ensemble of five multi-roomed buildings. The L-shaped building was inter-
preted as providing accommodation for workers, a dining or social area, as
well as spacious suites of rooms for officials/overseers and their families.
The building was gradually extended. The pottery finds seem to suggest an
occupation date of the late first to the mid-second century. Slipways led up to
the Rammius quarries, the latter being surprisingly small and not exploited
to the degree the size of the settlement at the foot of the slipway might lead one
to expect.27
Two workers villages were located along the slipway coming down from
the Lykabettus quarries. One village, consisting of a small number of rect-
angular and circular rooms, was built besides the loading ramp, while the
Lykabettus village lay close to the quarries.28 The village seems to have
comprised five housing complexes, lying on both sides of the slipway. Nearby,
a cemetery yielded a late Roman/Byzantine tombstone, and it appears that the
pottery finds and the coinage point towards a main occupation in the fourth
century ad. However, there seems to be evidence to suggest earlier activity,

25
I.Pan 18, cf. Maxfield & Peacock 2001a: 6486.
26
Maxfield & Peacock 2001a: 15572.
27
Maxfield & Peacock 2001a: 624, 86104, 1515.
28
Maxfield & Peacock 2001a: 10410.
22 Geological and Organizational Implications

perhaps under Nero.29 The Lykabettus quarries are located on one of the
highest mountains in the area. In one quarry (no. 4b) the inscription of a
centurio frumentarius documents work going on there during the second or
third century ad.30 The quarry faces normally reach heights of up to 10 or 15 m,
in one instance even 25 to 30 m (no. 4), and can be up to 70 m in width. The
slipways leading down from these quarries and villages were long and steep; the
slipway from the Lykabettus quarry, for example, reached 2.8 km, the one
leading down from the Rammius quarries c.1.7 km, covering heights of 550
to 450 m. Numerous cairns were used as depots for the repair of the slipway
surface. Loading ramps were positioned at the end of some of the slipways (e.g.
from Lykabettus and Bradford quarries). Visual communication was possible
via a central tower ( 
) at the head of the Wadi Abu Maamel, allowing
contact with the Lykabettus and Rammius quarries as well as the footpath
leading up to the pass over to Badia, where a further tower stood. The footpath
over the pass was guarded on the southern side by a small fortlet (Footpath
Station). To the north of the central structure the Wadi opens into Wadi Umm
Sidri. The walled structure at Umm Sidri once included animal lines and was
probably built during the second century ad.31 At the mouth of the Wadi Umm
Sidri a main loading ramp was positioned, which was 1.75 m high and could
accommodate vehicles of up to 22 m in length. A small settlement, consisting of
circular and rectangular structures, was detected nearby.32 The road then
headed south to the Badia complex, consisting of a fort, animal lines, a fortified
rock outcrop, a cemetery, and a well.33 From there a footpath led over the pass
into the Wadi Abu Maamel, while the main route continued south, joining the
NileAbu Shaar road (cf. 2.1.5).

2.1.3. Tiberiane/mod. Wadi Barud

In comparison to the spacious imperial extractive operations at Mons Clau-
dianus or Mons Porphyrites, the quarries and architectural remains at Tiber-
iane are modest in size. The fort at Tiberiane is a miniature clone of the fort
at Claudianus: the general layout, the interior dividing wall, the bastions, and

29
I.Pan 29. Tile/veneer from Neros Domus Transitoria has been determined on the basis of
magnetic susceptibility to originate from one of the Lykabettus quarries, cf. Maxfield & Peacock
2001a: 11029, 318.
30
I.Pan 24.
31
Maxfield & Peacock 2001a: 17290, 195 f., 2009.
32
Kraus, Roder, & Muller-Wiener 1967: 199201; Maxfield & Peacock 2001a: 20914.
33
Kraus, Roder, & Muller-Wiener 1967: 201; Maxfield 19945: 19 f.; Maxfield & Peacock
1996: 19; Maxfield & Peacock 2001a: 21539.
 Geological and Organizational Implications 23

the gate are all similar. A plaster-lined tank for water storage was found within
the fort, and a survey yielded three quarries with a slipway, various huts, a
tower ( 
), and the remains of a cemetery.34 The name of the site
suggests a founding date under Tiberius; this is supported by the find of
coarse quartz diorite (granito bianco e nero), originating from Wadi Barud, in
the Domus Tiberiana. Pliny refers to a marble found in Egypt during the reign
of Augustus and Tiberius called Tiberian, possibly the same as the one found
at Tiberiane. 200 ostraca were unearthed at Tiberiane, of which two date to
the year 10 of Antoninus Pius (ad 146/7).35

2.1.4. Mons Ophiates/mod. Wadi Umm Wikala

In Wadi Umm Wikala a green/dark green stone with white speckles was
quarried.36 The stone probably was known to Pliny as lapis ophyte although
he does not identify the origin of this snake-stone. The ancient name of the
area is revealed by an inscription as K H  , from which the toponym
Mons Ophiates comes.37 The numerous quarries and settlements are spread
out over an area of c.2 km2. Thirteen quarries as well as quarry prospections
small areas where weathered stone was removedhave been identified. The
quarries appear to be located mostly on the hillsides or hill-tops (sometimes
up to 100 m above the Wadi floor). From each quarry a slipway (made of
rubble and of boulder revetments with a rubble fill) was cut into the bedrock
and led down to the Wadi floor. Most slipways ended in platforms, variating
in height between 0.6 and 1.7 m. Some of the platforms still have architectural
elements stockpiled on them. Cylindrical stone cairns were discovered along-
side a few slipways, presumably intended as reserve dumps of repair material.
Crude huts were found in some of the quarries, but were only large enough
to shelter one man. Isolated huts and towers ( ) were distributed
throughout the area. The towers were positioned at a regular distance from
each other, allowing visual communication between the headquarters and the
quarrying sites. The main settlement in the Wadi Umm Wikala consisted of a
rectangular, bi-partite building structure (principia), a shrine, an assemblage
of one-room-huts and, finally, two multi-roomed buildings. The principia
comprised of twenty-eight rooms and a cistern, able to hold 8,800 litres, and
was probably built as a living space for military officials and administrators.

34
Peacock & Maxfield 1997: 27583.
35
Pliny, NH 36.55.
36
Meredith 1953: 106 f.; Klemm & Klemm 1992: 40810; Brown & Harrell 1995: 227;
Sidebotham et al. 2001: 1424.
37
Pliny, NH 36.56; I.Pan 51; Cuvigny 1996c: 92 fn. 4.
24 Geological and Organizational Implications

The Hydreuma, a large fortified well, is situated at the entrance of the Wadi
Umm Wikala, fortified by six or seven semicircular towers. Up to forty rooms
can be distinguished in the interior of the fort, surrounding a circular well of
unknown dimensions.38

2.1.5. Road System and Quarries in the Eastern Desert

The roads connecting Mons Claudianus, Tiberiane, Mons Porphyrites, and
Wadi Umm Wikala with the Nile valley were built specifically for this
purpose and protected by fortlets (see Fig. 2). Kaine/mod. Qena was initially
constructed as a starting point for the roads leading into the desert and
served as a river harbour for the reloading of pillars and other products from
the quarries.39 Remnants of the way-stations or forts are still preserved
today. The route from Mons Porphyrites to Kaine was guarded by five
forts (Qattar, Deir el-Atrash, El Saqiya, El-Heita, Bir Aras), while four
forts guarded the vast quarrying zone of Mons Porphyrites (Badia, Umm
Sidri, Abu Maamel, and Belia) and the small quarrying site at Umm
Balad.40 For the route from Mons Claudianus to Kaine at least three
fortsAbu Zawal, Tal et el-Zerqa, Qreiyaare attested in addition to the
forts at Mons Claudianus itself and at Tiberiane. The route from Wadi Umm
Wikala to Kaine was guarded only by one fort. The forts, which were built
near wells or enclosed them within their walls, reached sizes from 0.46
(Mons Claudianus) to 0.05 ha (El-Saqiya). Most of themwith the excep-
tion of the forts at Mons Porphyrites, Barud, Umm Balad, and Wadi Umm
Wikalawere equipped with animal lines.41 The large animal lines seem to
be a special feature of the routes leading to and from these great imperial
quarries, and apparently cannot be observed along the other roads through
the Eastern Desert. The forts were roughly 25 km apart from each other,
making it possible to reach the next way-station within a days travel.42
Besides being a shelter for travellers, the forts at Abu Zawal and Barud
perhaps protected smaller quarries nearby.43

38
Sidebotham et al. 2001: 14655, 157 f.
39
Cuvigny 1998: 90.
40
Meredith 1952; Meredith 1953; Sidebotham & Zitterkopf 1991: 5802; Brown & Harrell
1995: 2236; Maxfield 1996; Maxfield 2001: 15961.
41
Maxfield 2001: table 7.4.
42
Hamilton-Dyer 2001: 298; Maxfield 2001: 160.
43
Meredith & Tregenza 1949; Klein 1988: 20.
 Geological and Organizational Implications 25

2.1.6. Simitthus, Dokimeion, and other Imperial Quarries

2.1.6.1. Simitthus
The excavations of 196879 and 19928 at Simitthus/mod. Chemtou in Africa
proconsularis, where a yellow-orange-pink stone was quarried, uncovered a
tripartite work camp. The camp lies c.550 m north-west of the quarries on
the road from Simitthus to Tabarka. At the heart of this camp lay a stone
building with six long and narrow rooms with latrines at the northern end,
identified by its excavators as a penitentiary centre, an ergastulum. Coinage
and pottery unearthed within this central structure provided a construction
date of c.170 ad. A bath, built in the 190s, was added adjacent to the
ergastulum, and one may expect military barracks immediately to the east
of the ergastulum.44 This central prison area was abandoned by the imperial
administration at the beginning of the third century ad and partly turned into
a fabrica, where various refined products were made of the local giallo antico
marble. With the transformation of the prison camp to a fabrica, the central
complex received an addition to the east around ad 230, likely an officina
marmorum and a horreum. The buildings to the west of the former ergastulum
were added later and included a sanctuary with a treasury. The whole tripar-
tite area was abandoned in the late third century.45
A further religious centre appears on the hillflank south of the Numidian
sanctuary on top of the Tempelberg. A series of c.200 votive reliefs dedicated
to Saturn found on the hillside indicates the popular veneration of this god.46
The extraction history of the Simitthus quarries is rather complex and almost
impossible to date. Simitthus is privileged in having suffered only a limited
exploitation of giallo antico marble in recent years, a fact which facilitates a
reconstruction of ancient quarrying procedures. The quarries can be found
along the hill range immediately north-west of the city of Simitthus, the Gebel
Chemtou. Three peaks mark the Gebel, which have been named Stadtberg,
Gelber Berg, and Tempelberg. The quarrying area covers no more than
c.0.4 km2. Compared to the extraction areas of other imperial quarries, the
marble outcrop at Simitthus is significantly smaller. Most quarries at Simit-
thus appear to be clearly defined entities. Quarrying walls have been left
standing, outlining the separate areas of extraction. Some quarry faces reach
heights of up to c.23 m. These distinctions can be observed at the Gelber Berg
where the quarry walls divide the hillside into three quarrying zones.47
44
Mackensen 2005: 88 f., 100.
45
Mackensen 2000: 490, Abb. 2, 493, 502; Mackensen 2005: 87101, 11114.
46
Kraus 1993b.
47
Roder 1993: 17, 25, 27 f.
26 Geological and Organizational Implications

Figure 9. Simitthus, overall map (after Mackensen 2000: Abb. 1)

Continuous quarrying has removed part of these initial divisions. Between

the Stadtberg and the Gelber Berg, as well as between the Gelber Berg and
the Tempelberg, the quarries were dug through to the other side of the hill.
Quarries were cut into the southern side of the saddle between Stadtberg and
Gelber Berg, while at a later stage extractive operations were begun on
the northern flank. From the north, two further quarries cut through the
hill flank between Gelber Berg and Tempelberg, with only a thin wall left
standing. Roder argues that the earliest quarries were extracting the marble
horizontally (Flachausbau), but this was later replaced by vertical extraction
(Tiefausbau). An exact chronology has not been provided by the German
archaeological team, but it is probable that both techniques were used sim-
ultaneously. As a result of the small space available for manoeuvre, one major
problem for the quarrying administration at Simitthus was the management
of rubble deposits. Generally, half of the extracted marble was reduced to
rubble during the extraction process and when the quarried rough blocks
were dressed. The clearing out and disposal of rubble at previously designated
dumps within the quarry necessitated a detailed extraction plan, particularly
in the case of the Gelber Berg where the most desired marble colour was
available in abundant quantities.48
48
Roder 1993: 25 f., 424.
 Geological and Organizational Implications 27

It should be pointed out that the quarries at Simitthus were separated from
the town of Simitthus by a wall. The wall itself presumably indicated the
extent of the quarrying district, with the tripartite camp at its centre. Yet, not
all extraction sites were enclosed by the wall. Some quarries at the Stadtberg
remained outside of the quarrying district.49 The impression of an autono-
mous quarrying district disconnected from the town of Simitthus is further
strengthened by Rakobs observation that no giallo antico was used in great
quantities for the towns construction projects.50 The imperial quarries of
Simitthus lay in the immediate vicinity of the river Bagradas/mod. Medjerda,
which seemingly provided an ideal mode of transport for the quarried giallo
antico blocks. A broad stone plastered road was uncovered leading from the
quarries to the Medjerda. Subject to the water level of the river, the blocks and
columns may have been transported to Carthage by road.51 An alternative
land route was also in use. Lost column shafts were discovered by a French
officer in 1895 along a Roman road from Simitthus to the harbour town of
Tabarka. The road was 60 km long, had once been 6 m wide, and mastered
gradients of 4 to 8.5 per cent while heading over a mountain range reaching
heights of c. 800 m above sea-level. According to a series of milestones, the
construction or restoration(?) of this road appears to have taken place in ad
129, perhaps mainly for the export of columns and blocks.52

2.1.6.2. Dokimeion/Bacakale
Similar problems beset the analysis of quarries near Dokimeion/mod. Iscehi-
sar. There, little is left from the original Roman pavonazetto quarries near the
town, owing to their reuse in the 1980s. Consequently, no architectural
structures are associated with the ancient quarries, nor can much be said
about the layout of the old extraction zones.
The Roman pavonazetto quarries appear to have covered an area of
c.0.24 km2 in the marmoriferous zone south-east of Iscehisar. Extraction
efforts were concentrated at the Bacakale marble outcrop, leaving a gap of
200 m in length, 80110 m in width and 405 m in depth, cut into the side of
the marble ridge.53 The quarries yielded a white marble and a breccia of this
white marble with thin grey or violet veins (pavonazetto).54 The Bacakale
quarries may have been even larger than the size estimated by Joseph Roder, as
49
Roder 1993: 21.
50
Rakob 1997: 4.
51
Roder 1993: 502; Mackensen 2005: 15 f.
52
Winckler 1895: 3847; Salama 1951: 61. On the road, cf. Roder 1993: 51; Hirt 2003: 118 f.
53
Roder 1971: 265 f., Abb. 10, 11; Fant 1989a: 4 f.
54
Roder 1971: 259.
28 Geological and Organizational Implications

Figure 10. Dokimeion/Bacakale, overall map (after Roder 1971: Abb. 10)

modern quarrying operations removed vast amounts of the ancient rubble

still lying within the quarries.55 Once more a number of quarry walls suggest
separate sections of extraction. Roder argued that the orderly fashion in which
rubble was disposed of clearly indicates a deposit plan and, therefore, an
overall design for extracting the precious marble. Surely, such plans were
altered according to the demand for the Phrygian marble and might not have
been in place since the beginning of extraction.56 Apart from the disposal of
quarrying waste, a further logistical problem arosethe marble from the
landlocked Dokimean quarries had to be transported over a considerable
distance to the nearest harbour. Presumably, the pavonazetto was exported via
Synnada, Apameia, and Laodiceia ad Lycum, down the Maeander to Tralles
and then to Milet or Ephesos.57

2.1.6.3. Karystos
Other imperial quarries have not, as yet, revealed the remains of any substan-
tial buildings, nor has their physical layout been properly studied so as to
allow a comparison with either Simitthus or the Egyptian quarries. The
cipollino quarries near Karystos on Euboea, for example, are numerous, yet
their relationship to one another and their physical structure as a whole has
not been analysed. A Belgian team surveyed a part of the quarries near Styra
and Pyrgari and the associated road system. The quarries in the Haghios
Nikolaos and Krio Nero area near Styra were not subject to an intensive

55
Fant 1989a: 418.
56
Roder 1971: 269, 271.
57
Hirt 2003: 119 fn. 15, with further bibliography.
 Geological and Organizational Implications 29

studywith the exception of the Latomeia Claudiana, which displayed a rock

face of up to 16 metres in height. Other quarries appear to be of smaller
dimensions. Columns and blocks still litter the quarries or lie along the
slipways. Some of the quarried columns and slabs were used as pavement
for the construction of roads leading from the quarries down to the coast. The
roads show rut marks, indicating the width of ox-carts which were used to
transport quarried blocks or columns.58 At Pyrgari, nine large quarrying areas
were discovered, and most of the floors were littered with ancient debris.
A road system connected these quarries to a steep slipway, which ran down
from an altitude c.320 m above sea level to the coast with a gradient of 2040
per cent. Rectangular holes discovered along these steep slipways probably
once held wooden posts. Around these, ropes would have been slung to work
as a pulley on which the sledges transporting the columns or blocks could be
lowered down safely.59 Stone huts of unknown date have been closely exam-
ined, and interpreted as military buildings, positioned at strategic points of
the quarries near Karystos. This hypothesis, however, has not been corrobor-
ated by any epigraphic or archaeological evidence.60

2.1.6.4. Luna/Carrara
The description of the quarrying infrastructure and its layout at the white
marble quarries of Luna/mod. Carrara in Italy is similarly problematic. Since
marble of Carrara has been quarried more or less continuously since Roman
times, few archaeological finds have been made and most of the Roman
quarries were destroyed by medieval and modern extraction work. However,
at some points the remains of Roman quarrying can still be detected.
A preliminary list of ancient quarries and the findspots of iron smithing
furnaces, tools, blocks and columns was compiled and mapped by Luisa
Banti in 1931. Quarrying sites were located at the Cava del Polvaccio, the
Cava dei Fantiscritti, Cava della Carbonera, Canalgrande, Fossacava, Colon-
nata, Cava Gioia, Bedizzano, and Torano.61 In the 1980s Enrico Dolci dis-
covered two further sites, one at Scalochiello above the Valle Colonnata and
another at Monte Strinato near Carrara.62
The physical layout of the quarries can no longer be determined. The
ancient extraction area seems to cover c.4 km2. An administrative

58
Named after an inscription on a column discovered there, cf. no. 161. Papageorgakis 1964;
Hankey 1965; Vanhove 1996: 1622.
59
Vanhove 1996: 2233.
60
Kozelj & Wurch-Kozelj 1995.
61
For an overview, see map and list in Banti 1931 and Dolci 19812; Dolci 1983.
62
Dolci 1997; Dolci 1998.
30 Geological and Organizational Implications

complexif one existedwas possibly centered near the modern town of

Carrara (as some architectural remains and the epigraphic records might
suggest). If the funerary inscriptions are anything to go by, the graveyards
were situated near the main quarrying sites up on the mountain ridges,
indicating where the quarry workers most likely would have been accommo-
dated. Furthermore, any traces of an associated road system have disappeared.

2.1.7. Imperial Quarries and Organizational

Constraints and Challenges
The physical layout of the quarries, especially evident in the extensive remains at
Simitthus and the Egyptian Eastern Desert, reveal the main constraints and
challenges faced by the authorities responsible for their construction. The
formation of work procedures and the technology applied differed little from
one quarry to the next. The extraction of stone per se did not involve any major
technological challenges, but it was a low tech affair. After a suitable spot for a
quarry was located (occasionally with the help of trial trenches) the withered
rock surface was removed. Then broaching or channelling techniques were
applied by which a line of holes was chiseled in a channel across the rock surface,
perpendicular to the cleavages and joints of the underlying rock. Metal wedges
were inserted into the stone and hammered until the stone split off. The stone
blocks were then worked with chisels providing it with the rough form.
The organizational difficulties emerged not from the quarrying and fabri-
cation procedure, but from problems inherent in managing such an under-
taking. In order to quarry the stone the required labour force, preferably
skilled and experienced, needed to be assembled at the quarry and equipped
with tools. The workers had to be recruited and paid, or at least have their
basic needs (food, water, shelter) covered. The use of tools warranted a
constant supply of raw materials for fabrication or repair (iron, wood,
charcoal). This in turn required the presence of specialists acquainted with
the art of manufacturing these implements. The marble output then had to be
removed from the quarry and forwarded to the client. Draught animals and
wagons and/or ships had to be organized so as to deliver the produce (i.e.
mostly blocks and columns) to its destination. The topography of some
quarrying sites, in particular Mons Porphyrites, Karystos, and Carrara, com-
plicated the problem of exporting stone by adding a considerable difference in
altitude into the equation. In order to master the heights slipways had to be
put in place, sturdy wooden sleds built, rollers cut, and rope ordered in
considerable quantities. The lifting of marble blocks or columns on to wagons
warranted the use of more complex contraptions such as cranes. Moreover,
 Geological and Organizational Implications 31

the archaeological evidence (the location of workers villages, cemeteries, and

funerary inscriptions) creates the impression that the work force was housed
as close as possible to the quarries, in order to shorten the daily commute to
the workplace.
Additional difficulties were caused by geological constraints such as the size
of the stone outcrop. Whereas the numerous quarries of Mons Claudianus
were spread out over the vast area of c.9 km2, the quarries at Simitthus and
Dokimeion were limited to small marble outcrops, their quarrying districts, if
detectable, covering maybe 0.4 or 0.24 km2. Unlike the spacious quarries of
Mons Claudianus and Mons Porphyrites (and perhaps Luna and Karystos?),
the disposal of rubble at Simitthus or Dokimeion was a significant problem.
Owing to the constricted nature of these quarries, the waste had to be
removed quickly so it did not hinder ongoing and future extractive oper-
ations. Consequently, the disposal of rubble had to be planned before com-
mencing large extractive operations. Moreover, the small space limited the
available locations for stocking extracted columns or blocks. While at Mons
Claudianus, Mons Porphyrites, Karystos, and Luna extracted stones could be
left lying in the quarry until they were dressed into the desired shape and
shipped out to their respective destinations, the columns, blocks or sarcoph-
agi at Simitthus and Dokimeion had to be moved from the extraction zone
and were probably dressed and stocked at a location away from the quarrying
section. Within the quarries, particularly in the giallo antico quarries at
Simitthus, different quarrying sections are detectable, perhaps reflecting the
extractive operations of different work parties. This and the limited space
available implies that the quarrying authorities are likely to have coordinated
quarrying work by different teams. Moreover, mechanisms had to be devised
on processing incoming orders and converting this information into the
desired output: the correct execution of these procedures and the produce
had to be checked and various materials, tools, transport and lifting devices
organized. The location of a quarry far away from the populated regions of
the province had further repercussions for the organization of stone quarries.
The extractive operations in the Eastern Desert, at a distance of c.120 km or
more from the Nile valley, resulted in a wide array of logistical and infra-
structural problems in addition to those already discussed. The workforce had
to be brought in, provided with water and food, sheltered from the heat and
the cold, and protected against nomadic tribes. Thus fortified housing and
storage facilities had to be built. Moreover, supply routes had to be put into
place and guarded, fortified structures had to be constructed and manned by
soldiers, who in turn had to be supplied with shelter, water, and food. The
constant demand for provisions required the construction of wells and
storage facilities (cisterns, granaries) as well as a regular import of goods by
32 Geological and Organizational Implications

transport animals. The use of camels and donkeys increased the need for
further infrastructure and logistics such as animal lines, fodder, and water.
The limited availability of water probably posed the most serious problem.
This restricted the sustainable size of the population in the quarrying districts.
Any migration to the quarries had to be carefully controlled. The infrastruc-
ture of the quarries at Mons Ophiates, Tiberiane, Mons Porphyrites, and
Mons Claudianus appear to imply a fairly regular, if not constant presence
of workteams, officials, and soldiers. Apart from (occasionally fortified)
housing complexes, the existence of temples, baths, and cemeteries with the
occasional gravestone of a Roman soldier strongly implies that these settle-
ments were not makeshift lodgings but intended for permanent residenceat
least for the foreseeable future.
The quarries at Simitthus or Dokimeion both lay in the immediate vicinity
of sizeable towns and fertile plains which alleviated some of the ramifications
faced by the quarrying authorities for the Egyptian Eastern Desertthe
workforce could be brought in from the immediate surrounds and the supply
of water and food did not pose a logistical challenge. The proximity to
populated and fertile regions, however presented problems of a different
kind. The alleged use of convicts at Simitthus, for example, resulted in
additional infrastructural requirements, and a special compound had to be
constructed north of the quarries for the captives or slaves. It is open to
speculation whether the wall between the town of Simitthus and the quarries
was erected to protect the townspeople or to prevent unauthorized quarrying.
Given the range of organizational tasks dealt with by the quarrying author-
ities, this must have left a considerable paper trail: information on orders,
contracts, delieveries of various items, stocks, payments, rations, etc., had to
be recorded and filed. This in turn required a functioning archival system, the
assignment of clerks and the allocation of rooms or of a building to these tasks.
This had further implications, such as shelter and supplies for the subaltern
personnel, the construction of buildings, the supply of writing material etc. As
we shall see further on, these activities were not necessarily centred at the quarry.

2.2. IMPERIAL MINES

Unlike imperial quarries, the archaeological remains of most mining sites or

mining zones under imperial control are, as yet, not well documented outside
Roman Spain or Britain. Consequently, a comparison of the layout of imper-
ial mines throughout the empire can not be nearly as detailed as for imperial
quarries. Most Roman(?) mining sites, especially in former Yugoslavia or in
 Geological and Organizational Implications 33

Romania, are barely identifiable as Roman mines, mostly by heaps of slag and
corroded tools, in some cases also by leats, water tanks, or mining tunnels. In
particular in former Yugoslavia most observations on mining ventures were
made in Bosnia-Herzegovina during the period of occupation by the Austro-
Hungarian empire. Moreover, at a number of sites exploitation was continued
through the medieval period into the eighteenth or nineteenth century. As
most surveyors at the turn of the last century hardly can be described as
trained archaeologists it remains doubtful whether or not they dated the
remains of mining ventures precisely. More recent research on mining sites
in Dalmatia or former Yugoslavia is barely available. Many of the known sites
in Dalmatia or Romania have not been studied in depth and a map of the
layout has been produced only in a few cases. There are some exceptions
though: Alburnus Maior received broad attention in recent years, resulting in
an exceptionally detailed study. The archaeological record of mines in Spain
and the discoveries made at Dolaucothi in Britain provide a satisfying amount
of physical evidence to attempt a comparison of mining techniques and
physical layouts on a rudimentary level.
Unlike quarrying, mining techniques can be grouped in two distinctive
categoriesopencast mining and underground mining. Both are influenced
by different geological constraints and different applications of extraction
technologies with various implications for the organization of imperial min-
ing operations.

2.2.1. Opencast Mining

2.2.1.1. Secondary Gold Deposits and Hydraulic Technology
in Northwestern Spain
The specific geology of the gold deposits in the Douro basin west of Asturica
Augusta allowed a large-scale approach to mining. Gold which had been
eroded out of the mountainous regions and deposited as placers in the
high-level alluvium or in the rivers below (known as secondary deposits)
could be exploited far more easily than the vein ore from primary deposits.
The higher content of free gold in secondary deposits made their treatment
simpler.63 Roman ingenuity in the use of waterpower allowed the easy
removal of the gold-containing soil and the overburden in order to expose
the gold deposit. The hydraulic mining techniques used, hushing and ground
sluicing, necessitated a vast infrastructure for the supply of large quantities

63
Wilson 2002: 17.
34 Geological and Organizational Implications

of water. The latter technique, ground sluicing, allowed the constant removal
of gold-containing soil using the erosive force of water. The alluvial gangue
was directed into sluice boxes consisting of a series of stepped troughs where
the gold was filtered out. This technique is well documented in the Duerna
valley, south-west of Asturica Augusta/mod. Astorga, a gold-mining zone
where imperial control is documented during the late second century ad
(cf. 3.2.5). The right bank tributary rivers of the Duerna provide ideal
conditions for the use of waterpower.64 Ten ground sluicing zones were
discovered mostly on the southern banks of the Duerna valley, some of
them extending for several hundred metres along the hillsides.65 Not all of
these ground sluicing zones were worked at the same time, and in some zones
this hydraulic technique was perhaps used only as a means of prospection.66
The other hydraulic mining technique, hushing, was particularily useful in
removing large amounts of overburden to reveal the more promising strata of
alluvial deposits. Water was collected in large reservoirs above the opencast.
The gates of the reservoirs were opened from time to time, suddenly unleash-
ing the collected water with erosive force and washing away the loosened
overburden. The remnants of hushing are still detectable in the auriferous
hillsides of the Duerna valley.67 At Las Medulas a variant of the hushing
technique has left colossal scars in the landscape. The rich alluvial gold
deposits (Santalla facies: 20100/ 60300 mgr. Au/m3) were covered in some
places by other deposits which contained little gold (Las Medulas facies) of
c.100 m in height.68 The removal of this massive overburden called for
exceptional measures. Archaeological surveys have revealed the gigantic hy-
draulic infrastructure which was used. Seven aqueducts of 23 m in width and
with a length of up to c.50 km tapped the tributary rivers of the Duero or Sil,
directing water to tanks with a capacity of up to 24,000 m3.69 Remains of
tunnels and galleries are still visible at Las Medulas. Pliny the Elder describes
how the system worked: a network of tunnels was cut into the overburden and
then suddenly flooded bringing about the collapse of the rockface (ruina
montium). The debris of the collapsed hill side could then be removed by
hushing, until the gold-bearing strata were uncovered.70 The debris was
washed away in hush gullies, perhaps enabling the formation of the Lake of
64
For a description of both techniques, cf. Rosumek 1982: 5165; Woods 1987: 625 f.;
Domergue 1990: 46277; Wilson 2002: 17 f. with fn. 99.
65
Domergue & Herail 1978: 53246.
66
Wilson 2002: 18.
67
Domergue & Herail 1978: 26378.
68
Fernandez-Posse & Sanchez-Palencia 1988: 2438; Herail & Perez Garca 1989; Sanchez-
Palencia Ramos, et al. 1996: 6171, esp. 68.
69
Lewis & Jones 1970: 1748; Sanchez-Palencia Ramos et al. 1996: 7484; Wilson 2002: 19.
70
Pliny, NH 33.708. Sanchez-Palencia Ramos, et al. 1996: 81; Wilson 2002: 19.
 Geological and Organizational Implications 35

Carucedo some 5 km north of the Las Medulas mines.71 The remains of

buildings and settlements discovered in the vicinity of Las Medulas do not
provide us with a clear layout nor can their function in an organizational
context be determined. The dearth of epigraphic evidence from Las Medulas
forbids any conclusions on the function of buildings. However, recent surveys
in Northwestern Spain have provided evidence for a significant shift in
settlement patterns with the advent of Roman rule (cf. 6.1.3.2).

2.2.1.2. Primary Gold Deposits and Opencast Hard-Rock

Mining in Spain and Britain
Far more promising in reconstructing the organizational layout of extractive
operations under imperial control are the hard-rock opencast and under-
ground mines at Tresminas in north-western Spain and at Dolaucothi in
Britain. Unlike secondary deposits, primary deposits of gold ore occur as
veins in hard rocks of mountainous regions. The overburden, however, can
still be removed by hushing, and the geology in some cases allowed opencast
mining at the surface. At Brana de Folgueirosa, for example, the loosened
topsoil was washed away by hushing, exposing the outcrop of an auriferous
vein. Moreover, the water tanks could be used for periodic hushing in order to
remove unwanted rock debris resulting from hacking out the gold ore.72 In
the case of the imperial gold mines at Tresminas, water technology appears to
have been put to use in a different manner. A find of anvil or mortar stones
suggests that water-powered ore crushing machines were used to accelerate
the crushing of the extracted ore to smaller stones, which then could be
milled. The powder resulting from the milling was then washed in troughs
in order to separate the sterile rock from the gold ore. This complicated
procedure (beneficiation) minimized the dross of each smelting charge and
therefore reduced the waste of fuel.73 The Tresminas hard rock mines con-
sisted of two large opencasts: the Corta de Covas and the Corta da Ribeirinha.
Remnants of double shafts in the rockface suggest earlier underground
mining attempts before the hardrock had been sufficiently removed to allow
opencast mining. From the opencasts, five galleries either functioned as adits
draining water (as in the case of the Galeria do Pilar) or, in combination with

71
Sanchez-Palencia Ramos et al 1996: 918.
72
Bird 1972: 3748. On hardrock mining, cf. Domergue 1990: 47780; Rosumek 1982:
1551.
73
On the technology of ore-crushing machines and other findspots of anvil stones, cf. Wahl
1993: 13942; Lewis 1997; Wilson 2002: 21 f. with fn. 110. See furthermore the bucking stone
or Carreg Angharad Fychan at Erglodd/Wales, in Schlee 2007: 8.
36 Geological and Organizational Implications

shafts, permitted the continued underground exploitation of gold lodes. The

two opencasts cover an area of 430
140 m and 370
90 m. A third site of far
smaller dimensions, the Corta dos Lagoinhos, consisted of a tunnel of c.100 m
in length, connecting shafts sunk into the hardrock, whose ceiling collapsed at
some point. Apart from a water reservoir and an aqueductboth unrelated to
the mining worksas well as a wooden amphitheatre, the preliminary excav-
ations yielded hardly any building structures.74 The epigraphic record from
the cemetery at the site does document the presence of a military detachment
and a number of immigrant workers, while pottery finds support an early date
for the commencement of mining operations (probably under Tiberius). The
oil lamps found in the mining tunnels point towards a peak in the extraction
of ores during the first half of the second century ad.75
Hushing and ground sluicing were not only used on the Iberian Peninsula,
but were also employed in the extraction of the gold deposits at Dolaucothi in
Britain.76 Though epigraphic evidence for the presence of members of the
Roman administration or the Roman army is absent, the discovery of a
Roman fort in the vicinity of the opencast and subterranean mining oper-
ations appears to suggest the involvement of the Roman state at Dolaucothi.
A survey and excavations at this gold-mining complex from 1987 to 1999
have added to the knowledge of the site.77
The mining operations at Dolaucothi consist of an opencast exploitation
site combined with underground galleries and tunnels cut into the hardrock.
A system of leats tabbed water from the Annell and Cothi conducting it to vast
tanks situated above the opencast area. Jones and Lewis provided a develop-
mental model explaining the sequence in which the hydraulic system set in
place for hushing and ground-sluicing techniques facilitated prospection and
exploitation by the Romans. The removal of the topsoil uncovered primary
hardrock gold deposits which were then exploited by opencast mining and
underground stoping. Pre-Roman exploitation was marginal, according to
Jones and Lewis.78 Based on an unpublished study by Cauuet, Burnham now
proposes an alternative model: the Dolaucothi mining area included a primary
deposit of hardrock which was exploited by tool-working and fire-setting. The
secondary alluvial deposits were exploited with the hydraulic system. Cauuet
suggests that the primary deposit appears to have been already extensively

74
Wahl 1993: 12639, 1437.
75
Wahl 1993: 14650.
76
Lewis & Jones 1969; Jones & Lewis 1971; Jones & Little 1973; Jones 1991; Stewart 2002:
2338.
77
For an general overview and detailed results from the campaigns of 198799, cf. Burnham
& Burnham 2004.
78
Jones & Lewis 1971: 297300 with fig.9; Burnham & Burnham 2004: 68.
 Geological and Organizational Implications 37

Figure 11. Dolaucothi, overall map (after Burnham & Burnham 2004: fig. 1.2)

exploited in the pre-Roman era. The Romans, arriving in the 70s ad found an
opencast site which they sought to rework more thoroughly, in part by extend-
ing it further underground (fragments of a waterwheel attest such activity) and
in part by working the secondary deposits with a large-scale hydraulic system.79
As yet there is not sufficient evidence to resolve the early mining history of
Dolaucothi. Even so, the discovery of a mortar stone, most likely belonging to a
water-driven hammer mill of the Roman period and a conical spoil heap of
processing wastes and rubble, offer additional insights into the mining oper-
ations. The discovery of an increasing proportion of pyritic shale strongly
indicates the employment of roasting techniques in order to free the sul-
phide-locked gold.80 Apart from the surviving traces of the mining operations,
recent surveys have yielded settlement remains alongside a Roman road to
Llandovery and in the vicinity of the Roman fort or fortlet. The military fort
at Pumsaint was founded in the mid-70s ad on a level terrace above the
confluence of the river Cothi and Twrch. The size of the fort probably was
c.1.9 ha, enough for a cohors quingenaria. The interior of the fort/fortlet

79
Burnham & Burnham 2004: 329 f.
80
Burnham & Burnham 2004: 2845, 328.
38 Geological and Organizational Implications

revealed a complex sequence with five phases of construction. The internal

layout of the fort/fortlet, however, remains unclear. Around 100 ad the size of
the fort was reduced and the new fortlet saw a refurbishment of its defences
with a stone wall. Whether this alteration of the forts size reflects a change in
function and/or a reduction of troop level, as observed in other parts of Wales,
cannot be confirmed. The fortlet continued to be occupied until the mid-120s
ad and, like other military sites in south Wales, was abandoned during
Hadrians reign. A civilian settlement consisting of timber structures and at
least one stone-built structure was discovered on the east side of the fort.
Further settlement activity was located to its immediate south. With the
abandonment of the fortlet the associated settlements were probably aban-
doned as well.81 South of the Cothi river traces of a further settlement were
discovered, sprawling alongside the Roman road to Llandovery and perhaps
including a bath-house. The finds appear to indicate a date range from the
later first to the early second century ad and suggest that perhaps the settlement
may have outlasted the Roman fortlet by one or two decades. However, no clear
links to the gold-mine have been established.82
The settlement layout at Dolaucothi certainly draws the eye to the military
fortlet around which the settlements appear to be grouped. These were most
likely inhabited by miners and those supplying auxiliary services. In line with
the layout of Roman quarrying ventures in the Egyptian Eastern Desert, it is
tempting to see the Roman fortlet as the seat of the administration of the
mining ventures. The lack of any written evidence, however, prevents the
allocation of this function to the fort. Nevertheless, given the fact that gold
was mined at Dolaucothi, the involvement of the Roman state is likely to have
extended beyond the mere provision of security.

2.2.2. Underground Mining

2.2.2.1. Primary Silver/Lead Deposits in South-Western Spain
In contrast to the opencast extraction of primary and secondary deposits, the
problems posed by underground mining were of a different nature. In a
tedious process, the ore itself had to be extracted via shafts, galleries, and
tunnels, creating technical problems such as ventilation and drainage, as well
as the prevention of tunnel collapse. The mining procedures were severely
limited by the water-table: mining below the water-table required the instal-
lation of Archimedean screws and treadwheel-operated waterwheels to
81
Burnham & Burnham 2004: 31820.
82
Burnham & Burnham 2004: 320 f.
 Geological and Organizational Implications 39

evacuate the watera considerable investment. Mines also could be drained

by a sloping channel or adit.83 Moreover, the galleries and tunnels had to be
secured. This was not only achieved by limiting their dimensions. Certain
geometrical profiles such as trapezoidal shapes were better suited to deal with
the strata pressures on the tunnel.84 Additional security measures to prevent
the collapse of tunnels were provided by timber frames and pillars.85 Under-
ground mining also needed lighting, with oil lamps satisfying basic lighting
requirements.86 The lack of space in the underground tunnel furthermore
diminished the number of workers that could batter the rock with metal
hammers after the rock-face had been softened by setting fire to it. The output
in ore from an underground mine was thereby significantly limited and
the removal of rubble posed a significant problem.87 However, certain per-
fectly stratified primary deposits allowed the ore lode to be exploited simul-
taneously at several locations. Moreover, the appearance of slag heaps at
sites like Sotiel Coronada points to the instant beneficiation and smelting
of ore in furnaces at the site.88 Such optimal geological conditions were
encountered at argentiferous lead mines like Cabezo de los Silos/La Zarza,
the copper mines at Sotiel Coronada and at Cabezo de los Silos/Cabezas de
los Pastos in south-western Spain. At these mining sites the surface was
literally perforated by hundreds of twin shafts or single shafts sunk to reach
the vein ore. At La Zarza up to 800 pits or shafts, at Sotiel Coronada
100 twin shafts and around fifty single shafts, and at Cabezas de los Pastos
145 twin and again around fifty single shafts, have been discovered.
This specific layout of mining operations is recorded in the lex metallis
dicta, a mining regulation inscribed on a bronze tablet found at the imperial
silver and copper mines of Vipasca/mod. Aljustrel.89 The organizational
layout of these mining operations can occasionally still be observed.
Apart from the remains of mining operations and vast heaps of slag,
Sotiel Coronada yielded remnants of a Roman settlement. The report of

83
Craddock 1995: 7681; Wilson 2002: 17, 20 f. Treadwheel-operated waterwheels have been
discovered at Rio Tinto in Spain as well as Dolaucothi in Wales, while the mines at Posadas in
Spain yielded batteries of four Archimedes screws, cf. Oleson 1984: 191, 200, 221, 249 f., 2702.
Pumping devices have beendiscovered at Sotiel Coronada and in the Sierra de Cartagena, cf.
Domergue 1990, pl. XXIIa, b.
84
Rosumek 1982: 28; Shepherd 1993: 2630.
85
Cf. Rosumek 1982: 3142.
86
Rosumek 1982: 426.
87
On these tools and fire-setting, cf. Craddock 1995: 337, 47 f.; Rosumek 1982: 1528.
88
For slag at Sotiel Coronada, cf. Domergue 1987a: 221 f.
89
Domergue 1983: 15166, in part. 158 f.; Domergue 1987a: 21723, 2313, with older
bibliography.
40 Geological and Organizational Implications

Figure 12. Cabezas de los Pastos, overall map (after Domergue 1990: fig. 18)

the Companhia Mineira of 1885 identified a fortified settlement, and minor

settlements throughout the mining zone and a cemetery on the top of a hill
close by were still visible at the time. The coin finds demonstrate the longevity
of the settlement from the Republic to the first and second century ad. Some
of the most notable finds were three Archimedean screws and a water pump.
Moreover, an inscribed bronze tablet (100
80 cm) setting out the details of
slaves being put to work, was discovered in the 1960s but subsequently lost.90
A Roman mining settlement was also recorded at Rio Tinto, perhaps the
ancient Urium known to Ptolemy.91 A great number of buildings lay in the
immediate vicinity of the mining operations. Most prominent is the vast
settlement north of the Corta Dehesa, where in the eighteenth century walls,
doors, columns, and pillars could still be seen. Apart from the settlement, a
cemetery extended for 2 km along the former road to and from the mines.
Excavations there yielded numerous lamps and Spanish terra sigillata. Most
recorded inscriptions may originate from this locality. Moreover, the remains
of two tower tombs might indicate the burial of members from the upper
echelons of the mining community. Further cemeteries were discovered at
Nerva, Planes, Bella Vista, and San Dionisio around the mining area. Fur-
thermore, ancient slag deposits were found along the northern edge of the
Corta Dehesa and Corta Lago92

90
Domergue 1983: 222 f.
91
Ptol. 2.4.10.
92
Jones 1980: 1547; Domergue 1987a: 241 f.; Willies 1997.
 Geological and Organizational Implications 41

For both sites one may observe that the work force lived and died in the
immediate vicinity of the mining site. Some wealthy members of these mining
communities may even have been buried close by, presumably along the roads
leading to the mining settlement. This is suggested by large tower tombs at the
Dehesa cemetery at Rio Tinto. Modern exploitation of these sites prevents a
more detailed archaeological survey and excavation. Apart from this, the
inscriptions found at Rio Tinto contribute little information on the organ-
ization of mining operations. An inscription naming a procurator and libertus
Augusti of emperor Nerva was found at Rio Tinto, which certainly hints at
the supervision of the copper and silver mines there by the Roman state.93
A number of funerary inscriptions do provide some insights on some of the
inhabitants at Rio Tinto.94 The inscriptions, however, do not inform us on the
economic purpose of their presence.

2.2.2.2. Goldmining in Alburnus Maior/Dacia

Recent research on the underground gold-mining operations and mining
settlements in the vicinity of Alburnus Maior/mod. Ros ia Montana in
Roman Dacia provides a limited insight into the spatial layout of this district.
The extensive exploitation of the gold lodes in modern times prohibits the
complete reconstruction of the ancient mining topography. Even so, the
recent surveys and excavations by Romanian and French teams have revealed
a number of Roman settlements and remains of Dacian and Roman mining
activities, spreading out over an area of c.5.5 km2. These recent results add to
previous archaeological work in the area of Ros ia Montana.
Roman mining activity and settlements have been located at a number of
sites on each side of the Ros ia valley. Seven mining galleries discovered in
1983/4 on Carpeni hill display the use of timber to secure the galleries, niches
cut especially for oil-lamps, and a ladder carved from a tree trunk. The
galleries are cut in a trapezoidal form with a wide base (with heights between
1.5 and 1.9 m). Furthermore, excavations yielded remains of a settlement at
Balea as well as pottery and tools. Further building remains were uncovered
at the Tomus and Bisericut a sites on Carpeni hill. One structure unique to
Ros ia Montana displays stone-mortar walls, a hypocaust and a vast number of
tiles, some of which carry the stamp of the legio XIII Gemina.95

93
CIL II 956.
94
CIL II 957, 958; AE 1965: 298300, 302; AE 1965: 301 HEp 3, 1993: 221; AE 1991: 10002
HEp 3, 1993: 21517; HEp 3, 1993: 21825.
95
Wollmann 1996: 3768; C. Craciun and V. Moga, in Damian 2003: 35 f.; V. Rusu-Bolindet
et al., in Damian 2003: 383427; E. Bota et al., in Damian 2003: 42942. O. T entea and V.
Vois ian, in Damian 2003: 443.
42 Geological and Organizational Implications

Figure 13. Ros ia Montana, overall map (after Damian 2003: fig. 12 and maps;
Wollmann 1996: plate LXXXVIII)

Further discoveries were made at the so-called Gauri, Hop-Botar, and

Habad-Bradoaia sites, as well as in the Nanului Valley. At Gauri remains of a
settlement have been detected, consisting of wooden and stone-built struc-
tures, in one of which a votive altar to Ianus was found. Particular finds
(household pottery, grinders, oil lamps, needles, etc.) and the lack of mining
tools have been used to identify the settlement in question as one of the
civilian kastella referred to in the epigraphic evidence from the site.96 Further
building remains of Roman origin were yielded by excavations at Hop-Botar
and nearby Taul T apului, as well as at Habad-Bradoaia. The exact function of
either of these edifices remains mostly unknown.97 One complex at Habad-
Bradoaia was identified as an area sacra, including cult buildings and 35
inscribed altars. Amongst the numerous votive inscriptions the dedications of
three beneficiarii consulares stand out, whereas four inscriptions appear to
name a k(astellum) Ansi/s (perhaps to be equated with Habad-Bradoaia).98
A cemetery near Hop-Botar yielded 169 incineration burials.99 In the
Nanului Valley the excavators unearthed three structures probably erected

96
C. Craciun and V. Moga, in Damian 2003: 34. V. Moga et al., in Damian 2003: 4579.
97
P. Damian et al., in Damian 2003: 81120; A. Pescaru et al., in Damian 2003: 12146.
98
Wollmann 1996: 375; S. Coicis et al., in Damian 2003: 14789.
99
V. Moga et al., in Damian 2003: 191249.
 Geological and Organizational Implications 43

for religious purposes. The cult edifice at Szekely included three inscribed
votive altars.100 Similary, in a structure at Drumus seven inscribed altars and
a number of altar fragments were found, three naming a collegium Sardia-
t(ensium).101 Moreover, the Dalea site also consists of a religious precinct
and a number of inscribed, anepigraphic and fragmentary altars.102
Immediately to the east of these settlements on the Cetate mountain the
archaeologists examined the traces of Roman underground mining oper-
ations. The Zeus mining sector consists of mining tunnels, either for pro-
spection or exploitation purposes, the latter following the lode in a vertical
slant. As remaining niches suggest, the exploitation tunnels appear to have
been secured with wooden beams. The examination of the organic and non-
organic debris inside the Zeus mine allowed a date for the beginnings of the
exploitation during the first or second century ad and a continuation perhaps
into the third and fourth century. Further works are found at the Gauri
sector which might have been exploited in Roman times.103 East of the Cetate
mountain and south of Ros ia Montana a further hill, the Carnic ridge, was
mined for gold. Some of the underground mines at this site appear to be of
Roman origin, consisting of a number of galleries and tunnels. The French
excavators discovered traces of fire-setting, lamp niches typical of Roman
mines and charcoal remains, the latter providing a Carbon 14 date for the
mining works ranging from the second to the fourth century ad. Lamps and
fragments of oil-lamps found in the rubble of the Carnic mine date to the
second century. Surprisingly, in some sections of the mine wooden remains
provided a Carbon 14 date ranging between the mid-third century bc and the
first century ad. Provided the Carbon 14 dating is trustworthy, mining
operations at Alburnus Maior commenced in pre-Roman times.104
Similar data were gained from the analysis of organic material from a
survey of the T arina mining site on the northern bank of the Ros ia Valley.105
In the vicinity of the mine, remains of a cemetery were still visible in the late
nineteenth century. Funerary stelae and a sarcophagus lid were interpreted as
signs of wealth of the local mining community. Furthermore, the discovery of
a votive altar suggests the presence of a sanctuary there.106 Surveys on Orlea
hill yielded two mining galleries with vast timber constructions, niches for oil

100
C. Craciun et al., in Damian 2003: 25383.
101
Perhaps a reference to the tribe of the  or Sardeates in Dalmatia, cf. C. Craciun
and A. Sion, in Damian 2003: 285333.
102
V. V. Zirra et al., in Damian 2003: 33580.
103
B. Cauuet et al., in Damian 2003: 486501.
104
B. Cauuet et al., in Damian 2003: 467526.
105
B. Cauuet et al., in Damian 2003: 503.
106
Wollmann 1996: 379 f.; C. Craciun and V. Moga, in Damian 2003: 40 f.
44 Geological and Organizational Implications

lamps and water conduits still preserved. Moreover, seven incineration burials
were excavated, and in the vicinity of Orlea at Taul Secuilor a further cemetery
was unearthed.107 To the east of the OrleaT arina mining area c.50 wooden
writing tablets and mining tools were found in Roman mining tunnels at
Igren, Vaidoaia, and Lety during extractive operations in the eighteenth and
nineteenth century.108 Further tablets were discovered during mining oper-
ations at Carnicul Mare in the early nineteenth century.109
Although the intensity of modern mining and settlement activity destroyed
much of the original Roman layout, the recovered traces allow for some
conclusions to be made. The scattered settlements, cemeteries, and sanctuar-
ies are located close to the mining operations on the hills surrounding the
Ros ia valley. Undoubtedly, the population involved in mining saw it necessary
to settle in the immediate vicinity of their working place. This is reflected in
the epigraphic evidence and the tabulae ceratae as well: apart from a vicus
Pirustarum, a k(astellum) Baridust(arum) and a k(astellum) Ansi or Ansis are
named.110 Whether or not there existed an administrative centre or a military
fort at Alburnus Maior remains unknown. Tiles of the legio XIII Gemina might
suggest the occasional presence of a military contingent and the discovery of
inscriptions for beneficiarii consulares certainly implies some sort of adminis-
trative control, the bureau perhaps located somewhere beneath the modern
town of Ros ia Montana.

2.2.3. Mining Techniques and their Organizational Implications

The exploitation of secondary gold deposits in the river valleys of north-
western Spain required a considerable investment in hydraulic infrastruc-
ture.111 Huge aqueducts had to be constructed leading over difficult
terrain, covering long distances and considerable differences in altitude.
Large hushing tanks had to be built, channels had to be dug, sluice boxes
constructed, tunnels cut into the overburden, and so forth. The installation
and maintenance of this technological infrastructure as well as the mining
procedure itself required a large and constantly available workforce and
the presence of skilled engineers. The workforce needed to be supplied with
pay, food, and tools, and security measures had to be implemented. The
mining district required protection from brigands and the workforce

107
Wollmann 1996: 378 f.; C. Craciun and V. Moga, in Damian 2003: 36 f.
108
Wollmann 1996: 380 f.
109
Wollmann 1996: 381.
110
Piso 2004: 291, 297 f.; see now Ciongradi et al. 2008.
111
Wilson 2002: 17.
 Geological and Organizational Implications 45

(especially when coerced) had to be guarded. Military personnel were fur-

thermore needed for the protection of convoys exporting the metal. The
complexity of organizing a mining operation, the investment in a vast infra-
structure, the command of human and material resources, and the huge scale
of operations render a concerted extraction effort likely. The well-structured
opencast gold mines at Tresminas or Dolaucothi, in particular the galleries for
water drainage from the opencast as well as those cut into the hardrock
following the gold lode, imply a concerted effort under the control of one
party. Unlike opencast mines used for the exploitation of secondary deposits,
the removal of hardrock in the opencast extraction of primary deposits was
far more tedious. In the case of Tresminas, it is not quite clear whether or not
hydraulic technologies could be applied to the removal of rock debris. This
limited extraction to a smaller scale, and the technical process prior to the
smelting of gold was lengthened. Besides the usual requirements in supplying
and guarding or protecting the workforce, a hydraulic infrastructure had to be
put in place to evacuate water, and to accommodate the mechanized crushing,
milling and washing of gold ore.
The spatial restrictions of underground mining certainly reduced the
number of workers extracting ore, decreasing the ore output of a mine.
Moreover, the investments in technical infrastructure were considerable.
Timber and wood were needed to set fire to the rockface or to prevent tunnels,
shafts, and galleries from collapsing.112 Complicated water-lifting devices had
to be constructed in order to deal with rising water-tables. Metal tools were
required and had to be repaired, in turn making the import of iron and
charcoal necessary. Furnaces were constructed for the smelting of ore, while
mills and ore crushing devices were needed for the beneficiation process. The
vast quantities of rubble had to be removed from the tunnels and shafts.
Besides the basic requirements of food and shelter for the workforce, the
organizational challenges were significant, although perhaps not quite as
colossal as the large opencast extractive operations in north-western Spain.
Furthermore, in certain cases such as Sotiel Coronada or Vipasca the geo-
logical formation of the ore deposit allowed for a compartmentalization of
mining operations. The imperial administration was thus in the fortunate
position of being able to delegate the immediate burden of organizing the
exploitation of the ore deposits (i.e. the operative process) to either different
private contractors or different owners (cf. 7.1.1). The burden shouldered by
imperial officials was limited to the construction of drainage adits.113

112
This is suggested for the marked logs found at Mazarron, cf. Rosumek 1982: 38.
113
Cf. Vipasca/mod. Aljustrel Domergue 1983: 723, 159.
46 Geological and Organizational Implications

Given how remote some of these mines were from the more populated
regions, the mining authorities were likely forced to import the work force
over considerable distances. The populace involved in hardrock extractive
operations seems to have been settled in the immediate vicinity of the mines.
The location of cemeteries close by and the construction of sanctuaries and
baths at larger mining settlements appear to be the expression of a long-term
commitment to operating the mines. In contrast to the settlements of the
miners, the administrative mining centres were not necessarily to be found in
the mining zones butas at Dolaucothi and perhaps Ros ia Montanain the
valleys near the main communication links i.e. roads or rivers (cf. 4.3).

2 . 3 . S U M M A RY

The comparison of the restrictive framework set by geological, technological,

topographical, and geographical constraints reveals genuine organizational
differences between imperial quarries and mines. Although the workforce
lived in housing as close as possible to the extractive operations in both cases,
and there are similar solutions to basic problems in sustaining and protecting
the workforce in imperial mines and quarries in general, certain logistical or
technological requirements remain unique to each category of extractive
operation. Large-scale opencast mining required a complex hydraulic infra-
structure consisting of aqueducts, canals, and tanks, while underground
mining in some cases was in need of an elaborate scheme of water conduits
and water-wheels in order to evacuate ground water. Moreover, ore crushing
machines and mills could make a significant contribution towards speeding
up the processing of ore. These infrastructural and technological possibilities,
if fully exploited, undoubtedly increased the capital intensity of such ventures.
In contrast to imperial mining operations, there was little difference in
extractive technology applied to imperial quarries and quarry operations in
general. Stone was broken out of the rockface and split into the desired size by
applying a series of wedgeholes for wooden or iron wedges, or using stone saws.
The blocks were then dressed to the desired shape with chisels.114 In comparison
to opencast or underground mining procedures, the technology applied did not
require a vast infrastructure. The main organizational problems emerged when
the marble products had to be moved out of the quarry. The construction
of special carts, slipways, and roads, as well as the supply of draught animals,

114
Rosumek 1982: 12231; Adam 1999: 22 f. On stone saws, cf. Rosumek 1982: 1316.
 Geological and Organizational Implications 47

etc., demanded a considerable logistical effort from the authorities in charge.

The export of metal ingots, however, hardly necessitated preparations of a
comparable scale. Once the technological infrastructure for the mines was in
place, its maintenance perhaps was a lesser organizational burden than the
constantly recurring strain on human, animal, and material resources imposed
by the immense logistical problems connected with the movement of bulky
marble items.
Therefore, the authorities running imperial quarries or imperial mines
were faced with distinct organizational challenges. Even amongst imperial
mines different geological and topographical constraints posed different
problems (opencast or underground mining) and set limitations on the
scale of the mining operations possible. Similarly, the size of the marble
outcrop could determine the complexity of extractive procedures. Small
marble outcrops necessitated well planned operative procedures in order to
cope with the disposal of rubble and the quarrying activities of different
parties. These fundamental differences certainly had an effect on directive
and operative processes and in most cases demanded a customized organiza-
tional approach. In other words, the authorities in charge were forced by the
geological and topographical constraints as well as the limitations of the
available technology to find individual organizational solutions for each
imperial quarrying or mining district.
 3
Mining and Quarrying Districts

Mining and quarrying operations under imperial control appear to have

taken place within a strictly deWned territorial entity distinct from the colo-
nial, municipal and other territories within a province. The enforcement of
various organizational measures by those in charge of Roman mining and
quarrying operations was likely focused on these delimited districts. The
existence of such districts is highlighted most prominently in the Vipasca
tablets. Some scholars have tried to identify further imperial mining and
quarrying districts, their extent, and their setting within the ancient landscape
of Roman provinces. Not all their conclusions can remain uncontested.

3 . 1 . M E TA L LU M A N D T E R R I TO R I A M E TA L LO RU M

The bronze tablets found at Vipasca/mod. Aljustrel (Portugal) in the early

twentieth century clearly describe the mining area of Vipasca as an adminis-
trative district with its own boundaries. The passages in these texts stating this
are numerous: according to the lex metallis dicta (LMD) slaves convicted of
stealing ore were Xogged and sold under the condition that they never return
to metalla or territoria metallorum (ll. 278). In the case of a freeman caught
stealing ore, the procurator conWscated his property and banned him from
the mining territory, the Wnes metallorum (ll. 29). Similar rules applied to
saboteurs of mining operations: slaves who had been punished or sold were to
stay away from any metalla, while liberi were prohibited by the procurator
from entering the Wnes metallorum ever again (ll. 325). The same termin-
ology regarding the mining territory is repeated in the clauses concerning the
punishment for breaching technical protocol of mining procedures (ll. 401).
In the lex metalli Vipascensis (LMV) contractors were authorized to collect
certain fees intra Wnes metalli Vipascensis (ll. 19 and 5961). Moreover, the
barbers and slag-collectors, as contractors of these services, were assured a
monopoly of their trade within the conWnes of the vicus metalli Vipascensis or
its territories (ll. 378 and 4757).
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 49

The lex metalli Vipascensis and the lex metallis dicta distinguish between
three territorial entities, vicus, metallum and territoria metallorum or
Wnes metallorum.1 The enclitic particle ve is used in both texts to distin-
guish the mining region and its territories: LMV ll. 378 in vico metalli
Vipascensis inve territoris eius, in the vicus of the metallum Vipascense or its
territories, and in LMD l. 27 in ullis metallis territorisve metallorum, in
any metalla or territoria metallorum. If we assume that the distinction is a
deliberate one, the question arises as to what these terms actually mean. We
learn from the LMV that the metallum Vipascense included a vicus with a bath,
a school, barber shop, and, as the inscriptions found at Vipasca suggest, a
cemetery.2 In 1.2 of LMV one reads that contracts intra Wnes metalli Vipas-
censis, within the area of the metallum Vipascense, are subject to a 1 per cent
tax. The text thus suggests that the metallum Vipascense consisted of a
delimited mining zone, a Wnes metalli. In contrast LMD notes on several
occasions Wnes metallorum or territoria metallorum.3 The use of the singular
in the LMV and the plural of metallum in the LMD most probably reXects the
diVerent purposes of these regulations. Whereas the LMV regulates aVairs
within the metallum Vipascense only, the LMD probably was enforced in a
number of mining operations in Southern Spain.4 A tentative conclusion may
be proposed: a metallum could be an administrative district in its own right
with its own territory or territories.5
Interestingly, the lex metalli Vipascensis refers to only one metallum Vipas-
cense, whereas the title of the procurator at Vipasca, procurator metallorum,
suggests that his responsibilities covered more than one metallum.6 This is
corroborated by an inscription found at Vipasca which was set up by the
coloni ( . . . ) metalli Vipascensis for the procurator Beryllus, the restitutor
metallo[r]um.7 The singular metallum identiWes the basic territorial unit
such as the mining area at Vipasca. Consequently, the procurator metallorum
named in the Vipasca tablets and the inscription by the coloni would not only
have supervised the metallum Vipascense but a number of other metalla as
well.8 At Pergamon in Asia Minor, an honoriWc inscription for a Saturninus,

1
Dusanic 2004b: 249.
2
IRPac 1226, 128, 13041.
3
LMD ll. 278, 34, 412.
4
Domergue 1983: 161.
5
The sentence in vico metalli Vipascensis inve territorihiis eius(LMV l. 378), suggests that
the metallum Vipascenserather than its vicusconsisted of multiple territoria, cf. Domergue
1983: 54, 88. The singular forms territorium metalli or territorium metallorum are not
attested in the Vipasca tablets.
6
LMV l. 2: ( . . . )intra Wnes metalli Vipascensis ( . . . ) proc(urator) metallorum ( . . . )
7
IRPac 121.
8
Hirschfeld 1905: 160 with fn. 2.
50 Mining and Quarrying Districts

listing his career, documents the oYce of an K


P or procurator metallorum Vipascensium, evidently the plural
of metallum Vipascense.9 This does not necessarily contradict our previous
assumption.10 Vipasca was probably the administrative centre for the metal-
lum Vipascense and perhaps for a number of other metalla in the area
as well.11
The distinction between territoria/Wnes metallorum and metallum, as
observed in the Vipasca tablets, is not reXected in other legal sources. More-
over, Roman jurists hardly ever employ the term territorium in a mining or
quarrying context, while it is often used to deWne the territory of a commu-
nity.12 In fact, the writings of the Roman land surveyors demonstrate the
precise use of the term territorium for the lands of coloniae, municipia,
civitates etc. An additional aspect, which only is hinted at marginally in the
Digest, is the apparent understanding by Frontinus or Agennius Urbicus of a
territorium as a jurisdictional unit, which perhaps even had limited auton-
omy.13 Given the deliberate use of the term in the Vipasca tablets it could
reXect the judicial powers bestowed on the procurator metallorum and might
deWne the limits of his jurisdiction.14 Even the term metallum is deWned
rather vaguely in the Roman legal sources. For Ulpian both stone quarries and
any other extractive operations can be identiWed as metalla.15 This seems to
reXect the general understandingobservable in most literary sourcesof
metallum as a location where stones, metals, or other resources can be
extracted.16 However, in his ninth book on the duties of a proconsul, Ulpian
explains that metalla, although numerous, do not exist in all provinces.

9
Cf. Christol & Demougin 1990: 170.
10
The argument that either the scribes of the bronze tablets or the Pergamene inscription
mistakingly used the plural has to be ruled out. The legal content of the Vipasca tablets
theoretically excludes an unsystematic use of terminology. The explanation that the Greek
scribe in Pergamon misunderstood the legal niceties of the terminology does not quite work
as the term
 P seems to be a direct translation of metalla Vipascensia, albeit
with a misinterpretation of the letter i as , cf. Christol & Demougin 1990: 170 with fn. 60.
11
Based on the recent excavations at Aljustrel the question whether or not the so called
House of the Procurator actually was an oYce for the imperial mining administration cannot
be settled, cf. Domergue 1983: 31 f.
12
For a deWnition, see Pomponius, Dig. 50.16.239.8: Territorium est universitatis agrorum
intra Wnes cuiusque civitatis ( . . . ). Other attestations: Dig. 2.1.20, 10.1.7, pr. 30.41.5, 47.12.3.4,
48.22.7.19, 50.4.18.25, 50.12.8, 50.15.4.2.
13
See territorium in Campbell 2000: index, glossary.
14
Hirschfeld 1905: 160, compares the judicial and other powers of the mining procurator at
Vipasca with those of the municipal authorities. On the responsibilities of the mining procur-
ator at Vipasca, cf. 6.1.3.1.
15
Dig. 7.1.9.23, see also Dig. 7.1.13.5, 27.9.3.6.
16
TLL VIII M, 8705.
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 51

Convicts condemned to the mines in a province without metalla have to be

transferred to provinces with metalla.17 In this context the word metallum is
not used with the usual ambivalence, but must describe one speciWc kind of
extractive operation. Otherwise the explanation that not all provinces had
metalla (although all sorts of extractive operations such as quarries, salt mines
etc. are documented in every province) would not make much sense. Ulpian
therefore must be using metalla as reference to a speciWc category of extract-
ive operation to which the governor of a province could condemn convicts.

3 . 2 . M I N I N G A N D Q UA R RY I N G D I S T R I C T S

The existence of clearly deWned territorial entities exclusively reserved for

extractive operations under imperial supervision appears to be suYciently
documented by the evidence discussed above. Yet, when it comes to identi-
fying metalla and territoria metallorum at places other than Vipasca,
let alone deWning the precise extent of the mining district at Vipasca itself,
the epigraphic and archaeological material provides us with little evidence.
Although Roman mining and quarrying ventures per se can be detected
throughout the empire, one usually is left in the dark about the precise
delimitation of the district. Only on rare occasions can the outline of a
territory still be traced: the district of the Simitthus quarry, for example,
was partially demarcated by a wall which provides a rough idea of the extent
of the quarrying district. Moreover, the written material from the quarries in
the Egyptian Eastern Desert demonstrates the existence of an administrative
division consisting of numerous quarries.

3.2.1. Quarrying Territories in Roman Egypt

The archaeological remains at Mons Claudianus, Mons Porphyrites, Mons
Ophiates, and Tiberiane display uniform characteristics in their assemblage of
infrastructural elements (forts, slipways, cairns, etc.). These similarities seem
to point towards the inclusion of these four quarries within the same organ-
izational unit. Moreover, Peacocks discovery of red porphyry fragments at all
four sites provides evidence for signiWcant interaction amongst these quarries.
This is conWrmed by the written material which the excavations have yielded

17
Dig. 48.19.8.4.
52 Mining and Quarrying Districts

thus far. The management of the stone quarries at Mons Claudianus, Mons
Porphyrites, and Mons Ophiates(?)/mod. Wadi Umm Wikala, fell partly under
the responsibility of one K
H
/procurator metallorum, as
inscriptions naming the same procurators at diVerent quarries appear to
indicate. Marcus Ulpius Chresimus, for example, is documented in the epi-
graphic record at Mons Claudianus and at Mons Porphyrites, while one Ulpius
Himerus is known at Mons Claudianus and Mons Ophiates. Furthermore,
Epaphroditos Sigerianos, an imperial slave and
c
H
, is
documented at Mons Claudianus and at Mons Porphyrites (cf. 4.1.1).
Apart from the imperial oYcials in charge, further documentary evidence
seems to corroborate the view of a single vast administrative division contain-
ing these four individual quarrying districts. The
 (i.e. members of
the familia Caesaris), are noted in the ostraca as belonging to the I

of
Mons Claudianus. Together with the I
 (subdivisions) of the quarries at
Tiberiane and Mons Porphyrites, the I
e
F formed a subdiv-
ision of the 

 .18 An ostracon from Maximianon/mod.
Al-Zarqa on the road between Koptos and Myos Hormos mentions a man
K

---] (!), suggesting that other areas beyond the
known quarries might have been included in this vast administrative div-
ision.19 Further evidence is provided by an inscribed limestone block at El-
Ashmunein. The building inscription attests the existence of a hosp(itium)
tabular(iorum) Porphyr(itis) et aliorum metallorum, quarters for tabularii
of the Mons Porphyrites quarries, or perhaps even of the numerus of Mons
Porphyrites (provided that aliorum metallorum means the quarries of
Mons Claudianus, Tiberiane, and Mons Ophiates).20 These imperial quarries
undoubtedly were part of a vastthough not necessarily continuous
quarrying district in the Eastern Desert. There are indications in the docu-
mentary evidence of at least one other quarrying territorium in Roman Egypt:
apart from the numerus of Porphyrites, a numerus of Alabastron is mentioned
twice in the published Claudianus ostraca.21 Other hitherto unpubli-
shed ostraca refer to a H j  `:- and a

I
.22 Moreover, two graYti in Wadi al-Hammamat appear to

18
What status the familia of Mons Ophiates had, whether it belonged to the numerus of
Mons Porphyrites or to another numerus, cannot be determined at present. Cuvigny 1996c: 97
fn. 16; Cuvigny 2000a: 36 f., cf. also index 315, 317.
19
M 997, cf. Cuvigny 2000a: 37; Cuvigny 2003c : 373.
20
Cockle 1996: 238; MaxWeld 2001: 153. On the term hospitium, cf. Cuvigny 2000a: 37,
fn. 128.
21
O.Claud. 528, 587; for the location of Alabastron, cf. Cuvigny 2000a: 37 f.
22
O.Claud.inv. 3285, 7149, cf. Cuvigny 2000a: 38.
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 53

refer to Alabastrine.23 The territory covered by this numerus probably in-

cluded the alabaster quarries and other quarries in the area of al-Miniya and
Asyut near Alabastrine/mod. Qum el-Akhmar.24

3.2.2. Patrimonium Regni Norici

The inscriptional and archaeological evidence for such districts outside
Roman Egypt is far from abundant. Nevertheless, in his study on the patri-
monium regni Norici Geza Alfoldy synthesized the evidence to produce an
outline of a vast mining area at the heart of Noricum. The Alpine area
contained the majority of the provinces economic resources: Roman iron
mines were located at Gurina, Huttenberg, Lolling, Semlach, and Wiesenau in
Carinthia.25 The iron mines in the vicinity of Neumarkt and Friesach as well
as in Eisenerz in Upper Styria also show signs of Roman exploitation.26
Moreover, Strabo reports gold being gained from rivers in the vicinity of
Noreia in Noricum.27 Possible sources of gold are the gold-bearing rivers such
as the Weissenbach (Tragin) or the Klieningbach in the Upper Lavant valley or
the hardrock gold mines in the Hohen Tauern mountains, at Tragin and
Siftlitz.28 The presence of imperial slaves, soldiers, or conductores in the area
is recorded by inscriptions, strongly suggesting imperial management of these
resources.29 However, it is not easy to determine whether these imperial
oYcials controlled numerous and territorially dispersed mining and
other districts (such as the salt mines at Hallstatt, the quarries of Kraig near
St. Veit an der Glan and Schaidberg, and perhaps forests and pasture lands),
23
I.Ko.Ko. 107, 108; Cuvigny 2000a: 38. To what quarrying territory, if at all, the bekhen-
quarries at Persou/mod. Wadi al-Hammamat were attached is not clariWed by the written
material found there. The settlement at Hammamat appears to date to the 1st cent. ad. and,
apart from the inscription by P. Iuventius Agathopus, c
 to the

in
Egypt (OGIS II 660 SB 8580 I.Ko.Ko. 41; ad 18), there appears to be no further evidence for
imperial control of the bekhen-quarries after the early Tiberian period, cf. Brun 2003a; Cuvigny
2003a: 2804.
24
Drew-Bear 1979: 5961; Cuvigny 2000a: 37 f. Perhaps it was to these quarries that the
praefectus Aegypti sent convicts, cf. Hagedorn & Shelton 1975; Bastianini 1986.
25
For map, cf. Piccottini 1989: nos. 20, 123, 154, 225, 432, 508 with further bibliography.
26
Alfoldy 1970: 167. Roman involvement in the trade of iron products is attested for the
early 1st cent. bc on the Magdalensberg, where lists painted on to the plastered walls by Italian
merchants name a considerable number of diVerent iron tools being traded, cf. Egger 1961;
Alfoldy 1974: 73.
27
Strabo 5.1.8.
28
Piccottini 1994a: 4714.
29
TiVen: CIL III 4788 ILS 1466; AE 1957: 108 AE 1969/70: 454; CIL III 4787, 4822
11505, cf. Alfoldy 1969b: 25, no. 34. Hohenstein: CIL III 4807, 4808, 4809 ILS 1467; CIL III
14362 (p. 2328, 197) 14363 AE 1968: 408. Feldkirchen: CIL III 4861. Wieting: AE 1995:
1195.
54 Mining and Quarrying Districts

Figure 14. Mines in Noricum

or, alternatively, one continuous and vast territory embracing all these areas of
economic interest. Alfoldy examined the epigraphic evidence for Norican
soldiers and the distribution of inscriptions erected for and by members of
municipal authorities of Norican towns. A number of soldiers (mostly prae-
torian guards and equites singulares) did not name a town as their place of
origin but simply claimed to be of the Norican nation. Alfoldy thus argued
that these soldiers most likely came from a rural area which did not belong to
the known municipal territories in Noricum.30 More importantly, the distri-
bution of inscriptions by members of municipal authorities and especially the
dearth of such inscriptions in the Alpine area of Noricum, together with and
the concentration of important economic resources within this central zone,
led Alfoldy to conclude that the heart of Noricum formed a coherent terri-
torial unit under imperial control.31 Judging from the epigraphic record, the
centre of the mining administration appears to have been based at Virunum,
the provincial capital until the reign of Marcus Aurelius, and later the seat of
the Wnancial procurator. There, inscriptions display the letters prn following

30
Alfoldy 1970: 165 f. M. P. Speidel (19812) pointed out that the term natione Noricus
could also refer to soldiers of municipal origin. Thus, details on the origin of soldiersas
Alfoldy (1989: 52) conceded latercan not be used to argue for non-municipal territories.
31
Alfoldy 1970: 167; Alfoldy 1974: 100 f. For a discussion of Alfoldys views, cf. rsted 1985:
201 f. with further bibliography.
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 55

the functional grade of members of the familia Caesaris, e.g. disp(ensator)

prn. Alfoldy expanded the abbreviation to p(atrimonium) r(egni) N(orici), a
reading he based on the assumption that the iron mines, quarries and
pastures at the heart of Noricum were the private property of the emperor
which Augustus probably had inherited from the Norican kings.32 The term
regnum Noricum itself is attested in other inscriptions, which partly corrob-
orates this reading of prn.33 Alfoldys reading p(atrimonium) r(egni) N(orici)
appears to be the most plausible solution so far. Furthermore, Alfoldys
hypothesis of a vast territorial unit at the Alpine heart of Noricum is partly
conWrmed by the presence of two stationes for the exaction of the portorium
Illyrici. These toll stations are not found at the provincial border, but within
Noricum itself at Bad Ischl and in the area of Lambrechtskogel east of
Virunum, on the territorial borders of an imperial domain, as Alfoldy ar-
gues.34 Moreover, in Friesach a conductor ferrariarum Noricarum set up a
votive inscription for Termunes, the gods of the dominial(?) border.35
Alfoldy concluded that for the export of iron ore taxes had to be paid at the
limits of the mining territory.36 He thus oVered the compelling hypothesis
of a vast extra-municipal territory in central Noricum named patrimo-
nium regni Norici, containing most natural resources of economic interest
to the Roman state.37 Yet, apart from the peculiarly positioned toll

32
Alfoldy 1970: 172. Virunum: CIL III 4828; ILLPRON 176; CIL III 4800 ILS 4198; CIL III
4797 ILS 1506. As an alternative to Alfoldys reading of the abbreviation prn Winkler had
oVered p(rocurator) r(egni) N(orici). Alfoldy, however, pointed out correctly that subaltern
oYcials of the imperial administration normally do not identify themselves as subordinates to
a function like procurator but as members of an administrative branch. This and the rare
attestations of the single letter p as an abbreviation for p(rocurator) led Alfoldy to reject
Winklers reading, cf. Winkler 1969: 1413; Alfoldy 1970: 171; rsted 1985: 21618.
33
arcar(ius) regn(i) Noric(i), cf. CIL III 4797 ILS 1506, cf. Alfoldy 1970: 171; procurator
Augusti regni Norici, cf. Alfoldy 1974: 79 and 2427 (Appendix V).
34
Alfoldy 1970: 170 f.; Winkler 1977: 219 f.
35
CIL III 5036, cf. Alfoldy 1970: 169, 177.
36
Alfoldy 1970: 171. Alfoldys hypothesis has encountered opposition from Vetters and other
scholars. The massive extent of the proposed imperial domain appears to have particularly
troubled Vetters (1977: 30711; 1980: 42 f.). His main argument was that the borders of Alfoldys
imperial domain did not reXect any of the topographical realities. The location of inscription
CIL III 5620, naming a toll station at Bad Ischl was questioned by Scherrer (1985). He claimed
that, according to a manuscript by Petrus Apianus of 1534, this statio Esc(ensis) probably was
originally located in the Chiemsee area in Bavaria and therefore on the border between Raetia
and Noricum. Weber (1995), however, provided convincing arguments for relocating the station
at Bad Ischl. Even so, the arguments hitherto put forward alter the picture only marginally.
37
The inscriptions naming subaltern administrative personnel responsible for the p(atrimo-
nium) r(egni) N(orici) are dated to the 3rd cent. ad, yet the term patrimonium regni Norici is an
archaism referring to the early days of Roman rule in Noricum, when the properties of the
indigenous king(s) came under imperial control. The nature of the evidence forbids us to trace
possible alterations of territorial borders or the unity of the territory in question from the heyday
of Roman rule in Noricum to the early 3rd cent., cf. Alfoldy 1970: 171 f.; Vetters 1977: 310.
56 Mining and Quarrying Districts

stations, there hitherto is no positive evidence such as boundary stones

delimiting this estate or written documents describing such an extensive
entity within the province. One therefore might also be looking at a patch-
work of private or municipal lands and public mines, quarries, woods and
pastures not amalgamated in one homogeneous imperial estate.38

3.2.3. Mining districts and toll stations in Pannonia, Dalmatia,

Moesia Superior, and Thracia
Alfoldys hypothesis for the mining areas of central Noricum has been used as
a model by Slobodan Dusanic to pinpoint other Roman mining districts
throughout the Danube provinces. Toll stations of the publicum portorii Ill-
yrici in the interior of the customs district and in the vicinity of Roman
mining ventures have also been located in this region. Like their Norican
counterparts, these are believed to have marked the boundaries of vast mining
districts:39
. The inscription on a fragmentary altar by a vil(icus) Moes(iae) r(ipae?)
s(uperioris?) found at Goricka in Pannonia Superior supposedly refers to a
toll station associated with the Roman iron Welds around Topusko, west of
Siscia/mod. Sisak.40 Dusanic argued that the iron ore deposits near
Topusko together with those in the vicinity of Ljubija were part of a larger
imperial domain within Pannonia, perhaps including remnants of iron-
mining in the area around Brisevo and Stari Majdan, both near Sanski
Most.41 The epigraphic evidence documents an administrative centre of

38
Hadrianic coins with the legend met. nor., usually extended to met(alla) Nor(ica), would
refer to the existence of individual mining territories (?) in the early 2nd cent. adprovided the
abbreviation is read correctly and the term metallum is used in the sense oVered by the Vipasca
tablets as a clearly deWned territorial entity, cf. Strack 1933: no. 432a; Alfoldy 1974: 114 with
318 fn. 72.
39
Dusanic 1977: 63; Dusanic 2004b: 249 f. fn. 10.
40
CIL III 3937 10821 Eph. ep. II p. 413, no. 823 AIJ 524. On the mines, cf. TIR L 33,
p. 37.
41
Along the banks of the Japra and Sana river large deposits of iron slag are still visible today.
According to one estimate, the quantity of slag might amount to nearly 2,000,000 tons. A
number of smelting furnaces and so-called administrative buildings have been excavated, and
amongst the numerous Wnds are mining tools, nails and iron ingots of 610 kg in weight.
Moreover, ancient galleries have been documented near Liubija, although these have not been
precisely dated. In one tunnel of 300 m length, Roman pottery, tools and a human skeleton have
been discovered. Archaeological remains at Stari Majdan demonstrate the existence of a smelt-
ing furnace connected with a water adit running for 2 km, cf. Davies 1935: 1846; Pasalic 1967:
127 f.; Dusanic 1977: 65, 69; Bojanovski 1982: 10612; Dusanic 1989: 148; Skegro 2000: 11823,
with further bibliography; Dusanic 2004b : 251.
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 57

some sort at or near Ljubija.42 According to Dusanic, the boundaries of this

mining district might have been marked out by two further toll stations,
provided the two mansiones named Ad Wnes in the Tabula Peutingeriana
may be identiWed as such.43 Whether or not these mansiones north of
Ljubija marked provincial boundaries or those of a mining district cannot
be ascertained.44
. A further district in Moesia Superior is claimed to have contained the
silver/lead mining area in the vicinity of Kursumlija in the Toplica valley
and the mining areas of Janjevo, Novo Brdo, and Lece.45 A mould inscrip-
tion on a lead ingot discovered in Zuc northwest of Kursumlija reads
metallo Imp(eratoris) Aug(usti) and may originate from these mines.46
Based on coinage with the caption metalli Ulpiani, Andras Mocsy claimed
that the municipium Ulpianum or Ulpiana/mod. Gracanica (which reached
municipal status under Hadrian) was founded within this mining district.47
Although there is no evidence that this was the case, the municipality
probably did owe its existence to the neighbouring mining ventures.48
The vast district is understood to have been marked by toll stations
recorded in the area: an altar from Kursumlijska Banja, immediately south
of Kursumlija, names a vilicus stat(ionis) Aquar(um) Bas(); the inscription
of a vilicus stat(ionis) Ulp(ianensis) was discovered at Laplje Selo immedi-
ately east of Ulpiana; a further votive altar of a vilicus stationis Petobiensis et
Moes(iae) r() aq() originates from the village of Srbica. All four stations
are situated in the province of Moesia Superior.49
42
A number of procuratores, imperial freedmen as well as equestrians, and vilici set up
dedications mostly to Terra Mater during the Wrst half of the 3rd cent. ad, cf. AE 1958: 63
ILJug 157; AE 1958: 64 ILJug 158 (ad 228); CIL III 13240 ILJug 161 (ad 247/8); CIL III
13329 ILJug 162; AE 1973: 412 ILJug 778 (ad 21117); AE 1973: 411 ILJug 779 (ad 201);
AE 1973: 413 ILJug 780 (ad 223); AE 1979: 414 ILJug 781 (ad 229).
43
One was located at Laktasi on the route SalonaServitium, the other some 20 km
southwest of Siscia on the road EmonaSiscia. Dusanic opposes the opinio communis that
both mansiones stood on the provincial border between Dalmatia and Pannonia. He argues
that they perhaps demarcated the northern boundary of the imperial mining domain, cf. TIR L
33, p. 19; Dusanic 1977: 65, with fn. 58. His view is partly conWrmed by the discovery of an
inscription at Mursa, set up by a conductor ferrariarum who is also recorded at Ljubija. The texts
(Bulat 1989: 36; AE 1973: 411 ILJug 779) clearly state that the conductor had contracted out
ferrariae Pannoniarum.
44
Fitz 19935: 740 f.
45
On the mines, cf. Dusanic 1977: 72, with fns. 112, 113; Dusanic 2004b : 51.
46
AE 1994: 1512 IMS IV 136 AE 1978: 705, cf. Dusanic 19945.
47
Mocsy 1970: 77.
48
Dusanic 1977: 72 f.; Dusanic 2004b: 257 fn. 51. The fragmentary inscription of a bene-
Wciarius consularis discovered at Ulpiana (AE 1981: 735) certainly registers the administrative
interest of the provincial governor in the area. Yet, the epigraphic record of the area has hitherto
not provided any indication of the presence of imperial mining oYcials there.
49
Kursumlijska Banja: AE 1952: 192 AE 1955: 221 IMS IV 104 (ad 206), cf. Dusanic
1989: 152; Mocsy 1970: 25. On the Kursumlija mining area, cf. IMS IV, p. 62; Laplje Selo: AE
58 Mining and Quarrying Districts

. Imperial mining oYcials and military personnel are known from a further
mining zone north of Ulpiana in the Sitnica valley. The epigraphic record of
the municipium D(ar)d(anorum)/mod. Socanica might document a proc-
(urator) mm(etallorum) DD(ardanicorum) and names coloni arg[entar-
iarum Dardanicarum].50 The Wnd of a mine coin at Trepca, south of
Socanica, with the inscription (metalli ?) Dardanici, has been understood
to record the name of the mining district.51 A number of stationes of
beneWciarii consulares, not to be confused with toll stations, can be observed
in the Sitnica valley at Vucitrn (perhaps Vicianum?), at Novopazarska
Banja, at Slatina, and at Kosovska Mitrovica, and might have been con-
nected with the administration of the gold and silver mines in the vicinity of
the municipium D(ar)d(anorum).52
. Dusanic detected a further possible district in Moesia Superior on the
Kumanovo plain east of Scupi/mod. Skopje. Apart from the archaeological
evidence for mining, the epigraphic record does document the presence of
provincial oYcials, albeit not the usual mining administrators, as well as
soldiers in the Kumanovo plain and in the vicinity of the mines.53 A statio
Lamu() or Lamud() of the vect(igal) Illyr(ici) near mod. Lopate, and
Vizianus, probably Klecovce east of Kumanovo lay in the vicinity of the
Lojane and Konjuh silver/lead mines.54 Whether a further statio at Lomnica
was perhaps related to the gold and iron mines in the Vlasina valley (Bozica,
Dolno Kobile, Gorno Kobile, Gorno Ujno, and Dolno Ujno) or constituted
a border station between Thracia and Moesia Superior is currently
uncertain.55

1903: 286 ILJug 1413 (ad 227); Turicevac/Srbica: AE 1981: 724 AE 1982: 841 (ad 225),
cf. Sasel 1982. Vicianum: TIR K 34, p. 131.
50
ILJug 501, 503: cf. Dusanic 1977: 72. 87 f. with fn. 223.
51
Dusanic 1977: 72.
52
Novopazarska Banja: ILJug 1404, cf. TIR K 34, p. 131; AE 1972: 514, 515. Statina: AE 1952:
193 ILJug 68: the inscription is dedicated to a genius stationis M(-) Dard(anorum). Kosovska
Mitrovica: ILJug 13925. On stationes beneWciarii and their functions, cf. Rankov 1983: 4851;
Nelis-Clement 2000: 259 f.
53
Lopate: IMS VI 227. Lojane: IMS VI 241 AE 1984: 790 (early 3rd cent. ad). Konjuh: IMS
VI 236(?). On the mines, cf. TIR K 34, pp. 72 f. Konjuh, p. 80 Lojane; Dusanic 2004b : 258
fn. 52 with further bibliography.
54
IMS VI 209 (Lopate), 212 (Klecovce), and pp. 44 f. (ad 211).
55
Cf. CIL III 8256; Dusanic 1989: 152 with fn. 49. For the mines, cf. TIR K 34, pp. 46 (Dolno
Kobile, Dolno Ujno), 58 (Gorno Kobile, Gorno Ujno); for an imperial procurator at nearby
Pautalia/mod. Kjustendil, cf. IG Bulg 2052. An inscription recently discovered at Pautalia (AE
2004: 1313) names the construction of aqueducts for the baths and the city under the partial
supervision of a

, a mining engineer(?).
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 59

. The Mt Kosmaj/Stojnik region in Moesia Superior, together with the mines

at Avala, Zeleznik, and Rudnik were identiWed by Dusanic as belonging to
one vast imperial domain (Sumadjia).56 The argentiferous lead mining
ventures of Avala, some 15 km south of Singidunum are suspected to have
come under imperial control in the late third century.57 The material
remains of Kosmaj show that silver mining activity took place on a massive
scale under imperial control.58 Moreover, the second-century copper coin-
age discovered at Kosmaj displayed the caption metallum or metalla on the
reverse of ten coins.59 Dusanic at Wrst assumed that four coins from Trajans
reign with the caption metalli Ulpiani referred to the Kosmaj area and thus
argued that this mining district was named metallum Ulpianum, a name
which perhaps was changed later, in accordance with the caption metall(is)
Aurelianis on one further coin.60 In the immediate vicinity of the Mt
Kosmaj/Stojnik mining region, at Guberevac, a vilicus vectigalis Illyrici set
up a votive altar to Mithras. Based on this inscription Dusanic postulated
a toll station closeby, which delimited the mining territory.61 A further
toll station might be recorded at Kamenica c.10 km southwest of the
Roman mining area at Rudnik in Moesia Superior.62 Inscriptions
attesting the presence of a procurator (metallorum) and coloni at Rudnik

56
Dusanic 1977: 77; Dusanic 2004b: 259 with fn. 57.
57
A vir egregius is recorded there under whose cura an inscribed monument to the Dea Orcia
was set by the duoviri of the colonia Singidunensium in ad 287 (IMS I 20 CIL III 1660 8151,
p. 1022). The further attestation of a votive monument to Volcanus (IMS I 46 CIL III 1661; ad
272) documents ties between Avala and Singidunum. The assertion by Dusanic (1990: 588f.) that
a vet(eranus) leg(ionis) IIII Fl(aviae) ex sig(nifero) p(raefectus?) k(anabarum) q(uin)q(uennalis) Sing
(iduni), dec(urio) col(oniae) Sirmens(ium) (IMS I 16 AE 1910: 172 AE 1911: 165; late 2nd cent.
ad), controlled a territorium including the mines at Avala, overstretches the available evidence
considerably. This inscribed monument to Terra Mater was found some 45 km south of the
legionary camp at Singidunum near the road to Avala and not in the mines itself. On the mines at
Avala, cf. Davies 1935: 215 f.
58
The ancient slag deposits amounting to 1,000,000 t set aside, 5,000 (?) mining pits (said
to be probably Roman) as well as furnaces are recorded, cf. Tomovic 1995; Skegro 2000: 946.
The epigraphic record of the Kosmaj area documents the presence of imperial oYcials and
auxiliary units (IMS I 97, 98, 103, 116, 117, 118, 119), cf. Dusanic 1976: 1017; Dusanic 2004b:
259 fn. 57.
59
See IMS I 1605 with Dusanics commentary. On the mines, cf. Davies 1935: 214 f.;
Tackholm 1937: 15977; Dusanic 1976: 98 f.; Dusanic 1977: 78, 111 f.
60
Apart from the copper coins, thirteen stamped lead ingots with barely readable abbrevi-
ations were also discovered, cf. Dusanic 1971b: 554; Dusanic 1976: 99. Dusanic 2004b: 257 fn.
51, absconds from the above position. For the coinage, cf. Simic & Vasic 1977 and below.
61
IMS I 105 with commentary by S. Dusanic, cf. also Dusanic 1976: 102; Dusanic 1977: 151;
Dusanic 1989: 151 f. On the Kosmaj region as part of Moesia Superior, cf. Dusanic 1976: 957.
62
IMS I 167 and p. 115 n. 39; Dusanic 1989: 152 with fn. 49. The ancient silver, copper, and
lead mining pits there had probably already been exploited by the Romans, although there is no
hard evidence to support this assumption, cf. Dusanic 1976: 113 with fn. 31.
60 Mining and Quarrying Districts

do suggest imperial control and consequently Roman mining activity at this

site.63 As for the inscription from Kamenica, its fragmentary state does not
allow it to be linked convincingly with a vilicus of the vectigal Illyrici. In the
absence of any secure evidence on the toll station, the extent of the mining
district at Rudnik cannot be ascertained.
The hypothesis that the stationes mentioned above marked the extent of vast
territoria metallorum rests solely on the analogy with the toll stations located
near the alleged vast imperial domain in central Noricum. Unlike Noricum,
no additional sources have been marshalled to corroborate this hypothesis:
the epigraphic material, or rather the lack of it, prevents any attempts to
deWne the extent of mining territories in Pannonia, Dalmatia, and Moesia.
The few toll stations can not necessarily be synthesised to deWne the extent of
mining territories, as the sites of stations within the district of the portorium
Illyrici appear not to have been determined by the mining ventures alone.
Particular stations may have been erected on viae publicae: the toll stations
near Ulpianum/mod. Gracanica, Kursumlijska Banja, and Laplje Selo are
positioned on the road Naissus-Ulpianum-Scupi, whereas the station at
Srbica perhaps lay on one of the approaches to the main road.64 Similar
observations can be made at some of the other toll stations: The station at
Lamu(d)()/Lopate was positioned on the road ScupiAnausaro, whereas
Vizianus might have guarded one of the approaches from the Konjuh mines
to the via publica.65
This raises the question whether these internal toll stations functioned at all
as boundary markers outlining territorial mining enclaves within the cus-
toms district of the publicum portorii Illyrici. Jerome France pointed out that
most stations of the quadragesima Galliarum sont quasiment toutes, [ . . . ],
placee sur des lieux de passage et de transit, ports, carrefours routiers et
Xuviaux, points de rupture de charge. Dans le secteur alpin, on remarquera
leur presence exclusive dans les basses vallees et sur les sites de piemont, a
lentre des axes de circulation, mais jamais a linterieur du massif montagneux
lui-meme.66 Furthermore, the lessees of the portorium Asiae were required to
run stations within eight stadia ( 1 Roman mile?) from the provincial
border, the border of the customs district, but not at every conceivable
point of entry. The merchants and traders were obliged to report to the
nearest station upon entry into Asia or, if the station was not occupied, to
travel to the next town with a customs oYce. If there were two stations at a

63
IMS I 168.
64
On the road network, cf. Petrovic 1979: 268.
65
TIR K 34, p. 80.
66
France 2001: 332; cf. also VittinghoV 1953: 376 f.
Figure 15. Mines in Dalmatia, Pannonia, and Moesia Superior
62 Mining and Quarrying Districts

Figure 16. Mines in Moesia Superior

similar distance from the point of entry the traveller/trader was free to
choose where to deposit his declaration.67 Provided these Wndings can be
generalized, the stations did not mark the borders of customs districts
precisely, but were required to be located within a certain distance from
them. There is no indication whatsoever that similar requirements con-
strained the placement of stations in the interior of a customs district.
Although the proximity of toll stations to mining areas does suggest a strong
link between mining and the exaction of a toll or tax, these stations were not
necessarily placed at points of exit or entry into a vast mining district. Given
the position of some of these toll stations on viae publicae, one might
imagine the yield of diVerent mining districts passing through one and
the same station in order to calculate and pay the tollprovided this was
its purpose. Siegfried de Laet and Friedrich VittinghoV, in particular, as-
sumed that stations in the interior of a customs district, usually positioned
at important river crossings, crossroads or near mountain passes, merely
exacted tolls for the use of these roads and bridgesthe full customs duty
was paid upon entering the customs district.68 Even though Alfoldys study
demonstrated a connection between these stations and mining activity, the
conjecture that not all commodities passing through stations in the interior
were subject to a toll remains plausible. Hence, it is possible that only ingots
and metals emanating from the mines were taxed, provided they were not
owned by the Roman state, the emperor or the Roman army.69 Unlike
67
The lex portorii Asiae provides a list of ports and other entry points where a station must be
positioned, cf. Engelmann & Knibbe 1989: 166 and 9 f., 1217, 20 f., 2830, 51. For further
stations of portoria cf. VittinghoV 1953: 35175.
68
De Laet 1949: 168 f., 368; VittinghoV 1953: 378.
69
Written evidence for the taxation of ore (?) or metal is oVered by the lex portorii Asiae
(34) which notes that exports from the province of Asia to Rome were taxed according to a
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 63

Figure 17. Mines in Dalmatia

customs stations at town gates in Roman Egypt, the lex portorii Asiae gives
the impression that toll stations did not primarily function as points of
control covering all traYc in and out of a customs district. They appear
merely to have oVered a place where merchants and travellers could submit a
declaration on the value and quantity of imported/exported goods and pay
the customs duty calculated on the basis thereof.70 The contractors of the
portorium were allowed to inspect the transported goods in order to verify
the submitted toll declarations, conWscate goods or double the toll to punish
traders in conXict with the regulations.71 The marking of merchandise and




, a mining law. Moreover, 27 may indicate that the export of mining samples
may have been tax free, cf. Engelmann & Knibbe 1989: 167 and 25 f. Dig. 39.4.9.78; De Laet
1949: 121; VittinghoV 1953: 395; Dusanic 2004b: 249 f., fn. 10.
70
In a Wrst step, a declaration was provided orally. If required, a written declaration giving
number, weight and value of the imported goods followed suit, cf. Engelmann & Knibbe 1989:
166 f. and 2, 4, 6, 9, 11, 18, 20 f., 38, 51. On Roman Egypt, cf. Sijpestein 1987.
71
Engelmann & Knibbe 1989: 167 and 5, 8, 18, 19, 22, 23, 37, 38, 49; cf. also VittinghoV
1953: 396 f.
64 Mining and Quarrying Districts

the provision of documents and receipts to traders after payment of the toll
indicates that trade was subjected to further controls within the customs district.
The authority of the contractors to enforce compliance with toll regulations was
probably limited to checking the accuracy of submitted declarations at the
customs stations. Even though the lex portorii Asiae awards contractors
the commodities conWscated from smugglers, there is no information on con-
tractors running additional checkpoints in the hinterland or policing the bor-
ders of the customs district in order to undercut illegal smuggling activities.
Given the interest of the Roman state in revenue, these tasks, amongst others, are
likely to have been performed by military personnel, i.e. by beneWciarii consulares
at local road stations on behalf of the provincial governor.72

Toll stations in the vicinity of mining zones imply a certain extraterritorial

status of nearby mining districts in relation to the customs district. The
distinctive copper and brass semisses and quadrantes, the so-called nummi
metallorum, found within some of the Roman mining areas of the Danube
provinces were believed by some scholars to conWrm this notion.73 Based on
the Wnds of this coinage in the Kosmaj mining region, the argument was put
forward that it circulated exclusively in the mining districts. In analogy with
the medieval and early modern Bergwerksmarken it was assumed that the
mining districtsowing to their economic autonomyrequired their own
currency. Following the results of the chemical analysis of these coins Dusanic
maintained that this coinage was probably minted for the mining districts in
Pannonia, Dalmatia, and Moesia Superior.74 However, Bernhard Woyteks
recent study of these nummi metallorum has altered the perception of their
usage.75 The coinage consists of semisses (half of an as) and quadrantes
(quarter of an as), the former usually made of brass, the latter of copper
and distinguishable from other coins by the captions on the reverse. These
captions do appear to refer to mines or mining districts in the Danube
provinceswithout, however, providing any speciWcs on their location.76
The earliest series of metalla-coins were minted during the reign of Trajan,
displaying the emperors bust with his title on the obverse, and on the reverse
a depiction (i) of a female Wgurine (a personiWcation of the metallum
72
Engelmann & Knibbe 1989: 167 and 22 f., 51. On lead seals as markings, cf. France 2000:
604, with further bibliography. On beneWciarii and toll stations, cf. VittinghoV 1953: 396 f.;
Nelis-Clement 2000: 2524.
73
Dusanic 1977: 62.
74
Dusanic 1977: 56 f. fn. 4, 72 fn. 107.
75
Woytek 2004a; Woytek 2004b.
76
Woytek 2004a: 43 f. This is corroborated by mould marks on lead ingots recovered from
Caesarea Maritima, cf. AE 1999, 1683: met(alli) Dard(anici), and from Sarmizegetusa, cf.
Dusanic 2004b: 257 fn. 51 (unpubl.): me(tallo) Ulp(iano).
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 65

Dardanicum?) with the caption dardanici, (ii) of Aequitas with the caption
metalli ulpiani, (iii) of Aequitas with the captions metalli ulpian delm
or metalli ulpiani pan, or (iv) of Aequitas with metalli ulpiani sc. Under
Hadrian two groups of semisses and quadrantes are known, both showing the
emperors bust on the obverse and the letters met nor or aeliana picensia
in a wreath on the reverse. Further small coinage was produced during the
reign of Antoninus Pius, one series depicting the emperors bust and his
titulature on the obverse and a female Wgure with the caption dardanici
on the reverse. Other quadrantes and semisses appear to belong to the reign of
Antoninus Pius as well, although they do not show his portrait or bear his
name. We Wnd either the bust of Roma on the obverse and a female Wgurine
with the caption dardanici on the reverse, or a number of coins portraying
the busts of Apollo/Sol, Diana, or Mars on the obverse, and the letters metal
aurelianis, metal pannonicis, or metal delm on the reverse. The widely
accepted view is that the depiction of Apollo/Sol, Diana, and Mars refers to
the three metals gold, silver, and iron.77 The captions on the reverse either
name metalla directly or provide toponyms most likely to be associated with a
mining area. Apart from the legends with a rather broad geographical reach
such as met(alla?) Nor(ica?), metal(lis) Pannonicis, metal(li?) Delm(atici?),
metalli Ulpiani Delm(atici) or metalli Ulpiani Pan(nonici), the attempts by
Dusanic and Mocsy in locating a metallum Dardanicum, metallum Ulpianum
or metalla Aureliana have not been convincing so far. Only the legend
(metalla) Aeliana Picensia allows for the tentative localisation of these mines
in the Pincus/mod. Pek river valley in Moesia Superior.78
The purpose of the nummi metallorum is a contentious issue. The idea
proposed by Dusanic and others of a coinage circulating exclusively in mining
districtssimilar to the medieval Bergwerksmarken or token moneycan
not be upheld in the light of the coin distribution. Although the number of
known specimens is small, the conWrmed Wnds of such coins in secure
stratigraphic contexts suggests that these quadrantes and semisses were issued
not only for the Danubian provinces, but most likely circulated throughout
the empire as well. According to Woytek, roughly half of the known coins
were found in Rome and Italy, as well as Cyprus and Raetia.79 The circulation
of the nummi metallorum outside of mining areas, in fact, even outside the
Danubian provinces, once again raises the question of the purpose of these
coin issues. There is a scholarly consensus on the origin of the coinage which

77
Woytek 2004a: 369, 402, 44 with further bibliography.
78
Woytek 2004a: 47 f. For grammatical matters on coin captions, see Woytek 2004a: 44.
79
Woytek 2004a: 524.
66 Mining and Quarrying Districts

appears to have been minted at a central location, probably Rome.80 However,

the reason why low denomination coins with mining imagery were minted
and circulated remains obscure. It has been interpreted as either marking a
perceived change from an indirect to a direct exploitation regime of the
mines, orin analogy with the early modern Ausbeutegeldsimply com-
memorating the opening of new mines and the inXux of metals.81 Woytek
argued that during the preparations of Trajan for the Dacian wars the
increased demand for metals to cover war costs or for the production of
weapons and armour highlighted the importance of mining areas such as
Dardania in Moesia Superior.82
A diVerent interpretation may be put forward. Although the coinage did
not circulate exclusively in mining districts one might argue that the demand
for copper coinage of small denominations was speciWcally high in these areas
owing to increased economic activity. The hiring of labour, the supply of
mining works with wood and tools, the compliance with Wscal requirements
(fees) or the payment for services (baths, hairdressers, shoe makers) within
the mining district resulted in a high circulation of coinage, especially in coins
of small denominations. Perhaps initially intended to remedy the situation in
the mining districts and in order to reduce counterfeiting, a series of low-
denomination coinage was introduced. A passage of the Digest concerning the
punishments for counterfeiting in the vicinity of mining areas may indicate
that mining districts were likely to receive new coinage.83
The location of toll stations in the vicinity of extractive operations appears
to be a phenomenon limited to the Danubian provinces. In other provinces
no such stations were installed near imperial mines or quarries. The lex portorii
provinciae Asiae and other inscriptions indicate that they were mostly posi-
tioned in towns on the coast or near the provincial border of Asia. Similarly,
the quadragesima Galliarum was also exacted in the border areas of this
customs district.84 Furthermore, no toll stations have been observed near the
mining areas of the Iberian peninsula or Britain.85 Although one may not
necessarily conclude that the metals mined within these customs districts were
not subject to a toll or tax, the exaction of possible tolls was apparently not
carried out by establishing stations close to these mining zones.
The inscriptions naming either stationes and/or oYcials of the vectigal
Illyrici at Guberevac, Goricka, Laplje Selo, Kursumlijska Banja, Turicevac/

80
Dusanic 1971b: 553; Dusanic 1977: 57 f.; Woytek 2004a: 4850 with further bibliography.
81
For discussion of earlier research on the issue cf. Woytek 2004a: 548.
82
Woytek 2004a: 60 f.
83
Dig. 48.19.16.910.
84
Nicolet 1993: 931, map; France 2001: 333, Wg.18.
85
VittinghoV 1953: 370 f. (Spain), 375 (Britain).
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 67

Srbica, Lopate, and Klecovce mostly date to the end of the second century
ad or to the beginning of the third century ad. This coincides with De Laets
observation that during the reigns of Marcus Aurelius and/or Commodus
the practice of farming out the collection of the vectigal Illyrici was replaced
by direct imperial control.86 The lack of any evidence for stationes in
the vicinity of mining ventures prior to late second/early third century
ad does not allow one to conclude that they were not present during the
Wrst and second centuries. Even so, the similar date of most attested stationes
in the Danubian provinces may reXect an imperial eVort in intensifying the
exaction of tolls on metals near their point of origin. This is conWrmed in
part by a series of inscribed monuments identifying stationes of beneWciarii
consulares located near mining ventures of the Ibar and Sitnica valley,
around Scupi/mod. Skopje and the Kumanovo plain, Domavium/mod.
Srebrenica, and near Stojnik, mostly dating to the late second / early third
century ad.87
One can thus argue that toll stations alone do not provide a sound
enough basis for demarcating the territorial extent of vast mining districts.
Moreover, the so-called nummi metallorum can not necessarily be synthe-
sised to prove an extraterritorial status of mining districts. Even though
their existence can not be positively proven, the notion of vast mining
districts ought not to be disgarded completely: the existence of imperial
domains of considerable size is documented in the Lebanon (Hadrians
forest), in North Africa, and in Phrygia.88 Yet, one might also have to
consider the possibility of numerous smaller entities or metalla dispersed
throughout the Danubian provinces, perhaps existing alongside larger ter-
ritories, to be uniWed solely in an administrative sense under the control of
a procurator metallorum. The captions on the nummi metallorum and the
mould-marks on lead ingots may perhaps reXect generic administrative
entities consisting of several distinct metalla. However, no information is
available on the geographical location, extent and coherence of these hypo-
thetical units.

86
De Laet 1949: 404.
87
Ibar Valley: CBFIR 569 (Novi Pazar), 580 (Gracanica), 595 (Novopazarska Banja), 596
(Petova Crvka near Novi Pazar), 599 (Prokuplje), 610 (Vucitrn), 6058 (Kosovska Mitrovica).
Scupi and Kumanovo plain: CBFIR 575 (Blace), 581 (Kacanik), 597 f. (Prizren). Domavium:
CBFIR 431 (Bajna Basta), 4558 (Skelani), 460 (Pljevlja). Stojnik-Mt Kosmaj: CBFIR 604,
cf. Nelis-Clement 2000: 259 f., Alfoldy 2003.
88
IGLS VIII/3; Flach 1990: 82122; Mitchell 1993: 8098; Mitchell 1999: 3746.
68 Mining and Quarrying Districts

3.2.4. Mining Districts under Military Control(?) in Moesia

Superior/Inferior
3.2.4.1. Timacum Minus
The indications of territorial entities under military control which might have
included mining ventures are similarly problematic. This is the case with a
funerary stela from the auxiliary fort of Timacum Minus(?)/mod. Ravna
displaying the inscription of an Ulpius Aquilinus, soldier of the legio VII
Claudia and librarius oYci(i) praef(ecti) ter{r}it(orii), a clerk to the oYce of
the praefectus territorii.89 The extent and composition, not to mention the
legal status, of this territorium is diYcult to establish. A number of inscrip-
tions from the vicinity of auxiliary camps combine territorium with a topo-
nym of a fort such as territorium Capidavense or territorium Sucidavense for
the auxiliary forts Capidava in Moesia Superior and Sucidava in Dacia, or
territorium Matricensium and territorium(?) Vetussaliensium for the auxiliary
camps Matrica and Vetus Salina in Pannonia Inferior.90 Likewise the ter(ritorium)
Abri(tanorum) as well as the territorium Troesmensium(?) gained their toponyms
from legionary camps in Moesia Inferior.91 However, the content of the inscrip-
tions naming these territoria does not suggest that there was any military
involvement in their administration. They appear to have been under the control
of the vici or canabae in the vicinity of auxiliary and/or legionary camps whose
inhabitants not only copied municipal political structures but apparently held
sway over their own territorium.92
There is no evidence that this was the case at Ravna.93 The inscription
clearly names an equestrian oYcer, a praefectus, in charge of an undeWned
territorium with his own administrative staV (oYcium) consisiting of legion-
ary soldiers of legio VII Claudia. Besides this military bureau, the camp
at Ravna was occupied by auxiliary units, the cohors I Thracum Syriaca from
ad 70 to the early second century ad and a cohors II Aurelia Dardanorum

89
IMS III/2, 31. Dusanic 1990: 589 f., with fn. 41; Petrovic 1995a; Dusanic 2000: 354 f.
90
AE 1980: 712 (Matrica/Szazhalombatta). CIL III 10305 (Vetus Salina). 12491 IScM V, 77
(Capidava). IDR II 190 (Sucidava/Celei), cf. Berard 1992: 90 f., 104 f., nos. 1215.
91
IScM V 135 (Troesmis, ad 163). AE 1985: 765 (Hisarlyka near Razgrad/Abritus, ad 2447),
cf. Berard 1992: 89 f., 91, 104 f., nos. 11, 16. The inscription (CIL III 14370/10 ILS 7111 AE
1986: 534 AE 1987: 792) from the legionary camp at Castra Regina/mod. Regensburg naming
an aedil territor(ii) contr(ibuti?) et k(anabarum?) R(eginensium?) remains a conundrum, cf. Lieb
1998: 65 fn. 21.
92
For a discussion, cf. Mocsy 1972: 157 f.; VittinghoV 1974: 111; Mocsy 1980: 371 f.; Berard
1992: 919.
93
To date, there is no epigraphic evidence for a vicus in the vicinity of the auxiliary camp
at Ravna which might have exerted quasi-municipal control over the territory, cf. Petrovic
1995b: 42.
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 69

after ad 169.94 The auxiliary unit was posted there primarily to control one of
the major routes running from the Danube to Naissus.95 Quite obviously, the
auxiliary garrison at Timacum Minus was provided with administrative
specialists from the legion stationed at Viminacium with the additional task
of monitoring a territorium.
The explicit use of the term praefectus territorii is reminiscent of the
supervisory and juridicial function of praefecti over a civitas, gens or natio,
often connected with the command over an auxiliary unit.96 The oYce is
attested predominantly in the Wrst century whereas the inscription at Ravna
dates to the mid-second century ad or later.97 Furthermore, the title of
praefectus territorii does not directly indicate that his responsibilities included
the surveillance of a local tribe. However, one might also expect the readers of
the funerary inscription to have been spared the full title of the praefectus well
known to the locals. The inconclusive text raises the question what the
function of this oYce and the content of the territory was. On the premise
that territorium is a technical term for a topographically continuous and
clearly delimited area under administration (as appears to be its usage in the
legal sources and the writings of the land surveyors), the praefectus territorii
held control over a coherent territory and had judicial powers over its
inhabitants.
The extent of the territory is diYcult to trace as signs of any delimitation
are absent. Dusanic argued that the territorium was most likely a mining
territory centred on Timacum Minus, which might have included the silver
mines at Lukovo-Valakonje, perhaps the gold, silver, iron, copper, and lead
mines at Slot, Bor, and Rusman, and the mining areas of Kalna, Rgoste,
Gradiste, and Oresac, 1015 km south of Ravna.98 Moreover, a lead ingot
with the mould-mark metallo Caesaris Aug(usti) found at Jasenovik south-
west of Timacum Minus does suggest imperial control of some of the mines.99
The fragmentary evidence for a possible toll station at Ravna might indicate
the existence of mining districts closeby.100 The assertion, however, that a
metallum Caesaris Augusti or any other mining zone formed part of the

94
On the garrison, cf. IMS III/2, nos. 13, 3740 (coh. I Thracum Syriaca), nos. 7(?), 8, 9,
1820, 22, 29, 4352 (coh. II Aurelia Dardanorum).
95
Dusanic 2000: 350 Wg. 1.
96
Zwicky 1944: 1114; Dusanic 2000: 354.
97
Zwicky 1944: 16; Dusanic 2000: 354; Eck 2001b.
98
Dusanic 1977: 75 f. with fns. 14750; Dusanic 1990: 589 f.; Petrovic 1995a; Petrovic
1995b: 3743, 58 f.
99
Petrovic 1995a: 199.
100
IMS III/2 84, cf. Petrovic 1995b: 119 f.
70 Mining and Quarrying Districts

territorium under the command of a prefect and his staV at Timacum Minus
remains conjectural.

3.2.4.2. Montana
A further military territorium, perhaps including mines, might have existed in
the area of Montana/mod. Mihailovgrad in Moesia inferior. A local votive
inscription to the goddess Diana mentions a beneWciarius consularis of the
legio I Italica and ag(ens) t(erritorio) M(ontanensium).101 The term territor-
ium Montanensium is not otherwise documented in the epigraphic record
the term regio Montanensium, however, is well known.102 Besides the docu-
mentation of regionarii at Montana, an optio leg(ionis) XI Cl(audiae) agens
r(egione) Mont[an(ensium)] set up an inscription at Almus/mod. Lom on the
Danube some 50 km north of Montana.103 Two further inscriptions commis-
sioned by centuriones r(egionarii) in ad 1568 in Almus on the Danube and in
ad 15860 in Montana supposedly indicate the vast extent of the territory.104
According to M. P. Speidel an additional inscription found north-west of
Montana in Gromsin and dating to ad 1619 may name further regionarii
Montanensium.105 In the light of the evidence for a regio Montanensium
the expansion ag(ens) t(erritorio) M(ontanensium) is disputable. To my
knowledge, there is no indication that territorium and regio were used alter-
nately. Provided that a territorium Montanensium existed, one would have
to assume a separate, contemporary, or perhaps subsequent territorial
entity besides the regio Montanensium.106 It appears likelier that the engraver
made a mistake. Provided he copied the text from a wooden tablet written in
a Latin cursive, the minuscule r may have been misread as a t.107
The inscription thus should read bf. cos. . . . ag(ens) r(egione) M(ontanensium),
in accordance with the optio . . . agens r(egione) Mont[an(ensium)] known
at Almus.108 Given the distribution of inscriptions naming a soldier agens

101
CBFIR 647 AE 1987: 881, cf. Berard 1992: 91 f., 105, no. 17.
102
Rankov 1983: 46 f.; Speidel 1984: 140.
103
Montana: centuriones regionarii, cf. AE 1975: 745; CIL III 12371, 12380; others, cf. AE
1957: 341 ([ag(ens?)] reg(ione) Mont(anensium). Almus: AE 1969/70: 577, cf. Rankov 1983: 54.
104
CIL III 7420 (Almus). CIL III 12371 (Montana); with Speidel 1984.
105
Speidel 1984: 187.
106
Cf. Vulpe 1976: 2946. Berard (1992: 92) argued that Montana was a communaute de
type pseudo-municipale consisting of decuriones as well as other magistrates, and equipped
with its own territorium.
107
Speidel 1996: 314.
108
The epigraphic record on beneWciarii does not document a further bf. cos. agens territorio;
on the contrary, bf. cos. agens regione are attested in CBFIR 530, 531.
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 71

regione Montanensium or a centurio regionarius, the region may have reached

north of Montana as far as Almus.109
A military force of considerable size was based at Montana. A cohors I
Sugambrum equitata is attested there and was moved east during Hadrians
reign. It was replaced by a smaller legionary detachment of the legio XI Claudia,
under the command of a centurio.110 The garrison at Montana probably
guarded the approaches to the Petrohan pass into the interior of Thrace and
to the Sveti Nikola pass into Moesia Superior. Alternatively, this sizeable
garrison in the hinterland of the Danube frontier may have guarded the silver
and gold mines of the Ogosta and Zlatitsa valleys southwest of Montana
throughout much of the second century.111 Inscribed monuments naming a
primiscrinius oYcinae and a vikarius dispensatoris have been taken as evidence
for a mining administration based at Montana. Moreover, the presence of
beneWciarii consulares at Montana has been explained by its proximity to the
mining area, owing to the number of other stationes of beneWciarii attested near
mining areas throughout the Danubian provinces. Boris Rankov implied that
the regio Montanensium may also have included the mining areas.112 The
evidence, however, remains circumstantial. There is no explicit documentation
whatsoever for a mining procurator or mining bureau at Montana, nor for an
incorporation of the mining ventures described above in a regio Montanensium.

3.2.5. Further Mining Districts under Imperial Control

For most other mining areas throughout the Roman empire, the existence of
mining districts under imperial control is indicated only by inscriptions
documenting the presence of military personnel and imperial oYcials in the
vicinity of archaeologically attested mining ventures. The extent and coher-
ence of the following districts is not ascertainable on current evidence:
. The argentiferous lead mines in the vicinity of Domavium/mod. Srebrenica
in Dalmatia have yet to be the subject of a detailed archaeological survey,

109
Speidel 1984: 141.
110
Rankov 1983: 53.
111
Mining galleries discovered near Gaganitsa, Elovitsa, Karilovtsa, and Diva Slatina might
be Roman. Stone troughs (?) for washing alluvial deposits of ore were discovered at Govezhda
and water channels at Kotenovtsi. The by-product of the extraction of gold-bearing sand, piles
of stones, were found near Galanitsa, Govezhda, and Dulgi Del. Late Roman pottery provides
the only basis for datation, cf. Rankov 1983: 41, 45 with fn. 29.
112
CIL III 12379 14207/19 (vikarius dispensatoris); 14209 (primiscrinius oYcinae),
cf. Rankov 1983: 4658.
72 Mining and Quarrying Districts

but Roman remains of mining ventures (slag heaps and lamps) can be
observed along the lower Drina and between the rivers Jadar and Drina
near Srebrenica.113 The inscription metal(lis) Pannonicis on the reverse of
copper coins found at Kosmaj is taken to refer to these mining ventures.114
Latin inscriptions attest imperial mining oYcials and Roman army person-
nel at Domavium (cf. 4.1.10). Perhaps the stationes of beneWciarii consulares
recorded at Skelani and Bajna Basta are related to the mining ventures some
25 km to the north-west.115 Owing to its importance as a mining centre and
as a migrational focal point, Domavium reached municipal status, as a
series of inscriptions by the ordo municipii Domavianorum in the Wrst half
of the third century documents. Perhaps in the mid-third century the town
became col(onia) m(etalla?) D(omaviana).116
. Three inscribed altars to Terminus and Terminus-Liber discovered at Usti-
kolina near Foca and near Gorazde might (in analogy to the Terminus altar
discovered at Friesach in Noricum) provide evidence of one or more mining
districts in the Upper Drina Valley in Dalmatia. These perhaps included the
silver mines around Ustikolina, Foca/Potpec, and near Pljevlja in the area of
which the remains of Roman mining activites were recorded.117 A statio
beneWciarii is documented at Pljevlja.118
. A further argentiferous lead mining area might have been located in the Lim
Valley in the vicinity of Prijepolje, at Cadinj, where Roman excavations are
well documented.119
It has been argued that the argentiferous lead mines listed above, including
those west of Loznica on the Lower Drina and Brskovo, formed a vast mining
district called argentariae Delmaticae et Pannonicae, in accordance with the

113
Davies 1935: 194 f.; Wilkes 1969: 27780; Dusanic 1977: 66; Skegro 2000: 847; Dusanic
2004b: 254 with fn. 38.
114
Dusanic 1977: 66, 86.
115
CBFIR 431 (Bajna Basta), 4558 (Skelani), 460 (Pljevlja), cf. Nelis-Clement 2000: 259 f.
116
CIL III 12727 (ad 21317), 12733 8363 (ad 21718), 12720 8359, 8360 (ad 22935),
12728, 12729 (ad 2513), cf. Wilkes 1969: 280; Zaninovic 1977: 797 f.; Bojanovski 1982: 94,
99106, 19.
117
Besides slag heaps and furnaces, ancient mining tunnels, and cast moulds were discovered
along the Ceotina river valley between Foca and Pljevlja and in the area of Pljevlja, cf. Skegro
2000: 879; Dusanic 1977: 68. On Terminus/Terminus-Liber, cf. AE 1939: 301; ILJug 1572, 1573;
CIL III 8371.
118
CBFIR 460.
119
An argenti actor and a vilicus are attested at Kolovorat near Prijepolje (ILJug 1685, 1690;
Skegro 2000: 92 with fn. 259; Mirkovic 1975: 95108, nos. 1 and 7). There is no indication that
they were members of the familia Caesaris. Roman mining tools, slag heaps and remains of a
smelting furnace supposedly were discovered in the area, cf. Skegro 2000: 89 f. with further
bibliography.
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 73

procuratorial titles recorded at Domavium and elsewhere. Dusanic suggested

that the provincial border of Pannonia and Dalmatia cut through the mining
districthence the name argentariae Delmaticae et Pannonicae.120 There is
little to support the view of a territorial district of this size, yet on the
administrative level the subordination of mines from diVerent provinces
under one procurator is well attested.121
A further district may be recorded in Moesia Superior:
. The copper coins minted unter Hadrian with the legend (metalla) Aeliana
Pincensia are understood to refer to the mining ventures in the Pek (anc.
Pincus) and Mlava river valleys, for instance the copper, iron and gold
mines at Majdanpek, the gold/copper/silver mines near Kucajna, and the
lead/silver/iron mines at Vitovnica.122 Further mines have been located
along the Pincus river, but so far no administrative centre has been ob-
served.123 To date, there is no direct epigraphic documentation for imperial
control of the mining areas in the Pincus Valley.
In the immediate aftermath of the Pannonian warsaccording to Florus
(2.25.12)the Roman governor C. Vibius Postumus put the local Dalmatian
population to work in the gold mines. Both Statius and Martial refer to
goldmining in Dalmatia without providing any names for speciWc local-
ities.124 The archaeological evidence suggests that gold-mining mainly took
place in Central Bosnia:
. Austrian surveyors operating mostly during the late nineteenth century
identiWed a number of ancient mining sites in the immediate vicinity of
Uskoplje/Gornji Vakuf in the Vrbas valley. Based on the remaining traces
of sluicing, the construction of leats and the further evidence for a
Roman presence at Uskoplje, it was argued that the remnants were Roman

120
On Loznica, see TIR L 34, p. 74. Davies 1935: 189191; Dusanic 1977: 67 f.
121
Alfoldy 2003: 226.
122
Davies 1935: 21721; Dusanic 1977: 57, 74, 76; Dusanic 2004b: 259 f. with fn. 58; Woytek
2004a: 47 f. The recent excavations from 1971 to 1990 at the iron, copper and gold mining/
smelting site of Kraku lu Jordan near Brodica yielded not only a peculiar fortiWed architectural
structure with Roman pottery, tools and coinage, whichjudging from the slagswas appar-
ently erected for the sole purpose of smelting copper and iron ores and melting the gold gained
from placer deposits in the Pek river into ingots. Fetters found in the nearby village of Zeleznik
have led Miodrag Tomovic (2000) to see slaves (or perhaps convicts?) as the major source of
labour on the site.
123
Davies 1935: 217, believed the administrative centre to be based at Viminacium, while
Dusanic 1977: 76, locates the mining administration at Pincum/mod. Veliko Gradiste, cf. also
TIR L 34 Budapest, p. 90.
124
Stat. silv. 3.3.89 f.; Mart. epigr. 10.78.1.5; Wilkes 1969: 272; Zaninovic 1977: 796; Kienast
1999: 403.
74 Mining and Quarrying Districts

gold-mining ventures. Moreover, iron was also mined in the vicinity of

Uskoplje.125
. Traces of gold and iron-mining were observed in the Lasva and Bila river
valleys near Travnik. Remnants of sluicing (?) were detected between Var-
osluk and Travnik and near Vitez on both sides of the Lasva valley, whereas
mining tunnels were discovered at Gornji Slimeni near Travnik.126
. Evidence for gold and iron-mining (mostly sluicing) originates from the
areas around Fojnica, near Visnjika, and Ostruznika, near Kiseljak, in the
Fojnicka valley, and near Kresevo, south of Kiseljak. Gold-mining appears to
be attested in the area at a few sites west of Busovaca.127
. The Central Bosnian gold-mining area appears to have been linked by a
road from Salona to Haedum castellum Daesitiatium/mod. Breza in
19/20 ad. Scholarly opinion has Ad Matricem (mod. Bugojno?) as the
possible headquarters of the mining administration.128 However, there is
no direct epigraphic evidence for imperial oYcials or military units being
present in the area. An inscribed funerary monument of a commentariesis
(sic) aurariarum Delmatarum and a dispesator (sic) from Salona (perhaps
Wrst century ad ?), as well as an undated inscription perhaps of a [proc
(urator) (?) m]etalloru[m from Glamoc might suggest imperial control in
the hinterland of Salona/mod. Split.129 This assumption might be sup-
ported by the presence of a beneWciarius consularis in the third century at
Glamoc.130
Similar diYculties in outlining mining districts and territories emerge in the
case of Roman Dacia. Apart from epigraphic evidence for the mining admin-
istration of aurariae Dacicae being based at Ampelum/mod. Zlatna, there are
no available details on the territorial conWguration of the gold-mining areas
under imperial control. Nevertheless, Noeske argued for a vast Dacian gold-
mining district delimited in the west by the provincial boundary running
south from the Meses mountains to Baia de Cris, the eastern border perhaps
being the Muresul. The southern borders might have been created by the

125
On the Vranica mountain east of Uskoplje traces of ground sluicing(?), as well as two
leats tapping water from Suhodolpotok brook and a water tank have been discovered. At Zlatno
Guvno water leats stretching for 9 km, and at several sites near Uskoplje in the Vrbas Valley hill
slopes scarred by sluicing were reported. Skegro 2000: 74 f. (gold), 132 f. (iron).
126
Skegro 2000: 75 f. (gold), 133 f. (iron).
127
Skegro 2000: 76 f. (gold), 134 f. (iron), with further bibliography; Davies 1935: 184;
Dusanic 1977: 69.
128
Dusanic 1977: 68; Skegro 2000: 78 f.
129
CIL III 1997 (Salona, 1st cent. ad ?). ILJug 1655 (Glamoc) with D. Sergejevski, GZM 39,
1927: 260 n. 9.
130
ILJug 1463 (Halapic/Glamoc, ad 261).
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 75

Figure 18. Mines in Dacia

territorial boundaries of Micia and Apulum, home to the legio XIII Gemina.
Noeske, however, was unable to trace the northern borders of his district.131
To date, no evidence has come to light conWrming Noeskes concept of a vast

131
Noeske 1977: 274 f. Micia perhaps was a statio of a beneWciarius consularis connected with
the mining zone, cf. IDR III/3, 86 AE 1930: 11 AE 1931: 119 AE 1933: 9. As Rankov (1983:
49 with fn. 50, following Wagner 1938: 49 f., 53, 1246, 208 f.; and Gudea 1977: 872, no. 19),
argues, the auxiliary garrison at Micia did guard the approaches to the Dacian gold mining
76 Mining and Quarrying Districts

territory. At the most, the disparate metalla or territoria metallorum were

partly uniWed as aurariae Dacicae on an administrative level.132 Moreover,
control by imperial staV can only be veriWed in a few gold-mining areas in
Dacia. The most compelling evidence stems from Alburnus Maior/mod.
Rosia Montana.133 Outside Alburnus Maior written evidence for imperial
control begins to wear thin. Wollmann argued that a votive inscription
found at Apulum by a subprocurator aurariarum might have originated in
Baia de Cris where remains of Roman gold-mining have been located.134
The stamped tiles of legio XIII Gemina found near the alluvial gold deposits
of Pianul de Jos in the Ariesu Valley and in the valley of the Ogasul Baiesului,
or of legio IIII Flavia Firma found at gold-mining shafts near Bocsa-Vasiova,
are an inadequate basis from which to argue for imperial control of these
sites.135
Despite the wealth of archaeological material for extractive operations in
Roman Spain, the sparsity of written documents from mining zones makes it
diYcult to identify or to delimit the extent of imperial mining districts. In
north-western Spain the inscriptions set up by vexillations of the legio VII
Gemina and auxiliary units in Luyego and Villals, which name the (mining)
procurator in charge, provide signiWcant evidence for imperial control of the
alluvial gold extraction in the Duerna Valley south-west of Asturica Augusta/
mod. Astorga in the second half of the second century (cf. 4.1.6, 5.2).
Furthermore, the presence of Roman military personnel at Tresminas suggests
that these opencast hardrock gold mines were also under imperial
supervision.136
Turning to southern Spain, epigraphic material documenting imperial
mining districts is likewise sparse. Perhaps a number of the silver/lead
mines in the vicinity of Castulo were supervised by imperial oYcials. An
inscription from the Wrst half of the second century ad records a libertus
Augusti at El Centenillo, where opencast as well as underground mining

district(s). For beneWciarii consulares and their stationes near salt mines in Dacia, cf. Rankov
1983: 49 with fn. 51.
132
On mining remains at, cf. Wollmann 1996 with further bibliography.
133
Noeske 1977.
134
CIL III 1088, p. 1390 IDR III/3, 228, cf. Noeske 1977: 348, AMP 3. The gold mining of
secondary deposits in the Crisul Alb valley south of Baia de Cris can be dated by a number of
coins to the second half of the second century ad. cf. Wollmann 1996: 360 f.
135
Wollmann 1996: 390, 394, 397.
136
Although there is no direct epigraphic evidence for imperial oYcials, the presence of
army units suggests a mine run by the Roman state, cf. Wahl 1993: 142. CIL II 2389 AE 1907:
150. AE 1980: 582. AE 1907: 151.
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 77

Figure 19. Mines in northwestern Spain

operations are attested.137 Further evidence for the involvement of imperial

oYcials in mining operations is provided by the epigraphic documents of
Baetica. A procurator montis Mariani is attested in Hispalis at the end of the
Wrst century ad in charge of Mons Marianus, a gold mine or mining area close
to Corduba.138 The gravestone of an imperial dispensator in Regina/Los
Paredones near Casa de Reina (BA), c.20 km west from the Azuaga mining
area is the only indicator of imperial interest in the extractive operations on
the northern slope of the Sierra Morena.139 The connection of our dispensator
137
AE 1922: 9, cf. Domergue 1987a: pl. XIXa and Wg. 25. The discovery of Wve Archimedean
screws for the drainage of ground-water, tools, oil lamps, smelting furnaces, and a rudimentary
aqueduct, as well as coinage, is suggestive of a continuous exploitation since the 2nd cent. bc,
and evidences a high level of investment and organizational eVort, cf. Domergue 1987a: 26772.
138
CILA II 25. The location of Mons Marianus is problematic. While R. C. Knapp believes all
of the Sierra Morena in the hands of Sextus Marius, others would like to place Mons Marianus
in the mines at Cerro Muriano / Cerros Marianos, cf. Davies 1935: 359, 1325; Knapp 1983:
39 f.; Domergue 1987a: 11624. The epigraphic evidence seems to tip the balance more towards
the latter location.
139
CIL II2/7 981. Near Azuaga, a vast number of rafas, small opencast extraction ditches,
scar the landscape, cf. Domergue 1987a: 1725.
Figure 20. Mines in Baetica and Lusitania
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 79

Figure 21. Mines in Sardinia

with these local mining operations appears likely, as there is no evidence

for other activities (i.e. landed estates, military camps) in this area.140 At the
Rio Tinto mines a freedman procurator is attested during the reign of Nerva
where he set up an honoriWc inscription for his emperor.141
140
Boulvert 1970: 42933; Weaver 1972: 202.
141
CIL II 956. Latter-day silver/copper-mining operations have resulted in the destruction of
the original topography of this Roman site. However, Domergue and Davies assume that the
extractive operations resembled those at La Zarza, Sotiel Coronada, Cabezas de los Pastos, and
Herreras. Some mining galleries even yielded water-lifting devices. At least sixteen pairs of
treadwheel-operated wheels have been recovered from the mining site at Rio Tinto, suggesting
that there was underground mining below the water-table, cf. Davies 1935: 12631; Jones 1980:
146; Domergue 1987a: 2358, 244.
80 Mining and Quarrying Districts

Figure 22. Mines in Britain

(after Jones & Mattingly 1990:
map 6.2)

Further epigraphic evidence for the imperial control of mining areas

was recently discovered in Sardinia. The inscription mentioning an
imperial procurator metallorum et praediorum at Forum Traiani/mod.
Caddas has for the Wrst time conWrmed the notion, gained from other sources,
that some mines were under imperial control.142 The heartland of Roman
mining on Sardinia seems to have been the Iglesiente. In this argentiferous
region slag heaps and mining galleries yielding tools and oil lamps have

142
AE 1998: 671, cf. Benito Serra & Bacco 1998: 1244 f.; Bruun 2001.
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 81

been found at Monteponi, Malacalzetta, at S. Giovanni, and at S. Giorgo near

Gonnesa. Further Roman silver mines are recorded at Argentiera near
Nurra.143 Yann Le Bohec was able to show that a series of military inscriptions
in the Iglesiente probably records the imperial control of the mines there.144
Moreover, the mould marks on lead ingots discovered at Fluminimaggiore
and at San Nicolao in the Iglesiente display the name of the emperor.145
Similar labels naming Hadrian were found on nine ingots from Carcinadas
and on ingots from the shipwreck of Pistis.146 While the inscriptions on the
ingots do not necessarily prove the direct management of mines by imperial
oYcials on Sardinia during the Wrst and second century ad, we certainly can
suppose that part of the lead produced came into imperial ownership.147
Further evidence for a mining district under imperial control comes from
Gaul. Apart from tabularii (rationis) ferrariarum at Lugdunum, members of
the familia Caesaris are present in the mining areas at Villefranche-
de-Rouerge/Aveyron. The inscribed slab for a vilicus Zmaragdus names
the familia Caesaris of emperor Tiberius quae est in metallis.148 Although
the presence of military personnel is attested archaeologically in Britain at the
gold mines of Dolaucothi for the Flavian to Hadrianic period, the silver/lead
mines at Charterhouse-on-Mendip, and perhaps in Weston-under-Penyard(?),
there is to date no record of imperial administrative personnel for mines in
Britain.149

3.2.6. Summary
Leaving aside the evidence for mining areas under imperial control in the
Danubian provinces, the information on such districts in the western prov-
inces in general is surprisingly scarce, in spite of the rich archaeological Wnds
and remains of mines in Spain, Britain, or Gaul. This is not necessarily a result
of the sparsity of epigraphic record, but might reXect more fundamental
diVerences in administration in these areas in comparison to the Danube
provinces. Moreover, diVerences between the Danubian provinces and Spain
also appear in the chronological documentation of such districts. While

143
Meloni 1990: 179 f., 475 f. with further bibliography.
144
CIL X 8321 Sotgiu 1988: C113. AE 1985: 485a Sotgiu 1988: B115. CIL X 7535, 7537,
cf. Le Bohec 1992a: 2602.
145
CIL X 8073/1, p. 1002, 8073/2.
146
Zucca 1990: 8039.
147
Le Bohec 1992a: 258 f.
148
AE 1892: 23 CIL XIII 1550, cf. Domergue & Leroy 2000: 7 with further bibliography.
149
On the forts, cf. Wilson 1971; Jones & Little 1973: 13 f.; Stewart 2002: 134.
82 Mining and Quarrying Districts

mining districts under imperial control are documented on the Iberian

Peninsula from the beginning of the Wrst to the end of the second century
ad, most of the epigraphic evidence from Dalmatia and Moesia Superior
might point to the creation of mining districts or territories during the second
and beginning of the third century ad.
The existence of a vast mining district including massive tracts of land
under imperial control is hitherto only documented in Noricum, albeit only
by circumstantial evidence. In the Danubian provinces, the presence of toll
stations in the vicinity of mining ventures may imply the exaction of a toll or
tax on mined goods. Nevertheless, these toll stations did probably not delimit
mining districts precisely. Moreover, the nummi metallorum do not demon-
strate an extraterritorial status of mining ventures in the Danube provinces.
Thus, the precise delimitation of metalla and territoria metallorum, as implied
by the Vipasca tablets, is rarely traceable in the present day landscape.

3 . 3 . T H E L E G A L NAT U R E O F M E TA L L A
A N D T E R R I TO R I A M E TA L LO RU M

Given the clear demarcation of some of these imperial mines and quarries and
the presence of imperial oYcials and elements of the Roman army in these
districts, the question arises whose property these mining and quarrying
zones were. The scholarly answers are contentious: Dominic Rathbone
summed up the prevailing view when he wrote the Roman state also had
Wxed assets consisting principally of land, urban properties and mines. . . .
Under Augustus and Tiberius almost all mines not already run by the state
came into the hands of the patrimonium, and often if not normally were put
under military supervision, and new mines, like those in Britain, followed
suit.150 This echoes the assessment made in 1876 by Joachim Marquardt. He
argued that during the Republic, most mines had been owned by private
individuals, while in the Principate the most important mines were acquired
by the emperors, partly fur den Fiscus (for the public treasury), and partly
fur das kaiserliche Privatvermogen, for the emperors private property.151
In the wake of Marquardts theory, scholars such as Otto Hirschfeld,
Michael RostovtzeV, and Ulf Tackholm viewed public and patrimonial
mines as coexisting with privately owned mines.152 Hirschfeld added
to Marquardts view that the diVerence between public and patrimonial

150 151
Rathbone 1996: 315 f. Marquardt 1884: 259 f.
152
RostovtzeV 1904: 445; Tackholm 1937: 97 f.
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 83

mines was a result of how they had been acquiredas spoils of war, through
conWscation or inheritance.153 The view, however, that mines were exclusively
part of the imperial patrimonium has continued. Ferdinand Orth saw most
mines falling into the hands of the emperor, whom he described as eigen-
tlichen Besitzer der Gruben, the true proprietor.154 In his inXuential work on
the Norican iron mines, Geza Alfoldy simply noted that the mines there were
the private property of the emperor (without providing a discussion of the
known material).155 William Harris also observed: The principal metals in
question were gold, silver, copper, tin, bronze . . . lead and iron. Most of the
ultimate sources of supply were the property of the emperor.156 Taking a
more moderate position, Claude Domergue pointed out that it is impossible
to maintain a distinction between state/public mines and patrimonial mines
in the Roman empire:
En Wn de compte, il est, croyons-nous, plus simple et sans doute aussi plus conforme a
la realite de considerer ces mines administrees par les services Wnanciers du Prince
globalement et sans autre nuance comme des biens imperiaux, donc des mines
imperiales, et il semble bien qua partir du IIe siecle ces dernieres vont absorber celles
qui, dans les provinces, dependaient jusque la de laerarium.157
In the case of imperial quarries, the view voiced in 1884 by Joachim Mar-
quardt, that the quarries under imperial control belonged to the patrimo-
nium, seems to have prevailed.158 Otto Hirschfeld, Charles Dubois, and Ulf
Tackholm followed Marquardts opinion. Recent scholarship has failed to
directly address the question. John Ward-Perkins argued that certainly by
the mid-Wrst century ad the major quarries were apparently in imperial or
state control. For J. Clayton Fant, however, most imported marble in Rome
came from quarries owned by the Roman emperor.159 The only voice of
dissent appears to be that of Kurt Fitzler, who argued that the quarries in
Roman Egypt were public property and were not of patrimonial status.160

153
Je nachdem die Art der Erwerbung war, werden dieselben [mines] entweder dem Fiskus
(so bei der Eroberung des Landes[ . . . ]) oder dem patrimonium zugefallen sein, so besonders die
bona damnatorum. Durch Erbschaft sind ohne Zweifel ebenfalls zahlreiche Bergwerke in kai-
serlichen Besitz gekommen [ . . . ], cf. Hirschfeld 1905: 146 f. with p.147 fn. 1.
154
Orth 1924: 152 f.
155
Alfoldy 1970: 167; Alfoldy 1974: 100. On ownership of mines in Noricum, cf. rsted
1985: 217 f.
156
Greene 2000: 749; Harris 2000: 722.
157
Domergue 1990: 239 f.; cf. also Andreau 1990: 86.
158
Marquardt 1884: 263 with fn. 3; Ward-Perkins 1992b: 27, Wg. 14.
159
Hirschfeld 1905: 175 fn. 3; Dubois 1908: ix f.; Tackholm 1937: 113; Dodge 1991: 34;
Ward-Perkins 1992b: 24; Fant 1993a: 145.
160
Fitzler 1910: 112.
84 Mining and Quarrying Districts

In the light of these conXicting and vague positions on the legal nature of
mines and quarries under imperial control in the Roman empire, a reassess-
ment of the literary, legal, and epigraphic sources is appropriate.

3.3.1. Private and Public Metalla

Suetonius notes in his De vita Caesarum that the emperor Tiberiusbesides
conWscating the property of principes in Gaul, Spain, Syria, and Greece on
preposterous pretenceshad rid most civitates and private individuals of old
privileges (immunitates) and the ius metallorum ac vectigalium.161 This passage
has been interpreted by a number of scholars as evidence for the appropriation
of all relevant mines and quarries by Tiberius, either in the name of the Roman
state or for the emperors patrimoniumwithout, however, creating an im-
perial monopoly on extractive operations.162 In addition, Tacitus reports that
the silver and gold mines of Sextus Marius, described as the richest man in
Spain, were seized by Tiberius in ad 33 after Marius had been convicted of
having an incestuous relationship with his daughter. Tacitus has been thought
to accuse Tiberius of keeping the mines for himself, instead of transferring
Marius aerariae and aurariae into public property.163 This quote from the
Annales is usually taken to corroborate the above passage from Suetonius.
The texts of Tacitus and Suetonius, however, are in disagreement. Unlike
Suetonius, the infringement of the ius metallorum or ius vectigalium of cities
or private individuals by Tiberius is not mentioned in the surviving parts of
the Tacitean text. Moreover, Tacitus underlines the abnormality of Tiberius
procedure regarding Marius mines: it was unusual, perhaps even unlawful,
that the property or bona damnatorum intended for the state was diverted to
assets under his control.164 Michael Alpers and Peter Brunt have provided
additional insights on this passage. Both argued that the mines of Sex.
Marius were not necessarily incorporated into Tiberius private property,
but that Marius bona, including his mines, were made public property.

161
Suetonius, Tib. 49.2: plurimis etiam civitatibus et privatis veteres immunitates et ius
metallorum ac vectigalium.
162
Hirschfeld 1905: 146 f.; Schonbauer 1929: 135 f.; Davies 1935: 3; Tackholm 1937: 97 f.;
Domergue 1990: 236 f.; France 2001: 27883; For the quarries, cf. Dodge 1991: 32; Ward-Perkins
1992b: 24 with fn. 13 (commentary by Hazel Dodge).
163
Tacitus, Ann. 6.19: Post quos Sextus Marius Hispaniarum ditissimus defertur incestasse
Wliam et saxo Tarpeio deicitur. Ac ne dubium haberetur magnitudinem pecuniae malo vertisse,
aerarias aurariasque eius quamquam publicarentur, sibimet Tiberius seposuit; cf. Hirschfeld 1905:
147 fn. 1; Tackholm 1937: 97; Millar 1992: 176; Levick 1999a: 101.
164
On bona caduca and bona damnatorum going to the Wscus i.e. the public or state treasury,
cf. Brunt 1990a: 1416.
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 85

The distinction is made evident by Tacitus (usually precise) use of the term
publicare instead of conWscare. As stated by Brunt, Tiberius transgression lay
merely in having simply decided to manage and exploit [Marius mines]
through his own agents instead of involving the senate.165 Tiberius strictly
adhered to the division of Wscus Caesaris/patrimonium and the aerarium Saturni,
making it unlikely that the emperor had appropriated Marius mines for his own
Wscus Caesaris.166
Suetonius claim that individuals and cities were losing their ius metallorum
or ius vectigalium is not conWrmed but contradicted by other sources. In the
case of the ius vectigalium, there is no evidence of Tiberius alleged measure in
the epigraphic record of municipalitiestowns like Veii in Italy, Stratonicea
as well as Aezani in Asia, Irni, Malaga, and Munigua in Baetica, and others,
continued to exact vectigalia throughout the Wrst century and later.167 More-
over, Gaius, a jurist writing sometime during the second century, refers in his
Provincial Edict to publicani renting out vectigalia from the public authorities
of municipalities.168 As regards the vectigalia, Suetonius statement is an
untenable exaggeration. By analogy, one may assume that private individuals
or municipalities kept control of mines and quarries. Evidence for this
assumption is mainly provided by legal sources. In general, the rights of
ownership over landed property included not only a delimited surface area,
but were extended to the sky above and soil below.169 In the case that stone
quarries were discovered on private property, no one was to quarry the stone
either in a private capacity or in the name of the state without the permission
of the proprietor.170 Moreover, the usufructuary of a private estate was
allowed to make use of stone quarries or even open quarries and gold, silver,
copper, iron, sulphur, and other metalla after the legacy of the usufruct had
been made.171 Javolenus and Ulpian discussed the consequences of a divorce
on the ownership of marble quarries opened by the husband on land that
formed part of his wifes dowry. Ulpian believed the husband to be entitled to
keep the quarried marble still lying in the quarry, yet could not hope to be
reimbursed for the expenses in opening and running the quarries, despite the
rise in value of his divorcees dotal land. Ulpian and Javolenus both saw
165
Lang 1911: 77; Brunt 1990a: 145; Alpers 1995: 90 fn. 282.
166
Alpers 1995: 5995.
167
ILS 6579 (Veii). Syll.3 837, 910 (Stratonicea); OGIS 502 (Aezani); AE 1962: 288 (Muni-
gua); AE 1986: 333 (Irni); CIL II 1964 (p. xliii 876. 704) (Malaga), cf. Lintott 1993: 84 with fn.
89; Galsterer 1988: 86 with fn. 40; Gonzalez 1986: 167, ch. 63; LeRoux 1999: 15763; Nonnis &
Ricci 1999: 549 (Appendix).
168
Dig. 39.4.13.1: Praeterea et si quis vectigal conductum a re publica cuiusdam municipii
habet, hoc edictum locum habet.
169
Dig. 8.4.13.1, 39.2.26; Kaser & Knutel 2005: 114.
170
Dig. 8.4.13.1, 18.1.77.pr.
171
Dig. 7.1.13.5, cf. 7.1.9.pr.-7.
86 Mining and Quarrying Districts

marble quarries as a non-renewable resource (unlike chalk pits, silver and

gold mines, or other mining ventures, and certain marble quarries in Gaul
and Asia). The extracted marble therefore could not be regarded as fruits of
the land.172 In the thirty-Wfth book of his Edict, Ulpian discusses a speech
given by the emperor Septimius Severus on the Ides of June, ad 195, on the
property of those in tutelage or care and the protection of their property
from alienation (e.g. sale) by the tutor. Amongst other relevant issues,
Ulpian argues that lapidicinae or other metalla owned by a person in tute-
lage (pupillus) were protected under Severus ruling and thus were inalien-
able.173 Although the question of ownership of mines and quarries is never
directly addressed, Roman law did not prohibit the owner or the usufructuary
of land to open and run quarries or mines or to proWt from any other fruits of
the land. Thus, extractive operations could be owned privately.
There were, however, some restrictions: to Ulpians discussion of
Severus speach the sixth-century compilers of the Digest added a short
passage from Paulus commentaries. It was inserted as a caveat following
Ulpians list of extractive operations which could be owned by a person
in tutelage. The caveat implies that private ownership rights might not
have included all mines or quarries (Dig. 27.9.4: quod tamen privatis
licet possidere).174 In addition, Marcianus, a jurist from the Severan era,
records a rescript of Caracalla exempting any dominus praedii, landowner,
from penalty whose colonus or slave produced iron (ferrum facere) on his
estate without his knowledge and not in compliance with the law (illicite).175
This restriction on iron production may have been in accord with a

172
Dig. 23.5.18.pr.-1. (Javolenus), 24.3.7.134 (Ulpian).
173
Dig. 27.9.3.627.9.5.pr. (Ulpian): Si lapidicinas vel quae alia metalla pupillus habuit
stypteriae vel cuius alterius materiae, vel si cretifodinas argentifodinas vel quid aliud huic simile,
[Paulus: quod tamen privatis licet possidere] magis puto ex sententia orationis impediri aliena-
tionem.
174
The original context of Paulus caveat can not be reconstructed. The use of licet
possidere evokes the formula uti frui habere possidereque licere describing unimpeded rights
of possession and usage over an object. Roman jurists distinguished property (proprietas,
dominium) from mere possession (possessio). Real property, dominium ex iure Quiritum, was
limited to Roman citizens and only applied to moveable goods or landed estates in Italy. With
exemption of areas under ius Italicum, the owner of provincial land could theoretically never
gain full property rights. Provincial land was seen as property of the Roman state, since a land
rent (tributum, stipendium) had to be paid. The owner of provincial land, however, had rights of
possession and usage (uti frui habere possidereque licere), basically equalling regular dominium.
A Roman landowner in the province would hardly have noticed the legal diVerences, yet
amongst Roman jurists such issues appear to have been discussed at length, cf. Gaius, Inst.
2.7, 2.21; Inst. 2.1.40; Kaser & Knuttel 2005: 111 f.
175
Dig. 39.4.16.11: Magnus Antonius rescripsit, si colonus vel servi domini praedii ferrum
illicite in praedio fecerint ignorante domino, nulla poena dominum teneri. The term ferrum facere
may imply the mining for and/or smelting of iron ore, cf. Herz 2005: 28.
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 87

lex ferrariarum documented in the lex metalli Vipascensis: the contractor of

shoe-making within the mining district was to sell nails in line with the lex
ferrariarum.176 Moreover, a tax on nails and the use of iron are at issue in a
rescript by Hadrian to the Aphrodisians.177 Paulus (Dig. 39.4.11.pr.) relates
that the sale of iron to barbarians is strictly forbidden and subject to capital
punishment. Given the circumstantial evidence for legal and Wscal restrictions
on the mining and trade of iron, the general exclusion of this metal from
private ownership is plausible. There is, however, no direct documentation of
a particular law to that eVect.178
Set aside the legal codes, the private exploitation of mines and quarries is
demonstrated by epigraphic and literary sources. Pliny, while discussing
copper of diVerent origins, points out that the aes Sallustianum in the
Ceutronian Alps (Tarentaise/F) and the aes Livianum in Gaul were named
after the domini of the metalla, one a close friend of Augustus, the other
Augustus wife.179 He identiWes C. Sallustius Crispus and Livia as former
owners (domini) of the copper mines. However, it is uncertain whether Pliny
was aware of the linguistic niceties of Roman law and described the entitle-
ment of Sallustius and Livia to these copper mines in Gaul with any accuracy.
Papyri from Roman Egypt, however, provide interesting parallels. There, large
imperial estates were named after the initial owner. Apart from estates
carrying the name of Livia, the estates of Maecenas, the d
P, appear in papyri as part of Claudius and later Neros patrimonium.180
The answer to the question as to how Maecenas or Livia acquired these estates
has been controversial. George M. Parassoglou argued that with the Roman
occupation of Egypt, the conWscated   (lands granted by the Ptolemaic
kings to members of the royal family and trusted government oYcials), and
B (allotments given to soldiers or local guards) were oVered for sale at
public auctions.181 As some of the reviewers of Parassoglous study have
pointed out, there is no evidence either to conWrm or contradict his
view.182 Perhaps the distribution of patrimonial land to members of the
imperial family or close friends was a viable option as well. The senatus
consultum de Cn. Pisone patre provides some insight into this matter. Aside
from additional punitive sentences, the Roman senate ordered the conWscation

176
LMV ll. 34.
177
Reynolds 1982: 11518, no. 15, ll. 89, cf. Oliver 1989: 166, no. 69.
178
The content of the lex ferrariarum in LMV or the 


recorded in the lex
portorii Asiae (Engelmann & Knibbe 1989: 34, l. 78) remain unknown.
179
Pliny, NH 34.34.
180
Parassoglou 1978: 16 f.; Capponi 2005: 1046.
181
Parassoglou 1978: 4, 8.
182
Crawford 1980: 252 f.; Hengstl 1981: 37; Rathbone 1993: 102 f.
88 Mining and Quarrying Districts

of Cn. Calpurnius Pisos property for the state, with the exception of a saltus in
Illyricum. This estate had been a gift from Augustus to Piso, and now was to be
returned to Tiberius private property.183 By analogy with this passage, certain
copper mines in the Alpes Ceutronum and in Gaul were perhaps given as a
present to C. Sallustius Crispus and Livia by the emperor Augustus, and thus
came into into private ownership.184
Outside Augustus family and inner circle, wealthy individuals (besides
Sextus Marius) are documented owning mines. Pliny the Elder names two
Baetican lead mines, a metallum Sama/lutariense and a metallum Antonianum
that were contracted out by the Roman state.185 The metallum Antonianum is
most certainly named after an Antonius and hence is likely to have been
privately owned before coming under imperial administration.186 Nor was
the ownership of mines limited only to men. An inscribed monument from
Lugdunum/mod. Lyon set up in ad 226 names the ferrariae of Memmia
Sosandris, a c(larissima) f(emina), a woman of senatorial rank.187 The monu-
ment was commissioned by the contractors of a vectigal on the massa ferrar-
iarum (probably an estate including iron mines), of a Memmia Sosandris.188
The use of the term vectigal (mostly understood as state revenue or tax)
demonstrates the public ownership of the mines in question. Thus, Rene
Sablayrolles argued that the iron mines were not the private property of
Memmia Sosandris. Yet, vectigal can also describe revenues from private
estates; perhaps the small company (socii) was awarded the contract for
collecting revenue from the miners of these ferrariae.189 As one might expect,
the extant sources barely provide any insights on the private ownership of
mines outside the upper echelons of Roman society. Even though Strabo

183
Eck, Caballos, & Fernandez 1996: 45, ll. 846. For other estates given as donativa to
trusted generals and then returned to the emperor when they had fallen out of favor, cf.
Cornelius Gallus (Dio 53.23.7), C. Silius (Tacitus, Ann. 4.20.1). Eck, Caballos, & Fernandez
1996: 2027, with further bibliography.
184
Kaser & Knuttel 2005: 238 f.
185
Pliny, NH 34.165.
186
Domergue 1990: 235 with fn. 39, 270, 274 with fn. 52, 276; a hypothetical candidate is
Marc Anthony, given that a further inXuential politician of the Late Republic, M. Licinius
Crassus, reportedly owned silver mines, cf. Plutarch, Crass. 2.7.
187
CIL XIII 1811 ILS 8641 (Lugdunum), cf. Hirschfeld 1905: 158 fn. 4; Sablayrolles 1989:
159 fn. 24. Memmia Sosandris has been claimed to be the sister of Memmia, the wife(?) of
Severus Alexander. On the name, cf. PIR2 M 489. Syme 1971: 6, 8, understood the latter
Memmia to be a fabrication by the author of HA Alex. 20.3.
188
Hirschfeld 1905: 78 with fn. 2, argued that massa ferrariarum must be understood as ore
from the iron mines, cf. also TLL VIII 429/39 f., 1a. Brunt (1990c : 398 fn. 143) believed massa
ferrariarum to mean a territory or estate of iron mines, cf. TLL VIII, pp. 430 f., 2b.
189
Sablayrolles 1989: 160 with fns. 28, 29; Domergue 1990: 240, esp. 361 with fn. 70. On
C. Sallustius Crispus, cf. PIR1 S 61. On vectigal, cf. Mommsen 1887: 42734; Pekary 1979;
Burton 1999; Mateo 1999: 903.
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 89

records private ownership for the mines near Carthago Nova (except for the
gold mines) in the early days of the Principate, information on the owners
status is not provided.190
Besides private individuals, municipalities may also have proWted from mining
ventures. Suetonius claim that Tiberius had rid most civitates of ius metallorum
as well certainly implies some municipal ownership of metalla.191 By analogy
with the municipal vectigalia one may argue that municipalities retained control
of mines after Tiberius. However, there is little written evidence to corroborate
this hypothesis.192 Furthermore, the issue whether or not provincial councils
were entitled to revenues from mining ventures is a contentious one.193
The majority of archaeologically documented quarries undoubtedly
remained in private or municipal hands during the Principate, and only a
limited number of marble or granite quarries stood under direct imperial
control.194 The town of Luni may have held rights of ownership on the
quarries at Carrara, whereas Herodes Atticus perhaps counted the quarries
of the Pentelicon amongst his properties.195 The small number of papyri
refering to stone extraction do not directly touch on the issue of ownership:
190
Strabo 3.2.10.
191
Suet. Tib. 49.2.
192
Domergue 1990: 235 f., had pointed out that lead ingots carrying the stamp Carthago
Nova or Augusta Firma might originate from mines of the towns territory. A missive by
Tiberius to the town elders of the municipium Muniguense refers to a quarrel over oustanding
payments to the collector of the municipal vectigalia (AE 1962: 288 AE 1972: 257 CILA II
1052). Given the numerous iron mines recorded on the territory of Munigua in Roman Baetica
(cf. Griepentrog 1995), the municipial vectigalia possibly could have included the returns from
the known mining ventures.
193
The Marble of Thorigny mentions a iudex arcae ferrar(iarum), an oYce which T. Sennius
Sollemnis appears to have held before ad 238. By analogy with the arca Galliarum, the arca
ferrariarum has been understood to be independent from the imperial administration and
under the supervision of the Council of the Three Gauls. It has been argued that part of the
revenues (?) gained from iron-mining in Gaul belonged to the Council, cf. Hirschfeld 1905: 158;
PXaum 1948: 18; Sablayrolles 1989: 160 with fn. 31; Remy 1995: 77 f. For a diVerent view cf.
Deininger 1965: 104 fn. 4. Two adlectores(?) ferrariarum are documented in inscriptions at
Anicium/mod. Le Puy in an iron-mining area and were perhaps subordinate to the iudex arcae
ferrariarum (CIL XIII 1576, 1577).
194
Ward-Perkins 1992b : 24 with fn. 14.
195
On Carrara, cf. 7.2.3. The marble quarries at Tainaron, opened in response to heightened
Roman demand for marble, may have been owned privately, cf. Strabo 8.5.7; Pliny 36.135, 158.
Herodes Atticus ownership of the Pentelian quarries is indicated by an inscription on a block of
Pentelic marble found at Rome (no. 1260, ad 166), which reads caesura Cla(udii) Hier(odis)
Attici et Apolloni Lupi ( . . . ). Based on this reading, Dubois believed the quarries to be the
property of Herodes Atticus, who in the 2nd cent. ad used Pentelic marble for diVerent building
projects, cf. Pausanias 1.19.6, 6.21.2, 10.32.1; Philostratus, Vit.Soph. 2.550, cf. Ameling 1983a:
8494; Korres 1995. It therefore is possible that Herodes Atticus and his partner(?), Apollonius
Lupus, had leased or owned the quarries. Walter Ameling, however, believes the named Claudius
Hierodes Atticus to be his freedman, cf. Ameling 1983b: 216; Fant 1993a: 167. Atticus himself
was certainly not involved in the everyday work processes at the quarry.
90 Mining and Quarrying Districts

these are usually work contracts in which stone-cutters or masons come to

terms on the provision and transport of stone blocks and construction
elements (bases, capitals).196 Whilst the quarries from which the stone came
are occasionally named, the papyri do not assist in deciding whether the
named masons owned the stone quarries, were merely lessees of municipial or
private quarries, or, on the basis of a locatio-conductio operis, were paid to run
quarries and workshops of private owners.197

Other than private individuals and, perhaps, municipalities, the Roman

state emerges as owner of mines and quarries. As a consequence of its
expansion during the middle Republic, the Roman state acquired important
mining districts in newly conquered territories. These were regularly farmed
out by the state to private contractors.198 The literary sources, however, rarely
provide any particulars on public mining ventures. Limited insights are available
for southern Spain. With the fall of Carthago Nova/mod. Cartagena in 205 bc
Rome not only gained possession of considerable booty, but the silver mines near
the former bastion of Barcid Spain came under control of the Roman state as
well.199 In 195 bc the consul M. Porcius Cato, during his Spanish campaign,
ordered the exaction of vectigalia on iron and silver mines, including the
extractive operations near Carthago Nova.200 Strabo, quoting Polybios, claims
that 40,000 miners worked in the silver mines within twenty stadia from
Carthago Nova. The silver mines supposedly extracted silver worth 27,000 dra-
chmas per day, which went to the Roman state ( 

H  
).201
The territories near Carthago Nova (and, thus, the mines as well) remained
196
A 2nd-cent. contract between Antonia Asclepias from Oxyrhynchos and stone-cutters revolves
around the provision of diVerent sizes and types of blocks, some of which were transported by camel
from the northern quarry (P.Oxy. III 498). Two petitioners, Pamunis and Pausiris, known from a
papyrus found in El-Hibeh and dated to ad 17780 (P.Hibeh II 273 217), ask to be paid for the
transport of nine columns including the bases and capitals; as Dieter Hagedorn (1993: 97 f.) suggests,
they had probably produced the items in question as well. An account of construction work on a
temple from the Oxyrhynchite nome, dating to ad 117 (SB 11958) attests to the transport of
100 columns from the Ankyronon quarries to the port of Artemis.
197
The papyrological evidence for lease and work contracts between potters and owners of
kilns might provide a useful comparison: cf. P.Oxy. L 35957 with Strobel 1987: 927. Further
written evidence for quarries worked by stone-cutters comes from Saint-Boil in Gaul, cf. Monthel
& Lambert 2002: 111 f., Wg. 86. An inscribed monument at Marignac near St-Beat notes two men
qui primi hinc columnas vicenarias c(a)elaverunt et exportaverunt (CIL XIII 38 ILS 3579 AE
2000: 923) which Hirschfeld 1905: 147 fn. 5, assumes were perhaps also private owners of quarries.
A series of inscriptions from Phrygia documents the wealth of individual stonemasons, cf. Reinach
1890: 55, no. 9; Mendel 1909; Waelkens 1977: 288; Waelkens 1986: nos. 417, 471, 486, 501, 502;
Strubbe 1997: no. 256; Merkelbach & Stauber 2001: 200, no. 16/22/05.
198
Polybios 6.17.
199
Livy 26.47.
200
Livy 34.21.7, cf. Domergue 1990: 242 fn. 12; Lintott 1993: 73; Mateo 1999: 127.
201
Strabo 3.2.10 Polybios 34.9.811.
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 91

property of the Roman state until the late Republic. In the year 63 bc
Ciceroproviding his audience with a list of agri publicimentions the
agri propter Carthaginem Novam being public land since 209 bc.202 A passage
from Livy supports the view that during the Republic, mines owned previ-
ously by local political entities or rulers fell to the Roman state. Livy reports
on the senates decree in 167 bc terminating the lease of Macedonian mines
formerly owned by the Macedonian king Perseus. With the division of
Macedonia, L. Aemilius Paulus allowed for the iron and copper mines to be
reopened, whereas gold and silver mining was prohibited.203 Strabo identiWes
further state-owned mines at Mt Sandaracurgium near Pompeioupolis in
Pontus which were contracted to publicani, while Pliny alludes to a Repub-
lican lex censoria for the aurifodinae Victumularum (mod. Bessa) in the
territory of Vercellae in northern Italy, which prohibited the publicani there
from employing more than 5,000 workmen.204 The gold-mines of the Salassi
in the Aosta valley, too, had been farmed out to publicani prior to the conquest
in 25 bc.205 Alfenus Varus furthermore records whetstone-quarries on Crete,
which were probably publicly owned, farmed out (locare) by Caesar to redemp-
tores.206 With the submission of Numidia to Roman rule, the quarries of
Simitthus, formerly owned by the Numidian kings, passed into the hands of
the Roman state and are likely to have been contracted out as well.207
Public mines continued to generate considerable returns for the Roman
state during the Principate. Plinys report on the contracting out of the
metallum Samariense and the metallum Antonianum aside, he also names
the minium mines of Sisapo as providing vectigal for the populus Romanus.208
The legal texts once more provide the main bulk of evidence for state
ownership of mines. In the third book of his study on The Provincial Edict,
Gaius states that partners in collecting public vectigalia and running gold,
silver and salt mines are exempted from the prohibition to form corpor-
ations.209 Moreover, he declares in the thirteenth book of the same study that

202
Cicero, Leg. agr. 1.5, cf. Domergue 1990: 229, 233.
203
Livy 39.24.2, 45.18.35, 45.29.11; Cassiodor, Chron. ad 596 a.U.c.; Strabo 7.7.4; Domer-
gue 1990: 2434, 248.
204
Strabo 12.3.40. Pliny, NH 33.78. For the localization of Vercellae, cf. Cavalieri Manasse
et al. 1982: 767, also Strabo 5.1.12; CIL V, p. 715. Strabo 6.2.10 and Diod. 5.10, name an alum
mine on Lipara generating revenues for Rome.
205
Strabo 4.6.7; Dio 53.25.
206
Dig. 39.4.15.
207
Initial ownership by the Numidian kings is implied by the existence of an early temple at
Simitthus. The continuous and extensive exploitation of the marble during the Principate and
later has destroyed any older traces, cf. Rakob 1997: 2 f. On the history of the quarries near
Dokimeion, cf. Fant 1989a: 611.
208
Pliny, NH 34.118.
209
Dig. 3.4.1.pr.
92 Mining and Quarrying Districts

those who run salt mines, chalk-pits, or metalla are to be deWned as publicani
as well.210 Provided the text of this second-century law scholar is genuine,
public mines were still in existence in his time.211 Ulpian in the tenth book of
his Ad Edictum deWnes public vectigalia as taxes from which the Wscus, i.e. the
aerarium Saturni, derives revenues. Amongst these are to be counted the
vectigal metallorum.212 In this speciWc context vectigal is to be understood
as rent on state or public property, i.e. on state-owned mines, which suggests
that at the beginning of the third century mines or quarries could still be
owned by the Roman state.
Epigraphic testimonies for state ownership of mines and quarries are few.
The Vipasca tablets, too, refer to the Wscus on several occasions, but they do not
specify whether the term refers to the Wscus Caesaris, i.e the private funds of
the emperor, or the Wscus provinciae, the provincial sub-chest of the aerarium
Saturni in Rome containing public monies.213 The lex metallis dicta (LMD),
however, provides only vague clues on this matter. The text was sent by letter
to an Ulpius Aelianus, most likely the procurator metallorum in charge of
Vipasca. Although the author of the missive is not knownFlach surmises it
perhaps originated with the Wnancial procurator of Lusitania214we can
certainly exclude the emperor: the LMD does refer to emperor Hadrian, yet
he is never noted in the Wrst person singular. In fact the emperors name is
attested only once and in the third person singular. Moreover, the pronoun
noster for our Caesar, often used by procurators concerned with the
emperors private domains and by coloni working his estates, is omitted.215
In itself these observations do not provide enough evidence to exclude the
emperor as owner of the Vipasca mines. Additional evidence, however,

210
Dig. 39.4.13.pr.
211
For textual criticism, cf. Schonbauer 1929: 138 f.
212
Dig. 50.16.17.1.
213
LMD ll. 3, 6, 11, 21, 24, 26, 34; LMV ll. 13, 29. Current scholarly opinion is divided on this
issue, cf. Brunt 1990c : 398; Mateo 1999: 124 f. (public operation); Flach 1979: 4406; Domergue
1983: 171 f.; Flach 1990: 117 f. (emperors estate). On dates of both, cf. Flach 1979: 400, 413. On
the term Wscus: Jones 1960; Brunt 1990a: 134; Alpers 1995: 120 with further bibliography
30811. For a diVerent view, cf. Millar 1963a.
214
Flach 1979: 413 f.
215
Hadrian is still in power at the time the letter was written (the epithet divi is missing), cf.
LMD ll. 56: quorum pretia secundum liberalitatem sacratissimi Imp(eratoris) Hadriani Aug(usti)
obserjvabantur ( . . . ); on the date of the LMD, cf. Flach 1979: 440. Unlike the inscriptions from
imperial estates in North Africa, where the deliberate usage of noster mirrors the close
relationship of the procurator with the emperor, this is not highlighted in the Vipasca tablets
by the words our Caesar, cf. CIL VIII 2594326416 FIRA2, no. 101102 (Ain el-Djemala),
col. II, ll. 34: Sermo procuratorum [im]p(eratoris) hC iaes(aris) Hadriani Aug(usti): Quia Caesar n
(oster) . . . ; (Ain Wassel), col. I, ll. 89: Sermo procuratorum: Quihai Caesar n(oster) . . .
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 93

corroborates this notion: as noted by the lex metallis dicta, free men convicted
of destroying mining infrastructure forfeited their bona to the Wscus and were
banned from the mining district.216 This procedure seems to go beyond
regular liabilities of private law, as the usual penalty for the destruction of
property was the payment to the owner of damages equivalent to the loss.217
Furthermore, the property of the oVender is collected for the Wscus by the
procurator at Vipasca. If one understands the Wscus to be the Wscus Caesaris, the
private treasury of the emperor, the appropriation of bona by the procurator
metallorum would be highly irregular. However, Alpers and Brunt have clearly
shown that bona damnatorum were generally appropriated to the aerarium
Saturni, not to the Wscus Caesaris.218 Consequently, the property of convicts at
Vipasca was forfeited not to the Wscus Caesaris, but to the aerarium Saturni, that
is, the Wscus provinciae as the provincial sub-chest of the aerarium Saturni. The
LMD does not make any distinction between the fiscus receiving the bona of the
offender or the fiscus receiving the pretium for half of the extracted ore. This
leads us to the tentative conclusion that the Vipascan mines were public
property. Further, it is in line with our comprehension of internal arrangements
at Vipasca: the sale of proprietas partis dimidiae ad Wscum pertinentis to
occupatores appears to stand in the tradition of public land apportioned to
occupatores in return for a vectigal (cf. 7.1.1). The regular transfer of property,
albeit in a very restricted sense, does not Wt the idea of a privately owned estate.

3.3.2. Metalla and the Roman Army

Further indications towards the legal status may be provided by the personnel
present at extractive operations. The lex metalli Vipascensis (LMV) notes imper-
ial freedmen and slaves serving in the oYcia of the procurator, those receiving
commoda (salaries, pay), children and soldiers, being exempt from paying a fee
for using the baths.219 The presence of imperial freedmen and slaves in varying
functions at Vipasca is not a valid argument for or against the mines being
public property. Despite being part of the familia Caesaris, they did not only
conduct the private business of the Roman emperor. They also appear in public

216
LMD l. 34: liberi bona pr(ocurator) in Wscum cogito ( . . . ); LMD l. 28: liberum procurator
comWscato ( . . . ).
217
In classical Roman Private Law the destroyer of private property was only liable for the
loss to the owner, cf. Mommsen 1899: 832 f.; Nicholas 1962: 218 f.; Kaser 1971: 61922; Kaser &
Knuttel 2005: 255 f. As Mommsen 1899: 810, 8225, points out, regulations on the damnum
iniuria of public property hardly exist.
218
Brunt 1990a: 145 f.; Alpers 1995, passim.
219
LMV ll. 2324: . . . Excipiuntur liberti et servi [Caes(aris), qui proc(uratori)] in oYhciis
erunt vel j commoda percipient, item inpuberes et milites.
94 Mining and Quarrying Districts

functions, for example, as administrative staV of Wnancial or presidial procur-

ators.220 The regular presence of military personnel, however, may conWrm the
view of the metallum Vipascense and other mining districts being public prop-
erty rather than the emperors own. The Republican military oath, as recorded
by Livy and Polybios, included a promise to assemble on the consuls orders, not
to leave military service without instructions or desert during a battle, to be
obedient and to carry out orders to the best of ones ability. More importantly,
Servius added that they swore that they would act on behalf of the state.
Towards the end of the fourth century Vegetius reports that the formula on
behalf of the Roman state was still included in the military oath. Whether the
military oath reXected reality at the time is another issue, but it is signiWcant
enough that the reference to the Roman state probably remained in the oath
throughout the Principate.221
According to Tacitus and Suetonius, shortly after Augustuss death in ad 14
a libellus with a breviarium totius imperii listing the states assets, the opes
publicae, was found amongst four documents deposited with the Vestal
virgins. Besides listing the vassal-kingdoms and provinces, the tributa and
vectigalia, as well as necessary expenditures, necessitates, and presents, largi-
tiones, the document included the number of soldiers serving in the legions,
auxiliary units, and Xeets.222 This suggests that Augustus (and his successors)
understood the Roman army as a state asset. In his Res Gestae, however,
Augustus refers to the troops as exercitus meus.223 Wickert argued that the
use of the possessive in describing Augustus bond with the troops reXected
the real and exclusive power of the princeps over the legions. Even so, Wickert
conceded that this close relationship between emperor and army did not
translate into a formal ownership.224 Augustus and his successors were
quite aware of this: in the acts of the ludi saeculares (ad 17), the legions are
clearly identiWed as legiones populi Romani Quiritium.225 Cassius Dio provides
additional clariWcation: in his work, Tiberius is quoted as saying to the
senate the legions are not mine, but the states.226 Moreover, in ad 6 Augustus
had the Roman senate create a treasury, the aerarium militare, to dispense
the pay to soldiers.227 The aerarium militare was fed by a series of newly

220
For the staV of presidial procurators, cf. Eck 1997a: 104 f.; Haensch 1997: 725 f.; for
others, cf. Boulvert 1970.
221
Servius, Ad Aen. 8.1: ( . . . ), qui singuli iurabant pro republica se esse facturos ( . . . );
Vegetius, Mil. 2.5, cf. Campbell 1984: 19, 23 f.
222
Tacitus, Ann. 1.11.4. Suetonius, Aug. 101.4, cf. Speidel 2000a: 116.
223
RGDA 30, cf. Alfoldy 1987b: 23.
224
Wickert 1954: cols. 21003, with discussion of additional sources.
225
CIL VI 32323 ILS 5050 AE 2002: 192.
226
Dio 57.2.3, cf. Campbell 1984: 25.
227
RGDA 17, cf. Wolters 1999: 180 f.; Speidel 2000a: 132.
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 95

introduced taxes, such initiatives being a legislative privilege of the Roman

senate.228 There is no doubt that following the consolidation of Augustuss
position, the Roman army was regarded as part of the opes publicae, Wnanced
by a public treasury de iure under the control of the Roman senate.229 Conse-
quently, from a strictly constitutional point of view and in compliance with the
Wgment of a restitutio rei publicae, the Roman army belonged to the Roman state.
Hence, Roman jurists understood military personnel by and large to be
deployed on state business. This is expressed in the Digest: amongst the legal
means of a praetor the restitutio in integrum, restitution of previous status,
Wgures as one of the more prominent instruments. It could be used if ones
property or rights had changed whilst away on state business, rei publicae
causa abesse, for example.230 As a rule, Roman soldiers and their commanders
were regarded as absent rei publicae causa, except when on furlough. No other
form of deployment is noted.231 Thus, any deployment of military personnel
was theoretically in the interest of the state. This included work for the beneWt
of local municipalities: Ulpian details the obligation of the provincial gov-
ernor in supplying military specialists to public building projects.232 In
consequence, the use of soldiers for any private beneWt may have been ruled
out. The Wrst book of Macers De re militari quotes the following from the
disciplina Augusti: Although I know it is not unusual for soldiers to perform
artisanal/construction work, I nevertheless fear thatshould I permit any
such thing to be done for my beneWt or for yoursno limitations which I
could tolerate would be set in this matter.233 Augustus, probably addressing a
military commander, apparently prohibits the use of military personnel for
private works. This is repeated by Tarruntenus Paternus in the later second
century: military commanders were not to dispatch soldiers for private
works.234 Epigraphic and papyrological evidence partly corroborates the
legal texts. Roman soldiers are found collecting taxes and duties in provinces,
policing the countryside, guarding the transport of grain, and improving the
public infrastructure through the construction of roads, bridges, canals, and
aqueductsall in the interest of local communities and the Roman state.235

228
Talbert 1984: 3759; Speidel 2000a: 1446.
229
Speidel 2000a: 12635.
230
Dig. 4.6.1.1.
231
Dig. 4.6.7, 4.6.32, 4.6.34, 4.6.35.pr., 4.6.35.4, 4.6.35.9, 4.6.40, 4.6.41, 21.2.66.1, 49.16.1.
232
Dig. 1.16.7.1.
233
Dig. 49.16.12.1: Etsi scio fabrilibus operibus exerceri milites non esse alienum, vereor tamen,
si quicquam permisero, quod in usum meum aut tuum Wat, ne modus in ea re non adhibeatur, qui
mihi tolerandus. For translations cf. Brand 1968: 187; O. Robinson, in Watson 1998.
234
Dig. 49.16.12. 1: [ . . . ] ad opus privatum [ . . . ]militem non mittere.
235
Fink 1971: nos. 1, 2, 9, 10, 47, 63; Davies 1974: 3368; Isaac 1991; Alston 1995: 7996;
Speidel 1996: 78 f. with fn.4. Duties of the beneWciarii, cf. Ott 1995: 61163; Nelis-Clement 2000:
21168.
96 Mining and Quarrying Districts

In line with the observations made above, the use of soldiers and military
specialists for the beneWt of any private individual, including the emperor, is
prohibited. Thus, when we Wnd Roman centurions seconded to quarries like
Karystos, Dokimeion, or Mons Claudianus in order to support or perhaps
even implement the organization and management of extractive operations,
these districts are most probably to be identiWed as public property (cf. 5.1.1).
The deployment of Roman army detachments to imperial quarries and
mines seems to distinguish these districts from patrimonial estates in North
Africa and Asia Minor.236 Throughout the mid-second to the mid-third
century ad, a number of inscriptions from estates in Asia Minor and Thracia
document the misconduct of soldiers and imperial personnel passing by: their
illegal requisitioning of goods prompted a series of petitions sent to the
emperor by the inhabitants of these estates.237 The preserved texts imply
that Roman soldiers were not a regular Wxture of the emperors private estates.
Undoubtedly, military help could be requested by the patrimonial procur-
ators in charge to quell unrest, but they did not hold any regular authority
over military units.238 The epigraphic evidence from the patrimonial estates
in Roman Africa and Asia suggests that military garrisons were usually absent
from private imperial estates: their absence is not necessarily explained solely
by the lack of technical and security tasks suitable for a military detachment at
these estates. The deployment of the Roman army could probably only occur
where there were tasks or duties to be performed in the interest of the Roman
state. Given the emperors unchallenged control of the Roman army, it is
possible that this may not always have been the case. Yet, the adherence of
most emperors during the Wrst and early second century to the strict division
between patrimonial treasury and aerarium Saturni / Wscus provinciae, be-
tween private and public property, make an unconstitutional deployment of
Roman troops for private interests less plausible.

236
Particularly in the case of Asia Minor, the military garrison under the command of the
proconsul only consisted of a few auxiliary units which would hardly allow stationing detach-
ments at the numerous imperial estates alone in Central Phrygia, cf. Strubbe 1975: Eck 1997b:
201f.
237
Hauken 1998: 3457, no. 3 (Aga Bey Koyu), 5873, no. 4 (Kemaliye), 74139, no. 5
(Skaptopara, Thracia), 14061, no. 6 (Aragua), 1628, no. 7 (Kavacik), 20314, no. 4 (Tabala),
21743, no. 6 (Takina); and Herrmann 1990.
238
On procuratorial command over troops, cf. Tacitus, Ann. 4.15.2, 15.31, 15.32.3; Dio
57.23.5; Jos. AJ 18.158, cf. Brunt 1983: 52 f.; Brunt 1990b: 165 f.; Eck 1995c: 2513; Eck 1999;
Levick 1999a: 135. In addition, CIL VIII 10570 ILS 6870, col. II, ll. 914 (Suk el-Khemis with
Flach 1978: 471 f.), implies the presence of soldiers at the saltus Burunitanus to be highly
unusual. For the death of a soldier at a saltus Philomusianus, cf. 5.1.2.2.
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 97

3.3.3. Metalla and Convicts

The question of military personnel set aside, the use of convict labour in
quarries and mines under imperial control can probably only be explained if
we assume that the metalla were a publicly owned enterprise rather than a
private venture on the part of the emperor. Indications of this are provided
mainly by the laws concerning damnati in metallum found in the Digest. The
legal status the damnati acquired with their conviction is relevant to our
discussion of the legal nature of mines and quarries. Gaius, in book seventeen
on the Provincial Edict, states that damnati condemned to the mines lost not
only their freedom, libertas, but also forfeited their property, bona, to the
Roman state.239 Caracalla and Gordian III stated in rescripts that the bona of
damnati in metallum collected by the Wscus were not to be returned, even in
the case of the convict being freed by order of the emperor.240 Contrary to the
property of the convict, which fell to the Roman state, the convict was made a
servus poenae. These slaves of the penalty were neither the property of the
Wscus nor the property of the emperor. Nor did servi poenae enjoy the usual
rights of a slave. An edict of Antoninus Pius appears to have ruled that slaves
of the Wscus could receive an inheritance, while servi poenae could not.241
Moreover, slaves condemned to the metalla and saved by the clemency of
the emperoraccording to Ulpianwere not returned to their owner but
could become servi Wsci.242 The creation of a special status for the damnati in
metallum certainly was of a practical nature. The reduction in status of a Roman
citizen to a servus made the convicts subject to corporal punishmentthey
could be beaten like slaves.243 Moreover, servi poenae, unlike servi Wsci, were
not sold while condemned to the metalla, nor could they buy their freedom
or be set free by their former masters like regular slaves. The legal links between
the condemned slaves former owners and the family of a condemned free man
were severed, as in theory no damnatus in metalla was expected to return from
his sentence. This might explain why Roman jurists thought it necessary to
introduce a special status apart from those of proper slaves or servi Wsci.
The fact that former slaves condemned to the mines, but afterwards
released, could become servi Wsci, that is slaves of the Roman state, suggests
a connection between Wscus (i.e. aerarium) and metalla. This is particularly
clear in one speciWc case: a female slave condemned to the saltworks for a
crime was taken captive by foreign latrunculi and deported beyond the limes.

239 240
Dig. 28.1.8.4. CJ 9.49.4 (Gordian); CJ 9.51.2 (Caracalla).
241
Dig. 34.8.3.pr., 48.19.17.pr., 29.2.25.23, cf. Millar 1992: 183 with fn. 54.
242
Dig. 40.5.24.5, cf. also Millar 1992: 183 with fn. 55.
243
Paulus, Sent. 3.6.29, Dig. 49.14.12.pr., 50.13.5.2.
98 Mining and Quarrying Districts

She then was brought back across the limes into the empire and sold. Cocceius
Firmus, a centurio, bought her on the slave market. He apparently Wled a
report to the authorities, claiming back the money he paid for the slave. The
Wscus refunded the payment and the slave was returned to the saltworks.244 In
his study on the Wscus and its development, Peter Brunt pointed out that in
the Digest the term Wscus is used as a mere synonym for aerarium, i.e. the
public treasury of the Roman state.245 The story of the female slave thus
demonstrates the close relationship between the Wscus/aerarium and the salt
mines which must be regarded as public property.246 Moreover, this ruling for
one speciWc case seems to have been applied to all metalla during the reign
of Septimius Severus.247 Hence, we must conclude that under the Severans,
the metalla to which convicts were condemned were understood to be the
property of the Roman state. Although metalla Caesariana are mentioned
in the Digest, there is no evidence that convicts were condemned to the
emperors mines and quarries or those in private ownership.248

3.3.4. Quarries and Imperial Gifts

As detailed in an inscription from Smyrna, emperor Hadrian presented the
town withamongst other benefactions72 columns of Synnadan marble,
7 porphyry columns, and 20 columns of Numidian marble for its gymnasium.249
It was accepted that these columns originated from imperial quarries, which
were part of the emperors patrimonium. This permitted Hadrian to hand
out columns as gifts. Moreover, the use of precious marble is believed to have
been limited to public buildings and the palaces of the emperor, with only small
amounts of marble appearing in private contexts in Italy and throughout the
provinces. This emphasizes the exclusiveness of Hadrians donation of a sign-
iWcant and costly amount of columns from Phrygia, Africa, and, probably,
Egypt.250 The wording of the inscription implies that the senate in Rome had
dealt with requests from Smyrna on Hadrians behest and through the agency
of Antonius Polemo, and passed a second senatus consultum bestowing the title

244
Pomponius, Dig. 49.15.6.pr. For Marcus Cocceius Firmus, known from Latin inscriptions
from Auchendavy, cf. Birley 1953.
245
Brunt 1990a: 139, 143.
246
Pomponius, Dig. 49.15.6.pr., Millar 1992: 183.
247
Tryphoninus, Dig. 49.15.12.17.
248
Dig. 48.13.8.1, 48.19.38.pr. Paulus, Sent. 5.21a.1.
249
Pausanias 1.18.9 (Athens). CIG 3148 IGRR IV 1431 IK 24/1, 697, ll. 33 V. SEG XXXII
1203. Dubois 1908: 34; Fant 1993a: 155 f. with fn. 73. For further evidence, cf. Horster 2001:
217 f.
250
Millar 1992: 184, 420 f.; Fant 1993a: 155 f.
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 99

of neokoros on Smyrna. The inscription lists the beneficia by Hadrian as follows:

a sacred festival, immunity from taxation, an oYcial panegyrist of the gods,
singers of hymns, 1,500,000 denarii(?), and the columns mentioned above. At
least in the case of the immunity from taxation, Hadrian is likely to have acted
through the Roman senate, de iure still the Wnancial authority in Rome,
recommending an exemption of taxes for Smyrna to the Roman senate.251
Hence, it is probable that other benefactions listed were also subject to the
sanction of the senate. Provided this line of thought is correct, marble columns
may have originated from public properties.
This assumption is partially substantiated by an oddity encountered in the
epigraphic evidence of Simitthus. Unlike inscriptions on most other types of
marble, the labels on giallo antico blocks from Simitthus name Domitian,
Hadrian, or Antoninus Pius in the genitive form, indicating the emperors
ownership of the marble, while in inscriptions from the Wrst century and from
the reigns of Marcus Aurelius and Commodus such indications of their
ownership are missing.252 Had the quarries at Simitthus been the private
property of the emperor, the indication of ownership would hardly have been
necessary, certainly not within the quarrying district. Nor was it a require-
ment to mark the emperors stones to prevent the exaction of trade taxes
(portoria) (from which imperial/public goods generally were exempt253), as
the golden-yellowish Numidian marble of Simitthus was not only a visually
distinctive and bulky item, but probably, as Fant suggests, not transported for
any other use than public building projects in Rome and the provinces, and
for the adornment of the emperors palaces.254 In this context, it is of great
signiWcance that most of the giallo antico blocks from Romes marble yards are
not inscribed with the name of the emperor in the genitive form.255 Hence,
the transport or trade of marble blocks from Simitthus did not necessarily
warrant the indication of ownership by the emperorthe legal status of the
quarry did. Given the limited use of giallo antico outside a mostly public/
imperial context, one may tentatively argue that marble not inscribed with the
emperors name in the genitive form belonged to the Roman state. The
former was thus marked to diVerentiate it from the giallo antico blocks or
columns destined for public use and, hence, public property.256 The quarries

251
For precedence, cf. e.g. Dio 54,30,3 (Augustus) and Alpers 1995: 138 (Claudius). On
control of state Wnances by the senate, cf. Talbert 1984: 3759.
252
See Appendix (App.) nos. 778837.
253
Engelmann & Knibbe 1989: ll. 5866 (256).
254
Fant 1993a: 1525.
255
See App. nos. 787, 7958, 829, 830, 832, 843, 844, 846, 847, 87680, 8839, 90323.
256
Of course, additional information might have been displayed in painted letters or was
provided by lead tags attached to blocks, cf. Antium and Tivoli, App. nos. 9257.
100 Mining and Quarrying Districts

at Simitthus would consequently have to be seen as public property, at least in

legal termsa view corroborated by the likely presence of condemned con-
victs at this site.257
To return to Hadrians benefactions for Smyrna, the hypothesis that the
Numidian marble quarries at Simitthus and perhaps other quarries were
public property would have had only minor legal implications for the em-
perors benefactions to Italian or provincial cities. By analogy with the
procedure attested for the exemption of taxes, Hadrian either bought the
Numidian columns through the Wscus Caesaris directly from Simitthus
(hence, the indication of his name on marble blocks), or initiated the decision
of the senate to provide Smyrna with Numidian columns from its quarries in
Africa proconsularis.258 This decision may have been included in the senatus
consultum awarding Smyrna the second neokoros title and exemption from
taxation.259 For the Smyrneans, however, these complexities of procedure
were hardly relevant. It was Hadrian who ultimately provided the precious
columns, the tax cuts, and the neokoros-title. In their eyes, the role of the
Roman senate was marginal.

3.3.5. The Emperor, Ingots, and Public Metalla

The emperor could own mines or quarries in a private capacity as he owned
vast tracts of land in Italy and the provinces. The prospects of identifying
individual mines or quarries owned by the emperor vis-a-vis public extractive
ventures are poor, since written evidence on the issue remains scarce. Ulpian
records an edict of Antoninus Pius concerning the punishment of thieves of
silver or gold from metalla Caesariana.260 The plural metalla Caesariana
suggests that more than one silver or gold mine was Caesars property. As
the term metallum without an adjective is regularly used throughout the
Corpus Iuris Civilis, the employment of the term metalla Caesariana perhaps
designated a certain category of extractive operations as the private property
of the Roman emperor.261
257
Perhaps originally owned by the Numidian kings, the quarries probably became public
property in the aftermath of the Iugurthine War, cf. Lassere 1980: 31, 40 f. with fn. 9; Rakob
1997: 2 f.
258
Alpers 1995: 138.
259
IK 24/1, 697, ll. 3342. The aerarium could supply Wnancial funding for public building
projects in cities, cf. Suetonius, Claud. 25.5, and Horster 2001: 210 with fn. 7. Given the
involvement of the aerarium in public building projects throughout the empire, it is possible
that the Roman senate, probably on the initiative of the emperor alone, could occasionally
provide or allow access to building material instead of Wnancial funding.
260
Dig. 48.13.8.1; 48.19.38.pr.
261
Cf. Millar 1992: 182.
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 101

Further evidence for mines owned by the princeps is thought to be

provided by inscribed lead ingots. Mould marks set in a panel on the face
of lead ingots occasionally display the name of the emperor, as a number of
ingots found in Sardinia, Italy, Britain, and Gaul show:

Rena Maiore Augusti Caesaris Germanicum AE 2000: 653

Fluminimaggiore Caesaris Aug(usti) CIL X 8073/1, p. 1002
Rome Caesaris Aug(usti) CIL XV 7914
St. Valery Neronis Aug(usti) Britan(nicum) RIB II 2404.24
sur Somme l(egio) (secunda)
Charterhouse Imp(eratoris) Vespasiani Aug(usti) RIB II 2404.11
Richborough Imp(eratoris) Nervae Ca[es(aris)] RIB II 2404.65
Fluminimaggiore Imp(eratoris) Caes(aris) Hadr(iani) CIL X 8073/2
Aug(usti)
Pistis Imp(eratoris) Caes(aris) Hadr(iani) AE 1991: 902a
Aug(usti)
Cheshunt Imp(eratoris) Caes(aris) Hadriani RIB II 2404.66
Aug(usti)
Bath Imp(eratoris) Hadriani Aug(usti) RIB II 2404.14
Aston/Snailbeach/Snead Imp(eratoris) Hadriani Aug(usti) RIB II 2404.2930
Charterhouse/Bristol Imp(eratoris) Caes(aris) Antonini RIB II 2404.1618
Aug(usti) P[ii] p(atris) p(atriae)
Bruton/Wells/ Imp(eratorum) duo(rum) RIB II 2404.1922
Charterhouse Aug(ustorum) Antonini/
et Veri Armeniacorum
Sassenay [Imp(eratoris) Caes(aris) RIB II 2404.72a
L(ucii) S(eptimii) Severi
Pertinacis] Aug(usti) Part(h)ici
Adiabenici
Lillebonne I[mp(eratoris) Ca]e[s(aris) L(ucii) CIL XIII 3222
_
S(eptimii)Severi _
Perti]nacis
Aug(usti) Part(h)ici Adiabenici
_

The name of the emperor is given in the genitive case, a genetivus possesivus. In
some instances the term Germanicum or Britan(nicum) is added (cf. AE 2000:
653; RIB II 2404.24), apparently as the adjective attribute to plumbum, lead. This
is conWrmed by the moulded inscriptions on lead ingots from the shipwreck
Saintes-Maries-de-la-Mer 1 which render [L.] Flavi(i) Veruclae plumb(um)
Germ(anicum).262 Consequently, the emperor is primarily identiWed by the
moulded inscription as owner of the lead ingot. These mould marks originate
262
Rothenhofer 2003.
102 Mining and Quarrying Districts

from dies set in a trough-shape form in which the lead was cast following
roasting and heating, thus separating the elementary lead from the galena
(lead ore or lead sulphide). This smelting process of lead ore is assumed to
have taken place in the immediate vicinity of the mines. The fact that at least
part of the lead produced was allocated to the emperor near the mine gives the
impression that the lead mines were directly owned by the emperor. Yet, in the
light of observations made above, other alternatives are possible. A number of
lead ingots provide a precise indication of origin for the metal in question:

RIB II Face (moulded in panel) On sides of ingot

2404.3 Neronis Aug(usti) ex k(alendis) Back (stamp): ex argent(ariis)
Ian(uaris)
2404.4-10 Imp(eratoris) Vespasian(i) Aug(usti) Front (moulded): Brit(annicum) ex
arg(entariis) Veb(-)
2404.36 Imp(eratoris) Domit(iani) Aug(usti) Front (moulded): Deceang[l(icum)]
Ger(manici)
2404.13 Imp(eratoris) Vesp(asiani) Aug(usti)
VIIII Brit(annicum) ex ar(gentariis)
2404.39 Imp(eratoris) Caes(aris) Hadriani
Aug(usti) met(alli) Lut(udarensis)
AE 1999: Imp(eratoris) Domit(iani) Aug(usti) Back (moulded): met(alli) Dard(anici)
1683 Ger(manici)
Piso 2005: Imp(eratoris) Tr(aiani) me(talli) Stamps: C. Ulp. D.S.
Wg. 2 Ulp(iani)

Besides indication of ownership and general origin of the ingot e.g. (plum-
bum) Britannicum, moulded inscriptions can render the source of the lead as
ex argentariis Veb(-) or metalli Lutudarensis, from the silver-mines of Veb(-)
or from the Lutudarensian mines, simply Deceanglicum for Deceanglian lead,
or metalli Dardanici, for Dardanian mines. In none of these instances is an
indication of ownership by the emperor of the mines in question provided.263
This stands in contrast to one, perhaps even two, moulded inscriptions on

263
Moulded on the face of ingots from Flintshire and Yorkshire in Roman Britain, the names
of the emperors Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian are given in the ablative, as consular dates, i.e.
Imp(eratore) Vesp(asiano) V Aug(usto) T(ito) Imp(eratore) III co(n)s(ulibus). The origin of the
lead, Deceangl(icum) or Brig(anticum) is indicated in mould marks on the front of the ingot,
RIB II 2404, 3135, 61 f. Perhaps one might see these lead ingots as a yearly tribute owed to the
Roman state, cf. Tacitus, Agr. 31.2, 32.4 with Neesen 1980: 57. The mould mark RIB II 2404.3,
Neronis Aug(usti) ex k(alendis) Ian(uaris) may be interpreted in the same fashion.
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 103

lead ingots from Moesia Superior, on which the emperors ownership of a

mining venture was clearly marked:
AE 1978: 705 IMS IV 136 (Zuc): Face (moulded): Metallo Imp(eratoris) Aug(usti)
AE 1978: 706 IMS IV 135 (Jasenovik): Face (moulded): [Metall]o [Cae]saris Aug(usti)
Hence, lead ingots originating from a mine owned by the emperor were
labelled in accordance with a moulded inscription on the face of the ingot.
This adds further weight to the statement that ingots merely displaying the
emperors name must not necessarily originate from mines owned privately
by the emperor.
Provided this line of argument is valid, the question arises in whose
ownership the mines were from where the emperor derived the ingots. The
following inscription may provide a clue:
St Valery sur Somme neronis avg. britan. l. ii RIB II 2404.24
The editors of RIB II read the abbreviated inscription as follows: Neronis Aug(usti)
Britan(nicum) l(egio) (secundo) and translate this as (property) of Nero Augus-
tus, British lead, the second legion (made this). Provided the reading and
translation are accurate, this would render evidence for the Roman army running
extractive operations in the Mendips for a certain period, perhaps with most of
the produce intended for military use. As has been argued above, the Roman army
was probably not seconded to the private works of the emperor.
The cast moulds for gold ingots discovered on the Magdalensberg with the
imperial title C(ai) Caesaris Aug(usti) Germanici Imp(eratoris) ex Noric(is)
highlight an additional problem.264 The known sources of gold as recorded by
Gernot Piccotini are 30 km or more distant from Magdalensberg and mostly
appear to lay outside the patrimonium regni Norici outlined by Alfoldy
(cf. 3.2.2). The gold or gold ore from these primary and secondary deposits
must have Wrst been transported over a considerable distance to Magdalensberg
and then smelted and cast into ingots. The possibility of metal being cast or
even recast away from the mines further complicates any attempt to identify the
legal context under which the metal passed into the ownership of the emperor.
Consequently, caution is advised in drawing any conclusions regarding the
ownership of mines on ingots inscribed with the name of the emperor.
Occasionally, the name of the emperor appears in abbreviated form as a
stamp on the ingot. The stamp is applied cold after the ingot has been cast.
Most, if not all ingots stamped with the emperors name are from shipwrecks
in the western Mediterranean:

264
Contra Piccottini 1994a: 4713; Piccottini et al. 2002: 103.
104 Mining and Quarrying Districts
Mould mark on face Stamps
Saintes-Maries-de- [.] flavi veruclae plumb. germ. imp.caes.
la-Mer 1, a)
Saintes-Maries-de- no mould mark imp.caes.; l.fl.ve.;
la-Mer 1, b) erotis
Cabrera 6 [p.a]emili gallici imp. caes.; avg.
n.mevi apri imp. caes.; avg.
q. cornvti vesp. avg; avg.
l. manli vesp. avg; avg.
cma imp. caes.; avg.
so vr vesp. avg; avg.
Rena Maiore avgvsti caesaris germanicum l. val. ruf; imp; chi
The lead ingots from the shipwreck oV the coast of Southern France near
Saintes-Maries-de-la-Mer are of particular interest. The ingots can be divided
into two types: eight of them carrying the mould-mark [.] flavi veruclae
plumb germ are stamped imp. caes. and incised with numerals. Ninety-one
ingots do not have a mould-mark, but the stamp of l.fl.ve. for L(ucii)
Fl(avii) Ver(uclae) appears Wrst on the ingot, followed by the stamp erotis
and Wnally imp.caes., the latter perhaps simultaneous to the numeral inci-
sions.265 Recent studies have revealed that these lead ingots probably origin-
ated from mines in the Sauerland near Brilon, some 130 km east(!) of the
Rhine and were thus designated plum(bum) Germ(anicum).266 The probable
origin and the reading of imp. caes. as the titulature of Augustus allows to
narrow down the date of production of these ingots to the period 8 bc to ad 9.267
It was assumed that L. Flavius Verucla was the lessee of mines owned privately
by Augustus, as the stamps imp. caes. are read as Imp(eratoris) Caes(aris),
therefore indicating the ownership of the ingot by the latter. The ingots
stamped in this manner have been interpreted as the rent in produce owed
to the emperor.268
Two observations, however, question this plausible reconstruction. Pro-
vided the lead was owned by Caesar, one would expect to Wnd his name in the
genitive as a mould mark on the face of the ingot. This is the case with forty-
two ingots salvaged from Rena Maiore/Aglientu, a shipwreck oV the coast of

265
Long & Domergue 1996: 818, 8324.
266
Peter Rothenhofer (2003: 178 f., 280 with fn. 15) published a fragment of a lead ingot
discovered in Bad Sassendorf-Heppen with the cast mould-mark inscription l fla[-] on the face
and the stamp with the letters l.f.ve. Based on the analysis of lead isotopes, he argued that the
ingot from Bad Sassendorf-Heppen and the ingots from the shipwreck of Saintes-Maries-de-la-
Mer had the same origin and that the inscription, by analogy with mould-marks from the
shipwreck, should be read as L. Flavius Verucla; see also Trincherini et al. 2001.
267
Eck 2004a : 746.
268
Eck 2004b : 1921.
 Mining and Quarrying Districts 105

Sardinia which display the name of the emperor in full, Augusti Caesaris
(plumbum) Germanicum. These may also have come from Brilon in the
Sauerland.269 The product of smelting intended for the emperor thus could
be cast as ingots displaying the imperial titles. Hence, the application of the
emperors stamp to ingots mould-marked with the name of a private indi-
vidual require an alternative explication. Based on the superimposition of
stamps, nail holes and incised numerals on ingots, Claude Domergue was able
to show that stamps could be applied to the ingots well after they had been
cast.270 In the case of the ingots salvaged from Saintes-Maries-de-la-Mer imp.
caes. was stamped on after all other imprints and perhaps simultaneously
with the incision of numerals. On ingots from other shipwrecks the numerals
were regularly incised after transportation on river boats, probably to indicate
deviation from the standard weight (100 or 200 Roman pounds) for the
calculation of payable duties or portoria.271 The application of a stamp imp.
caes. thus must have taken place in this context. The stamp most likely
indicated that the ingot came into possession or ownership of the emperor
and thus its export was free of duty. Whether these ingots had been bought or
requisitioned before, during, or after weighing, or whether they were de-
tached from exported cargo as a payment of vectigal, portorium, or tribute in
kind, can not be answered conclusively.
In the light of the previous discussion one may tentatively argue that
mould marks or stamps on lead ingots displaying the name of the emperor in
the genitive case do not mean that the emperor owned the mines from which
the ingots originated.272 Of course, the strictly legal diVerentiation between
the property of the Roman state and the property of the Roman emperor
was irrelevant when it came to actual control. Most important mines and
quarries were managed by imperial oYcials, that is, members of the familia
Caesaris and equestrian administrators appointed by the emperor. More-
over, the emperor not only directly controlled his own Wscus Caesaris, but
could indirectly redistribute the public monies in the aerarium through
the Roman senate, de facto controlling public resources as well. In fact,
the observance of these legal distinctions was entirely at the discretion of
the emperor, for only he and his Palatine bureaux were able to compile the
rationes from the provinciae Caesaris and provide a balance sheet of revenues
269
Riccardi & Genovesi 2002: 131923; Eck 2004a: 76; Hanel & Rothenhofer 2005.
270
Domergue 1998: 202 f., 2069.
271
Domergue 1998: 203, 215 (table 2).
272
For what purpose the emperor obtained lead ingots can only be guessed at: the use of
Wstulae (lead pipes) in public building projects in Rome, Ostia and throughout Italy or the
provinces certainly increased the demand for lead. Given the considerable amount of construc-
tion work paid for by the emperors private treasury (cf. Millar 1992: 189201; Duncan-Jones
1994: 41 f.; Drexhage, Konen, & RuYng 2002: 55), the purchase of lead by imperial agents in
order to supply the building sites at Rome is plausible.
106 Mining and Quarrying Districts

and expenditures for the whole empirea breviarium totius Imperii.273

Despite the complete control exercised by the emperor over the Wnancial
matters of the Roman state, the legal division between aerarium and Wscus
Caesaris was strictly observed by the majority of Roman emperors during the
Wrst century ad and certainly was seen as a trait of good governance, as becomes
clear in Suetonius or Tacitus histories.274 These legal diVerentiations were still
respected by Trajan and other emperors of the second century, and we have no
reason to suspect that they were not observed on the provincial level.275

3 . 4 . S U M M A RY

Imperial mining and quarrying districts and territories held a special position
amongst the territorial entities within a province. The bronze tablets from
Vipasca clearly outline the jurisdiction powers the mining procurator held
within the district. Given the use of the term territorium and the regulations
meted out for the Vipascan district, this suggests the relative autonomy of
these districts comparable to colonies or municipalities. Moreover, in Nor-
icum and other Danubian provinces mining zones could be regarded as
territorial exclaves in relation to the Illyrian customs district; and the metals
extracted there and transported out of the mining districts were subject to a
toll or tax. As to whose property the mines and quarries under imperial
control were, a number of indications suggest that perhaps most of these
extractive operations strictu sensu belonged to the Roman state. Quarries like
Mons Claudianus, Mons Porphyrites, Tiberiane, and Mons Ophiates in
Roman Egypt, Dokimeion in Asia Minor, Simitthus in North Africa, and
Karystos on Euboea were probably public property under the emperors
control rather than private domains of the emperor. Similarly, the mining
areas under imperial and military control in north-western and southern
Spain, Britain, Sardinia, Gaul, Noricum, Pannonia, Dalmatia, and Moesia
were mostly state-owned as well. Although the Digest mentions metalla
Caesariana, the survey of imperial extractive operations documented in the
provinces indicates that there is insuYcient evidence for directly identifying
patrimonial mines or quarries. Apart from extractive operations under im-
perial control, there is occasional written evidence for private and, perhaps,
municipal ownership.
273
Alpers 1995: 25963; Speidel 2000a: 11518.
274
Corbier 1974: 6829; Brunt 1990a: 160 f.; Alpers 1995, passim; Wolters 1999: 174202.
Only Domitian appears to have illegally diverted a vectigal connected with water-rights from
the aerarium to the Wscus Caesaris, cf. Frontinus, De aquae ductu 2.118 with Alpers 1995: 243 f.
275
For Trajan, cf. Bennett 1997: 124 f. The creation of res privata as opposed to the
patrimonium probably had no eVect on the general distinction.
 4
Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

After reviewing the available evidence in an attempt to deWne imperial quarry-

ing and mining districts, their conWgurations and legal status, as well as the
organizational challenges which faced the Roman authorities, it is necessary to
examine the oYcials who supervised imperial mines and quarries. These
oYcials were usually members of the familia Caesaris, equestrians in the
emperors service, military oYcers, and possibly even civilian engineers.

4 . 1 . P RO C U R ATO R S

4.1.1. Quarrying Procurators in Roman Egypt

The management of the stone quarries at Mons Claudianus, Mons Porphyr-
ites, and Mons Ophiates was the responsibility of one K
H

 / procurator metallorum. Evidence for this assumption is provided
by various Greek and Latin inscriptions on stone, as well as letters and notes
on ostraca discovered at these quarries: Epaphroditos Sigerianos, imperial
slave (F
) and
c
H
, had an oblong architrave in-
scribed, commemorating the building of a temple for Zeus Helios/Sarapis
and other gods. The inscription lists Rammius Martialis as prefect of Egypt
(ad 11719), Chresimus (a libertus Augusti) as K
H
, and
Avitus, a centurio of the cohors I Flavia Cilicum equitata, as head of the
quarries at Mons Claudianus.1 This list of oYcials is repeated in a further
building inscription from the reign of Hadrianthis time on a temple for
Zeus Helios Sarapis at Mons Porphyrites: the same Epaphroditos,
c

H
, lists Rammius Martialis as praefectus Aegypti, a Proculeianus

as centurio in charge, and Marcus Ulpius Chresimus as K
.2 Given that
Chresimus is named at Mons Claudianus and Mons Porphyrites in charge of

1
I.Pan. 42 CIG III 4713 f IGRR I/5 1255; for Epaphroditos as imperial slave, cf. I.Pan. 21
CIG III 4713 IGRR I/5 1256 (Mons Porphyrites).
2
I.Pan. 21 CIG III 4713 IGRR I/5 1256.
108 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

the quarries, his procuratorial function entailed the oversight over both
quarries. Additional evidence stems from Mons Claudianus where an Ulpius
Himerus is identiWed as K
in two unpublished ostraca. Both ostraca
are dated by another letter, sent in ad 152/3 to Athenodoros, the tabularius of
Ulpius Himerus.3 Perhaps the same Ulpius Himerus, p[rocurator Augus]ti is
documented in an inscription at Mons Ophiates (ad 1504).4 Thus, the
procuratorial district of the K
H
 must have contained
the quarries at Mons Claudianus, Tiberiane, Mons Porphyrites, and Mons
Ophiates (cf. 3.2.1).
The epigraphic record of the Egyptian Eastern Desert yields further names
of quarrying procurators: perhaps the earliest known K
recorded at
Mons Claudianus is Encolpius. He is named together with the current holders
of the oYces relevant to Mons Claudianus such as Quintus Accius Optatus,
the centurio, on an inscribed altar dating to Trajans reign.5 The published
ostraca at Mons Claudianus complete the picture: an Encolpius is mentioned
on one of the ostraca while in another fragmentary text an K
is said to
have been notiWed of the number of camels and the water-supply.6 Two
further procuratores appear to be documented in further ostraca from Mons
Claudianus: a certain Probus is the addressee in a number of letters sent either
by quarry workers and smiths, or by the praefectus Aegypti Pomponius
Faustianus (ad 1857); and a Tertullus, K
(H
?) is one
of the addressees in a recently published ostracon.7 A further procurator,
Anokanos, emerges from a votive inscription at Mons Porphyrites in ad 137/
8.8 Additional evidence for an K
was discovered close to Fatireh el-
Beida and Abu Zawal on the road from Mons Claudianus to the Nile Valley.
A Latin inscription of six lines was engraved between ad 103 and 116, and
names Flavius Diadumenus as procurator Augusti. The proximity of the
inscription to the Mons Claudianus quarries implies that Diadumenus was
a procurator metallorum as well.9 The subsequent list of procurators consists
mostly of imperial freedmen, as the nomina gentilia indicate.10
3
O.Claud.inv. 4739, 7737, cf. Cuvigny 1996c: 96 f.
4
I.Pan 53 AE 1952: 248 (ad 150154; Wadi Semna), with Cuvigny 1996c: 91101.
5
I.Pan 38 CIG III 4173e IGRR I/5 1254 SEG XV 865 (The altar was commissioned by
Apollonios, the I, and dedicated to Zeus Helios/Sarapis).
6
Encolpius: O.Claud. 19; unknown K
, cf. O.Claud. 380.
7
O.Claud.inv. 7218, 7295, cf. Cuvigny 2002: 242 f., 2458.
8
MaxWeld & Peacock 1998a: 190.
9
Sidebotham 1996: 190.
10
Encolpius and Anokanos were probably freedmen, even though we lack substantial
evidence to support this view. The procuratores attested during Commodus reign, Probus and
Tertullus, do not bear slave-names or cognomina derived from Greek slave-names and therefore,
unlike their predecessors, might not be imperial freedmen originating from the eastern half of
the empire. There is no evidence to suggest that they were members of the ordo equester: the
vice-curator Rufus does not address these procurators with their full name, as he does in the case
of Vibius Alexander, the equestrian praefectus, cf. Cuvigny 2002: 245 f.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 109

Fatireh el -Beida Mons Claudianus Mons Porphyrites Mons Ophiates

Flavius Diadumenus, Encolpius, ad 98117
ad 103/116
Chresimos, ad 118 M. Ulpius Chresimus,
ad 117/19
Anokanos, ad 137/8
Ulpius Himerus, Ulpius Himerus,
ad 152/3 ad 1504
Probus, ad 185/7
Tertullus, ad 189

4.1.2. The letakkqwgr and the procurator montis Berenicidis

Prior to the K
H
, the control of the metalla in the
Egyptian Eastern Desert, was, at least for a short period of time, in the
hands of an I

or

. This oYce is known from
two inscriptions found in Wadi Umm Wikala (Mons Ophiates) and Wadi
Hammamat. According to the inscription at Wadi Umm Wikala, a sanctuary
was dedicated in ad 10/11 to Pan by Publius Iuventius Agathopus, procur-
ator, administrator, benefactor of all metalla in Egypt, and freedman of
Publius Iuventius Rufus, himself tribune of the legio III Cyrenaica, com-
mander (
) of Berenike, I

of the emerald mines,
topaz mines, pearl (Wsheries), and all mines of Egypt.11 The Wadi Hammamat
inscription is similar to the Wadi Umm Wikala inscription (with slight
diVerences), but was inscribed some years later on 2 October, ad 18. Again,
Publius Iuventius Agathopus, freedman and c
 (general ad-
ministrator) for Publius Iuventius Rufus, the

, of the emerald
mines, the topaz mines, the pearl(-Wsheries), and of all quarries in Egypt, sets
up a shrine for Pan in the name of his master.12
We do not appear to have any further attestation of an I

or


in the papyri and inscriptions of Roman Egypt, nor are we able
to delimit precisely the function of the oYce-holder. Based on the inscriptions
mentioned above, Hirschfeld and Dubois thought the I

/
11
Tholemaios, curator of the cohors Flori, of the centurionate of Bassus, added his

to the inscription, as did the two architects, Mersis and Soter. I.Pan 51, cf. Side-
botham et al. 2001: 139.
12
The inscription lists other leading Wgures involved in the quarrying procedures at Wadi
Hammamat such as the

 
Aryothes, Mersis, the I, and Mammoyais, soldier
of the coh Nigri, garrisoned at the (quarry) works, cf. OGIS II 660 SB 8580 I.Ko.Ko. 41 (with
further commentary). Four years earlier Publius Iuventius Agathopus also had a 

(adoration) to Pan carved at Wadi Hammamat on 25 October in ad 14, cf. I.Ko.Ko. 39 SB
8579.
110 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations


was in charge of all mines and quarries in Roman Egypt.13
Whether this actually was the case is diYcult to assess. From ad 10/11 to
ad 18 the I

/

P. Iuventius Rufus had at least the
quarries at Wadi Hammamat and Mons Ophiates under his control and
delegated supervisory tasks to his freedman P. Iuventius Agathopus. Whether
Agathopus managed both quarries simultaneously or consecutively and
whether or not his responsibilities included other quarries remains unknown.
The inscriptions of Wadi Hammamat and Wadi Umm Wikala show that
Iuventius Rufus range of tasks as I

/

certainly
included further economic ventures: emerald/beryl was mined at Mons
Smaragdus which is probably to be located in the area of Wadi Gemal, Wadi
Nuqrus, Wadi Sikait, Gebel Zabara, and Gebel Umm Kabu.14 The archaeo-
logical remains at these sites, mainly pottery shards, suggest mining operations
from the Roman, if not Ptolemaic era, up until the seventeenth century ad. At
Wadi Sikait a mining settlement is attested of which, so far, a precise rendition
of its topography has not been provided. An inscription from the year ad 253/4
perhaps documents the presence of a workforce there. However, apart from its
proximity to a mine the epigraphic evidence does not directly provide any
pointers for the profession of the inscribers.15 Once more, ostraca provide
additional insights: a recently published ostracon discovered at Didymoi, a
fortlet on the KoptosBerenike road, names an emerald worker as a carrier of
messages. According to Adam Bulow-Jacobsen, emerald workers occasionally
transmitted letters, as they appear to have travelled on a regular basis between
Koptos and Senskis/Sikkayt at Mons Smaragdus.16 Besides the emerald mines,
topaz mines were perhaps located on the Zabargad Island in the Red Sea,
probably together with the pearl Wsheries. The amethyst mines at Gebel
Abu Diyeiba and Wadi al-Hudi may have come under the supervision of
P. Iuventius Rufus as well.17 Pliny the Elder claims that many quarries in
Egypt had been opened under Augustus and Tiberius, and the archaeological
surveys so far seem to support the view that the main extractive operations
carried out in the Egyptian desert were nearly exclusively stone quarries.18 This
might be reXected in a slight change in title of P. Iuventius Rufus. In the

13
Hirschfeld 1905: 172; Dubois 1908: 69. For a diVerent view, cf. Fitzler 1910: 126, 128.
14
Shaw, Bunbury, & Jameson 1999: 205 f.
15
I.Pan 69.
16

: O.Did.inv. 329, 484, cf. Bulow-Jacobsen 2001: 121, l. 5 with commentary.
17
Meredith 1957; Shaw & Jameson 1993: 837; Sidebotham, et al. 2001: 140 f., with fns. 14, 15.
18
Pliny, NH 36.55. Attention has been drawn to the fact that no special mention of gold
mines is made in either of Iuventius inscriptions. Although gold was extracted in the Eastern
Desert, the exploitation was marginal compared to the Ptolemaic and Early Arab periods, and
hence might have been of minor importance during the Roman/Byzantine era, cf. Klemm &
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 111

Wadi Umm Wikala inscription of ad 10/11 Iuventius Rufus carries the title of
I

B

 d  d
 d  H
letkkym B
`N, while in ad 18 his title has been altered to


B

 d  d
 d katlym 
 B
`N. The replacement of the term
 (a generic term for
extractive operations) with 
(quarries) might describe the nature of
extractive operations throughout the Egyptian Eastern Desert more
precisely.19
Helene Cuvigny has recently maintained that P. Iuventius Rufus held the
post of

in conjunction with the oYce of praefectus montis
Berenicidis.20 While the Greek inscription of Wadi Umm Wikala names
P. Iuventius Rufus as tribune of the legio III Cyrenaica, as praefectus Berenicidis,
and as I

(connected by the conjunction ), the later Wadi
Hammamat inscription only identiWes him as

. Given the size of
the job at hand, the oYce of

might have been held separately,
after Iuventius Rufus had obtained the tribunate in legio III Cyrenaica and
the Berenician prefecture. Ostraca and inscriptions show, however, that the
Berenician prefecture was often held jointly with a military command over an
auxiliary unit.21 The exact tasks of the Berenician prefect are debated. Based on
the honoriWc inscription for D. Severius Severus, set up in Solmona/mod.
Sulmo in Italy and labelling him as praefectus praesidiorum et montis Bero-
nices(sic), Kurt Fitzler argued that Severius Severus was the oYcial in charge
of a Mons Berenicides. Fitzler located the toponym Mons Berenicides at
Gebel Zabara, and the praesidia, military stations, along the road from Koptos
to Berenike. Echoing Fitzler, Lesquier emended the K
Z
named
in I. Portes 86 (ad 219) to K
Z
(  
); he thought this
oYcial was a procurator controlling extraction procedures not only at
Gebel Zabara but at all quarrying (and mining) sites in the desert of Berenike.
He saw this K
Z
as a subaltern oYcial answerable to the

Klemm 1994: 211, with Wg. 6 (with wrong caption); Sidebotham et al. 2001. The recent
excavations and surveys at Wadi Umm Fawakhir suggest that, despite the low yield of 23 gm
of gold per metric ton of ore, its exploitation was pursued with vigour during the 5th and 6th
cents. ad, supposedly as a result of a high demand for gold during that period (Meyer 1995:
199). This might be symptomatic of most Roman/Byzantine sites in the Egyptian Eastern
Desert, which were possibly opened during Late Antiquity rather than the Wrst to third centuries
ad, when gold was mostly provided by other more abundant sources (Spain, Dacia).
19
Bernand 1972: 84 f.
20
Cuvigny 2002: 240.
21
O.Did.inv. 733; I.Memnon 14, cf. Cuvigny 2001: 172, l. 3 with commentary; Bulow-
Jacobsen & Cuvigny 2007: 23.
112 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

K
( . . . )  H
 B
`N, the title P. Iuventius
Agathopus bears in the Wadi Umm Wikala inscription.22
However, the translation of the Latin mons or Greek Z
as mountain
appears to have been misleading. As Helene Cuvigny has shown, the terms
mons/Z
do not necessarily designate a speciWc mountain or location, but
may be better understood as referring to a more extensive area, such as a
mountain ridge or desert plateau. Based on the ostraca found in the forts and
fortlets along the route from Koptos to Myos Hormos or Berenike among
other evidence, Cuvigny has shown that the praefectus montis Berenicidis or

Z

was a territorial command held by an equestrian
oYcer. The prefect commanded the auxiliary units scattered between Koptos
and Berenike although he himself was probably based at Koptos in the Nile
valley (despite what his titulature may indicate).23 Similarily, the
K
Z
(  
) reported by Lesquierwhich he thought was
a procurator metallorumwas not in charge of mining operations, but might
have replaced the praefectus montis Berenicidis (last attested in ad 216) for a
short period.24 Alternatively, the titles of praefectus/
and procurator
montis (Berenicidis)/K
Z
(  
) could be explained as deri-
vates from an oYcial title similar to procurator Augusti et praefectus montis
Berenicidis.25
It must remain unanswered whether the monitoring of quarrying oper-
ations was part of the functions of the procurator and prefect. The praefectus/
procurator montis Berenicidis is continuously attested from the early Wrst to
the early third century ad, whereas the oYce of

is known only
for the late Augustan/early Tiberian period. Perhaps the latter function was
incorporated in the regular tasks of the Berenican prefecture?26 The Greek
ostraca which have been found during surveys and excavations alongside the
KoptosMyos Hormos road have demonstrated the presence of army detach-
ments at the praesidium of Persou at Wadi al-Hammamat, known also for its
quarrying activity of the so-called bekhen stone during the Roman period.
These praesidia and their small garrisons stood under the command of the
Berenician prefect, which perhaps suggests a certain responsibility, at least in
military terms, for the quarries and mines along the KoptosMyos Hormos
route.27 However, a direct connection between the prefect and the quarrying
22
ILS 2699 CIL IX 3083 (Severius Severus); Fitzler 1910: 100 f., 130 f.; Lesquier 1918: 153
fn. 2, 240 with fn. 4.
23
Bulow-Jacobsen, Cuvigny, & Fournet 1994; Bulow-Jacobsen 1998; Cuvigny 2003b:
295305.
24
Cuvigny 2000b: 416 f.
25
Bulow-Jacobsen & Cuvigny 2007: 23 f.
26
Hirschfeld 1905: 471f.; Fitzler 1910: 128; Bulow-Jacobsen & Cuvigny 2007: 21 with fn. 20.
27
Cuvigny 2003a: 2804.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 113

operations at Wadi Hammamat or Wadi Umm Wikala/Mons Ophiates can

not be established.

4.1.3. Quarrying Procurators in Roman Asia and Achaia

An inscription for the procurator provinciae Frygiae and libertus Augusti,
M. Aurelius Marcio, found at Tricomia/mod. Kaimaz (Turkey) lists his pre-
vious procuratorial posts, which include the oYce of procurator marmorum.
Aurelius Marcio reached the oYce of a procurator marmorum after having
served as a proximus rationum, and before continuing his career as procurator
provinciae Britanniae, procurator summi choragi, and, Wnally, procurator pro-
vinciae Frygiae.28Proximus rationum or proximus a rationibus was the highest
clerical rank an imperial freedman could achieve within the Wnancial admin-
istration at Rome, and was usually the starting point for a string of procura-
torial posts.29 Marcio was next appointed to the position of procurator
marmorum. Hirschfeld and Strubbe argued that this post was the procurator-
ship of the imperial quarries at Dokimeion.30 Of course, the omission of any
geographical indication following the title procurator marmorum may be
explained by the relative proximity of the quarries at Dokimeion, assuming
the potential readers of the inscription knew what was meant. However, it is
problematic that the inscription at Tricomia was commissioned by a tabular-
ius named Senecius Collid(us?) in honour of his superior, the procurator pro-
vinciae Frygiae Aurelius Marcio.31 Given the function of proximus rationum at
Rome preceded the post of procurator marmorum, it appears likelier that
Aurelius Marcio held the latter oYce at Rome as well. This is corroborated
by the epigraphic record attesting further such oYce holders at Rome (cf.
8.2.2.2.).32
Few procurators are known from inscribed labels on quarried blocks and
inscriptions found in Phrygia: an otherwise unknown procurator Maro ap-
pears only in label inscriptions on pavonazetto in Bacakale.33 Furthermore, a
procurator Irenaeus is documented on pavonazetto blocks transported to
28
CIL III 348 CIG 3822 (Tricomia/Kaimaz), cf. Corsten 1997: 89, No. 43.
29
Weaver 1972: 224, 2528.
30
Hirschfeld 1905: 170 fn. 5; Strubbe 1975: 244 fn. 60.
31
For further inscriptions of an Aurelius Marcio, cf. MAMA IV 4 (Afyon). IGRR IV 704
(Synnada).
32
Hirschfeld 1905: 175 with fn. 4.
33
App. nos. 302, 303, ad 194. A white marble block found in Rome, presumably originating
from the white marble quarries at Bacakale, names an Aur(elius) Epity(nchanus?) following a
barely readable sub cura mark (App. no. 437). However, the inscription is too fragmentary to
ascertain whether or not Aurelius Epitynchanus should be added to the list of procurators at
Dokimeion.
114 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

Rome.34 His namesake appears in an inscription at Ginik in Phrygia where he

had set up a boundary stone in his capacity as a procurator.35 Provided these
Irenaei are one and the same person, this procurators involvement in bound-
ary disputes suggests that he held authority beyond the mere supervision of
the Dokimean quarries.36 Both Maro and Irenaeus were regarded not as
procuratores marmorum but procuratores provinciae Frygiae.37 The provincia
Phrygia was not a province in its own right but a district originating from the
uniWcation of several imperial territories, such as regiones or tractus, into one
vast district under one freedman procurator, possibly during Hadrians
reign.38 The administrative headquarters of this district is to be located at
Synnada where a number of oYciales and procurators are documented.39
Strabo may conWrm a connection between Synnada and the Dokimean
quarries: he claims that in Rome the marble from Dokimeion was known
as marmor Synnadicum or 

.40 One may tentatively suggest
that this may reXect some administrative connection in the form of a super-
visory function for the imperial quarries in Phrygia. As yet, there is insuY-
cient proof for the inclusion of the Dokimean quarries in a vast imperial
private estate.41
A supervisory function may also have been exerted by the patrimonial
procurators of Achaia: there are procuratores Augusti mentioned in the quarry
labels found on cipollino from Karystos stones at Rome or Ostia, Minic(i)us
Sanctus (ad 132) and a C. Cerialis (late Hadrianic period).42 Minicius Sanctus
or his son appear in Egypt as praefectus Aegypti in ad 149/50.43 C. Cerialis

34
App. nos. 115, 116 (ad 136).
35
CIL III 12237 AE 1897: 73 (Ginik); Burton 1993: 20.
36
For procurators and territorial disputes, cf. Burton 2000.
37
Christol & Drew-Bear 1991: 122 f.; Drew-Bear 1994: 814 with fn. 240.
38
Boulvert 1970: 294 with fn. 209; an alternative term is dioecesis, cf. Scheuermann 1957 with
further bibliography; Mason 1974: 38; Bleckmann 1997.
39
CIL III 7046, 7048 (liberti of procurator M. Ulpius Marianus); MAMA IV 53 (Hyacinthus,
tabularius), 54 ([T. Aelius, Augusti l]ibertus, verna procurator), 62 (Amiantus, Aug. lib. a
commentariis), 63 (Aur. Aristeinetos, procurator); SEG XXVIII, 1210 (M. Aurelius Paulos,
adiutor tabulariorum); IGRR IV 704 (Aur. Marcio, proc.) cf. Boulvert 1970: 294 with fn. 209
for a list of procuratores provinciae Phrygiae.
40
Strabo 12.8.14.
41
Strubbe 1975: 230 f., 244, 249, observed that the epigraphic record shows direct involve-
ment of the Roman state in the quarrying business in Phrygia from the late 1st cent. onwards,
whereas regular imperial estates seem to come into existence only in the mid-2nd cent. ad. He
concluded that the Dokimean and Kurt koy quarries (and presumably their administration)
were not incorporated in the imperial estates.
42
App. nos. 604, 618. In his commentary to CIL III 12286 ( no. 618) Th. Mommsen
proposed to date the inscription to the years around ad 132, based on the pr(obator?) Crescens,
who also appears in no. 603, cf. Wheeler 2000: 289 fn. 174.
43
PIR2 M 628.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 115

might be the procurator provinciae Achaiae under Hadrian.44 Hans-Georg

PXaum assumed that both Minicius Sanctus and Caius Cerialis were men-
tioned in the label inscriptions in their capacity as procuratores provinciae
Achaiae, though there is no direct proof that the former ever held such a
position.45

4.1.4. Chresimus, procurator a marmoribus

The activities of Chresimus, a procurator a marmoribuswell attested under
the emperors Domitian and Nerva through inscriptions at Ephesos, Miletos,
Tralles, and Mylasaare a riddle.46 His inscriptions occur in an entirely
municipal context, with the exception of one bilingual milestone, found on a
road near Mylasa by Louis Robert in the 1930s. As the inscriptions do not
reveal for which quarry Chresimus was responsible, it becomes diYcult to
assess his function. Peter Herrmann, who provided the editio princeps of the
Mylasa milestone based on a drawing by Louis Robert, thought that the
restoration of roads near Mylasa which took place under the supervision of
Chresimus was directly connected with marble production in the area. Herr-
mann argued that the quarries (mentioned in literary sources and attested
archaeologically) in southern Ionia and northern Caria near Alabanda, Mile-
tos, Mylasa, Herakleia on Latmos, Iasos, and Ephesos therefore might have
been under imperial control.47 That Chresimus had access to marble is indi-
cated by an inscription set up in Tralles. He apparently embellished the cella(?)
caldaria of the gymnasium with coloured(?) marble.48 Thus, Chresimus titles
[procurator lapicidin]arum(?) (Tralles), procurator a marmoribus (Mylasa),
K

= H (Mylasa/Tralles) and his benefaction of coloured
marble to Tralles, seem to suggest that his raison detre was closely linked to
either the marble trade or the quarrying of marble in this area.
The latter possibility seems less likely. There is no epigraphic evidence
to prove Herrmanns assumption that Chresimus was involved in the pro-
duction and trade of local marble in southern Ionia and northern Caria.
Although the Greek translation of his Latin titulature K


(Mylasa)/K

H (Tralles) appears to indicate control of

44
PIR2 C 670. AE 1934: 3 (Korinth).
45
PXaum 19601: 1001 f., no. 139bis, 1071.
46
AE 1988: 1028 SEG XXXVIII 1073 Herrmann 1988: 1225 (Mylasa), Milet, Inv.-Nr.
288. IK 13/3, 856 (Ephesos).
47
Herrmann 1988: 126 f.
48
Tralles, CIL III 7146 IK 36/1, 148, with Liermann 1889: 43.
116 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

several quarries, the original Latin title provided by the Mylasa inscription
merely names him as procurator [a] marmoribus or procurator for marble.49
There is no further indication that the local quarries were under imperial
control. The closest quarries where the presence of imperial oYcials is attested
and with which Chresimus might have been associated are the pavonazetto
quarries at Dokimeion, or perhaps the quarries at Chios and Teos, which might
have been under imperial control. Even if one expects an imperial oYcial of
Chresimus standing to live in the comfortable setting of a town rather than
close to a quarry, Ephesos, Miletos, and Tralles are a little too remote from the
quarries at Dokimeion, Teos, or Chios. Chresimus presence in this area,
therefore, must be explained otherwise.
Ephesos and Miletos, both harbour towns, were major trading centres,
Ephesos being the most important harbour within the province of Asia. Both
were positioned near the mouth of the Maeander valley, which allowed access
to the inner regions of western Anatolia, particularly Phrygia. The marble
from Dokimeion and the quarries in the Upper Tembris valley was presum-
ably exported via Synnada, Apameia, and Laodiceia ad Lycum, down the
Maeander to Tralles and then to Miletos or Ephesos.50 It is tempting to argue
that Ephesos and Miletos might have been possible harbours for the reloading
of marble products. The edict of Lucius Antoninus Albus, proconsul of the
province of Asia, on the stockpiling of wood and stones in the harbour of
Ephesos indicates that such activities were going on there. However, linking
the imperial marble trade with these activities is not warranted. Nonetheless,
Chresimus perhaps was involved in the export of marble.51
A further possibility must be considered: Herrmann assumes that Chresi-
mus headquarters were to be found at Miletos.52 His activities also allowed
him to commission inscriptions at Ephesos and Tralles, probably in connection
with projects he sponsored in both towns.53 Chresimus willingness to donate
money for construction work might reXect a more profound bond than mere
fondness for these cities. Various building projects in Ephesos were completed
during Domitians reign: the Artemision underwent a refurbishment under Titus,
the Harbour Gymnasium, a temple for the imperial cult, as well as a hydreion and
other buildings were constructed. These may have been erected in recognition
of the title of neokoros being bestowed on the city of Ephesos in ad 82 shortly
49
CIL III 7146 Eph. Ep. V 61, no. 163.
50
Hirt 2003: 119 fn. 15, with further bibliography.
51
IK 11/1, 23, cf. Eck 1997a: 123.
52
Herrmann 1988: 127 f. He bases this on the observation that a verb is missing from the
inscription there. Hence, the inscription of Chresimus found on a block of grey marble and
sculpted as a tabula ansata was not a building inscription, but was presumably once part of a
funerary monument.
53
Herrmann 1988: 122.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 117

after Domitians accession.54 Moreover, construction of the Serapeion at least

was begun during Domitians reign.55 The marble hall in the Harbour
Gymnasium was embellished with thirteen diVerent coloured marble types
of which, to my knowledge, none have been identiWed precisely.56 Some of the
coloured marble most likely came from quarries under imperial control in
Asia Minor, Greece, or Africa, and might either have been presented as
an imperial gift to the Ephesians, or been bought by the builders.57 Would
Chresimus have been responsible for supplying the capital of the provincia
Asia and Miletos, Tralles, and other towns, with the required marble from
imperial quarries? The answer must await a closer study of marble types used
in the public and private town buildings of Asia Minor.58
Chresimus supervision of road construction was most likely not related to
his activities as procurator a marmoribus. Occasionally imperial oYcials could
be burdened with additional tasks outside their usual responsibilities. In ad
62 the portorium Asiae, a public toll on imports and exports, was apparently
managed by the patrimonial procurator of Asia, an oYce usually devoted to
the supervision of the emperors private estates.59 Moreover, Wnancial and
patrimonial procurators and even freedmen are attested as being in charge of
road construction within a province, usually the preserve of the governor.60
Thus, it is possible that besides his usual tasks as procurator a marmoribus
Chresimus was summoned to supervise the road construction.61

4.1.5. Quarrying Procurators at Simitthus

The epigraphic evidence for procuratores and other oYcials in charge of the
quarries at Simitthus is abundant. Iulianus, Maximus, and Athenodorus are
54
Drager 1993: 15074; Karwiese 1995: 88 V.; Halfmann 2001: 3944.
55
Halfmann 2001: 42 f.
56
Benndorf & Heberdey 1898: 63 V., 71 V.; Heberdey 1912: 161 V.; Scherrer 1995: 178.
57
For marble columns as gift from the emperor, see IK 54, 193 (Perge; Antoninus Pius). IK
24/1, 697 CIG 3148 IGRR IV 1431 (Smyrna; c.ad 124).
58
The Chresimus from the Mylasa inscription is not to be identiWed with the Ulpius
Chresimus known from Mons Claudianus, cf. Herrmann 1988: 121. For distribution maps of
precious marble, cf. Dodge 1988: 736.
59
Eck 1997a: 72 with fn. 16, 80 f., 135.
60
Pekary 1968: 7786; M. Arruntius Aquila, Wnancial procurator of Galatia, built roads in
Lycia-Pamphylia (ad 50): CIL III 6737 ILS 215 IGRR III 768; C. Iulius Aquila, Wnancial
procurator in Bithynia, a road between Apameia and Nicaea in 58: CIL III 346 (p. 976) IGRR
III 15; L. Antonius Naso, Wnancial procurator of Bithynia, in 78: CIL III 6993 ILS 253 IK 39,
9. CIL III 188/3. T. Pri[-] Pacatus, Wnancial procurator, a road in Sinope: AE 1986: 646; Iulius
Honoratus, patrimonial procurator in Gallia Narbonnensis, during Domitians reign: CIL XII
5432 (p. 857) (Senez).
61
Hirt 2003.
118 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

clearly identiWed in dated label inscriptions on giallo antico blocks as procur-

atores Augusti.62 Moreover, Agatha, lib(ertus) Augusti, Gallus/Iulius Gallus,
Nova(tus?) and Hymenaeus are documented in the genitive case following sub
cura or caesura marks.63 This is a more or less secure indicator of their
procuratorial rank, given that Agatha is named procurator m(armorum?)
N(umidicorum) in a votive inscription at Simitthus. Other procurators such as
Primus, Pientius, Alceta, Amyrus, and Tertullus dedicated votive inscriptions
at Simitthus and Henchir Frouri, 3 km south-east of Simitthus.64 Few of these
votive inscriptions by procurators can be dated with any precision: Pientius
appears to have completed a porticus with cella and cistern which he dedi-
cated to the populus Simittuensis. The Wrst line of the inscription commem-
orates the return of emperor Marcus Aurelius, possibly to Rome, at the end of
ad 176 after his journey to the Near East.65 According to Khanoussi a possible
[procurator (or dispensator?)] m(armorum) N(umidicorum) named [-]toris,
set up an altar to the Dii Mauri for the welfare of Commodus.66 Finally,
Tertullus set up a slab of Numidian marble, devoted to the recently deceased
and consecrated Septimius Severus (ad 211).67 Thus, the sequence of pro-
curators can partly be reconstructed as follows:

Agatha ad 137/8, 139(?)141

(Iulius) Gallus ad 138
Iulianus ad 172
Pientius ad 176(?)
-]toris ad 18091)
Maximus ad 199
Athenodorus ad 199/200
Tertullus ad 211

62
App. nos. 834 (Iulianus), 835 (Maximus), 8368 (Athenodorus).
63
App. nos. 804, 806, 81120 (Agatha); nos. 805, 808, 809 (Iulius Gallus/Gallus); nos. 859,
863, 865(?) (Nova(tus?); no. 866 (Hymenaeus).
64
CIL VIII 14551 Dubois 1908: no. 97: [Ag]athae Aug. lib. pro[c.] m.n. ; CIL VIII 10589
14552 Dubois 1908: no. 125: Primus Aug. lib. proc. m. n.; AE 1994: 1885: Pientius Aug. lib. proc.
m.n.; CIL VIII 25692 Dubois 1908: no. 77: Aug. lib. Alceta proc. m.n.; AE 1913: 165 ILAfr 428
(Utica): Alci[t]a proc. m.n.; AE 1994: 1878 Kraus 1993a: 59: Aug. lib. [A]lceta proc. m.n.; AE
1994: 1879 Kraus 1993a, p. 60; Amyrus lib. proc. m. [n.]; Khanoussi 1996: 1001, no. 5: Amyrus
[; AE 1994: 1880: [.] Amyrus; AE 1994: 1881: Tertullus lib. proc. m.n.; AE 1998: 1573: ]toris []
m.n.
65
AE 1994: 1885, l.1: Pro salute et reditu Imp. M. Aureli Antonini; cf. Kienast 1996: 138.
66
Khanoussi 1996: 1011, no. 32 AE 1998: 1573. Commodus changes his name to Imp.
Caes. L. Aelius Aurelius Commodus Aug. before 29 August 191, cf. Kienast 1996: 148.
67
AE 1994: 1881, cf. Kienast 1996: 157.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 119

The procuratorship at the Simitthus quarries was presumably held by one

oYcial at a time. (Iulius) Gallus, however, held the procuratorship in ad 138,
the same year Agatha is attested as procurator in label inscriptions. There is
currently no epigraphic evidence indicating shared responsibilities by both
procurators. It thus appears likely that (Iulius) Gallus replaced Agatha for a
short period during 138. Most procuratores listed above were liberti Augusti
and, therefore, members of the familia Caesaris. The onomastics and the
indications of status provided by the inscriptions conWrm this notion.68 It
remains questionable whether or not the procuratorship of Numidian mar-
ble was restricted to Simitthus only.69 The discovery of marble rubble at
Simitthus (Gelber Berg) from diVerent locations suggests that other stones
from the region, possibly from Bordj Helal or Ain el Ksir, were dressed here.70
The dressing of these alien stones within the walls of the quarry district
might indicate that the term procurator m(armorum?) N(umidicorum) in-
cluded not only the supervision of the quarries at Simitthus, but also of
further quarries in the area.71

4.1.6. Mining Procurators in Roman Spain

A series of inscribed stelae from the gold-mining zones of the Duerna Valley
set up at Villals, Luyego, and Corporales give the names of procuratores
Augusti. The exact title of these procuratores is never speciWed, but in one
inscription the abbreviation met. can quite safely be read as met(allorum).
Besides these imperial freedmen, the inscriptions also mention the command-
ing centuriones and decuriones as well as the immunes of the legionary and
auxiliary detachments based in the mining area.72 As these stelae were set up
on the dies natalis of the respective unit (the exact day and consular date of
which are indicated), it is possible to construct an absolute chronology for the
procuratores, military commanders, their units and soldiers seconded to this
mining area. The earliest of these inscriptions discovered at Luyego, set up
during the reign of Antoninus Pius (ad 13861), only displays the name of a

68
Iulius Gallus appears to be the only procurator(?) with proper gentilnomen and cogno-
men. Moreover, there is no direct indication that he was an imperial freedmen. One could
conclude that Iulius Gallus was an equestrian procurator, cf. PIR2 I 336. Were this to be the case,
Iulius Gallus and Agatha might be viewed as procuratorial partners in a collegialite inegale.
However, imperial freedmen could also have nomina gentilia not derived from the name of the
ruling emperor or dynasty, cf. Weaver 1972: 36 f.
69
Dubois 1908: 34 f; Kraus 1993a: 63.
70
Roder 1993: 33 f., 52 f.
71
Dubois 1908: 35 f.
72
LeRoux 1977: 3657; LeRoux 1982: 273; Domergue 1990: 293 f.; Ott 1995: 154.
120 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

centurio and decurio in charge of a vexillation of the legio VII Gemina.

A mining procurator is not mentioned.73 The earliest procurator documented
at Villals, an imperial freedman named Hermes, appears on a stela of 10 June,
ad 163.74 The imperial freedman and procurator Zoilus is recorded on two
stelae at Villals, on one set up on 22 April, ad 166, the other more than a year
later on 15 October, ad 167.75 Marcus Aurelius Eutyches is documented twice,
at Luyego in a stela set up on 10 June, ad 180, and at Villals, on a stela erected
on 10 June, ad 184, on the same day four years later.76 The last attested
procurator, named on a fragmented inscription at Villals on 22 April, ad 191,
is an Aurelius Firmus. The inscription probably provides the full title of
Aurelius Firmus, a [pr(ocurator)] met(allorum).77 The series of inscriptions
ends with this last specimen. The procurators are only referred to by their
Greek cognomen (Zoilus, Hermes), but from ad 180 on they bear the full tria
nomina (Marcus Aurelius Eutyches) or their nomen gentile and cognomen
(Aurelius Eutyches, Aurelius Firmus). Further information on their function
is not given, but they were apparently all imperial freedmen and procurators.
They are not the only imperial mining oYcials documented in the epigraphic
record of northwestern Spain: an M. Ulpius Eutyches, procurator metalli Albo-
c(rarensis) (a mining district mentioned by Pliny) during Trajans or Hadrians
reign is named in an inscription of unknown origin.78
The presence of beneWciarii procuratoris Augusti in the mining areas of the
north-west casts light on the close relationship between the Wnancial procur-
atorship of Asturia and Callaecia and the administrative heads of the various
mining zones. A beneWciarius procuratoris Augusti is named together with the
procurator Hermes on a stelae of Villals set up 10 June, ad 163.79 A further
stela from Villals (22 April, ad 175) lists another beneWciarius procuratoris
Augusti.80 They were presumably sent there on the orders of the equestrian
73
AE 1967: 229 IRLeon 32 EAstorga, no. 112, with Garca Bellido 1966: 24. Whether
mining procurators were not yet appointed for that area in the mid second century, or whether
mining operations at Wrst(?) were run under military supervision only, cannot be ascertained
given the fragmentary epigraphic record.
74
CIL II 2552 EAstorga 114; Sanchez-Palencia 1980, Wg. 8. Hermes appears once more in
an inscription found at Castro de Corporales, which appears to be quite similar to the one from
Villals. Both inscriptions name the same legionary centurio, the same procurator and the same
auxiliary decurio; only the names of the beneWciarius and the signifer diVer. Patrick Le Roux
argued that this inscription is a fake; it appears to be a copy of the Villals inscription, and the
sun disc adorning the stone, a typical feature of Iberian funerary inscriptions, does not Wt at all
with the usual form of votive military inscriptions, cf. EAstorga 148, with LeRoux 1984.
75
CIL II 2556 EAstorga 115; CIL II 2553 EAstorga 116.
76
AE 1967: 230 IRLeon 34 (Luyego). AE 1910: 5 EAstorga 118 (Villals).
77
AE 1910: 2 IRLeon 41 (Villals).
78
CIL II 2598; Pliny, NH 33.80, cf. Christol & Demougin 1990: 188; Domergue 1990: 294.
79
CIL II 2552 EAstorga 114; Sanchez-Palencia 1980, Wg. 8.
80
AE 1910: 1 AE 1928: 176 IRLeon 40.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 121

Wnancial procurators at Astorga. One may assume that their main task was to
act as liaison oYcers to the Wnancial procurators in Astorga.81 Numerous
inscriptions at Asturica Augusta/mod. Astorga document the presence of a
procurator Asturiae et Callaeciae.82 The headquarters of this Wnancial procur-
ator appear to have been located at Asturica Augusta in the immediate
vicinity of important alluvial gold-mining areaslikely one of the main
reasons for the creation of this subprovincial region.83 Apart from monitoring
the imperial mining activities, the Wnancial procurator for Asturia and Call-
aecia, like his colleagues in other imperial provinces, was to provide the pay
for the army units based in his area.84 Moreover, he was responsible for the
collection of tribute and taxes from the provincial population.85 Perhaps the
earliest holder of the Wnancial procuratorship of Asturia and Callaecia, L.
Arruntius Maximus, is recorded in oYce in ad 79.86 The list of the equestrian
incumbents of the procuratorship of Asturia and Callaecia reaches down to
the late second century.87
Surprisingly, a Greek honoriWc inscription, re-edited in 1969 by Christian
Habicht, seems to provide information on the last known Wnancial procur-
ator appointed to Asturia and Callaeciaan imperial freedman named
Saturninus.88 The statue base, on which this inscription was engraved, was
discovered in the Asklepieion at Pergamon in Roman Asia in 1931. The text
lists the procuratorial posts held by Saturninus in inverse order: it begins with

81
LeRoux 1982: 241; Nelis-Clement 2000: 263.
82
CIL II 2477, 5616 ILS 254, Santos Yanguas 1983: 97; Haensch 1997: 174 f., 488; Alfoldy
2000a: 637.
83
Haensch 1997: 174 f.; Alfoldy 2000a: 46. The importance of the Spanish north-west is
furthermore highlighted by the constant presence of legio VII Gemina at Leon whose main task
most likely was the protection of the mining region. During Hadrians reign Asturia and
Callaecia even received its own legatus iuridicus to deal with juridicial matters which may
perhaps also have arisen from an increase in economic activity in the area, cf. Alfoldy 2000a:
42 f., with fn. 70 and further bibliography.
84
Strabo 3.4.20.
85
Dio 53.15.3, 54.21, cf. Brunt 1990b: 165; Burton 1993: 16; Eck 1997a: 1328. It is not clear
whether or not the Wnancial procurator of Asturia and Galicia was subordinate to the procurator
provinciae Hispaniae citerioris, as LeRoux 1995: 75, suggested, cf. also Christol 1999: 239.
86
CIL II 2477 ILS 254 Rodrguez Colmenero 1997: 41820, no. 587 (building inscrip-
tion, Aquae Flaviae/mod. Chaves), cf. PIR2 A 1145; PXaum 19601: 1047; PXaum 1982: 117;
Alfoldy 2000a: 63. Ronald Syme had argued that Pliny the Elder was probably a procurator
Augusti of Asturia and Callaecia as well. Plinys unique knowledge of mining methods used in
Spain and of the census numbers of the conventus of Lucus Augusti, Bracara Augusta and
Asturica Augusta seem to support this hypothesis, cf. Syme 1969: 45 fn. 78. Alfoldy (2000a: 46
fn. 76), however, remains undecided as to whether Pliny was a procurator for the northwest or
just procurator Augusti Hispaniae citerioris. Only a few equestrian administrators displayed the
full title of procurator Asturiae et Callaeciae in their inscriptions
87
Alfoldy 2000a: 637.
88
Habicht 1969: 8892, no. 44, cf. AE 1933: 273.
122 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

his last procuratorship in Pergamon and ends with his Wrst appointment as
procurator of the Quintilian estates (K

B
). The
Quintilii, Roman senators, were put to death by Commodus in the year
182/3 and their estates, presumably near Rome, were taken over by the
imperial administration. Saturninus, therefore, reached his Wrst procurator-
ship at some point after 183.89 For the subsequent post of a procurator a
pacticiis Saturninus remained in Rome for a while,90 before being moved to
Alexandria and appointed K
 A
or director of the -
tax, a tax on papyrus.91 He then took over the Wnancial procuratorship in
Asturia and Galicia in northwestern Spain, perhaps in the years between 193
and 198.92 The mining district in Vipasca/mod. Aljustrel in Lusitania was
Saturninus next assignment.93 Following these oYces on the Iberian penin-
sula, Saturninus returned to the eastern half of the empire and took over a
procuratorial post in the Wnancial administration of Asia.94
The appointment of Saturninus to the procuratorship of Asturia and
Galicia, a post normally held by equestrians, appears to be irregular. Hans-
Georg PXaum has argued that Saturninus must have shared this oYce as a
junior partner with an equestrian colleague. He regarded this collegialite
inegale as a normal feature of procuratorial oYces in the second century.95
Nevertheless, it probably was not a general rule. Based on an inscribed votive
altar set up by Saturninus in Lucus Augusti/mod. Lugo, Patrick Le Roux, and
Geza Alfoldy have dated his tenure of the Wnancial procuratorship to the years
between ad 193 and 198.96 During this period there is no equestrian procur-
ator documented, nor is there any other epigraphic evidence that the eques-
trian predecessors of Saturninus held this oYce in conjunction with an
imperial freedman. Given the available evidence, Saturninus might not have
been subordinate to an equestrian colleague, but possibly held the Wnancial
procuratorship alone. Why this imperial freedman would have been
appointed to a post formerly held by members of the equestrian order is
not easily explained. This unusual move may have been the result of the

89
Habicht 1969: 8892, no. 44. On the Quintilii, cf. Habicht 1969: 8991; PXaum 1970: 298;
Ricl 1997: 25965.
90
On a pact(ionibus) / a pact(iciis), cf. Habicht 1969: 91; Boulvert 1970: 163 with fn. 474;
LeRoux 1985: 224; Christol & Demougin 1990: 183.
91
A tax on papyrus fabrication(?) or perhaps a stamp tax, cf. Lewis 1974: 1379; Lewis
1989: 42.
92
Habicht 1969: 92; PXaum 1970: 298; LeRoux 1985: 223 f.; Christol & Demougin 1990: 169;
Alfoldy 2000a: 468 with fn. 78.
93
PXaum 1970: 3014; Christol & Demougin 1990: 190.
94
Christol & Demougin 1990: 197207.
95
Weaver 1972: 27981; Eck 1997a: 902.
96
LeRoux 1985: 223 f.; Alfoldy 2000a: 46 f. with fn.78.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 123

insecure political situation in Hispania Citerior. During the events of 1957,

the provincial governor of Hispania Citerior, Lucius Novius Rufus, sided with
the usurper Clodius Albinus against Septimius Severus. Although the legio VII
Gemina remained neutral, Novius Rufus and many provincial aristocrats had
given Wnancial support to Albinus, and consequently were executed after the
Albinians had been crushed.97 Perhaps during or immediately after this civil
war the appointment of an imperial freedman to the post of Wnancial proc-
urator may have appeared to be a sensible measure.98 However, the probable
abolition of the Wnancial procuratorship of Asturia and Galicia soon after
Saturninus time in oYce, and the disappearance of mining procurators from
the epigraphic record of the north-west after 191 may also be a consequence
of diminishing returns from the mining operations.99 Based on the observa-
tion that beneWciarii procuratoris are no longer attested in the vexillation-
inscriptions from Villals and Luyego after ad 175, one might tentatively
argue for a disengagement of the Wnancial procurators from the mining
areas in the Duerna Valley, perhaps resulting in growing autonomy for the
mining procurators there(?). Provided the chronological sequence of an
imperial freedman succeeding equestrian procurators is correct, one perhaps
may connect this with the decline of the north-wests economic importance.
After Saturninus stay in northwestern Spain he was appointed K

H
 P, procurator of the copper and silver mines at

Vipasca/mod. Aljustrel in southern Portugal, a post held by imperial freed-
men.100 One of the bronze tablets at Vipasca, the lex metallis dicta, appears to
be a letter written under Hadrian and addressed to an Ulpius Aelianus, most
likely one of Saturninus predecessors in the mining procuratorship at
Vipasca.101 The name of the sender was not preserved on the tablet: Dieter
Flach suggested the Wnancial procurator or procurator provinciae of Lusitania
as the author of this letter.102 A further inscription on a statue base set up by
the coloni metalli Vipascensis honours a Beryllus, libertus Augusti. At the time

97
HA Sev. 12.1. Birley 1999: 125 f., fn. 15; Alfoldy 2000a: 23.
98
Alfoldy 2000a: 23, 36. The diYcult political circumstances might also help explain why
Saturninus commissioned a votive altar at Lucus Augusti, cf. AE 1968, 229 IRPL 2, cf. LeRoux
1985: 2203; Christol & Demougin 1990: 1609. Caracallas creation of a shortlived provincia
Hispania Superior including only the former district of Galicia may perhaps be seen as a delayed
outcome of the political events of 195 to 197, and probably was designed to fasten the grip of
the ruling imperial dynasty on the essential resources of northwestern Spain, cf. Alfoldy 2000a:
1738.
99
Domergue 1990: 21524; Alfoldy 2000a: 48.
100
On the identity of
 P and metalla Vipascensia, cf. Christol &
Demougin 1990: 170 fn. 60.
101
Flach 1979: 403.
102
Flach 1979: 413 f.; Domergue 1983: 131, 170 f.; Domergue 1990: 291, assumes a similar
arrangement for the mines around Castulo.
124 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

the inscription was set up Beryllus apparently held the post of procurator,
most likely of the metalla Vipascensia. Beryllus was furthermore ratio[naliu]m
vicarius, a deputy or auxiliary of the rationales.103 Since the reign of Marcus
Aurelius the term rationales designated the equestrian oYces of a rationibus
and the subordinate procurator summarum rationum, to which Beryllus
appears to have been attached as vicarius, deputy.104 He may have been
seconded to Vipasca from this post to oversee the restructuring eVorts of
the Vipasca mines, probably after the Moorish invasions of southern Iberia in
ad 172/3.105 Beryllus inscription names him also as restitutor metallorum, a
reference to his success in getting the mines up and running again. He
probably redistributed or conWrmed property rights related to the mines,
ruled in unresolved contractual issues, and perhaps even provided money to
those coloni or conductores suVering Wnancial losses from damage to the
mining infrastructure. In this case of rebuilding a mining site it might be
possible that the rationales took direct interest in the appointment of a special
envoy to the troubled mining district. That the tasks of the procurator a
rationibus included the monitoring of imperial mines is speciWcally stated
towards the end of the Wrst century ad by Statius in a poem on the father of
Claudius Etruscus.106 Given the extraordinary circumstances of Beryllus
appointment, we can neither automatically conclude that mining procurators
at Vipasca were normally appointed by the rationales, nor that the rationales
were their immediate superiors.
The epigraphic evidence for the mining administration in Baetica is far
from abundant, despite the numerous archaeologically documented mines.
The only inscription in Baetica giving the full title of a mining procurator was
discovered in Hispalis/mod. Sevilla. The inscribed statue base of white marble
was commissioned by the confectores aeris at Hispalis(?), probably at the end
of the Wrst century ad, in honour of Titus Flavius Polychrysus, imperial
freedman and procurator montis Mariani.107 Polychrysus appears to have
supervised a private estate which in ad 33 had come under imperial control
after the previous owner, Sextus Marius, had been executed.108 A further
procurator to Marius minesa Dorotheus, libertus Augusti and procurator
massae Marianaededicated a votive monument to the god Silvanus at Ostia
on his departure to Marianus estate.109 A slave of Sextus Marius had a
103
IRPac 121; AE 1908: 233(?). For Beryllus, cf. Domergue 1990: 299301.
104
Domergue 1990: 300; Eck 1997a: 84 f. On vicarius, cf. Weaver 1972: 202.
105
HA M. Ant. 21; Wickert 1931: 8358; Domergue 1990: 300; Lazzarini 2001: 105.
106
Statius, Silv. 3.3.8990: ( . . . ) ab auriferis eiectat Hiberia fossis, Dalmatico quod monte nitet
( . . . ), cf. Dusanic 1989: 154; on the father of Claudius Etruscus, cf. Weaver 1972: 28494.
107
CILA II 25.
108
Tacitus, Ann. 6.19. Dio 58.22.2 f., cf. Levick 1999: 101.
109
CIL XIV 52 ILS 1592. On massa, cf. TLLVIII, p. 430 f., 2.b. with Brunt 1990c : 398, fn. 143.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 125

gravestone set up in Corduba, which does suggest that Marius mines (Cerro
Muriano?) and estates were administered from this town.110 Mining procur-
ators and imperial oYcials appear only on a few other sites in Roman Baetica.
The mining procurator Pudens, libertus Augusti, is attested during the reign of
Nerva at Rio Tinto where he commissioned an inscribed monument in
honour of his emperor.111 Further procurators might be mentioned on
inscribed copper ingots recovered from shipwrecks oV southern France. The
reading of these strongly abbreviated inscriptions, however, remains unsatis-
fying and does not yet provide a sound basis for further deliberation.112 A
diVerent oYcial is recorded on the inscribed tin ingots salvaged from the
Port-Vendres II shipwreck oV the coast of southern France. They were found
together with other cargo allegedly originating from Roman Baetica. These
are stamped with the letters L(ucius) Vale(rius), Aug(ustae) l(ibertus) a com-
(mentariis), a freedman of Valeria Messalina, the wife of Claudius and Augusta
in ad 41/42.113 Provided the origin of the ships cargo has been correctly
identiWed, L. Valerius might have been located in Baetica or had the ingots
procured while he remained in Rome.114

4.1.7. A procurator metallorum et praediorum from Sardinia

Apart from the well-documented equestrian and freedmen mining procur-
ators known from Spain, Gaul, and the Danubian provinces, procuratores
metallorum rarely appear in the epigraphic record of other provinces. An altar
dedicated to the nymphs and honouring Q. Baebius Modestus, procurator
Augustorum and praefectus provinciae Sardiniae was set up around ad 211/12
by an imperial freedman Servatus, procurator metallorum et praediorum, in a
110
CIL II2/7, 441 CIL II 2269. Sextus Marius was from Corduba or had close links with the
town, cf. Pliny, NH 34.4 (aes Marianum aes Cordubense). For a tessera hospitalis with his
name, cf. Eck & Fernandez 1991.
111
CIL II 956.
112
Part of the engraved letters on the copper ingots from the Marseillan shipwreck off
southern France were read as Telesphori j Aug(ustorum) n(ostrorum) (duorum) d(ominorum) j
pr. Felix CCCXXVII, cf. Laubenheimer-Leenhardt 1973: 535, no. 24; Domergue & Rico 2002:
146. A further copper ingot was found in the Museum of Biterrois, the last lines of the
inscription reading L. Caesi Severi j p(rocurator) A(ugustorum) (duorum) d(ominorum)
n(ostrorum) j pr. Fel[.]x j CCXCVIIII jj XX, cf. Domergue & Rico 2002: 145. Various readings
__ _45 of the inscription on the copper ingot from Planier, southern
are available for lines
France (AE 1963: 109). Besides pr(ocuratoris) col(oniae) Onojbensis, the variations pr(ocuratoris)
O(s)sonojbansis or proc(uratoris) S(.)S(.) lonojbensis have been put forward, cf. Laubenheimer-
Leenhardt 1973: 367, nos. 16, 7882; Domergue 1990: 287, 295, with further bibliography;
Lazzarini 2001: 104 f.
113
Colls et al. 1977: 1118.
114
Weaver 1972: 2413, 24552; Colls et al. 1975: 757.
126 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

niche of the Nymphaeum in the baths at Aquae Hypsitanae/mod. Caddas on

Sardinia.115 Prior to the appearance of this inscription it was assumed that the
responsibility for the imperial mines on Sardinia lay with the governor of the
island. Le Bohec argued that the procurator-governor probably did not get
personally involved in the mining administration but left that job to a
tabularius provinciae Sardiniae. The epigraphic record does not provide us
with any information concerning when the oYce of procurator metallorum et
praediorum was created.116 Servatus inscription for the presidial procurator
of Sardinia not only reXects his private admiration for the governor, but in all
probability was intended to honour him as his former superior in the
provincial hierarchy. The double function of procurator metallorum and
praediorum is hitherto unattested: while a number of procuratores praediorum
are known throughout the empire, Servatus appears to be the only one
documented in this double function so far.117 The combination of both
oYces was explained by Christer Bruun as a result of the paucity of mines
and imperial estates in Sardinia.118

4.1.8. Procuratores aurariarum in Roman Dacia

The epigraphic record of Ampelum/mod. Zlatna documents a number of
procurators in charge of the gold mines in the area of Alburnus Maior/mod.
Ros ia Montana and perhaps other gold mines throughout Dacia. In his
detailed study of the Dacian mining administration, Hans-Christoph Noeske
pointed out that ten procuratores aurarium are known to have been located in
Ampelum, three of whom were imperial freedmen. The inscriptions hardly
ever display the full title of the post. Noeske determined that this was the
result of the locations in which the inscribed monuments or stone slabs were
set up. At Ampelum, the administrative headquarters, the full title of the
procurator was known to the inhabitants and therefore did not have to be

115
AE 1998: 671. Another votive stela discovered in the natatio of the baths also honours
Baebius Modestus, the inscribed monument having been set up by a soldier of the cohors II, cf.
Benito Serra & Bacco 1998: 1244 f., fn. 101.; Bruun 2001.
116
Le Bohec 1992a: 260 with fn. 32; Bruun 2001: 359 f. For a list of governors, cf. Zucca
2001.
117
Numerous praedia are attested on Sardinia, e.g. praedia Statoniensia (AE 1981: 475c;
Cagliari); praedia Patulcensium (CIL X 7852; Esterzili); pr(aedia) Dom(itiae) Luc(illae) (CIL X
8046, 6b; Assemini); praedia L. Veri Aug(usti) (CIL XV 737; Arbus); [arcar]ius praedi[orum] (?)
(AE 1979: 307; Cagliari); cf. Sotgiu 1988, index, p. 726. Imperial estates are known from the
written sources, cf. AE 1971: 120 AE 1972: 227: Alexander, Aug. ser. regionarius; Meloni 1990:
1716, 474 f.
118
Bruun 2001: 357.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 127

displayed at full length in inscriptions.119 Although the title of these procur-

ators is never given in full, an inscription erected in the second half of the
second century or the early third century by a subordinate oYcial provides
enough evidence to reconstruct the title given to at least some of the incum-
bents as procurator aurariarum Dacicarum.120
The earliest known procurator aurariarum is one M. Ulpius Hermias who
served during Trajans reign. His funerary stone, set up by his wife Salonia
Palestrice and his freedman Diogenes, commemorates his death at 55 years of
age. His corpse was transported back to Rome, from where he might have
originated, ex indulgentia Aug(usti) n(ostri).121 Romanus, another libertus
Augusti and procurator aurariarum, set up a gravestone for his daughter
Aurelia Ianuaria. The name of Romanus daugther dates his tenure of the
procuratorship at Ampelum to Marcus Aurelius reign or later.122 A further
imperial freedman is Avianus, subprocurator aurariarum, whose inscription
was discovered at Apulum/mod. Alba Iulis. He dedicated an inscribed votive
monument to Iuppiter Tavianus in the late second century.123 There is no
record of the oYce of subprocurator before the ad 180s. Although the intro-
duction of this oYce prior to this date cannot be excluded, the appearance of
the Wrst subprocurator coincides with the occurrence of equestrians holding
the regular mining procuratorship.124
In an inscription on a votive altar, the equestrian L. Macrius Macer gives his
function as procurator Aug(ustorum duorum), which in turn allows us to place
his tenure of procuratorial oYce either in the years ad 1619 of Marcus

119
Noeske 1977: 299 with fn. 150.
120
CIL III 1297 IDR III/3, 314, cf. Noeske 1977: 352, AMP 12. The tabul(arius) aur-
(ariarum) Dacicarum Neptunalis named in the inscription probably is the same person as the
Neptunalis of CIL III 1313 AMP 12a, husband to Ulpia Marci liberta Trophima. The name of
his wife provides a rough date for Neptunalis term as tabularius.
121
CIL III 1312 ILS 1593 IDR III/3, 366, cf. Noeske 1977: 347, AMP 1. Noeske 1977: 296.
The name of Ulpius Hermias wife had been understood to refer to the toponym Salona and is
taken as an indication that Ulpius Hermias, prior to his procuratorship in Ampelum, had been
posted in Dalmatia in a similar function, cf. Patsch 1899: 267 with fn. 5; Patsch 1900: 73;
Hirschfeld 1905: 155 fn. 1; Noeske 1977: 347 f. The name Salonia, however, is rather common in
Italy and Rome which might suggest that he was perhaps directly transferred from Rome to his
new post, cf. Alfoldy 1969a: 117; Noeske 1977: 348 with fn. 326.
122
CIL III 1622 ILS 1532, cf. Noeske 1977: 348, AMP 2.
123
CIL III 1088, p. 1390 IDR III/3, 228, cf. Noeske 1977: 348, AMP 3. Noeske (1977: 348 f.)
points out that the epigraphic formula pro salute (et) victori[a] domini n(ostri) sanctissi[mi]
and the fact that Avianus names only one Augustus as his patron appear to indicate a date for his
tenure of oYce after the Marcomanic wars. The use of the formula pro salute et victoria domini
nostri is attested from the reign of Commodus onwards, the adjective sanctissimus surfaces
mostly during the reign of Septimius Severus. One therefore would tentativley suggest the
Severan period as a date for the inscription.
124
More cautious: Noeske 1977: 349.
128 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

Aurelius and Lucius Verus reign, or in the reign of Septimius Severus and
Caracalla (ad 198211).125 Around ad 1835 an inscribed slab from Ampe-
lum, perhaps a building inscription, naming the emperor Commodus,
identiWes a [M]aximus as procurator. As Noeske points out, the cognomen
Maximus is not followed by a freedman status indication. Thus it is likely that
he too was an equestrian oYcial.126 The procurator Aelius Sostratus erected a
votive inscription to Iuno Regina Minerva pro salute et victoria et incolumi-
tate of Caracalla and his mother Iulia Domna which allows us to date it to the
year ad 212 (death of Geta) or ad 214 (Caracallas visit to Dacia).127 An
inscribed votive altar to Ceres Augusta was set up in January ad 215 by
Suriacus, dispensator aurariarum and probably an imperial slave, and dedi-
cated by Aulus Senecius [-] Contianus(?), an equestrian procurator (vir
egregius).128 C. Aurelius Salvianus, procurator Augusti nostri, is named in a
building inscription as overseeing some construction work undertaken by the
duumviri and the ordo of Ampelum, possibly on an aqueduct(?). The naming
of these municipal institutions points to a date after the elevation of Ampe-
lum to municipal status under Septimius Severus. The erased name of the
emperor makes a date between ad 218 and 235 likely.129 Finally, a Papirius
Rufus, procurator aurariarum, received an inscribed memorial plaque from
his freedmen and heirs. The inscription cannot be dated.130 Whether or not
one M. Iulius Apollinaris can be counted amongst the procurators is uncer-
tain. Noeske argues that the undated dedication of the inscription by Verus
and Romanus, two vernae Augusti and vilici, as well as the location of the
inscription, seems to support the view that Apollinaris was an equestrian
procurator.131 This provides us with the following list of procuratores
aurariarum:
procuratores subprocurator
Ulpius Hermias, lib.Aug. (Traj.)
Romanus, lib. Aug. (M. Aur.)
M]aximus (183/185)
L. Macrius Macer (M. Aur./Sep. Sev.)
Avianus, lib. Aug. (Sep. Sev.)

125
CIL III 1310 12563 IDR III/3, 307, cf. Noeske 1977: 298, 349, AMP 5; PIR2 M 34.
126
IDR III/3, 281, cf. Noeske 1977: 351, AMP 6.
127
CIL III 7836 IDR III/3, 318, cf. Noeske 1977: 298, 350, AMP 7 with fn. 341; PIR2 A 265.
128
AE 1959: 308 AE 2003: 1512 IDR III/3, 292, cf. Noeske 1977: 298, 351, AMP 8.
129
CIL III 1293 IDR III/3, 282, cf. Noeske 1977: 298, 351, AMP 9, with fn. 348.
130
CIL III 1311 IDR III/3, 359, cf. Noeske 1977: 298, 351, AMP 10; PIR2 P 118.
131
CIL III 7837 IDR III/3, 332, cf. Noeske 1977: 298, 352, AMP 11.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 129

Aelius Sostratus (212)

A. Senecius [-] Contianus (215)
Undated
(M. Iulius Apollinaris (?) )
Papirius Rufus

Noeske observed that the last freedmen procurators in Ampelum are attested
during the reign of Marcus Aurelius or later and the earliest known equestrian
procurator is dated to the same period. Based on this, he concluded that the
procuratorial post at Ampelum was shared between an equestrian and freedman
procurator in an arrangement called collegialite inegale by Hans-Georg
PXaum. Although this sort of unequal arrangementwith the freedman proc-
urator being the subordinate partner to his equestrian colleaguecan be
detected fairly often in procuratorial oYces of the second century, it was
probably not a general rule.132 As there is no written evidence to conWrm the
view that equestrian and freedman procurators held the same oYce at Ampelum
simultaneously, a piecemeal replacement of freedmen procurators by those of
equestrian rank appears more likely.133 Nevertheless, imperial freedmen of
procuratorial rank continued to be involved in the administration of gold
mines, albeit as subprocuratores. Whether subprocuratores had been a regular
feature of the gold-mining administration at Ampelum prior to the Marcoman-
nic Wars and whether they remained a regular feature throughout the Severan
period cannot be ascertained. Eck argued that the introduction of subprocur-
atorial oYces in general must have been the result of an increasing pressure on
the administrative system during the second century.134
BeneWciarii procuratoris, attested in four inscriptions, roughly dated to the
second half of the second century ad, have been understood by Noeske and
Joachim Ott to refer to soldiers under the command of the procurator
aurariarum.135 Contrary to this view, Jocelyne Nelis-Clement pointed out
the possibility that the beneWciarii had been seconded to Ampelum by the
Wnancial procurator.136 Besides these inscriptions at Ampelum, no other

132
See e.g. Tacitus, Ann. 13.1. Pliny, Ep. 10.27.85. AE 1930: 86. See PXaum 1970: 305; Noeske
1977: 300 f.; LeRoux 1985: 22730; Christol & Demougin 1990: 18690; Domergue 1990: 292 V.;
Christol 1999: 235. For further examples, cf. Weaver 1972: 27981; Eck 1997a: 902. For
critisism, see Millar 1963b.
133
For the opposite view, cf. Noeske 1977: 300.
134
Eck 1997a: 83 f. A fragmentary inscription (AE 1989: 629) might name an A]ur(elius)
Urs[us]j[p]raepos[i]j[tusa]uraria[r]j[um]. _
135
CIL III _7833 1289 IDR _ III/3, 300 CBFIR 565. CIL III 1295 IDR III/3, 310
CBFIR 566. AE 1991: 1344. Noeske 1977: 314; Ott 1995: 152; Nelis-Clement 2000: 370, no. 186.
136
Nelis-Clement 2000: 263.
130 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

procuratorial beneWciarii are attested throughout Dacia.137 This might sup-

port the argument that the beneWciarii were on the staV of the mining
procurator at Ampelum. But in what function? Security issues were dealt
with by the numerus Maurorum Hispanorum or perhaps the legio XIII
Gemina, which both appear to have a detachment based at Ampelum.138
The speciWc purpose of beneWciarii at the administrative headquarters
remains obscure. They were not recorded in the mining zones and may not
have served as liaisons between the gold mines and the administrative centre.
More importantly, given the freedmen status of the procurators at Ampelum
prior to the Marcomannic wars, it is diYcult to imagine soldiers coming under
their command. Thus, the beneWciarii procuratoris are more likely to have
been seconded to Ampelum as liaisons with the Wnancial procuratorsWrst
of Dacia Superior and probably after ad 124 of Dacia Apulensis. The infrequent
visit of the latter is indicated by a votive altar at Ampelum commissioned by
C. Sempronius Urbanus, whom we know to be procurator of Dacia Apulensis
in and around ad 182.139 Provided this interpretation is correct, one might
conclude that the freedmen procuratores aurariarum were perhaps subordinate
to the Wnancial procurators of Dacia Apulensis prior to the Marcomannic
wars.140 Besides beneWciarii sent by the Wnancial procurator, a number of
military men, common soldiers (librarii) as well as beneWciarii consulares,
were being seconded by the governor to Ampelum as well as Alburnus Maior
during the second century.141 The epigraphic documentation in the mining
districts does not reveal the purpose of these stationes of beneWciarii
consulares.142

4.1.9. Mining Procurators in Moesia Superior and Noricum

There is little documentation on mining procurators in Moesia Superior.
According to Dusanic, votive altars for the Dea Orcia and maybe Volcanus(?)

137
Schallmayer et al. 1990: 392424.
138
Numerus Maurorum Hispanorum, cf. CIL III 1294 IDR III/3, 312; CIL III 1316 IDR
III/3, 335; IDR III/3, 302 AE 1971: 383; legio XIII Gemina, cf. CIL III 1317 IDR III/3, 344;
XIII Gemina (tile stamps), cf. AE 1911, 37, AE 1988: 961.
139
PXaum 19601: 542 f., no. 200, 1065. The Wnancial procurators for Dacia Apulensis
appear to have had their headquarters at Sarmizegetusa which supposedly was located in recent
excavations, cf. Piso 1993: 38 with fn. 53, 89 f. There presence at Sarmizegetusa is attested at the
earliest from 169 onwards, cf. Haensch 1997: 345 f.
140
For a list, see PXaum 19601: 1066.
141
CBFIR 567 (Ampelum), 5447 (Alburnus Maior). After ad 124 the governor of
Dacia Superior was based at Apulum, cf. Piso 1993: 37; Haensch 1997: 33846 with further
bibliography.
142
Ott 1995: 154 f.; Nelis-Clement 2000: 259.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 131

found at Avala recorded a vir egregius Simplicius, who must have been a
mining procurator. This claim is not further conWrmed by the epigraphic
record.143 The epigraphic material of the Kosmaj and Rudnik mining areas
provides us with more substantial evidence for mining procurators. Tyran-
nus, libertus Augusti and procurator, is named in a building inscription at
Kosmaj, probably during the second half of the second century, whereas
Cassius Ligurinus, procurator Augusti during Septimius Severus reign, super-
vises the repair of a collapsed temple of Terra Mater.144 The municipium
D(ar)d(anorum)/mod. Socanica probably yields three inscriptions referring
to mining procurators. A Telesphorus, presumably a mining procurator,
oversaw construction work by coloni arg(entariarum) during the years
ad 136/7.145 A fragmentary altar, perhaps from the reign of Antoninus Pius,
documents a procurator Amandus, a libertus Augusti.146 Moreover, an in-
scribed base set up for Gordianus III by the ordo colonorum names Titienus
Verus, vir egregius and procurator mm(etallorum) D(ar)d(anicorum).147 The
inscriptions at Kosmaj, Rudnik, or Socanica do not yield any further evidence
for other procurators.
Amongst the imperial procuratores documented in Noricum none is known
to have been placed in charge of the iron and gold mines. Alfoldy argued that the
presidial procurators of Noricum, attested from Claudius reign onwards, were,
at Wrst, responsible for the entire economic administration of the province.148
The inscription of an imperial freedman, a Tertius, libertus Caesaris, which he
dated to the early Wrst century and believed to have originated from the
Magdalensberg, was used as evidence that the mines stood under imperial
control as early as the time of Augustus.149 Further indications for the direct
control of mining areas by the imperial administration are provided
by two votive inscriptions of two imperial slaves at Hohenstein/Pulst to
the goddess Noreia: one inscription displays the name of a Chrysanthus, the
vikarius of Cypaerus, imperial slave under Claudius.150 A fragmentary votive
inscription at TiVen might give the name of a Ca[e(saris) n(ostri) (servus)]
provided Alfoldys reading is correct.151 Certainly, the mines near Hohenstein

143
IMS I 20 CIL III 1660 8151 (p. 1022) (ad 287). IMS I 46 CIL III 1661 (ad 272), cf.
Dusanic 1977: 77 f.; Dusanic 1990: 588 f.
144
IMS I 103 CIL III 14536 (Kosmaj/Guberevac). IMS I 168 CIL III 6313 8333
(Rudnik). On Cassius Ligurinus, cf. PIR2 C 497.
145
AE 1972: 500 ILJug 501 with Dusanic 1971a.
146
ILJug 504.
147
ILJug 503.
148
Alfoldy 1974: 7981, 115.
149
CIL III 4987, cf. Alfoldy 1974: 64 with fn. 12, 115 with fn. 82.
150
CIL III 4808, CIL III 4807 with Alfoldy 1969b: 25, no. 34.
151
CIL III 4822 11505, with Alfoldy 1969b: 25.
132 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

and perhaps near TiVen were under direct control of the presidial procurators at
Virunum from as early as the mid-Wrst century onwards.152 Based on the
epigraphic evidence Alfoldy believed that at the beginning of the second century
the mines and their administration were leased out to conductores ferrariarum
Noricarum. An inscription set up for Ti. Claudius Macro by his vilicus in
Aquileia might be the oldest attestation of a conductor ferrariarum Noricarum,
as it belongs to the early second century(?).153 A further building inscription at
Hohenstein names the presidial procurator of Noricum, Claudius Paternus
Clementianus, attested around ad 120. It was commissioned by a Sabi[nius],
perhaps a conductor ferrariarum Noricarum(?), according to Alfoldy.154 The
inscriptions of other conductores found at TiVen, Hohenstein, and Wieting
are diYcult to date but are believed to belong to the Wrst half of the second
century. Alfoldy argued that when the gubernatorial title changed from procur-
ator Augusti provinciae Noricae to procurator Augusti regni Norici (probably
between ad 158 and 160), the Norican mining areas were returned to the direct
administration of the presidial procurator.155 Under Marcus Aurelius these
equestrian procuratores Augusti regni Norici were soon replaced as governors
by senatorial legati Augusti pro praetore provinciae Noricae. The tasks of the
procurator Augusti regni Norici were now limited to the Wnancial administration
of the province, of which the mines were one of the main responsibilities.156
Only three of these Wnancial procurators are attested: one M. Porcius Verus is
recorded in a short inscription on a cult relief of Mithras from Celeia, sometime
during the reign of Severus Alexander.157 An inscription of an unknown eques-
trian, possibly dated to the beginning of the third century, provides evidence for
a further K
F.158 The third procurator is attested in an undated
building inscription at TiVen.159 A series of inscriptions mentioning imperial
slaves and freedmen at Virunumwho according to Alfoldy belonged to
the period of Marcus Aurelius at the earliestdisplay their function followed
by the term regnum Noricum or the abbreviation PRN (p(atrimonii?) r(egni)

152
Alfoldy 1974: 115.
153
CIL V 810 (Aquileia). On date, cf. Panciera 1957: 27 f.; Alfoldy 1974: 115, 319 fn. 86.
154
CIL III 14362 (p. 2328,197) 14363 AE 1968: 408 ILLPRON 148 (Hohenstein), cf.
Alfoldy 1969b: 25, no. 35.
155
Alfoldy 1974: 79; for a list of presidial procurators, cf. Winkler 1969: 2966; Alfoldy 1974:
2427 (Appendix V).
156
PXaum 19601: 801; Winkler 1969: 139; Alfoldy 1974: 164; rsted 1985: 2324.
157
CIL III 5317 (Celeia). He also is known as the tribune of the cohors I milliaria Hemese-
norum in Lower Pannonia from a votive altar of Szabadegyhaza in Hungary, dated by Alfoldy to
the reign of Severus Alexander. He probably reached the Wnancial procuratorship of Noricum
shortly after, cf. AE 1965: 10, cf. Devijver 197680: 674 f., P 98.
158
AE 1941: 63 (Alexandria).
159
AE 1968: 409 (TiVen) with Alfoldy 1970: 176; Alfoldy 1974: 164, 334 fn. 34.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 133

N(orici) ) and hence probably were part of an administrative bureau attached

to the Wnancial procurator.160

4.1.10. Mining Procurators in Dalmatia and Pannonia

4.1.10.1. Procuratores metallorum/argentariarum of Pannonia
and Dalmatia
A considerable number of partly fragmentary inscriptions from Domavium/
mod. Srebrenicaa municipality located amidst the extensive mining area of
the Drina Valley (cf. 3.2.5)document the presence of procurators there.
One inscribed monument from Domavium, dated to the early third century
ad, contains a very fragmentary version of the equestrian career of C. Iulius
Silvanus Melanio which had been reconstructed skilfully by Juan Manuel
Abascal and Geza Alfoldy. Based on their reconstruction of the text, Melanio
was perhaps honoured by the municipium Domavianum on receiving the
dignity of patron of the province of Dalmatia. The Wndspot demonstrates
Melanios close links with the municipality and particularly the mining
industry in its vicinity. Melanio appears to have held procuratorships con-
cerned with iron and silver mines in numerous provinces probably during the
late second century, before becoming Wnancial procurator in Hispania Citer-
ior c. ad 198206. These positions probably included the procuratorship of
silver mines in Pannonia and Dalmatia and may explain the origin of the close
ties with Domavium.161 Less enigmatic is a building inscription at Domavium
from the reign of Macrinus (ad 21820) which gives the name of an eques-
trian procurator argentariarum, Valerius Super, as the overseer of the recon-
struction of a macellum. A further inscription documenting the supply of
suYcient water for the bathhouse by Valerius Super can Wrmly be dated to the

160
CIL III 4797 ILS 1506. CIL III 4800 ILS 4198. CIL III 4798. 4828. Winkler 1969: 141,
no. 1, cf. Alfoldy 1970: 171; rsted 1985: 232 f.
161
CIL III 12732, cf. Abascal & Alfoldy 1998: 159 f. Nr. 6, 162 f., reconstruct lines 78 of
the inscription as follows: proc(uratori) Aug(usti) [fe]rr(ariarum) et j arg(entariarum)(?) per
_ _ 162 f.) assume
prouin/[cias] XXIII. . . . J. M. Abascal and G. Alfoldy (pp. _ _ that
_ some of Melanios
mining procuratorships covered more than one province which would explain the twenty-three
provinces refered to above. Further inscriptions by Silvanus Melanio have been recovered at
Astorga (ae 1968: 22931 irpl 2, 13, 14) and Segobriga (CIL II 3136) in Spain, where around
ad 198206 he is documented as procurator Augustorum Hispaniae citerioris, shortly after the
oYce of procurator Asturiae et Callaciae had been abolished. Moreover, an inscription at Lyon
(CIL XIII 1729), names him in a further unknown procuratorial function, cf. PXaum 19601:
734 f., no. 276; PIR2 I 581; Fitz 1972: 223 f., no. 6; Devijver 197680: 487 f., I 126; PXaum 1982:
67 f., no. 276; Haensch 1997: 395, 488; Lefebvre 1998: 248 f., 2524, 262; Alfoldy 2000a: 65.
134 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

year 220.162 In the later years of Severus Alexanders reign, between ad 229
and 235, the equestrian procurator Iulius Tacitianus appears as the dedicator
of an inscribed monument by the ordo municipii Domavianorum to the
emperor and his mother Iulia Mamaea.163 According to a further inscription,
a collapsed bath house was rebuilt under the supervision of a procurator
argentariarum, Aurelius Verecundus, in ad 274.164 A number of rather frag-
mentary inscriptions document further procuratores at Domavium: an M.
Arrius [?Iu]nianus is probably to be identiWed as a [pro]c(urator) Aug(usti),
while two fragmentary inscriptions record an unknown pr]oc(urator?)
ar[gentaria]rum and an unknown v(ir) e(gregius) [proc(urator) A]ug(usti)
n(ostri).165 While these are, as yet, impossible to date, the inscription of an
unknown equestrian procurator, []tus, can be dated to the reign of Gordian
III.166 Even though the full title of this procuratorial oYce is not provided, it
is possible that they all held the same or a similar post. The inscribed
monument honouring L. Domitius Eros, vir egregius, is the only one to
provide the full title of the oYce, procurator metallorum Pannonicorum et
Delmaticorum.167 This allows us to include further equestrian oYcials who
are not directly attested at Domavium, but held the same procuratorial post at
some point in their careers. According to an inscribed honorary monument
from Lambaesis in Numidia for Ti. Claudius Proculus Cornelianus, this
equestrian also held the oYce of procurator metallorum Pannonicorum et
Dalmaticorum, perhaps around ad 161/2.168 Ti. Claudius Xenophon, whose

162
CIL III 12733 8363 ILS 5587. CIL III 12734, cf. PXaum 19601: 1063; Fitz 1972: 216;
Fitz 19935: 1090, no. 719.
163
CIL III 12720 8359 8360 (ad 229235), cf. PIR2 I 595; PXaum 19601: 399, 1063; Fitz
1972: 216 f.; Fitz 19935: 1093, no. 726.
164
CIL III 12736 with Patsch (ad 274), cf. PXaum 19601: 1063; Mrozek 1968: 47, no. 16;
Fitz 1972: 216 f.; Fitz 1990: 189, no. 203; Fitz 19935: 405, 1099, no. 738.
165
CIL III 12725 142191. For M. Arrius [-]nianus, cf. PIR2 A 1085; PXaum 19601: 399,
no. 13, 1063; Mrozek 1968: 47, no. 15; Fitz 1972: 216; Fitz 1990: 189, no. 127; Fitz 19935: 1095,
no. 231; CIL III 12737, cf. PXaum 19601: 1063; Fitz 1972: 216. CIL III 12728, cf. Fitz 19935:
1097, no.735.
166
CIL III 12724. PXaum 19601: 1063; Fitz 1972: 216; Fitz 19935: 1093 f., no. 727.
167
CIL III 8361 12721 ILS 1443. On L. Domitius Eros: L. PIR2 D 145; RE V 1427, no. 56;
PXaum 19601: 399, 1063; Dobo 1968: 180, no. 282; Fitz 1972: 216; Fitz 19935: 1095, no. 729.
168
AE 1956: 123 1991: 1691 1992: 1866; PXaum 19601: 400; Christol 1990; Le Bohec
1992b; Fitz 19935: 404. Cornelianus career can be dated on the basis of the information
provided by his career inscription, as he held the oYce of procurator( . . . ) ad dilectum cum Iulio
Vero per Italiam tironum II legionis Italicae. As a response to the imminent barbarian incursions,
Iulius Verus, together with M. Claudius Fronto, was summoned to Rome to recruit two new
legions, the II and III Italica, probably around 166/7, cf. CIL III 1457 ILS 1097. Prior to that,
Cornelianus held the post of procurator kalendarii Vegetiani, which, according to PXaums
hypothesis, is to be dated to before 166. PXaum dates Cornelianus post as procurator provinciae
Syriae ad rationes putandas to the year 158, cf. PXaum 1955: 126; PXaum 19601: 1049. This
possibly leaves the years around 161/2 for his tenure of the Pannonian and Dalmatian mining
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 135

career is displayed on an inscribed monument at Ephesos, was appointed

proc(urator) argentariarum Pannoniarum et Dalmatiarum, probably in the
second half of the 180s.169 Thus, the chronological framework for the known
procurators and their tenure of this centenarian procuratorship can be
reconstructed as follows:170
Ti. Claudius procurator metallorum 161/2164
Proculus Cornelianus Pannonicorum et Dalmaticorum
L. Domitius Eros proc. metallorum Pannon(icorum) c. late 2nd c.
et Delmat(icorum) (Domavium)
Ti. Claudius Xenophon procurator argentariarum Pannoniarum c.18590
et Dalmatiarum
C. Iulius Silvanus procurator (argentariarum?) Sep. Sever.
Melanio (Domavium)
Valerius Super procurator argentariarum c.21820
(Domavium)
Iulius Tacitianus procurator Augusti nostri c.22335
(Domavium)
[]tus procurator eius (Domavium) c.23844
Aurelius Verecundus proc. argentariarum (Domavium) 274
Undated:
N.N. [pr]oc(urator) ar[gentaria]rum ?
(Domavium)
M. Arrius [..]nianus procurator Augusti (Domavium) ?
N.N. procurator Augusti nostri ?
(Domavium)
The evidence records the use of the titles procurator metallorum Pannoni-
corum et Da/elmaticorum or procurator argentariarum Pannoniarum et Dal-
matiarum as early as the reign of Marcus Aurelius. Fitz argued that the term

procuratorship, cf. PXaum 19601: 397404, no. 164 bis; Dobo 1968: 179, no. 280; Fitz 1972:
221f., no. 4; Corbier 1974: 232, no. 8; Devijver 197680: 267 f., C 174; Fitz 19935: 723 f.,
no. 400.
169
CIL III 6575 7127 ILS 1421 IK 13, 652. In the years ad 179/80, Xenophon is
documented in papyri as K
in Roman Egypt, cf. Thomas 1982: 189, no. 52. Accord-
ing to two inscriptions from Sucidava and Porolissum (CIL III 8042 IDR II 188; AE 1988:
977), Xenophon subsequently became the Wnancial procurator of Dacia Apulensis, probably not
before ad 183. He succeeded C. Sempronius Urbanus, who is attested after 181. It is after this
post that he reached the silver mining procuratorship, cf. PIR2 C 1054; PXaum 19601: 5902,
no. 222; Dobo 1968: 179 f., no. 281; Fitz 1972: 222 f., no. 5; Fitz 19935: 735 f., no. 419.
170
Mrozek (1968: 47, no.4) added a Bai[us] to the list of procurators, but the fragmentary
state of the inscription does not allow a secure reconstruction of his career. That Bai[us] held
the Pannonico-Dalmatian mining procuratorship is a pure conjecture, cf. Fitz 1972: 218; Fitz
19935: 405.
136 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

argentariae and metalla were used alternately by the oYcials in charge.171 On

the contrary, the terminological change might be signiWcant. The inscription
of Domitius Eros, which is not securely dated, might belong to the later
second century ad rather than the Wrst half of the third.172 The title used
(proc. metallorum) would support a date for Domitius Eros holding oYce
during Marcus Aurelius reign, perhaps after Ti. Claudius Proculus Cornelia-
nus tenure of the Pannonico-Dalmatian mining procuratorship. If this hy-
pothesis is correct, the titles would have changed during Commodus reign
from proc. metallorum. to proc. argentariaruma post first documented in
c.18590 (Ti. Claudius Xenophon). Assuming the procurator metallorum
Pannonicorum et Dalmaticorum supervised not only the silver mines, but
also monitored the copper, iron, and gold mines in these provinces (hence,
the use of the more general term metalla), this change perhaps reXects the
deliberate exclusion of mines other than argentariae from the responsibilities
of this procurator.173

4.1.10.2. Procuratores ferrariarum (Pannonicarum ?)

The iron mines around Ljubija, for example, might have been set apart and
assigned to another administrative department. The epigraphic record of
Ljubija and the surrounding area may add weight to this hypothesis: an
inscribed altar set up to Terra Mater by the vilicus Callimorphus on 21
April, ad 201, names a C. Iulius Agathopus, a conductor ferrariarum. Agatho-
pus exact title is given by an inscription at Mursa as c(onductor) f(errariarum)
Pannonicar(um) itemque provinciar(um) transmarinarum.174 On 21 April

171
Fitz 19935: 403 f.
172
A. Stein (RE V 1427: no. 56) believed the inscription to be no earlier than the 2nd cent.
PXaum 19601: 399, 1063, suggested the Wrst half of the 3rd cent. without providing a detailed
examination. The inscribed monument contains the following text (CIL III 12721 8361 ILS
1443, with Fitz 19935: 1095, no.729/1): L. Domitio j [.] Eroti, vijro ex equesjtribus turjmis
egregio, j proc[u]ratori j metallorum j [P]ann[o]n. j [et] Delm[a]t., mij[r]ae integritatis j [e]t
_
bonit[a]tis j L. Aur. Ru[s]ticus, j v.e., ducehni., amico j praesta[ntissimo]. The monument was
commissioned by an L. Aur(elius) Ru[st]icus, vir egregius, and ducehni(arius) for L. Domitius
Eros, vir egregius. The title vir egregius and the pay grade of ducenarius for equestrian oYces are
attested since the reign of Marcus Aurelius, as is the post of procurator metallorum Pannoni-
corum et Delmaticorum (cf. AE 1956: 123 1991: 1691 1992: 1866; PXaum 1950: 210 V.;
Alfoldy 1975: 148; Eck 1997a: 101; for criticism, cf. Millar 1963b). Attributes such as mirae
bonitatis et integritatis do appear mostly throughout the third century and later. Even so, earlier
attestations can be cited, cf. AE 1972: 70 (ad 176).
173
For a similar result, see Skegro 2000: 101, 116.
174
AE 1973: 411 ILJug 779; for Mursa cf. Bulat 1989: 36. Based on the inscription from
Mursa it has been convincingly argued that the iron mines of Ljubija formed part of Pannonia,
cf. Dusanic 1971b: 554; Fitz 19935: 407 f.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 137

209, an altar for Terra Mater is set up by the same Callimorphus and one
T. Flavius Verecundus, procurator Augustorum.175 The series of inscribed altars
for Terra Mater, mostly set up on 21 April, at Ljubija, Prijedor, and Brisevo
yields further procurators: a Iulius [] during the reign of Elagabalus (ad
21822); M. Iulius Macer in ad 228; Nicoma[chus] in ad 229; Co[ss]itianus
Firmus in ad 248; and an unknown procurator, possibly during the reign of
Valerian and Gallienus.176 In none of the inscriptions is the full procuratorial
title given. As the altars to Terra Mater were mostly set up by vilici oYcinae
ferrariae in conjunction with the procurators or under their oversight, one
may conclude that these procurators carried administrative responsibility for
the iron mines around Ljubija. Given the existence of a conductor ferrariarum
at Ljubija, it is likely that these equestrian oYcials bore the title procurator
ferrariarum.
However, it is diYcult to delimit the geographical area in which these
procurators operated. The votive inscriptions indicate that the procurators
either supervised the erection of altars to Terra Mater (sub cura illius) or
commissioned them, suggesting their frequent presence at Ljubija. Their
responsibilities thus might have been restricted to the local mines only.
However, bearing in mind the example of Iulius Agathopus, the conductor
ferrariarum Pannoniarum itemque transmarinarum attested at Ljubija, the
geographical scope of the procuratorship may not have been limited to
Ljubija, but included other iron mines throughout Pannonia, perhaps even
other Danubian provinces (cf. 6.1.3.4).
The inscriptions at Ljubija and surrounds provide us with the following list
of conductores and procuratores ferrariarum:
C. Iulius Agathopus conductor ferrariarum (Mursa: ad 201
Pannoniarum itemque trans-
marinarum)
T. Flavius Verecundus procurator Augg. ad 209
Iulius[] procurator c. ad 21822
M. Iulius Macer procurator Aug. ad 228
Nic[o]ma[chus] procurator Aug. ad 229

175
AE 1958, 63 ILJug 157 (Ljubija). T. Flavius Verecundus is perhaps identical with his
namesake, a centurio legionis XIIII Geminae from Savaria based at Carnuntum (CIL III 4416),
cf. Fitz 19935: 747, no. 433a 629, with further bibliography.
176
Iulius [-]: AE 1973: 412 ILJug 778 (Ljubija), cf. Fitz 19935: 1089 f., no.718. M. Iulius
Macer: AE 1958: 64 ILJug 158 (Ljubija), cf. PXaum 1982: 122; Fitz 19935: 1092, no. 724.
Nicoma[chus]: AE 1973: 414 ILJug 781 (Ljubija), cf. PXaum 1982: 122; Fitz 19935: 1092 f.,
no. 725. Co[ss]itianus Firmus: CIL III 13240 ILJug 161 (Prijedor), cf. PXaum 19601: 1062;
PXaum 1982: 122; Fitz 19935: 1096, no. 733. Anonymus: CIL III 13329 ILJug 162 (Brisevo).
PXaum 19601: 1062; PXaum 1982: 122; Fitz 19935: 1097, no. 736.
138 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations
Co[ss]itianus Fir[m]us procurator Augg. ad 248
N. N. procurator Valerian/Gallienus?

In the light of the numbers of inscriptions recording equestrian procurators at

Ljubija/Prijedor and at Domavium it is very likely that the above list and the
list of procuratores metallorum/argentariarum for Pannonia and Dalmatia are
mutually exclusive. Thus, one may tentatively propose that the iron mines in
the vicinity of Ljubijaperhaps together with other ferrariae in Pannonia and
beyondformed part of an administrative branch diVerent from the one run
by the equestrian oYcials documented at Domavium.
It is not possible to determine on current evidence whether the iron mines
had been separately managed early on in the history of the province or
whether a separation from the administration of other metalla took place at
a later time. Even though the earliest altar to Terra Mater at Ljubija originates
in ad 201 and procuratorial oversight of the iron mines there is attested
throughout the Wrst half of the third century ad, that does not mean the
procuratorship did not exist prior to 201. In this context a further inscription
is of interest: Flavius Verus Metrobalanus, procurator Augusti and praepositus
splendidissimus vectigalis ferrariarum had an altar set up at Siscia in Pannonia
Superior by Asclepiades, the arcarius stationis Siscianae, either during the
reign of Commodus or Septimius Severus.177 As Metrobalanus title clearly
indicates he was in charge of the vectigal levied on iron mines. Again, no
closer geographical speciWcations are given. Based on the inscription of
a conductor fer(rariarum) N(oricarum) P(annoniarum) D(almatarum)
from Hohenstein in Noricum, Andras Mocsy concluded that Metrobalanus
procuratorial post also covered the vectigal from iron mines in these
three provinces.178 A parallel might be seen in the post of procurator ad
vectigal ferrariarum Gallicarum, responsible for the vectigal on iron mines
in the provinces of Gaul (cf. 4.1.12). As yet, there is no evidence to
conWrm this view and the activities of the procurator and praepositus vectigalis
ferrariarum may have been limited to Pannonia only. Be that as it may, the
ferrariae of Pannonia, and perhaps Dalmatia and other provinces (cf. 6.1.3.4),
were administered separately from the other mines, perhaps as early as
the 180s.
Provided the preceding line of argument is correct, this observation coin-
cides with the change in title recorded for the mines in Pannonia and

177
CIL III 3953 ILS 3094, cf. PIR2 F 396; PXaum 19601: 1064; Dobo 1968: 180, no. 283;
Fitz 1972: 224 f.; Fitz 19935: 738, no. 422.
178
Mocsy 1962: 594.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 139

Dalmatia from procurator metallorum to procurator argentariarum during the

later years of Commodus reign. This coincidence thus may reXect an exclu-
sion of iron mines from the tasks of the procurator metallorum for the three
provinces.179

4.1.10.3. Procuratores argentariarum Pannonicarum, and a procurator

argentariarum Delmaticarum
Three procuratores argentariarum Pannonicarum, in charge of the silver mines
in Pannonia, are known before the reign of Marcus Aurelius. M. Antonius
Fabianus is known from an inscription at Viminacium as procurator argen-
tariarum Pannonicarum, a post he probably held during the Wrst half of the
second century ad.180 An inscription from Attaleia in Pamphylia furthermore
records L. Creperius Paulus tenure of this procuratorship, perhaps between
146 and 150.181 L. Septi[] Petro[nianus], was appointed to the post of
procurator argentariarum Pannonicarum at some point after 143, probably
as successor to Creperius Paulus.182 Until Marcus Aurelius reign, when the
Wrst procurator metallorum Pannonicorum et Dalmaticorum is documented,
the Pannonian silver mines were supervised by their own equestrian procur-
ator. Apart from the inscriptions at Domavium for the silver mines of both
provinces, a further inscription names a [procurator] arg(entariarum) Delma-
tica[rum].183 Based on the titulature, PXaum is probably right in dating him
to the period before the reign of Marcus Aurelius. A further procurator for the
mines of Dalmatia(?) may be attested in a fragmentary inscription from
Glamoc. However, the title of the former mining procurator, ex pro
[cura]j[to]re metallorum [], is not given in full nor can the inscription
__
be dated.184 Consequently, one may hypothesise that the (silver-) mines in
Dalmatia and Pannonia each had two separate procuratorial posts attached to
them during the mid-second century.

179
The speciWcs of this alteration remain obscure, as the exact responsibilities of a conduc-
tor ferrariarum or a praepositus vectigalis ferrariarumwhich might well be mutually exclu-
siveare unknown.
180
AE 1905: 152 ILS 9019. On the date of Fabianus career, cf. PXaum 19601: 3524, 978,
no. 150; Dobo 1968: 178, no. 278; Fitz 1972: 219 f.; PXaum 1978: 146, no. 2; Fitz 19935: 716 f.,
no. 393; France 2001: 18491.
181
AE 1915: 46 RHP 72. On dating Paulus career, cf. PIR2 C 1571; PXaum 19601: 3457,
no. 146; Dobo 1968: 178, no. 277; Fitz 1972: 218, no. 1; Devijver 197680: 306 f., no. 255; Fitz
19935: 404, 717, no. 394.
182
AE 1958: 156 (Caesarea/Mauretania) with Leveau 1973: 161. On the date of Petronianus
procuratorship, cf. PXaum 19601: 9758, no. 146 bis; Dobo 1968: 469, no. 13; Fitz 1972: 220 f.,
no. 3; Devijver 197680: 89 f., no. 104; Fitz 19935: 722 f., no. 399.
183
CIL III 1273912740 AE 1948: 243 ILJug 83 (Tegare, 10 km east of Srebrenica, mid-
2nd cent. ad?).
184
ILJug 1655 (Glamoc), with D. Sergejevski, GZM 39, 1927: 260 fn. 9.
140 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

The title of Ti. Claudius Proculus Cornelianus, procurator metallorum

Pannonicorum et Dalmaticorum, is regarded as demonstrating uniWcation of
the various mining districts in Pannonia and Dalmatia under the supervision
of one procurator metallorum at the beginning of Marcus Aurelius reign.185
The epigraphic material does not provide any information on the separate
existence of the procuratorships for the argentariae Pannonicae or argentariae
Delmaticae after the mid-second century, which in turn supports the notion
of a uniWed mining administration. The written sources leave us in the dark
on the particulars of this measure instituted during Marcus Aurelius reign.
Provided our interpretation of the changes in titles, i.e. from proc. metallorum
to proc. argentariarum of both provinces, is correct, the management of iron
mines in Pannonia and perhaps in Dalmatia as well, was excluded from the
functions of the procurator for Pannonian and Dalmatian silver mines as
early as the 180s.

4.1.11. Procuratores ferrariarum in Gaul?

In his landmark study on procuratorial posts in equestrian careers, Hans-
Georg PXaum provided a list of procuratores ferrariarum Galliarum. He
believed that at least nine procuratores held this oYce of centenarian rank at
Lugdunum/mod. Lyon.186 His theory seems to be corroborated by two
inscribed monuments of tabularii (rationis) ferrariarum at Lyon, and by an
inscribed statuary base at Lyon honouring Attius Alcimus Felicianus, one of
PXaums procuratores ferrariarum Galliarum, in the early third century. In
his inscription, however, Felicianus procuratorial title is only given as proc-
urator ferrariarum without an attributed toponym.187 Moreover, the inscribed
honoriWc monument of Abbir Cella in Africa for C. Attius Alcimus Felicianus,
also fails to provide a geographic area for the iron-mining procuratorship he
held.188 Based on the attestation of Attius Alcimus Felicianus at Lyon, it was
assumed that the title procurator ferrariarum, without any closer geographical
indication, must refer to a procuratorship held in Gaul, irreverent of where
the inscription was set up. Hence, a whole series of inscriptions naming

185
Fitz 19935: 404 f. For a diVerent view cf. Dusanic 1977: 67.
186
PXaum 19601: 1053; PXaum 1982: 119, Sablayrolles 1989: 158.
187
CIL III 1797 (Lugdunum). PXaum 19601: 8439, no 327; PXaum 1978: 16972, no. 2.
188
CIL VIII 23948 (Abbir Cella/Henchir en-Naam, Africa procos); cf. also CIL VIII 822
12345 23963 ILTun 741 (Bou Cha) cf. also cf. PXaum 1978: 16972.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 141

procuratores ferrariarum of centenarian rank were held to be iron-mining

procurators in Gaul.189 PXaum provides the following list:190
C. Caelius Martialis procurator ferrariarum c. ad 112
Publilius Memorialis [procurator] Augusti ( . . . ) Trajan
ferrariarum [-
T. Statilius Optatus procurator Augusti ferrariarum Hadrian
T. Petronius Priscus procurator Augusti ferrariarum ad 11793
Q. Domitius Marsianus procurator Augusti ad ferrarias c. ad 175
C. Iulius Silvanus procurator Augusti (Lugdunum) ad 198209
Melanio
M. Cosconius Fronto procurator Augustorum duorum ad ad 198209
vectigal ferrariarum Gallicarum
Domitius Antigonus [procurator fe]rrariar(um) [- ad 21218
C. Attius Alcimus procurator ferrariarum (Lugdunum) c. ad 231
Felicianus
As can be easily seen from the list, the title procurator ferrariarum Galliarum
is not directly attested in this form, but is merely a plausible hypothesis by
PXaum. Only M. Cosconius Fronto provides a full title for his post: procurator
Aug(ustorum duorum) ad vectig(al) ferr(ariarum) Gallic(arum).191 In com-
parison to other procuratorships listed in inscriptions which detail the careers
of equestrian oYcials, the absence of a geographical description from the title
procurator ferrariarum is suspicious. A reappraisal of the evidence thus
seems necessary.
As stated above, the epigraphic record at Lugdunum oVers evidence for
imperial oYcials involved in the administration of iron mines during the
second century. An Appianus, libertus Augusti and tabularius rationis ferrar-
iarum, set up a honoriWc monument for C. Iulius Celsus, Wnancial procurator
for Lugdunensis and Aquitania. Celsus may have held this post around ad
13545.192 Given Appianus commissioned an inscribed monument for the
Wnancial procurator, it appears likely that the latter was his superior. Conse-
quently, the ratio ferrariarum was possibly administered within the provincial
oYces under the supervision of the Wnancial procurator Iulius Celsus
rather than being a separate bureau created speciWcly for the mining

189
PXaum 19601: 82 f., 291, 558, 707, 734 f.
190
PXaum 19601: 1053; PXaum 1982: 119.
191
CIL X 7584 (p. 995) ILS 1359 (Caralis), cf. also CIL X 7583 (Caralis). CIL X 7860
(Forum Traiani). PXaum 1978: 138; PXaum 1982: 119.
192
CIL XIII 1808. The monument is dated by an additional inscription commemorating the
admission of Iulius Celsus son, Maximianus, into the senatorial order under Antoninus Pius,
cf. Hirschfeld 1905: 157; PXaum 19601: 2537, no. 106 bis (135).
142 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

administration.193 The inscribed funerary monument of a further tabularius

ferrariarum at Lyon, one Aurelius Calocaerus, commissioned during the
period of Marcus Aurelius or the Severans, provides no insights into his
administrative aYliation.194 Apart from the doubts arising over the existence
of an independent iron-mining bureau at Lugdunum, none of the tabularii-
inscriptions oVers a clue to the geographical location of the ferrariae in
question. This may be explained by the fact that its readers, the inhabitants
of Lugdunum, certainly knew which ferrariae were meant. Based on the
inscribed monument set up by the tabularius Appianus for the Wnancial
procurator for Lugdunensis and Aquitania, one may assume that the iron
mines in both provinces were probably covered by the ratio ferrariarum. There
appears to be no further evidence at Lyon for subaltern oYcials (librarii,
dispensatores, arcarii, etc.) associated with the administration of mines. In
comparison with the gold-mining administration at Ampelum or with other
spheres of provincial administration run by equestrian or freedmen procur-
ators, the epigraphic record at Lugdunum provides hardly any information
about the iron-mining administration allegedly based there.195 This calls into
question the notion of an independent iron-mining bureau for Gaul located
at Lyon.
The honorary monument for the procurator ferrariarum Attius Alcimus
Felicianus is the only inscribed monument explicitly honouring a procurator
of iron mines at Lugdunum. It was commissioned by Cogitatius Iuvenis,
beneWciarius legati legionis I Minerviae [ [Alexandrinae?] ] for his patronus
Felicianus.196 Cogitatius was the beneWciarius of the legionary legate of I
Minervia at Bonn and as such was not directly attached to Felicianus. The
nature of Cogitatius patronal relation with Felicianuswhether on a per-
sonal or professionel levelis not clariWed by the text. The location of the
inscribed monument at Lyon appears to imply that Felicianus was or had
been present at Lyon in the stated function as procurator ferrariarum. What-
ever brought about the erection of this honorary monumentit does not
provide unambiguous evidence for a permanent residence of the iron-mining
procurator at Lyon.

193
Compare EE VIII, no. 26: Aurelius Rufus, tabul(arius) provinc(iae) Lusit(aniae) rat(ionis)
pat(rimonii), according to Boulvert 1970: 126, a tabularius in the oYce of the Lusitanian
Wnancial procurator with the task of dealing with the emperors patrimonium single handedly;
Sachers 1931: 196668; Haensch 1997: 492.
194
CIL XIII 1825.
195
Cf. Boulvert 1970, passim; Haensch 1997, passim.
196
CIL XIII 1797 CBFIR 27; On beneWciarii and their patroni, cf. Nelis-Clement 2000:
annexe 11, 4279.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 143

It is striking that none of the other procurators of PXaums list have yet
surfaced in the epigraphic record at Lyonwith the exception of C. Iulius
Silvanus Melanio. As procurator Augusti he set up a votive monument in Lyon,
however, without providing any indication in what procuratorial function he
had been at Lyon.197 Furthermore, none of the other titles of the listed
procuratores ferrariarum (with the exception of M. Cosconius Frontos)
allow an association with ferrariae Gallicae. One of the earliest documented
of these procurators is Publilius Memorialis. Memorialis inscription from
Forum Clodii does not give any indication as to where he held his procur-
atorship of the iron mines ( . . . item ferrar[iarum] j). PXaum simply as-
sumed that after holding two sexagenarian posts, i.e. procurator Augusti in
Africa and procurator M[inicia]e, Memorialis must have reached a centenarian
iron-mining procuratorship, most likely the one in Gaul.198 The honoriWc
monument in Corinth for C. Caelius Martialis places the position of procur-
ator ferrariarum after his tenure as procurator provinciae Achaiae.199 Martialis
reached the procuratorship of the province of Achaia probably shortly after
the second Dacian war of Trajan (ad 1056), before becoming procurator
ferrariarum.200 His career does not suggest that the position or he himself was
aYliated with the western provinces or with Gaul, and thus can not be used to
argue for his tenure of the centenarian iron-mining procuratorship. In an
inscription from Bulla Regia in Africa, dating to the reign of Marcus Aurelius,
Q. Domitius Marsianus carries the title of procurator ad ferrarias.201 As he
held this post after being procurator Augusti ad census in Gallia accipiendos
provinciarum Belgicae etc. and before being promoted to procurator patrimo-
nii provinciae Narbonensis, Sablayrolles assumed that Marsianus remained in
Gaul to head the administrative bureau for iron mines at Lugdunum.202
Sablayrolles argued the same thing in the case of T. Statilius Optatus. Given
the geographical proximity of Optatus posts as procurator Augusti ad census
Britanniae and procurator Augusti ad census Gallorum with that of procurator
ferrariarum, Optatus must have been in charge of the iron mines in Gaul.203

197
CIL XIII 1729, cf. PXaum 19601: 734 f., no. 276; PXaum 1982: 67 f., no. 276; Abascal &
Alfoldy 1998: 163.
198
CIL XI 7554 ILS 9195 (Forum Clodii, Etruria). His career has been dated to the reign of
Trajan, based on an inscription (CIL X 8038) from Corsica from the year ad 77 or 79 naming a
homonymperhaps his fatheras procurator of Corsica, cf. PXaum 1978: 135 f., no. 1, 140.
199
AE 1934: 2 Corinth VIII /III 63, no. 135.
200
PXaum 19601: 170, no. 74; PXaum 1978: 136, no. 2.
201
AE 1960: 167 AE 1962: 183 (Bulla Regia).
202
PXaum 1971; PXaum 1978: 11524; PXaum 1982: 119; Sablayrolles 1989: 158.
203
Sablayrolles 1989: 158, cf. CIL VI 31863 41272; cf. PXaum 19601: 28992, no. 119;
PXaum 1978: 1368, no. 3. Attius Alcimus Felicianus also held the procuratorships for the
144 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

Yet, following the oYce of procurator ferrariarum, Optatus did not remain in
Gaul, but was appointed procurator ad patrimonium, procurator hereditatium,
procurator a [rationibus?] and Wnally praefectus annonae.204 All these oYces
were held in Rome, and one thus might reach the opposite conclusion,
namely that the post of procurator ferrariarum was also held in the capital
of the empire. If one follows Sablayrolles, the career of T. Petronius Priscus
sheds an additional light on this matter. After having served his tres militiae,
Priscus was promoted to procurator Aug(usti) ferrariarum et annonae Ost-
i(ensi)s, according to a second-century inscription found at Ostia.205 Based on
the conjunction et Sablayrolles argued that Priscus held both posts at Rome/
Ostia.206 There is therefore only ambivalent evidence for an independent
procurator of the iron mines at Lyon and for the presence of a procurator
ferrariarum there prior to the reign of Septimius Severus. This, together with
the absence of a geographical area in the procurators title, may indicate that
the oYce of procurator ferrariarum documented in these inscriptions was held
in or near Rome.207
For the other entries in PXaums list of procuratores ferrariarum Gal-
liarum the epigraphic evidence is inconclusive: the lines following the term
ferrar[iarum] in Publilius Memorialis inscription from Forum Clodii once
may have provided a clear geographical indication, but they are now
destroyed.208 Similarly precarious is our knowledge of the career of Domitius
Antigonus. As legatus legionis XXII Primigeniae he set up an inscribed monu-
ment honouring the emperor Elagabal at Mogontiacum/mod. Mainz around
ad 220 and detailing his own career. Apart from other posts, he is listed
holding the oYce of [procurator fe]rrariar(um)[].209 Domitius Antigonus
tenure as procurator of the iron mines has been dated to the years between ad

quadragesima Galliarum and for the annona provinciae Narbonensis prior to being appointed
procurator ferrariarum, cf. CIL VIII 822 12345 23963 ILTun 741 and CIL VIII 23948, with
PXaum 1978: 16972.
204
PXaum 1978: 137 f.
205
CIL XIV 4459 ILS 1442 (Ostia), cf. PXaum 19601: 558, no. 212; PXaum 1978: 138,
no. 4.
206
Sablayrolles 1989: 158.
207
Ostia seems a likely candidate as a hub of Roman iron-mining administration: a votive
inscription commissioned by Hilarus, servus socior(um) vect(igalis) ferr(ariarum) between ad
102117 at Ostia and the Wnd of an undated tessera nummularia inscribed with soc(iorum)
ferr(ariarum) in Rome corroborate this assumption (cf. AE 1924: 108 CIL XIV 4326 [Ostia];
AE 1928: 17a [Rome]). Moreover, a lead tessera naming a statio ferrariarum fori Ostiensis further
highlights the importance of Ostia (CIL XIV 4326, p. 773).
208
CIL XI 7554 ILS 9195.
209
AE 1966: 262 AE 1965: 242, cf. Alfoldy 1965b : 18791, with Nachtrage in Alfoldy
1987a: 366 f.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 145

212 and 218, however the lines referring to the geographical region in which
he served have been lost.210
In consequence, only one procurator ad vectigal ferrariarum for Gaul can be
identiWed beyond doubt, to which one may tentatively add the procuratores
attested at Lyon. These procurators constitute a chronologically and geo-
graphically consistent group of procurators which can be linked with the
ferrariae Gallicae during the reign of the Severans. As for the preceding
procuratores ferrariarum, a link with Gaul cannot be established (cf. 6.1.3.4).
Provided the above observations are correct, this leaves us with the following
list:
procuratores ferrariarum in Ostia/Rome (?)
C. Caelius Martialis procurator ferrariarum Trajan
T. Statilius Optatus procurator Augusti Hadrian
ferrariarum
T. Petronius Priscus procurator Augusti mid-2nd c.?
ferrariarum (Ostia)
Q. Domitius Marsianus procurator Augusti ad Marcus Aurelius
ferrarias
procurator ferrariarum Galliarum
M. Cosconius Fronto procurator Augustorum ad 198209
duorum ad vectigal
ferrariarum Gallicarum
(C. Iulius Silvanus procurator Augusti ad 198209)
Melanio (Lugdunum)
C. Attius Alcimus procurator ferrariarum Severus Alexander
Felicianus (Lugdunum)
procuratores ferrariarum for unknown areas
[.] Publilius Memorialis [procurator] Augusti ( . . . ) Trajan
ferrariarum [
Domitius Antigonus [procurator fe]rrariar(um) [ ad 21218

4.1.12. Equestrians, Freedmen, and Procuratorial Titles

Following the study of individual mining and quarrying procuratorships, it
is necessary to investigate the social status of the oYce-holders. As for
the incumbents of quarrying procuratorships, their social status was

210
Alfoldy 1965b : 191; PXaum 1982: 65 f., no. 249.
146 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

homogeneous. The procurators recorded at the quarries were imperial

freedmen, either directly responsible for an individual quarry, a quarrying
district (e.g. the Egyptian Eastern Desert), or a patrimonial district (e.g.
provincia Phrygia) to which the management of quarrying ventures was
perhaps added. In the case of Karystos the supervision of the quarries
appears to have been the responsibility of the equestrian patrimonial pro-
curators of Achaia, Minicius Sanctus, and C. Cerialis.211 As yet, the only
equestrian oYcial recorded as being directly in charge of quarrying oper-
ations is the

, who was in control of all quarries in Egypt
during the years 1418 ad. The

is not attested further and
seems to have eventually been replaced by procuratores metallorum of
freedmen status (cf. 4.1.2).
As regards the social status of persons holding mining procuratorships, one
can discern considerable diVerences particularly between the two main min-
ing regions of the empire. Procurators of equestrian rank are recorded mainly
in the mining districts or territories of the Danube provinces, increasingly so
from the mid-second century onwards. In the case of the gold-mining ad-
ministration at Ampelum in Dacia, imperial freedman are replaced by mem-
bers of the ordo equester after the Marcomannic wars. The former had held
this oYce from Trajans reign onwards. Imperial freedmen continued to hold
the oYce of subprocurator at Ampelum after the Marcomannic wars, though
obviously as subordinates to the equestrian procurators (cf. 4.1.9). This
change of status of the procurators of the Dacian aurariae seems to have
been unique, as similar alterations in social status of the oYce holders are not
clearly detectable. The freedmen procurators known from inscriptions at
Socanica may have been replaced by equestrians (such as the procurator
mm(etallorum) D(ar)d(anicorum?) dating to the mid-third century), after
the reign of Antoninus Pius at the earliest. The validity of this observation,
however, is called in question by the absence of any precise procuratorial titles
of the incumbents. In fact, it can not even be stated with any certainty whether
the freedman in question were mining procurators or imperial oYcials at
all (cf. 4.1.10). Alterations in social status are not otherwise attested: the
mid-second century procurators for the silver mines of Pannonia and for
Dalmatia, respectively, are all of equestrian rank. The posts of procurator
metallorum/argentariarum for Pannonia and Dalmatia (which were probably
established after the merging of the respective oYces for Dalmatia and for
Pannonia), procurator ferrariarum and procurator Augusti praepositus splendi-
dissimus vectigalis ferrariarum, were also held by equestrians. Beyond the

211
App. Nos. 604, 618; PIR2 C 670, M 628.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 147

Danubian provinces the evidence for equestrians holding procuratorial min-

ing oYces is limited to the procurator ad vectigal ferrariarum Gallicarum and
the other centenarian procuratores ferrariarum (cf. 4.1.12).
The social status of mining procurators of the Iberian Peninsula stands in
marked contrast to their equestrian counterparts in the Danubian provinces.
The procurators known from the gold-mining areas in north-western Spain
are exclusively imperial freedmen, as are the mining procurators recorded in
Lusitania, such as the procuratores metallorum Vipascensium, or the mining
procurators in Roman Baetica (cf. 4.1.7). The Sardinian mining procurator,
who was directly subordinate to the presidial procurator of the island, must
also be added to the list of freedmen procurators (cf. 4.1.8).
At Wrst glance, the evidence assembled for the Danubian provinces points
towards a marked increase in the appointment of equestrian oYcials to
existing or previously unattested mining procuratorships from the mid-
second century onwards. Bearing in mind our lacunose source material (not
least the result of local epigraphic habits), this phenomenon reXects the
general trend in appointment policy, observable throughout the imperial
administration during the second century ad, towards replacing imperial
freedmen with equestrians or relegating freedmen procurators to the position
of deputy to the equestrian oYce holder.212 Remarkably, this supposed trend
is not mirrored in the known evidence from the Iberian peninsula, where
freedmen mining procurators are attested for most of the second century ad,
particularly in north-western Spain.
This signiWcant diVerence in appointment policy requires explanation. One
approach lies in the comparison of procuratorial titles: the titles of equestrian
oYce holders from the Danube provinces reXect the magnitude of the organ-
izational task at hand. Setting aside the procuratores aurariarum at Ampelum,
the equestrian procuratores documented at Domavium and elsewhere super-
vised the metalla and later the argentariae of Pannonia and Dalmatia, while
the procurators documented at Ljubija perhaps had charge of the ferrariae of
one or more Danubian provinces. As regards the western provinces, the
procurator ad vectigal ferrariarum apparently supervised the iron mines in
all of Gaul. The lacunose inscription at Domavium, which charts the career
of C. Iulius Silvanus Melanio, provides additional insights. The detailing
of Melanios mining procuratorships in lines 7 f. is of particular interest: . . .
proc(uratori) Aug(usti) [fe]rr(ariarum) et j arg(entariarum)(?) per prouin/-
__ __ _
[cias] XXIII. . . . Provided the reading is correct, Melanio, quite obviously,
did not hold twenty-three diVerent iron- or silver-mining procuratorships

212
Eck 1997a: 8894.
148 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

during his career. Some of these mining procuratorships likely included two
or more provinces, as is the case with the procurator metallorum Pannoni-
corum et Dalmaticorum, the procurator Augusti praepositus vectigalis ferrar-
iarum or the procurator ad vectigal ferrariarum Gallicarum.213 In particular,
the administration of iron mines was usually divided into vast superprovin-
cial entities, as can be seen in the titles of conductores ferrariarum, eg.
conductor fer(arriarum) N(oricarum) P(annoniarum) D(almatarum);
manceps ferrariar(um) [-]I et provinciae Raetiae itemque Daciarum trium;
c(onductor) f(errariarum) Pannonicar(um) itemque provinciar(um) transmar-
inarum.214 One thus might venture to conclude that equestrian mining
procuratorships in general included one, two or more provinces within
which metalla or a certain category of mines (e.g. ferrariae, argentariae),
were under their control (cf. 6.1.3.4).
In contrast to these equestrian procuratorships, the titles of freedman
procurators attested on the Iberian peninsula do not indicate the same
geographical expanse.215 The titles of procurator metallorum Vipascensium,
procurator metalli Alboc(rarensis), or procurator montis Mariani identify spe-
ciWc localities of limited geographical scope. We may thus assume that the
other freedman procurators recorded on the Iberian peninsula were also put
in charge of mining districts or territories of similar size. There is no evidence
to date for the existence of a procuratorial post which was responsible for
either all or only one certain category of mines within one or all provinces of
the Iberian peninsula.216 The dearth of evidence for a supra-provincial min-
ing authority might be explained by the fact that in the case of the gold-
mining zones in northwestern Spain, for example, the Wnancial procurator
Asturiae et Callaeciae was ultimately responsible for mining operations in
his area. This is suggested by the presence of beneWciarii of the Wnancial
procurator in the mining zones of the Duerna valley. As some scholars
have argued, the Wnancial procurator of Lusitania (like his colleague in
Asturia and Callaecia) may have exerted similar power over the metallum
Vipascense and the mining procurator there (cf. 4.1.7). Hence, the freedmen
procurators of mining districts on the Iberian peninsula in all probability
answered to the equestrian Wnancial or perhaps even the patrimonial proc-
urator of their province. The subordination of the freedman procurator to the
equestrian Wnancial or presidial procurator may also be attested in Sardinia:

213
Abascal & Alfoldy 1998: 162 f.
214
CIL III 4809 ILS 1467 ILLPRON 151 (Hohenstein/Noricum); Nuber 1977: 233 f. and
Nuber 1985: 131 (Augsburg/Raetia); Bulat 1989: 36 (Mursa/Pannonia)
215
Mrozek 1968: 48, 54.
216
Andreau 1989: 98; Domergue 1990: 291; contra: Schonbauer 1929: 103; Tackholm 1937:
102 f.; Mrozek 1968: 55.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 149

the procurator metallorum et praediorum commissioned a votive monument

honouring his likely superior, the procurator Augusti and praefectus provinciae
Sardiniae (cf. 4.1.8). Prior to the Marcomannic wars, a similar arrangement
might have been in place in Dacia: there, beneWciarii procuratoris were prob-
ably on secondment from the Wnancial procurator of Dacia Apulensis to the
freedmen mining procurators at Ampelum. It thus appears likely that freed-
men mining procurators were supervised by the equestrian Wnancial procur-
ators of the province. With the replacement of the freedmen procurator at
Ampelum by an equestrian oYcial, the subordination of the procurator at
Ampelum to the Wnancial procurator of Dacia Apulensis may have also come
to an end.217 It is not possible to determine on the basis of available evidence
whether the replacement of imperial freedmen by equestrian oYcials went
hand in hand with a geographical expansion of procuratorial tasks to include
all auraria within the Dacian provinces.218
The picture which emerges from the above analysis is that there were two
administrative systems working side by side which controlled imperial mines:
(1) freedmen procurators managing regional mining zones under general
supervision of the presidial, Wnancial, or patrimonial procurator responsible;
(2) equestrian procurators in charge of various metalla or speciWed mines
(ferrariae, argentariae) within one or more provinces.

4 . 2 . S U B A LT E R N O F F I C I A L S

4.2.1. Subaltern OYcials in Imperial Mines

The epigraphic record from the administrative headquarters at Ampelum in
Dacia provides abundant evidence for imperial freedmen and slaves working
in the mining administration, oVering us a relatively complete picture of the
possible composition of this mining oYcium. The personnel employed at the
mines were predominantly members of the familia Caesaris: an inscribed

217
Although the subordination of equestrian oYcials under an equestrian prefect is docu-
mented for Roman Egypt (cf. Bowman 1996a: 252 f.; Bowman 1996b : 66 f.), there is no evidence
to suggest that this was also the case with equestrian mining procurators, cf. Eck 1997a: 142.
218
The sequence of known procuratorial titles from Ampelum which would possibly docu-
ment such an change is of no help as the titles lack any geographical indication. The inscription
(CIL III 1297 IDR III/3, 314, cf. Noeske 1977: 352, AMP 12) displaying tab(ularius)
aur(rariarum) Dacicarum (from which one might reconstruct the full title) can not be precisely
dated. We thus do not know whether the freedman incumbents were called procuratores
aurariarum Dacicarum or whether this title began to only be used when the post was Wlled
with equestrian oYcials.
150 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

monument honouring the empress Annia Lucilla was commissioned by the

liberti et familia and the leguli aurariarum in ad 165/6.219 A dispensator
aurariarum, Suriacus, provided a votive altar for Ceres Augusta and dedicated
it to the procurator A. Senecius [-] Contianus(?) in January 215, and another
dispensator, Callistus, commissioned an altar for Iuppiter Optimus Maximus
Aeternus Conservator, probably sometime after the Marcomannic wars.220
Another votive monument for Isis, which was erected for the beneWt of the
mining procurator(?) M. Iulius Apollinaris, names a Verus and a Romanus,
both vilici.221 Besides vilici, a number of tabularii surface in the epigraphic
record at Ampelum: the imperial freedman Neptunalis, a tabularius aurar-
iarum Dacicarum, commissioned a votive inscription and set up a gravestone
to his wife Trophima. She had been manumitted by a M. Ulpius, probably at
some point during the second half of the second century ad.222 Furthermore,
a certain Zmaragdus, tabularius (aurariarum), erected a votive altar to Deus
Aeternus, together with his wife Aurelia Urbica and his daugther Matrona,
probably no earlier than the reign of Marcus Aurelius.223 A further tabularius,
[Eutyche]s(?), had a sanctuary built at an unknown date for Aesculapius,
whereas a Moschus, imperial freedman and tabularius, commissioned an altar
to Fortuna Domestica, together with his wife Aurelia Asclepiodote; as the
nomen gentile of Moschus freeborn wife suggests, this occurred at the end of
the second or the beginning of the third century.224
The tabularii aurariarum at Ampelum were supported by a number of
subaltern clerks: Fuscinus, ab instrumentis tabularii, had a funerary stone
engraved for his wife Sossia Sabina, possibly sometime after the Marcomannic
Wars.225 A further inscription also records a commentariis from the late second
or early third century ad: Liberalis, a (libertus) Augustorum duorum a commen-
tariis, together with his wife Aelia Victoria, commissioned an inscribed funer-
ary monument for his father Syrillio, a former aedituus.226 Iustinus, subsequens
librariorum, is documented on an inscribed funerary stone set up by his
colleague(?), Tertius, in the second half of the second century ad whereas two

219
CIL III 1307 IDR III/3, 283 ( AMP 4), cf. Noeske 1977: 306, 349 with commentary.
220
AE 1959: 308 IDR III/3, 292. CIL III 1301 ILS 3014 IDR III/3, 289 AE 1965: 34
AE 2003: 1512 ( AMP 14), cf. Noeske 1977: 310 f., 353, see commentary for date. Callistus is
also known from a further inscription to Iuppiter Optimus Maximus Aeternus Conservator at
Apulum (CIL III 1085).
221
CIL III 7837 ( AMP 11), cf. Noeske 1977: 3068, 352.
222
CIL III 1297 ILS 1594 IDR III/3, 314 ( AMP 12). CIL III 1313 ( AMP 12a), cf.
Noeske 1977: 309, 352.
223
CIL III 1286 IDR III/3, 288 ( AMP 13), cf. Noeske 1977: 309, 352.
224
AE 1959: 306 IDR III/3, 280 ( AMP 19), cf. Noeske 1977: 354. AE 1992: 1471.
225
CIL III 1315 IDR III/3, 364 ( AMP 17), cf. Noeske 1977: 309 f., 354.
226
AE 1959: 305 IDR III/3, 365 ( AMP 18), cf. Noeske 1977: 310, 311, 354.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 151

adiutores tabulariorum are named in two undated votive altars at Ampelum.227

Additional imperial slaves and freedmen also appear in epigraphic documents
at Ampelum, but their function is not stated.228 The Roman army stationed
two clerks at Ampelum: M. Aurelius Antoninus, soldier of legio XIII Gemina
and a librarius, is known by his gravestone; P. Helvius Primanus, miles legionis
XIII Geminae was a librarius consularis. Helvius Primanus, and probably M.
Aurelius Antoninus as well, were seconded to the mining administration on the
orders of the governor. Noeske has dated both inscriptions to the beginning of
the third century.229 Given the diYculties in dating the inscriptions any
chronological outline must remain sketchy, as the following table shows:

procuratores dispensatores vilici auxiliary personnel

Ulpius Hermias,
lib. Aug. (Traj.)
Romanus, lib.
Aug. (M. Aur.)
Neptunalis, lib. Aug.
(mid-2nd c.), tabularius
Iustinus, verna Caes.
(2nd half 2nd c.),
subsequens librariorum
Callistus,
dispensator
(after 175)
Fuscinus, verna (after 175)
ab instrumentis tabularii
M]aximus (183/5)
L. Macrius Macer
(M. Aur./Sep. Sev.)
Avianus, lib. Aug.
(Sep. Sev.) subpro-
curator
(Continued)

227
CIL III 1314 IDR III/3, 366 ( AMP 16). AE 1944: 27 IDR III/3, 336 ( AMP 20).
CIL III 1305 IDR III/3, 323 (AMP 22), cf. Noeske 1977: 30911, 3535.
228
CIL III 1303 ILS 3382 IDR III/3, 319 (AMP 15). CIL III 1335 IDR III/3, 372
( AMP 21). CIL III 1300 IDR III/3, 358 ( AMP 23). CIL III 1333 7842 IDR III/3, 334
( AMP 24). AE 1983: 822. AE 1988: 954.
229
CIL III 1317 IDR III/3, 344 ( AMP 32); CIL III 1318 IDR III/3, 354 ( AMP 33),
cf. Noeske 1977: 310 f., 359.
152 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations
procuratores dispensatores vilici auxiliary personnel
Liberalis, lib. Augg. (M. Aur./Sep.
Sev.), a commentariis
Aelius
Sostratus (212)
A. Senecio [-]
Contianus (215)Suriacus, disp. (215)
Zmaragdus, lib. Aug. (beg. 3rd
c.), tabularius
Moschus, lib. Aug. (beg. 3rd c.),
tabularius
M. Aurelius Antoninus, miles leg.
XIII Gem. (beg. 3rd c.), librarius.
P. Helvius Primanus, miles leg.
XIII Gem. (beg. 3rd c.), librarius
consularis
Undated
(M. Iulius Apollinaris(?))Verus & Romanus
vernae Aug(?), vilici
[Eutyche]s, lib. Aug. tabularius
Leonas, lib. Aug.(?) adiutor tabu-
lariorum
[?] lib. Aug.(?) adiutor tabular-
iorum

The table provides an incomplete picture of the subaltern personnel involved in

the administration of the Dacian gold mines. The bulk of evidence appears to
date to the period following the Marcomannic wars with a peak at the
beginning of the third century. Whether or not this reXects an increase in
extractive and therefore administrative activity resulting in the demarcation of
the functions of subaltern personnel can not be answered with any certainty on
the basis of the available evidence. The increase in inscriptions of subalterns
may merely reXect a change in local epigraphic habits. Moreover, the consid-
erable amount of undatable inscriptions prohibits any conWdent statements
regarding an increase in size or functional diVerentiation of the procuratorial
staV. One may note, however, that military personnel were perhaps added to
the subalterns at Ampelum sometime during the third century.
Sadly, the discovery of a wide range of inscriptional testimonies at the
headquarters of a mining administration, such as at Ampelum, remains an
isolated occurrence. The documentation from other mining areas does not
provide suYcient material to allow for comparison. In the Danubian provinces,
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 153

for example, only few imperial slaves and freedmen can be connected with the
mining administration and only occasional Wnds yield unexpected insights: a
gravestone discovered at Salona/mod. Split was commissioned by a Felicissimus
dispesator (sic) for a Thaumastus Augusti (libertus?) commentariesis (sic) aurar-
iarum Delmatarum. The latter was associated with the administration of Dalma-
tian gold mines; both perhaps were part of the Wnancial procurators oYce based
at Salona.230 A series of inscriptions discovered at Ljubija and dating to the Wrst
half of the third century were set up by vilici oYcinae ferrariae either with or on
behalf of their conductores or procuratores Augusti: in ad 201 the vilicus Callimor-
phus honoured the conductor ferrariarum C. Iulius Agathopus and set up an
inscribed altar to Terra Mater together with a procurator Augustorum in ad 209.231
From this date on, Terra Mater regularly seems to have received an altar from the
vilicus: the vilicus oYcinae ferrariae Heliodorus provided one in ad 228, an
unknown []s, vilicus oYcinae ferrariae, in ad 229, as did the vilicus ferrariarum
Iucundus in 247/8.232 Although it is not possible to determine the signiWcance of
the change in title of vilici between 229 and 247/8, one could cautiously use the
recorded change to date a further inscription for Terra Mater: the inscribed altar
set up by vilicus oYcinae ferrariae Mercurius therefore may have preceded the altar
of Iucundus.233 At Stari Majdan/Sanski Most a number of other vilici are docu-
mented on altars dedicated to Nemesis Pia and Sedatus Augustus: a Ianuarius and
an Aurelius are the recipients of good wishes from a corpus and collegium.234 The
metalla Dardanica at Socanica in Moesia Superior have not yielded much infor-
mation on subaltern oYcials to date. The imperial freedman P. Aelius Menander, a
7 oYcinarum, commissioned a funerary stone for his wife. As Menander was a
member of the familia Caesaris the reading contrascriptor for 7 (instead of
centurio) appears more likely.235 Perhaps the primiscrinius oYcinae Raesius
Pudens, known from an inscription of Montana in Moesia Inferior, must be
included in this speciWc group of imperial clerks.236
In the vicinity of Ljubija and Prijedor in the Japra Valley, where iron mines
are situated, the inscribed altar of a Calimorphus, verna Augusti and
230
CIL III 1997 (Salona, 1st cent. ad ?), cf. Hirschfeld 1905: 154; Wilkes 1969: 272. On the
extraction of gold from Dalmatian mines, cf. Statius, Silv. 3.3.89 f.; Florus 2.25.12. On Salona as
seat of the Wnancial procurator, cf. Haensch 1997: 81, 4235.
231
AE 1973: 411 ILJug 779 (ad 201). AE 1958: 63 ILJug 157 (ad 209).
232
AE 1958: 64 ILJug 158 (Ljubija, ad 228). AE 1979: 414 ILJug 781 (Ljubija, ad 229).
CIL III 13240 ILJug 161 (Brisevo, ad 247/8).
233
CIL III 13329 ILJug 162 (Brisevo). Further inscriptions, albeit rather fragmented, might
possibly refer to vilici as well: AE 1973: 412 ILJug 778 (Ljubija, ad 211/17).
234
ILJug 775, 776 (Stari Majdan). The nature of the collegium is not known. The corpus
might have included miners (fabri ferrarii), cf. ILJug, p. 107, commentary to no. 775.
235
CIL III 14606 ILJug 1378 (Rudnica/Socanica). For further bibliography, cf. ILJug III,
p. 50 with commentary on no. 1378.
236
CIL III 14209, cf. Rankov 1983: 47; Velkov & Aleksandrov 1994: 14, no. 23.
154 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

dispensator, was discovered built into the porticus of a Christian church at

Crkvine.237 Although there is no reference made to iron mines, the dispensator
was probably connected with the mining administration of the ferrariae.
Apart from the administrative personnel at Virunum, the headquarters of
the presidial procurator, a number of imperial freedmen and slaves were
seconded to the mining areas of Noricum as well. Chrysanthus, a servus
Augusti and vicarius of emperor Claudius, and another unknown imperial
slave (De[cimus?]) set up votive inscriptions to Noreia, found at Hohenstein,
where a further votive inscription of a conductor ferrariarum was also dis-
covered.238 The administrative function of these imperial slaves is not
revealed.
Few subaltern clerks appear in the inscriptions of Lugdunum/mod. Lyon in
Gaul (cf. 4.1.11). An honoriWc inscription for the provincial procurator of
Lugdunensis and Aquitania was set up in the years ad 13545 by the imperial
freedman Appianus, tabularius rationis ferrariarum.239 Aurelius Calocaerus,
an imperial freedman, records his position of tabularius ferrariarum in a
funerary inscription dating to the end of the second century ad or later.240
Apart from a ratio ferrariarum at Lugdunum, members of the familia Caesaris
are present in few mining areas throughout Gaul, despite the abundancy of
iron-mining ventures in this province. At Villefranche-de-Rouerge, in the
Departement de lAveyron, the inscribed slab for a vilicus Zmaragdus names
the familia Caesaris of emperor Tiberius quae est in metallis.241
The known mining procurators aside, there is only marginal evidence for
administrative staV in the mining zones of the Iberian Peninsula. The lex
metallis dicta of Vipasca notes that liberti and servi Caesaris who are in oYcis
of the procurator or receive salaries, commoda, from the Roman state,
are exempted from paying entrance fees for the baths.242 However, no in-
scriptions of imperial oYcials, apart from the known procurator Beryllus,
have hitherto been discovered at Vipasca, thus severly limiting our knowledge
of the administrative personnel who assisted the procurator.243 Moreover, in
Roman Baetica hardly any subaltern oYcials from mining areas are known.
237
ILJug 765.
238
CIL III 4807, cf. Alfoldy 1969b: 25, no. 34. CIL III 4808. CIL III 4809 ILS 1467. A
further imperial slave might be attested in a very fragmentary inscription: CIL III 4822 11505,
cf. Alfoldy 1969b: 25, no. 34.
239
CIL XIII 1808, cf. Hirschfeld 1905: 157; PXaum 19601: 2537, no. 106 bis (135).
240
CIL XIII 1825.
241
AE 1892: 23 CIL XIII 1550.
242
LMD ll. 234: Excipiuntur liberti et servi [Caes(aris), qui proc(uratori)] in oYhciis erunt vel
j commoda percipient, ( . . . ).
243
AE 1908: 233, where ll. 45 have been read as vij[lici], might be a copy of the honorary
inscription for the procurator Beryllus (IRPac 121). DiVerent: Noeske 1977: 308; Lazzarini 2001:
176 f., fn. 357.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 155

The funerary stone of a Privatus, dispensator et verna Augusti in Regina/Los

Paredones near Casa de Reina (BA), c.20 km west of the Azuaga mining area,
is the only indication of a state or imperial interest in the extractive oper-
ations in this particular area of the Sierra Morena.244 A connection between
our dispensator and these local mining activities appears likely, as there is no
evidence of other economic reasons for his presence in this remote area. For
the mining area of Castulo in Hispania Tarraconensis, the inscription of a
M. Ulpius Hermeros, libertus Augusti at the El Centenillo mines seem to
suggest at least partial imperial control of mining operations there. The
inscription, however, does not give any additional information on the rank
or function of this imperial freedman.245 Inscribed tin ingots from the
Port-Vendres II shipwreck originating from Roman Baetica name a L(ucius)
Vale(rius), Aug(ustae) l(ibertus) a com(mentariis) during the reign of Claud-
ius. He may have been either located in Baetica or in Rome and was involved
in the production or import of tin(?).246

4.2.2. Subaltern OYcials in Imperial Quarries

4.2.2.1. Regular StaV
Procurators in charge of the quarries in the Egyptian Eastern Desert most
likely commanded a staV of accountants and other administrative personnel.
The tabularii of (Mons) Porphyrites and other metalla named in the inscrip-
tion of their hospitium at El-Ashmunein were presumably part of this proc-
uratorial bureau (cf. 3.2.1). Tabularii are also documented in the ostraca of
Mons Claudianus, together with an N

, tesserarius, subtesserarius,
laccarius,

 E
, and  of the
, and their assis-
tants.247N
 or dispensatores are recorded in further imperial quarries:
A d[ [isp(ensator)] ] and servus Caesaris is the only imperial oYcial who

244
CIL II2/7 981.
245
AE 1922: 9.
246
Weaver 1972: 2413, 24552; Colls, et al. 1975: 757; Colls, et al. 1977: 1118.
247
N

: O.Claud. 510, 551, 618; O.Claud.inv. 2238, 8175, cf. Cuvigny 2000a: 62 f.;
tabularius, tesserarius: O. Claud. 485, 498, 563, 576, 596; O.Claud.inv. 6483, cf. Bulow-Jacobsen
1996: 61; O.Claud.inv. 1538, cf. Cuvigny 2000a: 64 f.; subtesserarius: O.Claud.inv. 1538, cf.
Cuvigny 2000a: 64; : O.Claud. 36, 155, 156, 244, 365, 382, 41731, 433, 434,
43648, 4503, 455, 470, 474, 486, 487, 489, 4903, 497(?), 51824, 526, 527, 52931, 5335,
539, 558, 562, 570, 572, 577; O.Claud.inv. 1158, cf. Cuvigny 2000a: 58 f., 62 f., 65;

 E
:
O. Claud. 9, 22. Cuvigny 2000a: 66; laccarius, I
e
; d ;
N : O.Claud 38, 4468, 459, 461, 4635, 46984, 52039, 592; O.Claud.inv.
3229, 7366, cf. Cuvigny 2000a: 60, 66.
156 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

appears in the epigraphic record at Dokimeion.248 A further dispensator and

verna Augusti, Saturninus, is attested at Simitthus, while at Krokeai a votive
inscription to Castor and Pollux was commissioned by a dispensator Augusti,
who most likely was part of the quarrying administration at the marmor
Lacedaemonium quarries near Krokeai.249
The functional grade of vilicus is attested at Luna/mod. Carrara, not only
for members of the familia Caesaris but also for slaves of private individuals.
A vilicus Caesaris set up a small inscribed votive altar to the Nymphs near
Luna at Le Canalie/Bedizzano, perhaps between the end of the Wrst and the
mid-third century ad.250 At Luna a servus of the emperor Vespasian dedicated
an inscription to Bello.251 Both inscriptions seem to document the presence of
imperial slaves from the Flavian period. This Wts well with the evidence from
Rome, which attests tabularii rationis marmorum Lunensium during the
Flavian period. The special account was probably introduced after a sign-
iWcant increase in the demand for Lunensian marble after the Wre of Rome in
ad 64 (cf. 7.2.3).252
The  /tabellarii are a unique group of people attested quite often
in the ostraca of Mons Claudianus.253 Their basic function was to guarantee
the communications between the quarries in the Eastern Desert and the
procuratorial headquarters in the Nile valley. They therefore appear to be
partly connected with the procuratorial bureau.254 Tabellarii also appear in a
military context. They are summoned by the military curatores of the fortlets
guarding the routes to and from Mons Claudianus.255 Furthermore, a circular
dispatch of the centurio Horion during the reign of Hadrian or Antoninus
Pius orders the curatores of the way-stations to supply any help necessary to
the soldiers and the tabellarii in pursuit of fugitives, probably local Bedu.256
The tabellarii were also dispatched as guides for travellers and caravans, or
248
AE 1986: 674 Christol & Drew-Bear 1986: no. 5.
249
AE 1991: 1681 AE 1994: 1883. CIL III 493 IG V.1 1569. Le Roy 1961: 212. On
Lacedaemonian quarries, cf. Pliny, NH 36.55, and Fant 1993a: 164 fns. 113, 114.
250
AE 1980: 476. For photo, cf. Angeli Bertinelli 1978: 11, Wg. 5.
251
CIL XI 1315.
252
AE 1974: 153. CIL VI 8485, 8484. The mark ram read by Dolci 1998 as ra(tio) m(ar-
morum), discovered on a block in the Scalocchiella quarries above the Valle di Colonnata was
understood to refer to this new bureau.
253
Cf. Bingen et al. 1992: 186; Bingen et al. 1997: 296.
254
The tabellarii were mostly used for oYcial messages within the oYces responsible for the
administration of the annona or the vicesima hereditatium such as the statio hereditatium, the
oYcium annonae or the statio marmorum, cf. Eck 1995a: 69 fns. 56, 57. In Ephesus and at
Carthage tabellarii seem to be subordinate to the procurator provinciae Asiae, cf. Eck 1995a: 69
fn. 57; Kolb 2000: 80, 276 f. with 277 fn. 1.
255
O.Claud. 358, 363, 366, 367, 380. For the use of tabellarii for private matters: O. Claud.
250, 282, 290.
256
O.Claud. 357.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 157

accompanied  or donkeys to their destination.257 The socio-legal

status of the tabellarii at Mons Claudianus is not well known. Tabellarii in the
imperial service appear to be mostly slaves or freedmen. However, some
freeborn tabellarii Augusti are also recorded.258 The titles used by tabellarii
such as praepositi, decuriones, optiones, or tesserarii have been understood to
reXect the tabellariis military organization.259 Anne Kolb argues that the
tabellarii, as in other branches of the imperial administration, used titles
reminiscent of military functions even though they were not part of the
Roman army.260
Numerous inscriptions of imperial freedmen and slaves appear at imperial
quarries, although they do not always provide an indication of their function.
At Simitthus the Caesaris servi Abascantus, Corinthius and Ponticus, as well
as C. Iulius Crestus Samianus, Augusti libertus, were probably involved in the
quarrying administration.261 The names of the servi(?) Caesaris are also
documented in the label inscriptions on Carrara marble, such as Eros and
Ephebus.262 At Paros an Eros, imperial slave, left an inscription in the
quarries, naming himself superintendent of works (K 
).263

4.2.2.2. Hymenaeus Thamyrianus a lapicidinis

Carystiis and Karystos
A unique example is provided by the epigraphic evidence of an a lapicidinis
Carystiis. Close to the town of Paleochora near Karystos on Euboea a large
white marble base was discovered. The base, covered with inscriptions on the
front and back, probably dates to the mid-Wrst century.264 With this monu-
ment Hymenaeus Thamyrianus, a libertus Augusti, honoured the dispensator
Augusti and nutricius Thamyrus Alexandrianus, as well as members of his own
family and acquaintances. A similar inscription by Hymenaeus Thamyrianus
in Rome, again honouring Thamyrus and Hymenaeus family members and
friends, identiWes Hymenaeus as Caesaris servus and a lapicidinis Carystiis.
The inscription in Rome antedates the marble base in Karystos, as Hyme-
naeus is not yet manumitted.265 Hymenaeus agnomen, Thamyrianus, cer-
tainly bears testament to a close relationship with Thamyrus. Few imperial
257
O.Claud. 287, 358, 363, 366.
258
Hirschfeld 1905: 201 f.; Eck 1995a: 68; Kolb 2000: 275.
259
For overview of scholarly opinion, cf. Kolb 2000: 276 fn. 1.
260
Kolb 2000: 276 with fns. 2 and 3.
261
App. nos. 86770, 874, 875, Khanoussi 1996: 998, 1009, 1015.
262
App. nos. 115761, 1172, 11746.
263
IG XII.5 253 (cf. add. 312).
264
CIL III 563. 12289 (Paleochora), cf. photo in Pensabene 1994: Wg. 286.
265
CIL VI 8486 (Via Ostiense in S. Pauli).
158 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

slaves or freedmen carry agnomina in reference to their former masters who

were imperial slaves themselves. When slaves of imperial slaves became the
emperors own property, the former vicarii or slaves of slaves not only
reached a higher social status, but their occupational status also improved.
This change in status could be expressed by taking a second name ending in
-ianus, mostly in deference to their former owner. Weaver designates this
group as vicariani and provides a rough outline of their career. After
reaching the status of vicarianus imperial slaves appear to have reached the
rank of a dispensator. Following their manumission at about forty years of age
these vicariani progressed to the post of tabularius. Some of them might
even have reached a procuratorial post.266 In the case of Hymenaeus it is not
quite clear what intermediate or higher clerical grade the function of a
lapicidinis Carystiis was equal to. The Roman inscription identiWes Hyme-
naeus as an imperial slave when holding the post of a lapicidinis Carystiis. In
accordance with Weavers reconstructed sequence this post equalled the
functional rank of a dispensator. In that sense the former vicarius to Tha-
myrus, the dispensator Augusti, might have followed in his masters footsteps.
In this speciWc context of the imperial administration vicarius not only
denotes the slave of a slave but can also signify assistant to the dispensa-
tor.267 Perhaps Thamyrus had also been involved in the management of the
quarries at Karystos, as Dubois interpretation of the inscription shows that
the names of both Hymenaeus and Thamyrus appear in ligature on a series of
cipollino products recovered from the Emporium in Rome.268
The fact that Hymenaeus commissioned the Wrst inscription in Rome led
RostovtzeV to believe that the a lapicidinis Carystiis organized the import of
Karystean marble to the city of Rome and thus was based there.269 The import
and stockpiling of cipollino marble at diVerent sites throughout Rome would
certainly have merited supervision by an imperial oYcial.270 Hymenaeus
monument in Rome, however, does not give his title as a(b) marmoribus,
but indicates that he was responsible for lapicidinae, quarries, near Karystos
and not for the marble (marmor) itself.271 Moreover, the Karystean inscrip-
tions suggest that Hymenaeus was present at the cipollino quarriesat least
long enough to commission the making of a white marble base. What
prompted Hymenaeus to commission two monuments in Rome and in

266
Weaver 1972: 21618, 222, 230.
267
Weaver 1972: 205 f.
268
Dubois 1908: 117 f.
269
Hirschfeld 1905: 167 fn. 4, contra RostovtzeV 1904: 453.
270
cf. Maischberger 1997.
271
TLL VII/2, 941.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 159

Karystos is not speciWed in the inscriptions. Given inscribed honorary monu-

ments were set up in presence of those to be honoured, the sequence of events
may perhaps be reconstructed as follows. After his promotion to a lapicidinis
Carystiis, in step with the change in status from vicarius to vicarianus, and
perhaps on the eve of his departure from Rome (together with his former
master Thamyrus), Hymenaeus, now Hymenaeus Thamyrianus, commis-
sioned an inscribed monument in honour of Thamyrus. The second inscribed
monument in honour of Thamyrus was set up in Karystos either on the
occasion of Hymenaeus manumission or perhaps Thamyrus departure from
Karystos(?). As the latter inscriptions seemingly indicate, Hymenaeus, as
libertus Augusti, remained in charge of the quarries at Karystos. However,
the epigraphic material does not inform us of his clerical grade.

4 . 3 . H E A D Q UA RT E R S O F I M P E R I A L
E XT R AC T I V E O P E R AT I O N S

The accumulation of epigraphic evidence for oYciales and procurators at one

location has been taken to indicate the administrative residence of a mining/
quarrying procurator. Not all inscriptions, however, can be employed in
deWnitively pinpointing an administrative centre. In his study of capita
provinciarum Rudolf Haensch oVers a categorization of the epigraphic evi-
dence based on its value in identifying provincial capitals.272 This categoriza-
tion (which shall not be reiterated here) can also be applied to distinguish
inscribed monuments identifying procuratorial seats of oYce from inscrip-
tions that only attest the occasional presence of a procurator within a mining
or quarrying zone, or those pinpointing merely outposts of his staff. As a
preliminary it is of use to provide examples for both ends of the spectrum.
The epigraphic record of Ampelum in Roman Dacia shows what an admin-
istrative centre of one or more mining or quarrying districts could consist of.
Besides ample evidence for subaltern personnel such as dispensatores, tabu-
larii, adiutores tabulariorum, librarii, subsequens librariorum, and a commen-
tariis (whose funerary, votive, and building inscriptions attest their activity on
the spot), the funerary and votive inscriptions clearly attest the presence of
freedmen and equestrian procurators at Ampelum. This furthermore corrob-
orates the notion of a permanent administrative bureau for the aurariae
Dacicae located at Ampelum. As of yet, physical evidence for a bureau of
this kind is absent.
272
Haensch 1997: 3762.
160 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

At the other end of the spectrum one may cite the K H

for the Egyptian Eastern Desert. Despite being named in a number of
inscriptions, the K
presumably did not reside at Mons Claudianus,
Mons Porphyrites, or Mons Ophiates. Only a minority of the ostraca pub-
lished so far were addressed to the K
directly and no procurator
commissioned an inscription in the Eastern Desert. Moreover, he does not
appear in the water distribution lists at Mons Claudianus.273 A hospitium of
the tabularii at El-Ashmunein indicates that the accountants of the Porphyr-
ites quarrying administration were at least temporarily based in the
Nile valley, probably close to the procurator responsible for the Porphyrites
district(?).274 The necessity of using tabellarii, messengers who circulated
between the Nile valley and Claudianus and transmitted the procuratorial
orders to the foremen in the quarries, strongly suggests that the administra-
tive headquarters for the quarrying operations at Mons Claudianus, Mons
Porphyrites, and Mons Ophiates were located somewhere in the Nile valley, or
perhaps in Alexandria.275
The epigraphic evidence is rarely conclusive for potential sites of adminis-
trative residences other than Ampelum. It was assumed that an administrative
headquarters for mining operations might have been located at Domavium.
Ten procurators are attested in inscriptions from this town, of which two were
commissioned by procuratores argentariarum to commemorate the restor-
ation of baths.276 Two further building inscriptions by the municipium
Domavianum name procurators as supervisors or dedicators of buildings,
and a votive inscription of a procurator underlines the presence of equestrian
oYcials at Domavium at least on a short term basis.277 Moreover, two
inscriptions were commissioned to honour procurators, one of which carries
the full title of procurator metallorum Pannonicorum et Delmaticorum.278
A further inscribed monument was raised by the municipium Domavianum
in honour of C. Iulius Silvanus Melanio, likely a former procurator
argentariarum.279

273
Cuvigny 2005b.
274
Cuvigny 1992a: 85f. The procurator might have been located near the headquarters of the
K
of the Heptanomia either at Hermoupolis or Antinoupolis, cf. Thomas 1982: 58;
Cuvigny 2002: 241.
275
O.Claud.inv. 6483, cf. Thomas 1998: 182.
276
CIL III 12734, 12736. For Domavium as headquarters of the mining administration,
cf. Hirschfeld 1905: 153; Dusanic 1977: 66.
277
CIL III 8363 12733, 8359 8360 12720, 12725 142191.
278
CIL III 8361 12721 ILS 1143; CIL III 12739 12740 ILJug 83 AE 1948: 243.
279
CIL III 12737 with Abascal & Alfoldy 1998: 159, 162 f. The precise content and context of
a further, yet fragmentary inscription (CIL III 12728) probably naming a procurator can not be
established.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 161

Although there is suYcient evidence for the presence of procurators at

Domavium, the epigraphic record reveals no subaltern oYcials of a mining
bureau there.280 Undoubtedly, Domavium was signiWcant enough in order for
the mining administration to warrant the attendance of procurators there on
a regular basis. In comparison with Ampelum, however, the absence of
oYciales connected with the mining administration at least challenges the
assumption that Domavium was the permanent place of residence for proc-
urator metallorum/argentariarum for Pannonia and Dalmatia. The inscription
of a beneWciarius consularis legionis II Adiutricis from Bolcske provides add-
itional insight on this issue: the inscription lists one of the beneWciarius
postings as statio argentariarum Pannonicarum e[t Delmaticarum . . . ]. The
statio probably lay within Pannonia Inferior, as the legio II Adiutrix was based
at Aquincum. Alfoldy oVered the explanation that the administration of the
argentaria of both Pannonia and Dalmatia held at least one statio per prov-
ince.281 A further statio was probably located near Domavium at Skelani
where numerous beneWciarii left their inscriptions.282 Given the magnitude
of the task at hand, one must assume that the procurator perhaps frequented
these stationes throughout the year. A similar system probably was in use for
the procurator Augusti and praepositus vectigalis ferrariarum for Pannonia: an
arcarius stationis Siscianae was subordinate to this procurator and further
such posts have been assumed elsewhere.283 In the absence of any subaltern
personnel, the main headquarters of these procuratorsif any such thing
existedcan not be ascertained. Domavium remains the most promising
candidate.
There is a great number of inscriptions which record iron-mining procur-
ators at Ljubija, located in the Upper Drina valley (cf. 4.1.10). A number of
votive monuments for Terra Mater were erected here by vilici oYcinae ferrar-
iae under the supervision of procurators, or with their participation.284
Archaeological Wnds document smelting furnaces and so-called administra-
tive buildings closeby.285 These inscriptions, however, do not provide enough
evidence to regard Ljubija as the headquarters of the procurators of the iron
mines. There are no inscriptions set up by other staV of the procuratorial
bureau and we lack other examples of the procurators presence at Ljubija or

280
ILJug 81, 1517, 1522, 1524, 1532, 1543.
281
AE 2003: 1426 with Alfoldy 2003: 225 f.
282
CBFIR 4715.
283
CIL III 3953 ILS 3094; cf. Mocsy 1962: 594; Alfoldy 2003: 225 f.
284
cf. AE 1958: 63 ILJug 157; AE 1958: 64 ILJug 158; AE 1973: 411 ILJug 779; AE 1973:
412 ILJug 778; AE 1973: 413 ILJug 780; AE 1973: 414 ILJug 781.
285
Skegro 2000: 11823, with further bibliography.
162 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

in the surrounding area. The commissioning of votive monuments naming

procurators appears to be connected with the supervisory activity of the vilici
running the smelting furnaces. We thus may assume that the named procur-
ators were not constantly present at Ljubija but probably had their head-
quarters elsewhere. A possibility may be Siscia, a statio of the procurator
Augusti and praepositus vectigalis ferrariarum and perhaps the seat of the
Wnancial procurator for Pannonia Superior.286
The funerary inscription set up by a dispensator for Thaumastus, libertus
Augusti and a commentariis aurariarum Delmatarum, at Salona and dating
perhaps to the Wrst century ad, may place the gold-mining administration
there.287 To date, procuratores aurariarum Delmatarum are not recorded.
Thus, the a commentariis aurariarum Delmatarum was probably attached
to the procurator of Dalmatia. This appears to be the case with one inscribed
monument set up by a tabularius rationis ferrariarum at Lugdunum in
honour of the Wnancial procurator for the provinciae Lugdunensis et Aquita-
nia. The inscription reXects a professional relationship between the tabular-
ius and procurator, with the tabularius rationis ferrariarum (for Lugdunensis
and Aquitania?) perhaps serving on the staV of the latter. Thus one must
assume that a further tabularius ferrariarum attested at Lugdunum served on
the staV of the Wnancial procurator as well.288 The epigraphic evidence does
not allow us to conclude whether the procurator ad vectigal ferrariarum
Gallicarum also had his seat at Lugdunum and thus his own staV at his
disposal (cf. 4.1.11).
Further sites of procuratorial bureaux are not revealed by the epigraphic
record. The statue base set up by the ordo colonorum at Socanica and dedi-
cated by the procurator mm(etallorum?) DD(ardanorum?) does not oVer
suYcient proof for the location of the procuratorial headquarters there.289
Likewise, the freedmen mining procurators named in the series of inscribed
altars commissioned by the army vexillations at Luyego and Villals in north-
western Spain were perhaps not stationed at the Wndspot of these inscriptions.
We can only assume that the few attested Roman mining procurators in
Roman Baeticaa procurator montis Mariani known from an inscription at
Hispalis, and a procurator as initiator of an honorary monument to emperor
Nerva at Rio Tintodid not reside permanently in the mining zones of the
Sierra Morena. At least for the former, the procurator montis Mariani,

286
Haensch 1997: 352 f., remains undecided on the issue whether Poetovio or Siscia func-
tioned as base for the bureau of the Wnancial procurator. For the praepositus vectigalis ferrar-
iarum, cf. CIL III 3953 ILS 3094.
287
CIL III 1997; Hirschfeld 1905: 154, Haensch 1997: 7681.
288
CIL XIII 1808; Haensch 1997: 135, 463 f.
289
ILJug 503.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 163

Corduba might be a suitable candidate for the seat of his procuratorship. The
funerary stone of a slave of Sextus Marius set up in Corduba does suggest that
Marius mines (Cerro Muriano?) and estates had been run from Corduba
prior to their conWscation.290 Besides being the probable provincial capital of
Baetica, Corduba appears to have been an important administrative centre for
the mining industry and the metal-trade.291 The city was not only located at
the Guadalquivir, but was also at the head of the main roads north to the
mines around Azuaga, Cerro de Malatrigo, Belalcazar, Pozoblanco, and
Sisapo/Almaden.292 Although direct epigraphic evidence for the presence of
an imperial mining administration is missing, major mining companies
(societates publicanorum) left their epigraphic traces in Corduba. Several
liberti, receiving the gentilicium Argentarius after being set free by the societas
Sisaponensis, set up an inscription in Corduba, probably during the Wrst
century ad.293 Hence, the procuratores montis Mariani perhaps also held
their oYce in Corduba. This does not necessarily conXict with the monument
the confectores aeris set up at Hispalis. Eck and Haensch have argued that the
epigraphic record of Hispalis may attest the seat of the patrimonial procurator
there, and the procurator montis Mariani may have thus occasionally paid a
visit to Hispalis.294 The evidence for Vipasca as mining headquarters appears
to be more promising: the lex metallis dicta unmistakeably notes liberti et servi
Caesaris, qui proc(uratori) in oYciis erunt.295 At least in the case of Vipasca we
may assume that the procurator metallorum Vipascensium required oYciales
in accomplishing his various duties and therefore was in need of some form of
residence or bureau.296 The honorary monument for Beryllus at Vipasca
and the procuratorial titulature of Saturninus K
H

P point to Vipasca as the likely seat of the freedman mining
procurator.297
Apart from the administration of the quarries in the Egyptian Eastern
Desert, there is limited evidence for the bureaux of procurators charged
with the management of quarrying ventures. The inscriptions at Simitthus

290
CIL II2/7, 441 CIL II 2269. Sextus Marius was from Corduba or had close links with the
town, cf. Pliny, NH 34.4 (aes Marianum aes Cordubense). For a tessera hospitalis with his
name, cf. Eck & Fernandez 1991.
291
Knapp 1983: 52; Alfoldy 1996: 452; Haensch 1997: 17883, 492.
292
Sillieres 1990: Wg. 18.
293
CIL II2/7 415a. CIL II2/7 334 AE 1971: 181.
294
Eck 1994: 564 f.; Haensch 1997: 184 f.
295
LMD ll. 234.
296
Besides Aljustrel, where Domergue (1983: 31f.) believes to have unearthed the remains of
a House of the Procurator, buildings where the administration for a mining/quarrying district
was housed have yet to be identiWed.
297
IRPac 121; Habicht 1969: no.44.
164 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations

do name a disp(ensator) m(armorum?) N(umidicorum?) and a number of

inscribed monuments were comissioned by procurators (cf. 4.1.5). Inscrip-
tions by oYciales of the quarrying administration have not been found at
Simitthus. However, the funerary stone set up by the procurator Galata for his
alumna or foster-daughter Alexandria at Simitthus is testament to a strong
aYliation of the procurator with the site, one that goes beyond regular
stopovers.298 A further inscribed monument documents building activity
(a porticus with cella and cistern) by a procurator m(armorum?) N(umidi-
corum?) after fulWlment of a vow.299 Apart from the usual votive inscription
set up by procuratores, the two inscriptions may conWrm their long-term
presence at Simitthus. In particular the funerary inscription strongly suggests
that the procuratorial headquarters were situated at Simitthus. The scarce
epigraphic material from the quarries at Dokimeion is inconclusive. A
d[ispensator] might be named in a fragmentary inscription, but apart from
this subaltern oYcial, no further members of an administrative branch are
identiWed.300 Based mainly on the epigraphic and literary evidence, Otto
Hirschfeld and others have argued for Synnada being the administrative centre
of the Dokimean quarries. Even if Strabo tells us that in Italy pavonazetto
marble from Dokimeion was known as marmor Synnadicum, thus suggesting
the important role of Synnada in the trade or extraction of this marble, there is
no further evidence to substantiate this thesis. Even though the inscriptions
found at Synnada record imperial oYcials, none of these individuals carry a
title suggesting a linkage with the quarries at Dokimeion. Synnada was probably
the headquarters of the procurator provinciae Phrygiae whose involvement in
quarrying operations has yet to be proven.301

In the light of the preceding survey, one may conclude that the majority of
administrative bureaux of mining or quarrying procurators were not located
in or near mining or quarrying districts as a matter of course. Thus, inscrip-
tions attesting procurators at such sites may only have reXected occasional
visits by these oYcials. Given the judicial powers procurators possessed, one
might imagine an administrative practice similar to the assize system of large
provinces like Asia or Hispania Tarraconensis. The provincial governor was
required to travel part of the year through the province, visiting the assizes in

298
AE 1991: 1681 AE 1994: 1883.
299
AE 1994: 1885.
300
AE 1986: 674 Christol & Drew-Bear 1986: no. 5.
301
Strabo 12.8.14, cf. Hirschfeld 1913: 170; Ward-Perkins 1992a: 67 with fn. 25; Hirt 2003:
119 f. For Synnada, cf. CIL III 348 CIG 3822. CIL III 12237 AE 1897: 73. AE 1901: 132a, b, c.
MAMA IV 52, 55. MAMA VI 378.
 Imperial OYcials and Extractive Operations 165

order to rule on various legal issues of concern to the local communities.302 In

a similar fashion, the equestrian procuratores metallorum, ferrariarum, argen-
tariarum, or aurariarum of one or more provinces moved from one mining
district to the next in order to deal with the grievances of local occupants of
the mines. This is suggested by the evidence for stationes of the vectigal
ferrariarum at Siscia or of the argentariae Pannonicae et Delmaticae. Similarly,
at least the equestrian procuratores aurariarum documented at Ampelum may
have travelled throughout Dacia part of the year. They probably spent the rest
of the year at the administrative headquarters, directing or supervising the
compilation of accounts which they then reported to the Palatine bureaux in
Rome.303

4 . 4 . S U M M A RY

The survey of imperial procurators associated with mining and quarrying

venturesbe they imperial freedmen or equestrians in the emperors ser-
viceyielded a variety of functional titles (e.g. procurator montis Mariani,
procurator ad vectigab ferrariarum Gallicarum). We have examined the diVer-
ences of these titles in relation to the social status of their bearers: whereas
equestrian procurators, in general, were placed in charge of one category of
mine or all mines throughout one province or more, most freedmen procur-
ators presided over much smaller regions of mining or quarrying areas. In
completing their duties, the procurators were heavily dependent on their
subaltern staV, the size and composition of which may have varied consider-
ably in accordance to the task at hand. In the light of the disparity of evidence
for subaltern staV and our poor knowledge of the location and composition
of procuratorial headquarters, any observations on correlations of this sort
remain hypothetical at best. The inadequacies of our sources set aside, the
detailed titles of procurators and subalterns assist us in identifying their main
functions within quarrying and mining organizations. This should provide a
suYcient basis for determining the role each oYcial played in the adminis-
tration of these outposts. Before we embark on this task, however, it is
necessary to examine the role of another group, who did not form part of
the imperial familia or the equestrian bureaucracy, namely the Roman army.

302
Eck 1997a: 119 f.; Haensch 1997: 1836.
303
To my knowledge there is no Wrm evidence to assume that Ampelum or sites like
Domavium or Ulpiana were incorporated within mining districts. On the so-called municipal-
ization of former mining districts, cf. Noeske 1977: 27785 with further bibliography.
Table 1: Synoptic table of procurators
Dacia Pannonia Dalmatia Moesia superior proc. ferr. (gall.?) Asturia-Callaecia Lusitania/Baetica

T. Flavius Polychry-
sus, lib. Aug., proc.
mont. Marian.
(Flav.)
proc. aurar. proc. arg. Pann. C. Caelius Martialis, M. Ulpius Eutyches, Pudens, lib. Aug.
(Dac.) v.e., proc. ferr. (Traj.) lib. Aug., proc. met. proc., Rio Tinto,
Alboc. (Traj./Hadr.) (Nerva)
Ulpius Hermias, M. Antoninus Fabianus,
lib. Aug. (Traj.) v.e. (1st half 2nd c.)
?, proc. arg. Delm. Telesphorus, proc.(?) T. Statilius Optatus, Ulpius Aelianus, lib.
(Socanica) (136/7) v.e., proc. ferr. Aug., proc. met.
(Hadr.) Vipasc. (Hadr.)
L. Creperius Paulus, v.e. Amandus, lib. Aug.,
(146/50) proc. (Socanica)
(Ant. Pius)
Romanus, lib. L. Septi[-] Petro[nia- Tyrannus, lib. Aug., T. Petronius Priscus,
Aug. (M. Aur.) nus], v.e. (after 143) proc. (Kosmaj) (2nd v.e., proc. ferr. (mid-
half 2nd c.) 2nd c.)
L. Macrius proc. met. Pann. et Dalm. Q. Domitius Marsia- Hermes, lib. Aug.,
Macer, v.e. nus, v.e., proc. ferr. proc. (Villals) (163)
(M. Aur./S. Sev.) (M. Aur.)
T. Claudius Proculus Cornelianus, v.e. (161/4)
L. Domitius Eros, v.e. (late 2nd c.) Zoilus, lib. Aug., Beryllus, lib. Aug.,
proc. (Villals) proc. met. Vipasc.
(166/7) (c.172/3)
 (C. Iulius Silvanus Melanio, v.e. (late 2nd c.))
proc. ferr. (Pann.) proc. arg. Pann. et Cassius Ligurinus, M. Cosonius Fronto, Aurelius Eutyches,
Dalm v.e., proc. (Rudnik) v.e., proc. ad lib. Aug., proc.
(S.Sev.) vectig. ferr. Gall. (Villals) (180/4)
(c.198209)
Flavius Verus Metroba- Ti. Claudius Xeno-
lanus, v.e. (c.180/97) phon, v.e. (c.185/90)
Ael. Sostratus, v. T. Flavius Verecundus, Valerius Super, v.e. Aurelius Firmus, Saturninus, lib. Aug.,
e. (212) v.e. (209) (c.218/20) [proc.] met. (Villals) proc. met. Vipasc.
(191) (c.193)
A. Senecius [-] Iulius [-], v.e. (218/22) Iulius Tacitianus, C. Attius Alcimus
Contianus, v.e. v.e. (c. 223/35) Felicianus, v.e., proc.
(215) ferr (Sev. Alex.)
M. Iulius Macer, v.e. [-]tus (c.238/44) Titienus Verus, v.e.,
(228) proc. m(et.) D(ar)d.
(?) (Socanica)
(238/44)
Nic[o]ma[chus], (229)
Cossitianus Firmus, v.e.
(248)
Aurelius Verecundus,
v.e. (274)
 5
The Roman Army and Imperial
Extractive Operations

5 . 1 . T H E RO M A N A R M Y A N D I M P E R I A L Q UA R R I E S

5.1.1. Roman OYcers and the Operative Process

The presence of Roman army oYcers at imperial quarries is documented in
the epigraphic record and, in some rare instances, in label inscriptions on
quarried products. This raises the question as to whether or not the direction
of quarry operations was divided between civilian administrators/engineers
and Roman army oYcers. Unpublished ostraca from Mons Claudianus are
inscribed with reports on the progress of quarrying work. They were sent to
the military praefectus Antonius Flavianus, probably the commander of the
auxiliary unit stationed at Mons Claudianus, by the collective workforce
including the K
(foreman).1 Furthermore, a recently published os-
tracon documents two copied letters probably written by the vice-curator of
the praesidium at Mons Claudianus(?) to the praefectus and the procurator.
Whereas the letter to the praefectus Vibius Alexander recounts the outgoing
report of the vexillation, , on the equipment of the quarries,
 d K 
F
, and laments the delay of grain supply, the letter
to the procurator addresses the lack of personnel (
) and animals.2
Apparently the praefectus of the auxiliary unit had to be kept informed about
non-military issues concerning the imperial quarries. However, the one
oYcial who was able to respond directly to problems relating to the supply
of human, animal, and material resources to the quarry was the procurator
(K
H
).
The water distribution lists from Mons Claudianus provide information on
the hierarchy of military and civilian oYcers: a centurio and a decurio are
ranked Wrst amongst the recipients of water, the size of rations being left
blank. The military personnel in general was supplied with far larger rations

1
O.Claud.inv. 4471, 4852, cf. Cuvigny 2002: 240; Cuvigny 1992a: 87.
2
Cuvigny 2002.
 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations 169

of water than the workforce.3 From these published lists and other ostraca
one might deduce that the quarries at Mons Claudianus stood under the
direct command of a centurio or, occasionally, of a decurio. This notion is
supported by inscriptional evidence. At some point after ad 103 Annius
Rufus, a centurio of legio XV Apollinaris, set up an altar in the Sarapis temple.
In the accompanying inscription he names himself praepositus ab Optimo
Imperatore Traiano operi marmorum monti Claudiano.4 Avitus, centurio of the
cohors I Flavia Cilicium equitata, was put in charge of the quarries Z
e

E
F F 
during Hadrians reign. Both are clearly described
as being responsible for the quarries, with Annius Rufus being appointed to that
position on the orders of the emperor.5 Further centuriones are epigraphically
documented at Mons Claudianus and noted in a number of ostraca: Quintus
Accius Optatus, centurio of an unknown unit, and Valvennius Priscus, centurio
of legio XXII (Deiotariana), are named.6 At Mons Porphyrites the centurio
Proculeianus is mentioned in an inscription commissioned by Epaphroditos,
the
c
H
 during ad 11719, and the centurio Fanius Severus
put up an altar to Isis Myrionyma in ad 137/8.7 Moreover, a Pankratius, centurio
frumentarius, is attested at this site. Arrius Iulianus, perhaps a centurio(?) in the
cohors III Ituraeorum equitata, was garrisoned at Mons Ophiates.8
Mons Claudianus9 Mons Porphyrites Mons Ophiates
Crispus(?) (ad 109/10)
Q. Accius Optatus (ad 11014)
Annius Rufus (ad 10317)
Valvennius Priscus (ad 11317) Proculeianus (ad 11719)
Iulius Serenus
Antoninus
(Maximus?(c. ad 10020) )
Iulius Kelsus
Licinius Proclus
Lurius Aquila
Iulius Aquila
Avitus (ad 118) Fanius Severus (ad 137/8)
Caecilius Vindex (ad 13745) Arrius Iulianus (ad 1504)
Horion
Alexander
Pankratius (ad ?)

3
O.Claud.inv. 15382921, cf. Cuvigny 1992a: 86; Cuvigny 2005b: 3346.
4 5
I.Pan 39. I.Pan 42.
6
I.Pan 38, 41. O.Claud. 48.
7
I.Pan 21, cf. MaxWeld 2001, Table 7.1; MaxWeld & Peacock 1998a: 190.
8
I.Pan 22 (MP). I.Pan 53 Cuvigny 1996c.
9
Crispus: O.Claud. 141. Valvennius Priscus: I.Pan 41. O.Claud. 49; Iulius Serenus: O.Claud.
50, 51, 52; Antoninus: O.Claud. 5771, 148, 149; (Maximus?): O.Claud. 72, 73, 146; Iulius
170 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations

Only few of these oYcers were legionary centuriones, and in the case of
Annius Rufus at Mons Claudianus his unit, legio XV Apollinaris, was probably
never garrisoned in Egypt.10 Annius Rufus was undoubtedly assigned to the
quarries because of his technical expertise.11 His knowledge of construction
and presumably of quarrying procedures made him a suitable candidate for
the supervision of the imperial quarries at Mons Claudianus. Moreover, the
fact that Annius Rufus was sent to Mons Claudianus on the orders of Trajan
strongly supports the view that he was renowned for his technical or organ-
izational expertise. Had an ordinary commander been required for the army
detachment at Mons Claudianus, the oYcer corps of the legions or auxiliary
units recorded in Egypt certainly would have suYced. The transfer, therefore,
of a centurio from a diVerent province to Mons Claudianus on the speciWc
orders of the emperor strongly implies that Annius Rufus possessed useful
experience managing quarry operations.
Annius Rufus is not an isolated case. Further evidence for the involvement
of legionary centurions in quarrying procedures emerges from Karystos on
Euboea. A label inscription on a cipollino column found in Rome lists
Sergius Longus, centurio of the legio XXII Primigenia, together with a probator
Crescens, who shall be of interest further on.12 One T. Sergius Longus, pre-
sumably the same man, only now centurio of the legio XV Apollinaris, had an
inscription for the god Hercules engraved below a niche at a quarry near
Karystos.13 Another inscription on a lead tag, recovered on cipollino marble,
names a Sergius, centurio legionis XV.14 Given the rarity of the name Sergius
Longus amongst the ranks of the Roman army, the possibility of two oYcers
of diVerent units with the same rank, the same name, and the same

Kelsus: O.Claud. 76, 77; Licinius Proclus: O.Claud. 78, 363; Lurius Aquila: O.Claud. 368; Iulius
Aquila: O.Claud. 370; Caecilius Vindex: O.Claud. 79, 360, 361?, 362?; Horion: O.Claud. 286,
357; Alexander: O.Claud. 386.
10
MaxWeld 2000: 435. Contrary to the communis opinio, Everett Wheeler argued that the legio
XV Apollinaris was a regular unit posted in Egypt, albeit only posted there for a very short period
between ad 10617 before being transfered to Satala in Cappadocia, cf. Wheeler 2000: 28893.
11
Ritterling (1925, 1757) equates him with Annius Rufus, centurion of legio XIII Gemina,
recorded at the legions camp at Vindobona/mod. Vienna, cf. CIL III 151964. The camp was under
construction between ad 98 and ad 107, and a contingent of the XIII Gemina was supporting
construction eVorts of a camp at Brigetio in ad 97 to 101. Apart from acquiring a wide-ranging
expertise in construction work at Brigetio and Vindobona, his assignments may also have put
Annius Rufus in contact with legio XV Apollinaris, which participated in both building projects.
Perhaps he was transferred to XV Apollinaris, before the XIII Gemina was sent to Dacian war in
ad 101, cf. Wheeler 2000: 290.
12
App. no. 618.
13
CIL III 12286 Dubois 1908: no. 279.
14
Franke 2000; Wheeler 2000: 288 f.
 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations 171

capabilities being present at Karystos, is less probable than the possibility of

both the inscriptions at Rome and Karystos referring to one and the same
person.15 The probator Crescens, named in the column label found in Rome,
is recorded in another label inscription on Carystean marble from Rome
dating to the year ad 132. Consequently, Sergius Longus presence at Karystos
must be dated around 132.16 His transfer from legio XXII Primigenia (in
Mogontiacum/mod. Mainz since ad 97) to legio XV Apollinaris (in Cappa-
docia since c. ad 117) must have taken place around the same time.17 From
the label inscriptions on cipollino and his small monument to Hercules we can
conclude that Sergius Longus probably was at Karystos under both legions.
None of the named legions, however, was based in Greece, and there is no
evidence so far to suggest that Sergius Longus arrived on Euboea in the
company of auxiliary troops or a legionary detachment. Sergius Longus was
dispatched to the Karystean quarries based on his expertise in quarrying
organization. As numerous inscriptions from the Brohltal quarries near
Bonn in Germania Inferior demonstrate, an oYcer or soldier in legio XXII
Primigenia could easily gain experience in quarrying procedures (cf. 5.1.2). It
is therefore possible that the technical experience which Sergius Longus might
have gained during his service with legio XXII Primigenia prompted his
dispatch to the Karystean quarries.
This may also have been the case with two centuriones known from
numerous label inscriptions on pavonazetto blocks discovered in the Bacakale
quarries near Dokimeion. Both army oYcers were probably closely connected
with the introduction of the caesura-oYcina system at Bacakale after ad 136.
Tullius Saturninus, centurio of the legio XXII Primigenia, appears in label
inscriptions dating to the years 1368 discovered at Bacakale and pavonazetto
marble in Rome. As in the case of Sergius Longus, Tullius Saturninus legion
was based at Mogontiacum from ad 97 onwards and appears to have run the
Brohltal quarries.18 The province of Asia where the Dokimean quarries are
situated did not have a legionary garrison. Nor did Tullius Saturninus or his
successor Aelius Antoninus (ad 147/8) command a contingent of auxiliary or
legionary soldiers at Dokimeion. Thus far, no epigraphic evidence has
emerged for an army unit being stationed at Bacakale or in its vicinity. The
quarry labels on pavonazetto marble suggest that the centuriones Tullius
Saturninus and Aelius Antoninus had caesurae to their namein other

15
See Mommsens commentary to CIL III 12286.
16
App. no. 603.
17
Franke 2000: 98; Wheeler 2000: 288 f., with fn. 174.
18
Franke 2000: 99 with fn. 43.
172 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations

words, they supervised one or more extraction sites within the Dokimean
quarries (cf. 7.2.1).
Given the fact that these four centuriones were separated from their units
and sent to quarrying sites, probably for their technical or organizational
experience in quarrying procedures, the question remains as to how these
oYcers were picked for these speciWc tasks. Valerie MaxWeld argued that the
transfer of legionary centuriones from their units to imperial quarries reXected
the hand of the emperor at work.19 This conclusion was based on the
inscription of Annius Rufus, centurion of legio XV Apollinaris found at
Mons Claudianus, where he clearly states that he was appointed praepositus
[] operi marmorum monti Claudiano by emperor Trajan (ab Optimo Imper-
atore Traiano).20 The provincial governor, however, might also have played a
major role in demanding the transfer of specialist military personnel to his
province. Nonius Datus, librator of the Roman army, was requested by the
presidial procurator of Mauretania Caesariensis, C. Petronius Celer, on behalf
of the town of Saldae. On the orders of the legatus legionis III Augustae,
Nonius was then transferred from Numidia to Mauretania Caesariensis to
sort out a problem with the Saldae aqueduct tunnel.21 In response to one of
Plinys letters asking for an army engineer (librator) for the canal project near
Nicomedia, Trajan advised his governor in Pontus-Bithynia to approach the
governor of the neighbouring province of Moesia Inferior, P. Calpurnius
Macer.22 Although the evidence is patchy, it appears that the senatorial
governors of provinciae populi Romani or presidial procurators of provinciae
Caesaris could ask neighbouring governors with one or more legions at their
disposal for the required army specialists. The transfer of Roman centurions
from the Rhine or Danube provinces to the quarries in Egypt, Asia, or Achaia
may in some instances have been supervised by the emperor, rather than
being carried out by the provincial governors themselves. Whether or not the
emperor had a central archive of military personnel at his Wngertips allowing
him to answer requests by provincial governors for military specialists at his
own volition is open to debate. The sources only allow for limited insights:
according to the Historia Augusta (Sev. Alex. 21.68), Severus Alexander
constantly studied full records (which he kept in his bedroom) of the troops
pay and service. Whether further information was as readily available is not
stated.23 Based on Statius (Silv. 5.1.94100), Eric and Anthony R. Birley

19 20
MaxWeld 2000: 435. I.Pan 39.
21
CIL VIII 2728 18122 ILS 5795, cf. Eck 1995b: 222 f.; Laporte 1996: 737 f.; Horster
2001: 175.
22
Pliny, Ep. 10.41, 42, 61, 62; cf. Horster 2001: 176.
23
Millar 1967: 12.
 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations 173

argued that the ab epistulis perhaps ran a human resources department or

archive concerned especially with the selection of qualiWed equestrians and
military oYcers for certain tasks.24 However, no further evidence was pro-
vided to substantiate the idea of a central bureau for military personnel.
Perhaps emperors like Trajan could provide provincial governors in need of
a specialist with a suitable candidate based on their own military experience
or on the collective knowledge of their consilium. Whatever the decision
process may have been, it undoubtedly led Annius Rufus to state that he
had been put in charge of Mons Claudianus by the emperor Trajan.
One might conclude from the correspondence between Nonius Datus and
the provincial governor concerning the aqueduct of Saldae that the army
specialist stood under the command of the provincial governor after his
transfer. Werner Eck believes that this would have been the most practical
solution. Concerning the issue of pay, the proconsules in Asia and Africa were
ultimately responsible through their quaestores for the payment of the
soldiers under their command, as most units in the Roman empire were
paid with the revenues from the provinces in which they were stationed. One
may assume that the individual centuriones transferred to the quarries of
Dokimeion or Karystos received their pay from the provincial quaestor.
However, Eck thinks that issues of promotion, transfer, and retirement
remained matters for their unit of origin, as Annius Rufus, Tullius Saturni-
nus, and Sergius Longus continue to see themselves as oYcers in legio XV
Apollinaris or XXII Primigenia.25 In fact, a recently published military
diploma of ad 115 named not only former members of auxiliary units in
Moesia Superior who received Roman citizenship, but also units sent from
Moesia Superior on a military expedition to the East. Apparently the records
concerning these units remained with their former Moesian commander for
the duration of the campaign. In analogy to expeditionary corps soldiers or
oYcers who were seconded to quarries or mines of a diVerent province
probably stayed attached to their original unit. Only their pay might have
been distributed by the actual commander at their new posting.26 In this
context, Sergius Longus transfer from the XXII Primigenia to the XV
Apollinaris during his stay at Karystos may have resulted from a vacancy at
the latter Wlled by Longus prior to the completion of his task at the
quarries.27 The assignment of specialist legionary centurions to imperial
quarries in the Roman East during the Wrst half of the second century may

24
Birley 19634: 207; Birley 1992: 23 f., 4154; Eck 1995e: 13941.
25
Eck 1997b: 188 fn. 7. 200.
26
Eck & Pangerl 2005.
27
On transfers of centurions, cf. Birley 19634: 210.
174 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations

carry the hallmark of a decision reached at Rome. All four attested centur-
ions are sent from the Roman West to quarries in the Greek-speaking East, in
the case of Tullius Saturninus in 136 probably even with the task of reorgan-
izing extraction procedures at Dokimeion. Sergius Longus may have arrived
at Karystos in c.132, certainly during Hadrians reign, perhaps with a task
similar to Tullius Saturninus. The use of Latin in noting speciWcs such as
consular dates, numerals, location, contractors, and workshops at Doki-
meion and Karystos certainly may have prompted the transfer of oYcers
well aquainted with Latin quarrying terms.
Centuriones frumentarii often appear in the context of mining operations.
Pankratius, a centurio frumentarius of an unknown unit, was perhaps
seconded to Mons Porphyrites for his skills, as was Flavius Mucianus to
Luna/Carrara.28 The presence of the latter is documented by an inscribed
monument set up in ad 200 by M. Firmidius Spectatus, optio and frumentar-
ius leg(ionis) II Italicae p(iae) f(idelis) under the cura of Flavius Mucianus,
centurio frumentarius.29 Though the main function of the frumentarii initially
might have been the collection of food for their troops, they were increasingly
used for other tasks.30 Based at the castra peregrinorum, the frumentarii were
not only couriers for the Roman emperor but could be sent out on special
missions.31 It is not known why the frumentarii of the legio II Italica set up an
inscribed monument near Luna, but the reported Wndspot within the quarries
at Carrara suggests a connection with the quarrying business. Another fru-
mentarius functioned as an overseer of construction work at Delphi in the
name of the emperor Hadrian and in Salona a centurio frumentarius of the
II Traiana commanded the vexillations of the recently created legio II (Italica)
Pia and the legio III (Italica) Concordia in building an emergency fortiWcation
in ad 170.32 This seems to support the view that two frumentariitemporarily
dispatched from the legio II Italica based in Lauriacum/Noricum to the castra
peregrinorum in Romewere sent to Luna in connection with the Carrara
quarries. Pankratius presence at Mons Porphyrites must be explained along
similar lines.33

28
I.Pan 24.
29
CIL XI 1322 (Carrara), cf. Banti 1931: 484 f., no. 46.
30
Austin & Rankov 1995: 136 f., 150.
31
Clauss 1973: 82117; Rankov 1990; Birley 1995: 147; Rankov 1999: 29 f.; Kolb 2000: 175,
2904.
32
ILS 9473 (Delphi); CIL III 1980 ILS 2287 (Salona), cf. Zwicky 1944: 768; Saxer 1967:
41, no. 71; Clauss 1973: 94; Rankov 1990: 177.
33
AE 1978: 317, 327. AE 1990: 353.
 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations 175

5.1.2. Excursus: Quarrying Duty and the Roman Army

Both Tullius Saturninus and Sergius Longus likely gained initial experience in
quarrying procedures during their service with the legio XXII Primigenia
which in ad 97 had its legionary headquarters at Mogontiacum.34 During
the Flavian period, additional Roman fortiWcations on the Rhine frontier had
to be built, and buildings destroyed during the Batavian revolt in ad 69 were
restored. The source for most of the stone used in construction was the
Brohltal quarries. Commemorating their unpleasant ordeal, most troop
detachments sent there erected votive stelae for Hercules Saxanus. From the
time of Claudius/Nero to Trajan, a series of troop vexillations were seconded
to quarry work, and under Trajan stones were being cut for the colonia Ulpia
Traiana/mod. Xanten.35 The inscriptions are mostly commissioned by cen-
turiones of legions (VI Victrix, X Gemina, XXI Rapax, XXII Primigenia etc.),
auxiliary units (coh. II Varcianorum, coh. II Asturum, coh. II c.R. etc.) or the
classis Germanica, naming their fellow vexillarii or commilitones or the vex-
illatio consisting of further legions. Despite the location of these quarries in
Germania Superior, most army units mentioned were based in Germania
Inferior.36 The appearance of the classis Germanica in the Brohltal quarries is
explained by the use of this Xotilla for transporting quarried blocks, but
members of the Roman navy undoubtedly also took part in the quarry
work itself. It has been suggested that a detachment under the command of
a trierarch worked in the trachyte quarries at Drachenfels in the Siebengebirge
to supply the ongoing construction work at colonia Ulpia Traiana.37 Military
vexillations of the legio VIII Augusta, the X Gemina, XIIII Gemina Mars
Victrix, the XXI Rapax and a cohors V were also working in the tufa quarries
of Norroy during the Flavian period, while a vexillation and soldiers of
the legio XXII Primigenia are documented during Septimius Severus reign
in the tufa quarries at Brunholdisstuhl near Bad Durkheim.38 At some point
in the second century ad a vexillation of the legio XXX Ulpia appears to have
quarried stone in Idylle near Kruft for construction work at the legionary
camp of the legio I Minervia in Bononia or the XXX Ulpias own camp at
Vetera.39 A further inscription by the coh(ors) XXVI vol(untariorum)

34
Franke 2000: 99 with fn. 43.
35
Saxer 1967: 74, 79 with fn. 440, nos. 194203, 209, 21116, 2405, 248, 2502.
36
Bauchhenss 1986: 90.
37
Saxer 1967: 86, no. 253 CIL XIII 8036 ILS 2907 (ad 160).
38
Norroy: Saxer 1967: nos. 2047. CIL XIII 4625 ILS 3454, 4624 ILS 3453, 4623 ILS
9120. AE 1920: 118. Brunholdisstuhl: Nesselhauf 1937: 73, no. 80, 120; Saxer 1967: no. 222.
39
Nesselhauf 1937: 91, nos. 1315; Saxer 1967: 82 f., nos. 2346.
176 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations

R(omanorum) is known from subterranean tufa quarries near Kruft.40 An-

other small quarry near Reinhardsmunster in Alsace displayed an inscription
naming the oYcina of the legio VIII Augusta.41 Outside of the German
provinces military personnel are also found in other quarries: a protector
consularis together with a centurio of the coh. III Alpinorum Antoniniana set
up an inscription in the quarries on the island of Brattia/mod. Brac near
Salona.42 Furthermore, vexillations of the legio II Augusta and the legio XX
Valeria Victrix are recorded in the Cumberland quarries in Roman Britain,
perhaps supplying (although not exclusively) the construction eVorts at
Hadrians Wall.43 In the immediate vicinity south of Hadrians Wall, at
Coombe Crag, Lodge Crag, and Haltwhistleburn inscriptions record the use
of soldiers from legio VI Victrix in quarries opened for this speciWc purpose.44
One of the inscriptions of the Cumberland quarries may give the function
of a soldier of legio XX Valeria Victrix as a [co]r(nicen).45 The Brohltal quarries
also yielded a votive inscription by M. Hellius Secundus, a tubicen of the legio
X Gemina pia Wdelis probably from Trajans reign.46 The use of the signalling
corps in army quarries is moreover documented in the quarry of Arulis/mod.
Enesh near Zeugma on the Euphrates. A Rabilius Beliabus(?), tubicen of
legio IIII Scythica, seems to have been an essential part of the legionary
workforce there.47 A number of inscriptions found at the Arulis quarries,
engraved on diVerent heights on the rockface, some in the form of tabulae
ansatae, others inscribed on altars found in niches, seem to indicate that
vexillations of the IIII Scythica quarried stone there from the beginning of the
second century ad to the early third century ad.48 Oliver Stoll argued that
signiferi and tubicines were used in the quarries on account of their acquaint-
ance with administration and accounting. Michael A. Speidel, however, has
proposed that the tubicines might have sounded signals in order to indicate
the hours or to give warnings about blocks being moved by crane.49
The legio IIII Scythica took part in a number of building projects: legionary
contingents helped to cut a canal between the Orontes and Karasu river in ad
75 and construct a number of bridges over it.50 At the same time soldiers of
the IIII Scythica dug canals and tunnels into Mons Coryphaeus at Seleuceia
Pieria in order to divert a stream which threatened to silt up the citys

40
AE 1922: 62 Finke 248. 41
CIL XIII 5989.
42 43
AE 1979: 448, cf. Wilkes 1969: 228 f. RIB 998, 999, 1001, 1005, 1008, 1009, 1014, 1016.
44 45
RIB 1946, 1953, 1680. RIB 998.
46 47
CIL III 7694 (Brohltal). IGLS I 68.
48
Stoll 1998: 120 f. IGLS I 69, 70, 77 Saxer 1967: 27981; Speidel 2001: 153 f. with fn. 6.
49
Speidel 1998: 177, no. 4; Stoll 1998: 122.
50
AE 1983: 927. On the involvement of the legio IIII Scythica in construction work at
Antiochia, Dura Europos, and Artaxata, cf. Speidel 2001: 154 f.
 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations 177

harbour.51 In the spring of ad 73 a detachment of the legio III Gallica and the
legio IIII Scythica constructed a hydraulic installation at Aini. The legio IIII
Scythica built a bridge over the Karasu river near Habes, possibly during the
Flavian period, the building material of which was provided by a quarry in the
immediate vicinity. The rockface of the quarry was inscribed by the hard-
working IIII Scythica.52
Although unpopular with most soldiers, quarry work was apparently a
regular part of legionary life. A soldier of the legio III Cyrenaica based in Petra/
Arabia, C. Julius Apollinaris, writes home to his father in Egypt in ad 107 that
he is Wne, while others were breaking stones all day, and doing other things.53
After being promoted to the rank of principalis and transferred to Bostra, he
writes another letter and exclaims: I give thanks to Sarapis and Good
Fortune, that while all are labouring the whole day through at cutting stones,
I as a principalis move about doing nothing.54 From its stay in Egypt the
legio III Cyrenaica left a duty roster on papyrus, rendering the assignments of
soldiers from October 110 in ad 87. The roster gives the posting of C. Iulius
Valens for the 3/4 October ad cunicul(os) cal(carios)/cal(cis) in a limestone
quarry or lime-kilns of unknown location.55
Besides legionary units, auxiliary cohortes and alae also were seconded to
quarrying and construction duty in the Nile Valley. Near Eileithyiaspolis/
mod. El-Kab, 20 km north of Edfu, on the left bank of the Nile, a sandstone
quarry was opened at El Mahamid.56 We have records of an unknown soldier
of a legio II, who, in the eleventh year of Hadrians reign, searched and
discovered these sandstone quarries (
), and a certain Apollonios of
the ala Commagenorum, who inscribed his 
in the rockface(?) of
the quarry.57 Moreover, in the Gebel el-Toukh quarries on the east side of the
Nile, close to Ptolemais Hermiu/mod. El Menshije, where a Wne white lime-
stone was quarried, traces of Ptolemaic and Roman extraction were observed in
Steinbruchgebiet (quarrying area) 4 and 7.58 Latin and Greek inscriptions
discovered within the conWnes of Steinbruchgebiet 4 attest to the presence of a
military unit there. Q. Caesius Valentius, decurio of the ala Vocontiorum,
received two honoriWc inscriptions from the commilitones under his com-
mand.59 The commilitones who were on guard duty, the cohors (II Hispanorum
Cyrenaica) scutata civium Romanorum and the cohors III Ituraeorum, engraved
an inscription in the quarries as well.60 We do Wnd centuriones of the legio XXII

51
IGRR III 1005 IGLS III 1137.
52
IGLS 66 Wagner 1977: 522 fn. 38; Speidel 2001: 153.
53 54
P.Mich. 466, with Speidel 2001: 154. P.Mich. 465.
55 56
Davies 1989: 38; Fink 1971: no. 9. Klemm & Klemm 1992: 22831.
57 58
I.Th.Sy. 35. Klemm & Klemm 1992: 178 f.
59 60
CIL III 12067, 12068. CIL III 12069. On the cohors Scutata c.R., cf. Spaul 2000: 495.
178 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations

Deiotariana and the legio III Cyrenaica, as well as trierarchs and nauarchs of the
classis Augusta Alexandriana, setting up a series of altars with votive inscriptions
at Akoris. Titus Egnatius Tiberianus, centurio of the legio III Cyrenaica and
praepositus of the quarries i.e. Kd B


[], from where(?) the
pavement of the city of Alexandria derives, dedicated an altar to Zeus Megistos
in ad 82/3.61 The Wndspot of the altar is unknown, but it has been speculated
that the stone originates from the quarries near Akoris in the Gebel el-Teir.62
The other attested military units perhaps had contingents stationed in the
limestone quarries nearby (c.1020 km from Akoris) such as El Saweita,
Gebel el-Teir, Tehna, Wadi Sheikh, and in the large quarries of Zawiet Sultan,
north of Alabastrine/Alabastronpolis.63 Based on this assumption, we might
have a situation comparable to the Brohltal quarries near Bonn in Germania
Superior.64 Besides inscriptions on stone, Fritz Mitthof recently published a
receipt of a soldier who was probably stationed at the Akoris quarries to the
   

of Soknopaiou Nesos, in which he acknowledges the
requisition of unknown goods for the Akoris quarries.65 A similar receipt
documents the delivery of requisitioned palm Wbres from the komarch of
Philadelphia to a soldier sent by the commander of the Roman army contingent
at the Akoris quarries.66 The unit to which these soldiers belonged is not
named. The Roman army certainly supervised the extensive quarrying proced-
ures at Syene where the inscription of an ala Maur(orum?), documents the
extraction of columns and pilasters between ad 206 and 210.67
Although this short list of quarries run by Roman army and navy units is
incomplete, it has become evident that soldiers, as well as oYcers, were
provided with ample opportunity to acquire technical and managerial exper-
tise in quarrying operations. This is unsurprising, as it was part of the
governors task to provide assistance to municipal building projects within
his province and deploy soldiers when necessary.68 In fact, army units were
readily deployed for numerous public construction projects such as roads,
bridges, aqueducts, etc., which usually included the opening and exploitation
of quarries, preferably as close to the building site as possible.69 The exact
procedures for managing the pool of experienced oYcers, and for dispatching

61
Bernand 1988, no. 3. For a further soldier of classis Augusta Alexandriana at Mons
Claudianus (O.Claud. 540, 541), cf. MaxWeld 2002: 76.
62
Bernand 1988: 6.
63
Klemm & Klemm 1992: 78101.
64
I.Akoris 3, 12, 14, 16, 1821.
65
P.Alex.inv. 463, cf. Mitthof 1994: 207, 210 f.
66
BGU VII 1612, cf. Mitthof 1994: 207.
67
CIL III 75 ILS 4424.
68
Ulpian, Dig. 1,16,7,1.
69
For an overview, cf. Horster 2001: 16887 with Appendices 2 and 3.
 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations 179

them to the imperial quarries, remain unknown. The provincial governors

may have requested military oYcers with special skills from neighbouring
provinces, or directly from the emperor.

5.1.3. Deployment and Regular Tasks of Army

Units in Imperial Quarries
5.1.3.1. Egyptian Eastern Desert
Soldiers of auxiliary units were not only present at the quarries in the
Egyptian Eastern Desert, but were posted along the roads as well. The ostraca
of Mons Claudianus and inscriptions at Mons Porphyrites or Mons Ophiates
document the presence of cohortes equitatae or alae.70 The praefecti Vibius
Alexander and Antonius Flavianus mentioned in the ostraca of Mons Clau-
dianus were probably in charge of one of these units scattered along the desert
routes to Mons Porphyrites and Mons Claudianus.71 Detachments of various
auxiliary units garrisoned numerous fortlets along the roads from Koptos to
Myos Hormos or Berenike, of which some stood in the immediate vicinity of
quarries at Wadi Hammamat and Wadi Umm Fawakhir or Wadi Gemal, the
latter near beryl mines.72
The majority of the auxiliary soldiers seconded to the diVerent praesidia
east of the Nile had their main camp in the Thebaid.73 Thus, the praefecti of
these units mentioned in the ostraca of Mons Claudianus probably had their

70
Mons Claudianus: coh. I. Fl. Cilicum eq. (ad 118): I.Pan 42, 47; ala Apriana (Trajan): O.
Claud.inv. 413; coh. II Thracum (Trajan): O.Claud.inv. 6038. O.Claud. 388 names a Petronius
Valens who might be C. Petronius Valens, a beneWciarius of the cohors II Thracum (CIL III 12076
SB 4593); coh. II Itur. eq. (ad 144; 22235): O.Claud.inv. 7363. coh. I. Lus. eq.: I.Pan 56.
MaxWeld 2000: 429 f.; MaxWeld 2001: 152, table 7.2; MaxWeld 2002: 80 f., table. The brief of the
soldier from classis Augusta Alexandriana documented in the two receipts for advance payment
(O. Claud. 540, 541) is unknown, cf. MaxWeld 2002: 76. Mons Porphyrites: ala Vocontiorum (ad
113): AE 1936: 60; cohors I Apamenorum equitata (Antonine period): I.Pan 20; MaxWeld 2000:
430; MaxWeld 2001: 152, table 7.2; MaxWeld 2002: 81, table. Mons Ophiates: coh. Flori (ad 11): I.
Pan 51; coh. III Itur. eq. (ad 150152/3): I.Pan 53; ala I Thr. Maur. (2nd cent. ad): AE 1954: 85
AE 1952: 249; cohors I Lusitanorum equitata (2nd cent. ad): I. Pan. 56; MaxWeld 2000: 430;
MaxWeld 2001: 152, table 7.2; MaxWeld 2002: 80, table.
71
Cuvigny 2002: 240.
72
Wadi Hammamat/Umm Fawakhir: Coh. I. Fl. Cilicum eq. (Domitian): I.Ko.Ko. 52; coh.
Nigri: I.Ko.Ko. 41; coh. Facundi: I.Ko.Ko. 133; coh. Flori: Kayser 1993, no. 1; all ad 1114. Wadi
Gemal:cohors Nigri Cameresina (ad 1518): O.Tait. I 245, cf. MaxWeld 2000: 426 fn. 105. The
ostraca from the military forts at Maximianon/mod. Al-Zarqa and Krokodilo/mod. Al-Muwayh
attest the fabrication of stone tools, but do not refer to any extractive operations, cf. Cuvigny
2003c: 3713.
73
Except for ala I Thracum Mauretana, based at Alexandria, cf. MaxWeld 2000: 430.
180 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations

headquarters in the Nile valley. Unfortunately we are unable to ascertain

whether they were posted at Syene, the home base of most units documented
in the Eastern Desert, or perhaps closer to the supply routes leading out to
Mons Claudianus, Mons Porphyrites, and Mons Ophiates.
The auxiliary units were either cohortes equitatae, equipped with a sign-
iWcant number of troops on horseback or camel, or were cavalry alae. A high
level of mobility was an important factor, as the unit detachments executed
various tasks along the roads. The ostraca excavated in the praesidia (notably
Maximianon and Krokodilo) along the KoptosMyos Hormos road provide
some insight into the regular activities of these unit detachments. The rosters
for guard duty on the  
, watchtower, or the coxae, the four corner
towers of the fort, as well as lists of garrison members, allow one to determine
the size of the military garrisons in the praesidia. The garrison numbers
range between Wfteen and twenty soldiers, both foot soldiers and horsemen.
The soldiers were probably relieved on a regular basis but the length of duty in
the desert is unknown.74 The garrison stood under the command of a curator
praesidii. Curator was not a regular rank in the Roman army, but merely a role
Wlled by the principales (sesquiplicarii and duplicarii).75 The main responsi-
bilities of the curator and the garrison under his command are explained by
documentary evidence, such as circulary notes or letters addressed to the
curator individually or to the curatores along the road by the prefect of
Berenike or by decuriones, and daily journals. The curator and his garrison
were to provide security for travellers and goods on the road section under
their surveillance. They also ensured the swift transfer of information by the
oYcial courier, and provided water for travellers and animals.76 The con-
struction of strongholds, as Cuvigny argues, was perhaps necessitated by an
upsurge in banditry by the local Bedu. A number of ostraca from Krokodilo
and Mons Claudianus attest clashes between the army and the local tribes,
who often attacked the forts. For example, in an unpublished ostracon from
Mons Claudianus, Petearoeris complains to his father Bekis that he had not
eaten for two days out of fear of a barbarian assault. Another text from
Krokodilo records that sixty barbarians actually launched an attack on the
garrison at Patkoua.77 In one document, the prefect of Berenike requested the
curatores of the praesidia to furnish travelling parties with escorts. These
military escorts accompanied the travellers for a limited distance from their
own praesidium to the next and apparently returned to their base after

74
Cuvigny 2003b: 3079, 311 f.
75
Breeze & Dobson 1993: 76; Cuvigny 2003b: 314 f.
76
Cuvigny 2003b: 315 f., 32633.
77
O.Claud.inv. 4888. O.Krok. 87, cf. Cuvigny 2003b: 34652, esp. 351 f. with further ostraca.
 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations 181

completion of their task. Hence, the escort changed at every praesidia. The
escorts usually consisted of one or two soldiers, mostly horsemen. Further-
more, patrols, vestigationes, could be sent out to monitor the roads and the
tribes. Furthermore, circular notes sent by the prefect of Berenike and others
were transported by cavalrymen from the praesidia, seconded for courier
duty. These messengers only carried the document for a certain distance
and then handed it over to the next soldier. Water appears not to have been
freely available for civilian travellers at the praesidia, and certainly not in high
quantities. Letters suggest that requests for water went to curatores or soldiers
and it seems to have been rationed for the members of the Roman army and
civilian inhabitants of the forts.78
The function of these military installations along the road from Koptos to
Myos Hormos was probably not signiWcantly diVerent from the forts along
the roads to the quarries at Mons Claudianus and Mons Porphyrites. But
since the latter roads were used for quarrying purposes only, there were some
variations. As the road to either quarry was a cul-de-sac, the curatores of the
praesidia had to deal with less traYc engaged in private enterprise travelling to
the Red Sea and back. The praesidia were probably visited by supply caravans
going to the quarries, and stone and column transports making the return
journey. Other visitors would have included the tabellarii of the quarrying
administration. Travel was strictly controlled by the soldiers and travellers
were issued with a pass, . These passes apparently could be bought
at any station or fort, were not issued ad personam, and could be used only for
a certain period.79 The issuing of passes/ was perhaps necessitated by
the scarce water supplies at Mons Claudianus and at the road stations. The
amount of water was reported regularly to the centurio, who was in charge of
rationing the water supply for a population of up to c.1,000 civilian and
military personnel at Mons Claudianus.80 Besides this considerable popula-
tion of long-term residents and a large amount of animals for which the
authorities were responsible, the need to supply additional visitors with water
surely posed diYculties.81 The curatores of the praesidia were required to
guarantee the provision of water and the status of water supply was reported
regularly to the commanding oYcer.82 Perhaps the issuing of  pro-
vided the authorities with a tool to monitor and restrict arrivals and depar-
tures from Mons Claudianus and thus was the basis on which the praesidia
were informed about the travellers on the road to the Nile Valley. The 
78
Cuvigny 2003b: 32632 f.
79
O.Claud. 246, 247.
80
Tomber 1996: 42; Cuvigny 1997a: 79.
81
MaxWeld 1996: 11 f.
82
O.Claud. 2.
182 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations

mentioned in the ostraca should not be confused with the so-called laissez-
passer- or sauf-conduits-ostraca found at Claudianus. These ostraca were
issued by centuriones to the stationarii or curatores of the praesidia, requesting
to let a named person or a number of unidentiWed persons and animals
pass.83 The laissez-passer ostraca were probably not carried by the travellers.
Like the circular orders requesting escorts for travellers on the KoptosMyos
Hormos road, these were probably circular orders issued by the centurio and
copied at the way-stations and praesidia, including the fort at Mons Claudia-
nus. The soldiers along the routes were thus informed of the number of
individuals and animals travelling on the road to the Nile valley or to Mons
Claudianus.84 Unlike the circular orders from the KoptosMyos Hormos
routes, the stationarii or curatores were not ordered to dispatch escorts to
accompany the travellers. Such assignments do not appear in the published
ostraca from Mons Claudianus at any rate.85 Members of the auxiliary
garrisons were, however, sent on a regular patrol, the , which accom-
panied travel parties or the regular supply caravan ( ).86 Orders and
requests from commanding oYcers and soldiers, i.e. the centuriones, decur-
iones, and others at Mons Claudianus, to the curatores at the praesidia and the
stationarii/K along the roadsand vice versawere transmitted by
tabellarii and the regular cavalry patrol or travelling soldiers.87 The ostraca
also mention a 
 F who was in charge of the
praesidium at the Mons Claudianus quarries. The curator stood in regular contact
with his colleagues at the praesidia or the stationarii along the desert roads.88 The
detachment (two oYcers, thirty footsoldiers, six cavalry, twenty-two recruits) at
Mons Claudianus was considerably larger than the garrison of the praesidia
on the KoptosMyos Hormos road.89 The greater numbers of troops attested
in the quarries mirrors the amount of additional responsibilities the garrison
had. An additional feature of the military presence at Mons Claudianus was
the medical infrastructure, which was probably set up and run by the Roman

83
Rengen 1992; Adams 2001: 173; MaxWeld 2001: 160.
84
Bulow-Jacobsen 1998: 63 f.
85
Cuvigny 2003b: 326.
86
: O.Claud. 227, 279, 375, 376, 380.  : O.Claud. 245, 273, 278, 375, 376.
Bingen 1997: 82; Bulow-Jacobsen 1998: 63 f.
87
Orders and letters to and from centuriones: O.Claud. 357, 359, 360, 36870; decuriones:
O.Claud. 3635; duplicarii: O.Claud. 124, 125, 144, 366, 367; sesquiplicarius: O.Claud. 126.
88
O.Claud. 3716, 37882; O.Claud.inv. 5201, cf. Rengen 1992: 59 f.; Rengen 1997: 219;
MaxWeld 2001: 159. The rank of the curator is not speciWed, but the function could be held by a
decurio or normal soldiers, duplicarii or sesquiplicarii, Bulow-Jacobsen 1997a: 208 f. On dupli-
carii and sesquiplicarii in general, cf. Le Bohec 1994: 47; Speidel 2000b: 69 fn. 27.
89
Cuvigny 2005a: 3.
 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations 183

army.90 The ill were treated by doctors, N, who provided basic treatment,
while , veterinarians, were brought in for the horses of cavalry units.91
Sick lists appear on the ostraca, of which some were headed with the title r ,
lat. aegri. These lists note the day and month and comprise four to six names.92
More detailed lists report up to ten, even sixteen, ill or injured. Perhaps a
rudimentary hospital existed at Claudianus for which these lists were pro-
duced.93 In addition to treating patients, the doctors also distributed medicine
and handed out medicinal appliances to treat injuries.94 The high risk of (fatal)
accidents, injuries, and illnesses connected with the quarrying business is cer-
tainly reXected in the written documents. While some ostraca report deaths,95
others attest a variety of injuries.96 Not all inhabitants at Mons Claudianus,
however, had access to medical treatment. The ostraca appear to name only
soldiers or
, whereas  might have been excluded from the
medical treatment.97
The letters from the I Rufus to the prefect Vibius Alexander
and the procurator Tertullus suggest that supplying the quarries with
food, animals, slaves, equipment, etc., may have been the task of the curator
at the praesidium of Mons Claudianus.98 For certain tasks the army could
fall back on the civilian personnel present at the quarries: for the trans-
mission of letters, for example, the curator at Mons Claudianus could rely
on
.99 Moreover, the curator or centurio(?) may have diverted
quarry workers from their tasks for the needs of outposts (e.g. to dress
millstones).100 Furthermore the commanding oYcers on the spot were
informed on the whereabouts of quarry workers: in an ostracon Demetras
writes to the decurio Publius, that Nemonios, a stonemason (
),
did not arrive in the quarry of the Hydreuma.101 Furthermore, one
ostracon is headed with the title K d I
which
translates as undisciplined civilian workmen. The ten people listed did

90
Le Bohec 1994: 52; Wilmanns 1995.
91
O.Claud. 120(?). O.Claud.inv. 15382921, 2055, 27953739, 3260, cf. Cuvigny 1992b:
106 f.
92
O.Claud. 191210.
93
O.Claud. 115, 21219.
94
O.Claud. 120, 174(?), 220.
95
O.Claud. 121 (coYns), 211. O.Claud.inv. 415, 673, cf. Cuvigny 1992b: 108.
96
O.Claud. 119, 212, 213, 217, 2213.
97
Cuvigny 1992b : 82; Cuvigny 1997a: 20.
98
O.Claud.inv. 7295, cf. Cuvigny 2002: 2458.
99
On use of civilians and
 cf. O.Claud. 229, 266, 371, 372, 3746. See Bulow-
Jacobsen 1998: 64.
100
O.Claud. 287, 288.
101
O.Claud. 383.
184 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations

not appear for work. Another list ends with the remark P I:
did not come.102
In addition to the soldiers the workforce was also seconded for guard-duty
at posts. Lists of vigiles record the names of the guards, their daily routine and
duties. As Adam Bulow-Jacobsen points out, only a few vigiles on duty were
soldiers;  and 
 appear to have been mostly employed in
this function.103 The lists name eight or four men, two guards for each of the
four watches during the night.104 As the lists were found within the fort at
Claudianus, the guard posts must have been located close by.105 The quarries
perhaps remained unguarded at night. During the day the working parties
could be accompanied by two guards, .106 Distinct from the night-
watches were the  , manned watchtowers. Their position at Claudia-
nus perhaps ensured the quick exchange of basic information by signalling
between the 130 quarries and the central structure at Wadi Umm Hussein.
Such towers have also been observed at Mons Porphyrites and Mons Ophiates
(cf. 2.1.2, 2.1.4). More complex information was perhaps transmitted by men
on I -duty. The   and (?) most likely did not have
military backgrounds. The position of watchtowers ( ) at Claudianus
do not imply that they were built in order to monitor the surrounding area,
although internal control of convicts might be a possibility.107

5.1.3.2. Simitthus
The military presence at Simitthus may have consisted partly of soldiers from
the legio III Augusta and an auxiliary unit, cohors II Flavia Afrorum equitata.
The evidence for the latter include the tombstone of Cassius Iscoesius Valens,
a soldier, and a building(?)-inscription perhaps naming a praefectus cohortis of
this unit at the time of the Severans.108 One funerary stone of an L. Flaminius,
miles legionis of the III Augusta, who was killed by the enemy in a skirmish at
102
O.Claud. 384. O.Claud.inv. 415, cf. Cuvigny 1992b: 108. O.Claud. ZPE 1. O.Claud.inv.
746, cf. Cuvigny 1992b: 102; Cuvigny & Wagner 1986: 637.
103
: O.Claud. 30934, 348;
: O.Claud. 33747, 34953; soldiers:
O.Claud. 356. Bulow-Jacobsen 1997c.
104
O.Claud. 30936, cf. Bulow-Jacobsen 1997c: 166 f.
105
O.Claud. 33756.
106
O.Claud.inv. 1252, cf. Bulow-Jacobsen 1992a: 57 f.; Peacock 1992: 9; MaxWeld 2001: 156.
107
The excavations yielded a number of ostraca giving the timetable of several posts, cf.
O.Claud. 175, 3048 with Cuvigny 1997b: 14850. On watch-towers in the Eastern Desert, Brun,
Cuvigny, & Redde 2003.
108
Legio III Augusta in general, cf. Le Bohec 1989a. Cohors II Flavia eq.: AE 1992: 1821
Khanoussi 1991: 830 f. AE 1994: 1882 AE 1992: 1822 Khanoussi 1991: 831 f., and photo,
p. 832, Wg. 5. For the cohors II Flavia Afrorum equitata, see Le Bohec 1989b: 6770; Spaul 2000:
462 f.
 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations 185

the praesidium in the saltus Philomusianus, has been understood to indicate

that the quarries at Simitthus were part of this saltus.109 However, there is no
evidence to support this view. Flaminius site of death was not necessarily the
same as that where he had been stationed and buried.110 Besides the tomb-
stone of Flaminius, which dates to the year ad 568, the other inscriptions
appear to be of a later date.111 The funerary inscription of L. Venidius
Repostus, another legionary soldier of the III Augusta, might belong to the
ad 160s.112 A fragmentary inscription seems to attest to the presence of a
detachment of legio III Augusta at Simitthus under Elagabal (ad 21822).113
The soldiers documented at Simitthus were likely garrisoned there in
connection with the quarries. Unlike their colleagues stationed at the remote
Mons Claudianus they probably did not have to deal with problems of supply
or security of transport. The epigraphic record and archaeological remains at
Simitthus, however, only supply fragmentary and circumstantial evidence for
the duties of the military personnel. The probable use of convict labour,
documented by the large camp north of the quarries, made the presence of
military guards necessary, not only in order to guarantee the security of the town
of Simitthus close by, but also to prevent convicts from escaping (cf. 2.1.6).
However, there is currently no evidence that the military personnel at Simitthus,
as at other quarries, was directly involved in the process of quarrying.

5 . 2 . T H E RO M A N A R M Y A N D I M P E R I A L M I N E S

Despite abundant material attesting the presence of military personnel in

mining districts throughout the Roman empire, detailed information on the
functions of soldiers in mining ventures is not forthcoming. Hence, the
subsequent survey of military inscriptions at or near mining sites will merely
allow for limited insights into the purpose of their deployment. In fact, the
raison detre of some garrisons (Ravna, Montana) may not necessarily be
explained by their vicinity to mining operations alone.
109
CIL VIII 14603 ILS 2305.
110
Khanoussi 1997. See e.g. AE 1993: 1572 (Apameia) naming a Vivius(?) Batao who dies
whilst debarking at Aigiai in Cilicia. According to his inscription the corpse was taken to
Catabolum (Cilicia) and a gravestone set in Apameia-on-the-Orontes in Syria. For critisism
of Khanoussis view, cf. Mackensen 2005: 11 f. with bibliography.
111
For the date, cf. Lassere 1980: 33 f.; Le Bohec 1989a: 157 and fn. 84; Khanoussi 1991: 827.
112
The name of his centurio, a Antonius Clemens, also appears in a list of centuriones of legio
III dedicating collectively at Lambaesis in ad 162, cf. AE 1992: 1820 Khanoussi 1991: 827 f., cf.
Le Bohec 1989a: 168 f.
113
AE 1992: 1823 Khanoussi 1991: 833, no. 4, with photo on 832, Wg. 6.
186 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations

5.2.1. Roman Iberia

The series of dated inscriptions by the military vexillations at Villals and
Luyego in northwestern Spain provides us with insight into the internal
hierarchy of military detachments seconded to the mining areas and enables
us to observe changes in the vexillations and oYcers dispatched to this area
over a limited period of time.
The vexillatio of legio VII Gemina celebrates the legions creation on 10
June, whereas the soldiers of cohors I Gallica and cohors I Celtiberorum honour
the formation of their units on 22 April and on 15 October. In the years ad
184 and 191 members of ala II Flavia are listed in the inscriptions, suggesting
that an additional detachment of a diVerent unit may have been present at
Villals. Perhaps it replaced cohors I Celtiberorum, which is not mentioned on
the stelae after ad 167. All inscriptions name the highest oYcer present and
the imperial oYcial in charge of the mining district. They list the legionary
and auxiliary centuriones, and the decuriones of the auxiliary units, followed
by the beneWciarii procuratoris Augusti and Wnally the signiferi, imaginiferi and
tesserarii of the legion or auxiliary cohorts. The centurio legionis perhaps held
the overall command of the vexillations(?) at Wrst, but after ad 163 legionary
centurions disappear from the inscriptions set up for the vexillatio legionis VII
Gemina. Centuriones of cohors I Gallica and, after 184, decuriones of ala II
Flavia perhaps took over tasks within the mining district.114 The principales
listed in the inscribed stelae of ad 163 to 167 (180?) are a regular feature of
most vexillations and therefore did not necessarily apply their administrative
capabilities to the mining areas of northwestern Spain. The disappearance
of legionary oYcers and principales from the inscriptions at Villals and
Luyego might be of signiWcance, perhaps reXecting a reduction in troop
levels from ad 175 onwards.115 Another noticeable change is the absence of
beneWciarii procuratoris from the epigraphic record after ad 180. It is not
known whether this change reXects the diminishing importance of the gold
mines or whether troops were relocated for other reasons, such as the need to
fend oV the Moorish invaders.116
The vexillation seems to have been posted in or near Villals or Luyego,
where the main bulk of inscriptions were found. However, to date no military
camp or buildings have been discovered there. In fact, only few military
encampments in northwestern Spain are to be found in the immediate

114
Saxer 1967: 129 f.; LeRoux 1977: 3657; LeRoux 1982: 273; Domergue 1990: 34851; Ott
1995: 154.
115
Domergue 1990: 21524.
116
Domergue 1990: 300.
 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations 187
Table 2: Army vexillations at Villals and Luyego
Mananes 1982: Iulius Marcus, Valerius
112 Luyego; centurio, leg. Victoris,
c.138161; VII G.F. decurio
leg. VII G. F.
CIL II 2552 ILS 9125 Licinius Hermes, Lucretius Fabius Iulius
CBFIR 857 Saxer 1967: Paternus, lib. Aug., Paternus, Marcianus, Iulianus,
129. Villals; 10 June 163: centurio, leg. procurator decurio, coh. I b.f.proc. signifer, leg.
leg. VII G.F. (VII G.F.) Celtiberorum Aug. (VII G.F.)
Mananes 1982: Lice(!)nius Hermes, Lucri(!)tius Aemulius Aulius
148. Corporales, Paternus, (lib.) Aug. Paternus, Aecianus, Aulianus,
10 June 163: leg. VII centurio, leg. procurator decurio, coh. I b.f.proc. signifer, leg.
G.A(ntoniniana?) VII G.A. Celtiberorum Aug. VII G.A
CIL II 2556 Zoilus, Valerius Valerius Iulius
CBFIR 855 lib. Aug., Flavius, Valens, Iulianus,
Saxer 1967: procurator centurio, b.f.proc. signifer,
133. Villals; 22 coh. I Aug. leg. VII G.F.
April 166: coh.I Gallica
Gallica

CIL II 2553 Zoilus, Valerius Aelius Iulius

ILS 9127 lib. Aug., Flavius, Flavius, Sedulus,
CBFIR 856 procurator centurio, coh.I b.f.proc. tesserarius,
Saxer 1967: 131. Villals; Gallica Aug. coh. I Celt-
15 October 167: iberorum
coh. I Celtiberorum - Lucretius
Maternus,
imaginifer,
leg. VII G.F.

AE 1910 : 1 M.Sentius Val.

ILS 9130 Bucco, Sempro-
IRLeon 40 centurio, nianus
CBFIR 858 coh. I Gallica b.f.proc.
Saxer 1967, Aug.
134. Villals;
22 April 175:
coh. I Gallica
AE 1967: 230 M. M. Mes[ . . . ]ris, Avitius
IRLeon 40; Luyego; Aurelius centurio, coh. I Paternus
10 June 180: Eutyches, Gallica
leg. VII G.F. lib. Aug.
procurator
AE 1910: 5 CIL II Aurelius, Valerius
2554 Saxer 1967: Eutyches Sempronianus
lib. Aug., decurio, ala II
(Continued)
188 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations
Table 2: (Continued)
130; Villals; procurator Flavia
10 June 184:
leg. VII G.F.
AE 1910 : 2 Aurelius Valerius
ILS 9131; Firmus, Marcel[lus],
Villals, [pr(ocurator)] decurio, ala II
22 April 191: met(allorum) Flavia
coh. I Gallica

vicinity of the mining zones. An auxiliary camp was discovered at Valdemeda,

situated near Roman mining sites in the Rio Eria Valley.117 Moreover, several
training camps were built near Castrocalbon, but never housed an auxiliary
unit for a long period.118 The detachments present in the mining zones of the
Duerna valley originated from legionary and auxiliary bases close by.119
During the Flavian period the former encampment of legio X Gemina at
Rosinos de Vidriales was turned into a smaller fort for ala II Flavia Hispa-
norum c.R. and remained occupied until the third century ad.120 The cohors
I Celtiberorum eq. c.R. had its headquarters in Santa Maria da Cidadela,
Sobrado dos Monxes, c.40 km west of Lucus Augusti/mod. Lugo, where it is
attested from ad 134 onwards.121 The camp of cohors I Gallica eq. c.R. was possibly
located at Banos de Bande (Orense), although the Notitia Dignitatum attests its
camp in Veleia (Iruna, Prov. Alava) at the end of the fourth century ad.122
In the Iberian context the distribution of military units provides some inter-
esting insights into the strategic importance of the north-west. Until the mid-
Wrst century, the initial legionary and auxiliary units deployed during the
Cantabrian wars had been strategically placed to secure the control over
the Cantabrians and Asturians. Under the Flavians, the military presence was
signiWcantly reduced, leaving only one legion and a few auxiliary units in charge
of the Iberian peninsula. Apart from the auxiliary camps of the units mentioned
above, legio VII Gemina at Legio/mod. Leon was positioned immediately south
of the passes up to Asturia Transmontana and west of the mining areas near
Asturica Augusta, being superbly situated to handle any problems arising in the

117
Sanchez-Palencia 1980; Sanchez-Palencia 1986: 228, 234, Wg. 2.
118
Jones 1976: 59; LeRoux 1992: 235.
119
LeRoux 1982: 107, 11214; Balil Illana et al. 1991: 85.
120
LeRoux 1982: 1457; LeRoux 1992: 233.
121
Caamano Gesto 1984; Caamano Gesto 1989; LeRoux 1992: 233. The unit is attested in the
region through a tessera hospitalis of the praefectus cohortis with the Coelerni of the conventus
Bracarensis, cf. AE 1972: 282. LeRoux 1982: 14950; LeRoux 1992: 233.
122
LeRoux 1982: 147; LeRoux 1992: 2324.
 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations 189

region.123 Further units, such as ala Tauriana torquata victrix c.R., probably
based near Calagurris in the Ebro Valley, and the ala I Augusta close to Anavieja
(prov. of Clunia), were to be found in the north as well.124 Although military
detachments were placed throughout the three Roman provinces in the Iberian
Peninsula, the main military focus clearly lay on the north-west.125 The Moorish
incursions into the southern Iberian peninsula in ad 171/2 revealed the weak-
ness of this military disposition.126
The presence of military contingents seems less marked in imperial mines
other than those in northwestern Spain. The epigraphic record of Tresminas
contains a few inscriptions of the personnel based there: a soldier of legio
VII Gemina set up a votive inscription to Iuppiter at the end of the Wrst
century, a legionary detachment of the same unit commissioned a further
votive monument in ad 130, and cohors I Gallica eq. c.R. had an unknown
number of soldiers posted there.127 Apart from Tresminas, information on
army contigents in mining areas is scarce. The Vipasca tablets do refer to
milites using the baths within the mining district free of charge. However,
no inscriptions record a military presence.128 Funerary stelae of legionary
soldiers from other mining sites in Lusitania and Asturia et Callaecia provide
evidence for the presence of soldiers in their vicinity.129 In Roman Baetica
army units hardly appear in the mining areas. Only a very fragmented
funerary inscription of an eques legionis from the legio IIII Macedonica dating
to the mid-Wrst century records the presence of military personnel at Maga-
cela, a town in the vicinity of the Castuera mining area.130
It has been suggested that stamps on ingots provide additional evidence
for army units in Spanish mining zones, as lead ingots from the shipwreck oV
the coast near Comacchio (Ferrara) in northern Italy were thought to be
produced by the Roman army in Baetica in the early Augustan period.
However, recent metallurgic analysis of the ingots in question locates the
source of the lead not in Baetica, but near Carthago Nova, and it was

123
LeRoux 1982: 14453, 166; LeRoux 1995: 72.
124
LeRoux 1992: 2324.
125
LeRoux 1995: 72.
126
Christol & Demougin 1990: 195; Domergue 1990: 299, contra: LeRoux 1982: 173267,
Wg. 3; LeRoux 1992: 24858; LeRoux 1995: 735. For legio VII Gemina and Septimius Severus,
cf. Birley 1999: 126.
127
AE 1980: 582. CIL II 2389 AE 1907: 150. AE 1907: 151.
128
LMV l. 25.
129
Near Beccerea/Rio Navia 1 (Lugo), ILER 1014 IRPL 75 (San Roman de Cervantes;
adc.3063), cf. LeRoux 1982: 181, no. 37; near Barbantes, Razamonde (Orense) or Lago, Maside
(Orense), ILER 5997 (29 May ad 79), cf. LeRoux 1982: 196, no. 87; near Ribeira da Aravil,
Monforthino (POR 17), and Meimoa, Idanha-a-Velha: AE 1961: 358 AE 1967: 145; AE 1961:
359.
130
CIL II2/7 964 AE 1994: 885.
190 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations

convincingly argued that these ingots were probably not produced in a

military context.131

5.2.2. Germany
Incisions and stamps may reveal a military unit as the owner or perhaps even
the producer of an ingot, but they do not per se prove their control of mines
from which the ingot originated. A lead ingot from the camp at Haltern on
the river Lippe, east of the Rhine, weighing 64 kg, had its weight (cciii or 203
Roman pounds/66.472 kg) and the letters l xix, the initials of the 19th legion
destroyed in the Teutoburg forest in ad 9, carved into its side. Sigmar von
Schnurbein concluded that the lead probably originated from a mine in the
Eifel run by the legions. His interpretation, however, was based on the
assumption that the inscription, lxix, indicated the producer of the
ingot.132 Even though we cannot rule out that legio XIX (re-)cast ingots, the
inscription and the find spot do not support Schnurbeins conclusion. More-
over, the ingot may originate elsewhere: recent Wnds show that, in the
Augustan period, mining operations may have taken place near Brilon,
some 90 km east-south-east of Haltern, perhaps supplying the Roman army
in the provincia Germania.133 A further lead ingot inscribed with leg(io/nis)
XVI was discovered in the Eifel region near Bad Munstereifel at Mechernich
an area well known for its Roman mining activity. Legio XVI Gallica was based
at Novaesium/mod.Neuss from ad 43 to 70/1, c.70 km north of the Wndspot.134
Again, the inscription identifies a legion either as owner or producer of an ingot.
There is, however, no direct proof for a Roman vexillation extracting the lead.
The proximity of extractive operations to military installations, such as iron-
mining and smelting near frontier forts of Aalen and Buch, may be a weak
indication for the armys involvement in mining operations.135

5.2.3. Roman Britain

Roman Britain may oVer more convincing evidence that army units were in
direct control of smelting procedures, perhaps even the exploitation of the ore
itself. This is suggested by one lead ingot, discovered at St Valery sur Somme
131
Domergue et al. 2006, for older views cf. Berti 1985; Domergue 1987b; Garca-Bellido
19945; Garca-Bellido 1998.
132
Schnurbein 1971.
133
Rothenhofer 2003; Hanel & Rothenhofer 2005: 5365.
134
Horn 1987: 154 f. with p. 156, Wg. 91.
135
Johnson 1987: 13.
 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations 191

and probably originating from the Mendips, with the moulded mark Neronis
Aug(usti) (plumbum) Britan(nicum) l(egio) II (Augusta), which could be
translated as British (lead) of Nero Augustus. Legio II Augusta (made this).
As already argued above, the inscription may indicate the production of
ingots by the legio II Augusta for the Roman state (cf. 3.3.5). Further ingots
from Britain display the name of army units in moulded marks: a lead ingot
found near Mendip Hills renders Britannic[u]m Aug(usta) le(gio) II. Another
found at Caerwent was stamped by the same unit.136 One _of_ two lead _ ingots
originating from British mines and discovered near Chalon-sur-Saone were
stamped with the letters leg xxii, as well as doc and bflidoc. The latter is
read as b(ene)f(iciarius) l(egionis) I (Minerviae) doc. Nelis-Clement tenta-
tively argued that the import of lead ingots into Gaul may have been con-
trolled by a beneWciarius based at Gesoriacum/mod.Boulogne.137
Inscriptions on lead ingots set aside, archaeological evidence has been
interpreted as indicating the involvement of the Roman army in mining
operations. Excavations at the fortlet at Charterhouse-on-Mendip appear
to show that the Roman army was in control of the silver/lead mines as early
as the year 49.138 The fort at Pumsaint documents military presence at the
Dolaucothi gold mines in Wales, certainly during the Flavian period and into
the second century.139 The Wnd of lead and lead ore at Brough-on-Noe and of
lead ingots near Brough-on-Humber, which probably came from the lead
mines of Derbyshire, suggests that this was the reason for the establishment of
a castellum at Brough-on-Humber. Moreover, military forts at Brough-upon-
Stainmore, Whitley Castle, and Kirkby Thore in Westmoreland may have
been constructed to protect the lead mines at Alston Moor. It is a matter of
conjecture whether the two lead seals found at Alston Moor with the stamp of
cohors II Nerviorum and the letters metal(la?) on the reverse suggest the
exploitation of lead mines by this auxiliary unit based at Epiacum/mod.
Whitley Castle. A small wooden fortlet at Nanstallon near Bodmin (Cornwall)
has been thought to serve as a guard post for the lead and silver mines in the
area.140
The excavations at Beauport Park near Bottle have yielded a vast number of
tile stamps from the classis Britannica.141 Beauport Park is a site in The

136
RIB 2404.2, 25.
137
Nelis-Clement 2000: 259 f.; RIB II 2404.72a and b.
138
Todd 1996: 4; For the Mendip lead industry, cf. Elkington 1976; Stewart 2002: 1794. For
the forts, cf. Breeze 1987: 16; Johnson 1987: 13, 272.
139
Jones & Mattingly 1990: 1804; Jones 1991: 210, with further bibliography; Burnham
1997; Stewart 2002: 134.
140
LeRoux 1989: 172 with fn. 13.
141
RIB II/5 2481.6 V.
192 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations

Weald, an area in East Sussex heavily mined in Roman times for its iron. The
mining area covered at least 8 ha and comprised of a bath-house and a slag
heap of up to 15 m in height and 0.8 ha in size. The bath-house contained an
inscription and 1,641 stamped tiles of the classis Britannica were found
nearby.142 The Roman Xeet certainly provided the building material, but
there is no further epigraphic or archaeological evidence to attest the constant
presence of members of the classis Britannica there. Thus, it is unknown
whether the Roman Xeet provided security measures, ran the mines to supply
their own needs and/or those of the Roman army in Britain, or guarded the
transport of iron ingots oV the British Isles.

5.2.4. Danubian Provinces

We are comparatively well informed on the disposition of the army detach-
ment at Montana in Moesia Inferior which might have been charged with
protecting mining facilities to its southwest(?) (cf. 3.2.4). The cohors I Sugam-
brum veterana equitata, partly equipped with cavalry, was garrisoned there
some time during the Wrst quarter of the second century ad.143 During
Hadrians reign, a legionary detachment of legio XI Claudia replaced the
coh. I Sugambrum. The detachment consisted of nearly 100 men, a consider-
able reduction in size from the roughly 500 of the preceding auxiliary unit.144
Besides the inscriptions of the vexillatio legionis XI Claudiae at Montana, a
number of inscribed votive monuments were commissioned by members of
legio XI Claudia, mostly during the second century.145 A small number of
soldiers from legio I Italica may have formed their own vexillatio: according to
an inscription they were party to a venatio.146 Moreover, oYcers and bene-
Wciarii consulares from this legionary unit were based at Montana as well,

142
Wilson 1971: 277 f.; Brodribb & Cleere 1988; Jones & Mattingly 1990: 192 f.; Cleere &
David 1995: 5786; Stewart 2002: 13853. For the inscription, cf. Wright & Hassall 1971: 289,
no. 2; Brodribb & Cleere 1988: 261 f. with Wg. 11.
143
Ptolemy, Geog. 3.10.1, cf. Rankov 1983: 41 f. with fn. 16. Its presence at Montana is
conWrmed by two tile stamps of the unit (CIL III 12529), cf. Aleksandrov 1977: 59.
144
AE 1987: 867 AE 1999: 1327, cf. Rankov 1983: 53; Velkov & Alexandrov 1988; Velkov &
Aleksandrov 1994: 8 f., no. 9. The inscription (found at Eumeneia/mod. Ishekli in Phrygia)
attesting the presence of cohors I Sugambrum at Montana also reports its temporary departure to
Asia: AE 1927: 95 Buckler, Calder, & Cox 1926: 748, no. 201.
145
AE 1969/70, 577. AE 1985: 746. AE 1985: 751 AE 1987: 247. AE 1987: 869, 871, 876, 883,
8868 Velkov & Aleksandrov 1994, nos. 10, 16, 18, 34, 38, 42, 47, 53, 65, 71; additional
inscriptions, cf. Velkov & Aleksandrov 1994, nos. 84, 86, 88, 121, 138, 148.
146
AE 1987: 867, cf. Velkov & Alexandrov 1988; Velkov & Aleksandrov 1994: no. 9.
 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations 193

perhaps from the later second century onwards.147 Cavalry elements of legio I
Italica are represented by a p(rinceps) d(uplicarius) and a vexilarius equitum
during Gordians reign.148 In the Wrst half of the third century an auxiliary
unit, a numerus civium Romanorum, is recorded at Montana under the
command of centuriones of I Italica or XI Claudia.149 Rankov assumes that
the presence of an additional unit at Montana might be the result of a
heightened level of threat to the area and the mining zone.150 Moreover,
according to a fragmentary inscription from a fort near Kamena Riksa, a
cohors Dacorum may have been based there around ad 204 to provide security
for the mines in the Ogosta valley.151 As already noted above (cf. 3.2.4),
military oYcers of legio XI Claudia and legio I Italica may have controlled a
regio Montanensium.
At Timacum Minus(?)/mod. Ravna in Moesia Superior, military personnel
are likewise involved in the administration of a territorium. A praefectus
territorii had control of an area which could have incorporated a number of
silver and gold mines. The inscription, dated to the late second century ad,
suggests that this praefectus territorii had his own staV for the administration
of this district, consisting of soldiers of legio VII Claudia.152 The camp was
alternately occupied by diVerent auxiliary units: a cohors I Thracum Syriaca is
attested there from ad 70 to the early second century, and after ad 169 a
cohors II Aurelia Dardanorum.153
The Mt Kosmaj region in Moesia Superior was home to several diVerent
auxiliary detachments. Excavations in the early twentieth century yielded
evidence for a fort at Stojnik.154 Moreover, an inscribed votive altar discovered
there documents the transfer of a tribune from coh. XVIII Voluntariorum c.R.
to the cohors I Ulpia Pannoniorum milliaria equitata (c.1619). The inscription
does not clarify which unit was stationed at Mt Kosmaj, but one might expect
the newly promoted tribune to have commissioned the altar on his impending
departure to the new unit.155 A praefectus of cohors V (Callaecorum?)

147
Rankov 1983: 54 f. AE 1985: 743, 744. AE 1987: 867, 872, 873, 875, 881, 884. CIL III 12371;
cf. Velkov & Aleksandrov 1994, nos. 9, 14, 19, 30, 35, 41, 44, 48, 50, 51, 56, 57, 58, 78, 91.
148
AE 1957: 341, cf. Velkov & Aleksandrov 1994, nos. 22, 91; Rankov 1983: 55.
149
AE 1957: 338, and Velkov & Aleksandrov 1994: 3, 20, 96, 132.
150
Rankov 1983: 58 f.
151
CIL III 12382 (Kamenna Riksa).
152
IMS III/231. IMS III/229 ILJug 1297 AE 1934: 185. IMS III/230. IMS III/233 ILJug
1312 AE 1905: 163. A centurio of legio X Fretensis (based in Syria-Palaestina), is attested at
Timacum Minus, but probably died there during the course of the Marcomannic wars (IMS III/
2 34 ILJug, 1308 AE 1934: 187).
153
Coh. I Thrac. Syr.: IMS III/2, 29, 3740; coh. II Aur. Dard.: IMS III/2, 7(?)9, 1820, 22,
23, 4352.
154
Dusanic 1978: 237; Werner 1986: 562.
155
IMS I 97 CIL III 6302 ILS 2606 (Stojnik).
194 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations

Lucensium set up a further votive altar discovered at Suvodol near Stojnik,

perhaps in the years 166 to 169(?).156 A cippus in grey limestone even docu-
ments a valetudinarium, a hospital, of cohors II Aurelia nova milliaria eq. c.R.
for ad 179 in Stojnik.157 Furthermore, inscriptions record the presence of
ordinary auxiliary soldiers of this cohort at Guberevac, Sopot, and Stojnik.158
One of the main tasks of the Roman army units in Moesia Superior was to
provide security for the mining districts. The army forts at Stojnik and,
perhaps, Ravna seem to provide evidence for such a military objective, and
it has been argued that the series of forts along the Danube not only guarded
the river trade (by which metals were exported) but also the approaches up
the tributaries to mining areas like Bor or Mt Kosmaj in the hinterland.159
Moreover, the creation of six new auxiliary units in the later second century
allowed Rome to solve two problems at once. The Historia Augusta reports
that emperor Marcus Aurelius turned latrones Dalmatiae atque Dardaniae
into militesthe two cohortes Delmatorum, two cohortes Aureliae Darda-
norum and two cohortes Aureliae Novae which appear in inscriptions.160
These native auxiliary units were partially deployed on guard duty in the
mining areas of Moesia Superior.161 This measure not only secured the
important mines against barbarian incursion from across the Danube, but
probably dealt eVectively with the internal threat of brigands as well.
A fragmentary inscription found at Socanica might attest cohors I Darda-
norum in the mining area, but to date no further evidence for a military
presence there has been forthcoming.162 The mining area of the Kumanovo
plain in southern Moesia Superior has yielded further epigraphic material: a
librarius consularis and miles legionis IV Flaviae received a funerary stone at
Lopate; a strator legati of IV Flavia set up a gravestone for his wife at Lojane in
the second half of the second century ad; and at Konjuh the funerary
inscription names a centurio of a cohors I.163 From the epigraphic evidence
one may conclude that some of these soldiers were ordered there mainly on

156
CIL III 14542 AE 1901: 22 IMS I 98, (Suvodol) cf. Dusanic 1978: 106 with fn. 20, 125;
Spaul 2000: 87.
157
IMS I 116 CIL III 14437 ILS 9174 (Stojnik).
158
IMS I 112 AE 1910: 98 (Stojnik). IMS I 117 CIL III 14541 (Guberevac). IMS I 118
ILJug 26 (Guberevac); IMS I 119 CIL III 142176 AE 1908: 21 (Sopot). IMS I 120 (Stojnik).
A fragmented inscription might perhaps attest a (cohors) I Aurelia n[ova] at Stojnik or a vet(e-
ranus) of (II) Aurelia n(ova): IMS I 99 AE 1901: 23 CIL III 14545 (Stojnik), with Wilkes
1969: 118 fn. 6, 218 fn.4.
159
Dusanic 2000: 349; Werner 1986: 561 f.
160
HA M.Aur. 21.7.
161
Dusanic 1978; Dusanic 2000: 348 f.
162
Dusanic 1977: 75 with fn. 148; Rankov 1983: 46.
163
Lopate: IMS VI 227. Lojane: IMS VI 241 AE 1984: 790 (early 3rd cent. ad). Konjuh:
IMS VI 236 ILJug 563 AE 1964: 275 AE 1969/70: 459 AE 1979: 562.
 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations 195

administrative duties. The post of librarius consularis suggests an oYcial had

been commissioned by the governor of the province to undertake adminis-
trative work in the region.164 Whether their presence was related to mining
work in the area is not clear from the written evidence.
The strength report of cohors I Hispanorum veterana, formerly stationed at
Stobi in northern Macedonia, does record an unknown number of its oYcers
or men being sent in Dardania ad metella (sic). Given the date of this report,
the year 101 or the year 105, these auxiliary soldiers and/or oYcers probably
were not sent to Upper Moesia to provide technical support, but to protect the
Dardanian mines during the Dacian War.165 However, no detailed information
on their location and the mines in question is provided by inscriptions.
Despite the considerable size and importance of the Dacian gold-mining
areas, the inscribed monuments of military personnel known from Ampelum
and Alburnus Maior are few. Apart from inscriptions of beneWciarii consu-
lares/procuratoris at Ampelum, two librarii, both of legio XIII Gemina, appear
in the epigraphic record of Ampelum. One of them was seconded there on the
orders of the provincial governorhis function is given as librarius consu-
laris.166 The fragmentary inscription of a further active or former member of
XIII Gemina suggests that there may have been a legionary contingent at
Ampelum.167 In the later second century, additional men and horse were
provided by numerus Maurorum Hispanorum.168 Votive inscriptions record
two praefecti, one soldier of this unit, and a funerary monument for a further
soldier.169 The relative scarcity of evidence for a military contingent based at
Ampelum might be explained by the proximity of two large military bases.
The camp of XIII Gemina at Apulum and the auxiliary camp at Micia were
well-positioned to guard the approaches to the widespread aurariae Daci-
cae.170 There is, however, evidence for construction work by the army at
Ampelum, as tiles stamped by legio XIII Gemina and legio IIII Flavia Firma
have been found there.171 Moreover, stamped tiles of legio XIII Gemina have
also emerged from the recent surveys and excavations at the Tomus site at
Alburnus Maior.172 Centuriones frumentarii are found in other mining areas,
164
Austin & Rankov 1995: 152; Rankov 1999: 30.
165
Fink 1971: no. 63; LeRoux 1989: 172 with fn. 21; Dusanic 2000: 348 f.
166
CIL III 1317 ( AMP 32). CIL III 1318 ( AMP 33).
167
CIL III 1319 ( AMP 34).
168
Noeske 1977: 314. On cavalry in numeri, cf. Dixon & Southern 1997: 31.
169
CIL III 1294 IDR III/3 312 ( AMP 36). CIL III 1316 IDR III/3 339 ( AMP 38). IDR
III/3, 302 AE 1971: 383 ( AMP 35). CIL III 1149 ILS 3558 ( AMP 37) (Borosbocsard).
On the history of the unit, cf. Petolescu 1983, with older bibliography.
170
Gudea 1977.
171
AE 1988: 961b, 961c. The latter legion is attested in Dacia during Trajans wars and
appears to have returned to Singidunum in Moesia Superior around 119, cf. Strobel 1984:
8890; Piso 2000: 20813.
172
Damian 2003: 36, 431 f.
196 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations

most notably Noricum. A centurio frumentarius of legio I Adiutrix set up a

votive altar at TiVen, while a further centurio frumentarius of legio II Italica is
named in a fragmentary inscription at Feldkirchen.173 The sources do not
provide any detailed information on the function of centuriones frumentarii in
a mining context. It is noteworthy that these oYcers were not directly
attached to the legion but either to the castra peregrinorum in Rome or to
the headquarters of the provincial governor.174

5.2.5. Other provinces

Military personnel also appear in or near other mining districts. The Mis-
enum Xeet may have been connected with the mines of Gonnesa on Sardinia:
a soldier of the Misenum Xeet is documented in the Wrst half of the second
century at the site.175 Further inscriptions document military personnel in the
vicinity of mining ventures of the Sardinian Iglesiente: at the end of the Wrst
or beginning of the second century a member of cohors I Sardorum is recorded
at Grugua, a mining site176; and a centurio of the same unit is attested at
Campingeddus near the mines of San Nicolao.177
Further evidence is provided by inscriptions from the eastern half of the
empire. The inscription of a soldier of legio III Cyrenaica discovered at Wadi
Tuweiba, west of Aila was purportedly found near a copper mine.178

5 . 3 . T H E RO M A N A R M Y A N D E XT R AC T I V E O P E R AT I O N S

Apart from money and various victuals, the Roman army required a constant
supply of metals to produce military equipment. In general, army units
endeavoured to be self-suYcient, acquiring water, building materials, Wre-
wood, leather, ore, and other natural resources in the vicinity of the camp.179
The manufacture of military equipment was usually carried out by military

173
CIL III 4861 (Feldkirchen), 4787 (TiVen).
174
Clauss 1973: 82113; Rankov 1983: 54.
175
CIL X 7537.
176
CIL X 8321 Sotgiu 1988: C113. The name of a soldier from an unknown unit is
inscribed on a monument at the same site in the second half of the second century, cf. AE 1985:
485a Sotgiu 1988: B115.
177
CIL X 7535.
178
AE 1972: 671 AE 1936: 131; Speidel 1977: 694 f.
179
Speidel 1996: 72 with further bibliography.
 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations 197

personnel.180 However, we have less evidence for soldiers running mining

ventures to meet the demands of the army. The episode reported by Tacitus,
in which Curtius Rufus, governor in Germany, is awarded the triumphal
insignia by emperor Claudius for ordering his legionary soldiers to dig up
silver ore in the ager Mattiacus, is to be understood in the context of the
supply of the Roman state with precious metals.181 Although army units are
named in moulded marks and cold stamps on ingots, this should not be
regarded as an indication of their direct involvement in the extraction process.
The raising of forts and fortlets in the vicinity of lead mining ventures in
Britain only demonstrates that the Roman army guarded these facilities. In
fact, Roman soldiers actually partaking in iron or lead mining operations, is,
with the one exception, not directly attested in literary or epigraphic sources.
Although soldiers were not spared the wearisome burden of quarrying for
stone, cutting wood, or producing tiles for the construction of various
military or public installations, they may not have been required to mine
for iron and lead, which were the metals most commonly needed by the army.
Tacitus passage provides further insights on this matter: the soldiers of
Curtius Rufus secretly wrote a letter to the emperor Claudius asking for the
award of governors with triumphal insignia before their assignment to the
provinces. This was obviously intended to curb the enthusiasm of governors
in putting their soldiers to work on mining operations or construction tasks,
as Corbulo also received triumphal insignia for overseeing the building of a
canal between Maas and Rhine.182 Tacitus describes the diYculties encoun-
tered by the soldiers in pursuing the silver lodes and removing rubble in
underground mining operationsall for meagre returns.183 The Tacitean
episode conveys the reluctance with which soldiers went about such chores.
The fact that the gravamina of the soldiers were directed to the emperor may
perhaps mark the rarity of using army personnel in mining operations. Unlike
the occasional supply of building materials, such as stone and wood, for
military and public construction, the constant demand for iron, lead, and
copper by the Roman army would require the permanent deployment of a
considerable party of soldiers to opencast or underground mining sites.
Besides the hazards of working in a subterranean environment, the extent
and intensity of labour involved may have excluded soldiers as a constant
supply of work force. There is little written evidence to support these
assumptions. Mould marks, stamps, or incisions by a legion or an auxiliary

180
Bishop & Coulston 2006: 2338.
181
Tacitus, Ann. 11.20.3.
182
Tacitus, Ann. 11.20.2.
183
Tacitus, Ann. 11.20.3.
198 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations

unit may at most be interpreted as indicating ownership of the lead ingot.

However, in the case of the lead ingot found at St Valery sur Somme, the
mould mark might indicate the production of lead ingots by the Roman legion.184
This military involvement may have been limited to running the smelting ovens
and exercising general control over mining procedures. One cannot categorically
exclude the possibility of Roman soldiers working in mines (as Tacitus clearly
shows); even so, any such assignment probably was only for a short period.
Further, there is no written evidence for military engineers providing technical
advice on mining infrastructure such as aqueducts, tunnels, galleries, etc. In
comparison to the evidence from imperial quarries in Egypt and Asia Minor,
one may tentatively argue against the regular employment of military forces to
source required metals from mines. The mining activities for the needs of the
Roman army were likely delegated or contracted out to civilian personnel.
The main task of the Roman army was undoubtedly to provide protection
for the mining and quarrying districts, not only against external enemies, but
against brigands within the province. Moreover, based on the judicial powers
of the procurators, we can expect soldiers attached to certain mining districts
to have assisted in the execution of procuratorial decisions. Like the units
known from some of the imperial quarries, the military contingents in
imperial mines were often accompanied by a cavalry unit, be that an ala or
cohors equitata. These units probably provided protection for overland trans-
ports of gold or silver ingots, as well as the regular traYc to and from the
mining districtsa role possibly assigned to the Roman Xeet in the case of
imperial mines on islands like Sardinia or Britain.185 The heavy garrisoning of
auxiliary troops in Moesia Superior and Inferior, and perhaps Dacia too, may
have been an answer to security problems. Security considerations also con-
solidated the garrison of legio VII Gemina at Legio/mod. Leon in the vicinity of
the gold-mining zones of northwestern Spain. In the initial phases after the
Roman conquest of Asturia and Galicia, a heavy military presence was re-
quired, probably in connection with the forced resettlement of the indigenous
population and their subsequent employment in mining operations.
Apart from the protection of mining districts, the Roman army is recorded
at Ampelum in Dacia, and possibly at Lopate and Timacum Minus in Moesia
Superior as providing librarii. Vegetius described the military librarius as
book-keeper of military rationes. Haensch, however, argued that the presence
of librarii at all levels of military administration suggests they were regular
scribes.186 They either joined the local administration (as at Ampelum) at the

184
RIB II 2404.24.
185
Rankov 1983: 46.
186
Veg. 2.7; Haensch 1997: 722.
 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations 199

behest of the provincial governor or, as at Timacum Minus, were party to an

oYcium of the praefectus territorii. The principales of the vexillations present
at Villals and Luyego, such as the signiferi, the imaginifer of legio VII Gemina,
and the tesserarius of cohors I Celtiberorum, were higher ranking soldiers.
Their regular functions certainly included administrative tasks: the main
responsibility of the signifer (and perhaps of the imaginifer as well) was
running the accounts of the soldiers savings and the distribution of pay,
whereas the tesserarius ran the communication within the unit.187 Perhaps
they directed part of their administrative expertise towards the mining oper-
ations in northwestern Spain. One might presume similar tasks for the
principales and oYcers attested at Montanaprovided the regio Montanen-
sium included any valuable mining sites of interest. However, signiferi, tesser-
arii and others were regular part of vexillations, and their presence at mining
sites is more likely explained by the requirements of the military body
present.188
The beneWciarii procuratoris may have served as a link between the Wnancial
administration of the province and the mining administration. Probably
attached to the oYce of the Wnancial procurator (rather than the procuratores
metallorum/aurariarum), these beneWciarii most likely were present as liaison
oYcers. The existence of such a connection is evidence enough to suggest that
at least some mining procurators, notably those of the gold-mining areas of
north-western Spain (Villals, Luyego) and Dacia (Ampelum/mod. Zlatna),
were in direct contact with the Wnancial procurators at Asturica Augusta or
Sarmizegetusa. The case of the beneWciarii consulares is a bit more obscure.
These soldiers are quite often found in the service of provincial governors,
carrying out a wide range of tasks within the provincial administration.189
Hence, their purpose in the context of the imperial mining industry is
diYcult to assess. Were they stationed in or near mining territories to enforce
the collection of rents or taxes on extracted ore exported from mining
districts? Were beneWciarii based near mines as military police, providing
the mining procurator with a body of men to execute his legal decisions?
Or were the beneWciarii consulares liaison oYcers between the mining pro-
curators and the provincial governors? BeneWciarii, usually senior legionary
soldiers, were seconded to the provincial capital to serve at the headquarters
of the governor. A number of them, however, were outposted throughout the
province in legionary or auxiliary forts, at important road junctions, and

187
Veg. 2.7; 2,19 f. Breeze 1974: 263 V.; Davies 1974: 44, 246 fn. 48; Speidel 1996: 60 f., 62
with further bibliography on subject matter.
188
Saxer 1967: 129 f.
189
Ott 1995: 82157; Nelis-Clement & Wible 1996: 21168; Nelis-Clement 2000: 22059.
200 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations

most notably in mining areas.190 Papyri in Roman Egypt document the

involvement of beneWciarii consulares in the prosecution of minor crimes
and acting as liaisons to the praefectus Aegypti. It has been argued that
beneWciarii consulares perhaps fulWlled similar tasks in the mining districts.191
The thesis of Siegfried De Laet that beneWciarii consulares also protected the
custom stations of the portorium is based on the false observation of an
overlap between stationes of beneWciarii and customs stations.192 Hence, the
road stations of the beneWciarii might not have been exclusively related to the
collection of customs, although papyri do reXect an involvement of bene-
Wciarii in tax-collection in Roman Egypt.193 In this context, the absence in the
written evidence of any beneWciarii consulares or beneWciarii procuratoris from
imperial quarries in Roman Egypt, Asia, Achaia, Africa proconsularis has to
be noted.194 Consequently, we do not know whether the staV of every
provincial governor included beneWciarii and how many a governor could
deploy. The presence of two legions in Egypt and numerous auxiliary units
would supply an ample basis from which to promote beneWciarii to the gover-
nors service at Mons Ophiates, Mons Claudianus, or Mons Porphyrites.195
Administrative tasks were also performed by army oYcers and soldiers
seconded to the imperial quarries. Apart from the regular military duties,
such as protecting the quarries and the supply routes, securing the water
supply and communication, army personnel were also involved in procuring
basic needs such as food, water, tools, and animals for the workforce, par-
ticularly in the quarries of the Egyptian Eastern Desert. Moreover, progress
reports from the quarry workers were sent to the praefecti of the auxiliary
units garrisoned in the quarries. It remains doubtful whether army oYcials in
other imperial quarries fulWlled a range of functions comparable to those of
their colleagues in Roman Egypt. Certainly, in provinces like Asia or Africa,
quarries and their supply routes did not have to be protected to the extent the
extractive operations in the Eastern Desert had to be, but other problems
arose from the proximity of these quarries to inhabited areas. At Simitthus the
main task of the army might have been the segregation of the convicts
condemned to the quarries from the town. The Roman army probably also

190
Austin & Rankov 1995: 195204; Haensch 1997: 721; Rankov 1999: 28 f.; Nelis-Clement
2000: 25964.
191
Austin & Rankov 1995: 195 f., 201.
192
De Laet 1949: 449; Austin & Rankov 1995: 196.
193
Dise 1995: 76; Ott 1995: 12942; Eck 1997a: 131 f.
194
It remains uncertain whether the stationarii mentioned in the ostraca at Mons Claudianus
were beneWciarii. O.Claud. 5073. 802; Haensch 1997: 522.
195
Austin & Rankov 1995: 154; Haensch 1997: 721.
 The Roman Army and Imperial Operations 201

provided the medical infrastructure for soldiers and imperial personnel, as the
hospital at Mons Claudianus and the valetudinarium at Mt Kosmaj suggest.
Apart from guarding mining and quarrying districts and providing personnel
for administrative purposes, the Roman armyon the orders of the em-
perorappears to have dispatched skilled quarrying engineers to the imperial
quarries. The Roman army had a large supply of well trained and experienced
engineers at its disposal because soldiers were regularly employed in various
construction and quarrying activities (mostly connected with speciWc build-
ing projects). The secondment of individual centuriones frumentarii, as well as
legionary centuriones halfway across the empire suggests that they were
deployed to the imperial quarries based on their administrative and/or
technical expertise and experience in the quarrying industry.
Army detachments deployed on guard duty, and possibly for the technical
support of imperial mining and quarrying establishments, usually came from
the same provinces where the mines and quarries were located, with the
exception of the administrative or technical specialists brought in for speciWc
tasks. Procuratores metallorum could rely on military commanders and
oYcials to assume additional administrative functions if required to do so.
As the legions and/or auxiliary units stood under the command of the
provincial governor, he probably ordered their deployment to the imperial
quarries or mines. Moreover, the provincial governors also remained respon-
sible for the pay and supply of the troops with basic provisions.196 This
underlines a strong interdependence of provincial administration and imper-
ial mines and quarries, an interdependence which emerges in other areas
as well.

196
P.Dura 64 RMR 91 ChLA VI 319; P.Dura 129; O.Bu Njem 759, cf. Fink 1971: 383 f.;
Mitthof 2001: 4750.
 6
Imperial OYcials and the Allocation
of Responsibilities

The responsibilities of the heads of mines or quarries would have included an

assessment of the geological, topographical, technological, and geographical
constraints and challenges. Military personnel provided security and under-
took engineering tasks in imperial mines and quarries, and may have even had
managerial roles. The majority of remaining organizational measures were
probably undertaken by imperial procurators and their staV. In view of the
fragmentary evidence, it will not be possible to allocate organizational tasks to
speciWc personnel (procurator, tabularius, dispensator, etc.). Therefore, com-
parisons will be necessary with other branches of the Roman provincial
administration in order to assess the range of activities undertaken by these
personnel. Additionally, it is questionable whether each oYcial focused on a
speciWc set of tasks without transgressing into other administrative areas, or
whether everyday business was conducted less rigidly. The titles of adminis-
trative personnel seem to indicate the former, but appearances may be
deceptive.

6 . 1 . P RO C U R ATO R S

6.1.1. General Observations

The term procurator appears early on in the legal and literary sources of the
Roman Republic and initially describes liberti or liberi who acted as legal
representatives of a principal (e.g. proprietor of an estate, owner of a trade
business) in various matters of economic concern, such as single transactions
or the management of a business or estate.1 Within certain legal boundaries,
the procurator could act on behalf of the principal in various enterprises of
legal consequence. The basis of his power was either a iussum (in the case of a

1
Eck 2001d: 366.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 203

procurator omnium rerum as general representative in the absence of the

principal from Italy) or a mandatum (in the case of a procurator cui manda-
tum est as representative in a speciWed undertaking in the provinces). This
included the representation of the principal in court, the purchase of owner-
ship and property rights for the principal, taking up a loan, the rent and lease
of property, and the conclusion of obligations.2 Liability issues arising from
the conduct of business set aside, the procurators were also required to keep
track of Wnancial costs and income and to provide the principal with a
detailed account (rationem reddere). In return for their services, the procur-
ators were disbursed by the principal through a salarium or honorarium.3
The legal framework established for procurators of private individuals may
at Wrst not have diVered signiWcantly from that of procurators dealing with
the private estates of the emperor during the Principate. Imperial procurators
were, however, also concerned with the management of properties and Wnan-
cial transactions of the Roman state, irrespective of their social status as
imperial freedmen or equestrians. On being sent to their provincial posts,
imperial freedmen as well as equestrian procurators received mandata, a set of
directives.4 Furthermore, as a consequence of their employment in the ad-
ministration, procurators of some provinces (perhaps of provinciae Caesaris)
were probably vested with judicial powers from the reign of Augustus on-
wards. These rights may have been consolidated by Claudius in ad 53.5 The
judicial responsibilities appear to have covered issues of Wscal concern,
though with a mandate of the governor the procurator could hear other
cases as well. He predominantly served as a judge in cases where the Wscus
appeared as plaintiV or defendant, or in cases between third parties which
resulted from Wscal claims.6 According to the legal texts, procurators could
also seize property for the Wscus, sell it, request the payment of monies due to
the Wscus or collect Wnes imposed by other authorities.7 In general, they were
understood to be rei publicae causae absentes.8 These judicial powers and the
administrative activities in the name of the Roman state distinguished im-
perial procurators clearly from their private counterparts.

2
Schafer 1998: 2836 with sources and bibliography.
3
Schafer 1998: 3787, esp. 7887.
4
Dio 53.15.34, 57.23; Tacitus, Ann. 4.15; SEG XVII 755 IGLS V 1998; PXaum 1982: 21 f.,
no. 49 bis; Eich 2005: 10618; mandata in general, cf. Burton 1976: Millar 1992: 642 f.; Eck
1997a: 117.
5
Brunt 1990b: 1657 with sources and bibliography.
6
Brunt 1990b: 171.
7
Brunt 1990b: 173.
8
Paulus, Dig. 4.6.35.2, cf. Eich 2005: 288.
204 Allocation of Responsibilities

The responsibilities and functions of procurators in the diVerent branches

of mining and quarrying administration are occasionally highlighted by
epigraphic and papyrological material, but they hardly provide a complete
picture of activities. By analysing the organizational challenges which faced
the management of imperial mines and quarries, one can glimpse the range of
responsibilities a procurator might have shouldered.

6.1.2. Responsibilities of Quarrying Procurators

Since the organization of imperial quarries was constrained by the geology
and topography of the area, the challenges which faced the head of a quarry
were numerous and complex (cf. 2.1.6, 2.1.7). The written documentation for
Mons Claudianus and the Nile valley allows the reconstruction of some of the
strategies employed by such oYcials in dealing with the most prevalent
problems.

6.1.2.1. Division of Organizational Tasks

A list of the speciWc organizational tasks of the K
H
 at
Mons Claudianus cannot be compiled with ease. Apart from the fact that the
procurators hardly appear in the ostraca which have been published to date, a
further problem arises from the fact that it is not clear how activities were
divided between the procurator and the commander of the military garrison
on the site. Two letters from Mons Claudianus exemplify this problem.9
A published ostracon contains two copies of letters sent on the same day by
the I Rufus (a replacement for the regular curator of the fort at
Mons Claudianus, a Iulius Silvanus), to the prefect Vibius Alexander, and to
Tertullus, the K
(H
). In the letter to the prefect Vibius
Alexander, Rufus reminds him of a previous report the vexillation/
(i.e. the military detachment at Mons Claudianus) had Wled on the
K  F
, the equipment of the quarry, and on the delivery
of grain (for the soldiers) and of liquid nutriments, i.e oil and wine, being
late.10 The prefect Vibius Alexander was presumably a commander of an
auxiliary unit based in the Thebaid. The prefect, however, not only took
care of issues relating to the auxiliary unit under his command but, as in

9
O.Claud.inv. 7295, cf. Cuvigny 2002: 2458.
10
Cuvigny 2002: 245 f. Whether the equipment of the quarry refers to military equipment
of the vexillation at Mons Claudianus or to quarrying tools remains unclear.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 205

the case of Vibius Alexanders predecessor Antonius Flavianus, seems also to

have received reports on the progress of work by the quarrymen.11 In the
second letter, addressed to the procurator Tertullus, Rufus does not mention
the problems in grain supply, but compiles a detailed list of items left behind
by his predecessor, the curator Iulius Silvanus. Moreover, the procurator is
told of signiWcant shortages in slaves and donkeys, and of empty cisterns
resulting from the lack of personnel.12 The fact that a military I
of the fort at Mons Claudianus sent a letter to the quarrying procurator may
show that the division between military and civilian spheres was not clear-
cut. Whereas the military commanders were kept informed about the pro-
gress of work in the quarries, the procurator apparently received speciWc
requests for provisions, material and animals for the quarry workers through
military oYcials.
Apart from the logistical support for the personnel at Mons Claudianus,
the ostraca also attest the direct interest of the procurator in the amount of
quarried products available. One document names a procurator, probably
Ulpius Himerus (ad 152/3), who demanded information on the stock of
quarried blocks in his own caesura at Mons Claudianus through his tabularius
Athenodoros.13 The quarry labels found on blocks and columns there provide
further evidence, with the ligatured mark cip being read as c(aesura) hHii-
(meri) p(rocuratoris).14 Other ostraca conWrm that procuratores had caesurae
in their name.15 A caesura was an administrative term describing one or more
quarrying sites within a district where marble was extracted on behalf of a
procurator or a contractor (cf. 7.2.3). The quarry labels on giallo antico from
Simitthus document personal names of procurators in a similar context.
These observations imply that the procuratorial responsibilities also included
an output-related involvement in the quarrying process. In other words, the
registration of incoming orders, their translation into extracted and reWned
blocks or columns, and the keeping of records on outgoing produce to an
agreed destination is likely to have been the responsibility of the procurator.
On occasion, similar tasks may have fallen to the military specialists seconded

11
O.Claud.inv. 4471, 4852, cf. Cuvigny 2002: 240.
12
Cuvigny 2002: 246.
13
O.Claud.inv. 6483, cf. Bulow-Jacobsen 1996: 61 (translated from Danish): Athenodoros to
the most honourable Sokrates, greetings! I have been ordered by my master, the procurator, to
give you notice immediately that you should inform him on the stones still lying in the quarry of
his caesura (until?) the 31st of December. Inform me thus quickly, so that I can write a letter to
him in addition(?) to your letter. I hope you are well.
14
Quarries 19: App. nos. 9715; 23: no. 994; 36: no. 1005; 93: nos. 111315; 113: no. 1130.
Valerie MaxWeld and Wilfried van Rengen believe the lower case b to be a ligatured ld,
cf. Bulow-Jacobsen 1996: 61; Peacock & MaxWeld 1997: 223.
15
Bulow-Jacobsen 1996: 60.
206 Allocation of Responsibilities

to the quarries on the orders of the emperor or the praefecti who received
quarrying reports from the work force at Mons Claudianus (cf. 5.1.1).

6.1.2.2. Recruitment and Pay of the Workforce

As the letter to the procurator Tertullus suggests, the recruitment and supply
of quarry workers and other personnel were the tasks of the K
H
 and their staV. The workforce was divided into two distinct
groups, the  and
, suggesting diVerent modes of recruit-
ment and supply of labourers for the quarries. The term 
or paganus
usually describes non-members of the Roman army, in other words, civil-
ians.16 Within the context of quarry operations, this term identiWed free and
skilled labourers, hired for their expertise from renowned quarrying areas
such as Syene, Alexandria, the Thebaid, and the Fayoum.17 A water distribu-
tion list renders the exact numbers for the diVerent groups of 
(stonemasons): 210 Alexandrians, 130 Syenites, six Arsinoites, and three
Memphites.18
 and
 probably both received a money-payment
(O), and additional food rations:  earned 1 artaba (40 l?) of
wheat plus a wine-ration, members of the familia 1 artaba of E
(bread),
lentils, and oil, as well as an annual subsidy for clothing.19 The  had to
buy oil, lentils and other goods from the Nile valley through their .
The prices for these items owed by the workers and the amounts for reim-
bursement of advances on pay and payments to collegia were simply deducted
from their wages. According to Helene Cuvigny, the payment of wages to
 was administered diVerently to that of the
, creating two
sets of distinct documents: the K for the , and receipts for
advanced payments for the
. Both groups of documents are
attested during the second century ad, but the majority date to the period
of ad 13653.20 Any reconstruction of the pay scale of the
 is
diYcult to ascertain, as the receipts for advanced payment do not mention the
amount of the wage. However, the K do include the wage paid
per month to the . The pay-scales for  can be reconstructed:

16
Cuvigny 2000a: 1113.
17
Cuvigny 1996a: 139; Cuvigny 1998: 87.
18
O.Claud.inv. 1538 2921. Cuvigny 2005b: 328 f.
19
Cuvigny 2000a: 41, 43.
20
Cuvigny 2000a: 610, 22, notes a change in administrative practise, as from ad 136
onwards the receipts for advanced payment are being dated. This might coincide with the
changes in epigraphic formula observed on pavonazetto and giallo antico from Dokimeion and
Simitthus (cf. 7.2.8).
 Allocation of Responsibilities 207

47 drachmas appears to be the highest amount a common worker could

expect. Others received 37 drachmas and 4 obols, or even less, 28 drachmas
per month. Promotion within the pay-scale was a matter of seniority rather
than qualiWcation. It seems that around ad 151 wages were increased, reach-
ing 48 drachmas and 38 drachmas, 38 drachmas 2 obols, 38 drachmas 4
obols.21 Compared with the usual wages paid in the Nile valley (25 drachmas
per month), the wages paid at Mons Claudianus were certainly above
average.22
The money and the grain for the  were not distributed at Mons
Claudianus, but handed out at a central location in the Nile valley. Every
month, a group of delegates elected from amongst the , the
, travelled to the Nile valley and dealt with the payment of wages
and the supply of food rations. Their co-workers handed them K, or
instructions as to what items the  had to purchase with part of their
wages. The  most likely noted these instructions on a central
papyrus roll and took it with them on their trip to Egypt. Some 
asked for their grain rations to be handed to their relatives at Kaine or
Apollonopolis mikra;23 the wives and mothers of the quarry workers then
produced bread loaves which were sent on to the Desert quarries with the
.24
Helene Cuvigny argued that the
 were not exclusively imperial
slaves or freedmen i.e. members of the familia Caesaris. The names of some

 displayed in the documents also included patronyms. This has
been taken to suggest that freeborn individuals could be part of the familia
Caesaris.25 In general, Roman jurists understood the term familia not to
include slaves and freedmen alone. Ulpian states that free men (liberi) as
well as slaves of a third party (servi alieni) are considered part of the familia of
the tax-farmer (publicanus), provided they are involved in collecting the tax.26
Paulus further explains that free individuals working in a Wscal function
become part of the Wscal familia, without losing their free status.27 The
21
Cuvigny 1996a: 140 f.
22
Drew-Bear & Naour 1990: 4259.
23
Cuvigny 1998: 88 f., 91.
24
O.Claud. 38. Cuvigny 1996b: 25; Cuvigny 1998: 87. For further  cf. O.Claud.
156, 365. For the archive of Petenouphis, 
at Tiberiane and his position within the
quarrying community: O.Claud. 24354. O.Claud.inv. 4457, 5134, 5281, 5307, 6153, cf. Bulow-
Jacobsen 1997b: 6980.
25
Cuvigny 2000a: 25 f.
26
Ulpian, Dig. 39.4.1.5: Familiae nomen hic non tantum ad seruos publicanorum refer-
emus, verum et qui in numero familiarum sunt publicani, sive igitur liberi sint sive servi alieni,
qui publicanis in eo vectigali ministrant, hoc edicto continebuntur.
27
Paul, Sent. 5.1.3: Descriptio ingenuorum ex oYcio Wsci inter Wscalem familiam facta,
ingenuitati non praeiudicat; cf. also Cicero, Brut. 85; Cicero, Pro Caec. 58. For further evidence,
cf. Cuvigny 2000a: 268.
208 Allocation of Responsibilities

onomastic evidence for freeborn
 is partly corroborated by the fact

that they received a salary.28 The main genre of documents related to the

 are the receipts for advance payment.29 Salaries and rations were
distributed to them at the end of the month, as a reward for work done during
that period. At the time of entering the imperial service, the
 had
to go into debt, if they did not command suYcient savings on which to live
until the end of the month. Most of them therefore received part of their
monthly payment in advance and signed a receipt for this transaction.30
Unlike the , their wages and food rations were administered by their
own  who were appointed by the authorities. The analysis of the
onomastic material suggests that
 not only were recruited in
Egypt, but originated from Asia Minor, Syria, or Palestine. In contrast to
the , a number of
 were brought in from overseas, perhaps
even from other imperial quarries, to Mons Claudianus.31 The recently
published ostracon detailing the distribution of water to the work force and
military personnel at Mons Claudianus lists a number of highly speciWc
personnel who provided for the
. The text attests a guardian of
the cellae/dwellings of the familia (c
H

), and a guardian
of bread of the familia (c


). Provided the text is com-
plete, one may observe that a similar function, i.e. guards for the cellae of the
pagani, does exist, whereas a guard for their supplies is not named.32

6.1.2.3. 
; , and Operative Processes at Mons

Claudianus
The reason for distinguishing between two groups of workers is not quite
clear, as both  and
 were incorporated in the same working
parties sent to the quarries. A closer look at the division of labour, however,
shows that
 and  mostly fulWlled diVerent functions. The
necessity of supplying water to the inhabitants of Mons Claudianus (c.1,000
military personnel and quarry workers), produced a set of documents which
provide a unique insight into this speciWc organization.33 The texts list water
rations according to function, and hence, provide a blueprint of its hierarch-
ical structure. The largest rations of water were probably apportioned to the
centurio, the decurio, and the architect(s).34 O.Claud.inv. 1538 provides a clear

28
Cuvigny 2000a: 25.
29
Cuvigny 1992b: 103; Cuvigny 1996b: 21; Cuvigny 2000a.
30
Cuvigny 2000a: 4650.
31
Cuvigny 1996b: 20; Cuvigny 2000a: 32 f.
32
Cuvigny 2005b: 316.
33
Cuvigny 1992a: 85 f.; Cuvigny 2005b.
34
O.Claud.inv. 1538 2921, cf. Cuvigny 2005b: 34850; Cuvigny 1992a: 86.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 209

categorization of the work force, auxiliary personnel, and soldiers stationed at

Mons Claudianus based on the amounts of water distributed. A Fannius,
perhaps a centurio (?), and Sansnos, K
, were each given 1 keramion
(6.5 l) of water. Soldiers and cavalrymen, veterinaries, and the
I
c


 received Wve-sixths of a keramion (5.4 l). The largest
group of workers and other personnel, e.g. foremen, tirones, and the 
in general, received half a keramion of water (3.25 l), while

apparently received only a third (2.16 l).35
Apart from the Roman army personnel, the highest position within
the work force was held by the I
(engineers), followed by
the I
c


, the K, the , and Wnally the

. The I
appear to have been of importance in organ-
izing the operative processes in the quarries.36 At Mons Claudianus, Apollo-
nios of Alexandria commissioned an altar during Trajans reign, and a
Herakleides had an extracted column and a rockface inscribed during the
same period.37 The latters name is also found in an inscription on a grano-
diorite(?) column in Rome which gives the name of the praefectus Aegypti
M. Rutilius Lupus (ad 11317). Moreover, Herakleides name appears in the
water distribution list.38 The architects did not necessarily remain at the same
quarrying site: Apollonios was apparently moved from Mons Claudianus to
Mons Porphyrites.39 Whether such relocations happened on a regular basis
remains unknown.40
The I
headed the working parties in the quarries. A fragmen-
tary ostracon lists the team of the I Apollonios: twenty K
(workers), Wve I (adze specialists), four
 (hardeners),
ten  (hammermen), and two further men.41 From other ostraca
we hear of far larger teams, consisting of thirty-six stonemasons, three smiths,

35
Cuvigny 2005b: 336 f., 348.
36
Two architects, Mersis and Soter, appear in the earliest Roman inscription (ad 10/11)
found at Mons Ophiates/mod. Wadi Umm Wikala, and the same Mersis is again named in
inscriptions at the Paneion in Wadi Hammamat (I.Pan 51; I.Ko.Ko. 41).
37
I.Pan 38 Bernand 1992: 40, 41. Perhaps both are mentioned in one of the water
distribution lists, cf. Cuvigny 1992a: 85.
38
IG XIV 2421 IGRR I 550. Bingen 1992: 47 f.; Cuvigny 2005b: 315. Inscribed sherds of
wine amphora imply that architects were the recipients of wine deliveries, O.Claud. CdE 1, cf.
Bingen 1992: 42 f.; O.Claud. 1541; O.Claud.inv. 2755, 4338, 4391, cf. Bingen 1992: 43. App.
no. 1071 ( 
 ?)).
39
O.Claud. 17. The Xuctuation of personnel between Claudianus and Porphyrites seems to
have been quite common, cf. O.Claud. 143.
40
For I
at Gebel Gulab/Syene, cf. Nachtergael 1996: 335. I.Th.Sy. 107 (Silsilis). SB
4534 (Gebel Toukh). SB 5682, 5683, 5684 (Ombos), cf. Bernand 1969: 265 f.; Nachtergael 1996:
337 with fn. 11. Hermoupolis Magna, cf. Bernand 1999: no. 81, with further bibliography.
41
O.Claud. 15.
210 Allocation of Responsibilities

six bellowsmen and hardeners, two guards, one foreman, and one hammer-
man. In total forty-nine men are sent to a quarry on one day.42 Adam Bulow-
Jacobsen summarizes the contents of a further unpublished ostracon naming
the work force sent to the Myrismos quarry at Mons Claudianus. The
text makes a distinction between  and
: one K

(foreman), thirty-Wve  (stonemasons), one 

(ham-
merman), three E
(smiths), two  (bellowsmen), all in all forty-
two . And of the familia: one 
(hammerman), three

 (hardeners), one 
(crane-specialist), one overseer(?) of
side-wedges, one overseer(?) of chisels(?), one  
, Wfty-nine K
(workers).43 However, the published ostraca do not shed any light on the
particular responsibilities of I
as regards the quarries at Mons
Claudianus.
In the case of the I
c


 named in the water distribution
list O.Claud.inv. 1538, Cuvigny assumes that they basically controlled the
marble extracted by the work force.44 In this context the observation made by
Valerie MaxWeld in the quarries of Mons Claudianus has to be considered: a
group of inscriptions beginning with the letters  for 
(?), indicate
measurements in cubic feet.45 These measurements apparently do not refer to
the size of the unhewn blocks, but to the quarried block in its dressed state.
The probable size of the blocks was noted on the stone itself. As an unpub-
lished ostracon proves, a note was made for the archive; it gives the dimen-
sions, location, and the n-number of a stone as a reference.46 Moreover, there
is evidence from Wadi Hammamat to suggest a similar administrative pro-
cedure being followed in the Basanites quarries: an ostracon gives a list of
block-measurements in Roman feet (
).47 Perhaps the technical term
I
c


 refers to the speciWc activity, also observable in Gaul,
of measuring and estimating the size and future volume of marble blocks.48
The K are mentioned frequently in the ostraca at Mons Claudia-
nus.49 The work lists suggest that the K oversaw working parties
between twenty-six and eighty-six men strong. According to one water
distribution list, nine quarries were being exploited simultaneously by work-
ing parties under the command of seven K. Hence, K could

42
O.Claud.inv. 1252, cf. Bulow-Jacobsen 1992a: 58; Peacock 1992: 9; Cuvigny 2005b: 330.
43
O.Claud.inv. 3385, cf. Bulow-Jacobsen 1996: 40; Cuvigny 2005b: 330.
44
Cuvigny 2005b: 341.
45
App. nos. 936, 937, 960, 990, 996, 1079, 1096, 1097, 1099, 1120.
46
Bulow-Jacobsen 1996: 51 f.; Peacock & MaxWeld 1997: 224.
47
Kayser 1993: 126 f. and no. 20.
48
For Gaul, cf. Monthel & Lambert 2002: 111 f.
49
Cuvigny 1992a: 84 f., 87 f.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 211

supervise work in more than one quarry.50 The K do not seem
to be ranked more highly than their fellow workers: they do not appear
Wrst in the list of workers nor in the letters written to the procurator
metallorum or the praefectus. Together with the  and the
smiths, the K report to both oYcials on the progress in quarry
work at Mons Claudianus.51 Whether K were primarily recruited
from amongst the  or
 is not discernable from the written
evidence.
The stonemasons, , probably account for the largest group
amongst the workforce at Mons Claudianus, and are widely attested in
other quarries throughout Roman Egypt.52 The water distribution records
provide exact numbers: 212  are listed as coming from Alexan-
dria, 130 from Syene/Assuan, and others from Fayoum and Memphis, all
of them .53 In the lists of workmen under the command of an
I or an K
, the  usually made up the largest
group of workmen with up to 100 individuals working on one day in a quarry.
The stone-masons most likely were multi-task workers. They set wedge holes
and dressed the extracted blocks. Adam Bulow-Jacobsen has argued that most
of them were used for other tasks as well, such as giving stones their rough
form or helping with transport preparations.54
Certain functions, such as those of the   or the I, may
have been reserved for the
:55 the water distribution lists usually
name one, rarely two  , who may have been responsible for the
construction(?) and maintenance of the slipways;56 water carriers, I,
carried drinking water or water for metallurgical purposes.57 However, tech-
nical specialists such as I;
 and  were

50
Cuvigny 1992a: 74, 78, 85 f., and App., no. 1067. For K at Wadi Hammamat, cf.
I.Ko.Ko. 48, 112.
51
Cuvigny 1992a. For a similar letter, cf. SB 9230 (3rd cent. ad, Syene ?).
52
Further , cf. Wadi Hammamat: I.Ko.Ko 49, 75, 105, and Kayser 1993: nos. 11.
14; SB 9230, cf. also Cuvigny 2003a: 2804. Krokodilo: K 527 with Cuvigny 2003c: 371 f.
El-Boueib: I.Ko.Ko. 158. Syene: O.Eleph. DAIK 66, cf. Locher 1999: 71.
53
O.Claud.inv. 1538 2921, cf. Bulow-Jacobsen 1997d: 140 with fn. 3; Cuvigny 1992a: 85;
Cuvigny 2005b: 328 f.
54
For the size of a quarry, cf. Peacock & MaxWeld 1997: 17889. For other uses of the
workforce of : Bulow-Jacobsen 1996: 43.
55
Other functions not directly related to quarrying such as baker, wagon steward, and
tabellarius were probably exclusively held by
 (O.Claud.inv. 1538, 4524, 7334.
8686, cf. Cuvigny 2000a: 30).
56
For  : O.Claud.inv. 6467, cf. Cuvigny 2000a: 29, 307; Bulow-Jacobsen 1996: 46 f.;
Cuvigny 2005b: 342.
57
For I: O.Claud. 212; O.Claud.inv. 6438, cf. Cuvigny 2000a: 29. For water-tanks in
quarry huts, cf. Peacock & MaxWeld 1997: 234. The carrying of waterskins (I) may
212 Allocation of Responsibilities

 as well.58 `, or aciscularii, were well trained in the use

of the acisculus, a kind of adze with a long shaft. Given the fact that fewer
I than  appear in the work lists, the I were
perhaps responsible for delicate quarrying tasks.59 , hammermen,
who were sometimes  or
, were probably specialists in the
use of sledgehammers.60  , translated by Bulow-Jacobsen as
side-wedgemen, are only found in small numbers compared with the
.61 Side-wedges, , were used to enhance the eVect of
the iron-wedges used at Mons Claudianus. The side-wedges were probably
iron plates, holding the wedge Wrmly in its position. Bulow-Jacobsen argues
that the   were in charge of breaking away the stone from the
rockface.62 The supply and repair of iron-headed tools for these workmen
required the presence of metalworkers in the quarries. While iron bars were
brought on a regular basis by camel, the quarry workers needed the tips of
their adzes and picks resharpened every hour.63 With thirty-six stonemasons
working in the quarries, and having their tools reWtted with a new tip every
hour, three smiths ( E
; ), six bellowsmen () and
hardeners (
) had to accompany the workforce.64 The work lists
reveal that these metal-working specialists were provided by both  and

.65

have been the task of
, as was the supply of water for animals (

), the
collection of wood as well as providing services such as running the bath at Mons Claudianus,
cf. O.Claud. 1269; O.Claud.inv. 8512, 8696, 8815, cf. Cuvigny 2000a: 29. On the I, see
also Cuvigny 2005b: 332.
58
Cuvigny 2000a: 29.
59
 `: O.Claud. 15, 23, 130, 132, 162; O.Claud.inv. 746, 1064(?), 1125, 1168, 1190,
1550, 1814, 1870, 2072, 2575, cf. Bulow-Jacobsen 1992b: 117. The sick-lists mention I
as well: O.Claud. 212. Their speciWc task required leg protectors (ocreae), made of old water-
skins, cf. Bulow-Jacobsen 1996: 45. O.Claud.inv. 539, cf. Bulow-Jacobsen 1992a: 55.
60
O.Claud. 15, 213, cf. Cuvigny 2000a: 29.
61
Bulow-Jacobsen 1992a: 57.
62
Bulow-Jacobsen 1996: 34.
63
Camel-transport of iron bars: O.Claud. 2734. Bulow-Jacobsen 1996: 48 f; Bulow-Jacobsen
1997d: 140 f.; Peacock & MaxWeld 1997: 250.
64
O.Claud.inv. 1252, cf. Bulow-Jacobsen 1992a: 58. The repair of broken tools was appar-
ently done by the main smithy at the fort, where military needs in weaponry were served as well.
Bulow-Jacobsen 1997d: 140 f., believes the smithy in quarry 92 to be a 
, a place
where steel, 

, was welded. According to an unpublished ostracon 

was not
produced at Mons Claudianus itself, but imported (O.Claud.inv. 4852 5398), cf. also Bulow-
Jacobsen 1996: 49; Bulow-Jacobsen & Cuvigny 2007: 17. For further E
at Wadi Hamma-
mat, cf. I.Ko.Ko. 91, 113, 127, 131.
65
Further specialized functions are, for example, 
, a crane-constructor, cf. Bulow-
Jacobsen 1996: 46. For ropes and Wbre, cf. O.Claud. 129, 133, 376. Peacock & MaxWeld 1997: 259
Wg. 7.1.  were perhaps responsible for rollers (
) and for the transport
of blocks or columns down slipways (O.Claud. 20, cf. Bulow-Jacobsen 1996: 46). For an
I

, a chief-engineer, at El Hosh, cf. I.Portes 117, 118. Klemm & Klemm 1992:
236 f.;

at Gebel Silsilis, cf. I.Th.Sy. 159.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 213

The detailed terminology for speciWc functions within the operative pro-
cess certainly attests to a high degree of labour division and specialisation at
Mons Claudianus. While the
 provided specialists for speciWc
tasks and low-skilled labour for auxiliary duties, few of the  were
technical specialists; most of them were . No  have been
documented in auxiliary duties, nor are they recruited for other tasks at Mons
Claudianus, such as collecting wood, guarding the quarries as vigiles, man-
ning the  , carrying letters and other goods to the way-stations and
from the Nile valley to Mons Claudianus. Together with the
, they
did however participate in the collection, storage, and distribution of water.66
The division of the quarry workers into  and
 might hint
at distinct recruiting mechanisms or terms of employment utilized by the
authorities. Given the fact that the  are left alone in organizing the
transport of grain and wages from the Nile valley to Mons Claudianus, they
were probably hired on the basis of a work contract diVerent from that of the

. The members of the familia Caesaris aside,
 not only
received wages and better food rations, but also medical attention.67 The fact
that
 are often found in activities not directly related to the
extraction of marble, but connected with the protection and provisioning of
the quarrying community, might suggest that they were posted at Mons
Claudianus longer than . One therefore might assume that the latter
were only recruited for a limited period. Helene Cuvigny explained the
division of the workforce by arguing that the  had originally been
provided by contractors of quarrying work.68 There is only one recorded

c
H
 at Mons Claudianus and Mons Porphyrites, an
imperial slave(!) Epaphroditos Sigerianos, who must have contracted out
quarry work during Hadrians reign.69 The division of the workforce into
 and
, however, seems to have been a feature at Mons
Claudianus throughout the second century ad, and therefore was not neces-
sarily connected with the employment of contractors. Perhaps the contracting
out of quarry work was also handled by the procurator of the eastern Egyptian
quarries, though no direct evidence for this exists.
Whatever the precise arrangements might have been, given the range of
procuratorial powers it is likely that the quarrying procurator (and his staV )

66
For
 and their tasks, c.f. O.Claud. 115, 226 (with 229), 257, 264, 270, 271, 273,
274, 372, 3746, 382, 387; O.Claud.inv. 7029, 7032, 7036, 7042, 7045, 7054, cf. Bingen 1997:
1013. 105.
67
For medical supply, cf. Cuvigny 1992b: 82; Cuvigny 1997a: 20.
68
Cuvigny 2000a: 22 f.
69
I.Pan 21, 42.
214 Allocation of Responsibilities

hired and paid the workforce required for the operative process, while the
responsibility for organizing the operative process probably lay with the
resident I. Consequently, we must assume that the calculation of
food rations and fodder, and of the animals required for certain transport
tasks, were part of the procuratorial duties as well. Moreover, further func-
tions attested in the water distribution list recall the LMV tablet from Vipasca:
two shoemakers ( E
) and a barber ( 
) are named as recipients of
water. The LMV demonstrates that the provision of services to the work forces
was contracted out to shoemakers and barbers at Vipasca.70 It is not known
whether these or other functions were contracted out by the procurator at
Mons Claudianus.

6.1.2.4. The Supply of Provisions

The workforce in the Egyptian Eastern Desert had to be supplied with food
and water. Apart from the monthly supply of grain rations as part of the wages
for the  and
, the analysis of botanical and faunal remains
from the middens gives us an idea of the range of imported goods.71 The
roughly 22,000 recovered bones provide evidence that various domesticated
animals, such as donkeys, pigs, camels, goats, sheep, chickens, and horses,
were imported for food and work. The bones of horses were found in far
fewer numbers than donkey or pig bones, which suggests that these animals
did not Wgure as main attractions on the daily menu at Mons Claudianus,
though butchery marks were found on camel and horse bones as well.72
Dorcas, gazelle, ibex, goose, and sandgrouse were the most favoured hunting
game. Fish and molluscs were imported mainly from the Red Sea, but some
freshwater Wsh from the Nile valley, such as catWsh, are represented as well.73
The botanical remains include cereals such as six-row barley and hard wheat.
Both were consumed, but wheat grain is attested in far smaller quantities.
Pulses and fruits (some originating from India or Persia) found their way to
the quarries as well. Some items only appear in small numbers, while dates,
olives, grapes, Wgs, and watermelons were staple goods. DiVerent nuts, oil
plants, and olive oil were imported in large quantities. Herbs and spices
enriched the food and some of them were probably pot plants kept at
Claudianus itself. Pepper, an import from India, was a luxury item even in
Egypt and thus is only rarely attested at Mons Claudianus. The seeds for
cabbage, beet, cress, lettuce, chicory, as well as mint, basil, and rue were found
70
LMV ll. 327.
71
Van der Veen 1998; Hamilton-Dyer 2001; Van der Veen 2001.
72
O.Claud.inv. 7276, cf. Hamilton-Dyer 2001: 298 f.
73
Van der Veen 1998: 103 f. and table 1; Hamilton-Dyer 2001: 298301.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 215

in the garbage heaps, conWrming the assumption that vegetables were grown
in the middle of the desert.74 According to M. Van der Veen, this range of
foodstuVs would have guaranteed a balanced diet of carbohydrates, protein,
sugars, fats, minerals, and vitamins.75 Despite this abundance, the workforce
probably did not have the beneWt of a food supply covering all their nutri-
tional needs.76
Private and oYcial letters help us to determine what goods circulated
amongst which segments of the quarry population, as well as providing
additional evidence for imports and exports. Grain and grain products,
meat, Wsh, and other nutriments were imported, while vegetables could be
grown locally. Certain imports were for hygienic or medical use only.77 As
Helene Cuvigny has pointed out, recipients of vegetables and meat or Wsh
probably were members of the Roman army. Since they received higher pay
than the skilled workers, they were able to aVord additional foodstuVs for
their diet. Vegetables were apparently grown at some of the desert outposts by
soldiers or
 for their own use.78 The texts certainly suggest that
there were signiWcant diVerences in the provisioning of the population at
Claudianus, the military and
 being far better supplied than the
.
A small number of papyri do refer to the supply of grain and fodder to the
imperial quarries or to soldiers stationed there. An order of barley for the
animals transporting a Wfty-foot column was addressed by an unknown
oYcial to the 
of the Heptakomia, Apollonius, in the year ad 96.
The oYcial asks Apollonius to assist his representative, Chaeremon, in col-
lecting all the barley available in his nome. Moreover, the barley had to be
supplied to Kaine rather quickly.79 In ad 96 a 
N
 P

(vicarius dispensatoris Caesaris) sent an acknowledgment to the 

of
Magdola and other towns of the Polemon division that he received 2,089
artaba of barley at the harbour of Kaine. The barley was for the military
garrisons of the Thebais and the workers at the quarries between the Nile and
the Red Sea.80 The barley may not have been intended for the workers or the

74
Van der Veen 2001: 220 f. Mons Claudianus yielded amphorae from diVerent Mediterra-
nean oil production sites, cf. Tomber 1996: 3949.
75
Van der Veen 1998: 108.
76
Cuvigny 1997a: 76 f.
77
Van der Veen 2001: 218 f., and indices in Bingen et al. 1997; Bingen et al. 1992; Cuvigny
2000a.
78
Van der Veen 1998: 110. The ostraca seem to imply that these products were circulating in
a military context. O.Claud. 25578, cf. Bingen 1997: 81 f.
79
P. Giss. 69 (ad 118), cf. Pena 1989: 12632; Adams 2001: 178 f.
80
SB 12169 Youtie 1978b, cf. Adams 2001: 177 f., 179.; Mitthof 2001: 299 f., no. 3. Contrary
to Pena 1989: 128 fn. 9, Fritz Mitthof argues that the Kaine mentioned in the text is not the
216 Allocation of Responsibilities

soldiers to eat, but to be used as animal feed instead.81 Calpurnius Isidorus,


of the Themistes and Polemon districts of the Arsinoite nome
wrote a reply to a letter from the praefectus Aegypti Aurelius Septimius
Heraclitus, in which he asseses the state of the grain supply. His letter states
how much grain collected during the harvest of the 22nd year of Caracalla
(ad 214) was stored in the granaries and how much had been forwarded to
the troops in the Thebaid, the men in the Porphyrites and Claudianus
quarries, or distributed for other uses.82 The grain is likely to have been barley
intended as fodder for the animals at Mons Claudianus and Mons Porphyr-
ites.83 The wheat for the  and the
 at Mons Claudianus,
which we know of from the K and the receipts for advanced payments
from the years ad 13646, was probably acquired similarly. Mitthof might be
correct in assuming that the distribution of a grain ration to soldiers (and
hence to quarry workers), separate from the regular payment of a stipendium,
was in place as early as Trajans or Hadrians reign.84
The collection of barley and wheat for the quarry workers in the Egyptian
Eastern Desert was likely organized on similar lines to the grain supply of the
Roman army in Egypt. We can construct an outline of the supply system for
the Roman army in the last quarter of the second century ad based on a group
of texts known as the archive of Demarion, dating to the years ad 1846.
According to Mitthof s reconstruction, the praefectus Aegypti ordered the
requisition of a certain amount of barley to supply the needs of one mounted
unit for a year. This requisition was not limited to the immediate vicinity of
the units camp, but included diVerent nomes, perhaps of the whole Egyptian
province. The  were informed how much barley their nome should
supply; the authorities of the nomes (
d F 
F) divided
this amongst the villages. Based on this division, the village authorities
( ), provided the barley. Furthermore, the  were ordered
by the provincial administration to appoint a board consisting of honoratiores
from the capital of the nome. They were to receive an amount of money from
the public treasury and to distribute it to the villages which contributed
barley. The barley was then collected from the villages by a soldier of the
unit. In return, the villagers were handed a receipt which they immediately
passed on to the 
of their nome. In response to this receipt, the
board of honoratiores paid out a sum of public money for the villages barley

Kainepolis at the head of the roads leading up to the imperial quarries in the Eastern Desert, but
a town of the same name in the Arsinoite nome.
81
Mitthof 2001: 299.
82
P.Oxy. XLV 3243.
83
Mitthof 2001: 334 f.
84
Mitthof 2001: 310 f.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 217

contribution.85 A receipt for requistion of unknown goods handed to the

   of Soknopaiou Nesos from a soldier stationed in the Akoris
quarries in the years ad 1958 might refer to such a requisition of barley.86
A similar document attests the requisition of palm Wbres by a member of a
military unit at the quarries of Akoris in the third century ad.87 The requi-
sition of barley saw a signiWcant change under the Severans. On the orders of
the praefectus Aegypti, the 
and the e


 
of a
nome advised oYcials in some villages (i.e. the , the keepers of the
local granaries) to hand over a predetermined amount of barley to soldiers of
a speciWc unit, who had been sent to collect the grain needed. Unlike the
previous scheme, there was no payment for the requisitioned barley.88
The above-mentioned response of the 
Calpurnius Isidorus to the
prefect of Egypt may have been written after the conclusion of such a barley
requisition.89
The evidence for the supply of wheat to soldiers is rather scarce. It seems
that military units received their wheat (collected through regular taxation),
from dispensatores of the provincial administration.90 Regular taxation pro-
vided most wheat for the needs of the Roman army, and perhaps of the quarry
workers in the Eastern Desert as well. It has been suggested, however, that the
forced sales of wheat to the provincial authorities throughout the second
century ad document the incapacity of the grain taxation to guarantee a
continuous supply.91 In the Wrst half of the second century, the workers at
Mons Claudianus, the  as well as the
, received wheat
rations from their employers, the imperial quarrying authorities, and they
are mentioned together with troop units as the recipients of barley shipments.
Both factors strongly suggest that the imperial quarries were supplied with
grain through the regular mechanisms of grain taxation and requisition, as
were the army units stationed at the quarries in the Eastern Desert. Whether
or not this model applies to other provinces cannot be gleaned from the
known literary or epigraphic evidence.
Unlike other goods, water was not imported, but was collected from
springs and wells throughout the Eastern Desert.92 The scarcity of water
demanded strict measures. Lists of water-rations conWrm that members of

85
SB 1415562; P.Amh. II 107, 108; P.Bodl. I 14; BGU III 807, cf. Mitthof 2001: 43, 314317.
86
P.Alex.inv. 463, cf. Mitthof 1994: 207.
87
BGU VII 1612, cf. Mitthof 1994: 207.
88
Mitthof 2001: 44.
89
P.Oxy. XLV 3243, cf. Mitthof 2001: 44, 334 f.
90
P.Oxy. IV 735.
91
Mitthof 2001: 41 f. with fn. 20. For regular grain-taxation, cf. Wallace 1938: 3146.
92
MaxWeld 2001: 143.
218 Allocation of Responsibilities

the workforce did not receive more than 23 litres per day, an insuYcient
supply for a working adult under these extreme climatic conditions.93
The water supply was the main concern of military oYcials based along the
way-stations, and the military correspondence provides evidence of severe
water shortages and problems of storage.94 About 750 people at Mons
Claudianus had to be supplied with 2,250 l of water per day.95 Unpublished
ostraca mention a , including  as well as
. An
K
  , a work gang on duty, was in charge of collecting water
from Wve to six wells, using up to eighty camels. Camels owned by the
imperial authorites and by civilians were required to carry the water.96

6.1.2.5. The Requisition of Animals

The large distance between the imperial quarries and the main transport
waterways presented the quarrying authorities with a further problem,
namely the supply of transport animals. A letter sent by the anticurator
Rufus to the procurator metallorum Tertullus reports on the numbers of
donkeys still at Mons Claudianus, implying that the procurator was respon-
sible for the supply of such animals.97 But there are few references to transport
issues in the published ostraca of Mons Claudianus. Nothing is said about the
hauling of quarried blocks and columns or who would have carried out this
task. However, heavy carts which commuted between Claudianus and Kaine,
transporting stones one way and provisions the other, are mentioned in the
unpublished ostraca.98 Animals were required to haul columns and other
quarried items down to the Nile, and a caravan of camels, the  , came up
to Mons Claudianus every month, supplying the required goods to the
quarries. Provisions and letters were also brought in by donkeys.99
The ostraca record the use of camels for the provision of water. In one text

 , imperial camels, are distinguished from 
 ,

93
O.Claud.inv. 1538 2921, 3666, cf. Cuvigny 1997a: 77; Cuvigny 2005b.
94
On water shortage, see O.Claud. 362, 380. Antistius Flaccus, based at the way-station
Raima, reports abundant amounts of water (O.Claud. 2). The archive of Successus mentions
water-skins used to supply the quarries with water (O.Claud. 1269).
95
O.Claud.inv 1538 2921, cf. Cuvigny 2005b.
96
O.Claud. 134, 362, cf. Bulow-Jacobsen 1992b: 119; Rengen 1997: 203 f.
97
O.Claud.inv. 7295, cf. Cuvigny 2002: 245 f.
98
The texts mention wagons with two and four wheels. A special vehicle with twelve wheels
is recorded as well. One ostracon reports the arrival of a
, a chariot usually carrying granite
or other materials, cf. O.Claud. 362. Rengen 1997: 203; Bulow-Jacobsen 1998: 64; Hamilton-
Dyer 2001: 297.
99
On oYcial and unoYcial transports of goods and letters by camel-drivers, cf. O.Claud.
140, 142, 162, 224, 243, 248, 2679, 273, 274, 300; Adams 2001: 177.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 219

civilian camels.100 While the imperial camels had probably been purchased
by the quarrying administration, the 
  were undoubtedly
requisitioned from the provincial population. Two declarations dating to the
year ad 163 document the requisition of camels for tasks in the imperial
quarries. They were sent by the owners of camels from Soknopaiou Nesos to
the 
Stephanos and the e


 
Zoilos, of the div-
ision/(meris) of Herakleides in the Arsinoite nome. The declarations stated
how many camels they owned, how many were available for requisition, and
how many had been requisitioned. Both texts noted that camels had been
requisitioned to haul porphyry columns on the orders of the praefectus
Aegypti Annius Syriacus.101 Although the praefectus Aegypti authorized the
requisition of animals, it was the task of the local administration to carry out
these orders.102 While the main role of the K was to appoint
oYcials to requisition animals, the main control of this requisition system
fell to the  and the e


 
. Apart from the annual
census of livestock, designed to enhance the eVectiveness of collecting taxes on
animals, animal owners were obliged to submit declarations, I, of
their animals to the state. Moreover, village scribes compiled lists of eligible
liturgists for allotted tasks.103 Thanks to the census, the  had a
complete list of animals available within the nome. In one case, the praefectus
Aegypti, probably following a request (e.g. from the imperial quarries), gave
permission for a requisition on submission of a diploma. The village scribes
requested the animals from the liturgists and the animals then were gathered
and sent from the nome to the Eastern Desert.104
The liturgy system of Roman Egypt, which ensured the constant availability
of animals for various transports, surely has parallels in other provinces.
A Greek and Latin bilingual inscription found at Sulumenli on the road
from Dokimeion to Synnada might shed some light on the transport burdens
which the provincials faced. The inscription displays the record of hearings
held by the imperial procurators Aurelius Threptus, Philocurius and Novel-
lius in the years ad 200(?), 213, and 237 on the subject of a dispute between
the villagers of Anossa and Antimacheia. The issue at stake was the just
distribution of the angareia, the burden of providing oxen for the cursus
publicus, amongst both villages.105 Based on an initial hearing held at Anossa

100
O.Claud. 362, cf. Rengen 1997: 203 f.
101
BGU III 762 (ad 163). P.Lond II 328 (ad 163), cf. Adams 2001: 175. For further examples,
cf. Leone 1988: 15577; Sijpesteijn 1993: 29, no. 2; Leone 1998: 637.
102
Adams 2001: 1803.
103
Adams 2001: 181. For a census, cf. P.Oxy. XVII 2118 (ad 156).
104
SB 12168 (ad 130?), cf. Youtie 1978a; Adams 2001: 182.
105
Frend 1956: 536.
220 Allocation of Responsibilities

around ad 200(?), the procurator Aurelius Threptus decided to distribute the

angareia according to the ratio of the tax sum collected both from Anossa and
Antimacheia. This ruling was enforced by Aurelius Symphoros, an optio of
Threptus.106 The case was heard again in ad 213 by the procurator Philocur-
ius and in ad 237 by the procurator Novellius, and Threptus initial regulation
was upheld. A stationarius was supplied to ensure that the ruling was imple-
mented fairly. It has been argued that the angareia-duty was not meant for the
cursus velox but rather for the cursus clabularius, the transport of heavy
items.107 Some scholars believe that marble blocks from the imperial quarries
of Dokimeion, amongst other things, were transported with the cursus cla-
bularius.108 Given the archaeological evidence, a similar system might have
been in place for the imperial quarries at Simitthus as well.109

6.1.2.6. Imperial Quarries and the Provincial Administration

The procurators oYce could rely on the administrative structure already in
place for the acquisition of animals, grain, or any other goods required. Hence,
the amounts of grain or numbers of animals were calculated on the basis of
monthly rations and additional requests, and the information was compiled
and transmitted to the praefectus Aegypti. He then set the administrative
apparatus in motion in order to supply the required staple goods or beasts
of burden. As we have seen, the papyri suggest that Egyptian prefects played a
pivotal role in the logistical support of the quarries; grain was collected,
apparently on the orders of the praefectus Aegypti, for the soldiers and quarry
workers in the Egyptian Eastern Desert.110 Moreover, animals were requisi-
tioned for various transport tasks, again on the orders of praefectus Aegypti.111
The praefectus Aegypti appears on a regular basis in inscriptions found in the
Eastern Desert. The inscriptions of the
c
H
, Epaphrodi-
tos, from Mons Porphyrites and Mons Claudianus both name Rammius
Martialis as the prefect of Egypt (ad 11719). An inscription from the
Hydreuma at Mons Claudianus was set up in the year ad 109 for Sulpicius

106
SEG XVI 754 Frend 1956: 46 f., ll. 129; Mitchell 1999: 38 f.; Levick 2000: 5760,
translation.
107
Frend 1956: 54; Zawadzki 1960: 90.
108
Pekary 1968: 136; Kolb 2000: 96 f., 154 f. On the export route of pavonazetto from
Dokimeion, cf. Hirt 2004: 11921 with further bibliography.
109
Winckler 1895; Salama 1951: 61; cf. 2.1.6.
110
SB 12169 Youtie 1978b (ad 96). P.Giss. 69 Pena 1989. P.Oxy. XLV 3243 (ad 214/
215). P.Oxy. IV 735 (ad 205). Adams 2001: 177 f.; Mitthof 2001: 330, 334 f.
111
BGU III 762 (ad 163). P.Lond II 328 (ad 163). On Annius Syriacus, cf. Thomasson 1984:
351, no. 63. On requisition of animals, cf. Adams 2001: 1803.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 221

Similis, praefectus Aegypti from ad 10712.112 A number of ostraca conWrm a

visit in person of the latter prefect ( F

) to the Mons
Claudianus quarries.113 Moreover, a hitherto unpublished ostracon found at
Mons Claudianus is presumably a copy (the original probably was a papyrus)
of an undated letter by the praefectus Aegypti Pomponius Faustianus (ad
1857) to Probus, a procurator known from other unpublished ostraca. The
letter seems to refer to (construction?) activities taking place in the Mons
Claudianus quarries.114
The involvement of the praefectus Aegypti in extractive operations and the
visits to the remote imperial quarries were presumably not just out of
personal interest, but perhaps part of his duties. A small number of quarries
in the Nile Valley were opened on the orders of the praefectus Aegypti, perhaps
for speciWc purposes, such as building projects. In ad 8991 we Wnd the
prefect Mettius Rufus ordering stone for a basement, for which a quarry at
Gebel Toukh was opened.115 A Latin inscription from Syene conWrms our
notion that the praefectus Aegypti could be responsible for the opening of new
quarries on some occasions. Aurelius Heraclides, decurio in the ala I Thracum
Mauretana, inscribed a column between ad 206 and 209, commemorating the
discovery of novae lapidicinae near Philae. Under the auspices of Ti. Claud-
ius Subatianus Aquila, praefectus Aegypti (ad 2069) numerous pilasters and
columns were extracted.116 Unfortunately, there is no further evidence to
identify the prefects who opened other quarries in the Nile valley. Near
Eileithyiaspolis/mod. El-Kab, 20 km north of Edfu, on the left bank of the
Nile, a sandstone quarry was opened at El Mahamid.117 According to the
inscription of an unknown soldier of a legio II (Traiana), these sandstone
quarries had been opened in the eleventh year of Hadrians reign (ad 127).118
Other quarries might also have been worked at the behest of the praefectus
Aegypti: The porphyrite deposits at Gebel Dokhan were discovered by a Caius
Cominius Leugas, who in the year ad 18 set up an inscribed stelae commem-
orating his Wnd.119 According to his inscription he encountered not only
porphyry stone, but a stone he calls knekites, as well as black porphyry and

112
I.Pan 37, 42.
113
O.Claud. 130. According to Bulow-Jacobsen 1992b: 117, and Cuvigny 2000a: 9 fn. 28,
other texts (O.Claud.inv. 369, 2212) may refer to a visit of the prefect Sulpicius Similis who sets
up an altar in the temple, cf. I.Pan 37, ad 108/9.
114
O.Claud.inv. 7295, cf. Cuvigny 2002: 243. For activities under Commodus, cf. MaxWeld &
Peacock 2001b: 433.
115
I.Pan 16 I.Metr. 116.
116
CIL III 75 ILS 4424.
117
Klemm & Klemm 1992: 22831.
118
I.Th.Sy. 35.
119
SEG XLV 2097 AE 1995: 1615 Rengen 1995: 242 f.
222 Allocation of Responsibilities

polychrome stones.120 However, it is not stated who ordered Cominius

Leugas to venture into the middle of the Egyptian Eastern Desert.121 Pliny
the Elder possibly sheds some light on the issue: he oVers an interesting
passage on the procurator Vitrasius Pollio. Pollio imported statues made
of red porphyry from Egypt and presented them to the emperor Claudius,
who did not take any liking to the purple stone. Pliny claims that after this
episode no one tried to imitate Vitrasius Pollio.122 A Caius Vitrasius Pollio
appears as praefectus Aegypti in ad 3941 and is probably the same man.
Presumably during his tenure of the prefecture in Egypt Pollio was shown the
red porphyry from Mons Porphyrites, which he then mistakenly thought
worthy of presenting to the emperor.123 If Plinys account is correct, it
would imply that Pollios predecessors as prefect opened up quarries and
sent samples of the stone found there to Rome.
Like all provincial governors, the praefectus Aegypti had the right to con-
demn convicted provincials to the quarries for a number of years. However, it
seems as if only the alabaster quarries in the Nile valley and perhaps Mons
Porphyrites were regularly supplied with convict labour by the praefectus
Aegypti.124 Subatianus Aquila, the prefect in ad 2069, appears at least in
two routine Greek documents which inform the relevant  of the
release of convicts who had been condemned to work in the alabaster quar-
ries. This presumably happened in order to guarantee that the former convict
was re-enrolled in the taxation lists of their N by the I


 E
.125
A fragmentary letter in Latin from one of Subatianus Aquilas predecessors, C.
Avidius Heliodorus (ad 13742), to the oYcial in charge of the quarries near
Alabastrine, orders the release of the convict Petesuchos, who had been
condemned by the praefectus Aegypti M. Petronius Mamertinus (ad 1337)
Wve years before.126 According to Flavius Josephus, Titus had prisoners from
the Jewish war older than 17 years of age sent to the quarries in Egypt; the
praefectus Aegypti was likely required to distribute these prisoners of war to
the various quarries.127 Besides this, he also had to supply the prisoners
(perhaps not only within Egypt?) with clothing. Towards the end of the year

120
On the diYculties of identifying the knekites stone, cf. Rengen 1995: 2435.
121
C. Cominius Leugas appears to be a freedman, although he does not give his social status.
The cognomen Leugas does not appear often as a slave name: Lorincz 2000: 24, Leuga: CIL III
2073 (Dalmatia). Leuganus: CIL III 1158 (Dalmatia), from Clunia/Hispania citerior.
122
Pliny, NH 36.57.
123
Thomasson 1984: 344, no. 20; PIR V 524.
124
Mons Porphyrites(?): Aelius Aristides, Or. 36.67.
125
Hagedorn & Shelton 1975: 228, and Haensch 2000: 259 f.
126
Bastianini 1986.
127
Josephus, BJ 6.418.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 223

ad 153, the praefectus Aegypti ordered 6,700  for prisoners on behalf of
the Roman state (




). The guilds of weavers in the Arsinoite
nome had to manufacture these garments and were paid by the public bankers
(
  E) in advance.128
Governors of other provinces also sent convicts to work in metalla; con-
demnation in metallum was one of the commoner punishments meted out by
Roman magistrates for numerous crimes. Roman law envisaged a wide range
of punishments for criminals, the majority of which were designed for servi or
humiliores and included hard labour and corporal punishment, namely Xog-
ging and beating.129 Condemnation in metallum was considered to be a
capital punishment combined with a loss of citizenship or reputation/sta-
tus.130 In comparison to extreme capital penaltiessuch as being sent to the
gallows, burnt alive, beheaded, or cruciWedcondemnation in metallum was
thought a less severe form of punishment, even though a man so condemned
might view it as comparable to a death sentence.131 In general, condemnation
to a mine or quarry was literally a lifetime sentence.132 Yet, there is evidence
for the reduction of the poena metalli to a certain length of time: if the
damnatio in metallum was meted out without deWning the length of the
sentence, the predetermined period was to be ten years; a rescript of Hadrian
states that men were not to be condemned in opus metalli (a lighter form of
punishment) in perpetuity.133 Antoninus Pius even extended clemency to
convicts who were found to be too unWt for work owing to sickness or
advanced age.134 Despite the occasional leniency, condemnations in metallum
for perpetuity were still meted out in late antiquity.135
The nature of this punishment called for the damnatus to be restrained in
his movements. A man who had been condemned in metallum was either
Wtted with heavy chains, or if condemned in opus metalli was burdened with
lighter fetters.136 However, there is no record of any other diVerences between
the two punishments. The condemnation in opus metalli was understood to
be a lighter form of punishment than condemnation to a metallum and

128
P.Graux 30, Kol. VII, cf. Kambitsis 1997.
129
In general, cf. Mommsen 1899: 47 f., 9603; Millar 1984; Gustafson 1994; Gustafson 1997.
See Pliny, Ep. 2.11.8, 10.58.13. Sueton, Cal. 29, for legal mistreatment of senators or eques-
trians.
130
Dig. 48.19.2.pr., 48.19.28.1, 50.13.5.3. Paulus, Sent. 5.17.2.
131
Dig. 48.19.28.1.
132
See e.g. CTh 2.14.1, 16.5.40.
133
Dig. 48.19.23.pr., cf. Paulus, Sent. Int. 3.6.2; Dig. 48.19.28.6. Ulpian, Coll. 11.8.3.
134
Dig. 48.19.22.pr.
135
CTh 2.14.1, 16.5.40.
136
Dig. 48.19.8.6.
224 Allocation of Responsibilities

apparently limited in time. This view is supported by Ulpian who states that a
fugitive from opus metalli was to be condemned in metallum, increasing the
severity of his punishment.137 Apart from the damnatio in metallum and the
damnatio in opus metalli, Ulpian refers to a less drastic form of punishment,
the ministerium metallicorum, which was a punitive measure for women. This
may have been a kind of auxiliary mining or quarrying duty, and was not as
physically demanding as other hard labour punishments in the metalla.138
Convicts sent in metallum were usually branded, the mark being painfully
placed on the middle of their forehead.139
Literary sources also document the use of damnati in mines or quarries.
Aelius Aristides describes in gloomy terms what awaited the convicts con-
demned to an Egyptian porphyry quarry; the heat and the lack of water
prevented convicts from escaping as they feared being burned alive.140 In
his speech to his Caledoni, Calgacus cried that he would rather be killed in
battle against the Roman invaders than face deportation to metallathe fate
of many prisoners of war.141 Flavius Josephus reports that Titus sent prisoners
from the Jewish War to the quarries in Egypt.142 Other sources, mostly
patristic, refer to Christians condemned to unspeciWed metalla in Numidia,
Sardinia, Cilicia, Pontus, Egypt (Thebaid), or Palestine (Phaeno) in the third
and early fourth centuries.143
Despite the abundant legal and literary sources, the use of damnati in
quarries or mines is not documented in the epigraphic record. Provided
Aelius Aristides account of convicts sent to the quarries of Mons Porphyrites
in the Egyptian Eastern Desert is correct, one would expect there to be at least
some archaeological traces.144 To date, nothing seems to directly attest the
presence of convicts, although the   at Mons Claudianus and Mons

137
Dig. 48.19.8.6. A fate deemed even worse by Ulpian than the ordinary metalla (poena
metalli) awaited the convicts in the calcaria, lime quarries, or in the sulpuraria, sulphur mines
(Dig. 48.19.8.10).
138
Dig. 48.19.8.8.
139
Jones 1987.
140
Aelius Aristides, Or. 36.67, cf. Fitzler 1910: 11921; Klein 1988: 42 f.
141
Tacitus, Agr. 32.4, cf. Lassandro 1995.
142
Josephus, BJ 6.418.
143
Cyprian, Ep. 76, 77, 79. Eusebius, De mart. Pal. 7.34, 8.1, 8.13, 13.14. Eusebius, HE 9.1,
4.23.10, 8.12.10. Ap. Const. 8.10.15; cf. Gustafson 1994: 422. For the Passio Sanctorum Quattuor
Coronatorum, cf. Wattenbach 1870; Tackholm 1937: 136 f.; Geerlings 1983; Peacock 1995, with
further references. For mining in Late Antiquity, cf. Edmondson 1989. For the recent excav-
ations at Faynan/anc. Phaeno, cf. Barker et al. 1997; Barker et al. 1998; Barker et al. 1999; Barker
et al. 2000.
144
For Christian convicts sent to the porphyry quarries in Egypt, cf. Eusebius, De mart. Pal.
8.1, and perhaps the Passio Sanctorum Quattuor Coronatorum.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 225

Porphyrites could also be interpreted as watchtowers for guarding convicts.

The compound of the quarries at Simitthus/mod. Chemtou is the only
architectural structure which has been interpreted as a prison camp (cf.
2.1.6).

6.1.2.7. Summary
The administration of the imperial quarries in Egypt and their supply with
human and material resources probably required the praefectus attention on
a regular basis. The imperial quarries relied heavily on the provincial admin-
istration for the supply of provisions and the requisition of animals. The
procurators of these quarries therefore were not left on their own in acquiring
basic materials for extractive operations. The heavy reliance on the support of
the provincial administration in attaining access to these public resources
underscores the special status of these quarries in the Eastern Desert. The
recurring involvement of the praefectus Aegypti may suggest that he exercised
a supervisory control over the quarries.
However, we have little evidence which shows how the management of the
quarries in other provinces was integrated in the provincial administration as
a whole. As prisoners and convicts were sent to the metalla by provincial
governors, and provincials were required to supply beasts of burden under the
framework of liturgia, it is possible to suggest that the administration had at
least a limited involvement in extractive operations. Naturally, this requires us
to assume that the planning of work procedures, the supply of a workforce,
and means of transport were the responsibility of imperial oYcials. The
quarrying procurator in the Nile valley was probably required to assess
the needs of quarries under his jurisdiction in the Eastern Desert, and inform
the provincial authorities of their requirements. However, it is diYcult to
document these administrative activities precisely, since the majority of them
involve the Nile valley and are thus beyond the scope of the Claudianus
ostraca. There are a few references to the activities of the procurator in the
ostraca to provide us with some idea of his duties. The procurator and his
staV at Mons Claudianus apparently kept books on the produce of the
quarries, and possibly managed incoming orders, and ensured that the
stone required was quarried and exported. It cannot be ascertained, however,
whether they were directly involved in the arrangement of work procedures as
such. This was probably the task of the military oYcers or civil engineers
present at the quarries. Moreover, the recruitement, allocation and payment
of the workforce, be that  or
, the supply of food rations
as well as raw materials, tools, ropes, animals, etc., were in all likelihood
226 Allocation of Responsibilities

supervised by the quarrying procurators in charge, undoubtedly with the help

of his own staV and the provincial administration. Special tasks, such as the
recruitement of the work force from other quarrying areas in the Nile Valley,
may have been delegated to civilian contractors.
Given the speciWc circumstances of the quarries in the Egyptian Eastern
Desert, in particular their location far from the populated and fertile Nile
valley, procurators in charge of imperial quarries in other provinces may not
have faced the same range of responsibilities as their Egyptian colleagues. The
use of convicts may have resulted in similar procuratorial responsibilities,
namely the task of supplying food, garments and shelter to the work force.
The proximity to populated areas, however, required diVerent measures in
organizing extractive procedures, thus producing a diVerent portfolio of
tasks for the procurator (cf. 2.1.8).

6.1.3. Function and Responsibilities of Mining Procurators

6.1.3.1. The Mining Procurators and the Vipasca Tablets

The main sources of information on the duties of mining procurators are two
fragmentary bronze tablets unearthed by the Companhia Mineira Transta-
gana in 1876 and 1906 at Vipasca/mod. Aljustrel in Lusitania.145 The Wrst
tablet, usually refered to as the lex metalli Vipascensis, lists a series of regula-
tions for the contractors of fee collections and other services within the
metallum Vipascense. The initial regulations were probably written on at
least four bronze tablets, three of which have been found. The reverse side
of the bronze tablet displays a copy of the text on the front, albeit not in the
same layout. The text on the reverse has been moved down a number of lines,
probably as a result of emendations made to the original text on the front.146
The procurator contracted out monopolies for the provision of diVerent
services intra Wnes metalli Vipascensis, i.e. within the mining district of
Vipasca under his supervision.147 The Wrst paragraph of the lex metalli
Vipascensis regulates the centesima argentariae stipulationis. As Dieter Flach
argues, one per cent of the proWt made on an item sold in an auction was
collected by the broker (argentarius) from the seller as a fee for his services,
the terms of which the seller (venditor) had agreed to by oral contract

145
For most recent studies, cf. Domergue 1983; Flach 1979, with extensive discussion of the
older studies; cf. now Lazzarini 2001.
146
Flach 1979: 402; Domergue 1983: 436.
147
Flach 1979: 428 f.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 227

(stipulatio). If this interpretation is correct, the term conductor used in this

passage refers not to a contractor of tax on auctions but to the contractor of
broker services at Vipasca.148 Sales executed by the procurator in the name of
the emperor were exempt from this fee and, in the case of mining rights being
sold, were collected from the buyer.149 The sale or lease of items or mining
pits by the procurator in the name of the Wscus was also exempt from the
scriptura praeconii (a fee on items put up for sale, advertised by the praeco, a
herald or crier, and collected from the seller).150 Both passages show the
procurator metallorum as a vendor not only of mining rights and mining
pits to interested buyers but also of other miscellaneous items.151 Besides the
taxation of sales and the collection of fees for the advertisement of sales, the
procurator contracted out the baths to a conductor balinei. Moreover, shoe-
makers, barbers, fullers, and the collectors of slag and stone splinters were,
like all conductores, guaranteed a monopoly in providing their speciWc services
within the mining district.152 Apart from contracting out services, most
inhabitants of the mining district could be summoned by the procurator
metallorum for munera; teachers were exempt from such duties.153
Further insights are provided by the second tablet found at Vipasca in 1906,
the lex metallis dicta (LMD).154 It probably once covered at least three tablets,
of which only the second has been discovered.155 The LMD is a letter
addressed to an Ulpius Aelianus, and details the regulations on the sale of
mining pits. The remaining text allows a glimpse at the procurators main
responsibilities: (i) superintendence of the seizure and sale of mines and
mining rights to occupatores or coloni and their socii, respectively, and
(ii) the implementation of mining regulations (cf. 7.1.1). Furthermore, the
procurator had jurisdiction within his territorium. The theft of ores, the
sabotage of the mining infrastructure and the breach of security regulations
148
Flach 1979: 42934, esp. 430 with fn. 104; for a diVerent view, cf. Domergue 1983: 6873.
149
LMV, l. 2: exceptis iis, quas proc(urator) metallorum iu[ssu imp(eratoris) faciet, l. 3:
Conductor ex pretio puteorum, quos proc(urator) metallorum vendet, cent[esimam ab emp-
tore exigito]; cf. Flach 1979: 407. The text clearly states that auctions conducted by the
procurator metallorum on the orders of the emperor were exempt from the collection of taxes.
Hence, the procurator regularly held auctions.
150
LMV ll. 1314: Si quas [res proc(urator) metallorum nomine] Wsci venjdet locabitve. ll.
15: Puteorum, quos proc(urator) metallorum vendiderit; cf. Flach 1979: 408, 433 f.; Domergue
1983: 739.
151
This probably included possessions of extradited individuals who had been convicted of
deliberately ignoring some of the very strict security regulations or had stolen ore, cf. LMD.
152
Flach 1979: 408 f., 4348; Domergue 1983: 7999.
153
LMV l. 57: Ludi magistros a proc(uratore) metallorum immunes es[se oportet]. Hirsch-
feld 1905: 160; Flach 1979: 409; Domergue 1983: 98 f.; Mangas 1999: 24850.
154
For procuratorial jurisdiction and its development, cf. Millar 1964: esp. 186; Millar 1965;
Brunt 1990b: esp. 183 f.; Eck 1997c : 1614.
155
Flach 1979: 400.
228 Allocation of Responsibilities

were punished severely. Whereas slaves were Xogged, kept in chains, and had
to be sold outside of the mining district, perpetrators of a higher status lost
their property to the Wscus and were evicted from the mining district.156 The
judicial powers vested in the mining procurator also provided him with the
necessary means to enforce the swift and continuous exploitation of metal
ores. As the lex metallis dicta seems to imply, its strict regulations were crafted
to force the occupatores or coloni to keep their mining operations more or less
up and running without intermission.
The procurator metallorum at Vipasca appears to have been the head of a
quasi-municipal community with a clearly deWned territory.157 He sold the
mining rights to interested individuals or societates, farmed out monopolies
for a range of services which were provided within the mining district, and
could probably also summon some of the inhabitants for munera. Within the
mining district, procuratorial jurisdiction was not only a vital tool for enfor-
cing the mining regulations, but was also instrumental in achieving the
procurators main objectivethe unhindered and continuous exploitation
of the copper and silver mines.

6.1.3.2. Iberian Mining Districts

This combination of powers and responsibilities which appears in the tablets,
was probably not unique to the procurator metallorum at Vipasca. Claude
Domergue stressed that the mining regulations of the second tablet (LMD)
appear to have applied to other hardrock mines as well: the speciWc geological
constraints at Vipasca are found at other mines in southeastern Iberia such as
Concepcion, El Lagunazo, Tharsis, Herreras, Rio Tinto, Serra de Caveira, La
Zarza, and Sotiel Coronada. These speciWc conditions favour the sale or lease
of mining pits to private individuals.158
Unlike the hardrock silver and copper mines at Vipasca, the geology and
topography of the alluvial gold-mining zones south-west of Astorga in
northwestern Spain required the application of water power on a grand
scale. The visible remnants of this technology reXect the eVorts of a workforce
directed by a single authority.159 As yet, there is no evidence for societates
publicanorum or conductores running mining ventures on a grand scale in

156
LMD ll. 278, 325, 402, cf. Flach 1979: 404; Domergue 1983: 146 f.
157
Brunt 1990b: 183 f.
158
Domergue 1983: 15166, esp. 158 f. At La Zarza and Sotiel Coronada up to 100 and 150
double-shafted mining pits have been found. Such mining pits are assumed to have been in use at
Vipasca as well, although the evidence has been removed by the extensive mining at the beginning
of the 20th cent. On these mines, cf. Domergue 1987a: H6, 7, 9, 12, 19, 30, 36, 40, 43.
159
Domergue 1990: 299, 3036.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 229

this region. It is likely that the Roman state chose to exploit the alluvial gold
resources directly, rather than compartmentalizing the mining zones and
contracting out plots to numerous small-scale contractors, or even sell them
to Vipasca-style coloni.160 Moreover, the resettlement of indigenous com-
munities in order to supply labour for the mines supports the view that the
state was directly involved. Based on the survey results of the mining land-
scape west of Asturica Augusta, it has been argued that with the establishment
of Roman rule in northwestern Spain the socio-economic structure of the
area was fundamentally reshaped to serve the needs of the Roman mining
industry.161 This process may be observed in the change of settlement
patterns.
The pre-Roman landscape was dominated by castros, fortiWed settlements
usually positioned on hilltops.162 The distribution of these pre-Roman hill forts
shows that the distances between them never were less than 8 km. Most settle-
ments developed not far from favourable farmland, pastures, woodlands or iron
mines, allowing for self-suYciency.163 A signiWcant change is detectable from
the early Wrst century onwards, when the old pre-Roman castros were aban-
doned. This indigenous form of settlement was reused, albeit in a diVerent
topographical and socio-economic context. These Roman castros increased in
number, resulting in a far higher density of settlements than in pre-Roman
times.164 Most settlements now stood no more than c.2 km apart, clustered
around mining sites or places showing signs of metallurgical activity. A further
group of settlements seems not to be related to the mining areas, but was
positioned close to the agriculturally fertile soils of the area. In addition to the
indigenous settlement forms, distinctively Roman building structures were also
found in the mining zones. In the light of the increase in settlements (and
population?), it is questionable whether the Roman mining settlements or
castros were able to maintain self-suYciency.165 Although the Roman castros
kept their main feature, the wooden palisade, the interior spatial organization
was altered. Compared to pre-Roman settlements, the Roman castros were
now dominated by open spaces, whereas the orthogonal grid of its streets was

160
Orejas & Sanchez-Palencia 2002: 58995 with further bibliography. Contra: Brunt 1990c :
397 f.
161
Domergue & Martin 1977; Domergue & Sillieres 1977; Domergue & Herail 1978;
Sanchez-Palencia & Perez Garcia 1983; Domergue 1986; Fernandez-Posse & Sanchez-Palencia
1988; Herail & Perez Garca 1989; Sanchez-Palencia et al. 1990: 2623; Orejas 1994; Orejas 1996:
10316, 17084, 1869; Sanchez-Palencia Ramos et al. 1996: 10713; Sastre Prats 1998: 1824;
Orejas & Sastre Prats 1999: 17183; Orejas & Sanchez-Palencia 2002.
162
Orejas 1994: 2524.
163
Orejas 1994: 2505; Orejas 1996: 55101, esp. 1001.
164
Orejas 1996: lam. 10.
165
Orejas 1994: 2656; Orejas 1996: 17681.
230 Allocation of Responsibilities

oriented NESW.166 The castros in the area remained settled until the mid-
second century ad.
This vivid archaeological picture is partly corroborated by the literary and
epigraphic evidence. Florus (2.32.5960) tells us that, in Augustus reign, the
Asturians were forced to leave the hillforts, resettle in the plain, and were put
to work in the gold mines. A number of bronze tablets found throughout
northwestern Spain may reXect the Roman reorganization of indigenous
settlement patterns: The tabula Paemeiobrigensis, discovered only recently at
Bembibre, mirrors Augustan policy in the immediate aftermath of Roman
occupation. The tablet refers to two edicts from 14 and 15 February 15 bc, in
which Augustus regulates the status of the castellani Paemeiobrigenses ex gente
Susarrorum and the castellani Aiiobrigiaecini ex gente Gigurrorum. In the Wrst
edict Augustus declared the perpetual immunity of the Paemeiobrigenses from
tribute and services (perhaps including corvee labour in mines) as a reward
for their loyalty to Rome during a recent upheaval. In the second edict the
castellani Aiiobrigiaeciniin observance of their wisheswere separated
from the gens Gigurrorum, rejoined with the castellani Paemeiobrigenses and
required to provide tribute and services together with the gens Susarrorum.
The term used to describe the communities, castellani, most likely refers to
the inhabitants of castros.167 The text aYrms the territorial realignments
taking place under the auspices of Roman legates during and after the
paciWcation of the provincia Transduriana.168 Further bronze tablets, known
as tesserae hopistales, contracts regarding hospitality (hospitium privatum)
amongst private individuals or communities, may perhaps be a result of a
forced relocation.169 It has been argued that the signiWcant increase in move-
ments of families or members of a castellum or tribe required a legal instru-
ment to secure the settlement of these individuals in a new environment.
Given the fact that these movements probably had been forced or encouraged
by the Roman state, and that these documents appear nearly exclusively in the
mining areas of the north-west, Ines Sastre Prats believed that this new legal
device was introduced by the Roman authorities to bolster the eVects of their
resettlement policy.170

166
Fernandez-Posse & Sanchez-Palencia 1985; Fernandez-Posse & Sanchez-Palencia 1988.
For similar developments in the Cuenca del Boeza area east of Ponferrada/Leon, cf. Sanchez-
Palencia & Perez Garcia 1983: 240.
167
For list of attested castella, cf. Sastre Prats 1998: 801, Wgs.
168
Alfoldy 2000b: 197. On the tabula Paemeiobrigensis, cf. Balboa de Paz 1999; Costabile &
Licandro 2000.
169
Kierdorf 1967: 1234; LeRoux 1995: 902.
170
See mainly Sastre Prats 1998, with further bibliography. On the evidence: tabula
Lougeiorum, cf. Dopico Canzos 1988; tabula Zoelarum, cf. CIL II 2633; El Caurel tablet, cf.
IRPL 55; Castromao tablet, cf. AE 1973: 295 AE 1972: 282.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 231

Provided our interpretation of the archaeological and written evidence is

correct, the forced reorganization of the entire social landscape for the purpose
of accomodating a new mining industry on a vast scale certainly underscores
the tenacity of the Roman authorities in exploiting the metallic resources of
northwestern Spain. Undoubtedly the oYcials in charge of this mining area
were reliant on the provincial administration in several ways. Forced labour
and, at a later stage, free labour had to be put to work in an eVective manner,
paid and/or supplied with food rations and other goods; tools, wood, charcoal,
and other items had to be provided; aqueducts and furnaces planned and built
for the extraction and smelting procedures; the import of material resources
and the export of gold ingots had to be organized; and the security of these
transports guaranteed.171 These would have been major logistical undertak-
ings for the mining management in the north-west.
Despite these insights, we are not well informed on organizational strategy
and the allocation of administrative responsibilities in the early phase of
gold exploitation in northwestern Spain.172 Nor do we have information
concerning the division of tasks between the freedmen mining procurators
and the equestrian Wnancial procurators for Asturia and Callaecia, both of
which are attested in the Flavian period at the earliest. It remains merely an
assumption that the mining procurators documented at Vilals and Luyego
held judicial powers comparable to those at Vipasca. Were this to be the case,
the focus perhaps lay more on the enforcement of order and security within
the mining district rather than the supervision of miners and their obliga-
tions. In addition, a procurator in the north-west could have dealt with the
recruitement, provision, and payment of a workforce, as well as a whole range
of technical problems, particularly the construction and maintenance of a
vast water supply system for the mining operations, as documented at Las
Medulas (2.2.1.1).
In general, the responsibilities of freedmen procuratores metallorum could
therefore have diVered signiWcantly, depending on geological constraints and
the organizational strategy chosen. One thus could argue that freedmen
mining procurators either organized the extractive process by farming out
plots to small-scale contractors, by sale of plots to private individuals, or ran
171
There is no textual evidence on how the local population was forced to participate in
mining operatios. Almudena Orejas has suggested that the resettled villagers would provide
work as tribute (operae), cf. Orejas & Sanchez-Palencia 2002: 593.
172
As Florus (2.25.12) reports, the governor C. Vibius Postumus put the local population
to use in gold-mining operations in the vrbas Valley after the Pannonian mutiny, cf.
Wilkes 1969: 272; Zaninovic 1977: 796; Kienast 1999: 403. In analogy, one might see the legati
Augusti reported by the tabula Paemeiobrigensis for a provincia Transduriana and by Strabo
(3.4.20) for Asturia and Callaecia in charge of restructuring the newly gained territories for
economic ends.
232 Allocation of Responsibilities

mines directly by the means of a labour force. We cannot be sure whether the
Roman army oYcers and soldiers stationed in these areas were required to
undertake technical tasks or oversee the arrangement and command of work
procedures. These diVerences set aside, the activities of freedmen procurators
recorded for the Iberian peninsula were limited to well-deWned local districts
or regions within the provinces (4.1.13).

6.1.3.3. Procurators and Mining Districts in Danubian Provinces

Naturally, it is impossible to be sure whether these observations apply to other
known freedmen mining procurators in the Roman empire. The freedmen
procuratores aurariarum recorded at Ampelum prior to the Marcomannic
wars may also have held responsibilities limited to a local district, probably
including Alburnus Maior/mod. Ros ia Montana. The designation aurariae
Dacicae, which appears on an inscription by a tabularius at Ampelum, does
not provide any indication as to the precise geographical scope of the pro-
curators responsibilities.173 The inscriptions of beneWciarii procuratoris at
Ampelum may however indicate the subordination of the freedmen procur-
ators there to equestrian Wnancial procurators of Dacia Apulensis, just like the
procurators at Villals and Luyego (cf. 4.1.9).174 Provided this assumption is
correct, the freedman procurator may likely have supervised the gold mines in
a local district, or in Dacia Apulensis at the most.
The wooden tablets from Alburnus Maior in Dacia shed some light on the
local regime of Roman gold-mining there. The tablets found in Roman shafts
and tunnels in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century date to the
mid-second century and not later than ad 167.175 The tablets thus mirror the
situation at Alburnus Maior prior to the Marcomannic wars and may have
been discarded or hidden in the mines during the upheaval.176 The range of
topics covered by the texts is limited, with most containing contracts. Given
the diVerent Wndspots, they were not all part of one archive.177 Four of the
twenty-Wve tablets found seem to refer to mining ventures at Alburnus Maior.
On 19 May ad 164 an Aurelius Adiutor, most likely a Roman citizen, hired the
services of a Memmius Asclepi of peregrine status for opus aurarium, work in
the gold mines.178 Another work contract names a Titus Beusantis qui et
Bradua employing the mining worker []s Restitutus agnomine Senioris for
173
CIL III 1297 ILS 1594 and CIL III 1313, cf. Noeske 1977: 352.
174
Nelis-Clement 2000: 263 f.
175
Mrozek 1977: 97; CIL III p. 92160.
176
On Alburnus Maior, cf. Piso 1993: 97 f.; Piso 2004: 301 f.; on Marcomannic wars, cf. Birley
1987: 15579.
177
Noeske 1977: 336 f.
178
CIL III p. 948, cf. Noeske 1977: 398403.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 233

opus aurarium.179 A contract of 23 October ad 163 was concluded between a

Socratio Socratihoniis and the worker L. Ulpius Valerius at Alburnus Maior,
but does not explicitly name work in gold mines as the purpose of hire.180
This evidence lends support to the argument that at least some sections of the
mines at Alburnus Maior were worked by a labour force employed by private
entrepreneurs who ran extractive operations in agreement with the mining
authorities. Furthermore, a Iulius Alexander is named in four diVerent
wooden tablets as creditor and debitor.181 Noeske concluded that Iulius
Alexander was a banker/broker of some sort, reminiscent perhaps of the
argentarius documented in the Vipasca tablets.182 Although Iulius Alexander
might have provided the Wnancial capital for some of the mining contractors
at Alburnus Maior, there is no evidence to suggest that the mining adminis-
tration had awarded him the banking monopoly, or that Vipasca-style regu-
lations for the collection of a brokers fee had been implemented.
The available epigraphic evidence prior to the Marcomannic wars implies
that the freedman procurator aurariarum at Ampelum delegated part of the
underground mining activities at Alburnus Maior to private individuals or
companies, whatever the contractual basis. The other part of the mines were
perhaps worked directly by the Roman state. For instance, the relatively high
numbers of Dalmatians at Alburnus Maior and the mention in one of the
wooden tablets of a vicus Pirustarum as part of Alburnus Maior, named after
the Dardanian tribe of the Pirustae, has been understood to refer to a forced
resettlement of these skilled miners by the Roman state in order to exploit the
gold veins in Dacia.183 There is, however, no Wrm evidence for a deliberate
deportation of skilled mining workers from Dardania. The possibility of a
voluntary migration by Pirustae (perhaps in response to incentives, i.e. high
wages, oVered by the Roman state) may not altogether be excluded.184 Like
the situation in northwestern Spain, the movement of supposedly qualiWed
men to Alburnus Maior might hint at the direct exploitation of part of the
gold mines by the Roman state, perhaps in the early years of Roman rule.
As of yet, the epigraphic record of Ampelum and Alburnus Maior does not
provide any direct conWrmation of this view.185 One thus can merely presume

179
IDR I 43 CIL III p. 949, XII; cf. Noeske 1977: 403 f.
180
CIL III p. 948, cf. Noeske 1977: 3968 with 400 fn. 700.
181
IDR I 33 CIL III pp. 9302, III; IDR I 35 CIL III pp. 934 f.,V; IDR I 43 CIL III p. 949,
XII; IDR I 44 CIL III pp. 950 f., XIII; cf. Noeske 1977: 38991, 4046.
182
Noeske 1977: 340.
183
CIL III pp. 944 V.,VIII, with Mrozek 1969: 141 f.; Mrozek 1977: 99; Noeske 1977: 275 f.
184
Cuvigny 1996a.
185
The term leguli aurariarum recorded at Ampelum (CIL III 1307, ad 165/6) and Alburnus
Maior (CIL III 1260, late 2nd cent. ad) seems to refer to the free labour present in the gold mines
also attested in the tabulae ceratae, cf. Hirschfeld 1905: 155, 175 fn. 3; Mrozek 1969: 30; Noeske
1977: 349 with fn. 333.
234 Allocation of Responsibilities

that up to the Marcomannic wars, freedmen procurators at Ampelum had

sections of the gold mines at Alburnus Maior directly exploited by an
imported workforce. Exploitation with the help of private entrepreneurs on
a contractual basis, perhaps even by the sale of mining plots to interested
parties as at Vipasca, may also have been a common sight in other mining
zones of the Danube provinces. The use of the term colonus evokes the
establishment of an exploitation system similar to Vipasca; however, there is
no evidence to date to corroborate this assumption (cf. 7.1.2).
Unlike the Iberian peninsula or Sardinia, where freedmen mining procur-
ators are recorded holding oYce until the late second century, their colleagues
in the Danubian provinces were apparently mostly phased out or demoted
to subprocuratores during the reign of Marcus Aurelius.186 As argued
above, freedmen procurators at Ampelum seem to have been replaced by
equestrian procuratores aurariarum. Along with this change in status the
scope of procuratorial duties might have widened as well: whereas freedmen
procurators may have been limited to a local district, equestrian procurators
were probably responsible for the gold mines on a provincial scale, perhaps
even for all three Dacian provinces. A change in social status and thus in
scale of responsibilities(?) similar to Ampelum can not be traced as clearly
elsewhere: the epigraphic record at Socanica names a Titienus Verus, a proc-
urator mm(etallorum) D(ar)d(anicorum?). Unlike his predecessors, Verus is
an equestrian who performed a dedicatio of a statue base commissioned by
the ordo colonorum during the reign of Gordianus III.187 Unfortunately,
we do not know when this change in status occured or whether the equestrian
oYcial possessed similar responsibilities as the freedmen procurators documen-
ted at Socanica. The dedication of an inscribed monument would at least imply
the procurators temporary presence there. A further equestrian procurator,
Cassius Ligurinus, is recorded on an inscribed slab at Rudnik overseeing the
construction of a temple to Terra Mater during the reign of Septimius Severus,
providing evidence of his occasional visit to the silver, copper and lead
mines at Rudnik.188 The dedicatio of buildings or cura over construction work
required the temporary presence of these equestrian procurators on site. This,
however, does not preclude their oYcial responsibilities covering other mining
areas or all mines within the province of Moesia Superior.
As for the responsibilities of the procuratores for silver mines in Pannonia
and Dalmatia, we are left in the dark as well. We can only assume that their
line of work included the superintendence over the collection of vectigalia
186
CIL III 1088, p. 1390 IDR III/3, 228, cf. Noeske 1977: 348, AMP 3. Sardinia: AE 1998:
671; Bruun 2001.
187
ILJug 503. Dusanic 2004a cites a fragmentary inscription, the traces of which he reads as
naming a procurator of Commodus at Socanica.
188
IMS I 168. Whether IMS I 103 was set up by two coloni is not stated in the inscription,
cf. Dusanic 1976: 101.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 235

and/or the direct management of mining districts. A recently published

inscription of a beneWciarius consularis from Bolcske (AE 2003: 1426)
identiWes amongst his stationes a statio arg(entariarum) Pann(onicarum)
e[t Del(maticarum)]. Like the statio at Siscia for the procurator Augusti and
_
praepositus vectigalis ferrariarum, Alfoldy assumed that these equestrian min-
ing procurators held several stationes in each province, which they might have
frequented on a regular basis.189 This is supported by the nature of epigraphic
evidence from Domavium (cf. 4.1.11). If this argument is correct, a direct
involvement in the running of mining ventures is less likely. The procuratores
metallorum/argentariarum for Pannonia and Dalmatia thus probably func-
tioned as supervisors: they likely possessed judicial powers to deal with
conXicts between conductores and miners and border issues between mining
districts and local communities.

6.3.1.4. Procuratores ferrariarum

The erection of an altar to Terra Mater at Ljubija by the local vilicus oYcinae
ferrariae and the procurator meant that the latter occasionally visited the iron
mines. Even though the precise title of these equestrian oYcials can not be
gleaned from the inscriptions, it could be reconstructed as procurator ferrar-
iarum of the Pannonian and perhaps other Danubian provinces, similar to the
conductor ferrariarum Pannonicarum itemque provinciarum transmarinarum
documented at Ljubija in ad 201. The task of a conductor ferrariarum at
Ljubija is not explained by our sources. Given the geographic scope of
responsibilities expressed in his title, the collection of a vectigal from local
mining occupants in various iron-mining areas throughout the Pannonian
and overseas provinces was probably his main responsibility.190 Like the

189
Alfoldy 2003.
190
Hirschfeld 1905: 152. The term vectigal is primarily understood to mean the revenue
from public land or rents from state property, but is also used to describe indirect taxes on
goods, cf. Mommsen 1887: 434 fn. 3; Pekary 1979; Burton 1999. On the sale/lease of public land,
cf. Lintott 1993: 802; Rathbone 2003. Ulpian, Dig. 50.16.17.1, deWnes public vectigalia as
income for the Wscus, i.e. the aerarium Saturni, amongst which he counts the (vectigal)
metallorum. This is corroborated by the literary evidence for vectigalia on mining ventures,
cf. Livy 34.21.7 (M. Porcius Cato imposed vectigalia on silver and iron mines during his
governorship of Spain in 195 bc); Livy 39.24.2, 42.12.9, 44.18.3, 44.29.11 (Roman senate
exacts vectigal on Macedonian iron and copper mines payable to the Roman State); Strabo
3.2.10 Polybios 34.9.811 (lessees of silver mines near Carthago Nova provide silver worth
27,000 drachmas per day to the Roman state); Pliny, NH 33.118, 34.165 (the cinnabar mines of
Sisapo in Baetica are one of the most important sources for the vectigalia populi Romani; two
lead mines, metallum Sama/lutariense and metallum Antonianum, each contracted out by the
Roman state for 200,000 denarii in vectigalia, achieve 255,000 denarii per year, and 400,000
sesterces (or denarii?) after being contracted out a second time).
236 Allocation of Responsibilities

system of farming out land and pastures, the vectigal on mines is believed to
be a form of rent payable to the Roman state, collected either by oYcials or
conductores to whom collection was farmed out.191 However, it cannot be
completely ruled out that the conductor and his company ran the extractive
operations directly.192 On the basis of the evidence from Ljubija, Hirschfeld
had argued that imperial procurators replaced conductores by ad 209 and
dealt with occupants of mines directly.193 Moderating Hirschfelds position,
Brunt argued the procuratores and their administrative apparatus did not
function exclusively as superintending local managers of settlements like
Vipasca, but also acknowledged that they might have supervised the activities
of contractors, perhaps corporations, interested in the entire business of
mining throughout the areas concerned.194
Both concepts might apply to the administration of the iron mines near
Ljubija: the exaction of a vectigal by the conductor ferrariarum from private
individuals running the mines (most likely through the agency of the local
vilicus) may have been monitored by a procurator appointed speciWcally to
supervise the collection and receipt of vectigal ferrariarum. This is suggested
by the title of Flavius Verus Metrobalanus as procurator Augusti and praepo-
situs splendidissimus vectigalis ferrariarum. His subaltern of the statio Sisciana
was the treasurer in charge of the arca into which the revenues from the
vectigal ferrariarum collected by the conductores were paid.195 The principal
functions of a procuratorial praepositus vectigalis ferrariarum involved out-
sourcing and supervising the collection of revenue from public mines.
As Brunt assumed, the procurators received the instalments due under
the contracts, accounted for the sums received and disbursed, and may
have audited the accounts of the conductores.196 After ad 209, the procuratores
ferrariarum seemingly took a more direct interest in the running of the
smelting ovens (oYcinae ferrariarum) under supervision by the local vilici
around Ljubija. In contrast to the praepositus vectigalis ferrariarum, the titles
of the equestrian iron-mining procurators at Ljubija do not reveal any
information regarding their function. Thus one can merely speculate whether
they continued to monitor the collection of vectigal from the occupiers of

191
RostovtzeV 1904: 445 f.; rsted 1985: 221 f.; Brunt 1990c: 394 f.
192
Brunt 1990c: 401.
193
Hirschfeld 1905: 152 f.
194
Hirschfeld 1905: 1539; Brunt 1983: 46; Brunt 1990c: 401 f.; Eck 1997a: 136.
195
Based on the inscribed altar set up at Siscia in Pannonia Superior by his arcarius stationis
Siscianae, Metrobalanus perhaps was contemporary with the conductor attested at Ljubija, cf.
CIL III 3953 ILS 3094 (Siscia), cf. PIR2 F 396; PXaum 19601: 1064; Dobo 1968: 180, no. 283;
Fitz 1972: 224 f.; Fitz 19935: 738, no. 422.
196
Brunt 1990c: 385.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 237

mines or whether their brief titles meant they in fact possessed a wider range
of administrative responsibilities.
The procurator ad vectigal ferrariarum Gallicarum, M. Cosconius Fronto,
was probably burdened with tasks similar to those of the praepositus vectigalis
ferrariarum documented at Siscia. Unlike the Danube provinces, however,
there is no evidence for conductores contracting the collection of vectigal
ferrariarum in one or more provinces of Gaul. The scarce evidence appears
to pertain mostly to conductores who collected vectigal on a local level.197 The
documented title of a promagister f[errariarum] provincia[rum] Narbonens(is)
Lu[gdun(ensis)] Aquitanic(ae) Belgi[cae] in an inscription at Arelate/mod.
Arles is perhaps the only indication of a societas ferrariarum operating on a
super-provincial level within Gaul.198 As regards the procuratorial adminis-
tration of iron mines throughout Gaul, we can only speculate whether Attius
Alcimus Felicianus, the procurator ferrariarum documented at Lyon during
the reign of Severus Alexander, controlled the iron mines within a geograph-
ical area similar to the procurator ad vectigal ferrariarum Gallicarum.
In this context, two inscriptions of a further equestrian procurator,
C. Iulius Silvanus Melanio, may warrant consideration. Firstly, as procurator
Augusti he commissioned an inscribed altar at Lyon without any indication of
his precise function.199 Secondly, his fragmentary inscription at Domavium,
in particular lines 7 to 8 have tentatively been read proc(uratori) Aug(usti)
[fe]rr(ariarum) / et arg(entariarum)(?) per prouin/[cias] XXIII. Under the
__
provision _ _ lacunose
that these _ lines have been pieced together correctly we
wish to oVer the following hypothetical line of argument. The text implies
that during his procuratorial career he had held sway over iron and silver(?)
mines in twenty-three provinces. In accordance with a conventional eques-
trian career, he must have held at least two, perhaps more mining procur-
atorships, each post covering the iron or silver mines of several provinces.200
Melanio was quite certainly a centenarian procurator argentariarum of both
Pannonian provinces and Dalmatia.201 As there is only one procuratorship for

197
Cf. cond(uctor) ferrar(iarum) ripae dextrae (CIL XII 4398, Narbo) or the manceps of the
vectigal massae ferrariarum Memmiae Sosandridis c(larissimae) f(eminae) (CIL XIII 1811 ILS
8641 [Lugudunum]). For the former, cf. Desjardins 186785: 414 f.; Hirschfeld 1905: 158 with
fn. 5; Sablayrolles 1989: 159 fn. 23 with further bibliography.
198
PXaum 19601: 11823, no. 52, 1053, based on the reading of CIL XII 671 by Benoit 1932:
13841.
199
CIL XIII 1729; PXaum 19601: 734 f., no. 276; PXaum 1982: 67 f., no. 276; Abascal &
Alfoldy 1998: 163.
200
CIL III 12732, cf. Fitz 1972: 223 f., no. 6; Devijver 197680: 487 f., I 126; Abascal & Alfoldy
1998: 162 f.
201
The inscription CIL III 12732 from Domavium, according to the reconstruction of Abascal
& Alfoldy 1998: 162 f., distinguishes between [fe]rrar(ia) and arg(entaria). The singling out of
238 Allocation of Responsibilities

silver mines hitherto accounted for in the late second century ad, the remain-
ing two or three mining procuratorships held by Melanio likely covered iron
mines throughout the remaining twenty provinces. Inscriptions from the late
second/early third century have provided little evidence to date for equestrian
posts with a mandate to supervise iron-mining. The few examples we do have
include a procuratorship for iron mines of unknown rank at Ljubija, a
procurator Augusti and praepositus splendidissimus vectigalis ferrariarum at
Siscia, and the centenarian procurator (ad vectigal) ferrariarium (Gallicarum)
at Lyon. As regards the latter procuratorial post, the title procurator . . . ad
vectigal ferrariarum Gallicarum does not provide any clue as to the precise
geographical extent of the procurators jurisdiction. Given the inscription
of a promagister f[errariarum] provincia[rum] Narbonens[is] Lu[gdun(ensis)]
Aquitanic(ae) Belgic(ae) from Arles, however, it is plausible that procuratorial
jurisdiction may have covered more than just the Tres Galliae. A suitable
template may be provided by the customs-district of the quadragesima
Galliarum which included the Tres Galliae as well as Narbonensis, both
Germanies, the Alpes Maritimae, Alpes Cottiae, and Alpes Graiae et Poeninae.
One might argue hypothetically that the jurisdiction of the procurator ferrar-
iarum probably covered the same nine provinces.202 C. Iulius Silvanus
Melanio perhaps commissioned his votive monument at Lyon as the incum-
bent procurator (ad vectigal) ferrariarum (Gallicarum) under Septimius
Severus, a post later held by Attius Alcimus Felicianus.203
Let us return to C. Iulius Silvanus Melanios career: of the iron and silver
mines in twenty-three provinces, his post as procurator for silver-mines
covered three provinces (Dalmatia, Pannonia Inferior and Superior), whereas
the post held as procurator (ad vectigal) ferrariarum (Gallicarum), in all
probability, included nine provinces. Thus, we are left with the remainder
of eleven provinces. Melanio possibly held an additional procuratorial post
dealing with administration of ferrariae. The evidence for further equestrian

silver-mines may imply that C. Iulius Silvanus Melanio must have held the post of procurator
argentariarum Pannonicarum et Delmaticarum at Domavium, thus after the reign of Commodus
(cf. 4.1.11).
202
Abascal & Alfoldy 1998: 162 f. The proposed size of these dominions are not unheard of:
a procurator familiarum gladiatoriarum held responsibility per Asiam Bithyniam Gala-
tiam Cappadociam Lyciam Pamphyliam Ciliciam Cyprum Pontum Paphlagoniam, cf. PXaum
19601: no. 1973; Abascal & Alfoldy 1998: 162.
203
Whether or not M. Cosconius Fronto was Melanios predecessor or successor is not of
interest here; however, one might point out that Cosconius Fronto also held oYce between 198
and 209 ad. PXaum (19601: 1053, and 1982: 119) lets Cosconius Fronto follow Iulius Silvanus
Melanio. Abascal & Alfoldy 1998: 163, rightly point out that Melanio may have commissioned
the altar at Lyon later on in his career, perhaps when he held the ducenarian post of procurator
provinciarum Galliarum Lugdunensis et Aquitanicae.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 239

iron-mining procuratorships is limited. Apart from the procuratores (ferrar-

iarum) attested at Ljubija, only one further post, that of procurator Augusti
praepositus vectigalis ferrariarum at Siscia, is hitherto attested (cf. 4.1.11).
Both the procurators at Ljubija and Siscia possibly held the same post.
Based on the premise that our equestrian procuratores ferrariarum contracted
out the collection of vectigal to conductores in diVerent provinces, the list of
provinces after the designation of conductor ferrariarum may allow one to
tentatively outline this procuratorial dominion. The inscribed monument of
Agathopus at Mursa records his position as c(onductor) f(errariarum) Panno-
niar(um) itemque provinciarum transmarinarum.204 Furthermore, an inscrip-
tion from Hohenstein in Noricum names a con(ductor) fer(rariarum)
N(oricarum) P(annoniarum) D(almatarum).205 Hence, the procurator Augusti
praepositus vectigalis ferrariarum at Siscia and, later, the procuratores ferrar-
iarum at Ljubija may have controlled the iron mines in at least four provinces,
namely Noricum, Upper and Lower Pannonia, and Dalmatia. Further prov-
inces may have been included: an inscribed sarcophagus from Augusta Vin-
delicum/mod.Augsburg in Raetia dating to the early third century supposedly
names a manceps ferrariar(um) [] I et provinciae Raetiae itemque Daciarum
trium.206 Thus, the procurators dominion would amount to at least eight
or possibly even eleven provinces, if one wishes to include both Upper
and Lower Moesia, and Thracia.207 A possible template for this super-
provincial administration is the customs-district of the publicum portorii
Illyrici and publicum portorii ripae Thraciae which included Dalmatia, Raetia,
Noricum, Upper and Lower Pannonia, Upper and Lower Moesia, and the
three provinces of Dacia.208 One could argue that the procuratorship of iron
mines of the late second/early third century documented at Ljubija and Siscia
may have covered the same provinces, and thus was responsible for all of
Illyricum. Such a position could be regarded a precursor to the late fourth
century comes metallorum per Illyricum.209
There is no written evidence to date to corroborate this hypothetical
construct, and one cannot exclude the possibility that iron-mining

204
AE 1973: 411 ILJug 779 (Ljubija); Bulat 1989: 36 (Mursa).
205
CIL III 4809 ILS 1467 ILLPRON 51.
206
Nuber 1985. Whether the conductores ferrariarum known from an inscribed early
3rd-cent. altar from Teliucu inferior/Romania also held sway over all Dacian provinces rem-
ains unknown, cf. IDR III/3, 37.
207
Abascal & Alfoldy 1998: 163, have argued for two further separate iron-mining procur-
atorships, one for the three Dacian provinces, the other for both Moesia Inferior and Superior,
Thracia, Macedonia, and Epirus.
208
On the expanse of Illyricum, cf. App. Ill. 6. 29 f.; Zon. 8.19.8; VittinghoV 1953: 35961;
Alfoldy 2004: 208, 212 f.
209
Not. Dig. Or. XIII 11.
240 Allocation of Responsibilities

procurators at Ljubija and Siscia covered a provincial or super-provincial

entity of far smaller proportions. A possible blueprint might again be pro-
vided by the late second/early third century procuratorships for the publicum
portorii Illyrici: inscriptions record a procurator publici portorii vectigalis
Illyrici per Moesiam inferiorem et Dacias Tres and a procurator publici portorii
vectigalis Illyrici per Raetiam et Noricum et Dalmatiam et utramque Panno-
niam et Moesiam Superiorem.210 In consequence, the series of mining pro-
curatorships of C. Iulius Silvanus Melanios career may have included one
additional iron-mining procuratorship.
To sum up, C. Iulius Silvanus hypothetical procuratorial career in mining
administration might have covered three or four posts, the order of which
remains elusive; he most likely was procurator argentariarum Pannoniarum et
Dalmatiarum, perhaps procurator (ad vectigal) ferrariarum (Gallicarum), and
may have held either an unattested post of procurator ferrariarum Illyrici or
two further procuratorships for iron mines in super-provincial zones of
smaller size within Illyricum.
In the light of the Domavian inscription of C. Iulius Silvanus Melanio, the
administration of iron mines in the late second and early third century ad
may have consisted of two possible blocks, Gaul and Illyricumprovided
the analogy with the customs-districts of the quadragesima Galliarum and the
publicum portorii Illyrici is a valid one. This hypothetical assumption raises
the question of the purpose of such super-provincial iron-mining districts:
part of the answer may be provided by the inscribed monument for the
procurator ferrariarum C. Attius Alcimus Felicianus at Lugdunum, which
was commissioned by a beneWciarius of the legatus legionis I Minerviae during
the reign of Severus Alexander. Unfortunately, the inscription does not tell us
why the soldier of a legion garrisoned on the Rhine at Bononia/mod.Bonn
honoured a procurator ferrariarum by setting up a monument at Lyon.
However, the Roman army was undoubtedly in constant need of iron, the
supply of which could have been burdened on the procurator ferrariarum. As
argued above, the army units were in most cases unable, perhaps even unwill-
ing, to supply their needs by tapping local iron sources (cf. 5.2). One thus might
argue for a special authority which coordinated the supply of resources to
military units along the Rhine frontier. The procuratores ferrariarum at
Ljubija and the procurator Augusti praepositus vectigalis ferrariarum at Siscia
possibly Wlled a similar role in the supply of military units along the Danube

210
Mocsy 1962: 594; Alfoldy 2003: 225 f.; Alfoldy 2004: 212 f. For the procuratores publici
portorii vectigalis Illyrici, cf. VittinghoV 1953: 361; PXaum 19601: 1059, 1065. A further
super-provincial administrative entity in the area is the vehiculatio Pannoniae utriusque et
Moesiae Superioris et Norici, cf. PXaum 19601: 6479.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 241

frontierthe exercitus Illyricianiwithin their respective section(s).211 Thus,

the responsibilities of the procuratores ferrariarum for Gaul and Illyricum
may perhaps have gone beyond overseeing the collection of rents or proceeds
from iron mines.
The tentative conclusions on the administration of iron mines in the late
second/early third century ad rely heavily on conjectures based on our
knowledge of the expanse and organizational subdivisions of customs-
districts. Further parallels might be drawn regarding the development of
iron-mining administration in the Illyrian provinces, chronicled in particu-
lar in the series of votive altars to Terra Mater of Ljubija and surrounds. By ad
209 conductores disappear from the epigraphic record, their position taken
over by procuratores. Based on this observation, one might argue for the
intensiWed involvement of the equestrian procurators in iron-mining oper-
ations at Ljubija and elsewhere throughout their super-provincial domain.
At about the same time administrative modiWcations can be detected in the
portorium Illyrici and the quadragesima Galliarum. Conductores and their
personnel are replaced by members of the familia Caesaris between the reigns
of Commodus and Severus Alexander.212 Our sources provide no informa-
tion on why this change was carried out, and its eVects remain somewhat
obscure. It has been argued, however, that the direct exaction of these duties
by imperial oYcials would have resulted in a far higher revenue than farming
out their collection. The desire for a signiWcant increase in revenues was
understood to be a result of a Wnancial crisis in the later second century,
mainly a result of a considerable growth in military expenditure in particu-
lar.213 The replacement of conductores by imperial personnel at Ljubija could
have been prompted by a similar rationale.
The discussion of the administration of iron mines has so far centred on
the period of the late second and early third century ad. Prior to this period,
the known procuratores ferrariarum can not be suYciently linked to a par-
ticular super-provincial iron-mining district, as the procuratorial titles do
not provide a geographical area, nor do the Wndspots of the inscriptions
oVer any further clues. Based on the inscribed monuments for Attius
Alcimus Felicianus at Lyon and Abbir Cella/ Henchir en-Naam in Africa
Proconsularis, where his functional title is rendered as procurator ferrar-
iarum only, PXaum conjectured that the other known equestrians holding the
title of procurator ferrariarum must have been responsible for iron mines

211
Alfoldy 2004: 214.
212
De Laet 1949: 393, 4038; VittinghoV 1953: 361; Brunt 1990c: 416; Eck 1997a: 136 f.;
France 2001: 4308; Lo Cascio 2005: 154.
213
France 2001: 4368; for a diVerent view, Brunt 1990c: 415 f.; Lo Cascio 2005: 153.
242 Allocation of Responsibilities

throughout Gaul.214 This attribution, however, is not necessarily warranted:

the absence of any Wrm indication for an iron-mining procuratorship for
Gaul prior to the reign of Septimius Severus (when this procuratorial title is
Wrst documented) and the lack of evidence for an iron-mining bureau in
Lyon independent of the regular provincial administration questions whether
this argument is valid.
Quite to the contrary, the functional title of procurator ferrariarum might
designate an oYce held in Rome. The brevity of the procuratorial title in
numerous inscriptions featuring equestrian careers is striking, especially in
inscriptions where geographical descriptions of other procuratorial functions
are recorded in detail (cf. 4.1.12). The absence of any geographical region in
career inscriptions can refer to procuratorial oYces held in Rome or in the
proximity to the emperor. This might be the case with the procurator ferrar-
iarum. If this conjecture is warranted, what was the job description of this
procuratorial oYce? There is a large amount of evidence at Ostia and Rome
for activities related to iron-mining. This includes an honorary monument
for T. Petronius Priscus, procurator ferrariarum et annonae Ostiensis; an
undated lead tessera naming a statio ferrariarum fori Ostiensis; an inscribed
monument of ad 10217 commissioned by a servus socior(um) vect(igalis)
ferr(ariarum); an undated tessera nummularia discovered in Rome inscribed
with soc(iorum) ferr(ariarum); this implies a possible contemporaneity of socii
ferrariarum and procuratores ferrariarum.215 One might argue further that the
procurators oversaw the socii ferrariarum who were involved in the collection
of vectigal from iron mines or in running mining districts. If Brunt is correct,
the procurators may have leased the contracts to publicans which included a
regular audit of the latters accounts; one thus may see the procurator ferrar-
iarum at Rome in a similar function.216 Concerning the expanse of their
jurisdiction, the procuratores XX hereditatium may provide a suitable model:
besides the procuratores for diVerent provinces, e.g. procurator XX heredita-
tium provinciae Syriae Palaestinae, per provincias Narbonensem et Aquitani-
cam, or per Asiam, a procurator XX hereditatiumhis function is regularly
given without a geographical indicationwas responsible for the collection
of the 5 per cent inheritance tax in Rome and Italy.217 By analogy one might

214
CIL VIII 822 12345 23963 ILTun 741, cf. also CIL VIII 23948, cf. PXaum 1978:
16972.
215
statio ferr.: CIL XIV 4326, p. 773 (Ostia); socii vectigalis ferr.: AE 1924: 108 CIL XIV 4326
(Ostia); socii ferr.: AE 1928: 17a (Rome); T. Petronius Priscus: CIL XIV 4459 ILS 1442 (Ostia),
cf. PXaum 19601: 558, no. 212; Meiggs 1973: 302; PXaum 1978: 138, no. 4; Sablayrolles
1989: 158.
216
Brunt 1990c: 385.
217
Eck 1979: 132; Eck 1997a: 80.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 243

argue that the centenarian procurator ferrariarum at Rome only oversaw the
iron mines of a limited area, possibly the Italian peninsula. It is, however,
rather doubtful that the authority of these procurators was limited to Italy:
Even though Pliny the Elder identiWes iron mines on Elba and near Sulmona/
mod. Sulmo, and iron processing sites such as Comum, there was probably
not suYcient iron-mining activity to warrant the creation of an equestrian
procuratorship speciWcally for the Italian peninsula.218 The mandate of a
procurator ferrariarum at Rome may therefore have included a vaster
domain.
The social status of the conductores ferrariarum who appear in the epi-
graphic record of Noricum may provide a clue. The municipal elite of
Noricum was not able to acquire a lease on iron mines, and these leases fell
nearly exclusively to contractors from Aquileia, i.e. to entrepreneurs from
outside of Noricum.219 Furthermore, the inscribed monument to Isis Noreia,
set up by the procurators of Q. Septueius Clemens for their superior at the
sanctuary at Hohenstein during the second century, names Clemens as
conductor ferrariarum N(oricarum) P(annonicarum) D(almaticarum).220 Sep-
tueius Clemens is unlikely to have collected leases from each and every
Wnancial or presidial procurator of the listed provinces. There is no evidence
that the presidial procurator of Noricum awarded these contracts; this ex-
plains, in part, the exclusion of the Norican provincial elite.221 It is plausible
to suggest that Clemens, like his Aquilean colleagues, may have acquired these
contracts centrallyperhaps from the procurator ferrariarum in Rome. Dur-
ing the Principate important revenues still were generally farmed out at
Rome.222 The bureaux for various customs duties, such as oYces for the
quadragesima Galliarum, the quattuor publica Africae, and perhaps publicum
portorii Illyrici may have been based at Rome during the Wrst century and
apparently answered to the a rationibus.223 Hence, it is not implausible to
assume that by the second century companies interested in the collection of
vectigal and/or the running of iron mines in one or more provinces through-
out the empire were to address the procurator ferrariarum in Rome. A rather

218
Pliny, NH 34.142, 144. Davies 1935: 6374.
219
Scherrer 2002: 29. It has to be pointed out that the elite of Aquileia traditionally
maintained close economic ties with the regnum Noricum since the Middle Republic.
220
CIL III 4809 ILS 1467 ILLPRON 151.
221
The fragmentary building inscription from Hohenstein (CIL III 14362, p. 2328,197
14363 AE 1968: 408 ILLPRON 148) naming the presidial procurator Claudius Paternus
Clementianus was commissioned by a Sabi[nius], who is understood to be a conductor
ferrariarum, cf. Alfoldy 1969b: 25 f.; the inscription, however, provides no secure indication to
argue a direct administrative connection of conductores with the presidial procurator.
222
Brunt 1990c: 377.
223
De Laet 1949: 373 f.; VittinghoV 1953: 390 f.; France 2001: 40010.
244 Allocation of Responsibilities

fragmentary inscription from Arelate, listing the career of an unknown

equestrian, names a pro mag(ister) f[err(ariarum)] provincia[rum] Narbo-
nens(is), Lu[gdun(ensis)], Aquitanic(ae) Belgi[c(ae)], a representative of the
company contracting out the running of iron mines within parts of Gaul in
c. 75 ad.224 It is plausible to assume that iron mines within these and other
provinces must have been contracted out centrally at Rome, even though
there is no evidence for a procuratorship of iron mines dating already to this
period.
Our sources do not tell us why iron mines in particular were thought to be
important enough to be administered by an equestrian procurator. There are,
however, infrequent indications for a unique valuation of iron and iron mines
within the Roman empire. The early second century lex metalli Vipascensis,
for example, refers to a lex ferrariarum in accordance with which the shoe-
maker is to sell nails within the mining district.225 A tax on nails and the use of
iron are the subject of a rescript by Hadrian to the Aphrodisians.226 Paulus
(Dig. 39.4.11.pr.) relates that the sale of iron to barbarians is strictly forbidden
and subject to capital punishment. Moreover, a rescript of Caracalla
(Dig. 39.4.16.11) exempts any dominus praedii, landowner, from penalty
whose colonus or slave produced iron (ferrum facere) on his estate without
his knowledge and not in compliance with the law (illicite); the term ferrum
facere may imply the mining for and/or smelting of iron ore.227 It is tempting
to conjecture from this evidence that the creation of a procuratorship for
iron mines at Rome by the early second century and the lease of iron mines in
one or more provinces to promagistri, socii or conductores ferrariarum must be
seen in the context of an otherwise unknown general reform of iron-mining
administration which occurred as early as the Flavian period. However, this
would go beyond the available evidence. The underlying rationale of these
legal restrictions and regulations on iron production and trade, besides the
tendency to safeguard iron from unsolicited procurement, remains mostly
obscure.
To sum up this tentative model of organizational arrangements, the re-
sponsibilities of a hypothetical procurator ferrariarum at Rome may have
covered all relevant iron-mining regions throughout the empire during the
224
CIL XII 671 with Benoit 1932: 13841. PXaum 19601: 11823, no. 52, 1053. On
promagistri, cf. Brunt 1990c: 366; Aubert 1994: 327, 3446.
225
LMV ll. 34. Whether the lex ferrariarum corresponded with the mining law mentioned in
the lex portorii Asiae is unknown: Based on a 


(34) ore or metal exported
from the province of Asia to Rome were taxed. 27 may indicate that the export of mining
samples may have been tax free (cf. Engelmann & Knibbe 1989: 167 and 25 f; for a possible
parallel cf. Mateo 2001: 53 f. with Pliny, NH 33.118).
226
Reynolds 1982: 11518, no. 15, ll. 89; Oliver 1989: 166, no. 69.
227
Herz 2005: 28.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 245

second century ad. By the end of the second century, one might postulate a
division of responsibilities. This division may have occured by the reign of
Septimius Severus at the latest when there is evidence for the occasional
presence of a procurator (ad vectigal) ferrariarum (Gallicarum) at Lyon and
for procuratores ferrariarum and a procurator Augusti praepositus splendidissi-
mus vectigalis ferrariarum perhaps for the Danubian provinces at Ljubija and
Siscia. Additional evidence for the date of this administrative division may be
provided by the change of procuratorial titles of the imperial oYcials who
administered the (silver) mines of Pannonia and Dalmatia: provided the
dating of the relevant inscriptions is not oV the mark, the change from
procurator metallorum Pannonicorum et Dalmaticorum to procurator
argentariarum Pannoniarum et Dalmatiarum could indicate the exclusion
of ferrariae from the brief of the procurators at Domavium towards the end of
Commodus reign. The earliest procurator ferrariarum hitherto attested for
the region, the procurator Augusti praepositus splendidissimus vectigalis ferrar-
iarum Flavius Verus Metrobalanus, may also be dated to Commodus or
Septimius Severus reign (cf. 4.1.11). Furthermore, the practice of partitioning
and regionalizing administrative functions would be in line with the general
trend towards diversiWcation and growth of the non-senatorial administra-
tion throughout the second century ad.
As of yet, straightforward data in support of this hypothetical explanatory
model remains elusive. Most evidence is circumstantial and patchy at best
(the Domavian inscription of Silvanus Melanio being a prime example),
providing a barely reliable basis for interpretation. The precise administrative
arrangements currently remain unknown.228

6.3.1.5. Summary
The functions and responsibilities of mining procurators could vary dramat-
ically from district to district, owing to the range of diVerent mining
operations with varying geological and topographical constraints and organ-
izational implications (opencast and underground mining), and the varying
technological and organizational strategies available for the exploitation of
ore deposits (hydraulic technology, lease of mines). While at Vipasca the
procurator seems mainly to have enforced the laws which concerned the
occupants/owners of copper and silver mines, the procurators of the alluvial
gold-mining districts in the Spanish north-west were probably directly
involved in various organizational tasks such as the provision of a workforce,
construction of an infrastructure for the hydraulic mining technology, and so
228
Eck 1997a: 7988, 135 f.
246 Allocation of Responsibilities

forth. Mining procurators for the aurariae Dacicae or various metalla in the
Danube provinces faced a combination of responsibilities resulting predom-
inantly from the collection of vectigalia from mines by proxy, to a lesser
degree perhaps from the direct exploitation of mines.

6.1.4. Procuratorial Careers and QualiWcations

The variety and range of responsibilities entrusted to the oYcials appointed to
these posts raises the question as to whether the holders of these procuratorial
oYces came to the job well prepared and whether this resulted in specialization in
their careers. The career structure of quarrying and mining procurators can only
be reconstructed for a few equestrian oYce holders of mining procuratorships. In
the case of the procuratores argentariarum/metallorum for Pannonia and/or Dal-
matia, it is possible to glean suYcient information from the epigraphic sources.229

M. Antonius . proc. XL Galliarum . proc. argentariarum

Fabianus230 et portus Pannonicarum
. conductor portorii Illyrici
L. Creperius Paulus231 . proc. argentariarum
Pannonicarum
. idiologus in Egypt
L. Septi[] . archistator praef(ecti) . proc. argentariarum
Petro[nianus]232 Aegypti Pannonicarum
. praef(ectus) classis [] . proc. Mauretaniae
. a commentariis praefecti Caesariensis
praetorio
. proc. Moesiae inferioris
Ti. Claudius . proc. ad rationibus putandas . proc. metallorum
Proculus Syriae Pannonicorum
Cornelianus233 et Dalmaticorum
. proc. kalendarii
Vegetiani in Hispania
. proc. regionis Thevestinae
. proc. quadragesimae
publicorum Africae

229
Fitz 19935: 4036, 695 f., 7002, 71648, nos. 393, 394, 399, 400, 419, 420, 423, 426.
230
AE 1905: 152 ILS 9019, Viminacium.
231
AE 1915: 46, Attaleia.
232
AE 1958: 156, Caesarea/Mauretania.
233
AE 1956: 123, Lambaesis.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 247
Ti. Claudius . proc. viarum . proc. argentariarum Pan-
Xenophon234 . proc. ad epistrategiam septem noniarum et Dalmatiarum
nomorum et Arsinoitum . proc. Illyricus per Moesiam
. proc. Daciae Apulensis Inferiorem et Dacias tres
. subpraefectus annonae
urbis
. proc. provinciae Asiae
. proc. Augusti ad bona
cogenda in Africa
Our information on the careers of procuratores ferrariarum is similarly
abundant:235
Publilius . praefectus coh. III Cyrenaicae sag. . item (proc.) ferrariarum
Memorialis236 . tribunus milit. leg. X. Fretensis
. praefectus gentis Numidarum
dilectator tironum ex Numidia
lectorum
. proc. Augusti in Africae, item
M[iniciae]

C. Caelius . praefectus coh. I Raetorum . proc. ferrariarum

Martialis237 . tribunus leg. XIII Geminae
. proc. provinciae Achaiae

T. Statilius . praefectus coh. I Lucensium . proc. Augusti ferrariarum

Optatus238 . tribunus leg. VI Ferratae . proc. Augusti ad
. tribunus leg. VI Victricis patrimonium
. praefectus alae Afrorum . proc. Augusti hereditatium
. proc. ad census Britanniae . proc. a rationibus
. proc. Augusti ad census Gallorum . praefectus annonae
Q. Domitius . praefectus militum . proc. Augusti ad ferrarias
Marsianus239 . proc. Augusti ad census in . proc. Augusti patrimonii
Gallia accipiendos provinciae provinciae Narbonensis
Belgicae per regiones Tungrorum
et Frisauonum et Germaniae
inferioris et Batavorum

234
CIL III 7127 ILS 1421 (Ephesos). CIL III 8042 IDR II 188 (Sucidava/Dacia). AE 1988:
977 (Porolissum/Dacia).
235
PXaum 1978: 13543; Sablayrolles 1989: 1579.
236
CIL XI 7554 ILS 9195. 237
Corinth VIII/3, 135.
238
CIL VI 31863 ILS 9011. 239
AE 1962: 183a.
248 Allocation of Responsibilities
T. Petronius . praefectus coh III [] . proc. Augusti ferrariarum
Priscus240 . tribunus leg. VII Geminae felicis
. praefectus alae II
Pannoniorum
. proc. Augusti annonae Ostis

M. Cosconius . praef coh. I [] . proc. Augustorum ad

Fronto241 . tribunus mil. leg. I Italicae vectigal ferrariarum
. proc. Augustorum duorum Gallicarum
ad vectigal XX hereditatium . proc. Augustorum duorum
per Pontum et Bithyniam et praefectus provinciae
et Pontum mediterraneum Sardiniae
et Paphlagoniam
. subpraefectus annonae urbicae
C. Attius . advocatus Wsci provinciarum XI . proc. ferrariarum
Alcimus . proc. alimentorum per . proc. hereditatium Romae
Felicianus242 Transpadum Histriam . curator operis amphithea-
Liburniam tri
. proc. per Flaminiam . magister summarum
Umbriam Picenum rationum
. vice proc. XX Galliarum . magister summae privatae
. proc. privatae per Salariam . praefectus annonae
Tiburtinam Valeriam . vice praefectus vigilum
Tusciam . vice praefectus
. proc. annonae provinciae
Narbonensis

The list of oYces held before and after appointment to the mining procur-
atorship in Gaul/Rome or Dalmatia/Pannonia does not suggest that these
equestrians had acquired a speciWc knowledge of mining operations prior to
their appointment. During their tenure, however, procurators of mining
districts certainly had the opportunity to deepen their knowledge in mining
aVairsprovided they wished to do so. Galen refers to his visit to a copper
mine at Soli on Cyprus run by a procurator and friend of his. This
K
H
 apparently gave Galen a tour of the mines and let
him collect slag and samples from the mining shafts, displaying detailed
knowledge of the mining geology.243 Whether this was a requirement of the
job or whether Galens friend had a speciWc interest in geology is not clear.

240
CIL XIV 4459. 241
CIL X 7583, 7584 ILS 1358, 1359.
242
CIL VIII 23948. CIL VIII 822, cf. 12345 23963 ILS 1347 add., p. clxxiv.
243
Galen XII 21441 Kuhn, XIV 7 Kuhn, cf. Millar 1992: 185.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 249

Even so, experience gained during a tenure as mining procurator was not
necessarily required for subsequent postings. Equestrian procurators were
transferred to quite diVerent branches of the administration.244 No recogniz-
able eVorts were made by the imperial authorities to have them specialize in
the management of imperial mines or mining provinceswith the exception
perhaps of one distinct case: C. Iulius Silvanus Melanio. Provided Abascal and
Alfoldys reconstruction of the rather fragmentary inscription at Domavium
is correct, Melanios career might have included a number of posts in the
mining administration. Lines 7 to 8 of this inscription read proc(uratori)
Aug(usti) [fe]rr(ariarum) j et arg(entariarum)(?) per prouinj[cias] XXIII. He
thus must have _ _ held at least_ _two,
_ perhaps more procuratorships of the iron
and silver mines over several provinces.245 An inscription documented at
Lugdunum/mod. Lyon giving his name provides circumstantial evidence in
support of this notion, even though it remains unclear what procuratorial
post he held there.246 One thus might tentatively argue a certain specializa-
tion of Melanio in the Weld of mining administration. The majority of
evidence concerning the careers of equestrian mining procurators, however,
suggests such promotions were a rare exception. This can be noted as regards
other procuratorships as well: even though mining undoubtedly played a
dominant part in the administrative district of northwestern Spain, the
known equestrian procurators for Asturia and Callaecia were not equipped
with any speciWc knowledge of mining when promoted to this Wnancial
procuratorship (mostly after their tres militiae), nor would they have been
able to put their knowledge to use in their following appointment.247 There
might have been a rare exception during the reign of Antoninus Pius. After his
tenure as procurator of Asturia and Callaecia, M. Bassaeus Rufus advanced to
the post of procurator regni Noricia post undoubtedly including the
244
See in general Brunt 1983: 4852; Eck 2001c.
245
CIL III 12732, cf. Fitz 1972: 223 f., no. 6; Devijver 197680: 487 f., I 126; Abascal & Alfoldy
1998: 162 f.
246
PXaum 19601: 734 f., no. 276; PXaum 1982: 67 f., no. 276: Abascal & Alfoldy 1998: 163.
247
Cf. Alfoldy 2000a: 3951, 637. L. Arruntius Maximus (ad 79): CIL II 2477 ILS 254
Rodrguez Colmenero 1997: 41820, no. 587, cf. PIR2 A 1145; Alfoldy 2000a: 63; PXaum 19601:
1047; PXaum 1982: 117. Q. Petronius Modestus (ad 96): CIL V 534 ILS 1379; Inscr.It. X 4, 34, cf.
PXaum 19601: 147, no. 63; PIR2 P no. 292. D. Iulius Capito (ad 114/5): CIL XII 1855 ILS 1380;
CIL XII 1869 ILS 6997; CIL II 1870, cf. PXaum 19601: 175 f., no. 79; PIR2 J 244. Sex. Truttedius
Clemens (Wrst half 2nd cent. ad): CIL II 2643 IRPL 121; AE 1985: 374; CIL VI 2968; CIL IX
5931, cf. Alfoldy 2000a: 64; Dobson 1978: 274, no. 161; PXaum 19601: 567, no. 216. Calpurnius
Quadratus (2nd cent. ad): CIL II 2642 IRPL 115, pl. XCII, cf. Alfoldy 2000a: 63 f.; Haensch
1997: 488; PXaum 1982: 117; Tranoy 1981: 185. C. Iunius Flavianus (Hadrian/Ant. Pius): PXaum
19601: 320 V., no. 134; CIL VI 1620 ILS 1342 in CIL VI 8,3, add. et corr. [C. Iulius(?)] Flaccus
Aelianus (ad 161/169 or 177/180): CIL VI 1599 31828 ILS 1326 CIL VI 41141, cf. PXaum
19601: 38991, no. 162. P. Aelius Hilarianus (ad 185192): CIL II 5678, cf. Alfoldy 2000a: 64 f.;
Domergue 1990: 289; Haensch 1997: 489; PXaum 1981: 353 f.; Tranoy 1981: 183.
250 Allocation of Responsibilities

superintendence of iron mines there.248 There is no Wrm evidence, however,

that experience gained in mining regions such as Asturia-Callaecia or Nor-
icum was taken into account. The evidence remains scanty at best. In general,
skills or knowledge acquired in a certain branch of administration were not as
important for promotion as seniority, grade, or, indeed, letters of recommen-
dation.249 The processing of any information on the equestrian oYce holders
beyond rank, seniority, and current posting would prequire a centralized
bureau for personnel. Whether or not the ab epistulisas is implied by a
poem of Statius (5.1.94100)was, apart from his regular duties, also con-
cerned with managing the personnel of the imperial administration (in par-
ticular for army oYcers and equestrians), can not be proven satisfactorily.250
This same ineYciency in the use of human resources can also be seen in the
careers of imperial freedmen. Here the evidence is rather slim, and, apart from
the career of Saturninus, we have no knowledge of the careers of freedmen
procurators attested in the mining districts of the Danube provinces and the
Iberian peninsula. On the procuratorial level, careers of freedmen were perhaps
comparable to those of equestrians inasmuch as there is evidence for a cursus.251
Like the careers of most equestrians and freedmen in the civil service of the
Roman empire, Saturninus appointment to the Wnancial procuratorship in
Asturia and Galicia was not based on any previous expertise in administering
mines.252 Saturninus certainly knew how to run an imperial estate and had
gained insights into special Wscal bureaux in Rome, Egypt, and Asia. He pos-
sessed experience in conducting judicial procedures in Wscal cases, a good grasp
of accountancy and managing a complex organized system.253 Saturninus,
however, did not have knowledge of Roman mining technology or manage-
ment.254 In his position as Wnancial procurator of Asturia and Galicia he
undoubtedly came into contact with the mining industry and acquired some
valuable knowledge along the way. According to the late second-century vexilla-
tion inscriptions from Luyego and Villals, the freedmen mining procurators
could stay in oYce for up to four years or more, which implies that they
probably had enough time to become acquainted with the speciWc requirements
of a mining district (cf. 5.2). It is believed that one of Saturninus equestrian

248
AE 1968: 227 IRPL 7. AE 1968: 228 IRPL 3. CIL VI 41278, cf. Nony 1970: 196; Tranoy
1981: 183; Alfoldy 2000a: 65.
249
Fronto, Ad M. Caes. 5.37, p. 87 Nab, cf. PXaum 1971: 34951; Weaver 1972: 268 f.; Birley
1992: 25 f.; Eck 1995e: 138 f.; Eck 1997a: 98 f.
250
Birley 1992: 23 f. 4154; Eck 1995e: 139 f.
251
Fronto, Ad M. Caes. 5.37, p. 87 Nab; Weaver 1972: 26781; Boulvert 1974: 11980; Eck
1997a: 105.
252
Eck 1997a: 97; Eck 2001c.
253
On jurisdiction of procurators, cf. Brunt 1990b.
254
Christol 1999: 243, contra: Hirschfeld 1905: 162.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 251

predecessors in this oYce, Pliny the Elder, had certainly gained a deep enough
insight to provide a reasonably accurate description of Roman mining proced-
ures and of the Wnancial proWts made from these mines.255 This knowledge
might have been decisive in choosing Saturninus for the post in Vipasca.256
The picture gained from this evidence implies that equestrian procurators,
and probably those of freedman status as well, possessed good general
knowledge of Wscal jurisdiction and experience in managing a complex
organization when appointed to mining procuratorships. Freedmen procur-
ators in particular had suYcient time to gain experience in dealing with the
special organizational problems of mines or quarries. Moreover, their longer
tenure of oYce guaranteed a certain continuity of management.257 Given the
numerous posts equestrian procurators held during their careers, we might
suspect that the average tenure of a mining procuratorship was around two or
three years.258 Even so, the freedmen and equestrian procurators were un-
likely to proWt from their expertise by taking up similar posts after their
mining procuratorships.

6 . 2 . S U B A LT E R N S TA F F

In light of the rather short tenures of the equestrian procurators, subaltern

oYcials likely guaranteed continuous administrative support for extractive
operations.259 The available epigraphic evidence rarely helps us to deWne the
responsibilities and precise functions of these subaltern oYcials within the
organization of mining and quarrying operations. Only in the case of Mons
Claudianus does the internal correspondence between imperial oYcials yield
suYcient information to allow us to assess their role within the administra-
tion of the quarries. Athenodoros, a tabularius for the procurator Ulpius
Himerus (ad 152/3), appears in a number of ostraca from Mons Claudianus,
and helped to manage the stock of quarried blocks.260 According to Cuvigny,
Athenodoros remained in regular contact with the smaller quarries at Tiber-
iane through the curator Nepheros, a member of the Roman army, and the
tesserarius Kallistratos, the latter presumably a civilian (despite his occupa-
tional grade). While Nepheros writes to Athenodoros about chronic problems

255
Pliny, NH 33.6678, cf. Syme 1969; Haensch 1997: 403 fn. 23, 489; Alfoldy 2000a: 45 fn. 76.
256
For a further procuratorial career of a freedman, cf. Aurelius Marcio (4.1.3).
257
Brunt 1983: 51; Eck 1997a: 93, 104 f.
258
Eck 1997a: 97.
259
Eck 1997a: 104.
260
O.Claud.inv. 6483, cf. Bulow-Jacobsen 1996: 61.
252 Allocation of Responsibilities

with water supplies and provisions, Kallistratos reports on the arrival and
departure of men and animals, and on the distribution of food. The ostraca
reveal the position of the tesserarii within the organizational hierarchy:
Cuvigny argues that the curator and the tabularius communicated on the
same level, while the tesserarius Kallistratos appears as a subaltern to Atheno-
doros.261 Moreover, the water distribution lists attest the post of a subtesser-
arius/ 
, an assistant to the tesserarius.262 Tesserarii were
perhaps recruited from amongst the  of the
, as the ap-
pointment of a former 
to the function of tesserarius suggests.263
Whether or not the

 E
mentioned in the Claudianus ostraca are to be
equated with the tesserarii, as Cuvigny suggests, is uncertain.264 Although
tesserarii do appear as addressees in a number of receipts for pay advance and
debt of
, their exact function remains unknown.265
The provision of food for the
 was apparently the main respon-
sibility of the  of the familia Caesaris (cf. 6.1.2.1). There only was
one 
at Mons Claudianus for the
, who presumably had
been appointed by the quarrying administration. He managed the salary and
rations which the
 received. His stocks were replenished on a
monthly basis, and used for advance payments to the
 or handed
to their creditors. The stocks of the 
, however, were not always
suYcient to meet the demands for advance payments. In these situations
services paralleles could supply additional resources: the caesarianus Gaion
and the laccarius Serapion seem to have provided supplementary advance
payments. In particular, the 
Menelaos encountered diYculties in
supplying the necessary grain for indebted
 in the second half of
ad 137 and received an unknown quantity of matia and half-artaba from the
laccarius Serapion. Perhaps in response to this supply crisis, the function of
an I
e
, a distributor of bread and assistant to
the 
, was created in ad 139.266 d  and even an
N , assistants to the 
, are attested at Mons Clau-
dianus and Tiberiane.267
Another oYcial named in the receipts for advanced payments and in the
K of the  at Mons Claudianus is the N

.268 The N

261
Cuvigny 2000a: 65.
262
They receive the same amount of water as the , cf. O.Claud.inv. 1538, cf. Cuvigny
2000a: 64.
263
O.Claud.inv. 1158, cf. Cuvigny 2000a: 65.
264
Cuvigny 2000a: 66. For

 E
at Wadi Hammamat, cf. Kayser 1993: nos. 12, 18.
265
O.Claud. 9, 22, 485, 498, 563, 576, 596.
266
Cuvigny 2000a: 5961, 66.
267
Alkimos (ad 110111): O.Claud. 38. Sarapodoros (ad 145): O.Claud. 52039; O.Claud.
inv. 7366. N: O.Claud.inv. 3229, cf. Cuvigny 2000a: 60.
268
O.Claud. 510, 551, 618. Cuvigny 2000a: 62.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 253

dealt mainly with equipment issues. They also were involved in supplying
bread and grain at a time when the oYce of the 
had been abolished
(after ad 147).269 The function of an N

is not easily described. Its
Latin equivalents are vilicus or dispensator.270 In the case of the N


Isidorus, who also is named as caesarianus, the translation as dispensator or

expansion to 
N

appears more likely, particularly since
this function is quite often attested in imperial quarries.

Inscriptional evidence tells us little about the subalterns in most other im-
perial extractive operations except their title. Any study of these functional
grades therefore must be dependent on information collected from other
branches of the imperial administration. The staV of the procurator aurar-
iarum at Ampelum includes a wide range of subaltern personnel. Apart from
the procuratores (freedmen and equestrians), we Wnd dispensatores, tabularii,
an ab instrumentis tabularii, adiutores tabulariorum, a subsequens librariorum,
an a commentariis, and librarii at Ampelum, the administrative headquarters
of the auraria Dacicarum. The librarii are military personnel, whereas the
former are slaves and freedmen of the familia Caesaris. The diversity of the
procuratorial staV is reminiscent of the personnel attached to presidial pro-
curators, or Wnancial and patrimonial procurators. The functions of the
oYciales, i.e. the members of the procuratorial oYcium at Ampelum, certainly
indicate complex accounting procedures, as well as the Wling and copying of
various documents. These administrative operations undoubtedly called for
an archive of some sort, in which documents relating to mining operations
could be stored. The composition of the archive might be deduced from the
administrative and judicial topics a procurator aurariarum Daciarum at
Ampelum might have had to cover. The gubernatorial archive, as recon-
structed by Haensch, may function as a template for a procuratorial arch-
ive.271 As noted above (cf. 6.1.3.3), the tabulae ceratae found in one of the
mining shafts at Alburnus Maior suggest that at least part of the mines or
individual mining shafts were contracted out, whereas other aurariae in Dacia
were perhaps operated directly by the state. Furthermore, most of these
documents are work or sales contracts, which in case of a legal action by
one of the contract parties formed the basis of the legal deliberations by the
magistrate or oYcial hearing the case. One may assume that court cases
involving the gold mines were heard by the procurator aurariarum at Ampe-
lum (cf. 6.1.1).

269
O.Claud.inv. 2238, 8175, cf. Cuvigny 2000a: 63.
270 271
O.Claud. 551. Cuvigny 2000a: 63 f. Haensch 1992.
254 Allocation of Responsibilities

The Vipasca tablets provide a limited account of the procurators duties at

the metallum Vipascense, where mines were sold to interested individuals or
societates, and monopolies for a range of services were farmed out. These
activities must have resulted in a set of written documents: a record of mining
pits listed the current owners, as the acquisition of mines had to be reported
to the procurator.272 We may also assume that copies of contracts were stored
and the date of their conclusion was noted. This procedure was undoubtedly
necessitated by the procurators judicial responsibilities within the mining
territory. Consequently, the minutes of procuratorial decisions on various
matters (not only judicial) concerning the mines and other activities must
have been Wled. We might furthermore expect that petitions (?) and letters to
the procurator were stored. The presence of an a commentariis at Ampelum
suggests that these procuratorial records were known as commentarii.
Haensch has shown that gubernatorial commentarii not only included legal
decisions but covered the whole range of the governors daily activities,
forming a log of his term in oYce. The governors activities may not have
been directly copied to the commentarii, but may have been organized
according to matter and importance in diVerent volumes. This procedure
certainly facilitated the retrieval of procuratorial decisions for speciWc Wscal
cases.273
In addition to these central documents, registers of incoming and outgoing
letters, as well as records of correspondence with the emperor, the towns and
other oYcials, are attested in the provincial administration, and probably
existed for mining procurators as well.274 Moreover, the various payments
made to the Wscus by the contractors or occupants of mining pits (cf. 7.1)
were probably noted in accounts and receipts for these payments written by the
clerks. Further Wnancial gains and expenses from the mining ventures may have
been entered in a balance sheet. In mining ventures or quarries directly
operated by the state, payments to workers and contractors of quarry work
had to be accounted for. The quantity and quality of quarried blocks appears to
have been recorded, as the quarry labels on numerous granite and marble
blocks of diVerent origin attest (cf. 7.2). Working contracts comparable to
those known from Alburnus Maior must have been archived, and, in the case
of the quarries in the Eastern Desert, the expenditures for the supply with water,
tools and provisions certainly had to be accounted for as well. The quarrying
administration there probably also kept a record of animals requisitioned for
transport duty (cf. 6.1.2.5). Moreover, the condemnation of criminals to mines

272
LMD ll.21 f.
273
Haensch 1992: 23745 with sources and bibliography.
274
Haensch 1992: 24563.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 255

and quarries perhaps was partly recorded at procuratorial oYces as well.

Haensch cautiously assumed that the soldiers guarding the alabaster quarries
in Egypt kept records of the date and length of a convicts sentence, and
reported to the praefectus Aegypti any discharge from the quarries.275
Any attempt at reconstructing an archive must remain speculative, as we
have no documents which originate from the archive of speciWc mining or
quarrying sites. The mere existence of an archive, however, is implied by
inscriptions of subaltern oYcials named tabularii, who handled tabulae,
writing tablets. The known tabularii are predominantly liberti. The tabularii,
a basic clerical post in a departmental oYce or tabularium, certainly func-
tioned as keeper of documents and controlled part of the Wnancial transac-
tions.276 They wrote the receipts for payments and compiled the accounts for
creditors and debitors of an imperial domain. Furthermore, they appear to
have reported the Wnancial situation of the imperial domain to their super-
iors.277 At Mons Claudianus this is partly exempliWed by the tabularius
Athenodoros; he appears to be responsible for the management of the marble
stock, is informed about water and food supply, as well as the number of
personnel present at Mons Claudianus and Tiberiane.278 Athenodoros appar-
ently functioned as the proxy of the procurator in the Eastern Desert. Other
tabularii, however, connected with an administrative bureau at Ampelum or
the provincial administration at Lugdunum, might have kept the books on
expenditure and revenue from conductores of vectigalia or extractive oper-
ations, basically acting as the accountants of the mining procurator. By
analogy with the function of the dispensator, the actual tasks of a tabularius
might have varied depending on which mine or quarry he was posted to.
The a commentariis, mostly imperial freedmen, dealt with the commentarii,
a set of documents containing legal decisions and letters by the provincial
governor, basically protocols, and other administrative records (acta). Their
responsibilities also covered the safe custody of original documents. The
documents had to be available to make copies which the a commentariis
was required to authenticate.279 The two documented a commentariis for
the aurariae Delmatae and for the aurariae Dacicae probably both Wlled
such a purpose. The latter, however, may have been attached to the bureau
of the Wnancial procurator for Dalmatia at Salona/mod. Split. The adminis-
trative aYliation of L(ucius) Vale(rius), Aug(ustae) l(ibertus) a com(mentariis),

275 276
Haensch 1992: 281. Weaver 1972: 241.
277
Hirschfeld 1905: 5864; Sachers 1932; Boulvert 1970: 4205; Weaver 1972: 2413; Noeske
1977: 309; Haensch 1997: 725 f.
278
Cuvigny 2000a: 64 f.
279
Premerstein 1901; Hirschfeld 1905: 63; Boulvert 1970: 4257; Weaver 1972: 2413;
Noeske 1977: 310. On gubernatorial archives, cf. Haensch 1992.
256 Allocation of Responsibilities

known from stamps on tin ingots from the Port Vendres II shipwreck, is
uncertain; he may have supervised the export of goods.
The following subaltern oYcials are documented exclusively at Ampelum:
the adiutores tabulariorum were subordinate to the tabularii and, as their title
suggests, aided the tabularii in their tasks. The junior clerical grade of adiutor,
mostly imperial slaves, provided an opportunity for promotion to the oYce
of tabularius later on in their career and after their manumission.280 The ab
instrumentis tabularii was in charge of the instrumenta, the accounts on rents
from the leases and all documents related to the imperial domain or the
mining district.281 The task of the librarii was probably to keep Wles and
participate in managing the Wnancial accounts. More likely they were used as
regular scribes.282 In the case of Ampelum, the librarii were seconded from the
Roman army on the orders of the provincial governor. One inscription also
names a subsequens librariorum, an attendant to the librarii(?), a term hardly
known in administrative contexts.
Apart from the limited use of army personnel, the subalterns were mem-
bers of the familia Caesaris, of which the tabularius and a commentariis
belonged to the highest intermediate clerical grades within the imperial
administration, held by freedmen as well as slaves. Belonging to the same
grade, but perhaps less concerned with archival duties, was the dispensator.
The Roman jurist Gaius provides a deWnition for the term dispensator:
servi, quibus permittitur administratio pecuniae, dispensatores appellati
sunt. Thus, they were basically slaves placed in charge of the distribution of
monies.283 Their main task was the collection and distribution of payments,
which necessitated the formal approval of the imperial procurator.284 Gerard
Boulvert observed that imperial dispensatores could make contracts on behalf
of the Wscus, although only in a limited capacity and at the request of the
procurator.285 Given our lack of knowledge about this oYce, the actual
function of dispensatores within the mining administration is not clear. One
might imagine, for example, a dispensator aurariarum Dacicarum making out
or receiving payments from conductores of services and fee collections, as well
as from the occupants of Dacian gold mines, whatever the contractual basis of
the latters involvement in mining operations (cf. 7.1.2).286 The documents
from Mons Claudianus provide us with some idea of their purpose in the

280
Sachers 1932: 1972; Weaver 1972: 231240; Noeske 1977: 309.
281
Hirschfeld 1905: 64 with fn. 1; Steinwenter 1916; Boulvert 1970: 426; Noeske 1977: 309 f.
282
Bilabel 1927; Noeske 1977: 310 f.; Haensch 1997: 722.
283
Gaius, Inst. 1.123.
284
Aubert 1994: 197 f. with further bibliography; Haensch 1997: 726.
285
Boulvert 1970: 42933; Weaver 1972: 202; Aubert 1994: 197 with fn. 296.
286
Noeske 1977: 310.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 257

context of the quarrying administration. Provided the term N


can be
equated with dispensator, these oYcials were involved in making payments to
the , helped supply bread and grain to the
 and were
partially responsible for quarrying equipment.287 The dispensatores in other
quarries may have performed similar tasks. Even so, diVerences in geological
and topographical constraints and the choice of exploitation regimes certainly
inXuenced the range of tasks required of a dispensator. In the case of dis-
pensatores recorded at Dokimeion and Krokeai, one may speculate whether
they were responsible for making payments after receiving marble blocks by
the caesura-holders (cf. 7.2.6). Perhaps the dispensatores at Ampelum and
elsewhere made out payments in the context of such work contracts.
A further oYcial attested in a number of imperial mining districts is the
vilicus. On the basis of the information which follows the title vilicus in the
votive inscriptions to Terra Mater from Ljubija, these imperial slaves appear
to have run the oYcina ferrariae (cf. 4.2.1). The oYcina ferrariae is understood
to be the smelting furnace for metal ore. According to the lex metallis dicta,
the coloni were obliged to submit the extracted ore to such oYcinae, most
likely under the supervision of vilici. The title of the seven (contrascriptor?
vilicus?) oYcinarum from Socanica indicates that more than one furnace
might have been run by imperial oYcials.288 Private and imperial vilici also
appear at Carrara in Italy where they probably held other functions (cf. 4.2.2).
In general, vilici not only played an important part in the Wnancial adminis-
tration of provinces, such as in the collection of taxes and other revenues, but
were also used in more general managerial functions.289 The managerial tasks
vilici are known to have carried out at private landed estates might provide an
appropriate basis for assessing the role of vilici in mining and quarrying
environments. Writers on Roman agriculture laid out the managerial func-
tions of a vilicus: he was to keep track of the yields of all produce, the work
done by members of the household in and out of the estate, register all the
transactions in produce and money and the sale of produce. He was also
required to buy equipment and slaves, hire additional free labour where
required, and to let contracts for speciWc work to be done.290 One may assume
that a vilicus at Luna/Carrara or a vilicus oYcinae fulWlled similar functions,
although a number of tasks might have been carried out by their superiors.
Like his private counterparts, the imperial vilicus attested at marble quarries

287
Cuvigny 2000a: 624.
288
Noeske 1977: 3078. For an alternative view on the role of the vilicus ferrariarum,
cf. Dusanic 1977: 84 with fn. 85, 88 with fn. 223.
289
Schneider 1958; Boulvert 1970: 433 f.; Weaver 1972: 202; Noeske 1977: 3068; Aubert
1994: 1368, 16975.
290
Aubert 1994: 170 f. with sources.
258 Allocation of Responsibilities

of Carrara may have kept track of the workforce, supplied workers and
equipment, and monitored extractive operations. The vilicus oYcinae at
Ljubija, it may be assumed, was to control the ore brought to the furnace
and the reWned produce leaving it, perhaps setting aside part of the produce
for the Roman state.
Most of the subaltern oYcials probably remained at their posts or at the
same location for a number of years. In comparison to the rather short
periods spent by imperial freedmen and equestrians in the procuratorial
oYce (cf. 6.1.4), a certain Callimorphus, for example, is attested at Ljubija
as vilicus in ad 201 and in ad 209, which indicates that he remained in the
same oYce for eight years.291 Moreover, as the evidence from Mons Claudia-
nus suggests, administrative oYcials were promoted through the ranks while
remaining at the same site.292 The longer tenure of oYce by these subaltern
oYcials certainly allowed them to obtain a certain amount of expertise in
mining and quarrying administration. Hence, the procurators could rely on
an experienced staV, which was well equipped to process the exchange of
information between the procuratorial oYce and the extractive operations or
the provincial administration. The ostraca at Mons Claudianus provide
evidence for the transfer of experienced oYcials, e.g. I
, from
one quarry to another within the quarrying territory of the Egyptian Eastern
Desert.293 One might expect that on this organizational level, the

could specialize in their functions, with their extensive knowledge being put
to use eVectively by keeping skilled individuals within the sub-organization.
Consequently, a large group of members of the familia Caesaris probably
remained in the Egyptian Eastern Desert, with most of them not being
promoted to higher posts outside of the quarrying administration.

6 . 3 . T H E F U N C T I O N O F P RO C U R ATO R S
AND IMPERIAL PERSONNEL

The inscriptions of the mining administration at Ampelum perhaps provide

the most complete picture of the size and diversity of the administrative staV
at the disposal of the procurator. At the other end of the spectrum, the ostraca
from Mons Claudianus document the activities of imperial subaltern oYcials,

291
AE 1973: 411 ILJug 779 (ad 201). AE 1958: 63 ILJug 157 (ad 209).
292
The appointment of the 
Magios to the rank of tesserarius is a good example
of this phenomenon, cf. Cuvigny 2000a: 65.
293
O.Claud. 17, 143.
 Allocation of Responsibilities 259

not at the administrative headquarters, but at an individual quarry. Owing

to the sparsity of written evidence for adminstrative bureaux at other imperial
mines and quarries, it is prudent not to assume that these sites boasted
an administrative staV of comparable size and diversity as Ampelum or
Mons Claudianus. Geological and topographical constraints, technological
demands, as well as the type of exploitation, i.e. the decision to contract out
or sell operations or have them exploited by a workforce, might have sign-
iWcantly inXuenced the size and make-up of an administrative bureau.
The organizational measures could leave a considerable paper trail which
was dealt with by the equestrian and freedman procurators and their staV.
The numerous functional titles of subalterns attested at administrative head-
quarters like Ampelum or at the quarries and mines themselves appear to
cover most of the accounting, registration, recording, Wling, or authentiWca-
tion tasks connected with mining or quarrying activities. The subaltern
clerks and accountants guaranteed administrative continuity as procurators
came and went. The short tenure of mining procuratorships held by eques-
trians and imperial freedmen, which possibly lasted between one and four
years, does suggest that these oYce-holders would have acquired some ex-
perience in the administration of mines and quarries. However, these pro-
curatorships did not require an in-depth knowledge of mining or quarrying
procedures. In the published ostraca from Mons Claudianus, the procurator
is rarely noted and is mostly involved in supplying the workforce with the
required provisions, materials, and animals, as well as keeping track of the
marble-stock. His main function was probably to compile and pass on orders
and requests for provisions and marble. The planning and execution of
operative processes (i.e. the quarrying operations as such), were probably
the task of the (civilian or military) engineers and foremen on the spot.
The mining procurator of the Vipasca mining district appears to have been
even less involved in the technicalities of the everyday extraction process. By
supervising the occupatio of mining pits, the burden of organizing and
supplying the process of extraction, was outsourced to civilian entrepre-
neurs. The procurators responsibility was hence focused on the implemen-
tation of the regulations and the legal enforcement of a continuous and
uninterrupted exploitation of the mines. No in-depth knowledge of geology
or extraction technology was necessary, as the implementation of the mining
regulations was likely controlled not by the procurator himself but by his
subordinates. SpeciWc activities like the smelting of ores, for example, were
carried out under the supervision of vilici. In the case of extractive operations
being run directly by the Roman state, mining or quarrying procurators could
be entrusted with the supply of human and material resources to these
operations, as well as hauling and storing the extracted material. For part of
260 Allocation of Responsibilities

these organizational tasks the procurators could rely on the provincial ad-
ministration. In Roman Egypt the requisition of transport animals, as well as
the exaction of grain from the provincial population for the workforce,
soldiers and animals, proWted from the well-established administrative mech-
anisms under the control of the praefectus Aegypti. This perhaps applied to
other provinces as well: Simitthus apparently received convicts condemned by
provincial governors in metallum. In the initial stages after the conquest of
northwestern Spain or Pannonia, the oYcials in charge of the mining zones
were even provided with an ideal source of labour by the provincial author-
ities, as the indigenous population was forcibly resettled to allow the quick
start-up of the alluvial gold-mining operations.
In the light of the evidence for iron-mining in Gaul and the Danubian
provinces, the Roman state may have contracted iron mines to private
individuals and companies in return for a vectigal, the collection of which
was contracted out to conductores. The epigraphic documentation for procur-
atores (vectigalis) ferrariarum implies that the conductores ferrariarum were
supervised by equestrian oYcials; the latter possibly covered vast provincial
conglomerates, such as the provinces of Gaul and perhaps part of the
Danubian provinces.
 7
Private Partners to Imperial Operations:
Occupatores/Coloni and Conductores

The organization of extractive operations in remote areas required careful

planning by the authorities. Where circumstances permitted, all possible steps
were taken to reduce the burden on the imperial oYcials. In line with the
organizational principle central to Roman administration, mining or quarry-
ing operations or particular tasks were handed over to private entrepreneurs
or corporations. This principle certainly had its beneWts: organizational
issues, such as the supply and pay of a workforce or the collection of rents
or fees from the occupants, could be contracted out to private individuals
who thus shouldered a considerable amount of the organizational burden.
The speciWc arrangements, mostly related to work procedures, are in part
reXected in numerous quarry labels on blocks and columns excavated at
Romes marble yards and discovered at the quarries. Mould marks or stamps
on lead ingots are less revealing for mining arrangements involving contract-
ors. SigniWcant insights into a particular disposition of private partners in a
public context are provided by the second Vipasca tablet (LMD).

7 . 1 . M I N E S , O C C U PATO R E S / C O LO N I
A N D C O N D U C TO R E S

Unlike imperial quarries, the contractual involvement of private entrepre-

neurs or companies in imperial mining operations is rarely attested. Labels,
stamps, and marks on ingots are believed to provide information on this
issue; yet, as we shall see below, there are signiWcant limitations to their value
as a source. One thus has to rely on the fragmentary epigraphic record for
further insights. A unique glimpse of possible outsourcing dispositions is
provided by the Vipasca tablets which demonstrate how the organizational
arrangements pertaining to the mining infrastructure were handed over to
private occupatores/coloni or conductores.
262 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

7.1.1. The Vipasca Tablets: Occupatores and Coloni

The lex metallis dicta (LMD), the second tablet discovered at Vipasca in 1906,
provides the most detailed insight into mining arrangements within an im-
perial metallum. The LMD probably once covered three tablets, of which only
the second has survived. The loss of the adjoining columns of the remaining
bronze tablet complicates the reconstruction of its original legal content.1
The Wrst lines of the recovered text (ll. 14) introduce the reader of the LMD
to the consequences of not paying the pretium to the mining procurator in
time.2 The following lines deal with the sale of silver mines and the restric-
tions laid down for the occupatores and coloni as regards the formation of
societates and the exchange of mines amongst coloni. The section also lays out
security measures in order to ensure the unhindered exploitation of the mines.
The legal procedure of gaining access to mining pits is not mentioned in this
part of the regulations, but some elements of this transaction are reXected in
the surviving passages.
Two opposing views on the legal nature of the mining regulations have
emerged since the tablets were discovered. Some scholars, most recently Dieter
Flach and Claude Domergue, assumed that the ore extracted was partitioned
between the Wscus and the occupant of the mine. Others, such as Alvaro dOrs or
Antonio Mateo, understood the text to mean that the occupant gained full
ownership rights over the mine and its contents after they had paid the money
for half of the mine to the Wscus.3 These opposing views can be traced to distinct
interpretations of the term pars dimidia ad Wscum pertinens (pdfp) and varying
interpretations of the acquisition of proprietas over pdfp by the occupant of
the mine. The passages of LMD ( Vip. II) at the centre of controversy are
1, 2, and 5 of the second column, which are paraphrased as follows:
. The Wrst four lines of the remaining text (1) centre on the payment of a price
(pretium) for the half belonging to the Wscus: the occupant of the mine is
required to pay the pretium for the half of the Wscus to the procurator before
smelting ore. If the occupant does not pay the pretium before smelting ore he
loses his part (pars occupatoris) and the whole mining pit (puteus universus) is
sold by the procurator. Anyone who reports an occupant to the authorities for
smelting ore prior to paying the pretium is to receive one fourth of the sum
owed.4
1
Flach 1979: 400; Domergue 1983: 111 f.
2
For the edition of the text, cf. Flach 1979.
3
A lucid summary of the debate and criticism of the position of Flach and Domergue is
provided by Mateo 2001: 87131, whose arguments are supported by Domergue 2004.
4
LMD ll. 14: Aug(usti) praesens numerato. Qui ita non fecerit et convictus erit prius
coxisse venam quam pretium, sicut su j {su}pra scriptum est, solvisse, pars occupatoris commissa
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 263

. The next three lines (2) refer to silver mines (putei argentarii): these are to be
run according to an unknown regulation set out in the preceding column(s)
of the law. Ownership (proprietas) of the part belonging to the Wscus is
acquired by oVering a price Wrst and paying 4,000 sesterces to the Wscus.
These prices are in accordance with the liberalitas of emperor Hadrian.5
. A further passage (5) regulates procedure in the event that a mining pit
(puteus) sold by the Wscus has not been worked continuously for six
months. The right of occupation (ius occupandi) passes on to a third
party. As usual (ex more), once ore is extracted from the puteus by the
new occupant, half of it belongs to the Wscus.6
The Wrst few lines of the LMD provide insight into the constituent parts of a
puteus or mining pit: it can be inferred from 1 that a mine (puteus universus)
was partitioned into a pars occupatoris, the part of the occupant, and a pars
dimidia ad Wscum pertinens (pdfp), a half owned by the Wscus, i.e. the Roman
state.7 The pdfp is not to be understood as a spatial or territorial entity within
a mining shaft or tunnel. The use of dimidia in the spatial context would not
make much sense and terms like pars Wsci or pars occupatoris would suYce to
distinguish two separate areas of one mine. Therefore, pdfp must refer to a
measurable entity, a dividable mass, most likely the contents extracted or to
be extracted from the mine. This interpretation is corroborated by 5: as soon
as ore is discovered in the puteus half of it becomes the property of the Wscus.8
One therefore may argue that the pars dimidia ad Wscum pertinens must
designate half of the ore. In consequence, the other half of ore became the
possession of the occupant.9

esto et puteum universum proc(urator) metallorum j vendito. Is qui probaverit ante colonum
venam coxisse quam pretium partis dimidiae ad Wscum pertinenjtis numerasse, partem quartam
accipito. For text and translation cf. Flach 1979: 403, 405.
5
LMD ll. 47: Putei argentari ex forma exerceri debent, quae j hac lege continetur; quorum
pretia secundum liberalitatem sacratissimi Imp(eratoris) Hadriani Aug(usti) obserjvabuntur
ita ut ad eum pertineat proprietas partis, quae ad Wscum pertinebit, qui primus pretium puteo
fecerit j et sestertia quattuor milia nummun Wsco intulerit. For text and translation, cf. Flach
1979: 403, 405.
6
LMD ll. 1112: Puteum a Wsco venditum continuis sex mensibus intermissum alii occu-
pandi ius j [es]to ita ut, cum venae ex eo proferentur, ex more pars dimidia Wsco salva sit. For
text and translation, cf. Flach 1979: 403, 405.
7
Flach 1979: 417 with older bibliography; Domergue 1983: 1246; Andreau 1990: 102.
8
LMD ll. 1112: Puteum a Wsco venditum continuis sex mensibus intermissum alii occu-
pandi ius j [es]to ita ut, cum venae ex eo proferentur, ex more pars dimidia Wsco salva sit. Flach
1979: 416; Domergue 1983: 139. For a diVerent interpretaion, cf. Mateo 2001: 1319.
9
Flach 1979: 415 f., argued that the proprietas was a right of possession rather than a right of
ownership, as part of the extracted ore still was handed to the Wscus after the pretium had been
paid. In Flach 1989: 135 f., and Flach 1990: 120, he then changed and reWned his view claiming
that proprietas must have meant ownership of the pars dimidia ad Wscum pertinens, while the
pars occupatoris was only the possessio of the occupant.
264 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

Hence, the interpretation of these paragraphs allows one to identify the

constituent elements of a mine at Vipasca as follows. The mine (puteus)
consisted of a pars occupatorispresumably including any mining structures,
shafts, and tunnels made or constructed by the current occupant, as well as
half of the oreand a pars ad Wscum pertinens, comprising half of the ore.
Provided this reconstruction is correct, both entities are integral parts of the
puteus. However, the pdfp only becomes measurable upon extraction of the
ore from the puteus. This legal constructupon which the Wscus based its
claim of ownership, proprietas, of the pars dimidiaonly applied when the
occupant hit an ore lode (5). In return for a pretium the Wscus transfered
proprietas of its half to the occupant (2). This transfer aVected the ores in
possession of the occupant as well: with payment of the pretium the occupant
apparently was free to smelt all the ore extracted from his puteus (1).

Given its importance in LMD, the term pretium merits further deliberation. In
8 the coloni are permitted to sell partes puteorum, which have been sold by the
Wscus and for which the pretium has been paid, for the highest price attainable.
The pars putei must be the former pdfp, which upon payment of the pretium
becomes the property of the colonus. This suggests that with one single payment
of the pretium the Wscus surrenders any rights to the ore, yet strictly limits any
future transfers of ownership rights to local coloni. In fact, with the sale of the
pars dimidia now owned by the colonus, all of the mine, including the pars
occupatoris, can be transfered into the ownership of another colonus.10
The process by which an agreement on the pretium between Wscus and a
potential buyer was reached is only attested for certain types of mine. LMD 2
allows limited insights regarding the pdfp of silvermines and their sale by the
Wscus: the proprietas of the pdfp is aquired by the person who Wrst oVers a price
(pretium) for the puteus and pays 4,000 sesterces.11 In my view, the relevant
passage on the silver mines might refer to an auction rather than a simple sale.12
Possible indications are provided by the lex metalli Vipascensis, which mentions
auctions held within the Wnes metalli Vipascensis, some of them by the procurator
metallorum on behalf of the emperor.13 Was the proprietas of silver mines
auctioned oV as well? The wording of the passage might suggest just that: ita
10
LMD ll. 201: Colonis inter se eas quoque partes puteorum, quas j a Wsco emerint et
pretium solverint, vendere, quanti quis potuerit, liceto. For the interpretation of this passage, cf.
Mateo 2001: 1616.
11
LMD ll. 57.
12
For a diVerent view, cf. Flach 1979: 415, 4202, with discussion of older opinions
bibliography on this issue; Domergue 1983: 127 f.; Mateo 2001: 15660; Domergue 2004: 228.
13
LMV ll. 13: Conductor ea[rum stipulationum, quae ob auctio]jnem intra Wnes metalli
Vipascensis Went, exceptis iis, quas proc(urator) metallorum iu[ssu imp(eratoris) faciet, cen-
tesimam a vendito]jre accipito.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 265

ut ad eum pertineat proprietas partis, quae ad Wscum pertinebit, qui primus

pretium puteo fecerit et sestertia quattuor milia nummum Wsco intulerit. It
stresses that the pretium has to be oVered Wrst in order to acquire proprietas over
the pars dimidia ad Wscum pertinensa provision which does not make much
sense in a regular contract of sale. An auction better Wts the context; Domergue
and Flach pointed out that the formula pretium facere is used in literary sources
in the context of auctions.14 Both scholars dismissed this possibility as the term
qui primus pretium puteo fecerit does not seem to suggest a regular auction-
eering procedure. However, the auction might have been held similar to a
Dutch auction, where the auctioneer starts with the highest price, slowly
reducing it step by step, until someone makes the Wrst bid.15
Furthermore, the special regulation as regards silver mines does not neces-
sarily specify whether the pretium for silver mines is the 4,000 sesterces
payable to the Wscus, as has been assumed.16 The conjunction et separates
the act of oVering a pretium for the silver mine as the Wrst bidder from the
actual payment of 4,000 sesterces to the Wscus. An explanation for this
distinction might be that the Wscus wanted 4,000 sesterces to be paid imme-
diately, while the pretium (minus the 4,000 HS?), like the pretium for copper
mines, would be paid as soon as the Wrst ore was to be smelted.17 Moreover,
the 4,000 sesterces had to be paid whatever the price achieved at the auction
was, and hence might be understood as the minimum price or knockdown
price for which the Wscus was willing to give the pdfp away. Hadrians liberal-
itas might therefore have been to reduce the sum to be paid immediately to
the Wscus to 4,000 sesterces, lowering the benchmark for possible buyers. As
soon as silver ore was extracted, it was easier to take up a loan with the local
banker (cf. LMV ll. 19) for the rest of the pretium.18
This auctioning procedure was perhaps limited to putei argentarii owned by
the Wscus, in which silver ore had already been discovered or even extracted
hence the adjective argentarius. Any potential buyer of a silver mine would
have been highly reluctant to pay the considerable sum of 4,000 sesterces in
advance without having some form of guarantee that silver ore would be found

14
Martial 1.85.7, 7.17.8, 9.59.20; Varro, Rust. 2.9.7; Plautus, Pers. 5.86; Propertius 4.5.29.
Domergue 1983: 126 f.; Flach 1990: 120 f.
15
Whether or not such Dutch auctions were known in the Roman empire is of course
debatable; yet given our limited knowledge of Roman auction procedures, it cannot be com-
pletely discounted. The auctioning procedures of the period are not well known, but appear to
resemble the more common model with the highest bidder being awarded the auctioned
property, cf. Leist 1896; Kaser 1971: 547 with fn. 16. For a diVerent view, cf. Flach 1979:
420 f.; Domergue 1983: 127.
16
Flach 1979: 415, 420.
17
Fitzler 1910: 90 with fn. 4, with Flach 1979: 421, 423 on older bibliography.
18
For a diVerent view Flach 1979: 414, 423; Domergue 1983: 1347.
266 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

in suYcient quantities. Thus, the existence of silver ore was a crucial prerequis-
ite for the sale of the puteus. Provided this conclusion is correct, one could
acquire proprietas of pdfp and therefore of the whole mine (puteus universus)
directly by buying the pdfp of a silver mine at an auction, paying 4,000 HS in
advance and, after commencing mining operations and extracting silver ore,
the rest of the pretium. Other existing mines could also be bought from the
Wscus, as LMD 1 indicates: the procurator sold putei from which ore had been
extracted, removed and smelted prior to payment of the pretium.19

A diVerent procedure for aquiring ownership of pdfp and consequently, a

mine, can be reconstructed from various passages in LMD and LMV. The last
paragraph in the LMV sets out the regulations for the collection of a vectigal
pittaciarum, a fee in return for a pittacium, a certiWcate or written conWrma-
tion. This fee had to be paid two days after a puteus or locus putei had been
occupied, at the latest, in order to maintain legal right of possession
(6ownership) over the mine.20 According to Flach, this act of occupatio was
followed by an adsignatio, as becomes clear from the last section of the LMD
(18): eos puteos, quos occupaverit adsignatosve acceperit. Flach argued that
the occupatio preceded the adsignatio and the occupied mining pit was
oYcially assigned to the occupant with the payment for the pittacium, a
registration fee.21 According to LMD 18, these assigned plots had clearly
deWned limits (Wnes putei) beyond which the occupant was not to expand his
mining operations. As soon as ore had been found and extracted the occupant
was to pay a pretium for the pdfp. Following payment of the pretium, the
occupant aquired full ownership of the mine and its contents and was allowed
to process the metal.22

19
LMD ll. 23: puteum universum proc(urator) metallorum vendito.
20
LMV ll. 5860: Usurpationes puteorum sive pittaciarum. Qui intra W[nes metalli Vipas-
censis puteum locum]jque putei iuris retinendi causa usurpabit occupabitve e lege metallis
dicta, b[iduo proximo quam usurpaverit occupa]jverit apud conductorem socium actoremve
huius vectigalis proWteatu[r] ( . . . ). The text diVerentiates between usurpare and occupare
which might refer to diVerent objects held by the individuals. Furthermore, the text distin-
guishes puteus from locus putei. Whereas the locus putei might be a pristine plot of land within
the mining district hitherto unscathed by mining works, the puteus must indicate an already
existing mine. The term usurpare, may refer to a person taking into use an already existing
mine (puteus), whereas occupare could refer to the seizure of a plot of land to be mined (locus
putei). Without the complete lex any interpretation of this diVerence remains hypothetical,
cf. Domergue 1983: 1002.
21
LMD ll. 425, cf. Flach 1979: 439 f. with discussion of older scholarly opinions. Domergue
1983: 145, 168 f., sees the adsignatio as an assignment to coloni of silver mines which have no
occupant. He argues that such a regulation was probably not limited to silver mines alone. Flach
1985: 202; Flach 1989: 135; Flach 1990: 119 later altered his view, adding that mines which had
been unworked for six months were assigned to new occupants by the procurator metallorum.
22
LMD 1, 5.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 267

The terms occupator and colonus could refer to one and the same person,
probably in diVerent phases of their legal relationship with the Wscus.23
The distinct meanings of the terms occupare (to seize) and colere (to till)
allows for greater precision: the person who had acquired the right to occupy
a mine or mining plot by paying a fee for the pittacium, set up a mining
infrastructure, or had begun mining, were probably known as occupatores. As
soon as ore was extracted, they were termed coloni.24
As becomes clear from the LMD, the right of ownership by the colonus and
the right of possession by the occupator were curtailed by the authorities.25
The rights of property or possession could easily be lost by occupatores as well
as coloni. If the pretium was not paid in time, i.e. before the colonus smelted
ores, the whole mine returned to the Wscal administration. Anyone who
reported the colonus to the authorities was rewarded with one quarter of the
price for which the mine had been sold.26 The ius occupandi of a mine could
revert back to the Wscus even before ores were smelted if certain conditions
were not met. The occupator had to run the mine (for which the pretium had
not been paid?) without interruption for longer than nine days, after an initial
period of twenty-Wve days in which the occupator was allowed to acquire the
means necessary for running a mine.27 If ores were found in one mine, the
colonus was obliged to continue his eVorts sine intermissione in the other four
mines (for which the pretium had not yet been paid). The lex metallis dicta
refers speciWcally to one of Wve mines, which Flach interprets as a Wfth of all
mines run by one occupator/colonus. If ore was extracted in less than a Wfth of
the mines owned by one occupator/colonus, he was allowed to interrupt work
in each of his mines for up to nine days. In the case of ore being extracted in a
Wfth or more of the mines, the occupator/colonus was deemed Wnancially Wt to
increase his investments for uninterrupted mining in the other putei.28 If
these conditions could not be met, the Wscus awarded the ius occupandi to
another party. Moreover, if a mine was sold by the Wscus (i.e. the pretium had
been paid), and not been worked for six months, the ius occupandi also fell to
a third party. If the new occupier hit an ore lode, the Wscus could claim pdfp.29
In order that one entrepreneur was not burdened with all the costs of
running a mine, the occupator of a mine was allowed to have socii, who shared

23
Flach 1979: 417 does not see occupatores and coloni as diVerent groups, but acknowledges
that occupatores and coloni could be the same person, cf. also Domergue 1983: 12831.
24
Domergue 1983: 128 V.
25
Flach 1979: 415 f.; Flach 1989: 135 f.; Flach 1990: 120.
26
LMD ll. 14, cf. Flach 1979: 424.
27
LMD ll. 911.
28
Flach 1979: 426 f.
29
LMD ll. 1112, cf. Domergue 1983: 138 f.; Flach 1979: 426.
268 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

the costs and the expenses (as well as the proWts as soon as ores were found).30
If all the costs were not shared in accordance to the size of the share, a detailed
procedure could be set in motion to enforce a fair distribution of costs.31 A
colonus was also able to force his socii to cover some part of the expenses made
bona Wde.32 The coloni could sell a mine they had bought from the Wscus at any
price they saw Wt. However, they could only sell it to other coloni and under
the proviso of having paid the pretium for the pars dimidia to the Wscus. The
vendor and buyer had to declare their intentions to the procurator metal-
lorum. Through this procedure the Wscus was able to verify whether the
colonus selling the mine had paid the pretium. Moreover, if the colonus was
a debitor Wsci he was strictly prohibited from transferring the ownership of a
mine by a gift.33
Besides minimizing interruptions in the extraction work, a number of
regulations in the lex metallis dicta were aimed at securing mining pits against
deliberate or unintentional destruction. The pits had to be secured with
wooden pillars or left-over stone pillars, and they were not to intersect with
the cuniculus (a drainage tunnel for ground-water).34 The procurator could
permit galleries for the extraction of ore being cut into the rock from the
cuniculus as long as the restrictions concerning size and length were adhered
to.35 Sabotage of mining installations or any other breach of these security
regulations were severely punished.36 As regards the ore extracted from the
putei, additional regulations applied. LMD 1 sanctioned the smelting of ore
prior to payment of the pretium for the pdfp. In the prevention of this illicit
activity the mining authorities, however, appear to have relied, at least in part,
on the local community at Vipasca. Anyone who notiWed the authorities of
illegalities taking place was awarded a fourth of the sum owed to the Wscus.
9 sheds light on further restrictions on the transfer of ore to the smelting
oven. Extracted ore stockpiled near the mines was to be transported to the
furnaces (oYcinae) by its owners during daylight hours. If someone was
caught removing ore stockpiled near the mine after sunset, he would be
Wned 1,000 sesterces, payable to the Wscus.37 Moreover, thieves caught stealing

30
Flach 1979: 427 f.; Domergue 1983: 141 f.
31
LMD ll. 1318.
32
LMD ll. 1920.
33
LMD ll. 203, cf. Domergue 1983: 1426; Mateo 2001: 1616.
34
LMD ll. 2930, 356, 425. For a discussion of the technological implications of
these regulations and the mining situation at Vipasca, cf. Domergue 1983: 14866.
35
LMD ll. 379.
36
LMD ll. 325, 402.
37
LMD ll. 235: Venas, quae ad puteos prolatae j [i]acebunt, ab ortu solis in occasum ii,
quorum erunt, in oYcinas vehere debebunt; qui post occaj[s]um solis vel noctu venas a puteis
sustulisse convictus erit, (sestertium) (mille) nummos Wsco inferre debeto. For text and translation,
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 269

ore were punished according to their status.38 These sections of the LMD give
the perception that the mining authorities were trying to ensure that there
was transparency about the amount of ore being extracted. The LMD does not
tell us why this was the case: perhaps the authorities required exact data on the
mineral output of the district as a basis for setting the pretium to be paid to
the Wscus. Moreover, the date of payment was the same as the discovery of ore.
If a colonus had moved ore to the smelting furnace in secret (apparently these
furnaces were not controlled by the mining authorities), he would be able to
avoid or at least delay the payment of pretium. Apart from the silver mines,
there is no indication of how the pretium for the other mines (most likely
copper) was established.
The security regulations and the strict regimentation of interruptions of the
mining activities were undoubtedly aimed at enforcing a continuous and
secure extraction of ores by the occupants.39 In regulating nearly every aspect
of the extractive procedure, the administrative body in charge revealed its
immense mining experience. However, a certain reluctance in transferring full
ownership of mines to private individuals seems to underlie these regulations.
Domergue correctly identiWed the exceptional nature of a metallum in which
both copper and silver was mined, a feature unique for the Iberian peninsula
and detectable only in the pyriteous lodes mined in the south-west.40 Hence,
the regulations recovered at Vipasca might have been drafted speciWcally for
the copper/silver mines of the southwestern Iberian peninsula.41 Provided this
interpretation is correct, the regulations of the LMD were not just limited to
the copper/silver mines at Aljustrel itself, but probably extended to contem-
poraneous mining establishments throughout the southwestern Iberian
peninsula.

7.1.2. Other Imperial Mining Districts: Owners,

Contractors, and the Workforce
Apart from the Vipasca tablets, inscriptions from the mining districts hardly
ever include the terms colonus or occupator. At Vipasca itself we Wnd coloni

cf. Flach 1979: 404, 406. These regulations have hitherto been understood to underpin the
hypothesis that half of the extracted ore was collected by the Wscus (cf. Flach 1979: 422 f.) Most
recently Mateo (2001: 13945) again pointed out the improbability of a colonus buying proprietas
of the pars dimidia and handing in half of the extracted ore to the Wscus.
38
LMD ll. 268, cf. Domergue 1983: 146 f.
39
Domergue 1983: 140.
40
Domergue 1983: 158 f.
41
Domergue 1983: 161.
270 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

( . . . ) metalli Vipascensis setting up an inscribed base and statue for their hero
Beryllus, the restitutor metallorum.42Coloni also are named outside the Iberian
peninsula: P. Fundianus Eutyches and P. Aelius Mucianus commissioned an
inscription at Rudnik in Moesia Superior.43 Furthermore, coloni of the arg-
[entariae Dardanicae] near mod. Socanica commemorated the construction
of a sanctuary during the years ad 136/7.44 A gravestone from Grugua near
one of Sardinias argentiferous lead mines provides the name of a col(onus),
Silvanus.45 Provided the named coloni are to be associated with a mining
district, the question arises as to whether legal regulations similar to those at
Vipasca also applied, i.e. whether the mines had been sold to these coloni as
well. Given the lack of epigraphic material from other mining districts, a
satisfying answer cannot yet be provided.
The Wnd of twenty-Wve wooden tablets between 1786 and 1855 in the
vicinity of Alburnus Maior/mod. Ros ia Montana in Dacia throws some light
on the internal organization of mining operations there. Although the tablets
appear not to belong to a single archive, the same person can appear on
diVerent tablets in diVerent functions, i.e. as witness of or party to a contract.
Three tablets are work contracts:46 Socratio Socratis, an Oriental, Aurelius
Adiutor, and a Titus Beusantis qui et Bradua, an Illyrian of peregrine status,
are explicitly identiWed as employers (conductores in a locatioconductio
agreement), whereas L. Ulpius Valerius, Memmius Asclepi and [-]Restitutus
agnomine Senioris appear to have oVered their services as employees (loca-
tores). Two of these three work contracts clearly state the purpose of hire
opus aurarium.47 What the term opus aurarium entailed is not quite clear. It
appears, though, to have required working in a shaft or mining tunnel, as the
conductor (according to the contract) was not liable to pay the wage in the case
of Xooding.48 This suggests that opus aurarium included underground min-
ing, a work environment prone to Xoodings and problems with the water
table. These and the other wooden tablets only refer to contracts amongst
private citizens. By nature they keep us in the dark about the legal standing of
those hiring free labour for opus aurarium: perhaps a system similar to

42
IRPac. 121. AE 1908: 233.
43
IMS I 168 CIL III 6313 8333 (Rudnik). Hirschfeld 1905: 153, questioned whether the
named coloni actually were part of the mining district at Rudnik.
44
AE 1972: 500 ILJug 501 with Dusanic 1971a, cf. ILJug 503 with Cerskov 1970.
45
Sotgiu 1988: B 106.
46
IDR I 402 CIL III, p. 948, IX. 948, X. 949, XI; cf. Mrozek 1969: 141; Noeske 1977:
396404.
47
IDR I 41 CIL III, p. 948, X, l. 3: opere aurario; IDR I, 42 CIL III, p. 949, XI, l. 3: opere
auhrairio. Tackholm (1937: 113 f.) mistook the term conductor as identifying the contractor or
mines, not the employer in the workcontract.
48
IDR I 41 CIL III, p. 948, X, ll.78: [si laborem] j [X]uor impedierit. . . .
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 271

Vipasca applied, with coloni acquiring property of a mine and its contents.
Alternatively, given the sensitivity of the mined metal for the Roman econ-
omy, the gold mines at Alburnus Maior may have been farmed out to
individuals or small companies in return for a rent in kind or money. It is
even worth considering an arrangement in which private entrepreneurs may
have been contracted to execute mining tasks in return for a Wxed payment.
Either way, the contractor/lessee would need to supply or hire his own
workforce for carrying out any menial tasks.
Noeske assumes that these miners at Alburnus Maior were probably part of
a collegium funeraticium mentioned in one of the tablets.49 Apart from this
collegium, the tablets also provide an insight into other activities within the
mining district. Iulius Alexander, a man of Eastern origin, appears in four
tablets and is involved in oVering Wnancial support in the period between ad
162 and 167. The recipients of his money, for which Iulius Alexander received
interest in return, were mostly of peregrine status: an Anduena Batonis
received 140 denarii, an Alexander Caricci 60 denarii, and a Lupus Carentis
got 50 denarii as a depositum irregulare.50 Other Wnancially solvent inhab-
itants of the mining district purchased or traded slaves or bought and sold
houses. The people involved were mostly of peregrine status such as Dasius
Verzonis, Maximus Batonis, Dasius Breucus, Bellicus Alexandri, Ingenuus
Callisti, and Plator Acceptianus.51
Occasionally the inscriptions of Ampelum and Alburnus Maior allow a
closer identiWcation of individual roles within the mining community.52 The
only private individual at Alburnus Maior who indicates his profession in a
votive inscription is M. Aurelius Maximus, a legulus auri.53Leguli aurariarum
are also named in an inscription at Ampelum, honouring Annia Lucilla and
dating to the year ad 165/6.54 The term legulus is only rarely attested in Latin
literature: in an agricultural context the term is used to describe pickers.55
Hence, the term leguli aurariarum might be understood to identify menial
labourers, which would explain the rarity of this term in the epigraphic
evidence. In fact, the gravestone of M. Aurelius Maximus appears to be the
notable exception. Although one should refrain from placing too much
emphasis on a single inscription, one could argue that the leguli aurariarum
49
Noeske 1977: 343 f. For the collegium funeraticum, cf. IDR I 31 CIL III, p. 9247.
50
Mrozek 1969: 144; Noeske 1977: 340, 38991, 4046. IDR I 33 CIL III, p. 9302, III. IDR
I 35 CIL III, p. 934 f., V. IDR I 43 CIL III, p. 949, XII. IDR I 44 CIL III p. 950 f., XIII.
51
Noeske 1977: 344 f., 392 f., 409. IDR I 48 CIL III, p. 954, XVII. IDR I 36 CIL III,
p. 937, VI.
52
On this problem, cf. Mrozek 1969: 141.
53
CIL III 1260 IDR III/3, 390.
54
CIL III 1307 IDR III/3, 283.
55
Cato, Agr. 64.1, 144.3, 164.3; Varro, Ling. 5.94, 6.66; TLL VII/2, p. 1134.
272 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

may have been better paid than their fruit-picking namesakes: according to
Helene Cuvignys comparison of wages at Mons Claudianus and Alburnus
Maior, the work contracts of ordinary miners show they received above-
average pay. This would have allowed individuals to participate in a funerary
collegium which might have paid for an inscribed stelae of its late member.56
The labour force employed in Dacian gold mines thus might have been called
leguli or aurileguli.57 Some scholars have also equated the term legulus with
colonus.58 The fact that leguli aurariarum share in commissioning an in-
scribed monument to a member of the imperial family at Ampelum lends
support to such a conclusion. However, this rests on the assumption that the
mining organisation at Alburnus Minor was similar to Vipasca, an assump-
tion for which there is no direct support in the epigraphic record.
The composition of the population at Ampelum and Alburnus Maior
provides additional insights. Noeskes study of inscriptions revealed that in
the period prior to the Marcomannic Wars, its population originated mainly
from Italy, as well as Dalmatia, Pannonia, or other Danubian provinces.
Strong social ties existed with the legionary camp at Apulum, and the
municipal elite of the colonia Dacica Sarmizegetusa.59 While the old entre-
preneurs continued to pursue their interests in the mining district after the
Marcomannic wars, new arrivals from the upper echelons of Dalmatias
society (the case of T. Aurelius Aper, princeps of Splonum is instructive)
and, most notably, of wealthy Orientals from Syria and Bithynia (some of
them commissioning Greek inscriptions) added to the entrepreneurial make-
up of Ampelums society.60 Unlike the inscriptions found at Ampelum, those
of Alburnus Maior are smaller in size and yield only sparse information.61 We
therefore might be looking at lower strata of Roman society working at
Alburnus Maior. Apart from this diVerence, the composition of the popula-
tion mostly resembles that of Ampelum, although recently discovered in-
scriptions establish Illyrians from Dalmatia of peregrine status as the largest
and most coherent immigrant community at Alburnus Maior.62
The economic discrepancies detectable between Ampelum and Alburnus
Maior may further reXect a diVerence of involvement in the mining business.
Noeske argues that elite citizens resident at Ampelum perhaps owned or
56
Cuvigny 1996a: 141.
57
TLL II, p. 1501.
58
RostovtzeV 1904: 449 f.; Mrozek 1969: 151; Noeske 1977: 349 fn. 333; Andreau 1990: 106.
59
Noeske 1977: 321 f.
60
Noeske 1977: 3279; for T. Aurelius Aper, cf. CIL III 1322 ILS 7153 AE 1968: 443. On
freedmen and slaves, cf. Noeske 1977: 321, 3257; Wollmann 1989: 110.
61
Noeske 1977: 329.
62
Mrozek 1969: 1413 (on the Pirustae); Noeske 1977: 334 f.; Wollmann 1989: 11013;
Damian 2003:14789.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 273

leased gold mines from the state or provided Wnancial services for those
contracting out mines. Hence, the members of a collegium aurariarum
recorded at Ampelum were probably contractors or owners of mines.63 The
inhabitants at Alburnus Maior, on the other hand, were perhaps less wealthy
miners or workers employed in mining operations.

Migrational patterns similar to those at Ampelum and Alburnus Maior have

been observed at other mining districts in the Danubian provinces. Domavium
records a considerable inXux of Orientals and people from southern Dalmatia,
whereas Italians barely surface in the epigraphic record. The growth in popu-
lation allowed Domavium to Wrst reach municipal, and later colonial status.64
In the case of the municipium Dardanorum/mod. Socanica, Mocsy argued that
the social elite of this mining area partly consisted of freedmen standing in for
private entrepreneurs involved in the local mining industry.65
The eVect of mining districts on migrational patterns can also be observed
in the Iberian peninsula. Immigration both from within and outside the region
has been detected in the mining areas in southern Spain.66 At Rio Tinto, we
Wnd immigrants originating from Emerita(?), Talabriga and Olisipo in Lusi-
tania. The mines at La Zarza were the focal point of arrivals from even further
away: two Limici from the castellum Berense near Bracara Augusta in north-
western Spain had travelled to these mines. Moreover, workers or entrepre-
neurs from Clunia in the north-east of the Iberian peninsula, were able to
make money at mines in the Sierra Morena, like Nava de Ricomalillo or El
Centenillo.67 In the mining areas of the Spanish north-west, similar patterns
can be observed.68 The votive or funerary inscriptions found at or in the
vicinity of Roman mining establishments in Asturia demonstrate the presence
of members of diVerent Galician tribes in this area. These individuals probably
migrated freely from the western coast of Spain over a distance of up to
200 km. The fact that members of the same tribe appear at completely
diVerent places throughout northwestern Spain (up to 100 km apart)
might partly corroborate our view of free migration rather than a forced
resettlement.69 Apart from the Galician tribes, the conventus Cluniensis proved

63
CIL III 941. Noeske 1977: 331.
64
Alfoldy 1965a: 154 f., 186 (Italians), 188 f. (Orientals), 198.
65
Mocsy 1970: 90.
66
Domergue 1990: 33748; Haley 1991: 8994.
67
Domergue 1990: 339, tables XVI & XVII, nos. 2, 913, 15, 25, 45.
68
Domergue 1990: 339, tables XVI & XVII; Haley 1991: 949.
69
The latter probably took place immediately after the conquest between 25 and 16 bc,
cf. Florus 2.32.5960. Individuals from Galician and other northwestern tribes such as the
Celtici Supertamarci, Interamici, Zoelae, Bibali, Argaeli(?), Seurri, and Limici, migrated to
the mining zones, cf. Haley 1991: 96; Balil Illana et al. 1991.
274 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

to be a signiWcant area of recruitment. Clunienses appear in the epigraphic

record at Tresminas and Santa Colomba in the Turienzo Valley, bear Roman-
ized names, and were certainly attracted by paid work or other economic
incentives provided by the mining districts.70 Miners with the origo Cluniensis
or Uxamensis are quite prominent in other mining areas of the Iberian
peninsula. As already noted above, they also appear fairly often in the mining
areas of Baetica and of Lusitania.71 Although Domergue compiled a list of
Wfty-seven personal names recorded in the epigraphic documents of mining
zones of the Iberian Peninsula, it is still very diYcult to determine what these
people actually did.72 Only a few inscriptions give us an insight into their
activities. For example, slaves and freedmen of mining companies like the
societas Sisaponensis documented at Corduba certainly attest that these people
were involved in directing or operating various mines.73 A young man named
Vegetus may have worked in the gold mines at Mons Marianus or provided
auxiliary services, but his funerary inscription merely informs us that he died
there and his remains were transferred to Conimbriga/mod. Condixa-a-Velha
in Lusitania where his grieving parents laid him to rest.74

7.1.3. Ingots and Mining Arrangements

Apart from imperial oYcials and soldiers, the epigraphic record rarely allows
us to identify precisely the functions of civilians present at mining operations.
It has been argued, however, that the mould marks on metal ingots identify
contractors of mines, and that the onomastic material does provide some
insights into the organizational policies the Roman state implemented during
the Republic and Principate.
Most Republican lead ingots found in southern Spain or on shipwrecks
have cast mould marks which reveal diVerent groups of ingot-owners: indi-
viduals, small companies of two or more people (often members of the same
family), and large-scale societates.75 Domergue argued that the majority of
70
Haley 1991: 946; Wahl 1993: 23840. It is not easy to prove a direct connection between
inscriptions of migrants located in the vicinity of mines and the mining business. However,
there seems to be hardly any other economic incentive to move from the Spanish Meseta or the
Galician coastland to Asturia and Asturia Transmontana except for the opportunities provided
by the gold mines, cf. Tranoy 1981: 23441. 251 f.; Haley 1991: 713.
71
On the migration of Uxamenses and Clunienses, cf. Garca Merino 1973: 11; Haley 1991:
11011.
72
Domergue 1990: 338.
73
CIL II2/7 441 CIL II 2269. CIL II2/7 334 AE 1971: 181. CIL II2/7 415a.
74
Alarcao & Etienne 1976: no. 32.
75
Domergue 1990: 253, 2547 (Table X). 258 f.; Domergue 2004: 225. On societates, cf. Kaser
1971: 5726.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 275

inscribed lead ingots from the late second and early Wrst century bc originated
from the mines of the Sierra de Cartagena.76 This is corroborated by the
observation that names of individuals and family companies which appear on
the ingots also emerge in the epigraphic record of Carthago Nova/mod.
Cartagena.77 The study of personal names attested on these early ingots
revealed mostly nomina gentilia of Italian origin, of which some were borne
by known personalities, mostly homines novi of the Roman nobility, possibly
represented by their freedmen in Carthago Nova.78 In comparison, large-scale
societates seem nearly absent from the Sierra de Cartagena:79 a soc(ietas)
argent(ariarum) fod(inarum) mont(is) Ilucro(nensis?) or soc(ietas) montis
argentarii Ilucro(nensis?) may have mined for silver on mons Ilucro(nensis?),
a region situated near the mine of Coto Fortuna, close to the mines at
Mazarron, c. 20 km east of Carthago Nova. At Mazarron itself the mines
were possibly exploited by a s(ocietas) m(ontis) F(icarensis).80 During the Wrst
century bc large-scale societates must have been active in the Sierra Morena as
lead ingots from shipwrecks and lead seals have been found in the mining
area.81 The lead objects were perhaps used to seal bags of ore which were
transported from the mines to the smelting furnaces where most of them were
found. Whereas one side of the seal was marked with moulded letters or
initials, the other side displays numbers or an image. Similar inscriptions can
be found on other objects, such as coins or bronze seals.82 Lead or bronze
seals showing the initials s.b.a., s.ba., s.c., s.c.c. were discovered in mines
throughout Southern Spain. These abbreviations are expanded to s(ocietas)
Ba(edronensis) or Ba(eculonensis), s(ocietas) B( . . . ) A(rgentifodinarium), and
76
Domergue 1990: 266 f. However, only one marked ingot (carrying the mark m.p. roscieis)
was found in the mines on the Sierra de Cartagena, cf. Domergue 1990: 256 (table X, no. 1038),
266.
77
Vives y Escudero 1924: 34, no. 5 pl. XXX, 5; Beltran Martnez 1939: 279; Domergue 1966:
45; Koch 1987: 128 f.; and list by Domergue 1990: 265 f.
78
Domergue 1990: 32130. The harbour of Cartagena yielded further ingots inscribed with
the names of individuals connected with the local metals trade, cf. Domergue 1990: 266.
79
Strabo 3.2.10 Polybios 34.9.811. Cicero, Leg. agr. 1.5, 2.51. Domergue 1990: 267, 269 f.
On an inscribed ingot found in a mining area near Castulo, cf. Domergue 1990: 265 fn. 30.
80
At Mazarron a lead object carrying the inscription mont. argent. was found: Domergue
1990: 260 with fn. 12. For the mines, cf. Domergue 1987a, MU10 (Mazarron), MU12 (Coto
Fortuna). According to Domergue, the archaeological remains at Coto Fortuna, dated to the
end of the Roman Republic/beginning of the Principate, suggest a vast mining operation worthy
of a large-scale publican company, cf. Domergue 1987a: 397405. On s(ocietas) m(ontis)
F(icarensis), cf. Domergue 2004: 226 fn. 27 with further bibliography.
81
The shipwreck Cabrera D (c. ad 115), for example, yielded 21 lead ingots, carrying mould
marks with the names anteros eros, l. iunii dvo, t.l. osca and a soc(ietas)vesc( . . . ?), and 700
amphora. The pottery in particular suggest that the ingots originate from a ship sailing from
Roman Baetica, loaded with olive oil and Wsh sauce. Thus, the lead ingots probably came from
the Sierra Morena, cf. Domergue 1990: 260 f., fn. 15; Parker 1992: no. 126.
82
Domergue 1971: 3583, Wg. 35; Domergue 1990: 261.
276 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

s(ocietas) C(astulonensis).83 Based on recent Wnds of ingots at the entrance of

the bay of Cartagena, of which one carried the abbreviation soc. baliar., the
mark s.ba. has been read as s(ocietas) Ba(learica).84 The s(ocietas) C(astulo-
nensis) might have operated several mines in the Sierra Morena, one of which
was located at El Centenillo. These mines yielded tools and coins marked with
the letters of the s(ocietas) C(astulonensis).85
These mould-marks on ingots and seals from southern Spain have been
interpreted on the basis of the few literary sources. The silver mines near
Carthago Nova and Baetica generated vectigalia for the Roman state as early
as the beginning of the second century bc. In 195 bc one of the Wrst governors,
M. Porcius Cato, introduced these rents on iron and silver mines.86 Strabo,
quoting Polybios, recounts that 40,000 miners extracted silver worth 27,000
drachmas per day from the mines near Carthago Nova.87 Diodorus, based on
Posidonius account, describes a genuine goldrush during the second century
bc with many Italians Xocking to the mines in southern Spain and making
signiWcant proWts.88 As these sources on the Republican exploitation of mines
on public grounds are more enigmatic than enlightening, there is room for
numerous interpretations:
. J. S. Richardson argued that the mines on public land in southern Spain
were initially contracted out to small-scale lease holders, but not along the
lines of a locatio censoria.89 He believed that a proWt of 27,000 drachmas per
day could not have been made if societates publicanorum had run the
mining operations in the name of the Roman state. These companies,
according to Richardson, paid a lump sum to the censors at Rome in
return for the right to extract metals from the public mines during a
lustrum, a Wve year period.90 Based on Diodorus account of Italian immi-
grants Xocking to the mines, Richardson envisaged small-scale contractors
exploiting plots of the mining area which were allocated to them, probably
for a Wxed rent payable to the Roman state.
. Claude Domergue argued that Diodorus account did not refer to lessees of
public mines but to private miners, as the term N used by Diodorus
must refer to private mining ventures rather than state-owned mines.
Furthermore, Domergue believed that the locatio censoria of public lands
83
Domergue 1987a: CO 56, 81, 82, 102; J 12, 20; Domergue 1990: 261 f.
84
Poveda Navarro 2000: 297.
85
Domergue 1990: 262 f.
86
Livy 34.21.7. On Catos taxes, cf. Domergue 1990: 242 fn. 12.
87
Strabo 3.2.10 Polybios 34.9.811.
88
Diod. 5.36.
89
Richardson 1976: 137; Domergue 1990: 246 f.
90
Lintott 1993: 88 f.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 277

was not reserved for societates publicanorum alone, but that small-scale
lessees could be subjected to the conditions of a locatio censoria as well.91
He points out that authors like Livy, Strabo, and Pliny the Elder record that
the state generally contracted out mines to societates publicanorum.92
Domergue did not entirely exclude the possibility of publicani being pre-
sent in the mining zones of southern Spain at an early stage. However,
instead of large societates publicanorum, he imagined small-scale publicani
as lessees mining near Carthago Nova under a locatio censoria.93
. Antonio Mateo recently oVered a compelling third interpretation of the
literary evidence. He argued that diVerent exploitation regimes applied,
depending on the geological conditions and abundance of the metal. The
opencast or underground mining of rare metals on public grounds was
farmed out to societates publicanorum.94 On the other hand, the abundant
copper, iron, tin, silver, and lead mines of southern Spain allowed for
individuals to mine in small pits. Hence, Mateo believes that in the latter
case, the right to mine on public land may have been granted to any
occupant (occupator) of the land in return for a rent, a vectigal, to the
Roman state. The collection of these vectigalia, instituted by Cato in 195 bc,
may have been farmed out to publican companies.95 The inXux of Italians
to the Iberian peninsula reported by Diodorus thus is likely to have
occurred in this context.96 Perhaps under dire circumstances (under
Sulla?) the silver mines near Carthago Nova were sold by the Roman
state to the occupiers, a change in status duly noted by Strabo.97
Mateos model for the Republican era should probably apply, at least in part,
to the Principate as well: the epigraphic and literary sources demonstrate the
continuation of societates during the Wrst century ad for Roman Baetica. Pliny
the Elder notes the mining activities of a societas Sisaponensis in his day,

91
Diod. 5.36.2. Strabo 3.2.10. Domergue 1990: 247 f.
92
On Macedonian gold and silver mines, cf. Livy 39.24.2, 45.18.35. Domergue 1990:
2434, 248.
93
Richardson 1976: 144; Domergue 1990: 248.
94
Strabo 4.6.7 (gold mines of the Salassi); Pliny, NH 33.78; Strabo 5.1.12 (gold mines of
Victumulae in the territory of Vercellae); Strabo 12.3.40 (realgar mine at Mt Sandaracurgium).
Pliny, NH 34.118, 34.165 (Sisapo); cf. Mateo 2001: 4355. For criticism of Mateos position,
cf. Domergue 2004: 2235.
95
According to Mateos reading of the passage by Livy on Macedonian mines, the Roman
senate may have decided against publicani as collectors of vectigal from mines and landed
estates, not against publican companies running mines directly, cf. Mateo 2001: 4365, esp.
58 f.; Domergue 2004: 223.
96
Diod. 5.36.
97
Strabo 3.2.10; Frank 1959: 157, 2568; Mateo 2001: 6671.
278 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

a company already known to Cicero.98 At Sisapo/mod. La Bienvenida and in

Almaden the company extracted silver and minium (cinnabar).99 Further-
more, inscriptions within Roman Baetica document the presence of the
societas Sisaponensis, particularly in Corduba: liberti, receiving the nomen
gentile Argentarius subsequent to manumission by the societas Sisaponensis,
appear on an inscribed monument.100 Apart from former slaves of this
company, an inscribed slab found near Corduba refers to a servitus viae, a
servitude imposed by the societas Sisaponensis on a road which led from
Corduba to the montes s(ocietatis?) S(isaponensis?).101 Moreover, a funerary
inscription from Ostia refers to a vilicus of the socii Sisaponenses and a
C. Miniarius(!) Atimetus, procurator sociorum miniariarum at Rome, might
be associated with the same company.102 The latter inscription may provide
an idea of the scope of tasks such companies could cover: apparently the
societas Sisaponensis not only mined cinnabar, but may even have controlled
the export of its produce to Rome as well. The practice of naming freedmen
after the mining company which had owned them is documented for another
company as well: a M(arcus) Aerarius Telemachus, medicus, freedman and
former slave of socii aerar(ii) or aerar(iarum) (fodinarum?) received a similar
type of nomen gentile.103
Large societates involved in mining on public lands are also attested else-
where. Lead tesserae dating from the second century bc to the Wrst third of the
Wrst century ad have been found at the mining village of Lascours in Gallia
Narbonensis, close to the copper and lead-silver mines of the Orb valley.
Some of these tesserae were inscribed on one side with the letters soc. arg., on
the other side with rot., to be read as soc(ietas) arg(entifodinarum) Rot-
(enensium/s).104 The realgar mines at Mt Sandaracurgium in Pontus were
also contracted to publicani, whereas a Republican lex censoria forbade

98
Pliny, NH 33.118; Cicero, Phil. 2.19.48, cf. Domergue 1990: 270 fn. 40; Vitruvius 7.9.4
reports that minium had also been mined near Ephesos, cf. Brunt 1990c: 398 with fn. 142. Mateo
2001: 53 f., has pointed out a parallel between Plinys report on minium exploitation and the lex
portorii Asiae (Engelmann & Knibbe 1989: 34, 7881): Pliny claims that 2,000 pounds per
annum of unsmelted and unreWned cinnabar ore were delivered to Rome under seal (vena
signata) and sold at a Wxed price of 70 sesterces per pound. It was forbidden by law (statuta lege)
to alter the minium ore and the price of sale. The lex portorii records the taxation of ore exported
to Rome under the provisions of a 


, a mining law. The ore in question is
believed to be minium.
99
Strabo 3.2.3; Pliny, NH 33.118, 121; cf. Fernandez Ochoa et al. 1994.
100
CIL II2/7 415a.
101
AE 1995: 846 CIL II2/7 699a (Corduba).
102
CIL X 3964 ILS 1875 (Ostia). CIL VI 9634 (pp. 3470, 3895) ILS 1876, cf. Domergue
1990: 26871, 277 fn. 60; Mateo 2001: 51 f. fn. 68.
103
Koch 1987; contra: Dardaine 1983.
104
Domergue 1990: 261 fn. 16.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 279

publicani of the aurifodina Victumularum (mod. Bessa) in the territory of

Vercellae in northern Italy to employ more than 5,000 workmen.105 The gold-
mines of the Salassi in the Aosta Valley had been farmed out to publicani prior
to their Wnal conquest in 25 bc.106 And Pliny reports on black lead mines
(plumbum nigrum), i.e. the metallum Samariense/Salutariense and the metal-
lum Antonianum, being rented for 200,000 or 255,000 denarii per annum,
which suggests that large societates probably ran mining operations in each
metallum.107 Apart from the literary sources and inscriptions on stone, large
societates are barely named in mould marks or stamps on ingots from Roman
Baetica during the Principate.108
Inscriptions on lead pigs and bun-shaped copper ingots from Roman
Britain and Gaul provide additional evidence for societates possibly involved
in mining operations: the copper ingots were nearly exclusively found in
North Wales stamped either with private names or, in one case, with the
letters socio(rum) Romae. Cast mould marks on lead ingots read socior(um)
Lut(udarensium) Brit(annicum) ex arg(entariis), i.e. British lead from the
silver mines of the socii at Lutudarum (Derbyshire lead mining area).109
Further, the cold stamp of soc(ii) Novaec(-) is recorded on ingots from the
Mendip Hills.110 A lead ingot from Anse Saint Gervais carries the mould mark
sociorum plumb(um) Ger(manicum).111 Setting aside those naming com-
panies, most mould marks on lead ingots dated to the Principate provide
the personal names of individuals: C. Nipius Ascanus is named on an ingot
from Carmel in Clwyd/North Wales, L. Aruconius Verecundus, P. Rubrius
Abascantus, C. Iulius Protus, or Ti. Claudius Tr(iferna?), are named on lead
ingots from Lutudarum in Derbyshire.112 The latter name, Ti. Cl(audius)
Trifer(na), was also stamped on the left or right end of ingots from the
Mendip Hills.113

105
Strabo, 12.3.40; Pliny, NH 33.78. For the localization of Vercellae, cf. Cavalieri Manasse
et al. 1982: 767, also Strabo 5.1.12. CIL V, p. 715. Strabo 6.2.10 and Diod. 5.10, name an alum
mine on Lipara generating revenues for Rome.
106
Strabo 4.6.7; Dio 53.25.
107
Pliny NH 34.165. Whether or not the gold mines of Asturia had been contracted out, as
Brunt (1990c: 397 f.) believes, is diYcult to prove. Although Pliny (NH 33.78) reports that
20,000 pounds (22,500,000 denarii) of gold were produced a year, there is no direct indication
that societates necessarily were present in the north-west.
108
An exception might be the cast mould mark soc(ietas) Vesc(-) on lead ingots found on
shipwreck Cabrera D (115 ad), cf. Domergue 1990: 260 f., fn. 15; Parker 1992: no. 126.
109
RIB II/1, pp. 347 (copper); RIB II/1, 2404, 535, 5760 (lead).
110
RIB II/1, 2404, 5, 6, 11, 13.
111
AE 1959: 124. Rothenhofer 2003: 280.
112
RIB II/1, 2404, 3951.
113
RIB II/1, 2404, 710.
280 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

The mould-marks on ingots from the Wrst century ad found on shipwrecks

from the Baleares, Southern Gaul and Corsica Wrst and foremost provide the
name of individuals as owners of ingots.114 The shipwreck Cabrera 6/Ses
Salinas oV Mallorca, for example, carried Dressel 20 amphoras and lead
ingots, of which only few have survived. The ingots again carry mould-
marks with the names of individuals like P. Aemilius Gallicus or Q. Cornutus,
while the secondary stamps of Vespasian declare the ingots imperial property.
Numbers indicating the weight are incised as well.115 Further names of
individuals are recorded on Wrst-century ad lead ingots recovered from the
shipwrecks Cabrera 4 and 5, Sud-Perduto 2, Sud-Lavezzi 2, and Port-Vendres
2. In contrast to the onomastic material on ingots from the Republican era
associated with the Sierra de Cartagena, a geographic contextualization of the
personal names provided by these ingots is not possible.116 This is not the case
with the ninety-nine lead ingots from Saintes-Maries-de-la-Mer: eight of
them carry the mould-mark [.]Flavi(i) Veruclae plumb(um) Germ(anicum),
the German lead of [.] Flavius Verucla and were stamped with imp. caes and
incised with numerals; the other ninety-one ingots were merely stamped with
l.fl.ve, imp. caes, erotis and incised with numerals.117 Based on the lead
isotopes and the rediscovery of a lead ingot with the mark L. Fla[-] at Bad
Sassendorf-Heppen, it is possible that the lead originated from mines in the
Sauerland, probably from the area near Brilon.118 Given the mark imp. caes.
on these ingots, they were likely produced during the period of Roman
control of territories east of the Rhine during 8 bc to ad 9.119
The survey of inscribed lead (and copper) ingots of the Roman Principate
reveals no signiWcant changes in comparison to the Republican era, apart
from an increase of the number of ingots owned by the emperor. This
phenomenon has been understood as mirroring the growing control of
114
Domergue 1990: 265; Domergue 1998: 201 f. On the shipwrecks, see Veny & Cerda 1972;
Parker 1974; Colls et al. 1975; Veny 1979; Liou & Domergue 1990; Bernard & Domergue 1991;
Long & Domergue 1996.
115
Veny 196970; Parker 1974; Parker 1992: no. 1017.
116
The nomen gentile of C. Haterius Gallus, for example, a personal name attested only once
in a mould-mark on a lead ingot from the shipwreck Cabrera 5, may appear in the epigraphic
record of the Iberian peninsula (L. Hat[erius? . . . ], Abascal Palazon 1994: 148). Nor do we Wnd
any attestation of the Mevii, recorded on lead ingots from the shipwreck Cabrera 6 in Southern
Spain, see Abascal Palazon 1994: 185. For a list of names on 1st cent. ad lead ingots, cf.
Domergue 1998: 214 f. (tables 1 & 2). For inscribed ingots and shipwrecks, cf. Veny 196970;
Veny & Cerda 1972: 30210; Laubenheimer-Leenhardt 1973: 11419; Parker 1974; Colls et al.
1977: 1122; Veny 1979: 4713, 4838; Colls et al. 1986: 7580; Liou & Domergue 1990: 7490,
99104; Bernard & Domergue 1991; Long & Domergue 1996: 83751; Domergue 1998: 214,
table 1a.
117
Long & Domergue 1996: 818, 8324.
118
Rothenhofer 2003; Eck 2004b: 1921.
119
Eck 2004a: 746.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 281

mines by the emperor himselfa notion based on mould marks alone (cf.
3.3.5). The opinio communis holds that the names on the mould marks are
those of individuals and companies mining on public land or on private
property. The purpose of these mould-marks, however, must be seen in the
context of further markings applied to the ingot. Most ingots carry a variety of
markings, be they cast mould marks, stamps, holes, or incisions. Based on the
superimposition of some of these markings on ingots found on shipwrecks
from the Wrst century ad (Cabrera 4,5,6; Port-Vendres II; Saintes-Maries-de-la-
Mer 1; Lavezzi 1; Sud-Lavezzi 2; Sud-Perduto 2), Claude Domergue recon-
structed their sequence of application.120 Firstly, the lead was cast in the form of
ingots, which carried a moulded mark. At a later stage the lead was stamped
cold with diVerent seals. The ingots were then probably nailed to a wooden
surface (hence the nail holes) in order to prevent movement. Numerals were
subsequently incised and occasionally a further cold stamp applied. Domergue
oVered a compelling explanation for this sequence of markings, based on the
assumption that the ingots originated from Roman Baetica: the producer cast
the lead into the form of ingots carrying his mould-mark or cast stamp. The
lead ingots then might have been collected by mercatores; they stamped their
own seals on the lead ingots. Nailing their cargo to the Xoor of the river boat
to prevent movement, the mercator might have sailed down the Baetis,
anchoring at every harbour on the northern bank of the river and collecting
further lead ingots from the nearby mines of the Sierra Morena. At Hispalis,
Baeticas large shipping port, the ingots were probably unloaded and stock-
piled. They were then sold to a further trader, the ingots were weighed
(incised numbers) and the stamp of the new owner applied. The second
mercator then might have entrusted the lead cargo to a navicularius which
transported them to Italy or Gaul. Evidently less complicated models are
possible (Domergue oVers three further possibilities), and one might im-
agine several of them being practised at the same time.121 Interestingly, the
incision of numbers signifying the weight of the ingots was performed after
the ingots changed hands for the Wrst time. Weighing the ingots appears
therefore not to have been a necessary requirement during regular transac-
tions. However, the exaction of trade taxes, such as the portoria, forced the

120
The ships carrying the ingots, amongst other items, have been dated to the 1st cent. and,
based on the amphora, may have originated from Roman Baetica. Domergue assumed that the
ingots must also stem from southern Spainan assumption refuted by the observations of
Rothenhofer on the origin of the Saintes-Maries-de-la-Mer lead ingots. Perhaps the freight has a
more complex assemblage history. This evidence notwithstanding, Domergues observations
still provide a solid foundation for further deliberation, cf. Domergue 1998: 202 f., 2069;
Rothenhofer 2003.
121
Domergue 1998: 2038.
282 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

traders to weigh and standardize their cargo. According to the lex portorii
Asiae, the weight and number of any cargo being exported or imported by
sea or land had to be declared to the customs oYce.122 The tax on the ore
was 4 asses per 100 pounds.123 The numbers incised on the sides of our
ingots indicated the number of pounds exceeding the normal weight,
allowing the exact calculation of the charged tax-sum or of shipping
costs.124
Whereas the application of cold stamps, holes, and numerals can be
explained with some certainty, we are still uncertain about the role of the
socii and individuals named in mould marks in the context of mining and
metal trade. A list of the more informative mould marks on ingots from the
Principate may provide some insights:
AE 1997: 1042 Flavi(i) Veruclae plumb(um) Germ(anicum)
RIB II/1, 2404.40 L(uci) Aruconi Verecundi metal(li) Lutud(arensis)
RIB II/1, 2404.51 P(ubli) Rubrii Abascanti metalli Lutudare(n)s(is)
RIB II/1, 2404.41.445 Ti(berii) Cl(audii) Tr(ifernae?) Lut(udarense)
Brit(annicum) ex arg(entariis)
RIB II/1, 2404.4650 G(ai) Iul(i) Proti Brit(annicum) Lut(udarense)
ex arg(entariis)
RIB II/, 2404.535 Soc(iorum) Lut(udarensium) Brit(annicum) ex arg(entariis)
As the four ingots of Saintes-Maries-de-la-Mer (AE 1997: 1042) indicate, the
genitive of the personal names (e.g. Flavii Veruclae) is a possessive, likely
indicating ownership rather than origin of the lead ingot (plumbum).125 The
origin of the ingot is indicated either by a partitive genitive (e.g. metalli
Lutudarensis), an adjective (e.g. Britannicum, Lutudarense), and/or by a prep-
osition (e.g. ex argentariis).
The scholarly consensus is that the societates and individuals are named not
only as owners of the ingots but as lessees, occupiers or private owners of
mines as well. Even though it is plausible that in most cases the producers of
the ingots put their name on their ingot, there is no evidence to date that
satisfyingly corroborates this line of argument. In fact, the appearance of the
same names either as mould-marks or cold stamps on ingots further calls this
thesis into question, in particular when cold stamps are understood to have
been applied by later owners or merchants (mercatores/navicularii):

122
Engelmann & Knibbe 1989: 80 f., ll. 456 (18).
123
Engelmann & Knibbe 1989: 97 f., ll. 7881 (34). The weight norm of a 100 pounds for
a wide range of transported goods also appears in the customs tarif of Zarai in North Africa
(2nd cent. ad): CIL VIII 4508, cf. Domergue 1998: 209 fn. 41.
124
Domergue 1998: 203, 215 (table 2).
125
Domergue 2004: 225.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 283
RIB II/1, 2404.41.445 Ti(berii) Cl(audii) Tr(ifernae?) Lut(udarense)
Brit(anicum) ex arg(entariis)
RIB II/1, 2404.410. Face (moulded): Imp(eratoris) Vespasian(i) Aug(usti)
Front (moulded): Brit(annicum) ex arg(entariis) Veb(-)
Stamp: Ti(berii) Cl(audii) Trif(ernae?)
Saintes-Maries-de-la-Mer 1 (a) Face (moulded)[.] flavi veruclae plumb. germ.
Stamp: imp.caes.
(b) no mould mark
Stamps: imp.caes.; l.fl.ve.; erotis
Ti. Claudius Triferna thus appears as owner of lead ingots andprovided the
interpretation of cold stamps is correctas intermediary shipper of ingots
owned by the emperor. Similarly, L. Flavius Veruclas name appears either as a
mould-mark or as a stamp on ingots. This calls into question the idea that
mould-marks only identiWed the individuals or companies mining the ore. To
my knowledge, there is no indication in the sources which required the
miners of ore to be named on the reWned produce. In fact, numerous lead
ingots carry no mould-marks at all, are anepigraphic, or carry moulded
panels without lettering.126 Unlike large-scale companies such as the societas
Sisaponensis, a considerable number of individual miners in southern Spain
are likely to have concentrated their eVorts on the extraction of ore, whereas
the trade in the produce was left to merchants. Some miners may have even
yielded the task of smelting ore to another party, and thus saved on the costs
of running their own furnace.127 One could easily imagine the extracted ore
being sold either to the operator of the furnace and/or a merchant prior to
smelting. Only large-scale companies may have controlled the whole process
from mining and smelting the ore down to shipping and trading the ingots.
Consequently, the mould-mark of the ingot may provide the name either of a
miner or mining company (provided they smelted the ore at their own cost),
an owner of the furnace, and/or the merchant buying the ore from the
miners.128
I therefore argue that the names displayed in the cast mould-marks on
ingots at the most provide evidence of the initial owner of the ingot at the
time it was cast, but do not conclusively identify the owner, occupant, or
contractor of a mine where the ore originated. Hence, one cannot be certain

126
E.g. Sancti Petri, Spain, cf. Parker 1992: 382, no. 1027; Cabrera 4, cf. Veny & Cerda 1972:
30210; Veny 1979: 4713, 4838.
127
The Vipascan lex metallis dicta, for example, does not provide any information on who
ran the oYcinae. The text implies, however, that the furnaces were not under the control of the
mining authorities, cf. LMD ll. 14, 235.
128
Poveda Navarro 2000.
284 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

that the production and/or trade of ingots was run by the same individuals
that also exploited the mines.129

7.1.4. Conductores/mancipes/promagistri ferrariarum

Unlike the conductores known from the Vipasca tablets who leased auxiliary
services within the mining district (e.g., shoemaker, barber, etc.), the function
of conductores ferrariarum who are recorded in some of the mining provinces
must have been of a diVerent scale and nature altogether.130
The earliest contractor of iron mines may be documented in an inscription at
Arelate/mod. Arles dated to the late Wrst century ad: the title of promagister
f[errariarum] provincia[rum] Narbonens(is) Lu[gdun(ensis)] Aquitanic(ae) Belgi-
[cae] noted in the inscription of an unknown equestrian is perhaps the only
indication of a societas ferrariarum operating on a superprovincial level within
Gaul.131 The term conductor is often attested in Noricum: an inscription set
up for Ti. Claudius Macro by his vilicus in Aquileia might be the oldest
attestation of a conductor ferrariarum Noricarum, belonging to the early
second century(?).132 The inscriptions of other conductores found at TiVen,
Hohenstein, and Wieting are diYcult to date, but according to Alfoldy belong to
the Wrst half of the second century as well.133 A further individual from Aquileia,
an equestrian M. Trebius AlWus, c(onductor) f(errariarum) N(oricarum), praefec-
tus iure dicundo at Aquileia, commissioned a votive inscription at TiVen.134 The
Trebii are well attested in Aquileia and were probably part of the municipal
elite.135 Moreover, we Wnd a Trebius AlWus as a high-ranking member (pater) of
the Mithras cult at Virunum.136 Another conductor is attested in TiVen: [Pu]dens,
the slave of a c(onductor) f(errariarum) N(oricarum) [et as]seshsior [fe]rrariarum,

129
Andreau 1990: 105.
130
For a similar view, cf. Tackholm 1937: 109.
131
PXaum 19601: 11823, no. 52, 1053, based on the reading of CIL XII 671 by Benoit 1932:
13841.
132
CIL V 810 (Aquileia). On date, cf. Panciera 1957: 27 f.; Alfoldy 1974: 115, 319 fn. 86.
A further building inscription by a Sabi[nius], possibly a conductor ferrariarum Noricarum(?),
who rebuilt the temple of Noreia at Hohenstein, names the presidial procurator of Noricum,
Claudius Paternus Clementianus, attested around ad 120 (CIL III 14362, p. 2328, 197 14363
AE 1968: 408). Besides providing a date for the inscription, the naming of Clementianus
might also reXect a direct administrative connection between the conductores and the procurator
at Virunum.
133
Any attempt to date these inscriptions would have to rest on palaeographic or onomastic
analysis. However, rsted 1985: 22336, dates some of the discussed inscriptions to an earlier
period.
134
CIL III 4788 ILS 1466 ILLPRON 604, cf. rsted 1985: 223 f.
135
Inscr. Aqu. III, p. 1310, Index.
136
AE 1994: 1334 AE 1996: 1189 AE 1998: 1016. Piccottini 1994b.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 285

appears in a fragmentary inscription.137 Q. Septueius Clemens, con(ductor) fer-

(rariarum) and two procuratores ferrariarum, Tib. Claudius Heracla and Cn.
Octavius Secundus, are named on a votive altar set up by a further procurator
ferrariarum, Q. Septueius Valens, to Isis Noreia in Hohenstein.138 The reading of
the three letters n.p.d. following the words con(ductor) fer(rariarum) has been
the subject of intense scholarly debate. Alfoldy, Winkler, and rsted, based on
Egger, read conductor ferrariarum N(oricarum) p(artis) d(imidiae), while Hirsch-
feld, RostovtzeV, Mocsy, Dusanic, and Andreau opted for conductor ferrariarum
N(oricarum) P(annoniarum) D(almaticarum).139 It has been rightly pointed out,
in favour of the latter position, that there is no parallel for a conductor ( . . . ) partis
dimidiae.140 Moreover, as we shall see below, parallel examples of conductores/
mancipes covering the iron mines of more than one province appear in the
epigraphic record. The procurators honoured alongside the conductor Q. Sep-
tueis Clemens were his private procurators. This is suggested by the nomen gentile
of the procurator commissioning the votive altar, Q. Septueius Valens.141 Hirsch-
feld assumed that the three private procurators of Q. Septueius Clemens were
each responsible for a province.142 While Q. Septueius Clemens personnel are
well attested in Noricum, his own origins can again be traced to Aquileia.143 A
votive inscription to Termunes found at Friesach was set up for a Q. Calpurnius
Phoebianus, c(onductor) f(errariarum) N(oricarum), by his private procurator C.
Iulius Hermes.144 At Wieting a votive inscription records a Campilius Verus,

137
AE 1957: 108 AE 1969/70: 454; Alfoldy 1969b: 235, no. 33; Alfoldy 1970: 168 f. Contra
Alfoldy, cf. rsted 1985: 218. Alfoldy believed the assessor ferrariarum had judicial competence
within the Norican mining districts; the inscription, however, is fragmentary and does not
support Alfoldys reading unequivocally. An a(dsessor) might be named in two inscriptions from
Anicium/mod. Le Puy in Gallia Narbonensis, cf. CIL III 1576 ILA Vell. 24. CIL III 1577 ILA
Vell. 25 with Aymard 1856: 344; Hirschfeld 1905: 158 f.; Wuilleumier 1948: 68 fn. 32; Sablayr-
olles 1989: 160 fn. 36; Remy 1995: 76 f. They probably were connected with the arca ferrariarum
tres provinciae Galliae, cf. Hirschfeld 1905: 158; PXaum 1948: 18; Sablayrolles 1989: 160 with fn.
31; Remy 1995: 77 f. A further funerary inscription from Mogontiacum/mod. Mainz, CIL XIII
11833 AE 1913: 241, refers to an adsessor fer(rariarum).
138
CIL III 4809 ILS 1467 ILLPRON 151.
139
RostovtzeV 1904: 448; Hirschfeld 1905: 152 fn. 3; Winkler 1969: 165 no. 2; Alfoldy 1970:
176; rsted 1985: 225 f.; Andreau 1989: 101 f. Alfoldy (2003: 226; 2004: 213 fn. 29) now reads
N(oricarum) P(annoniarum) D(elmaticarum).
140
Dusanic 1977: 82 fn. 199.
141
RostovtzeV 1904: 448; Winkler 1969: 164 f.
142
Hirschfeld 1905: 152 fn. 3.
143
Scherrer 2002: 19 with fn. 52; CIL V 8459 Inscr. Aqu. I 1134; Inscr. Aqu. I 404, II 2139.
The procurators aside, it has been pointed out that two further Quinti Septueii are attested
within the province of Noricum: Q. Septueius Adiectus, named in an inscription from Weyer,
perhaps was a freedmen of Clemens, cf. Alfoldy 1970: 170 fn. 28; CIL III 5480 ILLPRON 1482;
for Teisendorf, cf. CIL III 5593 ILLPRON 1552. A recently discovered inscription from
Virunum/Zollfeld (AE 1986: 538) names a Thallus, a slave of Clemens.
144
CIL III 5036 ILLPRON 89.
286 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

conduct(or) ferrar(iarum), being honoured by his vilicus Fortunatus.145 Calpurnii

and Campilii do not appear in the epigraphic documents of the Norican muni-
cipal elite.146 The Campilii, however, probably were based in Mediolanum/mod.
Milano in the Transpadana.147
The preponderance of private individuals from Aquileia and northern Italy
as conductores of Norican ferrariae is striking. Peter Scherrer pointed out that
the municipal aristocracy of Norican towns was able to lease portoria publica,
but was apparently unable to break into the market for mining contracts.148
The exclusion of the municipal elite from such public contracts was not a
phenomenon which can be observed in other parts of the empire. An in-
scribed votive altar from Roman Dacia, set up at Teliucu Inferior in the
vicinity of iron mines, dates to the years ad 20011.149 Caius Gaurius
Gaurianus, sacerdos of the colonia Apulensis and Flavius Sotericus, member
of the Augustales at the colonia Sarmizegetusa, appear to both have been
conductores ferrariarum at the beginning of the third century.150 Unlike
Noricum, the wealthy of Apulum and Sarmizegetusa certainly had access to
these contracts. Whether these included all of the iron mines in Dacia or just
the mines in the vicinity of Teliucu Inferior cannot be established, but it is
reasonable to assume that the full title might have been conductor ferrariarum
Dacicarum. This title is echoed in a barely readable inscription on a sarcopha-
gus discovered in the garden of the priory St. Ulrich und Afra in Augusta
Vindelicum/mod. Augsburg in Raetia.151 The often overlooked inscription
names P. Frontinius Decoratus as manceps ferrariarum for an unknown area,
Raetia and the three Dacian provinces. Based on stylistic and epigraphic
criteria, Hans Ulrich Nuber dated the sarcophagus and its inscription to the
beginning of the third century ad.152 A further contractor of iron mines in
more than one province appears in two inscriptions from Pannonia. An altar
found at Ljubija near the iron mines of the Japra valley names C. Iulius
Agathopus as conductor ferrariarum. The inscription was set up by Callimor-
phus, a vilicus, on 21 April 201.153 Agathopus other altar at Mursa, commis-
sioned by the arkarius Gamicus, renders his exact title as c(onductor)
f(errariarum) Pannoniar(um) itemque provinciar(um) transmarinarum.154
The tasks of these conductores are rarely noted in our written sources. An
inscription from Lugdunum/mod. Lyon, dated to ad 226, names a societas of

145
AE 1995: 1195 ILLPRON 720. 146
Scherrer 2002: 26, table 1.
147 148
Lorincz 1999: 29. Scherrer 2002: 29 with fn. 90, 91.
149 150
Kienast 1996: 164. IDR III/337 (Teliucu Inferior).
151 152
Nuber 1985. Nuber 1977: 233 f.; Nuber 1985: 131.
153
AE 1973: 411 ILJug 779. 154
Dusanic 1971b: 554; Bulat 1989: 36; Fitz 19935: 407 f., 740.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 287

contractors collecting a vectigal from the iron mines of Memmia Sosandris.155

A further societas vectigalis ferrariarum is mentioned in an inscription from
Ostia; a Hilarus, a slave of this societas, erected a marble cippus to Silvanus in
the year ad 102.156 The named societates were apparently in charge of
collecting vectigal from iron mines. RostovtzeV and Hirschfeld thus assumed
that all conductores ferrariarum simply collected the vectigal ferrariarum from
miners.157 Furthermore, the sheer geographical scope suggested by their titles
supports the view of these conductores ferrariarum collecting the vectigal in
one or more provinces. Just like the process of farming out the portoria, it has
been suggested that their activities were monitored by the procuratores metal-
lorum with similar regional circumscription (cf. 6.1.3.4).158 However, not all
conductores ferrariarum would have dealt exclusively with vectigal: Peter Brunt
argued that no proof has been provided for Hirschfelds view that conductores
simply collected a vectigal from small-scale operators. As regards the forma-
tion of corporations, the mid-second-century jurist Gaius remarked that socii
(except those for public vectigalia) who ran gold, silver and salt mines received
corpus habere, i.e. the right to have common property.159 The conductores,
mancipes, or promagistri ferrariarum, Brunt argued, were the heads of such
corporations or partnerships.160 Provided this is the case, the conductores
ferrariarum could also be directly involved in the extraction of metal ore.161
This might be the case with a conductor named on a funerary stela from
Narbo/mod. Narbonne. Perhaps dating to the second century ad, the stela
was set up for his brother by Ti. Iunius Fadianus, sevir Augustalis of Narbo
and cond(uctor) ferrar(iarum) ripae dextrae.162 Belonging to the wealthy
stratum (but not the municipal elite) of Narbo and being a sevir Augustalis,
which was usually, but not exclusively, a lower grade priesthood for freedmen,
Ti. Iunius Fadianus evidently gained a contract over mines on the ripa
dextra i.e the right bank of a river.163 The exact location of these ferrariae

155
CIL XIII 1811 ILS 8641 (Lugudunum).
156
CIL XIV 4326. Despite the unsolved property issuethe question whether Memmia
Sosandris owned the mines or simply had gained usufructit is likely that the vectigal was
exacted by a societas vectigalis, cf. Hirschfeld 1905: 158 fn. 4; Sablayrolles 1989: 159 fn. 24.
157
RostovtzeV 1904: 448, 451; Hirschfeld 1905: 152; Tackholm 1937: 110; Alfoldy 1970: 168.
158
Brunt 1990c: 401 f.; Eck 1997a: 136.
159
Gaius, Dig. 3.4.1pr.: Paucis admodum in causis concessa sunt huiusmodi corpora: ut ecce
vectigalium publicorum sociis permissum est corpus habere vel aurifodinarum vel argentifodi-
narum et salinarum, cf. Brunt 1990c: 368 f., 401.
160
Brunt 1990c: 398; France 2001: 384.
161
See also Tackholm 1937: 109.
162
CIL XII 4398 ILS 6971. Hirschfeld 1905: 158, assumed Ti. Iunius Fadianus had
contracted the iron mines belonging to the colony of Narbo.
163
Based on Desjardins 186785, 414 f., Hirschfeld 1905: 158 with fn. 5, hesitantly located
Fadianus iron mines on the right bank of the river Aude. Sablayrolles 1989: 159 fn. 23, with
further bibliography, locates the ferrariae ripae dextrae in the area of the Corbieres. Given Tib.
288 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

remains unknown, but one may assume that they were located within Gallia
Narbonensis.164
How these conductores ferrariarum, i.e. their companies, precisely func-
tioned is not made clear by our written sources. The inscription from Hohen-
stein names three private procurators in the service of the conductor
ferrariarum N(oricarum) P(annoniarum) D(almatarum) who, according to
Hirschfeld, were put in charge of ferrariae in each (or rather the collection of
vectigal from there).165 Further insights are provided by the inscriptions at
Mursa and Ljubija relating to C. Iulius Agathopus, the conductor ferrariarum
Pannoniarum itemque provinciarum transmarinarum. The altar at Ljubija was
set up by a vilicus named Callimorphus who in ad 201 may have functioned as
the local agent of the contracting corporation at the iron mines. Perhaps he was
in charge of the local collection of the vectigal or dealt with other management
aspects of the mining operation.166 The inscribed altar at Mursa was commis-
sioned by Gamicus, an arkarius, obviously the local treasurer of Agathopus
company.167 The personnel working for such companies may have been spread
out over several provinces, in particular when their main responsibility was the
collection of vectigal from the occupants of iron mines.

7.1.5. Summary
The majority of evidence for conductores, mancipes, or socii in the mining
business is provided by epigraphic sources. However, the functional titles
which appear in inscriptions, hardly allow us to reach an exact understanding
of the contractual arrangements. The term conductor implies that the basis of
the arrangement was a locatio-conductio, a contract which could involve a wide
array of diVerent obligations.168 The infrequent inclusion of the term vectigal in
the functional titles makes it likely that there was a collection of vectigalia or rents
from the occupants of iron mines. In this context vectigal is to be understood as

Iunius Fadianus minor post of sevir, Hirschfeld believed it unlikely that he was a conductor of
imperial mines, a position Sablayrolles 1989: 159, severely opposes.
164
Domergue & Leroy 2000. Whether a Gamicus documented in a Latin inscription from
Haghio Pneuma near the iron mines of Monoekos, on the edge of the territory of Philippi in
Macedonia, was a full-blown conductor ferrariarum, or simply a small-scale contractor of
services within the iron mines there, is not clariWed by his inscription. His socio-legal status
as a freedman might suggest the latter: AE 1986: 629: Gamicu[s] j conduct[or] j an(norum) X j
lib(ertus) Pont[i] j Nov(i) SC [] j [], cf. Samsaris 1985; Samsaris 1987: 156 f.
165
CIL III 4809 ILS 1467 ILLPRON 151, cf. Hirschfeld 1905: 152 fn. 3.
166
AE 1973: 411 IL Jug 779. In ad 209 Callimorphus is named as vilicus in a
further altar set up together with T. Flavius Verecundus, the procurator (ferrariarum), cf. AE
1958: 63 ILJug 157.
167
Bulat 1989: 36.
168
Kaser & Knutel 2005: 219 f.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 289

a revenue from the use of public property.169 Usually, the titles bear no direct
reference to the collection of a vectigal; nonetheless, the conductores or mancipes
ferrariarum as heads of companies and in charge of one or more provinces, are
likely to have supervised the collection of vectigal from miners in public districts.
Whether conductores ferrariarum in general exclusively collected vectigal or were
perhaps more closely involved in mining operations, remains unknown. Any
clear evidence for the precise nature of these contracts remains elusive; they were
apparently signiWcant enough to merit monitoring by procuratores ferrariarum.
The epigraphic evidence only provides particulars on conductores of iron mines;
contractors of silver or gold mines are not directly identiWed in our sources.170
This is in line with the special arrangements reported for the opening of ferrariae
and the trade of iron and iron products (cf. 6.1.3.4).
The manner in which the conductores ferrariarum acquired the collection
contracts for one or more provinces might be explained as follows. A con-
ductor and his company may simply have agreed bilateral contracts with
several provincial governors; or the contracts for the collection of vectigalia
and the running of iron mines may have been concluded on a super-provin-
cial level. Given the tentative evidence for centenarian procuratores ferrar-
iarum (Gallicarum), possibly in charge of up to ten provinces within the
customs-district of the quadragesima Galliarum, and at least one further iron-
mining procurator for the Danubian provinces, the latter explanation is to be
favored. At an earlier stage contracts may have been concluded centrally with
a procurator ferrariarum in Rome (6.1.3.4).
As regards the evidence from mould-marks and stamps on lead ingots,
most inscriptions refer to the owner of the ingot, who occasionally might have
been its producer as well. In contrast to scholarly opinion, it is not possible to
certainly identify the function or status of the names of persons or companies
named, whether they were the owner/contractor of a mine, of smelting
furnaces, or a merchant. Likewise, the epigraphic evidence from mining
sites does not provide information on the function of the civilian personnel
present. Unless clear terminology is used (coloni, occupatores, conductores), it
is virtually impossible to make any distinction between civilian workers in
mines and the contractors or owners. Even the wooden tablets of Alburnus
Maior do not oVer much further information: apart from documenting the
inXux of foreigners to the mining district (together with the epigraphic
evidence), the tablets provide insights only into the hiring of mine workers,
without identifying the status of the employers within the operation. Only the

169
Dig. 50.16.17.1; Pliny, NH 34.118; Mommsen 1887: 434 fn. 3; Pekary 1979; Burton 1999.
On the sale/lease of public land, cf. Lintott 1993: 802; Rathbone 2003.
170
Tackholm 1937: 108.
290 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

literary evidence sheds light on the use of societates publicanorum in the

exploitation of rare metals. Even though this is mainly documented for the
Republican era, the example of the societas Sisaponensis and the metalla
Antonianum and Samariense suggest that the system continued at least into
the early Principate.171 One could thus argue tentatively that companies ran
mines during the early Principate, perhaps even controlling the whole process
from the extraction and smelting of ore to trading the Wnal product.
If this interpretation is accurate, the lex metallis dicta of Vipasca shows a rather
diVerent approach to the organisation of extractive operations on public land.
The mining administration in charge of the districts was not primarily interested
in the extracted copper and silver per se; the authorities, however, were keen to
sell mines oV in return for an agreed sum. The sale by the authorities of a mining
plot within the Vipasca district to the occupatores, however, only occurred when
ore was extracted. Only then did the authorities claim the Wscus ownership of half
of the ore and demanded compensation for the continued exploitation of ore by
the occupiers of the plot. Hence, the mining administration at Vipasca was
interested in seeing as many mining plots as possible sold to occupatores/usurpa-
tores of unworked plots or orphaned mines. This helps explain the many restric-
tions on occupants. Nonetheless, after the sale of mining plots the authorities
strongly curtailed the ownership rights of the colonus: the resale of mines was
limited to the other coloni at Vipasca, and if a silver-mine remained unworked for
half a year, the colonus lost ownership. To acquire ownership of one or more
silver mining plots one had to buy an operational mine from the Wscus at an
auction. Alternatively, one could occupy and then be assigned a plot or vacant
mine which had to be operated until ore was discovered, for it it was only then
that the administration would transfer ownership. Based on our current know-
ledge, it is uncertain whether this system documented at Vipasca was limited to
southern Spain or whether it was employed in other provinces.

7 . 2 . Q UA R RY L A B E L S A N D Q UA R RY I N G C O N T R AC TO R S

Over 300 quarried products with inscribed labels were unearthed from the
marble yards of Rome during Viscontis excavations between 1868 and 1870
and published by Luigi Bruzza in 1870. A smaller number of blocks and columns
were found at Portus as a result of the excavations from 1959 onwards. These
have yielded the main bulk of inscriptions found on coloured and white

171
Domergue 2004: 229.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 291

marble.172 A vast number of inscriptions on pavonazetto marble discovered in

the quarries of Dokimeion, on giallo antico in Simitthus, and on granodiorite
stone from Mons Claudianus, mostly from the years ad 22 to ad 236, have been
published in the last two decades (see Appendix App.). In spite of the highly
abbreviated and formulaic nature of these label inscriptions, which make their
interpretation a diYcult task, they provide us with a limited understanding of
internal work arrangements involving contractors.173
Based on the premise that the labels engraved on the marble were merely
intended to convey relevant information as concisely as possible to a limited
audience, the presence or absence of numerals and various abbreviations
becomes highly signiWcant in itself. In other words, every term or abbrevi-
ation utilized in these inscriptions delivered a distinct and unique message,
often reXecting the inner organization of quarrying operations. Moreover, the
fact that all surviving labels had been engraved on the stone and not merely
painted on may suggest (apart from issues of practicality) that at least part of
the information had to be readable for a speciWed length of time, possibly for
the duration of storage at the quarry or, following shipment, to ensure it
could be read at the destination.

7.2.1. Dokimeion and the Upper Tembris Valley

A vast amount of epigraphic evidence survives on pavonazetto and white
marble products from the Bacakale quarries near Dokimeion/mod. Iscehisar
(Turkey) and its vicinity, which dates mainly to the years between ad 73(?)/
92236.174 Most inscribed labels on quarried marble blocks note provenance,
responsibilities, amounts produced, as well as the year of extraction(?). The
exact signiWcance and meaning of these terms have not, as yet, been satisfac-
torily resolved. In addition, due to the ongoing exploitation of marble, the
initial locations of the inscribed blocks and columns within the Roman
quarries at Dokimeion remain unknown.175
SigniWcant changes in the epigraphic formula can be detected: the inscrip-
tions on blocks discovered in the Bacakale quarries prior to the year ad 136
occasionally list diVerent consular dates, numbers and abbreviations, e.g.

172
Bruzza 1870; Baccini Leotardi 1979; Baccini Leotardi 1989; Pensabene 1994; Maischber-
ger 1997; Fant 2001.
173
The perhaps earliest inscription from the year 2 bc on a marble block so far was
discovered in Rome and edited by Alfoldy 1992 App. no. 1281.
174
On dates: Fant 1989a: 29. See App. nos. 1437, for a listing of all label inscriptions from
Dokimeion. For description of pavonazetto and other marbles, see Fant 1993a: 164 f.
175
Fant 1989a: 1216.
292 Private Partners to Imperial Operations
App. no. 61. (a) loco IV b(racchio) III
(b) Sur(a) III co(n)s(ule) II j CCXXXVIII
(c) RMA Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule)
(d) VFR Vop(isco) co(n)s(ule)
(e) b(racchio) tert(io)
Around ad 136 the epigraphic formula appears to have been altered dramat-
ically e.g.
App. no. 227. Te[rt]ullo et Sacerdote co(n)s(ulibus)
ex of(Wcina) Andaev(i) caesura Alex(andri)
loco XCIX b(racchio)R
The abbreviations used in the formulaic inscriptions from Bacakale/Doki-
meion appear in quarry labels from other imperial quarries as well, and
therefore are worthwhile examining more closely. However, it remains to be
shown whether the terms carry the same meaning in diVerent imperial
quarrying districts.

7.2.1.1. Bracchia and Loci

The term bracchium is not documented in full in any inscription at Doki-
meion, but is abbreviated to br or a simple b followed by the numbers i, ii, iii,
iiii or by the abbreviated ordinal numbers prim, sec/gund, tert, and
qvart. The reading of the letters b or br as bracchium was proposed by
Theodor Mommsen and has never been questioned.176 J. Clayton Fant
pointed out that bracchia have always been understood as indicating the
branch of the quarry from which a particular piece was extracted. In his
opinion, bracchium is a topographical term describing subdivisions within
the quarries of Dokimeion.177 This interpretation has been tested by the
appearance of inscriptions with diVering bracchium-numbers on the same
stone.178 As the same bracchium-number is quite often indicated twice or
even three-times on one stone (usually connected with an inventory), it is
tempting to explain the rare appearance of discrepancies as simple mis-
takes.179 Alternatively, the diVerent notations of bracchia might reXect the
movement of quarried stones from one bracchium to the next, in order to
clear the access to the quarry sections, or the rearrangement of stockpiling
areasan action necessitated by the spatial restrictions of the Bacakale

176
Hirschfeld 1905: 163 fn. 4.
177
Christol & Drew-Bear 1986: 84; Fant 1989a: 19 fn. 8.
178
App. nos. 25, 39, 81, 275.
179
Fant 1989a: 91.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 293

quarries (cf. 2.1.6). All inscriptions with diVering bracchium-numbers also

carry more than one consular date. One therefore might conclude that the
transfer of stones from one bracchium or section of the quarry to the next
between inventories was duly noted in the quarry labels.180
Like bracchium, the term locus, accompanied by a number (henceforward:
l-number), is only rarely found in the early inscriptions from the Dokimean
quarry. The term is a regular feature in inscriptions from ad 136 onwards,
while earlier appearances are attested for the Wrst decade of the second century
ad.181 Usually, loci have been understood to be subdivisions of bracchia, but
Fant has argued that locus indications were unique designations, Wrst, of the
site where a block was being freed and, later, of the block itself functioning as
an annual serial number. Fants thesis that l-numbers were reissued annually
is supported by the appearance of the same numbers in diVerent years and by
the fact that no number is repeated within one year. Furthermore, a sequence
of l-numbers within a year can be assigned to diVerent bracchia, caesurae, and
oYcinae.182 It thus seems probable that Fants assumption of an annually
assigned serial number, without any topographical signiWcance, might be
correct. If so, these numbers give us an idea of the annual production rate.
l-numbers up to ccccxxxiii (433) are documented (App. no. 165, ad 147).
On average, however, l-numbers are rarely higher than 250.183

7.2.1.2. Caesura and OYcina in the Epigraphic Formula after ad 136

Caesurae and Caesura-Holders. The term caesura once probably delimited
an area of extraction or a quarry within a quarrying district.184 It may have
been introduced around ad 136 and, at Wrst, appears only irregularly in
quarry labels.185 From ad 147 onwards, the term caesura is a Wxed element
in the labels. After its introduction, caesura is accompanied by a name in the
genitive case.186 The name associated has been understood as referring to
180
On bracchia, cf. Christol & Drew-Bear 1987: 99; Fant 1989a: 21. For corrections of Fants
readings and additional material, see Christol & Drew-Bear 1986; Christol & Drew-Bear 1987;
Christol & Drew-Bear 1991: 113 fn. 2, 173 f.; Drew-Bear 1994: 842 f.
181
App. nos. 61, 108, 109, 110.
182
Fant 1989a: 19 f., tables 1 and 2.
183
Fant 1989b: 215 fn. 54.
184
TLL III, p.115.
185
Fant 1989a: 30 f.
186
Caesurae: Tullius Saturninus, centurio leg. XXII Primigenia, ad 136/8: App. nos. 11317.
Ael(ius) Ant(oninus), centurio(?), ad 147/8: nos. 157, 162, 163, 165, 166, 168, 1718, 180, 182,
183, 185, 188, 190; PERCLDAED, ad 149: no. 201; Alex(ander), ad 149, 15760: nos. 203, 221,
223, 22632, 23449, 257; Ael(ius) Zos(imus), ad 153/4, 158/9: nos. 21012, 215, 217, 218, 222,
224, 225, 233; Manl(ius) Alex(ander), ad 154: nos. 213, 216, 21921; Claudian(us), ad 15961:
nos. 2504, 256, 258, 261, 262, 264, 268; Efor(-), ad 160: no. 255; Fabi(us) ad 160/1: nos. 259,
294 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

the person directly responsible for the extraction procedure, who is hence-
forth identiWed as a caesura-holder.187 Who these persons were is only partly
revealed by the onomastic material provided by the quarry labels. Closely
linked with the introduction of a new accounting system (using terms such
as locus-numbers, bracchia, oYcinae, and caesurae) in ad 136, is the appear-
ance of Roman military personnel responsible for a caesura. Tullius Saturni-
nus, centurio of the legio XXII Primigenia, is named in inscriptions found at
Bacakale and on pavonazetto marble in Rome.188 Perhaps a specialist in
quarrying technology, he was put in charge of a caesura, possibly being
responsible for the change of the label formula. A further centurio appears
in charge of a caesura in ad 147/8 (cf. 5.1.1).
After the initial period of military personnel in charge of a caesura, other
names appear without any direct indication of social status. According to
Thomas Drew-Bear, Aelius Zosimus, Ulpius Yacinthus(!), Aurelius Dionysus,
Aurelius Theophilus, and Aurelius Demetrius might have been imperial
freedmen manumitted by the emperors of the second century ad, but. Iulius
Neophytus, Iulius Gaurus, Manlius Alexander, and Ostillius Elpidephorus do
not fall into this category. Fant seems to suggest that the latter four caesura-
holders were private entrepreneurs, an opinion Drew-Bear did not support.
As the Wrst two holders of a caesura were both centuriones, he Wnds it hard to
imagine that private contractors could have had free access to caesurae
afterwards.189 However, Drew-Bears assumption that all caesura-holders
were linked to the familia Caesaris is not veriWable on the basis of the
onomastic material.190 The notation systems from other known imperial

263; Domest(icus), ad 1614, 177: nos. 265, 267, 2715, 281, 289, 384; Athenob(us), ad 175:
nos. 278, 279; Tit(us), ad 17780: nos. 2828, 2903, 295301, 393; Ant(oninus?), ad 178:
no. 293; Vetus, ad 179: no. 300; Aur(elius) Dionusi(us), ad 194, 197: nos. 302, 303, 307; Iul(ius)
Neophyt(us), ad 197/8, 200, 209, 220, 229: nos. 306, 310, 328, 345, 365, 371, 373, 374; (H)ostili-
(us) Elpidephor(us), ad 1979, 206, 209, 210, 213: nos. 308, 311, 312, 315, 316, 318, 319, 3213,
339, 343, 347, 348, 350; N, ad 197?: no. 309; Ulpi(us) Yacin(thus), ad 198: nos. 313, 317; Aur-
(elius) Theophil(us), ad 198203, 205, 209, 212: nos. 314, 320, 32934, 3368, 344, 349; Iul(ius)
Gaur(us), ad 200: no. 325; Episco(-), ad 200: no. 326; Herculan(us), ad 206: nos. 3402; (Nova,
ad 217: nos. 352, 354); Phoenix, ad 218, 220: nos. 358, 366; Mar(-) Romae, ad 222: no. 368;
Maryllin(us), ad 222, 229, 235: nos. 369, 370, 372, 375; Var(us), ad 236: no. 376.
187
Hirschfeld 1905: 164, 169; Dubois 1908: 37; Dworakowska 1983: 135; Fant 1989a: 27 f.,
33. Nevertheless, one name following the term caesura is not a personal name. See caesura
Nova (App. nos. 352, 354), Christol & Drew-Bear 1991: 154.
188
Hirschfeld 1905: 170.
189
Fant 1989a: 2931; Drew-Bear 1994: 806.
190
Drew-Bear (1994, 806 f. with fns. 188, 189) argues that the adjective noster or dominus
noster in consular dates including the name of the emperor, is only used by members of the
familia Caesaris. Hence, if caesura-holders are not freedmen or slaves of the emperor, noster does
not appear. The epigraphic record at Bacakale, however, does not corroborate Drew-Bears view.
Cf. also Weaver 1972: 1547. The adjective noster in consular dates appears with the names
Claudianus, Domesticus, Fabius, Titus and Vetus, cf. App. nos. 2615, 268, 28290, 297301.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 295

quarries, such as Teos, Chios, or Luna, have the names of imperial oYcials
regularly followed by an imperial status indication, such as Aug(usti) or Caes-
(aris) (cf. 7.2.4, 7.2.5). Freedmen and slaves of the familia Caesaris generally
took much pride in making their status known.191 Moreover, the names of the
centuriones on the label inscriptions were followed by rank and unit. Thus,
space limitations of the labels would not have prohibited an indication of
social status. However, the names of the caesura-holders such as Aelius
Zosimus, Ulpius Yacinthus, Aurelius Dionysus, Aurelius Theophilus, Aurelius
Demetrius, Iulius Neophytus, Iulius Gaurus, Manlius Alexander, and Ostillius
Elpidephorus are not provided with any indication of imperial status. Even
less can be said for caesura-holders such as Alexander, Claudianus, Domes-
ticus, Phoenix, Maryllinus, Titus, Fabius, Athenobus, Vetus, etc.192 In conse-
quence, we must conclude that at least some of these caesura-holders were not
associated with the familia Caesaris, but were private entrepreneurs, most
likely members of local communities in Phrygia. One might subscribe to
Fants view that they were perhaps not of a low social standing.193 Whether
the caesura-holders were present at the caesura themselves and in direct
control of the quarrying procedure (as Fant believes), or whether they simply
managed the extraction of stone while pursuing other economic interests,
cannot be established on the basis of the available epigraphic material.194
A caesura at Bacakale probably included more than one extraction site: the
caesura of the centurio Aelius Antoninus covered three bracchia in ad 147
(i, ii, and iiii) and a fourth bracchium is mentioned in ad 148 (iii). The
quarrying operations of Alexanders caesura comprised the bracchium iii in
ad 149, whereas further bracchia were included in ad 15760 (i, ii, iiii). Other
caesurae, such as the caesura Claudiani or the caesura Domestici, seem to have
produced stones in one bracchium only. Hence we may conclude that caesura
was not a topographical term and could cover several bracchia within one
year. Caesurae were held for varying periods of time. While some caesura-
holders are only attested for one or two years, Iulius Neophytus seems to
have run a caesura for more than two decades. Up to four caesurae
of diVerent contractors existed simultaneously within the Bacakale quarries
(ad 198), extracting marble in the bracchia iii and iiii. (This diminishes the
possibility of the names in the genitive case after caesura being those of

191
There are a few attestations of slaves or freedmen omitting their imperial status indica-
tion, cf. Weaver 1972: 2, 806.
192
Perhaps some of them were servi Caesaris, as their Latin slave names suggest. Fant 1989a:
34 f.; Solin 1996a: 6 (Titus), 13 (Claudianus), 18 (Fabius), 121 (Vetus) 130 (Domesticus).
193
Fant 1989a: 34.
194
Fant 1989a: 35.
296 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

procuratores).195 The insertion of the numbers ii and iii between the words
caesura and Athenob(ii) in some quarry labels might indicate that Athenobus
ran at least two or three caesurae within one year (ad 175).196 Furthermore, a
caesura can be named together with diVerent oYcinae. The caesura of Clau-
dianus appears on quarry labels together with the oYcinae pelag, contra
pers, and ephes, whereas the caesura Alexandri is noted only in connection
with the oYcina andaev.197 This shows that the caesura-holders were not
necessarily subsections of an oYcina but, as Fant pointed out, probably
operated independently from the latter.198 The observation that Tullius
Saturninus, Aelius Antoninus or Manlius Alexanders caesurae are not com-
bined with any oYcina in the quarry labels, conWrms the view of both oYcinae
and caesurae being separate and independent entities.
Three further inscriptions provide rare insight into accounting procedures.
No photographs of the inscriptions are provided by Fant, preventing the
veriWcation of his readings. Following the consular dates in nos. 295 and
296, the labels display the words recep: :ti a Tito nomene (sic) alicuius,
which one might translate as (stones) received from Titus, in the name of
someone(?). No. 300 reads recepti ex oYcina Prusaen[si] j in locqum(sic)
lapidum quo: s: receperat promutuo Titus ex caesura Veteris, or (stones) received
from the Prusaean oYcina [] in place of the stones which Titus had received
as a loan from the caesura of Vetus.199 Titus appears in various inscriptions of
the same year (ad 179), running a caesura. This Titus may be the same Titus
of the above-mentioned inscriptions; however, in inscription no. 295, Titus
not his caesurais named as the person from whom the stones were received.
In comparison to inscription no. 300 this seems rather peculiar. There, the
preposition ex indicates the place from where the stones were received. The
inscription nos. 295/296 and 300 probably do not refer to the same transac-
tion, but to two diVerent events. In nos. 295 and 296 Titus delivers quarried
blocks to an unknown location on behalf of an unknown person. In no. 300
stones are delivered from the oYcina Prusaensis to an unknown location
(presumably the same location as in nos. 295/296) as a substitute for a
delivery of stones from the caesura Veteris. The caesura-holder Vetus had
given quarried blocks as a loan to Titus, who had not returned the loan in
time. The missing stones were then delivered by the oYcina Prusaensis. Apart
from this speculative reconstruction, two important insights may be gained:
Wrstly, the need to designate clearly who delivered the stone indicates a strict
195
App. nos. 31115, 31719. Fant 1989a: 34.
196
App. nos. 278, 279.
197
App. nos. 2504, 256.
198
Fant 1989a: 35.
199
Fant 1989a: 31.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 297

accounting policy. The person under whose name a product had been quar-
ried had to be easily identiWed. Secondly, the option of receiving quarried
stones as a loan from a caesura (if promutuo in label no. 300 has been read
correctly) is only possible when one assumes that the caesura-holders had to
deliver a previously agreed number of blocks quarried during a limited period
of time. If this obligation could not be met, additional products could be
supplied from an oYcina.
Based on these observations, the caesura-holders may be regarded as
contractors of quarry work in a locatio conductio operis.200 The contractor
perhaps received a Wxed payment for working a caesura, and in turn was
obliged to extract a set amount of quarried products, presumably within a
limited period of time. If the obligations of the contract were not met, the
caesura-holder did not receive the agreed payment (merces). In order to
prevent such a penalty, quarried products could be borrowed on an informal
loan from other caesura-holders or oYcinae, on the condition that the origin
of the products was properly designated. Another possibility might have been
a locatio conductio rei, in which the caesura-holders could lease a quarry
section and pay a rent for doing so. Some of the quarried products might
have gone to the state/emperor directly, whereas the rest may have been sold
privately. While the white marble of Dokimeion was in high demand as
material for sarcophagi and for local Phrygian door-stones (funerary monu-
ments in the shape of doors), the exclusive use of the pavonazetto marble in
imperial construction contexts appears to rule out any private trade of
pavonazetto during the high empire.201 Consequently, the contracting out of
quarries at Bacakale along the lines of a locatio conductio rei may be less likely.
Perhaps some of the white marble extracted at Dokimeion even remained
under imperial control.

OYcinae. The term oYcina, combined with a name in the genitive case, is
also introduced in ad 136, although not regularly used until after ad 157.202
200
Kaser & Knuttel 2005: 225 f.
201
Waelkens 1985: 643; Fant 1985; Fant 1989a: 3.
202
OYcinae: Papia, ad 13647: App. nos. 115, 116, 158; Pelagon(i), ad 14677: nos. 154, 155,
160, 161, 206, 222, 225, 250, 253, 254, 258, 260, 264, 268, 270, 278, 279, 288, 290; Asiatic(i), ad
14764: nos. 159, 180, 217, 233, 271, 2735; Ephes(ia), ad 149/50, 160: nos. 202, 203, 208, 251,
256; Andaev(i), ad 14962: nos. 221, 223, 2268, 2302, 23449, 255, 257, 259, 263, 265, 266,
272; contra Persis, ad 158212: nos. 224, 252, 267, 340, 341, 349; Neicaens(is), ad 177/8: nos.
280, 292; Veria(na), ad 177: nos. 282, 285; Lucilli(-), ad 1779: nos. 283, 298; Commodiana, ad
177206: nos. 286, 287, 291, 293, 297, 299, 301, 325, 327, 342; Prusaen(sis), ad 179: no. 300;
Smurnaiorum, ad 1947: nos. 302, 303, 307; Pers(-), ad 197: no. 306; Bassiana, ad 197213: nos.
308, 311, 319, 322, 323, 343, 347, 348, 350; Urania, ad 198: no. 310; Herculi(ana), ad 198206:
nos. 312, 315, 316, 318, 321, 339; Severi(ana), ad 198235: nos. 314, 320, 32933, 3368, 344,
369, 370, 372, 375; Mar(tis/tialis), ad 198: no. 317; Horolog(-), ad 199: no. 324; Antoniana, ad
298 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

The Wrst few attested oYcinae are followed by anthroponyms in the genitive
form such as the oYcinae Papia(ni), Pelagon(i), Asiatic(i), Andaev(i) or
Crescent(i).203 It has been argued by Christol and Drew-Bear that after the
reign of Marcus Aurelius these anthroponyms were increasingly replaced by
names honouring members of the imperial family and/or toponyms and
names of gods. This does not necessarily mean that the old oYcinae had
been abandoned and replaced by new onessome simply might have
changed their names.204OYcinae named after members of the imperial family
or their protective deities are the oYcinae Veria(na), Commodiana, Lucilli(-),
Bassiana, Herculi(s/ana), Sever(iana), Antoni(ni)ana, Mar(tis/tialis), and
Alex(andriana).205 Place names such as (oYcina) Ephes(ia), Neicaens(is),
Smurnaiorum, or Prusaens(is) perhaps indicate a special relationship between
these workshops and important cities like Ephesos, Nicaea, Smyrna, or
Prusa.206 Christol and Drew-Bear argue that the emperor had permitted
these cities to receive pavonazetto. The epigraphic evidence at Bacakale does
not answer the question whether these towns in Asia and Bithynia received
the marble as a gift through the emperor or whether they were allowed to
quarry the pavonazetto columns or blocks.207 Even so, an inscription from
Smyrna records that Hadrian, through the agency of Antonius Polemo,
provided seventy-two columns of Synnadian marble for a gymnasium(?).208
A direct link between the quarries and the town of Smyrna certainly existed,
and the oYcina might have been opened to deal with this large order of
columns in particular. In the quarry labels, however, the oYcina Smurnaiorum
is attested only from ad 194 to 197. A similar explanation is given for the
abbreviation [off(icina)] horolog (no. 324), which is understood to have
been opened for the construction or restoration of a monumental
horologium.209
In addition to these above-mentioned oYcinae, some carry toponyms
referring to their location at the Persis ridge; oYcinae iuxta Persidem, contra

20929: nos. 345, 364, 365, 374; iuxta Persidem, ad 21822: nos. 358, 366, 368; Erc(-), ad 229:
no. 371; Crescent(i), ad 229: no. 373; Alex( ), ad 236: no. 376.
203
Christol & Drew-Bear 1987: 109; Christol & Drew-Bear 1991: 123 with fn. 45; Drew-Bear
1994: 776 fn.75, 7916.
204
Christol & Drew-Bear 1987: 149 f.; Christol & Drew-Bear 1991: 171.
205
Christol & Drew-Bear 1991: 121 with fn. 37, 131 f.
206
Christol & Drew-Bear 1991: 121 f. with fns. 368; Drew-Bear 1994: 800 fn. 157.
207
Christol & Drew-Bear 1991: 122 with fn. 40.
208
CIG 3148 IGR IV 1431 IK 24/4, 697 (Smyrna). Millar 1992: 421 f.; Fant 1993a: 155 f.
with fn. 73; Boatwright 2000: table 6.2.
209
Christol & Drew-Bear 1991: 137: les oYcines dont les noms derivent dethnique de cites
devaient produire du marbre pour des constructions dans les villes nommes.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 299

Pers(), as well as Pers() are attested.210 Assuming our interpretation of the

oYcina followed by the toponym Persis is correct, it seems plausible that
oYcinae were situated within the quarrying zone. The oYcina Andaev(i), for
example, is noted together with more than one bracchium in ad 159.211 We
therefore may assume that the oYcinae were mobile units, with the task of
dressing the rough shapes extracted from the bedrock into the basic column
and block shapes required.212 Christol and Drew-Bear have opposed Fants
view by pointing out that some blocks carrying a label with the full oYcina-
caesura formula are not dressed but remain in a rough state.213 Labels could be
engraved on the rough-cut stone before they were dressed, probably to indicate
which caesura cut the stone and which oYcina would transform the rough
stone into the desired item. Hence, an oYcina might have not only reWned the
rough shapes, but accompanied the dressing process from the start.
Provided that omissions were made deliberately and were not simple
mistakes, the absence of either caesura or oYcina from quarry labels is sign-
iWcant. Between ad 136 and 154 we do Wnd inscriptions where caesura is
omitted and only the oYcina mentioned or vice versa.214 The omission of one
or the other component, though, does not only conWrm the independence of
oYcina and caesura but supports the hypothesis of two entities, at least in the
initial stages of the Antonine period, performing the tasks of cutting and/or
dressing the extracted stone. The inscriptions nos. 295, 296, and 300 support
this hypothesis; according to these inscriptions, an oYcina could lend stone
blocks. Hence oYcinae with town names such as Prusaensis must have had the
capacity to cut stones as opposed to only dressing them.215 From ad 154
onwards caesurae and oYcinae are both mentioned in the same inscriptions.
This is understood as reXecting a division of work in which the stone is cut by
the caesura and then dressed in the oYcina. The actual division of work
procedures might have been more complex: perhaps certain oYcinae cut
stone in their own right under the direct control of the imperial oYcials.
However, it is not possible to determine the exact procedure on the basis of
the available evidence.

COMM, REPR, AND r. An additional mark which appears together with

caesura and oYcina in the Dokimean inscriptions is com(m), combined
with an ordinal number (as indicated by the abbreviation prim in

210
Christol & Drew-Bear 1991: 155 f. with fn. 169.
211
Christol & Drew-Bear 1987: 101.
212
Fant 1989a: 35.
213
Christol & Drew-Bear 1991: 157 f.
214
See App. nos. 154, 155, 15860, 202, 206, 208, 270.
215
Christol & Drew-Bear 1991: 137.
300 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

no. 329).216 Pensabene thought of resolving comm as comm(issura). His

emendation was hesitantly approved by Christol and Drew-Bear, but rejected
by Fant.217 The interpretation of comm as a further sub-(or super?-)division
of a quarry is supported by the use of ordinal numbers, as is the case for
bracchium-numbers. The bracchium-numbers, though, seem independent
from the three attested comm-numbers (i, ii). Moreover, there is no sign-
iWcant correlation of the comm-numbers with the caesurae or oYcinae. After
198/9, com(m) ii is not used further, while com iii is only attested in ad
180.218 Whatever its signiWcance might be, the abbreviation was introduced in
ad 180 and remained a common feature in Dokimeion quarry inscriptions
until ad 236, the latest dated inscription on Synnadic marble.219
Another abbreviation appearing from ad 147 onwards is the mark repr,
which, based on an idea of Otto Hirschfeld, was understood by Thomas
Drew-Bear and Werner Eck as repr(obatum).220 According to this interpret-
ation, a probator checked the quality of the stone and decided whether the
specimen was worthy of export.221 If not, the stone was marked with the
letters repr. The vast majority of stones left behind at Dokimeion do not
carry this mark, which raises the question whether they were unWt for export
and thus discarded or simply stacked in the quarry. Drew-Bear and Eck have
suggested that the barred letter r is to be resolved as r(eprobatum) as well.222
With this, the number of rejected stones at Dokimeion would increase from 8
to roughly 40.223 However, the resolution of the mark r as r(eprobatum),
r(ecensitum), or r(ecepti sunt) cannot be supported by any written evidence
from the quarries, nor can any semantic content be discerned.224

Procuratores and sub cura-marks. Finally, the marks on pavonazzetto marble

in Rome and Ostia, as well as on two quarried blocks discovered at Bacakale,
name imperial procurators, such as Irenaeus in ad 136 and Maro in ad 194.

216
Cf. App. nos. 301, 311, 312, 31418, 3203, 325, 32734, 336, 337, 340, 34256, 358, 360,
365, 366, 36871, 373, 375, 376.
217
Pensabene 1978: 115; Fant 1989a: 27; Christol & Drew-Bear 1991: 122 fn. 42, 127 fn. 53,
168.
218
COM II, cf. nos. 315, 317, 322, 323. COM III, cf. no. 301.
219
ad 180 (no. 301), ad 236 (no. 376).
220
Hirschfeld 1905: 169; Drew-Bear & Eck 1976: 314 f. See App. nos. 159, 175, 191, 199, 200,
269, 270, 411.
221
Hirschfeld 1905: 164 with fn. 3.
222
Drew-Bear & Eck 1976: 315.
223
For r (in various contexts), see App. nos. 1, 1012, 14, 18, 19, 21, 22, 28, 31, 32, 34, 35, 37,
38, 40, 42, 63, 74, 78, 8991, 94, 96, 98, 100, 103, 105, 108, 110, 214, 227, 255, 257, 263, 266, 268,
278, 282, 287, 291, 407, 425, 430, 434.
224
On the mark r, cf. Christol & Drew-Bear 1987: 104 f.; Fant 1989a: 22; Christol &
Drew-Bear 1991: 816; Pena 1998: 128.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 301

Hirschfeld and Fant claimed that the sub cura-formula was applied at a later
stage of shipment, preferably in Synnada.225 Christol and Drew-Bear discovered
two inscriptions, which completely disproved Hirschfelds assumption and
conWrmed the notion that the sub cura-formula was applied in the Dokimean
quarries themself.226 The Wrst appearance of the sub cura-mark in ad 136
coincided with the introduction of the caesura-oYcina system, which again
conWrms our notion of an intentional change in the way quarrying procedures
were to be organized. The fact that military personnel as well as an imperial
procurator were named, strongly suggests a swift implementation of this new
system by the administrative authorities of the Bacakale quarries.

7.2.1.3. Ex r(atione) PN
Another abbreviated term used sporadically in inscriptions from Dokimeion
is the mark ex r(atione). This mark is, with one exception, not found on
blocks in Dokimeion but in Rome, Lepcis Magna, and Ostia.227 Fant argues
that the Dokimean marble exported to Rome, Lepcis Magna, etc. was marked
with a diVerent epigraphic formula using the term n(umero) followed by a
number (henceforward: n-number), a consular date and the ex rat-mark
plus a personal name. Fant argues that this type of label inscription was meant
for trade and might have been inscribed in Synnada, while the other types
reXected the internal quarrying administration at Dokimeion.228 This is not
quite correct: the attestation of a ratio Syr(i) at Bacakale in ad 150 obviously
shows that ex ratione-indications were inscribed at Dokimeion, and not in
Synnada.229 The exact signiWcance of the term ratio is uncertain. The long-
held view, proposed by Hirschfeld and based on the collection of inscriptions
from the marble-yards in Rome and Ostia by Bruzza and others, is that the ex
ratione formula designates the contractors of a quarrying lease.230 However,
the ex ratione formula is only used once in Bacakale, which hardly Wts the idea
that sections within a quarry were contracted out to private enterpreneurs on
a regular basisa semantic range the term caesura already covers. In the case
of the Dokimean quarries, the term ex ratione followed by a name in the
genitive form presumably identiWed an activity outside of the actual
225
Hirschfeld 1905: 169, and 164 (on sub cura-marks in general); Fant 1989a: 27.
226
App. nos. 298, 299. Christol & Drew-Bear 1991: 1204.
227
Ex r(atione) Oly(m)p(i) Caes(aris) (ad 96, Ostia): App. nos. 28, 29, 33, 38, 424, 430;
ratione () (ad 136?, Lepcis Magna): no. 111; rationi Urbicae (ad 136, Rome): nos. 115, 116; ex
rat(ione) Cl(audii) Zel(oti?) (ad 142, 150, Ostia): nos. 140, 141; ex rat(ione) Syr(i) III (ad 173,
Bacakale): no. 276.
228
Fant 1989a: 17 f.
229
App. no. 276.
230
Hirschfeld 1905: 166 with fn. 1; Fant 1989a: 18, 19 f.
302 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

extraction process. One might think of contractors responsible for the import
and/or transport of marble to Rome and other destinations (cf. 7.2.7).231

7.2.1.4. The Notation System prior to ad 136

The caesura-oYcina system of ad 136 replaced an older notation system,
which operated with a diVerent set of abbreviations. Although bracchia and
loci do appear in the earlier inscriptions, they do not surface regularly. The
usual components of an early inscription are a consular date, a number and
marks such as rma, r, he, vfr, ant, etc. One very distinctive feature is the
appearance of up to four or even Wve consular dates on one stone.232 These
dates provide evidence for the periodic inventories of stones stockpiled in the
quarries. Most of the marks encountered in the Dokimeion inscriptions of the
period prior to ad 136 are diYcult to interpret.233 Even so, they appear closely
connected to inventories, which occurred in the years ad 100, 105, 107, 109,
114, 115, and 116.234 If we follow Christol and Drew-Bear regarding the
periodization of the inventory procedure and only count the major inventor-
ies in the Dokimean quarries beginning with 92/3, 100, 105, 109, 114/15, we
might be close to a quinquennial cycle, a lustrum.235 The marks rma and vfr
seem closely related to these inventory dates. r and he are marked together
with the annually distributed serial numbers.236 Based on these periodically
repeated inventory dates, Fant argues that the intense scrutiny of the Dom-
itianic and Trajanic periods suggests an eager hunt for usable material.237

7.2.1.5. White Marble and Pavonazetto Quarries at Bacakale

and Upper Tembris Valley
The discovery of quarry labels on white marble similar to those on pavona-
zetto has raised the question whether or not the marble from the quarries at
Bacakale and in the Upper Tembris Valley was also extracted under imperial

231
Mommsen read the mark vec as vectura; hence the name after the mark belonged to a
transport contractor(?). It is curious, however, that the only two reported attestations of a
vectura are found exclusively on marble labels in Rome (see App. nos. 304, 437), cf. Bruzza 1870:
no. 297; Hirschfeld 1905: 164 with fn. 4.
232
App. nos. 1, 8, 9, 1018, 21, 246, 31, 32, 35, 36, 3847, 51, 539, 61, 63, 68, 70, 72, 746,
7882.
233
On the interpretation of these marks, cf. Christol & Drew-Bear 1987: 105 f.; Fant 1989a:
23 f.; Drew-Bear 1994: 81537.
234
Drew-Bear 1994: 83741.
235
Drew-Bear 1994: 841.
236
Drew-Bear 1994: 837.
237
Fant 1989a: 29.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 303

control.238 The white marble discovered at Bacakale was locally distributed in

the shape of doorstones, and used for sarcophagi.239 However, no inscrip-
tions on white marble have been recorded at the Dokimeion quarries them-
selves. One inscription on a white marble block, recovered at Argithani near
Tyriaion/mod. Ilgin, 100 km west of Synnada, seems to use the older epi-
graphic notation system (prior to ad 136), and could therefore originate from
the quarries at Dokimeion or the Tembris Valley.240 Another inscription
found on statuary marble is believed to come from Dokimeion. Even so, in
a slight deviation from the normal formula the inscription, dating to the year
ad 206, lists an Epictetus, an Augu[sti servus] and proactor pro[-], and then
goes on naming the caesura(?) of Aur(elius) Demetrius, and presumably the
procurator Aur(elius) Epity(nchanus?).241 This would suggest that at least
part of the white marble also was controlled by imperial oYcials. The exact
origin of the stone, though, cannot be established other than through the
similarity of the epigraphic formulas.
The region of the Upper Tembris or Porsuk valley is rich in pavonazetto and
white marble quarries. A quarry of pavonazetto was found near Cakirsaz,
50 km north-west of Dokimeion, and other white marble quarries have been
discovered near Altintash, Alibey, and Kurt Koy.242 The inscriptions from
these pavonazetto and white marble quarries resemble the epigraphic evidence
on quarried products known from Dokimeion. Not only is the older notation
system used (consular date and number), but between ad 92 and 156 inven-
tories were apparently made in the same years as at Bacakale.243 However, the
change of the epigraphic formula observed at Bacakale for the year ad 136
does not appear in the quarry labels of the Upper Tembris valley. Despite the
slim quantitative basis of epigraphic evidence from Kurt Koy, the same
inventory dates and use of abbrevations for consular dates suggest that the
pavonazetto quarries in the Upper Tembris valley were subsidiary quarries of
the imperial venture at Dokimeion.244

238
Waelkens 1982: 124 f.; Waelkens 1985: 642.
239
Fant 1985: 660.
240
App. no. 408.
241
Bruzza (1870: no. 279) and Dubois (1908: no. 207) believed the white marble to be from
Paros or Greece: Epictetus Augus[] j proactor pro[] j [l]oc(o) IIII j b(racchio) sec(undo)
COM I j [Al]bino et Aemilian[o co(n)s(ulibus)] j [caes(ura)?] Aur(elii) Demetri(i) b[] j [sub
cu]ra Aur(elii) Epity[nchani?] j VE CAVRT []. Cf. also Christol & Drew-Bear 1991: 119 fn.
31, 171 fn. 223.
242
Waelkens 1985: 642.
243
Waelkens 1985: 643 f.; Waelkens 1986: 8893, believes that the exploitation of the white
marble quarries continued after ad 156. The quarries were leased out to individuals, supplying a
local workshop with the material for their votive and funerary sculpture.
244
Fant 1989a: 9 f.
304 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

7.2.2. Simitthus
Whereas some of the terms known from quarry labels on pavonazetto also
appear in the quarry labels from Simitthus, the epigraphic formulae of labels
on giallo antico is markedly diVerent from the formulae known from Bacakale.
Although the earliest epigraphic evidence for regulated quarrying procedures
at the giallo antico quarries near Simitthus is given by a quarry label dating to
the year ad 64, it is from the ad 100s onwards that most quarried giallo antico
blocks are marked with formulaic label inscriptions.245 These labels on marble
products discovered at Ostia, Rome, and Simitthus note a consular date, an
n-number, ex rat mark followed by a name in the genitive form, as well as a
further name in the genitive form,246 e.g.
App. no. 788. Sura III et Senici(one) II co(n)s(ulibus)
ex rat(ione) Felicis Aug(usti) ser(vi)
d(e) n(umero) DCXII XXX
(oYcina) Tiluris
As at Dokimeion the term oYcina on giallo antico is also often combined with
personal names, the names of divinities or of members of the imperial
family.247 The term also appears to have a topographical meaning, as observed
at Dokimeion.248 Moreover, oYcina and lapicaedina appear to be inter-
changeable expressions. A quarry label in Rome is noted as being [ex no]vis
lapicaedinis Aurelianis (ad 161), whereas another block in Simitthus is from
the oYcina nova Aureliana (ad 199).249 It is therefore conceivable that the
words oYcina and lapicaedina/lapidicina covered a similar semantic range,
although the term lapicaedina is used only once. Moreover, as observed for
Bacakale, the term oYcina may not only identify a location where a stone was
cut, but also where it was dressed and reWned. Blocks inscribed with the name
of the same oYcina have been found lying together in clustersan observa-
tion which has led Dubois, Roder, and Kraus to try to locate their area of
245
App. no. 787; Rakob 1997: 3 claims that a quarry administration at Simitthus is attested
from the reign of Tiberius onwards.
246
App. nos. 78894.
247
Regia: nos. 821, 823, 826; nova Aurel[iana?]: nos. 834, 837; Genii Montis: nos. 835; nova
Cael(estis?): nos. 794, 838; Iunonis: nos. 829. For oYcina Iunonis: AE 1994: 1876 Kraus 1993a:
Neu 29; for oYcina Caelestis, cf. AE 1994: 1884. Friedrich Rakob argues for an imperial takeover
of the Simitthus quarries in 28 bc, perhaps with the involvement of M. Vipsanius Agrippa
(hence the oYcina Agrippae, nos. 822, 824, 825), cf. Lassere 1980: 41; Fant 1993b: 75 with fn. 8;
Rakob 1993: 7 fn. 29.
248
This is supported by an inscription of the later 3rd cent. ad which was found on the
rockface of a subterranean quarry (together with a christogram) and designated the oV(icina)
found/inventa by Diotimus, agens in rebus, cf. no. 871.
249
App. nos. 834, 837.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 305

extraction. They pinpointed the oYcinae Age(ntii) and Genii Montis at the
Gelber Berg/Yellow Hill, and the oYcinae Cael(estis), Nov(ati), Regia and
Agrippae at the Tempelberg/Temple Hill.250
Besides the term oYcina, the ex rat(ione) mark found occasionally on
pavonazetto blocks at Bacakale and Rome was also used in in the epigraphic
formula on giallo antico. However, at Simitthus the term disappears during
the major change in the epigraphic formula around ad 137. The personal
names in the genitive form following the ex rat mark, such as Felix, Callistus,
Plurianus, Puteolanus, Puteo, belong to servi or liberti Augusti, while Lae-
(tus?), [..]lutaris(?), and Agentius may be members of the familia Caesaris as
well.251 None of them, so far, has surfaced in funerary, votive or honoriWc
inscriptions at Simitthus itself; besides the slave name Felix, none of the
other names appear in the epigraphic documents of Africa Proconsularis.252
Theodor Kraus believed these rationarii were in charge of an administra-
tive subdivision of the Simitthus quarry, which included several oYcinae. This
does not quite Wt the evidence. First, no direct connection or indication of
hierarchy between ratio and oYcina is recorded other than the fact that both
terms appear in the same inscriptions. Secondly, ratio is used exclusively on
quarried material and is not attested in graYti or inscriptions on the rockface of
the quarries. Therefore the connection between ratio and the actual extractive
procedure cannot be conWrmed. Thirdly, none of the personal names connected
with the ex rat mark are, as yet, documented elsewhere in the epigraphic
record at Simitthus.253 The term ratio, therefore seems not to be directly
connected with the quarrying procedure, nor did it describe a subdivision of
a quarry. The absence of the names of rationarii (i.e. the persons named after
ex rat marks) from the epigraphic record at Simitthus might imply that these
individuals were not present at the quarries but located somewhere else.

7.2.2.1. First Change of Formula around ad 137

The epigraphic formula for quarried products at Simitthus receives a sub-
stantial make-over at the end of Hadrians reign. The emperor is now men-
tioned in the genitive clause, indicating his ownership of the stone. The ex

250
Dubois 1908: 32 f.; Kraus 1993a: 61; Roder 1993: 31, 33, 36, 38. Kraus follows Roder in the
assumption that oYcinae were subdivisions of bracchia. The latter do not appear regularly
in inscriptions and are not followed by digits, but by abbreviated numerals such as s(ecundum)
or t(ertium) (see App. nos. 820, 830), cf. Kraus 1993a: 62.
251
App. nos. 78794, 796, 797, 800, 83946, 84852.
252
Felix: AE 1979: 656 (Hr. el-Messaouer; C. Iulius Felix, libertus Augusti). ILAfr 409
(Karthago; Felix, Augusti servus).
253
Kraus 1993a: 62; Khanoussi 1996: 1013.
306 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

rat mark is replaced by sub cura plus the name of a procurator, whereas the
consular date, the n-number, and an indication of the oYcina remain,254 e.g.
App. no. 816. Imp (eratoris) Antonini Aug(usti) Pii d
n(umero)vac.of(Wcina) Certi
Stloga et Severo co(n)s(ulibus)
su(b) cura Agathae
The signiWcance of this change is unknown, but the indication of imperial
property raises the question of why this became necessary. The identiWcation
of blocks or columns belonging to Hadrian or Antoninus Pius suggests that
blocks or columns which were not owned by the emperor, were quarried at
Simitthus at the same time (cf. 3.3.4).255
The replacement of the ex rat mark with the sub cura mark and the name
of the procurator apparently mirrors a change in administrative procedures.
Up to the year ad 137, stones were cut on behalf of an imperial oYcial in
charge of a ratio, a person not necessarily recorded at Simitthus or within the
African province. Beginning with the year ad 137, the responsibility for
extracting blocks belonging to the emperor seems to be laid squarely on the
shoulders of imperial procurators. Agathas, lib(ertus) Augusti, Iulianus, Max-
imus, Athenodorus are clearly noted as procuratores Augusti, whereas Iulius
Gallus, Nova(tus?), and Hymenaeus are documented in the genitive form
following sub cura or caesura marks (at Simitthus, a more or less secure
indicator of their procuratorial rank).256
A further change in the epigraphic formula took place at the latest under
Septimius Severus but presumably already in ad 156,257 e.g.
App. no. 835. n(umero) CCCV of(Wcina) Genii Montis
Imp(eratore) Commodo Aug(usto) IIII
et Victorino [I]I co(n)s(ulibus)
caesura Maximi proc(uratoris)
The sub cura mark is replaced by the term caesura, but still names procur-
atores as the responsible oYcials.258 If caesura precedes the name of a person
in charge of the extraction procedure of stones, the use of this term could

254
App. nos. 8049, 81120, 834.
255
The emperor himself used giallo antico for his villae in Tivoli and Antium, cf. App. nos.
9257, and presented Athens and Smyrna with giallo antico columns, cf. Pausanias 1.18.9. CIG
3148, l. 42. Dubois 1908: 34; Fant 1993a: 155 f. with fn. 73.
256
App. nos. 8049, 81120, 8348. Agathas is not noted as procurator in the label inscrip-
tions on giallo antico, but is named in votive inscription at Simitthus: Kraus 1993a: 56; CIL VIII
14551 Dubois 1908: no. 97.
257
Kraus 1993a: 62.
258
App. nos. 8358, 859?, 8636.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 307

imply that the procuratores became more closely involved with the technical-
ities of quarrying.259 The procuratorship at Simitthus may have required a
basic knowledge of quarrying procedures. Against this view, one might argue
that the term caesura is a substitute for sub cura, covering the same
semantic range. This opinion is supported by the fact that either term
precedes the name of an imperial procurator. Yet, it would hardly make
sense to replace sub cura with caesura unless the primary purpose was a
change in meaning. Therefore one might argue that the procuratorial duties
at Simitthus were altered to include the supervision of extraction techniques,
in addition to other administrative responsibilities. Whether this resulted in
specialization on the part of the procurators cannot be answered on current
evidence.

7.2.3. Mons Claudianus

Unlike other quarries, the administration at Mons Claudianus used a simple
set of abbreviations for their quarry labels. Most blocks are only marked with
numbers. In other cases numbers are accompanied by the letter n for
n(umero) and the abbreviation , as well as a limited set of abbreviations
such as raclp, pd/pdn/prdn, cb, or cep. No variation in the basic formula is
discernible over time, since consular dates or regnal years are completely
absent, e.g.
App. no. 988. (a) RACLP
(b) P D XVII
The low numbers on the blocks and columns seem to refer to the amounts of
blocks extracted in one quarry, as the numbers are repeated on stones in other
quarries at Mons Claudianus. Some blocks from the same quarry are in-
scribed with two or three diVerent numbers.260 It is not known whether this is
a result of regular inventories or whether it reXects diVerent counting systems,
such as a serial number referring to the annual(?) production at Mons
Claudianus and a number for the extracted products within one quarry.
A group of inscriptions beginning with the letters  for 
)(?),
indicate measurements in cubic feet.261 These measurements apparently do
not refer to the size of the unhewn blocks, but to the quarried block in its
dressed state. The probable size of the blocks was noted by the quarrying

259
Kraus 1993a: 62.
260
App. nos. 942, 945, 952, 953, 957, 958, 960, 979, 980, 989, 998, 1009, 1013, 1017, 1022,
1023, 1025, 1072, 1077, 1080, 1088, 1089, 1102, 1106, 1135.
261
App. nos. 936, 937, 960, 990, 996, 1079, 1096, 1097, 1099, 1120.
308 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

administration on the stone itself. As an ostracon proves, a note was made

for the archive; it gives the dimensions, location, and the n-number of a
stone as a reference.262 Moreover, there is evidence from Wadi Hammamat
to suggest that a similar administrative procedure was being followed in
the Basanites quarries: an ostracon gives a list of block-measurements in
Roman feet (
)).263
Presumably, each of the 130 quarries had its own name: the names of
latomia, such as Myrismos, Cochlax or Apol(lon) and Epikomos, Harpo-
crates, Nikotyche, Hieronymos appear on some inscribed blocks.264 More-
over, the water distribution list recently published by Helene Cuvigny, apart
from listing  and
 in the quarries, provided a number of
additional names of quarries such as Traiana, Mesee, Chresmosarapis (the
Oracle of Sarapis), Apis, Hera, Dioscurides, etc.265 Furthermore, a hitherto
unpublished and barely readable ostracon lists some of the mentioned quarry
names.266 The ligature ep, used in quarry labels and discovered on the rock-
face of quarries, has been read by Adam Bulow-Jacobsen as an abbreviation
for Ep(aphroditos), the

documented during Hadrians reign in
inscriptions at Mons Claudianus and Mons Porphyrites.267 The ligature is
often preceded by the letter c which most likely must be read c(aesura).268
This reading is supported by an ostracon, so far only published in translation.
The text identiWes two blocks by their n-numbers, lists their measurements,
and gives the exact location by naming the quarry and the person responsible
for the caesura.269 Hence, the administrative system apparently kept track of
the size and location of the stone and under whose responsibility it had been
produced. Few stones give us such exact information: one inscription found
on the rockface in quarry 109, c ep ex lat arpocr, is emended to c(aesura)
Ep(aphroditi), ex lat(omia) (H)arpocrati.270 Quite often the c for caesura
does not appear in a label inscription and only the ep ligature, followed
by a number, is engraved in the stone.271 The ligature ep appears in a

262
Bulow-Jacobsen 1996: 51 f.; Peacock & MaxWeld 1997: 224.
263
Kayser 1993: 126 f. and no. 20. The measurements of blocks were important information
and also processed by other quarrying organizations, cf. Monthel & Lambert 2002: 111 f.
264
App. nos. 935, 993, 1067, 1129, 1136, 1137.
265
Cuvigny 2005b: 314 f.
266
O.Claud.inv. 6969. Bulow-Jacobsen 1996: 51 f.; Peacock & MaxWeld 1997: 223.
267
I.Pan 21, 42.
268
App. nos. 933, 934, 106870, 11036, 1119, 1129.
269
Caesura of Epaphroditos; Dionysos quarry. N 57 revised(?) 3.310.9 m. N59 revised(?)
4.50.90.75 m, Bulow-Jacobsen 1996: 59.
270
App. no. 1129.
271
App. nos. 964, 100610, 1058. Peacock & MaxWeld 1997: 6.61.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 309

vast number of quarries. Quite obviously the term caesura does not identify a
subdivision of a quarry.272 The inscriptions suggest that the term caesura has
no speciWc topographical meaning. Hence, the use of this term at Mons
Claudianus is comparable to Simitthus or Dokimeion. Similar observations
can be made for the mark cb; Bulow-Jacobsen interprets the mark as a
ligatured cip and reads c(aesura) hH ii(meri) p(rocuratoris).273 Whatever the
exact reading of the ligature is, the ostraca do indicate that procuratores could
be in charge of caesurae.274 The use of the mark cip in numerous quarries at
Mons Claudianus (provided it is read correctly) supports our interpretation of
the term caesura as an expression indicating the administrative responsibility
for a series of quarries, rather than the subdivision of a quarry.275 Moreover, an
ostracon which refers to a procurator who ordered the tabularius Athenodoros
to report on the amount of quarried blocks lying in the procurators caesura
corroborates that caesura-holders did not necessarily have to be present at
the quarry itself.276

7.2.4. Quarry Labels on Marble from Karystos,

Teos, Chios, and Paros
In other quarries, such as Luna, Karystos, Teos, Chios, and Paros, changes in
the epigraphic formula of quarry labels are not as marked as at Simitthus or
Dokimeion. There, the inscribed labels usually consist of a few basic elements:
a consular date, an ex rat(ione) mark followed by a name, and the abbre-
viations l(oco)- or n(umero) followed by a number (henceforth l- and
n-numbers). This minimalist practice makes it far more diYcult to identify
any alterations of the formulaic labels, as in some cases a further element is
simply added or removed. In addition, the small quantities of dated label
inscriptions hamper the identiWcation of such changes. This makes it hard to
discern whether the addition or omission of an abbreviation from a quarry
label is a mistake by the inscriber or an actual change in the epigraphic
formula.

272
Quarries 6: nos. 933, 934; 11: no. 964; 55: nos. 100610; 62: no. 1058; 75: nos. 106870;
89: nos. 11035; 90: no. 1106; 96: no. 1119; 109: no. 1129.
273
MaxWeld and Rengen believe the lower case b to be a ligatured ld, cf. Bulow-Jacobsen
1996: 61; Peacock & MaxWeld 1997: 223.
274
Bulow-Jacobsen 1996: 60.
275
Quarries 19: nos. 9715; 23: no. 994; 36: no. 1005; 93: nos. 111315; 113: no. 1130.
276
O.Claud.inv. 6483.
310 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

7.2.4.1. Quarry Labels on Cipollino

These inadequacies certainly apply to the quarry labels found on cipollino, a
marble type said to originate from the quarries near Karystos. The scarcity
of datable texts prevents any sound observations on changes in formula.
Moreover, the main bulk of the 162 recorded inscriptions on cipollino
discovered at Portus and Rome consist of little more than ligatured letters
of an abbreviated name and an n-number. Despite these deWciencies, a
probable change in epigraphic formula can be detected between ad 132
and 134. In ad 132 the cipollino blocks are marked with a consular date, the
name of the imperial procurator under whose cura the stone was extracted
and shipped, the mark pr/prob followed by the name of a libertus Augusti
(?), an n-number, and a l-number.277 In ad 134/5, again during Hadrians
reign, the formula is altered; besides the consular date, the inscriptions
found in Rome consist of an ex rat-mark plus nomen (in the genitive
form) and an n-number. The personal names following the ex rat(ione)-
mark are Valens, Orbius Natalis, Caecilius Marcianus, ! Zoes(imus?), and
Cla[udianus?].278 The only dated label inscription from Karystos itself,
found on a cipollino block in its harbour, bears the name of Caecilius
Marcianus.279 The inscription does not indicate any direct connection to
the familia Caesaris. Neither his name nor the gentilicium are recorded in
the epigraphic evidence from Karystos or Euboea, nor do the names of the
others appear in the local epigraphy.
The personal names coupled with ex rat(ione) marks set aside, other
abbreviated names documented in undated labels do appear in the epigraphic
record of Euboea. Hymenaeus and Thamyrus, names appearing on labeled
cipollino marble at Rome, should probably be equated with Hymenaeus
Thamyrianus, the a lapicidinis Carystiis, and Thamyrus Alexandrinus, dis-
pensator Augusti, both of whom are known from two inscriptions found near
Paleochora/Karystos and Rome (cf. 4.2.2.2).280 Besides Minic(i)us Sanctus
and C. Cerialis, perhaps patrimonial procurators, and Sergius Longus,
centurio of the legio XXII Primigenia, a unique pr/prob-mark, followed by
the nomen Crescens in the ablative form, also appears on cipollino blocks (cf.
4.1.3). If our reading of prob as prob(atus), checked, or probator, approver,

277
App. nos. 60310, 618.
278
App. nos. 61217, 61922 (ad 13461).
279
App. no. 617.
280
Hymenaeus: App. nos. 62330. Thamyrus: nos. 63147. Dubois 1908: 117 f. CIL III 563
12289 (Paleochora), cf. photo in Pensabene 1994, Wg. 286. CIL VI 8486 (via Ostiense in S. Pauli).
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 311

inspector, is correct, the mark might indicate that the quarried product had
been checked by an oVcial, a libertus (Augusti?).281

7.2.4.2. Quarry Labels on Africano

The quarry labels on africano and grey marble, both originating from the
Karagol quarry near Teos, provide a suYcient evidential basis for the detection
of changes in the epigraphic formula.282 Formulaic inscriptions on africano
marble are documented on blocks found in Rome as early as ad 64.283 The
inscriptions usually name the consular year (in which the stone was cut), display
the term ex rat(ione) followed by a name in the genitive form, and an
n-number.284 A change perhaps appears around ad 116 on the africano blocks,
as the l-number is introduced.285 They do not necessarily replace the n-num-
bers and seem to disappear from the dated inscriptions on africano again after
ad 132.286 Perhaps l-numbers were assigned only in ad 132, presumably during
one general inventory of the marble products in stock. During the same period,
from ad 116 and 132 the use of the r mark emerges on africano marble found at
the Marmorata in Rome and coincides with the use of the l-numbers.287 The
names in the genitive form following the ex rat(ione) mark seem to belong to
members of the familia Caesaris.288 Marks of imperial slaves on africano appear
from ad 64 to ad 80. Soon after, the mark Cae(saris) disappears from the dated
inscriptions. One inscription in ad 86, however, notes a Tychus, known as a
Cae(saris) in ad 77, simply as a ser(vus).289 As both appearances are within Wve
years of each other, it is probable that in both instances Tychus is one and the
same person. Thus, the letters ser have to be read as ser(vus Caesaris).290 The
name Laet(us) belongs to an imperial slave as well and in his case, the letters ser for
ser(vus) seem again to be used alternatively to indicate a ser(vus Caesaris).291

281
App. nos. 603, 604, 618. Dubois 1908: 116. On probator, cf. Hirschfeld 1905: 164. Other
names or rather abbreviations like Ti. Eup., C.Pol., C. Apol., Cla. Phl., CIA, and Cla. B., cannot
be emended easily, cf. Dubois 1908: 117.
282
Both grey and africano marble are believed to have been quarried at the same spot and
were handled by the same administration, cf. ratio of a Mamius Licinianus, App. nos. 489. 547.
283
App. nos. 460, 461.
284
Fant 1989b: 214 with fn. 52.
285
App. nos. 486 V.
286
App. no. 486 carries both l- and n-numbers nos. 494 V.
287
App. nos. 486, 488, 4902.
288
App. nos. 463, 467, 470, 475, 476, 480, 483, 5436.
289
App. nos. 469, 470, 480.
290
For Tychus, see App. nos. 469, 470, 480, 5446.
291
For Laetus, see App. nos. 462, 463, 467, 475, 476, 5369, 543.
312 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

The strongly ligatured marks her and paed(), followed by the letters cae(saris),
are diYcult to interpret.292 Both were abbreviations for names, presumably of
rationarii; this is the case with the abbreviation of her, whereas pae(d) is never
coupled with an ex rat mark. Apart from identiWed members of the familia
Caesaris, further names are linked with ex rat(ione) in the genitive clause. These
personal names found in labels engraved on africano, however, are not tagged with
any indication of status; Mul(), Dac(), Cl(audius) Zel(otus), Lucilius (H)erma
or Lucilius Herma Sotienus(?), Claudius Sotericus, Sex(tus), Her(-ma?/-molaos?),
and Mamius Licinianus are perhaps private individuals. Moreover, their names
seem not to be attested at Teos or in Asia Minor.293
Dated label inscriptions on grey marble found at Karagol emerge by ad
164, two years after the last consular date documented on africano blocks.294
Hence, the grey Teian marble began to be quarried after the africano deposits
had been exhausted. The labels recorded on these quarried products also
register a slight change in formula; the mark loc(o), followed by a number,
appears and is now used simultaneously with ex r(atione)-indications.295
The names coupled with ex r(atione) are too abbreviated to be of any help, nor
are any imperial status indications provided.296

7.2.4.3. Quarry Labels on Portasanta (Chian Marble)

All quarry inscriptions on portasanta marble were discovered in the marble
yards of Rome and Ostia. The identiWcation of the portasanta marble with the
marmor Chium is based on the discovery of the portasanta quarries at Latomi
north of the town of Chios.297 The Wrst dated inscription on portasanta appears
in ad 67 and adheres to a simple epigraphic formula: the consular date is
followed by a name (in the genitive form?) and an n-number.298 The only
name noted in this system is a Ian(uarius?), presumably a servus(?) Caesaris.299

292
HER: App. nos. 460, 461, 52732 (ad 64); PAED(): nos. 5335 (ad?).
293
Mul(-): App. nos. 485, 486 (ad 116); Dac(): no. 491 (ad 132); Cl(audius) Zel(otus),
no. 495 (ad 150); Lucilius (H)erma or Lucilius Herma Sotienus(?): nos. 496, 497, 5214 (ad
152); Claudius Sotericus: nos. 496, 497 (ad 152); Sex(tus): nos. 499501 (ad 162); Her(ma?):
no. 500 (ad 162); Mamius Licinianus: nos. 489, 547 (ad 124). Claudius Zelotus and Claudius
Sotericus were perhaps members of the local population, cf. Claudii Soterichi at Ephesos (IK 7:
3221), Kibyra (IK 60: 347); for the epigraphic record of Teos, cf. McCabe 1985. Lucilii, cf. Tyana
and Anazarbos in Cilicia (IK 55: 122. 123; IK 56: 592); Eastern Phrygia (Akshehir/Philomelion:
MAMA VII 197, doorstone). Mamii, cf. Prusa ad Olympum (IK 39, 134).
294
App. nos. 502 V.
295
App. nos. 50311.
296
Diod(): App. nos. 5035, 50811; Pol(): no. 507.
297
Yalouris 1986: 144; Fant 1993a: 164.
298
App. no. 565.
299
App. nos. 565, 583.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 313

This notation system was probably changed in ad 96 to include an ex rat-

(ione)-mark.300 The names in the genitive case following the letters ex rat all
belong to members of the familia Caesaris: Successus, servus(?) Caesaris, Thras()
Latianus, servus Caesaris nostri, and Rest(itutus), servus Augusti, who appears
together with Hya(cinthus?), servus Augusti.301 The only exception to this rule
might be an Aurelius M[-], either an imperial freedman manumitted under
Antoninus Pius or a provincial who had received the Roman citizenship.302
None of the servi Caesaris is otherwise known from the epigraphic record of
Chios. Whether these members of the imperial administration therefore were
present on the island remains doubtful.

7.2.4.4. Quarry Labels on Parian marble

Even the inscriptions on Parian marble adhere to the regular formula of
consular date, ex rat(ione)-mark plus name, and a number. There is not
enough epigraphic material to observe any changes in the formula.303 Two
inscriptions on Parian marble blocks found at Portus provide evidence for the
rationarii Sext(us) and Her(ma) in the years ad 163/4.304 Another group of
inscriptions on white marble, vaguely identiWed by Baccini Leotardi as
marmo greco, seems also to originate from Paros.305 These stones carry the
ex r(atione)-mark followed by the name Aur(elius) Geor(-). Again, the
epigraphic formula consists of an n-number, consular date, ex rat(ione)
mark plus name, and a separately noted locus-number. The inscriptions date
to the years ad 153, ad 160, and ad 161 and seem to precede the Sextus and
Herma inscriptions. As yet, no Aurelius Geor(gus) appears to be documented
in the epigraphic record on Paros, nor does the Greek personal name
H
appear on Paros.306

300
App. nos. 57281, 5849.
301
Successus: App. nos. 572, 573 (ad 96); Thra(-) Latianus: nos. 574, 575, 5846 (ad 1014);
Rest(itutus): nos. 5768, 587, 588 (ad 108/18); Hya(cinthus?): nos. 5768, 587, 588 (ad 108).
302
Aurelius M[ ]: App. no. 581 (ad 150).
303
On three exceptional labels on statues of Parian marble, cf. App. nos. 12302. Bruzza
1870: 193 nos. 177, 278.; Hirschfeld 1905: 163 fn.4.
304
App. nos. 1243, 1244. Probably as a result of an inventory of older extracted stones, the
two blocks in question were reinscribed during that time in the Parian quarries, replacing the
Hermo(-)-plus-l-number-inscriptions, cf. nos. 1243, 1244, 1246, 1247, 12502, 1255. The
relative chronology of these inscriptions, though, is not at all secure; the Hermo(-)-formula
might be of a later date.
305
App. nos. 123544, 12559. See Hirschfeld 1905: 166 with fn. 4; Fant 2001: 184.
306
See IG F.5 P.2, Indices. H
, LGPN I 107 (Andros, 2nd3rd cent. ad). II 92
(1. Athens, c. ad 177/8). III/1, 98 (1. Misenum: 1st cent. ad).
314 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

7.2.5. Luna/CarraraA special case?

This study has so far focused on imperial quarries located in the provinces of
the Roman empire. The quarries at Luna/Carrara, however, are situated not
in a province, but in the rather diVerent administrative setting of Italy.
Moreover, the quarry labels, as well as the epigraphic record of Luna display,
organizational traits diVerent to the imperial quarries in the provinces. They
therefore merit separate treatment.
The quarry labels recorded at the Carrara quarries near Luna can hardly be
described as complex. They mostly consist of abbreviated and ligatured
names; numbers and consular dates are mainly absent. Their simplicity is
reminiscent of the quarry labels found at Mons Claudianus. Even so, when
examined in connection with the epigraphic record of Luna, some quarry
labels do allow a reconstruction of the unique quarrying history at Carrara.
A slab of Luna marble carrying an inscription, known as the lapis Salvioni,
discovered in the quarries (Valle di Colonnata) in 1810 or 1812 and kept in
the house of Salverio Salvioni in Massa Carrara, provides a detailed list
compiled by Hilario, a vilicus magister, who in ad 22 notes the names of
decuriones of each year.307 The names only provide vague indications of the
social status of these men. As the usual tria nomina are missing and only one
name is given, the listed decuriones were probably slaves.308 Moreover, Hilar-
ios title, vilicus, conWrms the hypothesis that we are dealing with a group of
servi.309 What Hilarios speciWc task as a vilicus was is not stated. Despite the
rather signiWcant Wndspot, in the immediate vicinity of the Carrara quarries,
no reference to the quarrying business is made in our inscription. Hilario,
who compiled the list, is also called mag(ister), which designates him as a
presiding Wgure of a collegium.310 Furthermore, other members of a typical
collegium are mentioned in the inscription as well. The inscription lists the
four decuriones for each year and has the names of deceased decuriones
marked with a theta nigrum.311
The lapis Salvioni raises a number of questions: what kind of collegium are
we dealing with, and, more importantly, who was the owner of these slaves?
Slaves and freedmen usually were accepted members in collegia funeraticia,
amongst which Kornemann includes the collegia, collectives consisting of

307
CIL XI 1356 ILS 7228; for location, cf. map Banti 1931: 480, no. 24.
308
Waltzing 1899: 484. Latin slave names, cf. Solin 1996a; for Greek slave names, cf. Solin
1996b.
309
Fabian 1979.
310
Royden 1988: 14.
311
Waltzing 1899: 484. Collegia apparently copied the titulature used by municipial oYcials,
cf. Royden 1988: 14; Stevenson & Lintott 1999.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 315

slaves and freedmen either belonging to the emperor or a private person, and
the collegia familiae publicae, which are collegia domestica consisting of servi
publici.312 Based on Kornemanns observations, we must assume that the
slaves listed as magister and decuriones on the lapis Salvioni probably
constituted a collegium funeraticium.313 Inscribed monuments of collegia
funeraticia, and collegia in general, usually appear in graveyards or in towns.
In the case of Luna, the colony in whose territory the Carrara quarries were
situated, three other collegia set up their inscriptions within the town.314 The
Wndspot of the lapis Salvioni in a remote area therefore can only be
explained by the existence of a graveyard in the immediate vicinity of the
dispersed Roman quarries. Funerary inscriptions were unearthed at Torano,
conWrming the notion of individuals being buried close to the quarries; as yet,
no burials as such have been discovered there.315
As noted above, no link with the quarrying ventures is indicated by the
inscription itself, except for its original location close to one of the Roman
quarries. Charles Dubois observed that the names of some of the decuriones
known from the lapis Salvioni emerge in inscriptions on marble blocks from
the Lunensian quarries, albeit in abbreviated and ligatured form. Dubois read
the marks phil, hilar, tb as Hilarus/Hilario, Philo, and Tiburtinus.316 Other
decuriones like Solumarus, Primus or Caloteimus are presumably also named
in labels on quarried blocks.317 Dubois interpretation of the ligatured letters
is not beyond doubt, but together with the Wndspot of the lapis Salvioni it
remains a powerful working hypothesis. Hence, the connection of our colle-
gium with the quarrying business cannot easily be dismissed.
But who owned this group of slaves? Though the lapis Salvioni does not
give any indication of ownership, the quarry inscriptions on marble found in
the Carrara quarries do provide limited information. Unlike the quarry labels
naming imperial slaves or freedmen, the slave names known from the lapis
Salvioni and documented in the quarry inscriptions are not followed by an
imperial status indication.318 This opens the Weld for candidates of ownership
other than the emperor. Our slaves could have been owned by a private
individual or a company involved in the quarrying business. So far, there is
no direct evidence for the existence of a societas being active at the Lunensian
312
Kornemann 1901: 387.
313
Although slaves also could join a collegium fabrum, they were not legally able to form a
collegium fabrum on their own without the consent of their owners nor would the formation of
such a legal entity appear likely. Waltzing 1895: 346; Kornemann 1901: 417.
314
CIL XI 1355, 1354. AE 1983: 390. See Waltzing 1899: 482 f.
315
CIL XI 6994 with CIL XI 1355; CIL XI 1377, 1384, cf. map Banti 1931, nos. 47, 48.
316
phil: App. nos. 11625; hilar: nos. 1147, 1148, 1150, 1151, 1153; tb: nos. 115760.
317
Solumarus: App. no. 1154. Primus: nos. 1180, 1181, 1184. Dubois 1908: 6.
318
Weaver 1972: 2.
316 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

quarries. Private individuals apparently took part in the extraction of Carrara

marble: votive inscriptions found in or near the Carrara quarries document a
number of vilici owned by private entrepreneurs.319 Moreover, the fact that these
altars and other monuments are dedicated by the vilici to the gods Silvanus or
Herculesboth divinities appear very often in quarrying or mining contexts
conWrms our notion of an association with the quarrying business.
Two other inscriptions found at Luna, albeit not in the vicinity of the
quarries, might conWrm the involvement of a senatorial family in the extrac-
tion and/or trade of Lunensian marble. The fragmentary honoriWc inscription
discovered near Luna (and now lost) mentions a Scribonius Proculus and his
oYce as curator operum publicorum. Municipal curatores usually were either
elected by the community or, in the case of direct Wnancial participation in a
municipal building project, appointed from amongst the members of the
community by the emperor.320 M. A. Speidel came to the conclusion that
Scribonius Proculus probably was the senator P. Sulpicius Scribonius Procu-
lus, who together with his brother held the governorship of both German
provinces between ad 63 and 67.321 Moreover, P. Sulpicius Scribonius Pro-
culus was curator aedium sacrarum et operum publicorum in Rome and
apparently had good contacts in Luna. This is conWrmed by an inscription
at Luna of a probable ancestor of his, the senator L. Scribonius Libo, whose
libertus, Diogenes, set up a richly decorated altar in ad 2. It was made of Carrara
marble and dedicated to Silvanus, a god often addressed by quarry workers.
Scribonius Libo therefore might have had a hand in the extraction and trade of
Luna marble.322 The question arises why a curator aedium sacrarum et operum
publicorum in Rome would receive an honoriWc inscription in Luna. Speidel
assumes that Scribonius Proculus, as a curator, was able to contract out orders
for Luna marble to private quarrying enterprises, in which he was probably
involved himself as a consequence of his ancestors business interests. The
private entrepreneurs in return erected a monument for their senatorial
business partner at Luna in gratitude. That curatores hired private contractors
for building projects is well documented in Rome and there is no reason why
this should have been limited to the city of Rome itself.323 It therefore appears

319
Carrara: AE 1985: 391 (Le Canalie/Bedizzano). CIL XI 1319 (Luna). 1320 (Cava della
Carbonera). 1327 (Colonnata). 6947 (Cava del Polvaccio). CIL XI 6946 Mentella 1990 (Luna),
cf. map Banti 1931, nos. 2, 11, 25, 41; Dubois 1908: 6.
320
Liebenam 1900: 385; Kolb 1993: 58.
321
CIL XI 1340; Dio 63.17.1, 3, cf. Eck 1985: 1258; Speidel 1994: 213.
322
Speidel 1994, fn. 19: CIL XI 6948, cf. photo, see Angeli Bertinelli 1978: 15, Wg. 6, with map
Banti 1931: 482, no. 40. Silvanus appears quite often in inscriptions at Luna, see CIL XI 6947,
6949, 6945. AE 1985: 391.
323
Speidel 1994: fn. 28. For orders to private enterpreneurs by curatores operum publicorum,
see Kolb 1993: 11517.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 317

possible that the colonia Lunensis, or members of this community, quarried the
marble in their own right or had contracted out work and sold the produce to
the curatores in Rome. Cassius Dio records that P. Sulpicius Scribonius Proculus
and his brother were summoned to Greece in ad 67 by Nero and driven to
suicide; the emperor, having spent a considerable amount of his treasury on
various building programmes, wanted access to the wealth of the brothers.324
Speidel speculates that the Scriboniis business in Luna marble might have led
Nero to get rid of the brothers. The demand for Luna marble increased sign-
iWcantly after the Wre of Rome in ad 64 and the emperor perhaps wanted to gain
direct access to parts of the quarries.
That private individuals controlled part of the extractive procedures in the
Carrara quarries through slaves and freedmen is recorded in the epigraphic
evidence from Luna. All the same, it appears less likely that one of these
private entrepreneurs owned the slaves noted on the lapis Salvioni. In fact, an
observation by Dubois suggests a public ownership of these slaves. Some of
the names from the lapis Salvioni inscribed on marble products in the Luna
quarries were accompanied by a number and the mark col. This abbreviation
was emended to col(oniae) and believed to refer to the town of Luna.325 Thus,
the names documented in connection with these col or col(oniae)-marks
were, in Dubois opinion, servi publici of the colonia Lunensis. Moreover, a
recently discovered, but undated grave inscription set up by a Chresimus, a
(servus) colonorum Lunensium, provides evidence for the existence of public
slaves in Luna.326 If we assume Dubois interpretation is correct, it is possible
that the slaves noted on the lapis Salvioni were public slaves of Luna and,
therefore, owned by this municipality.327
The appearance of the mark caes for Caes(aris) in some inscriptions on
quarried blocks from Luna, has been used to argue for an early takeover of the
quarries by Tiberius, at the latest in the year ad 27 (see no. 1145).328 Dubois
pointed out that some of the marble blocks, inscribed with the names of
decuriones known from the lapis Salvioni, furthermore carry the names
of imperial oYcials, which were obviously inscribed at a later date. The case
of the decurio Philo helped Dubois in determining the terminus post quem of
the inscriptions added by the imperial oYcials: on the lapis Salvioni Philos
name is accompanied by a theta nigrum, marking his death after the year 22
(when the inscription was set up). The imperial oYcials therefore must have

324
Dio 62.17.1.
325
App. nos. 114751, 11546, 1164(?). Dubois 1908: 6, cf. also Eder 1980: 112 f.
326
AE 1998: 435 (Luna).
327
AE 1997: 504; AE 1998: 436c.
328
App. nos. 115761, 1165(?), 11739. Hirschfeld 1905: 176 fn. 3; Dubois 1908: 7; Fant
1988: 150.
318 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

inscribed their names after ad 22. Based on a further inscription, which

provides only the name of a consul for the year ad 27 and does not name
any imperial oYcial, Dubois concluded that the quarries near Luna were
taken over by the emperor Tiberius during the years 22 to 27.329 Although
it is true that no consular dates are used in the known colonial quarry
inscriptions at Carrara, this is hardly a sound basis to argue for an imperial
takeover, especially when consular dates do not appear in an imperial context
either and the consular date of the year ad 27 is the sole attested example.
Hence, an imperial takeover of the Luna quarries during the reign of Tiberius
cannot be proven. The presence of imperial oYcials is attested at Luna from
the Flavian period onwards, and the existence of tabularii rationis marmorum
Lunensium for the same period suggests that part of the Luna quarries had
perhaps come under imperial control. Even so, keeping in mind the very
dispersed nature of the quarrying sites at Luna, private and municipal quar-
ries might have easily continued to exist even after imperial control had been
extended over the quarries.330

7.2.6. Caesura-Holders: Contractors of Quarry Work

The presence of private entrepreneurs in the quarrying business at Luna, as
well as at the Bacakale quarries near Dokimeion, prompts a closer look at the
legal basis of their involvement in the extractive procedures of imperial
quarries. As the analysis of the quarry labels at Dokimeion and Simitthus
has revealed, holders of a caesura could be army oYcers or members of the
familia Caesaris as well as private individuals. Epaphroditos, a servus Caesaris
appears on numerous quarry labels from Mons Claudianus as caesura-holder.
Moreover, in two inscriptions found at Mons Claudianus and Mons Porphyr-
ites he is also titled
c
H
, a contractor in a

or
locatio conductio.331 Concerning the nature of locatio conductio, however,
there are diVerent scholarly opinions. Fitzler believed that the Roman state
farmed out the extraction of granodiorite to Kleinpachter, small-scale les-
sees, who were allowed to keep part of the produce. The

Epaphro-
ditos was an Abgabenpachter, a contractor or conductor responsible for the
collection of the quarried products owed by the Kleinpachter to the Roman
state.332 Fitzler thus assumed that a locatio conductio rei was the basis of the

329
Dubois 1908: 7.
330
Fant 1993b: 76 with fn. 13; Speidel 1994: 213 fn. 28.
331
I.Pan 21 (Mons Porphyrites), 42 (Mons Claudianus), with extensive commentary by
A. Bernand, p. 102 f. On the

, cf. Taubenschlag 1955: 354 f.; Kaser 1971: 563.
332
Fitzler 1910: 117.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 319


, with Epaphroditos simply collecting rent from the tenants.333
However, none of these small-scale lessees or Kleinpachter have so far
surfaced in the ostraca. Moreover, the marble from Mons Claudianus and
Porphyrites appears to have been quarried exclusively for use by the Roman
emperor and was certainly not thought to be of lesser quality. Tenants were
probably barred from selling their blocks of granodiorite stone privately
within Roman Egypt.334 Consequently, Helene Cuvigny argued that Epaph-
roditos was a contractor of a locatio conductio operis faciendi, a contract for
the completion of work. At Claudianus this was the extraction of a certain
number of stone blocks from a quarry, for which the contractor perhaps
received payment.335 A similar arrangement can be seen at Bacakale/Doki-
meion where holders of a caesura (who could extract stone from diVerent
sections of a quarry) produced a previously agreed number of blocks during
one year (cf. 7.2.1). These contractors were named in the inscribed labels on
marble blocks for two reasons: Wrstly, the conductor may have been held
accountable for a faulty product;336 secondly, the imperial administration
needed to check the actual number of quarried products extracted during a
year by one caesura-holder in order to ascertain whether or not he had met his
legal obgligations.
Other branches of the Roman economy were partially organized along
similar lines: three papyri provide a glimpse at the legal arrangements of
pottery production in Roman Egypt. These contracts were drawn up between
the owner of a pottery kiln and the work contractor: for a deWned period of
time the contractor was allowed to use storage room, pottery kilns, potters
wheels and further tools for production in order to manufacture an agreed
number of pots. The contractor was to provide a number of workers to reach
the set goal of production. In return, the contractor received a Wxed sum of
money per produced unit, payable in rates and provisions, as well as wood,
water, and clay from the owner. The contractor could keep any additional
pottery produced for himself.337 These third-century work contracts of
Roman Egypt might well apply to other branches of the economy. The stamps

333
RostovtzeV 1957: 327; Flach 1990: 88100; Millar 1992: 180 f.; Cuvigny 2000a: 18 f.
334
Pliny, NH 36.57. Klein 1988: 38; Cuvigny 2000a: 19.
335
Hirschfeld 1905: 166 f. Cuvigny pointed out that giving a lease to Epaphroditos, a servus
Caesaris, in the context of Roman private law is an unique event, if not a legal absurdity, cf.
Brunt 1990c: 383, 400; Cuvigny 2000a: 20 f. The contract of Epaphroditos probably was not
limited to Mons Claudianus, but covered Mons Porphyrites and Wadi Hammamat as well, more
or less the administrative area the quarrying procurator was responsible for (Mons Claudianus:
I.Pan 42; Mons Porphyrites: I.Pan 21. Wadi Hammamat(?): I.Ko.Ko. 54, 55. Cuvigny 1992a:
76; Kayser 1993: no. 19.
336
Kaser 1971: 571.
337
P.Oxy. 3595 (ad 245), 3596 (c. ad 250 s?), 3597 (ad 260); cf. Strobel 1987.
320 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

on roof tiles suggest similar procedures for the tile production in Rome: apart
from naming the land where the clay was collected (e.g. ex pr(aediis) of PN)
and the clay bed (e.g. ex Wg(linis) of PN ), the name of the person in charge
of production could also be given (e.g. op(us) dol(iare) of PN, ex of(Wcina) of
PN, ex conduc(tione) of PN). Furthermore, a consular date and the type
of product was occasionally indicated as well. The formula was altered over
the course of the centuries, apparently becoming more elaborate in the second
century. Even though no exact details are provided on the nature of the
contract, the possibility of a work contract on the basis of a locatio conductio
operis faciendi may be the most plausible explanation.338 Given the probable
proliferation of such organizational arrangements, it is not surprising to Wnd
a similar system in quarrying enterprises. In view of the possible contract
arrangements, as documented for the pottery production in Roman Egypt,
the Bacakale quarries might have seen similar agreements, in which a yearly
quota of pavonazetto blocks was delivered in return for a Wxed payment; any
white marble quarried during this period the caesura-holders may have been
allowed to keep.
By far the largest number of holders of a caesura appear on quarry labels at
Bacakale/Dokimeion. Whereas the names associated with the term caesura at
Mons Claudianus or Simitthus are those of imperial oYcials or of members of
the familia Caesaris, the caesura-holders at Bacakale apparently also include
private individuals. The majority of the latter caesura-holders, however, do
not appear otherwise in the epigraphic record from Dokimeion. Occasionally
homonyms appear on inscribed honorary, funerary or votive monuments
outside the quarries; the information provided is never suYcient enough nor
the inscription precisely datable in order to identify the named persons
securely with caesura-holders known from Bacakale. The problem is illus-
trated by the following examples. The name of the caesura-holder for the
years ad 194 and 197, Aurelius Dionysios, is attested in a fragmentary and
barely datable inscription in the vicinity of the quarry: an Aurelius Dionysios
and his wife set up a funerary stela for their son at Sulumenli, an imperial
estate immediately south of Dokimeion on the road to Synnada. Apart from
the fact that they share the same name, there is no evidence that Aurelius
Dionysios from Anossa and the Aurelius Dionysios from Dokimeion were one
and the same person. The name itself is common in Asia Minor, particularly
after the grant of Roman citizenship to all provincials in the constitutio
Antoniniana of ad 212.339 One might speculate that the Wndspot of the

338
Steinby 1978: 1516 f.; Aubert 1994: 232 f.
339
IK 52, 258 CIG 3883 (and add. 1101); Zawadzki 1960; Strubbe 1975: 2458; Gibson
1978: no. 3. Aur. Dionysii/Dionysidorii: Ephesos: IK 17, 1577, 3712a, 3804. Stratonikeia: IK
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 321

inscription at Sulumenli indicates that a connection with the administration

of the imperial domain ultimately led Dionysios to gain access to a caesura at
the imperial quarries of Dokimeion. That he had the required Wnancial assets
and had reaped Wnancial proWts is indicated by the richly ornated stela at
Sulumenli.340 A further homonym of a caesura-holder of white marble quar-
ries in ad 206, Aurelius Demetrius, appears in the epigraphic record at
Dokimeion.341 An inscription, set up for Aelia Maximilla, wife of the procur-
ator provinciae Frygiae Aurelius Marcio, names an I f
H H
Aurelius Demetrius.342 From his priesthood we can infer that Aurelius Deme-
trius also was an important member of the local elite at Synnada at the end of
the second and the beginning of the third century ad.343
The equation of caesura-holders with homonyms recorded in the inscribed
monuments from the environs of the Dokimean quarry is not a convincing
argument in and of itself. However, circumstantial evidence shows that part of
the wealth articulated in highly ornate and inscribed stelae from the surrounds
of Dokimeion or the quarries in the Upper Tembris Valley must derive from
proceeds gained in the quarrying business. This is never pointed out by the
inscriptions directly; the depiction of tools and scenes closely linked to quarry-
ing activity on the monuments, however, strongly implies an economic correl-
ation of this nature. A few examples must suYce: a so-called doorstone (i.e. a
stela crafted in the shape of a door) from Dokimeion, depicting a stonemasons-
hammer, is engraved with the inscription of Chysogonos for Babeis and his
children Kyrila and Mousaios.344 From Dokimeion an uninscribed stelae shows
a bearded man with a chiton and a cloak. In his left hand he holds a scroll, and an
adze or pick, a typical quarrying or stone working tool, appears beside his right
foot. This unWnished stela had likely been intended for an administrative Wgure
involved either in the quarries at Dokimeion or running a workshop.345 Another

22: 319, 449, 457, 472. Smyrna: IK 23: 385, 258. IK 24: 793. Prusias ad Hypum: IK 27, 8 II 45.
Kios: IK 29, 107. Mylasa: IK 35, 441. Laodikeia a. Lykos: IK 49, 94. Alexandria Troas: IK 53, 95.
Arslani/Sevrihissar: CIG 4096. Laodicea Combusta/Kadyn Khan: MAMA I 154. Apollonia/
Senirgent: MAMA IV 185. Eumeneia/Ishiklu: MAMA IV 338 A/B.
340
Gibson 1978: no. 3, Taf. IIIa. Despite the style of depiction and artwork, common to a
whole series of similar gravestones found in the Aka Cay Valley, Aurelius Dionysios probably
had to pay a considerable sum to the stone-mason. Waelkens 1977: 288 f.; Gibson 1978: nos.
14; Strubbe 1997: 178 f., no. 258.
341
Dokimeion: MAMA IV 4. Other Aurelii Demetrii: MAMA IV 117 (Lysias); 131 (Metrop-
olis); 356 (Eumeneia); VII 470 (Bulduk); 537 (Insuyu); IK 22, 44650, 4546 (Stratonikeia); IK
28, 379(?) (Iasos); IK 31, 44 (Klaudiupolis); IK 49, 93 (Laodikeia a. Lykos); TAM IV 1. 185
(Nikomedia); CIG add. 4325d (Olympus/Deliktash).
342
MAMA IV 66 (Synnada).
343
On imperial cult and priesthoods, see Price 1984: 624.
344
Waelkens 1986: 201 no. 501; Strubbe1997: no. 256.
345
Waelkens 1977: 288; Waelkens 1986: 202, no. 502, Taf. 74.
322 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

doorstone at Afyon (third quarter of the third century ad) names a lecticarius/
 
, basically a litter bearer; besides the depiction of a lectica with a
marble block on it, a cart laden with three marble blocks and drawn by a pair of
oxen is rendered.346 Another doorstone from Afyon, now lost, showed a regula, a
ruler used by stone masons. The inscription records Italian immigrants,
L. Tullius Montanus and his wife Alennia Venusta, the former perhaps a stone-
mason closely associated with either the imperial quarries or a workshop.347
A further monument depicting objects such as a regula, a stone-masons hammer,
and two yard sticks was discovered in the vicinity of Altintash in the Upper
Tembris Valley.348 A doorstone at Akmonia is illustrated with stone masons
tools, indicating that the person named in the inscription, a certain Zenon,
pursued this line of work.349 A funerary altar at Tiberioupolis/mod. Kirgil is
engraved with an epigram for Euprepes, a stonemason, who claims to have learned
his trade from his father Trophimos and his mother Asklepiodora.350
Given the involvement of certain elements of the populace in the quarrying
business, it is likely that the caesura-holders recorded at Bacakale originate
from the local surrounds. Quarrying activity was undoubtedly not limited to
the pavonazetto outcrops under imperial control, but also covered white
marble quarries, the produce of which was widely distributed. Inscriptions
on white marble sarcophagi found throughout Asia Minor refer to Docimean
marble as a brand.351 The existing expertise in the region provided a suitable
pool from which the imperial oYcials could recruit eligible contractors for
quarrying operations at Bacakale. Based on this hypothesis, one may assume
that other caesura-holders named in the quarry-labels, and not otherwise
recorded amongst the inscribed monuments of Phrygia, are likely to have a
similar background. In addition, the term caesura and its use in quarry labels
on pavonazetto suggests a certain involvement of caesura-holders in everyday
quarrying processes:352 caesura is found in overwhelming numbers on blocks
at Bacakale (c.155) and rarely appears on blocks in the marble-yards of Ostia/
Rome or the shipwreck of Punto Scifo (6). Although this observation is far
from conclusive, it supports the tentative notion that the term caesura is not

346
Waelkens 1977: 288 MAMA IV 10; Waelkens 1986: 196, no. 486, Taf. 75.
347
Waelkens, 1977: 288; Waelkens 1986: 191, no. 471, Abb. 53. For inscription cf. Mendel,
1909; Gibson 1978.
348
Waelkens 1977: 288.
349
Waelkens 1986: 167 f., no. 417.
350
MAMA IX, no.198a. cf. Reinach 1890: 55, no. 9; Merkelbach & Stauber 2001: 200, no.
16/22/05.
351
IK 39, 39 (Prusa ad Olympum) cf. commentary to l. 6; Humann 1898, nos. 56, 158, 209,
213, 323 (Hierapolis).
352
This is especially well documented in the inscribed labels App. nos. 295, 296, 300.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 323

automatically linked to the handling of the produce outside the quarry.

Consequently, the contractors of a caesura, e.g. of quarry work at Dokimeion,
were most likely to be found in the vicinity of the quarry. An example is
provided by the

Epaphroditos, who is not only recorded on the
inscribed architectural element of the main temple at Mons Claudianus, but
also appears on the quarry labels and the ostraca as a caesura-holder (cf.
7.2.3). The involvement of private individuals at Carrara can also be observed
from the epigraphic evidence there, although it is not clear whether they owned
or contracted out quarries of Luna marble from the colony of Luna or the
Roman state. Hence one can argue that the caesura-holders at Dokimeion were
mostly private entrepreneurs contracting out quarry work. They either super-
vised the extraction process in their caesurae directly or, as wealthy members of
the local society, had a slave or freedman supervise the quarry work.353

7.2.7. Ex ratione Marks, Redemptores Operis,

and the Marble Trade
Despite the diVerences in the use of the administrative vocabulary (as
recorded in the quarry labels), we have observed certain trans-regional uni-
formities such as the appearance of the ex rat(ione) mark followed by a
personal name (PN) in the genitive form, belonging to either private individ-
uals or members of the familia Caesaris. Hitherto, the ex rat(ione) mark has
been understood to precede the names of redemptores, whom Otto Hirschfeld
believed had an intermediary role(?) between lessees and the administrative
oYcials at imperial quarries.354 He based this observation on two arguments:
(1) that some ex rat(ione) marks are followed by two names of slaves, and (2)
that in one case the ex rat(ione) mark is followed by the term redemptor in the
genitive form.355 Hirschfeld used the Wrst argument to discard the view that
the ex rat(ione) mark referred to the haulier of a quarried block. He thought
the quarrying procurator was in charge of expediting the quarrys produce,

353
The latter view is supported by an inscription on a block of Pentelic marble found at
Rome (no. 1260, ad 166), which reads caesura Cla(udii) Hier(odis) Attici et Apolloni Lupi ( . . . ).
Based on this reading, Dubois believed the quarries of Pentelicon were the property of Herodes
Atticus, who in the second century ad used Pentelic marble for diVerent building projects, cf.
Pausanias 1.19.6, 6.21.2, 10.32.1; Philostratus, Vit.Soph. 2.550. See also Ameling 1983a: 8494;
Korres 1995. It therefore is possible that Herodes Atticus and his partner(?), Apollonius Lupus,
had leased or owned the quarries. Walter Ameling, however, believes the named Claudius
Hierodes Atticus is that of his freedman, cf. Ameling 1983b: 216; Fant 1993a: 167. Herodes
Atticus was undoubtedly not involved in the everyday work processes at the quarry.
354
App. no. 548. Hirschfeld 1905: 166.
355
Hirschfeld 1905: 166 fn. 1.
324 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

and found it diYcult to explain why two slaves would be mentioned in such a
context.356 Furthermore, he interpreted the genitive redemptoris in this
inscription as replacing the name of a deceased or retired entrepreneur, as it
had been inscribed over an erased word.357 Hence, Hirschfeld believed that the
personal names following the ex rat(ione) mark were those of redemptores of
quarry work or lessees of quarry sections. His observations were followed by
Thomas Drew-Bear, J. Clayton Fant, and others.358
However, there are some problems concerning Hirschfelds interpretation
of the ex rat(ione) mark. First and foremost, Fant noticed that some of the
names following it appear in label inscriptions on diVerent marbles; Laetus,
Caesaris servus, is named on africano marble from Teos and on giallo antico
from Simitthus.359 Similarly, the names of Cl(audius) Zel(otus) or Sextus and
Herm(-olaus/-a), following ex rat(ione) marks, show up in label inscriptions
on africano and pavonazetto marble or on africano and Parian marble.360
According to Fants interpretation, this would indicate that Claudius Zelotus
was a contractor of quarry work at Teos and Dokimeion, while Sextus and
Hermolaus did the same in Teos and Paros. Laetus, however, might have
encountered some considerable diYculties supervising extraction procedures
at Simitthus and Teos simultaneously. This led Fant to suggest that, personal
supervision of operations was not necessary. This means that the contractors
were much bigger men than was apparent earlier and probably had hundreds
of men (slaves?) working for them.361 Baccini Leotardi explained the appear-
ance of the same name on blocks from diVerent quarries as the result of
labels with the ex rat(ione) mark being engraved at a punto di raccolta del
materiale, a collection point away from the quarries, or at Ostia itself.
Hence, she believed that the oYcials named on blocks from diVerent places
probably coordinated their transport to Rome.362 Maischberger pointed
out that labels with the ex rat(ione) mark also show up on blocks in the
quarries, which makes Baccini Leotardis idea of punti di raccolta, where the
blocks were newly inscribed, untenable.363 Moreover, Maischberger argues
356
Hirschfeld 1905: 165 f.
357
Hirschfeld 1905: 166 fn. 1.
358
Tackholm 1937: 118 f.; Fant 1989a: 1820; Fant 1993a: 157; RostovtzeV 1904: 454,
understood these redemptores to be redemptores operis i.e. contractors in a locatio conductio
operis.
359
Africano (ad 65, 7580): App. nos. 462, 463, 467, 475, 476, 5369, 543; giallo antico
(ad 64): no. 787.
360
Claudius Zelotus: pavonazetto (ad 142, 150): App. nos. 140, 141, 207; africano (ad 150):
no. 495. Sextus et Herm(a): africano (ad 162): nos. 499, 500; Parian marble (ad 164): nos. 1243,
1244.
361
Fant 2001: 173, table 3.
362
Baccini Leotardi 1989: 108 f., 116 V.
363
Maischberger 1997: 22.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 325

that label inscriptions were not applied in the marble yards at Rome and
Portus but in the imperial quarries.364 However, none of the ex rat(ione)
names is documented in the epigraphy of the quarries and their vicinity;
this can be observed in the case of distinctive names, where nomina gentilia
and cognomina are legible. Although there are a number of reasons for this
dearth of evidence, the fact that the same name can appear on marble
from diVerent quarries makes it likely that these ex rat(ione)-men or
rationarii known from imperial quarries were not involved in the quarry-
ing process.
This interpretation is in part conWrmed by additional observations: Wrstly,
the ex rat(ione) marks do not appear often on marble blocks in the quarries.
Of the 104 ex rat(ione)-marks counted on marble of known provenience
(Parian marble, giallo antico, africano, Teian grey, portasanta, pavonazetto, and
cipollino), seventy-Wve were found on marble slabs and blocks in the marble
yards of Portus and Rome and one on a pavonazetto slab in Lepcis Magna.
Twenty-nine were found directly in the quarries of Teos (9), Simitthus (18),
Dokimeion (1) and Karystos (1). Hence the main bulk of ex rat(ione)
inscriptions were discovered at Rome. Given the numbers of inscriptions
involved, this is not mere coincidence. Moreover, the ex rat(ione) marks
are rarely documented in imperial quarries such as Dokimeion or Karystos,
and seem to disappear from the giallo antico labels documented in Simitthus
after ad 134.
The preponderance of ex rat(ione) marks on stones found at the ports of
destination, mainly Ostia and Rome, and the appearance of similar names on
blocks of diVerent origin, makes Hirschfelds explanation that the ex rat-
(ione) names, aka redemptores, were contractors of quarry sections less likely.
The term redemptor perhaps refers to a diVerent kind of contractor. Given the
fact that the marble yards at Rome and Ostia yielded most ex rat(ione)
inscriptions, a connection of the rationarii with the capitals marble trade is
possible. The term redemptor can describe any kind of contractor. However,
numerous occurrences in inscriptions dating from the Wrst to third century
ad suggest that the most common use of the term was to designate contract-
ors of building projects and construction work.365 This usage seems very

364
Maischberger 1997: 23 with fn. 80; contra: Ward-Perkins 1971: 148 fn. 35; Baccini
Leotardi 1979: 44 f.; Pensabene 1994: 17, 325.
365
Building and construction work (see also Martin 1989, 5262): Crawford 1996, no. 24.
CIL XI 4127 ILS 6027. CIL X 3821 ILS 3662. CIL X 3703 with CIL X 1614 ILS 7731a. CIL
VI 9794 ILS 7672. CIL VI 607, 9851, 33873. CIL IX 3650, 4694. CIL X 1549. AE 1971: 88 AE
1993: 465 AE 1995: 307. CIL XIV 2091 ILS 3512. CIL XIV 3530 ILS 3512 InscIt 4/1,
611. IL Tun 732 AE 1940: 16. IRT 275. Supp.It. 2/V, 25 AE 1925: 87. Other redemptores operis
(not of construction work): CIL II2/5 1022, ll. LXIX 30 f. CIL VI 9854, 9852. Mateo 1999: 3387.
326 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

much to reXect the meaning of the term in the Digest and in some of the
literary sources.366 As a working hypothesis, I propose that some of these
rationarii may have been building contractors for public or imperial build-
ings or had contracted the task of providing the required building material for
Rome or for other towns in the empire.367 The latter is possibly expressed by
the term redemptor marmorarius, documented in inscriptions found at
Rome, Puteoli, and Lepcis Magna.368 Fants observation that a number of
rationarii are recorded on marble blocks of diVerent origin seems to cor-
roborate this interpretation. Consequently, we are provided with a possible
explanation for the ex rat(ione) marks; public building contractors or
contractors of the marble supply ordered the marble blocks directly from
the imperial quarries, the stone blocks being earmarked with the words ex
ratione PN or (credited) on the account of PN.369 Hence, the quarries reacted
directly to the demand of marble by producing custom-made productsin
other words, a quarry-to-order system.370
At Simitthus the ex rat-mark is documented on giallo antico labels for a
limited period of time (ad 64134) only. One might speculate that the change
in epigraphic formula on giallo antico around ad 134when ex rat marks
seem to disappearwould reXect a departure from a quarry-to-order to a
quarry-to-stock system. The latter system probably saw blocks being quar-
ried automatically without directly reXecting actual demand and being stock-
piled at a certain location in or near the quarries. The change of production
system might be an explanation for the vast numbers of giallo antico, pavo-
nazetto, or granodiorite left in the quarries at Simitthus, Dokimeion, and
Mons Claudianus. In turn, this is conWrmed by the observation that the
numbers of ex rat(ione)-marks on marble blocks found in the marble
yards at Rome or Portus are by a 2.5:1-ratio signiWcantly higher (75) than
those found in quarries (29). The advantage of a quarry-to-order system
lies in limiting the output of surplus products from the quarry to a minimum;
the disadvantage is that the individual who demanded the product may be
366
Alf. Dig. 19.2.30.3, 19.2.60.3; Marcell. Dig. 45.1.98.1; Papir. Dig. 50.8.11; Ulp. Dig. 6.1.39,
11.6.7.34, 42.5.24.1, 50.8.3, 50.10.2.1; Cicero, Ver. 1.56.146, 1.57.150, 1.55.145, 3.7.16; Cicero,
Q. 2.4.2, 2.5.3, 3.2.3; Cicero, Att. 4.25; Cicero, Phil. 9.7; Vitruvius, 7.5.8; Tacitus, Hist. 1.27;
Festus, p. 270 M.; Sallust, Hist. 3.85; Horace, Ep. 2.2.72, Carm. 3.1.35.
367
On building contractors in Rome, cf. Kolb 1993: 115 f. with further bibliography; Daguet-
Gagey 1997: 22330. On their wealth, cf. CIL X 3821 ILS 3662. CIL VI 607 with Martin 1989:
57 fn. 57, 58 fn. 70 f., 60 f.; Adam 1999: 46 Wg. 94. For redemptores in a locatio conductio operis
providing building materials, see Alf. Dig. 19.2.30.3; Ulp. Dig. 6.1.39; cf. Kaser 1971: 570.
368
CIL VI 33873. CIL X 1549. IRT 275.
369
Fant 1993b: 84.
370
We cannot be certain that all names following the ex rat(ione)-mark belong to redemp-
tores. Imperial slaves could appear as rationarii which implies (though not conclusively) that
rationes, accounts, were also opened for non-contractors.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 327

stuck with an eventual surplus, which probably is the reason for the high
number of blocks with the label ex rat(ione) being stored at the marble yards
in Rome or Portus. A further downside was that the person ordering pillars or
blocks would have to wait a considerable time until they were ready.
The Karagol quarries at Teos where africano and grey marble were
extracted, apparently had a quarry-to-order-system in place from ad 75 to
ad 166. No basic change in the epigraphic formula can be detected there. This
might reXect the sparse supply in africano marble, making a change to the
perhaps more wasteful quarry-to-stock-system unfeasible. Similarly, be-
tween ad 96 and ad 150 the quarries at Chios seem to have extracted marble
to order, as did the quarries in the hinterland of Karystos between ad 132 to
161 and the Parian quarries between ad 153 and 164. At Dokimeion
ex rat(ione) marks (with one exception) do not appear to be used at all; a
quarry-to-stock-system could have been introduced early on in order to
cope with the high demand for this exotic marble. Nevertheless, the existence
of ex rat(ione) marks on pavonazetto at Rome/Ostia or Lepcis Magna (11) and
at Dokimeion (1) does prove that certain pavonazetto products still were
quarried on the direct orders of rationarii. The quarry-to-stock system also
permitted the standardisation of measurements. John Ward-Perkinss observa-
tions on the standardisation and prefabrication of quarried products seem to Wt
well into this model.371 The archaeological and epigraphic evidence for stand-
ardized column lengths, though, is not as clear as Ward-Perkins suggests: Hazel
Dodge lists a variety of diVerent non-standardized pillar sizes, but it is not
certain when and under what circumstances i.e. in a quarry-to-order or
quarry-to-stock-system, these columns were produced.372
A number of personal names following the ex rat(ione)-mark were not
those of private individuals but of imperial slaves or freedmen. In the years ad
96100 we Wnd an imperial slave (?) responsible for direct orders of pavona-
zetto marble, while the names of imperial slaves follow the ex rat(ione)-mark
in labels on giallo antico from Simitthus in ad 64134. Even in the case of
quarries like Teos or Chios, where direct imperial control cannot be proven,
members of the familia Caesaris are documented as rationarii in ad 64100
and ad 96118. If our interpretation of the onomastic material is correct,
rationarii could be private individuals or members of the familia Caesaris.
For the former we have argued that they were redemptores, not of quarry
sections but of the marble import to Rome or other cities, and perhaps
connected with speciWc public building projects. The latter, imperial slaves

371
Dodge 1988: 72; Ward-Perkins 1992b: 25.
372
Dodge & Ward-Perkins 1992: 25 fn. 18, with further bibliography, cf. also Fant 1993b: 74
fn. 6; Maischberger 1997: 24 f.
328 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

or freedmen, were to be found in a similar function in Rome, perhaps as

members of an institutionalized marble bureau.373

7.2.8. Similarities, DiVerences, and Changes of Epigraphic

Formula
The diVerences between the quarry labels from the large imperial quarries at
Mons Claudianus and the inscriptions found on pavonazetto and giallo antico
blocks at Dokimeion and Simitthus are signiWcant. The labels from the latter
two quarries exploit the administrative language to the fullest: the terms
oYcina, caesura, ex ratione, sub cura, l(ocus), n(umerus), etc., are used regu-
larly and consular dates as well as n- or l-numbers are engraved on most
blocks. At Mons Claudianus, on the other hand, a less complex system was
employed: n- and l-numbers are used, but consular dates, are absent. More-
over, the terms bracchium, caesura, sub cura, ex ratione, or oYcina are com-
pletely missing. Strongly abbreviated and ligatured marks appear instead, and
it is only through the ostraca that they become legible. The lack of any
consular dates is a signiWcant clue, and the inscribers at Mons Claudianus
felt no need to display the year a block had been quarried on a label. I have
argued that the brevity of the quarry labels at Mons Claudianus is a result of
the geological and topographical conditions there, i.e. the outcrop size of the
desired granodiorite stone (cf. 2.1.1). The 130 quarries (presumably opened
in diVerent years) were spread out over the vast area of c.9 square kilometers.
Extracted blocks could be left in the quarries and did not have to be moved in
order to make room for further exploitation. Rather than continuously
exploiting old sites, new quarries were opened at diVerent locations (prefer-
ably as close to the Wadi Xoor as possible). The authorities only had to note
the caesura, the name of the contractor (Epaphroditos) and the serial
number of the extracted block on the quarryied blocks. Any further informa-
tion could be easily deduced, as the blocks remained at the quarry until they
were exported. Additional information may have been stored in a central

373
A quarry label on pavonazetto naming a ratio urbica might indicate that marble for
Romes public building projects could also be ordered directly, perhaps by public magistrates(?).
App. nos. 115, 116 (ad 136). Perhaps the curatores operum publicorum were in charge of the
ratio urbica (?), cf. (AE 1945: 80 1947, p. 13, s.n. 20 1950: 83) with Hirschfeld 1905: 177 fn.
2; Kolb 1993: 1316, 2947, Nr. 6. Hirschfeld read the Wrst line of a quarry label on Carystean
marble (App. no. 618 Bruzza 1870: no.1 Dubois 1908: no.278 ILS 8717) as ex m(etallis)
n(ovis) Caesaris n(ostri) r(ationis) d(omus) A(ugusti). . . . Based on this reading he argued the
ratio domus Augusti to be an account for marble delivered to embellish the imperial palace at
Rome. The latter ratio as claimed by Hirschfeld and based on his reading of CIL VI 8531 was
part of the Wscus castrensis, cf. Hirschfeld 1905: 177 f. with fns. 2, 3, 316 fn. 2.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 329

archive at Mons Claudianus. Consequently, the degree of complexity in label

inscriptions on granodiorite stone from Mons Claudianus was low, a result of
the spacious layout and favourable geological conditions of the quarries.374
The geological and topographical constraints imposed on quarries like
Simitthus and Dokimeion limited the available space signiWcantly. The extrac-
tion zones did not exceed a size of 0.32 or 0.2 square kilometers (cf. 2.1.6). Old
quarries had to be used continuously and extracted products (along with the
accumulating rubble) could not be left in the quarries, but had to be moved.
Furthermore, diVerent contractors extracted blocks from the small outcrops.
The high density of quarrying sections, the removal of blocks, and the changing
of contractors in a quarry section necessitated a more complex accounting regime;
consular dates, the contractors names (caesura-holders), the workshops (oYci-
nae), the extraction zone before removal (bracchium), and a serial number had
to be recorded on the marble blocks. The higher complexity of label inscriptions
also allowed the quarrying authorities to check more easily whether or not the
contractors had met their obligations. The quarries of Simitthus and Doki-
meion possess more or less similar topographical and geological constraints.
Even so, at Dokimeion/Bacakale a whole list of abbreviations (particularly
ligatured marks like rma, he, vfr, ant, etc.) are documented which do not
occur at Simitthus. Furthermore, the elements of the administrative language
are combined diVerently at both quarries. The epigraphic formula at Simitthus
for the years ad 64 to c. ad 135/6 consists of a consular date, an ex rat(ione)
mark plus the names of the rationarii, probably the name of the oYcina and an
n-number. In Dokimeion the surviving evidence shows the use of a diVerent
formula. There, a consular date is accompanied by a ligatured mark such as
rma, he, or vfr, a b(racchium) number as well as a (serial?) number. The
appearance of numerous consular dates on one stone documents major inven-
tories of stockpiled blocks over several years. This procedure is not recorded at
Simitthus. Both quarries seem to alter their epigraphic formula at the end of
Hadrians reign. In Simitthus the ex rat(ione) mark is replaced around ad 137
with a sub cura indication plus the name of procuratores, whereas the name of
the emperor in the genitive form appears alongside the obligatory consular date.
This change has been interpreted as an attempt to intensify the control of the
imperial oYcials of the extraction process at Simitthus and, therefore, we must
assume that the ex ratione system was phased out. At Bacakale (but not in the
Upper Tembris valley), the caesuraoYcina system seems to have been intro-
duced around ad 136, replacing the older notation system.375 The new system,
374
Comparable sites are the Carrara quarries near Luna or the cipollino quarries near
Karystos.
375
Fant 1993b: 84 argues for a transitional stage in the evolution of labels, and therefore sees
the change taking place less abruptly.
330 Private Partners to Imperial Operations

used at Wrst for caesurae run by centuriones of the Roman army, allowed a more
eVective control of the contractors and workshops, under whose responsibility
stones were extracted and/or reWned into the desired products. The term
oYcina designated the workshop where the extracted blocks were roughly
hewn into the desired shape. A few inscriptions, though, seem to suggest that
certain oYcinae may, from time to time, also have extracted stones in their own
right. The caesura mark (followed by a name in the genitive form) presumably
indicated the contractor of a locatio conductio operis, a work contract; a certain
production quota had to be met by the caesura-holder in return for a money
payment. The appearance of caesura-holders at Bacakale, most likely private
individuals not related to the familia Caesaris, indicates that work in the
pavonazetto quarries was increasingly contracted out. Whether the new epi-
graphic formula also bears witness to the introduction of contractors for quarry
work and the reWnement of the quarried products in ad 136, or whether quarry
work already had been contracted out prior to that date, remains unknown.
No such system can be traced in Simitthus. There the imperial oYcials
seem to have had a Wrm control of the extractive procedure. No work was
contracted out to private individuals, perhaps a consequence of using convict
labour in these quarries.376 Whereas no signiWcant changes are introduced in
the epigraphic formula in Bacakale (apart maybe from the introduction of the
com(m) mark in ad 180), the sub cura-mark at Simitthus is replaced by the
term caesura, followed by the name of a procurator during the reign of
Antoninus Pius or later. Perhaps the synchronicity of the change in formula
observed for ad 136/137 at Simitthus and Bacakale reXects a centrally issued
administrative directive, but in itself does not provide enough evidence to
argue for a centralized administration for the imperial quarries.377 An in-
crease in demand for quarried products might also have triggered the admin-
istrative changes in these quarries.378

376
Mackensen 2000 with further bibliography.
377
Cuvigny 2000a: 9 f., observed a change in administrative practice at Mons Claudianus, as
from ad 136 onwards the receipts for advanced payments are supplied with a date. It is doubtful
whether this small change should be seen in the same light as the changes in epigraphic formula
at Simitthus and Dokimeion.
378
On Dokimeion: Fant 1989a: 268; Maischberger 1997: 21 f. An abrupt change also can be
detected at Karystos in ad 134/5, after which the ex rat-mark is used regularly. Hazel Dodge
believes that, (i)ncreased production is indicated by the opening of new quarries at Karystos
under Hadrian . . . and at Chemtou under Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius. Her assumption
is based on label inscriptions from Simitthus naming an oYcina nova Aureliana/Augustea and on a
inscription from Karystos, emended by Dessau, cf. Dodge 1988: 72 no. 618 ILS 8717 (Karystos);
App.nos. 833, 834 (Simitthus). Dessau emended the beginning of the Wrst line as: ex m(etallis)
n(ovis) Caesaris n(ostris) r(ationis) d(omus) A(ugusti). . . . Although his reading of ex mn is
plausible, no direct parallel can be cited in support of his view, cf. Hirschfeld 1905: 177 fn. 3.
 Private Partners to Imperial Operations 331

Based on the evaluation of the label inscriptions, the diVerences between

these two imperial quarries are quite fundamental. While one gains the
impression that private individuals were more or less excluded from the
extractive procedures at Simitthus, private contractors were employed on a
regular basis to extract pavonazetto from Bacakale. Moreover, quarries like
Mons Claudianus or Luna display distinctive quarry labels, suggesting fun-
damental diVerences from Simitthus or Dokimeion. For labels from quarries
like Karystos, Teos, Chios or Paros (no imperial control is directly attested for
the latter three) discrepancies or changes in formula are barely noticeable. All
quarry labels from these quarries, as well as those from Dokimeion and
Simitthus, display ex rat-marks followed by the name of the rationarii . As
none of the names of the rationarii appear in the epigraphic records of these
quarries, these speciWc abbreviations might not reXect organizational structures
within the quarries but in the trade of marble (cf. below). Moreover, terms like
caesura and oYcina appear to have the same or similar semantic content in every
imperial quarry where these terms are used. Despite these similiarities, the
signiWcant discrepancies in organization, which cannot be explained by refer-
ence to diVerent geological constraints, certainly underscore the autonomy of
the men-on-the-spot in organizing their own extractive procedures.
 8
The Emperor and Imperial
Extractive Operations

8 . 1 . M E TA L L A A N D I M P E R I A L I N T E RV E N T I O N S

There are various questions which still remain regarding the position of
mining and quarrying operations within the overall administration of the
Roman empire. These issues include the assignment of equestrian procur-
ators, members of the familia Caesaris, and military specialists to imperial
mining and quarrying ventures; the establishment of equestrian procurator-
ships for a certain category of mines on a provincial or even supra-provincial
level; the synchronicity of changes observed in the epigraphic formula at
Simitthus and Dokimeion; the documented (albeit limited) involvement of
emperors in regulating mining ventures at Vipasca or the redirection of
Numidian and Phrygian marble by Hadrian to cities in Asia Minor, etc.
Furthermore, there is the role of the emperor and his Palatine bureaux in
running mines and quarries during the Principate.

8.1.1. Human Resources

The emperor undoubtedly played a central role in the allocation of
human resources to extractive operations. His involvement is particularly
well attested in the case of the dispatch of military specialists to imperial
quarries: the centurio Annius Rufus was ordered to Mons Claudianus ab
optimo Imperatore Traiano. Similarily, the centuriones Tullius Saturninus,
Aelius Antoninus, and Sergius Longus were transferred across the empire to
Dokimeion and Karystos respectively, in order to put their knowledge of
quarrying organization to use. Given the distances covered by these military
specialists, it is likely that their assignment to imperial quarries came about at
the initiative of the emperor and his Palatine bureaux. Similarly, the centur-
iones frumentarii seconded to Luna/Carrara and elsewhere must have acted on
the orders of the emperor (cf. 5.1.1).
 The Emperor and Extractive Operations 333

The workings of a central authority were probably not limited to military

oYcers. Other personnel contributing to the organization of mining and
quarrying operations might also have been allocated to their respective
work places by a central authority: this appears to apply to convicts con-
demned in metallum. Ulpian in his ninth book on the Duties of a Proconsul
points out that governors whose provinces did not possess metalla were to
deport their convicts to provinces with such precincts.1 The patristic sources
occasionally refer to transfers of condemned Christians from their provinces
to foreign metalla: according to Eusebius, ninety-seven Christian convicts
were moved from a porphyry quarry in the Thebaid to the copper mines of
Phaeno/mod. Wadi Faynan in Palaestina in ad 309/10; a further group of
Egyptian Christians was deported to mines in Cilicia and Palaestina.2 A group
of Christian detainees in Phaeno were later deported to Cyprus, undoubtedly
to work in the mines there as well.3 During the reign of Commodus, a certain
Callistus was condemned by the praefectus urbi to the metalla of Sardinia, for
disturbing a ritual at a Jewish synagogue in Rome. He was later released, after
a letter was received by the local procurator of Sardinia to set Christians free.4
Ulpians passage in the Digest and the deportation of Christian prisoners from
one province to another oVers circumstantial evidence that a central authority
coordinated the assignment of prisoners to metalla. Occasionally, the Roman
emperor is attested as being directly involved in the distribution of prisoners
(albeit prisoners of war) to important construction projects: Titus had
prisoners from the Jewish war sent from Iudaea to quarries in Egypt5; Nero
allocated 6,000 Jewish captives to the commencement of work on the canal
across the Corinthian isthmus6; he also ordered those in custody to be
deported to Italy in order to work on canal projects between Misenum and
Ostia and those convicted of a crime to be condemned ad opus (publicum).7
In the late empire, Diocletian and Maximian answered a letter from Julian,
proconsul of Africa, on the issue of how to deal with persons of higher status
(honorati) who were guilty of thinking Persian thoughts, i.e. Manicheans.
The rescript prescribes the conWscation of property and condemnation of the
pursuer of Persian teachings to the metalla of Phaeno and Proconnesus
(marble quarries).8 The available evidence strongly suggests that the emperor
(i.e. his Palatine bureaux) directed the Xow of convicts and prisoners to the
metalla on a regular basis. Perhaps the distribution of prisoners clothing also
involved Rome: it is at least questionable whether the 6,700  ordered by

1 2
Dig. 48.19.8.4. Eusebius, MP 8.1, 8.13, 9.1.
3 4
Eusebius, MP 13.2. Haer. IX, 1112; Millar 1984: 140.
5 6
Jos. BJ 6.418. Jos. BJ 3.540.
7 8
Suet. Nero, 31.3. Coll. 15.3.7.
334 The Emperor and Extractive Operations

the praefectus Aegypti from the guilds of weavers in the Arsinoite nome in ad
153 were intended only for Egyptian convicts.9
Besides convicts and prisoners of war, the emperors directed newly acquired
subjects to mining works. The resettlement of indigenous communities in
north-western Spain conWrms Florus report that after the Cantabrian Wars
Augustus ordered the Asturians to be moved from their hilltop villages to the
valleys in order to work in the gold mines (cf. 6.1.3.2).10 The edict(s) of Augu-
stus regarding the castellani Paemeiobrigenses underlines his role in the reorgan-
ization of northwestern Spain after the Roman conquest. Apart from tribute
payments and other burdens on the community of Paemeiobrigenses, Augustus
grant of immunitas perpetua may also have freed them of corvee labour in the
mines.11 Florus furthermore informs us that after the Pannonian mutiny Au-
gustus legate C. Vibius Postumus put the local Dalmatian population to work in
the gold mines of the Vrbas valley.12 The propagation of such measures in other
conquered territories is not directly indicated by our sources. Yet, the available
written evidence might imply that such measures were commonplace in newly
annexed territories. In a speech to the Caledoni on the eve of the battle of Mt
Graupius, Tacitus has the chieftain Calgacus declare that he would rather be
killed in battle against the Roman invaders than face deportation to metalla.13
Calgacus purported words could reXect the experiences of some British tribes
immediately after the Roman conquest. Lead ingots from Flintshire further
provide insights on the issue: apart from a consular date on the face of the
ingots, mould marks on the front render the adjective attributes Deceangl(icum)
or Brig(anticum).14 Both adjectives derive from the ethnics Deceangli/Decangi
and Brigantes, tribes located in northeastern Wales and in Yorkshire, respect-
ively. The Deceangli probably came under Roman rule after the Wnal subjuga-
tion of north Wales around ad 73/4 and 77, as did the Brigantes by ad 78. The
consular dates for the years ad 74, 76, and 84, on the Deceanglian ingots and for
the year ad 81 on the Brigantian lead pigs illustrate the rapid pace with which
mines were up and running after the Roman conquest. Thus, the use of
indigenous populations in these local mines in the years immediately after the
conquest seems plausible.15 This might have also applied to lead mines opened
in the provincia Germania between 8 bc and ad 9. Recent studies on the lead
ingots from Brilon in the Sauerland east of the Rhine imply that mines were

9
P. Graux 30, Kol. VII, Kambitsis 1997.
10
Florus, 2.32.59 f.
11
AE 1999: 915 AE 2000: 760, cf. Alfoldy 2000b: 177.
12
Florus 2.25.12, 2.32.5960.
13
Tacitus, Agr. 32.4; cf. Lassandro 1995.
14
RIB II 2404.316. 61 f.
15
Jones & Mattingly 1990: 6677; Birley 2004.
 The Emperor and Extractive Operations 335

opened there immediately after the Roman conquest. Perhaps some of the
indigenous tribes were initially required to mine lead on behalf of the Roman
state.16 In Dacia the measures to allocate a work force to the deserted gold-
mining ventures were diVerent from the other provinces. Eutropius claims that
in the aftermath of the Dacian wars, which deprived the country of its populace,
Trajan had numerous subjects ex toto orbe Romano moved to Dacia.17 The
Pirustae, Baridustae, Sardiatae, and other Illyrians documented in the epi-
graphic record of Alburnus Maior in Roman Dacia have thus been regarded as
deportees from their ancient tribal area in Dalmatia. The Pirustae in particular,
located in the metalliferous region of the Upper Drina valley, were probably well
acquainted with mining techniques.18 Provided the Pirustae and other Illyrians
were moved en bloc to Alburnus Maior as an initial measure to restart mining
activites, the emperor himself must have initiated or at least sanctioned such a
radical measure.
The most obvious aspect of the emperors role in the administration of
imperial mines and quarries was the appointment of equestrians and freed-
men to procuratorial posts. Apart from career inscriptions, there is other
evidence that members of the familia Caesaris were promoted from an
unknown position to mining and quarrying posts: the commissioning of
inscribed monuments Wrst in Rome, and later in Karystos is clear evidence
for the movement of Hymenaeus Thamyrianus from Rome to the cipollino
quarries in Karystos (cf. 4.2.2). Dorotheus, procurator massae Marianae,
likewise set up an inscribed monument to Silvanus at Ostia, likely on the
eve of his departure to Baetica.19 Apart from the assignment of individuals to
administrative posts in the provinces, the initial allocation of imperial per-
sonnel en bloc to mining and quarrying districts was likely decided in Rome
as well. Tiberius directive, for example, to seize control over the mines of
Sextus Marius in Baetica must have taken place simultaneously with the

16
The tribe of the Sugambri (located in the region south of the river Lippe, within which the
lead mines of Brilon lay) may, in part, have been deported to Gaul and settled on the Rhine, cf.
Suet. Aug. 21.1, Tib. 9.2; Epit. 1.7; Orosius, Hist. adv. pag. 6.21.24 f.; RGDA 32; Tacitus, Ann. 2.
26. We have no direct indication that L. Flavius Verucla, named in the mould marks of the
ingots, was anyone other than the owner of lead ingots from the mines at Brilon (cf. 7.1.3). On
the provincia Germania, cf. Eck 2004a: 63112; Eck 2004b.
17
Eutropius 8.6.2.
18
CIL III pp. 944 V.,VIII; CIL III p. 937, VI. Hirschfeld, 1905: 154 f.; Mrozek 1969: 1413;
Wilkes 1969: 173 f.; Mrozek 1977: 99; Noeske 1977: 275 f; Wilkes 2004; Piso 2004: 292 f. Even
though Dacian names do not occur in inscriptions at Alburnus Maior or Ampelum, one cannot
completely exclude the presence of Dacians in the mines, cf. Gudea & Lobuscher 2006: 5860,
with further bibliography. The archaeological Wnds at Alburnus Maior imply pre-Roman
mining activity (B. Cauuet et al., in Damian 2003: 467526). This indicates indigenous
knowledge of mining operations which may have been put to use by the Roman conquerors.
19
CIL XIV 52 ILS 1592; for massa cf. TLL VIII, p. 429.
336 The Emperor and Extractive Operations

designation of a procurator and subaltern personnel to the site.20 One might

argue similarly in other instances. The argentiferous lead mines of the Ruteni
in Gaul, noted by Strabo, must also have fallen under direct imperial control
early in the Principate: an inscribed monument for a vilicus Zmaragdus was
commissioned by the familia Ti. Cae[sa]ris quae est in me[tal]lis.21 The
allocation of imperial personnel to extractive operations in newly conquered
regions such as Gaul, Egypt, Noricum, Dacia, and other Danubian provinces,
must have been decided by the emperor and his Palatine bureaux. Although
direct evidence for the process of imperial decision-making is extant, the
inclusion of mines and quarries in public or patrimonial property either by
conquest, by condemnation of individuals (bona damnatorum), by appropri-
ation of unclaimed domains (bona caduca), or by private bequest, must have
prompted the allocation of members of the familia Caesaris and equestrian
procurators to these extractive operations, provided direct imperial control
over these public or patrimonial assets was intended.22
The involvement of the empires central authority was perhaps not only
limited to the initial dispatch of parts of the familia Caesaris to newly
acquired extractive operations, as their transferral (apart from single procur-
ators and other oYcials) from other provinces to long-established imperial
mining and quarrying districts may have been monitored by Rome as well.
The onomastic evidence from Mons Claudianus suggests that besides Egyp-
tians, a small group of
 originated from Asia Minor, Syria, and
Palestine. These foreign
 are attested as recipients of advance
payments; they appear to have received wages for their work and, as their
personal names partly suggest, were probably not imperial slaves.23 Their
relocation from Asia Minor, Syria, and Palestine to Mons Claudianus is likely
to have involved the Palatine bureaux at some pointprovided these Orien-
tals did not migrate to Egypt of their own volition.

8.1.2. Costs and Revenues

In his treatise on the water supply of Rome, Frontinus points out that
Caesaris familia ex Wsco accipit commoda. The members of the familia
Caesaris assigned to the water supply of Rome alongside the public slaves

20
Tacitus Ann. 6.19.
21
AE 1892: 23 CIL XIII 1550, cf. Hirschfeld 1905: 156 f. For the silver-mines of the Ruteni
see Strabo 4.2.2.
22
Brunt 1990b: 1416; Millar 1992: 15874.
23
Cuvigny 1996b: 20; Cuvigny 2000a: 306, 287309.
 The Emperor and Extractive Operations 337

thus received a salary from the Wscus (Caesaris).24 At Vipasca the liberti et
servi Caesaris are also recorded as receiving commoda.25 The ostraca from
Mons Claudianus provide evidence of advance payments to
, the
source of these payments likely being the Wscus Caesaris. The quarry workers
in the Egyptian Eastern Desert received wheat and barley through the regular
mechanisms of grain taxation and requisiton (cf. 6.1.2.4), and thus one may
argue that the upkeep of
 was provided at least in part by public
revenues.
The grouping of the familia in a numerus of Alabastrine and a numerus of
Porphyrites with its respective sub-divisions, such as the I

of Mons
Claudianus, is recorded in the receipts on advance payments to
 at
the earliest in ad 136/7. Before c. ad 140 the authors of these cheirographa
(i.e. the recipients of the advance payments) did not provide their aYliation to
a numerus or I

. The change of practice, bearing in mind that the precise
dating of all receipts is diYcult, has been tentatively suggested to mirror the
inception of these organizational groupings under Antoninus Pius.26 How-
ever, this notable extension of the formula might be interpreted slightly
diVerent. The indication of aYliation was obviously not a legal requirement
of the cheirographa at Mons Claudianus, otherwise the attestation of the
recipients precise association to one of the numeri would occur in the
Hadrianic receipts on advance payments as well. The indication of numerus
and/or I

was of relevance to the person making the payment (in other
words, the recipient of the cheirographon) and may in fact reXect the account-
ing procedures of the 
and his proxies; the  must have
compiled a list on papyrus of those
 who had already received an
advance payment. We can only assume that the indication of numerus and
I

must have been noted meticulously by them. The purpose of this is
indicated by those receipts which stray from the numerus of Porphyrites /
arithmos of Claudianus formula: one Zambas K 
  `: H

:
I
F . . ., obviously received his advance payment in ad 146 from the

at Mons Claudianus; likewise those of the I

of Tiberiane also
received theirs at Mons Claudianus; in ad 148/9 one Serenus received his
advance from an oYcial of the numerus of Alabastron.27 The ostraca thus
might be interpreted as reXecting an accounting regime in which the salaries
were noted per numerus and arithmos. This information would have

24
Frontinus, aq. 2.118, cf. Boulvert 1970: 103; Boulvert 1974: 114; Alpers 1995: 124 f. In this
context Wscus clearly identiWes the Wscus Caesaris, as the familia Caesaris is juxtaposed to the
familia publica paid by the aerarium (Saturni).
25
LMV ll. 234.
26
Cuvigny 2000a: 81 f.
27
O.Claud. 527, 528, 535, 536, 587, 597.
338 The Emperor and Extractive Operations

undoubtedly been of interest not only to the quarrying procurator but to his
superiors within Egypt (perhaps the idios logos?) as well. Ultimately, a Wnal
account of the costs, arising amongst other things from the deployment of
members of the familia Caesaris throughout the province, must have reached
Rome.
The hiring of additional personnel to the quarry works in the Eastern
Desert, be they  or freeborn
, undoubtedly aVected the
costs of these ventures considerably.28 Similarly, the contracting out of work
to private entrepreneurs at Dokimeion (cf. 7.2.6) or the probable use of
convicts at Simitthus (cf. 2.1.6, 8.1.1) had an impact on the balance sheet.
The local freedmen procurators for the quarries in the Eastern Desert and
elsewhere undoubtedly formulated their personnel requirements based on
their knowledge of topographical and geographical constraints and on the
demand for marble. Yet, one wonders if it lay within the brief of the freedman
procurator to hire additional personnel besides the imperial functionaries
allocated to the quarries.29 A signiWcant increase in personnel either by hire of
free labour, contracting out work to private entrepreneurs, or by the alloca-
tion of convicts, all of which would have resulted in an increase of costs, could
(in theory) have required the emperors approval.
In general, the opening of new quarries under imperial control may have
necessitated the approval of the emperor. A building inscription commis-
sioned by Epaphroditos Sigerianos at Mons Claudianus relates to (quarry)
work ordered by Hadrian.30 Furthermore, toponyms like Mons Claudianus or
Tiberiane might imply the involvement of Claudius or Tiberius in their
opening; and Pliny recalls Egyptian marble being named Augustan or
Tiberian because it was discovered during the reigns of Augustus and
Tiberius.31 This tentative interpretation might also pertain to oYcina in
imperial quarries: the oYcinae Veriana, Commodiana, Severiana, Antoniniana
28
The marble quarried at Mons Claudianus was predominantly used in public construction
or imperial buildings at Rome, cf. the list in Peacock & MaxWeld 1997: 321; currently our
evidence very much excludes the idea of these quarries being run commercially. In the case of
red porphyry from Mons Porphyrites a precise reconstruction of the archaeological context is
nearly impossible given that the material was sought after and thus reused in various contexts,
cf. MaxWeld & Peacock 2001a: 30619. The distribution of polychrome marble from imperial
quarries seems to be primarily restricted to public and imperial buildings. This observation by
Fant (1993a: 1535) virtually excludes free market trade of this marble during the Principate.
Thus, the imperial quarrying ventures may not have generated any revenues for the imperial
treasury.
29
The legal sources on procurators of private principals do not directly address the issue of
hiring personnel; yet, one may assume that a procurator omnium rerum, for example, was
relatively free in deciding matters of human resources. The procurator, however, was obliged
to hand in a Wnancial report on a regular basis which allowed the principal to take action when
necessary, cf. Schafer 1998: 7887.
30 31
I. Pan 42, l. 2. Pliny, NH 36.55.
 The Emperor and Extractive Operations 339

or Alexandriana at Dokimeion, nova Aureliana at Simitthus, or Traiana at

Mons Claudianus, perhaps came into existence after speciWc orders of marble
by the emperor.32 The decision-making process which led to the opening of
new quarries might be illuminated in part by an episode reported by Pliny the
Elder. The presentation of red porphyry marble to the emperor Claudius by
Vitrasius Pollio and the formers distaste for it might not be merely a story of
ill-advised gift-giving: Pliny claims that after Vitrasius Pollio no one else
presented specimens of marble to the emperor.33 One might argue tentatively
that prior to this episode it was not unheard of to make presentations of
marble samples to the emperor. Apart from Wnancial considerations, the
emperor may have based his decision whether or not to open a quarry on
these marble samples.
The emperors perhaps not only ordered the opening of new quarries
or quarry sections but may have also become involved in the operative
processes in quarries. The alteration of quarry labels on giallo antico from
Simitthus and pavonazetto from Dokimeion echoes a central directive from
ad 136/7 which was issued in regard to these quarries only (cf. 7.2.8). Even
though the reason for this directive remains obscure, Wnancial issues must be
taken into consideration.34 Whether directives for imperial quarries were
promulgated on a regular basis remains unknown; yet, given the emperors
role as principal initiator of building projects at Rome and in the provinces
and as distributor of produce from imperial quarries, it is likely that he
would have taken an interest in the organisation of quarrying procedures.35
The emperor Hadrian perhaps intervened in pecuniary matters in the
mining administration at Vipasca. The lex metallis dicta refers to Hadrians
generosity (liberalitas) in the context of the down payment of 4,000 HS for
the pretium owed to the Wscus.36 The text does not provide any precise
indication of the exact nature of the emperors liberalitas; one thus can only
assume that he reduced the initial downpayment (cf. 7.1.1). Given the geo-
logical similarity of Vipasca to other mining areas in southern Spain, Hadrian
might have extended his liberalitas to other mining areas in this part of the

32
App. nos. 282, 285, 286 f., 291, 293, 297, 299, 301, 314, 325, 320, 32933, 327, 3368, 342,
344, 340, 369, 372, 375, 345, 364 f., 374, 832, 836.
33
Pliny, NH 36.57.
34
Whether an administrative change from a quarry-to-order to a quarry-to-stock system,
possibly reXected in the modiWcation of quarry labels at these quarries, was triggered by
shortcomings in the supply of Numidian and Phrygian marble for public building projects
is not evidenced by other written sources (cf. 7.2.7).
35
On Hadrian having giallo antico and pavonazetto shipped to Athens or Smyrna for public
building projects, cf. Boatwright 2000: 1537, 160 f. with table 6.2.
36
LMD, ll. 47.
340 The Emperor and Extractive Operations

Iberian Peninsula as well.37 At least on regulatory issues the emperor dealt

with imperial mines in general or with certain mining areas in particular.
Mateo argues that both Vipasca regulations likely originated with Vespasian;
the well documented attempts to regiment public land strongly suggest his
systematizing approach in dealing with the empires assets.38 Even though
Mateos argument is compelling, one ought to refrain from assigning such
measures to one speciWc emperor without any deWnite indications. Neverthe-
less, the general orientation of the Vipasca tablets may suggest an attempt to
increase revenues from the sale of mining rights and the contracting out of
auxiliary services, and facilitate the permanent production of metal ore from
the mines (cf. 6.1.3.1, 7.1.1).
Whether Wscal considerations otherwise played a role in administrative
decisions regarding imperial mines is rarely demonstrated by our written
sources. A lex limiting the output of lead in Gaul and Spain and increasing
output in Britain instead is reported by Pliny to have been inXuenced by the
abundance and relative shallowness of British galena deposits.39 This decision
to limit galena extraction to speciWc sites certainly identiWes an awareness of
extraction costs by the central authority. The productivity of mines not only
varied signiWcantly from venture to venture but could diminish over time,
rendering the continuation of mining operations useless. The opening and
closure of mining districts under imperial control thus must have followed
successful prospection and an estimate of possible returns.
The imperial freedman and members of the ordo equester appointed to
mining and quarrying procuratorships were, like the private procurator cui
mandatum est, required to provide regular accounts of their tenure (rationem
reddere).40 The addressee of these Wnancial reports was, in principle, the
emperor. Not all procuratorial reports may have reached Rome directly; some
of them were transmitted to the equestrian oYcials responsible for the
Wnancial aVairs of the respective province before being forwarded, perhaps
in an abridged version(?), to the Palatine bureaux. Even though our sources
are mostly mute on this issue, there is some circumstantial evidence. The
beneWciarii procuratoris Augusti documented in the inscriptions of Villals
suggest a close relationship between the freedmen procurators present in
the opencast mining area of the Duerna valley and the equestrian Wnancial
procurator for Asturia and Callaecia in nearby Asturica Augusta.41 Similarily,
the beneWciarii procuratoris documented at Ampelum may indicate the
37
Domergue 1983: 15166, esp. 185 f.
38
Mateo 2001: 17896 with sources; cf. also Levick 1999b: Domergue 2004: 22931.
39
Pliny, NH 34.164.
40
Paulus, Dig. 2.13.9.pr. Aubert 1994: 183; Schafer 1998: 746.
41
CIL II 2552 EAstorga 114; AE 1910: 1 AE 1928: 176 IRLeon 40.
 The Emperor and Extractive Operations 341

involvement of the Wnancial procurator of Dacia Apulensis with the gold-

mining administration (cf. 4.1.9).42 A close connection with the gold-mining
administration is furthermore indicated by a votive monument commissioned
by C. Sempronius Urbanus, Wnancial procurator of Dacia Apulensis.43 Based
on these observations one could argue that the freedmen procurators at
Ampelum and in the Duerna valley were perhaps subordinate to the Wnancial
procurator of Dacia Apulensis and Asturia and Callaecia, respectively. Thus,
the rationes compiled by these freedmen procurators were likely forwarded to
the Wnancial procurators. The epigraphic evidence from Sardinia oVers a
further indication: the inscription commissioned by the procurator metal-
lorum et praediorum at the beginning of the third century ad suggests that
he was directly subordinate to the presidial procurator of the island
(cf. 4.1.8).44 Furthermore, Flach surmised that the LMD perhaps originated
with the Wnancial procurator of Lusitania.45 As for the freedman procurators
managing the quarries of the Egyptian Eastern Desert, any rationes were
perhaps presented to the praefectus Aegypti: the inscriptions and ostraca
from Mons Claudianus and Mons Porphyrites as well as occasional written
documents from the Nile valley throw a sidelight on the role of the governor in
running the quarries (cf. 6.1.2.6). There is however no Wrm evidence to suggest
a direct referral of accounts to the praefectus Aegypti; other oYcials of the
provincial administration within Egypt, such as the idios logos or perhaps the
procurator usiacus, could have received accounting reports. A similar subor-
dination might have been the case with the freedman procurator provinciae
Phrygiae who may have answered directly to the patrimonial procurator of
Asia.46 Again, positive evidence is extant, yet one might tentatively cite the
quarry labels on Karystean marble as a plausible parallel: they mention procur-
atores Augusti such as Minicius Sanctus and C. C(a)erialis, both possibly
patrimonial procurators of Achaia. This suggests that the Karystean quarries
fell within the brief of these equestrian procurators.47 Hence, in the light of the
sparsity of evidence one can only argue cautiously for a subordination of
freedman quarrying procurators under an equestrian provincial procurator
within the administrative hierarchy. In the case of freedman mining procur-
ators a subordination, for example, under the equestrian Wnancial procurators

42
CIL III 7833 1289 IDR III/3, 300 CBFIR 565. CIL III 1295 IDR III/3, 310 CBFIR
566. AE 1991: 1344. Nelis-Clement 2000: 370, no. 186.
43
CIL III 1298 IDR III/3, 316 with Noeske 1977: 356 (AMP 35). See also PXaum 19601:
542 f., no. 200, 1065.
44
AE 1998: 671.
45
Flach 1979: 413 f.; Domergue1983: 170 f.; Lazzarini 2001: 8798, with further bibliography.
46
Eich 2005: 3038, esp. 307, with bibliography.
47
App. nos. 604, 618. PIR2 M 628, C 670, cf. PXaum 19601: 1001 f., no. 139 bis, 1071.
342 The Emperor and Extractive Operations

for Asturia et Callaecia or Dacia Apulensis is plausible. Nonetheless, one can

not exclude a direct link between the freedman procurators and Rome. The
equestrian procuratores aurariarum (Dacicarum), argentariarum Pannoni-
carum and/or Dalmaticarum, or ferrariarum for Gaul and the Danube
provinces probably answered directly to Rome.48 Be that as it may, the rationes
from mines or quarries under imperial control must have reached Rome either
directly or as part of a Wnancial report submitted by the patrimonial or
Wnancial procurator.

8 . 2 . PA L AT I N E B U R E AU X A N D E XT R AC T I V E O P E R AT I O N S

A number of scholars have postulated the existence of a central authority in

charge of mining and/or quarrying ventures under imperial control. Helene
Cuvigny argued that the monthly wages paid to free workers at Mons Clau-
dianus were similar to those paid to miners in the gold mines of Alburnus
Maior. She believed this observation of a Wxed annual pay for all free workers
in the metalla (mines and quarries) of the Empire conWrmed the hypothesis
of a centralization of the administration of metalla throughout the Empire.49
Cuvigny had based her hypothesis on J. C. Fants idea of a centralized marble
bureau controlling the production as well as the trade of marble.50 The
abbreviations, marks and formulae on various marbles, apparently part of
the same administrative vocabulary, together with epigraphic evidence for a
statio marmorum in Rome, led Fant and others to believe in a central marble
authority, which controlled the exploitation and import of the desired col-
oured and white marbles to the capital.51 Moreover, Slobodan Dusanics
hypothesis of a central bureau for imperial mines appeared to corroborate
this picture. On the basis of the evidence from the Illyrian provinces he argued
that it was possible to detect the outlines of a centralized administration of
metal production. This centralization was, he believed, prompted by the
constant need to supply the mint at Rome with gold, silver, and copper on
a large scale. Thus, Dusanic assumed that there was a special tabularium
attached to the bureau of the a rationibus. In support of this model, he

48
Eich 2005: 289., cf. Although the subordination of equestrian oYcials under prefects is
documented for Roman Egypt there is no evidence to suggest that this was also the case with
equestrian mining procurators. Bowman 1996a: 152f.; Bowman 1996b: 66f.; Eck 1997a: 142.
49
Cuvigny 1996a: 145.
50
Fant 1993a: 145 f.
51
For an overview of recent discussion, cf. Fant 1993a: 157; Maischberger 1997: 19 f.; contra
Hirschfeld 1905: 176; Dubois 1908: XXXVIII.
 The Emperor and Extractive Operations 343

cited the coinage especially intended for the imperial mining districts in
Noricum, Pannonia, Dalmatia, and Moesia Superior. Moreover, he argued
that the appearance of similar groups of migrants at mining districts in the
Illyrian provinces reXected not only a coherent policy of deportation on
Romes part, but were unthinkable without the help of a mining tabularium
in Rome.52
Given the range of connections between emperor and individual extractive
ventures as set out in the preceding chapters, there is no doubt that the Palatine
bureaux dealt with issues as they arose, appointed members of the familia
Caesaris to mines and quarries, decided on the distribution of convicts to
metalla throughout the empire and received rationes from quarries or mines
under imperial control. Yet, the identiWcation of a particular Palatine bureau
and its speciWc part in the activities described above remains a diYcult issue.

8.2.1. The Palatine Bureaux and Imperial Mines

As regards the mines under imperial control one very obvious Palatine oYcial
involved with these operations is the a rationibus. In his funerary poem on the
father of Claudius Etruscus, Statius notes the overall responsibility of the a
rationibus for revenues and expenditure. Amongst the former, mining ven-
tures Wgure prominently. The text alludes to mining ventures in Spain and
Dalmatia (quicquid ab auriferis eiectat Hiberia fossis, Dalmatico quod monte
nitet . . . ).53 A further connection is perhaps demonstrated by Beryllus in-
scription at Vipasca, according to which rationales (the procurator a rationibus
and the procurator summarum rationum) could have had a hand in the
appointment of the vicarius rationalium Beryllus as procurator of the mining
district there(?).54 The mission of Beryllus, namely the restitution of the Vipas-
can mines, may suggest that the bureau of the a rationibus may have been
directly informed of the situation at Vipasca. Undoubtedly the rationes from
the mines under imperial control directly or indirectly (i.e. via the Wnancial/
patrimonial procurators) reached the a rationibus. Yet, it remains uncertain
whether the allocation of freedman procurators was a regular task required
of the rationales, i.e. the a rationibus. In fact, the few documents on the posting
and promotion of imperial freedmen do not mention a bureau in charge of
personnel matters. The letter of recommendation written by Fronto on behalf

52
Dusanic 1989: 154 f.
53
Statius, Silv. 3.3.87 f. Hirschfeld 1905: 30 fn. 4; Boulvert 1970: 383 f.; Weaver 1972: 28494;
Eck 1997c: 14956; Eich 2005: 163 f.
54
IRPac 121 AE 1908: 233(?). The ultimate authority for promotions to administrative
posts was the emperor, cf. Suet. Vesp. 23.2. Eck 1995d: 24.
344 The Emperor and Extractive Operations

of the imperial freedman Aridelus was addressed to Marcus Aurelius directly, as

was the letter by Pliny on behalf of Maximus to Trajan.55 Furthermore, two
letters of promotion written by an unknown emperor are addressed to the
imperial freedman Ianuarius.56 Given the range of diVerent procuratorial
posts at hand, the number of incumbents, and the multitude of transfers or
advancements not only of imperial freedmen, but of equestrians and military
oYcers as well, it is likely that records on such issues were held at Rome.57 Based
on Statius, Silv. 5.1.94100, it has been assumed that ab epistulis perhaps ran a
human resources department or an archive concerned especially with the
selection of qualiWed equestrians and military oYcers for certain tasks.58
The Palatine bureau involved in the appointment of freedmen procurators
to mining or quarrying ventures cannot as yet be identiWed. Moreover, it is
not certain that the administrative issues arising from the imperial control of
mining ventures only aVected one speciWc Palatine bureau. Whereas the
accounts from various mining and quarrying procurators must have reached
the a rationibus, the pool of equestrians and military specialists and the
appointment of these to the metalla in the provinces was perhaps managed by
the ab epistulis. Several tasks may have been distributed amongst further
bureaux and Palatine oYcials. Under these circumstances, there would not
have been a need for a speciWc mining tabularium.

8.2.2. An Imperial Marble Bureau at Rome?

As regards the administration of quarrying operations throughout the prov-
inces, the epigraphic evidence for a statio marmorum, procuratores marmorum
and staV has been interpreted as the written remnants of a marble bureau at
Rome.

8.2.2.1. Locating the Marble Bureau

The physical remains of a central quarrying or marble authority, i.e. an oYce
building identiWed by an inscription, has yet to be discovered at Rome.
Nonetheless, in the years 186870 a large wharf with quays, ramps, and
embankment walls, the Marmorata, was excavated on the left bank of the
Tiber west of the Aventine hill. More than 1,200 marble blocks, as well as

55
Fronto, Ad M. Caes. 5.37, p. 87 Nab; Pliny, Ep. 10.85; Weaver 1972: 269; Boulvert 1974:
120, 162; Eck 1997a: 105.
56
CIL VI 8619. Weaver 1972: 256; Boulvert 1974: 163.
57
For a list of freedman procuratorial posts, cf. Boulvert 1970: passim.
58
Birley 19634: 207; Birley 1992: 23 f., 4154; Eck 1995e : 13941.
 The Emperor and Extractive Operations 345

10,000 slabs and fragments of diVerent stones, white and coloured marble,
and tons of stone chippings were found.59 In 1886 Wve blocks of cipollino
marble, two blocks of africano marble and twelve cubic metres of giallo antico
chippings were discovered in the area of the so-called Porticus Aemilia.
Moreover, Rodolfo Lanciani uncovered what he called an oYcina marmoraria
in the area of the Horrea Lolliana. In an 18
15 m2 large court, Lanciani noted
eighteen column shafts and segments, column bases and capitals, as well as
smaller fragments of coloured and white marble.60 The wharf on the left Tiber
bank and the Emporium were probably the major stockpiling and sawing
areas for marble imported to Rome.61 However, the preponderance of pre-
Trajanic marble blocks recovered from the Emporium, has led Maischberger
and Fant to the assumption that for a short period the marble was not stocked
at the wharf.62 During the restoration of the quays under Trajan, the marble
yard was temporarily situated either at Portus or somewhere along the
Tiber.63 In the 1938 excavations in the area of the municipal gasworks
(AGEA), a further deposit of twenty-six rough-hewn stones was discovered,
of which there were Wfteen cipollino blocks or column fragments, six africano
column fragments, four bigio column fragments and one alabaster column.64
Maischberger showed that the imported marble was not stocked at the
Campus Martius. The various workshops located there in connection with the
ongoing building projects explain the Wnds of unWnished marble columns and
roughed out statues, but there is no evidence for stockpiling at a central
location. Given the archaeological evidence (or the lack thereof), Lancianis
idea of a central marble oYce located under the church of S. Apollinare is
doubtful.65 He had based his view on three inscriptions found in the
Campus Martius area. An inscribed votive altar of an optio tabellariorum
stationis marmorum was unearthed in the Parione quarter; and a funerary
monument of a a marmoribus discovered near the Mausoleum of Augustus.66
In particular, it was an inscription on a lead water pipe naming a statio
patrimonii, located together with quarry-state columns under the S. Apolli-
nare church, which led Lanciani to locate the statio marmorum there.67 First,
the method of locating the statio marmorum on the basis of a lead pipe

59
Bruzza 1870.
60
Maischberger 1997: 84 and fns. 341. 342, with bibliography.
61
Maischberger 1997: 6193.
62
Bruzza 1870: nos. 13840, 191, 220 (Nero); 3, 14759 (Vespasian to Titus); 168, 170, 193,
194, 199 (Domitian); 200 (Trajan); 4, 612, 181, 2579, 266 (Hadrian); 223 (Antoninus).
63
Maischberger 1997: 80 V.; Fant 2001: 194.
64
Maischberger 1997: 58, with further bibliography.
65
Maischberger 1997: 107, 11037, 140 fn. 487 with further bibliography.
66
CIL VI 410 30760. CIL VI 8483 ILS 1598.
67
CIL XV 7315: Imp(eratoris) Antonini Aug(usti) Pii stationis / patrimoni sub cura Dioscori.
346 The Emperor and Extractive Operations

inscription in the Campus Martius does not withstand closer scrutiny. Even if
a statio patrimonii were to be located under the S. Apollinare church, no direct
link can be established to a statio marmorum. The Wnd of columns in this
context is not signiWcant, as numerous and dispersed Wndspots of columns
located in the Campus Martius area do not bear witness of a large-scale
marble yard. Secondly, the other two inscriptions hardly support the idea of
a central marble oYce in the Campus Martius; the funerary inscription of the
a marmoribus does not refer to a statio marmorum. Moreover, the Wndspot of
the optio tabellariorum inscription (which does refer to a statio marmorum) is
less than certain. It presumably was Wrst unearthed on the Aventine hill close
to S. Sabina. The Vigna Ciampolini, where the altar was found, became the
property of Francesco Losca in the Wrst half of the sixteenth century. Together
with other sculptures it probably was moved to his house in the Via del
Governo Vecchio in the Rione Parione on the Campus Martius, where it was
Wtted into a pillar on the ground Xoor. There it was re-discovered in 1888. In
the year 1993 excavations in the Crypta Balbi yielded a further inscription
naming a statio marmorum. A votive altar for the Bona Dea Apollinaris,
commissioned by an M. Ulpius Restutus, a libertus Augusti and praepositus
ex statione marmorum, had been reused in the construction of an early church
in the fourth or Wfth century ad. Whether this votive inscription Wrst stood in
the temple of the Bona Dea Subsaxana on the Aventine is doubtful, as Rest-
utus might also have set up the altar in a sacellum close to his working place.
Hence, none of these inscriptions provides satisfying evidence for the location
of the statio marmorum. Moreover, the term statio itself poses a further
problem. Maischberger, following Christer Bruuns discussion of the term
statio aquarum, has argued that statio can be understood as an administrative
authority in the abstract sense, or a real oYce building to be located within
the citys topography.68
Inscriptions referring to marble trade and its administration appear to
be concentrated in the Aventine/Emporium area. The votive altar of the
optio tabellariorum stationis marmorum was Wrst discovered in the sixteenth
century on the Aventine.69 An altar devoted to Hercules by Primigenius
Iuvencianus, a servus(?) of emperor Vespasian and tabularius a marmoribus,
was found in 1737 on the banks of the Tiber at the Vigna Sforza-Cesarini
together with molti alabastri e marmi pregiati.70 Furthermore, the funerary
inscription of C. Tullius Crescens, a negotiator marmorarius, found at the via

68
Bruun 1991: 257 V. with discussion of literary and epigraphic evidence; Maischberger
1997: 122, no. 35, 1402.
69
Maischberger 1997: 63.
70
CIL VI 301 30731.
 The Emperor and Extractive Operations 347

Figure 23. Rome (after Maischberger 1997: Abb. 17)

del Tritone Nuovo, seems to indicate that this marble trader was presumably
located in or near the Horrea Galbana.71 Another funerary inscription of a
Marcus Aurelius Xenonianus Akylas documents that this person maintained
the Wrst(?) station in the Horrea Petroniana and was the Wnest stone-trader.72
The Wndspots of these inscriptions suggest that the main activity of marble
trade in the capital was quite obviously located in the Emporium. This
circumstantial evidence thus may allow us to tentatively locate the bureau
of an imperial administrative authority for marble in this area.73

71
CIL VI 33886.
72
SEG IV 106 IG XIV 2247 IGUR II 413.
73
Maischberger 1997: 51 f.
348 The Emperor and Extractive Operations

8.2.2.2. DeWning the Marble Bureau

The location of a marble bureau set aside, the description of its organiza-
tional outlines, development, and role is also problematic. The earliest attest-
ation of an imperial oYcial perhaps connected with the marble trade is
provided by an inscribed statue base from Nepet/mod. Nepi north of Rome,
commissioned by the ab marmoribus Hermeros Thyamidianus, a slave of
emperor Claudius.74 Three further inscriptions of Flavian date identify tabu-
larii (rationis) marmorum Lunensium: an inscribed gravestone of T. Flavius
Celadus was unearthed alongside the Via Ostiense; and two funerary inscrip-
tions, discovered in the church of S. Croce in Gerusalemme and on the Via
Praenestina, were commissioned by a T. Flavius Successus. Successus position
was that of tabularius marmorum Lunensium or tabularius rationis marmorum
Lunessium. So far, this oYce is only attested under the Flavians, and there are
no epigraphic indications that this ratio was continued afterwards, or had
been introduced at an earlier date (cf. 7.2.5).75 Other decorative stones
imported were perhaps dealt with by tabularii a marmoribus; the votive
monument of Primigenius Iuvencianus from Vespasians reign documents
the devotee in this position.76 A funerary inscription found near Augustus
Mausoleum in Rome attests M. Ulpius Martialis as a marmoribus.77 Further-
more, a statio marmorum in Rome is evidenced in a hitherto unpublished
inscribed votive altar found in the Crypta Balbi in 1993 commissioned by an
M. Ulpius Restutus, purportedly a praepositus ex station(e) marmorum.78
Semnus, an optio tabellariorum of the statio marmorum, set up an altar to
Iuppiter Maximus Dolichenus after ad 197.79 The undated and fragmentary
inscription discovered in S. Maria Maggiore renders the functional title of
[-]us Antiochus, libertus Augusti, as procurator marmorum.80 The same title is
documented in the inscription of the procurator provinciae Frygiae, Aurelius
Marcio in Kaimaz, who once probably held the oYce of procurator marmorum

74
CIL XI 3199 ILS 3481. As the title ab marmoribus is not followed by a topographical
indication and no quarries of any importance are to be found in the vicinity of Nepet, Hermeros
probably held this post in Rome. The inscription appears to have been set up at Nepet in
commemoration of his role as magister of a collegium Feroniae for the name, cf. Weaver 1972:
21223. On a collegium Feroniae in Furcona, cf. AE 1998: 406 and Buonocore 1998: 56 f.
75
CIL VI 8484, 8485; Quilici 1974: 279, no.166 AE 1974: 153.
76
CIL VI 301 30731.
77
CIL VI 8483.
78
Sagu 1993: 413, Wg. 6; Maischberger 1997: 141. The title praepositus ex statione mar-
morumin analogy with the military usage of ex (cf. Speidel 1993)might be understood to
indicate a promotion of M. Ulpius Restutus from the statio marmorum to a diVerent posting.
This promotion obviously warranted the commissioning of a votive altar.
79
CIL VI 410 30760 ILS 1707.
80
CIL VI 8482.
 The Emperor and Extractive Operations 349

in Rome, perhaps sometime during the second half of the second century
(cf. 4.1.3). Thus, the following chronology emerges:
Claudius Hermeros
Thymidianus
ab marmoribus
Vespasian Primigenius
Iuvencianus
tabularius a
marmoribus
Flavian T. Flavius Celadus
tabularius marmorum
Lunensium
T. Flavius Successus
tabularius (rationis)
marmorum Lunensium
Trajan M. Ulpius
Restutus
praepositus
ex station(e)
marmorum
M. Ulpius
Martialis
a marmoribus
Septimius Severus Semnus
optio tabellariorum sta-
tionis marmorum
Late 2nd/early 3rd c. M. Aurelius
Marcio
procurator
marmorum
Undated [-]us Antiochus
procurator
marmorum
The arrangement of the evidence in chronological order may provide an
outline of the gradual development of a marble bureau. The oYce may
have had its origins in a few imperial slaves acting as ab marmoribus under
Claudius, and the evidence for tabularii for marble in general and a ratio
marmorum Lunensium in particular for the Flavian period might mirror the
350 The Emperor and Extractive Operations

increase of building activity in Rome.81 The complexity of this administrative

branch grew more and more elaborate during the second century: a statio
marmorum is attested as early as Trajans reign, whereas tabellarii might be a
late second century additionperhaps coupled with the creation of a freedman
procuratorship. In view of the lacunose evidence, this model, which implies
organic growth, might be misleading; the functions and administrative respon-
sibilities could alternatively be seen as part of one administrative branch or
marble bureau headed by a procurator, which had already been established
during the Wrst century.
The purpose of the bureau is not revealed by the epigraphic sources.
Whereas designations such as a(b) marmoribus are not particularly illumin-
ating, the functional title of tabularius rationis marmorum Lunensium is rather
precise. The administrative tasks of a tabularius are well known in general,
and in the case of Mons Claudianus, the local tabularius is documented
managing the marble stocks (cf. 6.2). One might well imagine the tabularii
a marmoribus keeping track of numerous blocks and columns stocked at
marble yards throughout Rome and Ostia. The duties of a tabularius rationis
marmorum Lunensium were perhaps slightly diVerent: the term ratio in this
context may have described a speciWc registry for Lunensian, i.e. Carrara
marble, arriving and being stored at Rome.82 The use of tabellarii in the
service of a statio marmorum raises the question of their purpose. As the
tabellarii stationis marmorum are hitherto only attested in Rome, it appears
less likely that they were responsible for the transfer of messages between
Rome and the imperial quarries.83 Given the fact that marble was also
stockpiled at yards in Portus and Ostia c.30 km down the Tiber, the statio
marmorum at Rome probably used the tabellarii at its disposal for the transfer
of information between Rome and the marble yards, perhaps comparable
to the fashion in which the K
H
 deployed tabellarii to
the quarries in the Egyptian Eastern Desert (cf. 4.2.2). Perhaps some of the

81
Perhaps these tabularii rationis marmorum stood under the direction of a princeps or
praepositus tabulariorum, as is occasionally evidenced for other branches of the Roman admin-
istration, cf. Hirschfeld 1905: 460 f.; Sachers 1932: 1972.
82
A parallel for the use of ratio in this context is provided by graYti from the vaults of the
archaeological complex at Barco Borghese in Monte Porzio Catione/Frascati, south-east of
Rome, likely used as a logistics centre for construction work at the numerous imperial villae
nearby. The letters ratio marmoraria painted on plaster, dated to the end of the 1st cent. ad., and
other graYti from one of its vaults, list modii of marble, a measurement normally used for
liquids or grain. The constraints of the small vaulted room suggest that the marble stored in this
room was pulverized marble in bags. The marble powder probably derived from rubble of
marble work shops or directly from the quarries themselves as a useful by-product of the Roman
marble industry, cf. Lega 2003.
83
Hirschfeld 1905: 202 with fn. 1; Boulvert 1970: 186; Kolb 2000: 276.
 The Emperor and Extractive Operations 351

numerous imperial oYcials named in the genitive after ex rat(ione)

on quarry labels were allocated to the statio (or perhaps even stationes?)
at Rome (and Ostia or Portus?). The procurator marmorum is likely to
have supervised this whole system. The responsibilities of the procurator
marmorum or the role of the statio marmorum is perhaps comparable to
the function of Ulpius Chresimus, the procurator a marmoribus known
from Mylasa. Based on the geographical concentration of the epigraphic
evidence, Chresimus was most likely stationed in the Maeander valley, if
not at Miletos itself, probably overseeing either the marble transport and/or
the supply of imperial marble for local public building projects in Asia
Minor (cf. 4.1.4). While Ulpius Chresimus held this possibly temporary
position in connection with particular building projects in cities of the
Maeander valley, the constant building site which was the city of Rome
certainly supported the creation of a more permanent oYce. The main
purpose of this administrative branch was therefore to order marble blocks
and columns for imperial building projects from various quarries and
manage the stockpiles of marble at Portus, Ostia, and Rome. The names
of private rationarii on quarry labels may suggest that contractors of
public building projects or contractors supplying building material may
have ordered marble directly from the imperial quarries or via the marble
bureau. The question remains, however, whether this marble bureau
inXuenced operative procedures at the quarries such as Dokimeion, Simit-
thus, Mons Claudianus, or Karystos.

8.2.3. Marble Bureau and Imperial Quarries

8.2.3.1. Latin Quarrying Vocabulary
Based on the dissemination of Latin quarrying terminology documented in
quarry labels throughout the empire, it has been argued that this central
marble bureau was in control of the exploitation of coloured and white
marble and its import to the city of Rome.84 The markedly diverse epigraphic
formulae documented on quarry labels, however, record not only signiWcant
variations in geological and topographical constraints but also diVerent
approaches to organizing operative processes under similar geological condi-
tions (cf. 7.2.8). While at Dokimeion quarry work was contracted out to
private individuals, the quarry labels on giallo antico from Simitthus do not
refer to contractors at all, but appear to reXect the running of extractive

84
Fant 1993a: 157, contra Hirschfeld 1905: 176; Dubois 1908: XXXVIII.
352 The Emperor and Extractive Operations

procedures directly by imperial oYcials. Consequently, quarrying procurators

might have been relatively independent in implementing the appropriate
working procedures, and in deciding whether or not quarry work was to be
contracted out.
Nonetheless, the abbreviations, marks, and formulae used in the imperial
quarries of Dokimeion, Karystos, Luna, and Simitthus, and on marble from
quarries such as Teos, Chios, Paros, Hymettos, or Pentelikon, are part of the
same administrative vocabulary.85 The use of Latin terminology for accounting
purposes within the quarries, let alone for the categorization of the work force
(e.g. pagani, familiarii), in the context of a predominantly Greek-speaking
population is signiWcant. This suggests an intentional use of Latin terminology
at least in quarry labelsa usage which needs to be explained. Assuming the
above observations are correct, the information displayed by the quarry labels
mostly concerns the internal organization of the quarries and does not refer to a
central authority. The practice of detailing the contributors to the production of
marble items in Latin seems not to have been associated with possible liability
issues emerging from deWcient produce being delivered to Rome. The quality of
marble blocks is likely to have been examined prior to their export to Rome; this
diminishes the relevance of quarry labels for the recipients of the marble
produce. Only the formula ex rat(ione) PN in quarry labels may relate to
private contractors, redemptores, of building projects and imperial oYcials in
Rome ordering marble from the respective quarries. This information would be
of interest to a central authority coordinating the order of marble produce from
the imperial quarriesperhaps this task fell to the marble bureau at Rome and
Ostia (cf. 8.2.2). If so, the use of Latin markings might be partly explained by the
monoglot recipients of the marble exports to Rome. The observation, however,
that the quarry labels reflect the internal organization of quarries calls for a
different explanation: the appointment of imperial slaves and freedmen and of
military personnel to the quarries partly explains the spread of Latin termin-
ology to all imperial quarries, particularly Dokimeion or Karystos in the Greek
East. Apart from inhabitants of Roman colonies (e.g. Alexandria Troas, Anti-
ochia Pisidiae, or Berytus) and private individuals from the west, it is mostly
members of the provincial administration and the Roman army who are
recorded commissioning monuments inscribed in Latin during their service in
the east. Furthermore, much of the internal military correspondence known
from the papyri and ostraca of Roman Egypt and the Near East is composed in
Latin.86 These observations also apply to the staV documented at imperial
quarries: the Latin inscriptions of dispensatores at Dokimeion and Krokeai, of

85
For an overview of the recent discussion, cf. Maischberger 1997: 19 f.
86
Millar 1994: 40319.
 The Emperor and Extractive Operations 353

tabularii at El-Ashmunein, of Aurelius Marcio at Kaimaz, of Chresimus at

Mylasa and Tralles, and of Hymenaeus Thamyrianus at Karystos, certainly
provide evidence that Latin was customarily used by members of the quarrying
administration.87 The spread of Latin as the language used in quarry labels is
thus best explained by the appointment of Latin speaking officials to the
quarries. Therefore the employment of a Latin quarrying vocabulary, seemingly
common to quarry organizations under imperial control, must not be credited
to a central marble bureau in Rome. The dissemination of this vocabulary
might as well be attributed to accounting practices shared by the military,
imperial personnel, and the public domain. As for the involvement of a central
marble bureau in every day quarrying operations the quarry labels do not
provide any evidence in support of this view.

8.2.3.2. Distribution of Organizational Tasks

The use of Latin in quarry labels set aside, there is hardly any evidence for the
inXuence of a marble bureau on quarrying operations. Even though the
emperor, i.e. his Palatine bureaux, can be observed in our sources opening
and interfering in the running of quarries (cf. 8.1.2), there is nothing to
suggest that this was a regular occurrence. In the light of their Wnancial
implications, some decisions, such as the expansion of existing quarries or
the opening of new ones in order to meet the demand of public and imperial
building projects in Rome, were probably ordered or at least sanctioned by the
emperor. Further aid by the emperor, i.e. his Palatine bureaux, was required in
the deployment of members of the familia Caesaris, military specialists, and
perhaps convicts from other provinces to quarries (cf. 8.1.1). Only on one
occasion is there any evidence for central intervention in ongoing quarrying
operations: the change in epigraphic formula at Simitthus and Dokimeion
may reXect a central directive most likely issued by the emperor (cf. 7.2.8).
Most of the time Rome probably did not interfere. The varying geological
and topographical constraints amongst imperial quarries, and the organ-
izational implications arising from them, not to mention the lack of uni-
form traits in operative processes as expressed in the diVering quarry labels,
make it highly unlikely that there was centralized management of extractive
operations in Rome. Consequently, it is doubtful whether the scale of the

87
AE 1986: 674 Christol & Drew-Bear 1986: no. 5 (Dokimeion); CIL III 493 IG 5/1, 1569
(Krokeai); Cockle 1996: 238 (El-Ashmunein); CIL III 348 CIG 3822 (Kaimaz); CIL III 7146
IK 36/1, 148 (Tralles); AE 1988: 1028 SEG XXXVIII 1073 Herrmann 1988: 1225
(Mylasa); CIL III 563, 12289 (Karystos).
354 The Emperor and Extractive Operations

emperors, i.e. the Palatine oYcials, direct involvement in the organizational

structures of imperial quarries merited the creation of a special administra-
tive branch in Rome to cope with the information Xow generated by the
production and trade of marble. The procuratores marmorum and the statio
marmorum in Rome were probably not responsible for the organization of
the marble production, but were primarily concerned with the importing of
marble from diVerent imperial quarries for speciWc public building projects
in Rome.88
The demand for marble produce from quarries under imperial control
(Simitthus, Dokimeion, Mons Claudianus, Karystos) was predominantly
formulated in the context of public and imperial building projects at Rome
(and, infrequently, in other towns throughout the empire).89 The conclusions
gained from the analysis of quarry labels, if correct, imply that during an early
phase of imperial control at quarries (such as Dokimeion, Simitthus, and
others) contractors of imperial and public building projects and members of
the familia Caesaris at Rome may have ordered marble elements (capitals,
columns, bases, blocks, etc.) directly from the quarries. Perhaps the early
forerunners of the statio marmorum in Rome, the ab marmoribus may also
have been involved in relaying the orders to the quarries. The addressees were
undoubtedly the freedmen procurators or other imperial oYcials placed in
charge of the quarrying operations. They would have compiled and relayed
these orders for marble to the individual quarries. It was probably up to the
imperial oYcial on the spot, the civilian and military engineers, and/or the
foremen to organize the work gangs or distribute any incoming orders
amongst the contractors. The produce was then extracted, dressed, and
readied for transport. This quarry-to-order system would have had some
apparent disadvantages. The time elapsing from transmitting the order, the
production of the required elements, to their shipment to their respective
destination would have taken roughly one year or more. Moreover, the loss of

88
On the role of the statio marmorum as provider of building materials, cf. Daguet-Gagey
1997: 207.
89
The dissemination of polychrome marbles from imperial quarries in a private context
appears to be limited mostly to small specimens found in the Xoors and veneers of villae
in Italy and the provinces, cf. Fant 1993a: 1535. How members of the Roman elite had
come into possession of these samples is unclear. It is not known whether the marble
blocks were presented as gifts by the emperor to meritorious senators or equestrians, or
whether these coloured marbles were available to anyone who could aVord such luxuries.
Even though the Prices Edict of Diocletian of ad 301 (CIL III Suppl. pp. 22089, de
marmoribus) does provide the maximum prices for speciWc coloured marbles, this may
not necessarily be taken as evidence for free market availability of coloured marble in the
preceding centuries.
 The Emperor and Extractive Operations 355

customized marble elements, particularly columns, during transport (as a

result of shipwrecks or other accidents), would have taken considerable time
to replace. At Dokimeion and Simitthus this rather sluggish quarry-to-order
system may have been changed by ad 136/7. For Dokimeion the quarry labels
could indicate a signiWcant shift from a quarry-to-order to a quarry-to-stock
system, perhaps in combination with a norming of measurements allowing
for the prefabrication of capitals, bases, columns, etc. The contractors or work
gangs produced certain marble elements in advance, stocking them at the
quarries. This would have cut the response time considerably and would have
speeded up construction at Rome (cf. 7.2.7). This new system (albeit limited
to Simitthus and Dokimeion) may have developed in step with the formation
of the statio marmorum in Rome (provided one wishes to argue for the
growth of this bureau) which possibly compiled the orders for marble at
Rome and forwarded them to the quarries (cf. 8.2.2). The tons of marble
shipped to Portus/Ostia and then to Rome could not be deposited in the
immediate vicinity of the building sites given the spatial restrictions of the
sprawling capital. Thus, central stocking areas at Portus, Ostia, and in Rome,
such as the Emporium, were designated and the incoming marble distributed
to the building sites throughout Rome. The administration of these stocks at
Rome and at its harbours, as well as the transmission of orders to the quarries
possibly lay with the statio marmorum in Rome.
How this demand for marble in speciWed shapes and sizes was to be met
was basically up to quarrying authorities in the provinces. The aquaintance of
quarrying procurators and the civilian or military specialists in charge of
operations with the geological, topographical, and geographical constraints
rule out constant interference from Rome. In the case of Dokimeion, however,
the imperial oYcials in charge must have met considerable diYculties which
prompted the dispatch of military specialists to the quarries (cf. 5.1.1). Most
of the time, many of the organizational decisions are likely to have been taken
by the procurator of a quarrying district. The recruitment and pay of the
workforce (apart from convicts and members of the familia Caesaris), de-
cisions on the general structure of working procedures (made together with
the experienced military or civilian engineers), and the outsourcing of quarry
work, all probably fell within the brief of the freedman quarrying procurator.
The origin of the  from the Nile Valley makes it likely that the hire of
free labour and their deployment was part of the procurators responsibilities
(contracted out to
?), as was the formulation of the demand for

 from Asia Minor, Syria, or Palestine, or for convicts in the case of
Simitthus (cf. 8.1.1). Moreover, the procurator and his staV probably com-
piled the demands for provisions and logistical support reported to them
by the military commanders and the civilian administrators on the spot
356 The Emperor and Extractive Operations

(cf. 6.1.2.1). At Mons Claudianus the necessary supplies were then requested
from the praefectus Aegyptiat least pro forma. The latter issued the relevant
orders for the collection of grain or the requisition of animals from the
provincial population (cf. 6.1.2.6). The responsibilities of the prefects of
Roman Egypt, however, went beyond merely responding to the needs of the
quarrying procurators. The military contingents detached from the exercitus
Aegypti to the quarries stood under the general command of the praefectus
Aegypti. Moreover, the army quarrying specialists from other provinces were
likely seconded to the imperial quarries on the request of the prefect. The
written evidence from the Egyptian Eastern Desert hints at occasional visits
made by the praefectus Aegypti to the quarries at Mons Claudianus (cf.
6.1.2.6). The initiation of extractive operations as well as the presentation of
marble samples to the emperor probably reXects the fact that the responsi-
bility for the imperial quarries in Egypt was shared between the prefect and
the freedman procurators. Provided the distribution of responsibilities be-
tween quarrying procurators and governors, as observed in Roman Egypt,
was the same throughout the empire, one could assume that most decisions
concerning the supply of quarries with provisions and logistical support, as
well as the deployment of troops and military specialists, were taken by the
governors and other equestrian oYcials of the provincial administration. The
evidence for the support of imperial quarrying activities by other provincial
governors is circumstantial: military contingents were probably detached to
the quarries on the orders of the provincial governors and military specialists
were requested by the governors from neighbouring provinces or from the
emperor in Rome. Moreover, the gubernatorial authority of sentencing con-
victs to quarrying duty might imply a limited responsibility for part of the
workforce in the metalla (cf. 6.1.2.6).
 9
Imperial Mining and Quarrying
Administration: A Conclusion

Arranging our written sources in a chronological order would allow one, in

theory, to trace the respective origins and formation of quarrying and mining
organizations within the framework of the empires administration, perhaps
even to identify a coherent policy towards extractive operations under imperial
control. The lacunose nature of our evidence, however, is a formidable obstacle
to drawing deWnitive conclusions. For example, any proposal for a timeline of
procuratorial posts established by Rome must inevitably rely on arguments
e silentio; this prohibits any certainty or precision, for example, in pinpointing
the date for the establishment of a new procuratorship or in outlining the
responsibilities of the oYce-holder. In consequence, any attempt at reconstructing
the decision-making process at Rome which led to the establishment of these
procuratorships remains hypothetical, and any essay on the evolution of mining
and administration in the Roman provinces remains an educated guess.
The Augustan settlement of 27 bc saw the placing of unpaciWed provinces of
Spain, Gaul, Syria, Cilicia, Cyprus, and Egypt in the custody of Augustus.1 Dio
reports that the princeps seconded procurators to all provinces, to his own as well
as those of the Roman populus. These oYcials would be guided by a set of rules
and directives established by the emperor. The purported task of these oYcials
was the collection of revenues and disbursements in accordance with their
respective instructions.2 In addition, Strabo highlights the presence of procur-
ators in Hispania Citerior, who were in charge of supplying the soldiers with
what they needed.3 The administrative tasks bestowed on the Wnancial procur-
ator within a provincia Caesaristhe collection of taxes and revenue from
public and imperial lands, the payment of the army stationed within the
province and perhaps the expenditure for infrastructural construction work
(e.g. roads, aqueducts)would indicate the relative independence of Wnancial
procurators within the provincial administration.4 As regards the opening and

1 2 3
Dio 53.12.5 V.; Kienast 1999: 86 f. Dio 53.15.3 f. Strabo 3.4.20.
4
Brunt 1983: 52; Brunt 1990b: 165 f.; Burton 1993: 16; Eck 1997a: 135 f., 142 f.; Eck 1997b:
198 f.
358 Conclusion

running of mining operations on public or the emperors land in these prov-

inces, our knowledge is limited to the rare insight provided by Florus testi-
monies on the early mining activities in north-western Spain or in Dalmatia: in
the initial phases after the Roman conquest the local population was directed by
force towards the exploitation of its own gold resources.5 Similar processes may
have been in play in other newly conquered territories such as the Augustan
provincia Germania, or later, under Claudius and his successors, in Britain,
where silverlead and iron mines, respectively, fell into the hands of the Roman
conquerors (cf. 8.1.1). The conspicuous location of legionary and auxiliary
camps in the vicinity of mining regions, such as Legio/mod. Leon in north-
western Spain, or the auxiliary forts at Dolaucothi, Charterhouse-on-Mendip,
or Brough-on-Humber, strongly suggests that military forces were employed
not only to provide security for these mining ventures, but were also perhaps
there to enforce corvee-labour in the opencast or underground mining oper-
ations during the early phases of occupation (cf. 5.2). At what point, if ever,
the exploitation regime in these regions changed from a forced approach to
farming out or selling oV mining plots, or whether potential mining areas were
contracted out soon after paciWcation of the occupied territories, cannot be
determined based on the available evidence.6 Even though military personnel
may occasionally have been used as a workforce in the exploitation of iron
or gold mines, their use for this purpose on a regular basis appears unlikely
(cf. 5.3). Strabos passage on the tasks of the procurators in Spain indicates that
procurators in provinciae Caesaris were predominantly entrusted with the
commissariat and pay of the troops.7 The build-up and onslaught of military
expeditions, for example, into the territories east of the Rhine under Augustus
and the early days of Tiberius reign, and later the permanent garrison of Roman
legions and auxiliary units along the Rhine frontier, must have considerably
augmented the demand for metals and other supplies.8 This demand was likely
met by iron and lead mined in Gauls provinces.9 Similar arrangements must

5
Florus 2.25.12, 2.32.5960.
6
The onomastic evidence for private individuals and societates named on British and
German lead ingots provides only an inadequate basis for identifying the organizational
arrangements of individual mining operations. As argued above (cf. 7.1.3) the names in the
genitive case in mould marks and stamps at most identify the (current) owners of the ingots,
and not the owners or contractors of mining ventures.
7
Strabo 3.4.20 with Brunt 1983: 52.
8
The camp of Oberaden on the river Lippe, in use from 118 bc, yielded several tons of nails,
which had been either manufactured there or imported. Nails, metal Wttings, and lead must have
been supplied in vast quantities for the construction of a great Xeet by Drusus in 13/12 bc (Dio
54.32.2). The construction of 1,000 boats for Germanicus last campaign east of the Rhine ad
15/16 must have required considerable quantities of metal (Tacitus, Ann. 2.6.2); Eck 2004a: 79.
9
Strabo 4.2.2. For an overview, cf. Davies 1935: 7793; Sablayrolles 2005: 416; Cauuet et al.
2005: 42341.
 Conclusion 359

have been in operation in other frontier regions and provinces of the Roman
empire such as the Danube frontier. It thus is plausible, although there is no
direct evidence, that the commissariat, if necessary, included the supply of the
Roman army with iron and lead.
Setting aside the military requirements, the revenues and vectigalia from
extractive operations must have been forwarded to the Wnancial or presidial
procurators and prefects in these provinces. As for the mining operations in the
patrimonium regni Norici, their supervision was possibly the responsibility of
the presidial procurator documented since Claudius reign (cf. 4.1.9). Moreover,
the control of opencast gold-mining ventures in Wrst-century north-western
Spain possibly fell within the mandate of the Wnancial procurator of Hispania
Citerior.10 By the end of the Wrst century, mining regions within provinces are
documented as falling under the supervision of imperial freedmen. The mines
of Mons Marianus, Rio Tinto in Baetica, or Vipasca in Lusitania were headed by
freedmen procurators (cf. 4.1.6). The metall(um) Alboc(rarense) in Callaecia,
mentioned by Pliny (NH 33.80), was likewise superintended by a freedman, the
procurator M. Ulpius Eutyches.11 If one takes the epigraphic record at face
value, the evidence implies that mining districts were removed from the direct
control of the Wnancial or patrimonial procurators by the turn of the century.
This measurewhether preconceived or in response to emerging needs
would have alleviated the administrative burden on the Wnancial or patrimonial
procurators. The assignment of a special representative of the emperor to the
site allowed for an intensiWcation of control over these districts. This result is
likely to apply to Asturia and Callaecia as a mining region which was probably
initially included in the mandate of the Wnancial procurator for Hispania
Citerior. The abundance of gold mines in northwestern Spain and the garri-
soning of a legionary force and accompanying auxiliary units in the same area,
however, may have prompted the emperor to install a procurator for Asturia
and Callaecia by ad 79 (cf. 4.1.6) and, by the later years of Hadrians reign, of
legati iuridici Asturiae et Callaeciae.12 The earlier measure would Wt nicely with
the administrative reorganization observed during the reign of Vespasian and
his sons in pursuit of increasing Wscal revenues.13

10
PXaum 19601: 1048. Possibly in the early phases after conquest at the end of Augustus
reign and the succession of Tiberius, mining operations had already been under supervision of a
praefectus Asturiae (CIL II 4616 IRC I 101 IRC V p. 23 ILS 6948); a praefectus Callaeciae
(CIL II 3271 CILA III 92) is documented for the Flavian period who might also have dealt
with mining operations within his district, cf. Zwicky 1944: 20; Brunt 1983: 55; Domergue 1990:
291 fn. 291.
11
CIL II 2598.
12
Alfoldy 2000a: 32.
13
According to Mateo (2001: 17896), the Vipasca regulations must similarly be seen as
product of Vespasians Wscal policies (cf. 8.1.2).
360 Conclusion

This plausible reconstruction, nonetheless, rests on the premise that our

evidence is not skewed by chance or by change in the epigraphic habit. One
can not prove beyond doubt that freedman procurators did not head mining
districts on the Iberian peninsula since the early days of the Principate. The
estate of Sextus Marius in Baetica, for example, over which Tiberius estab-
lished direct imperial control, may have been administered by a freedman
procurator from the outset.14 The occurrence of freedman procuratores at
Ampelum after the founding of the new provincia Dacia lends support to the
idea that the emperor placed particular mining ventures under the supervision
of a special procurator when these ore deposits came into his sphere of control.15
The evidence from Dacia, however, pertains to the second century ad and may
not necessarily be indicative of the previous century or for other regions.
The presence of beneWciarii procuratoris in the later second century at
Villals, Luyego, and Ampelum highlights a further aspect (cf. 4.1.6, 4.1.8).
The evidence implies the subordination of the freedman procurators to the
respective Wnancial procurators of their provincesa notion corroborated
partly by the inscribed monument commissioned by the Sardinian procurator
metallorum et praediorum for the procurator Augusti and praefectus provinciae
Sardiniae (cf. 4.1.7). This interpretation Wts with the model of an evolving
provincial administration, whereby particular Wnancial tasks were gradually
removed from the responsibilites of the Wnancial procurator within a prov-
ince and entrusted to special procurators instead. Moreover, the assumption
that these branches of the administration evolved organically seems to be
consistent with the increasing diversiWcation and growth of the non-senator-
ial administration observed during the second century.16 In the course of the
second century, the supervision of the collection of certain taxes and those
collected from a certain category of mines in one or more provinces was
transferred to equestrian procurators. For the silver mines of Dalmatia and
Pannonia, separate equestrian procuratores argentariarum appear already
during the Wrst half of the second century. The superintendence of these
mines was apparently uniWed during the reign of Marcus Aurelius and
perhaps was extended to include other metal resources such as copper and
iron mines (cf. 4.1.10). At approximately the same time one can observe a
change at Ampelum from imperial freedmen to equestrian procuratores aur-
ariarum; the imperial freedmen were relegated to the post of subprocurator
aurariarum. Perhaps this change in status went hand in hand with the
extension of the geographical realm to include gold mines in all three Dacian

14
Tacitus, Ann. 6.19.
15
CIL III 1312 ILS 1593 IDR III/3, 366, cf. Noeske 1977: 347, AMP 1.
16
Eck 1997a: 7988, 135 f.
 Conclusion 361

provinces (cf. 4.1.12). By the reign of Commodus the iron mines may have
been singled out for separate management under an equestrian procurator
ferrariarum whose administrative responsibilities might have covered super-
provincial entities as vast as the customs district of the publicum portorii
Illyrici. Likewise, by the early third century a procurator (ad vectigal) ferrar-
iarum may have supervised iron mines in all of Gaul, that is, all the provinces
within the customs district of the quadragesima Galliarum. As for the other
equestrian procuratores ferrariarum of centenarian rank documented before
the third century, they perhaps held oYce in Rome, contracting out the
collection of vectigal from iron mines to conductores in diVerent provinces
(cf. 4.1.12; 6.1.3.3). As is the case with the tightening of imperial control over
the publicum portorii Illyrici or the quadragesima Galliarum, there is scant
evidence for an intensiWcation of imperial control of vectigal collection from
iron mines by the end of the second or the beginning of the third century
(cf. 6.1.3.4). It appears plausible to assume similar developments for other
mines under imperial control, although clear proof remains absent. The
emergence of toll stations in the vicinity of mining areas in the Danubian
provinces by the late second and early third century may not be a mere
coincidence or a result of our lacunose records (3.2.3).
As for imperial quarries, the scarcity of epigraphic evidence does not allow
for insights of similar detail; the evidence of ostraca and inscriptions from
Roman Egypt, however, can be synthesized to provide an outline of the
evolution of the quarrying administration in this province. The equestrian


, who supervised all extractive operations in Egypt at the begin-
ning of the Wrst century ad, appears to have been replaced at some point. As
suggested by the ostraca at Mons Claudianus, which name the division of

 into the numeri of Mons Porphyrites and of Alabastrine, the
equestrian function of

might have been split into at least two
entities. A freedmen procurator was appointed to one of these by the early
second century ad at the latest. The magnitude of the tasks at hand may well
have been too much for one equestrian oYcial to handle, resulting in the
abolition of the post of

. Apart from Roman Egypt, the epi-
graphic record of imperial quarries in other provinces does not display such
obvious changes in oYcials. Some imperial quarries were perhaps not super-
vised by their own quarrying procurators: Karystos, Dokimeion, or Krokeai
merely yield monuments inscribed by dispensatores (cf. 4.1.5, 6.2). There are
rather vague indications as to the aYliation of these quarries to administra-
tive districts: Dokimeion might have been supervised by a procurator pro-
vinciae Phrygiae at Synnada (cf. 4.1.3), whereas the quarries at Karystos
perhaps fell under the overall responsibilities of the procurator provinciae
Achaiae (cf. 4.1.5). As for Simitthus, a suYcient number of inscriptions proves
362 Conclusion

the presence of a freedman procurator there (cf. 4.1.6). The testimonies

relating to the administration of imperial quarries date predominantly to
the second century ad; for the Wrst century there is hardly suYcient evidence
to allow one to trace administrative developments with any precision.

Imperial freedmen and equestrians in the service of the emperor undoubtedly

played a vital role in the administration of mines and quarries. In the function
of procurator they were placed in charge of a speciWc mining or quarrying
district or mines within one or more provinces. Individual mines and quarries
were deWned as metalla, a term carrying the territorial notion of a district
obviously distinct from other territorial entities within a province. Based on
the patrimonium regni Norici, it had been assumed that other mining districts
covered a vast area as well. EVorts to identify mining districts of this magni-
tude have rested solely on the assumption that the toll stations of the publicum
portorii Illyrici marked the boundary of these districtsa notion refuted
above. As for the legal nature of metalla under imperial control, the majority
of them were most likely property of the Roman state, perhaps in rare
instances property of the Roman emperor.
Most administrative responsibilities were common to all procuratorships
and similar to those of private procuratorswith the notable exception of the
judicial authority in Wscal matters. Apart from the more general tasks (com-
pilation of accounts, representing the principal (i.e. the emperor) in a wide
range of business deals based on a set of directives), it has proved somewhat
diYcult to allocate speciWc responsibilities within the organization of mining
and quarrying operations to the procurator. As for the quarrying procurators
responsible for Mons Claudianus (amongst other quarries), their responsi-
bilities appear only in vague outline and are not easily contrasted with those
of military and other oYcials connected with quarrying operations in the
Egyptian Eastern Desert. Nevertheless, one can tentatively argue that procur-
ators were generally in charge of recruiting, paying, and provisioning the
workforce and transport animals, and relayed any orders for quarried products
to Mons Claudianus. In their logistical eVorts to supply Mons Claudianus or
organize the removal of produce from the quarry, the procurators could fall
back on the provincial administration. Particularly in Roman Egypt, the supply
of the imperial quarries in the Eastern Desert proWted from the ancient
structures set in place for the collection of the grain tax, from which wheat
and barley were regularly diverted to the soldiers and imperial personnel
stationed in the desert. Camels and donkeys needed for various tasks in the
quarries were requisitioned by similar means. Comparable arrangements may
have been in place at Bacakale, Simitthus, or Karystos; the major diVerence of
these quarries, however, was that they were not nearly as remote as Mons
 Conclusion 363

Claudianus. This fact must have made the use of contractors far easier and
alleviated the logistical burden on the procurator. There appears to have been
no direct involvement of the procurators in the technicalities of quarryingat
least not at Mons Claudianus. There, civilian and military engineers may have
organized extractive operations, as did the centurions at Bacakale.
The evidence for the responsibilities of mining procurators at Vipasca
provides a similar picture: one of the procurators responsibilities was to
contract out the provision of auxiliary services (the collection of fees, the
running of the baths, barbershops, etc.) to interested individuals. More
importantly, the procurator was in charge of superintending mining oper-
ations. It appears that the procurator at Vipasca was responsible for the
allotment and the sale of mining plots. He was required to keep track of
changes in ownership, monitor the progress of mining operations and enforce
compliance with the regulations. Should any occupant of mining plots at
Vipasca be in breach of these mining laws, the procurator had the judicial
power to Wne or even evict culprits from the district. The theft of ore, the
sabotage of mining infrastructure and the violation of security regulations
were punished severely. This set of procuratorial responsibilities was probably
unique to a certain type of mining venture located in southern Spain.
Therefore, the obvious diVerences in organizational constraints which can
be observed, for example, between individualized underground mining and
large scale opencast operations, must have aVected the responsibilities of the
mining procurator. The operation of mines such as vast opencast operations
in north-western Spain (Las Medulas), undoubtedly altered the responsibil-
ities of the authorities. Like the procurators placed in charge of the Egyptian
Eastern Desert, the imperial authorities at Las Medulas probably focused on
coercing or recruiting a workforce and on related logistical issues.
The Vipasca tablets describe the duties of the freedman procurator respon-
sible for a speciWc mining district within a province. In comparison, the titles
of equestrian procurators (with the proviso that they are given in full),
indicate that their responsibilities covered not one small mining district
but numerous districts throughout one province or more. Given the sheer
diVerence in size of the geographical area supervised by these equestrian
procurators, their administrative responsibilities must have diVered signiW-
cantly from the comparably petty aVairs overseen by the freedmen procurator
at Vipasca. Outlining the duties of these provincial or super-provincial
mining procurators, however, remains diYcult. Part of their responsibilities
was likely the superintendence of contractors. These contractors either col-
lected rents, vectigal, from occupants running mines on public land and/or
they ran their own mining ventures or districts. This organizational approach
is hitherto only fragmentarily recorded for iron mines, but one could imagine
364 Conclusion

similar strategies for the aurariae Dacicae or the argentariae Pannonicae

et Delmaticae. It seems plausible that the procurator in charge concluded
the lease contracts with these mining companies directly. As a consequence of
farming out mining operations and the collection of vectigal, the tasks of the
procurator must have primarily been the monitoring of the activities of the
contracting companies, that is, whether the conductores were in compliance
with the contracts agreed and the Roman state received the expected revenues.
If this did not prove to be the case, the procurators would have decided on
possible sanctions. Like their colleagues in other administrative branches,
they perhaps ruled on legal disputes regarding Wscal issues arising between
the collectors of the vectigal and those running the mines. In the case of the
procuratores ferrariarum, one inscription at Lyon may suggest they possessed
the additional responsibility for supplying the Roman army with iron. Given
the geographical expanse of procuratorial jurisdiction, and the judicial and
monitoring responsibilities of equestrian procurators, it is reasonable to
assume that they were required to occasionally visit the mining districts
within their jurisdiction, much like governors of large provinces were re-
quired to visit the assizes of their province.
The usually short tenure of procuratorships by equestrians and imperial
freedmen throughout the Roman empire and their common lack of expertise
in the speciWcs of mining or quarrying management meant that the incum-
bents of these posts were heavily reliant on the support of an experienced
staV. These oYciales were based at the permanent headquarters of their
procurators. Apart from providing a certain administrative continuity and
expertise, the predominant task of the procuratorial staV was obviously to
deal with the paperwork from the mining and quarrying procurators and
handle any cash disbursements and receipts. Other members of the familia
Caesaris in diVerent functions (tabularius, dispensator, arcarius, vilicus oYci-
nae ferrariae), undoubtedly in contact with their respective procurator, were
seconded to outlying stationes or to the mining and quarrying districts within
the procuratorial jurisdiction. Further support was oVered by military per-
sonnel in administrative and other tasks. The dispatch of military specialists
from distant provinces to quarrying (and perhaps mining?) ventures in a
speciWc organizational or engineering capacity certainly identiWes the Roman
army as one of the main providers of technical expertise. The predominant
reason for a military presence at imperial mines and quarries, however, was to
protect the operation, the export of produce and import of supplies against
disruptive elements, and, furthermore, to guard convicts or direct corvee
labour. The use of soldiers as a workforce in mining is little documented
and perhaps was limited to rare occasions; quarrying stone, however, was
seemingly part of regular army chores and soldiers were frequently deployed
 Conclusion 365

to construction work and related quarrying duties. This is where some of its
oYcers acquired the experience needed to be seconded as specialists to
imperial quarries.
Regarding the organization of quarries and mining ventures, the speciWcs
were undoubtedly left to the men on the spot most of the time. Setting aside
the sheer size of the Roman empire, this relative autonomy of imperial
mining and quarrying operations was mostly a consequence of varying
organizational constraints. The analysis of the quarrying and mining ventures
throughout the empire has shown that the geological, topographical, techno-
logical, and geographical ramiWcations could vary signiWcantly, which had
considerable implications for the organizational approach and the scale of
logistical support. Further challenges were set by the customer. In the case of
quarries under imperial control, the demand for marble produce, predomin-
antly for public and imperial building projects in Rome (and occasionally in
other towns throughout the empire), meant that speciWed shapes (columns,
capitals, blocks) had to be produced in the required numbers within a
reasonable time. An increase in orders had an impact on the organization
of work procedures. At Bacakale, the change in formula of quarry labels may
perhaps reXect an alteration in the production system from quarry-to-order
to quarry-to-stock by ad 136/7. The rationale behind this decision is undis-
coverable. One can only assume that it was intended to increase the eYciency
of the production cycle.
Certain major decisions may have been taken on a local level, rather than at
Rome. On-site personnel would have decided whether the mine or quarry was
to be directly exploited by a hired or forced workforce (convicts, corvee
labour) under the general supervision of imperial oYcials and military
personnel (cf. Mons Claudianus), or whether outsourcing mining and
quarrying operations to private companies and individuals was more desir-
able. In principle, the Roman statein the Republic as well as during the
Principatewas intent on delegating the exploitation of mines or quarries to
private parties. This could mean that whole mining districts were either run
by large scale companies in return for revenue or, like at Vipasca, were
compartmentalized into plots sold oV to its occupants. Furthermore, the
collection of vectigal from occupants of iron mines on public grounds was
farmed out to large scale companies. Occasionally, particular circumstan-
ces may have prevented the use of contractors either because of the topo-
graphical remoteness of the extractive operation or because the workforce
operating the mines and quarries had been forced to do so. The former could
have been the case with Mons Claudianus where contractorswith the
exception of Epaphroditos Sigerianosare virtually absent. Military person-
nel,
, and hired labour had to be brought in and were supplied and
366 Conclusion

in part supervised by an K

H
. The absolute remoteness
of the quarries from the densely settled Nile Valley and the costs of supplying a
workforce out in the desert may have rendered all quarrying operations
unattractive for potential contractors. This was probably not the case with
the Bacakale quarries near Dokimeion in a populated area of Phrygia, where
private contractors were perhaps hired on the basis of a locatio conductio
operis. At the quarries of Simitthus it was the possible use of convict labour
which prohibited the employment of contractors.
The running of mining and quarrying districts under imperial control left a
considerable footprint on the economic landscape of the province. For the
inhabitants of Roman Egypt, the supply of the workforce and soldiers in the
Eastern Desert with tax grain and requisitioned animals must have meant an
additional burden. The population of other provinces with signiWcant mining
activity was perhaps pressed to corvee labourat least in the early phases
following conquest. Yet, mining and quarrying districts did not only have
negative consequences for the populace: for a number of quarry workers,
miners, and contractors these extractive operations were a source of income.
The wealth resulting from the quarrying business in and around Bacakale
near Dokimeion, for example, is reXected in the lavishly decorated stones of
the area. Particularly in Spain and the Danubian provinces, mining districts
emerge as focal points of migration. Whether or not the positive economic
consequences for the populace formed part of the decision-making process
of the Roman emperors is debatable. The emperors occasionally appear aware
of the economic implications of their decisions.17
The importance of extractive ventures to the Roman state as source of
revenue or as source of building materials is emphasized by the scores of
imperial personnel, soldiers, oYcers, engineers, convicts, prisoners of war,
coerced and hired workers, as well as contractors, who were directed to
quarrying and mining operations, and the amount of provisions, tools, and
materials supplied to these districts. Although the main reason for these
measures was to produce revenue for the state, not all extractive operations
under imperial control generated revenue: the distribution model argued
for by Fant suggests that imperial quarries predominantly supplied vis-
ually distinctive marble elements for public and imperial building projects.
These quarries (Simitthus, Mons Claudianus, Mons Porphyrites, Bacakale,

17
This is implied by Suetonius, Vesp. 18: Vespasian reportedly did not implement a new
mechanical device facilitating the transport of columns up to the Capitol. The reason given is
that the plebicula were not to be deprived of their income. Given that the construction business
sustained perhaps between 100,000 to 150,000 inhabitants at Rome (cf. Kolb 1995: 4835), the
use of a mechanical device would have lowered costs yet deprived scores of workers and their
families of their daily income, cf. Drexhage et al. 2002: 32.
 Conclusion 367

Karystos) were thus run primarily for non-economic reasons connected with
the display of imperial power and its projection through the means of art and
architecture.18 As for mining districts under imperial control, the revenues
generated by these were seen as an important asset for the Roman state:
Statius poem on the a rationibus highlights, amongst other things, the
income from mining ventures, and numerous further references detail the
sums acquired from speciWc mining districts for the Roman state. Apart from
their importance as source of revenue, iron mines in particular appear to have
had an additional strategic value emphasized by the obscure laws on the
production and distribution of iron.
The approach to controlling these public assets and ensuring the inXux of
revenue to the Roman state was Xexible: mining on public land could seemingly
be left to occupants in return for a vectigal payable to Rome which, in the case of
iron mines in Gaul and the Danubian provinces, was handed to contractors of
vectigal collection. Perhaps the mining of more precious metal ores was left to
large-scale companies; mining plots of less precious or more abundant metals
were sold to private entrepreneurs, as the Vipasca tablets seem to indicate. At
Wrst sight, Roman authorities appear hesitant to get directly involved in mining
ventures. Written sources barely note the Roman state operating a mining
district directly and the evidence for outsourcing public mining operations to
companies is far more abundant. The Vipasca tablets, however, indicate that
Rome, represented by the local procurator, controlled nearly all aspects of
mining activities even after mining plots had been sold to the occupants and
thus were technically not public property anymore. This reluctance to give up
control over the productivity of the mines at Vipasca may stem from the
necessity to ensure the market was supplied with the desired metals in suYcient
quantities. The Roman state may have further proWted from the inXux of metals
to the economy by taxation of ores and metal ingots emitted from public
minesas is tentatively implied by the lex portorii Asiae (34) and the occur-
rence of toll stations of the publicum portorii Illyrici near mining ventures in the
Balkans. The control of mining ventures was increased mostly by seconding
imperial personnel of lower clerical rank or freedmen procurators to the mining
districts. Moreover, the creation of equestrian procuratorships for mines in
one and more provinces during the second century was likely intended to
keep the contractors of mines or the conductores of vectigal on a short leash.
If our chronological outline is correct, administrative control over mining

18
Peacock 1992; Fant 1993a: 14651. This must not necessarily apply to all marble emitted
from these quarries: the white marble from Bacakale/Dokimeion, for example, was worked into
sarcophagi and found in private contexts throughout Asia Minor (cf. 7.2.6) and thus appears to
have been available to the general public.
368 Conclusion

ventures was gradually intensiWed during the Wrst and second century ad, either
in conjunction with the growth of expenditure (particularly for the Roman
army) towards the end of the second century and/or was precipitated by an
increased strain on the administrative structures of the empire.
An overarching organizational system was probably never devised for the
administration of mines and quarries. In fact, by the end of the second
century ad in the Danubian provinces mining ventures for a speciWc metal
were superintended by equestrian procurators covering one or more prov-
inces, while in Spain or Britain there is hitherto no evidence for an equestrian
post of such a magnitude. In combination with the organizational strategies
put in place to deal with geological and topographical constraints for mining
and quarrying ventures, one might argue that the Roman authorities were
inclined to work out solutions in the local area in response to speciWc
challenges. Consequently, decisions regarding the internal organization of
quarries and mines were rarely made in Rome. The emperor and his Palatine
bureaux were probably involved when mining and quarrying procurators
were allocated and military specialists needed. Given the allocation of add-
itional human and material resources resulted in an increase of costs, the
opening of new ventures, particularly quarries, or the enlargement of existing
operations could require imperial approval.
The guiding principle of the Roman mining and quarrying administration
was to keep imperial involvement to a minimum without renouncing control
of these ventures. Where possible, much of the work was entrusted to private
entrepreneurs either in return for a Wxed payment or ownership of the
produce. Ideally the presence of military and imperial personnel would have
been limited to a few oYcials receiving proceeds or making out payments to
contractors and restricting any contract infringements by their private part-
ners. Any aberration from this principle is primarily explained by unique
organizational constraints of mining and quarrying operations which resulted
in exploitation by a hired or coerced workforce under the direct supervision
of imperial and military personnel. The authorities in charge were not
primarily interested in acquiring the produce from mines per se (with the
exception perhaps of gold and cinnabar) but in reaping the proWts by contract-
ing out the operation of mines. Besides pecuniary revenues, the Roman state
had a vested interest in seeing the market supplied with suYcient quantities of
metalsan interest implicit in the Vipasca regulations. The supply of Rome
with marbles from diVerent corners of its empire was, in comparison, a costly
aVair and seemingly not always subjected to an entrepreneurial rationale. The
use of marble in the display of imperial wealth and power was the main reason
for its extraction. In other words, the emperors had remote quarries worked
not for the proWt of the treasury, but simply because they had the capability to
 Conclusion 369

do so. Whatever the main impetus for the extraction and distribution of
metals and marble from imperially controlled operations, the inception,
growth, and diVerentiation of the administrative structurescentring on
the procuratorial system in its local variationsensured the continued supply
of Rome and its economy with the desired materials. This elaborate organ-
izational system remained vital to maintaining Romes power throughout the
Principate.
 APPENDIX

Pavonazetto and White Marble: Dokimeion

1. a) Ant?(onino) III co(n)s(ule) (ad 140) Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 11
j [.]c[.]x; b) CLVIIII; c) Ant(onino) III Drew-Bear 1994: 811
XX, d) DCCLXXII, e) R, f ) [.]GIE; fn. 221.
g) RMA; h) RMA; i) C(aesare) XVI
co(n)s(ule) (ad 92); j) Pal(ma) II
choi(n)s(ule) (ad 109); k) VFR Verg-
(iliano) co(n)s(ule) (ad 115); l) Dom-
(itiano?) I I co(n)s(ule) j []XX (ad 73?)
2. a) C(aesare) XVI co(n)s(ule); b) GIA Bacakale, ad 92 Fant 1989: no. 6.
3. C(aesare) XVI co(n)s(ule) j II Afyon, ad 92 Fant 1989: no. 1.
4. C(aesare) XVI co(n)s(ule) j III Afyon, ad 92 Fant 1989: no. 2.
5. C(aesare) XVI j IIII Afyon, ad 92 Fant 1989: no. 3.
6. C(aesare) XVI co(n)s(ule) j XV ad 92 Fant 1989: no. 492
CIL III 7009 Ramsay
1882: no. 16.
7. a) C(aesare) XVI co(n)s(ule) j XVIIII Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 8
(ad 92); b) MA; c) GII[]?? j Drew-Bear 1994: 829,
Traian(o) III co(n)s(ule) (ad 100) fn. 292.
XXXVI
8. a) RMA ANT; b) [T]rai(ano) n(ostro) Afyon Fant 1989: no. 162
III co(n)s(ule) (ad 100); c) D CXII; CIL III 7010, 7011.
d) C(aesare) XVI co(n)s(ule) (ad 92)j
CXXXXV; e) NER Verg(iliano)
co(n)[s(ule)] (ad 115)
9. P Ailian(os) co(n)s(ule) (ad 116) j Iscehisar Fant 1989: no. 622
C(aesare) XVI co(n)s(ule) (ad 92)j j JRS 18: 1928: 22 f.
[] CC[] no. 232 CIL III 12228.
10. a) DCII; b) R Aelian(o) co(n)s(ule) Iscehisar Fant 1989: no. 632
(ad 116)j C(aesare) XVI co(n)[s(ule)] JRS 18: 1928: 22 f.
(ad 92)j XI no. 233.
11. a) C(aesare) XVI co(n)s(ule) (ad 92) j Iscehisar Fant 1989: no. 332
R Aelia(no) co(n)s(ule)(ad 116) CIL III 12227.
CXXXVI; b) M D XIII j T DIIX
co(n)s(ulibu)s ; c) R Aelia(no)
co(n)s(ule) C(aesare) XVI co(n)s(ule)
j CXXXVI ; d) M D XIII
12. a) VFR Verg(iliano) co(n)s(ule) Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 10.
(ad 115); b) AA LX C(aesare) XVI
co(n)s(ule) j V (ad 92); c) Traian(o)
III co(n)s(ule) (ad 100); d) I R
 Appendix 371
13. a) IIII b(racchio) IIII ; b) C(aesare) XVI Afyon Fant 1989: no. 4.
co(n)s(ule) VIII (ad 92); c) RM[A]
Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule) (ad 109);
d) RMA; e) ANT; f ) Traian(o) III
co(n)s(ule) IIII (ad 100); g) VFR Verg(-
iliano) j co(n)s(ule) (ad 115); i) GI
CN
14. a) GICNZ; b) R; c) RMA j Pal(ma) II Afyon Fant 1989: no. 5
co(n)s(ule) (ad 109); d) R; e) Christol & Drew-Bear
b(racchio) quart(o); f ) C(aesare) XVI 1991: 117 f. fn. 25.
co(n)s(ule)(ad 92)j VIIII ; g) loco VI; h)
Traian(o) III co(n)s(ule) (ad 100); i)
b(racchio) IIII; j) VFR Verg(iliano)
co(n)s(ule) (ad 115); k) ANT
15. a) [T?]r(aiano) III co(n)s(ule)[] Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 12.
(ad 100?); b) RMA ANT; c) b(racchio)
IIII; d) Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule)(ad 109);
e) DCCXXI; f ) VFR Verg(iliano)
co(n)s(ule) (ad 115); g) C(aesare) XVI
co(n)s(ule)(ad 92) j XX; h) b(racchio)
quar[t(o)]; i) GIIP
16. a) VFR Verg(iliano) co(n)s(ule)(ad Afyon Fant 1989: no. 9
115); b) C(aesare) XVI co(n)s(ule) Drew-Bear 1994: 808
(ad 92); c) Trai(ano) n(ostro) III fn. 196.
co(n)s(ule)(ad 100)j XXXVII;
d) Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule)(ad 109);
e) GII[.]XZ; f ) RMA; g) XLVII;
h) ANT; i) XXV; j)RMA
17. a) VFR Verg(iliano) co(n)s(ule)j Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 13.
DCCLXIII (ad 115); b) GINE?;
c) b(racchio) tert(io); d) XXXXV;
e) RMA Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule)
(ad 109); f ) DCCLXVII; g) C(aesare)
XVI co(n)s(ule) (ad 92); h) Sura III
co(n)s(ule) (ad 107), HER CCCXII,
b(racchio) ter(tio)
18. C(aesare) XVI co(n)s(ule)(ad 92) j L j Altintas Fant 1989: no. 14.
XX j R Aelia[n(o)] j co(n)s(ule)
(ad 116)
19. Coll(ega) co(n)s(ule)j XIIII R (ad 93) Afyon Fant 1989: no. 1022
Christol & Drew-Bear
1986: no. 6.
20. Coll(ega) co(n)s(ule) XIX (ad 93) Aizanoi? Fant 1989: no. 37b2
R. Naumann, Der
Zeustempel zu Aizanoi,
Berlin 1979: 80.
21. a) VI R III j Coll(ega) co(n)s(ule) Afyon Fant 1989: no. 1032
(ad 93) ; b)VFR Verg(iliano) j Christol & Drew-Bear
co(n)s(ule) (ad 115) 1986: no. 7.
22. a) Coll(ega) co(n)s(ule) (ad 93) VIII R; Afyon Fant 1989: no. 1042
b) VER Verg(iliano) j co(n)s(ule) Christol & Drew-Bear
(ad 115); c) RMA 1986: no. 8.
372 Appendix
23. Co[l] l(ega?)
 co(n)[s(ule)] X (ad 93) Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 15.
24. a) R;
 b) Coll(ega) co(n)s(ule) LXXIX Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 16
(ad 93); c) Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule) Drew-Bear 1994: 808
(ad 109); d) Tra(iano) n(ostro) III fn. 196.
co(n)s(ule)j XCVIII (ad 100);
e) DCCCL; f ) R ANT; g) RMA,
h) CR RMA, i) VFR Verg(iliano)
co(n)s(ule) (ad 115)
25. a) DCCCLXIX b(racchio) IIII; Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 17
b) Trai(ano) n(ostro) III co(n)s(ule)j Drew-Bear 1994: 824.
XCVI (ad 100); c) RMA; d) Coll(ega)
co(n)s(ule) CLXXV j b(racchio) III
(ad 93); e) CLXIX; f ) CHR XCVI;
g) DCCCLXIX Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule)
(ad 109); i) VFR Verg(iliano)
co(n)s(ule) (ad 115)
26. a) C(aesare) XVII co(n)s(ule) XXXV Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 18.
(ad 95); b) (mille) (mille) LXX,
b(racchio) IIII; c) Traian(o) III
co(n)s(ule) CCXVI (ad 100)
27. C IXXXXVIII j C(aesare) XVII Iscehisar, ad 95 Fant 1989: no. 502
co(n)s(ule) XXXI CIL III 7012 Ramsay
1882: no. 17.
28. a) L 1 CR) ; b) ex r(atione) Olyp(i?) Ostia, ad 96 Baccini Leotardi 1989:
Caes(aris); c) Ve(tere) e(t) [Val(ente)] no. 40
co(n)s(ulibus
29. a) ex r(atione) Ol(ym)p(i) Caes(aris?); Ostia,ad 96 Fant 1989: no. 832
b) n(umero) CXXXXII jj II; c) Ve(tere) Baccini Leotardi 1979:
e(t)Val(ente) co(n)s(ulibus) no. 35 Pensabene
1994: 52, fig. 55
30. a) CXLVI; b) VETER COS XCXC Iscehisar, ad 96? Fant 1989: no. 552
CIL III 7014 Ramsay
1882: no. 22.
31. a) Veter(e et Gallicano) co(n)s(ulibus) Bacakale, ad 96? Drew-Bear 1994: no. 1
1 LXXV[-]; b) CLXX[]; c) R
32. a) Ve(tere) e(t) Val(ente) Ostia, ad 96 Baccini Leotardi 1989:
co(n)s(ulibus); b) n(umero) DXXXII; no. 39 Fant 1989:
c) L 1 C R no. 922.
33. a) Pa(lma) et Sen(ecione) Ostia, ad 99 Fant 1989: no. 842
co(n)s(ulibus), b) ex r(atione) Baccini Leotardi 1979:
Olyp(i?) Caes(aris) no. 36 Pensabene
1994: 74, no. 20
34. a) X j CXXI; b) DXC; c) R; d) VFR Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 23.
Verg(iliano) j co(n)s(ule) (ad 115);
e) MAR; f ) Traian(o) III co(n)s(ule)j
VIII (ad 100); g) ANT; h) T[.] XLVII
35. a) Tra(ia)n(o) III co(n)s(ule) (ad 100) Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 182
CXLIIX j CHR RMA(?); b) 1 CLX TR CIL III 7015 III
 Appendix 373
Pal(ma) co(n)s(ule) (ad 109?); c) VE(!)- 13653 Fant 1989:
R Verg(iliano) co(n)s(ule) (ad 115) no. 302.
36. Traian(o) III co(n)s(ule) CLXXVI Bacakale, ad 100 Fant 1989: no. 19.
37. a) MAR; b) 1(mille) CDLIX R; Bacakale, ad 100 Fant 1989: no. 20
c) b(racchio) II[]; d) CHR RMA; Drew-Bear 1994: 825
e) Traian(o) III co(n)s(ule) CCCX[] fn. 280.
38. a) LDCIX j R; b) Trai(a)n(o) III Ostia, ad 100 Fant 1989: no. 852
co(n)s(ule); c) [e]x r(atione) Olyp(i?) Baccini Leotardi 1979:
Caes(aris) N CXIIII no. 37.
39. a) [P]isone
 et Bolano [cos] j XXXIIX Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 21.
(ad 111); b) b(racchio) II; c) 1(mille)
DCCLXI b(racchio) III; d) b(racchio)
tert(io); e) Tr(aiano) [I]II et
F[ro]n[tino] j [I]II co(n)s(ule) (ad 100)
40. a) []o, b) [T]ra(iano) III co(n)s(ule) Iscehisar, ad 100 Fant 1989: no. 172
(ad 100) HE C j XLVII R, c) VF[R] CIL III 7018, 7019
(ad 114/115) Christol & Drew-Bear
1986: no. 9.
41. a) RMA; b) C[and(ido) II] Bacakale, ad 102? Fant 1989: no. 27
co(n)s(ulibu)s XLIII
42. a) Cand(ido) II co(n)s(ule) HE (ad Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 28
105) j CCLXXV; b) R; c) VFR Verg- Drew-Bear 1994: 833
(iliano) co(n)s(ule) (ad 115) j fn. 315.
DCCCIX; d) Sur(a) IIhIi co(n)s(ule)
(ad 102) j HE CCCLXXXIV; e) RMA
Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule) (ad 109);
f ) DCCLV
43. a) XXXIV; b) DLXIII b(racchio) Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 24
tert(io); c) RMA Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule) Drew-Bear 1994: 829
(ad 109); d) VFR Vop(isco) co(n)s(ule) fn. 289.
CCXL j IIII (ad 114); e) b(racchio) III;
f ) Cand(ido) II co(n)s(ule) HE DLXIII
(ad 105); g) Trai(ano) V co(n) s(ule)

HE X (ad 103)
44. Cand(ido) I[I] co(n)[s(ule)]
 (ad 105) j Bacakale Drew-Bear 1994: no. 6.
VFR Vop(isco) co[s] (ad 114)
45. a) Pal(ma) [I]I co(n)s(ule) (ad 109) Bacakale Drew-Bear 1994: no. 5.
HE CXCIX j [C]and(ido)
 [II] c[os]
(ad 105) ; b) [VF]R Vop(isco)
co(n)s(ule) DCXC[] (ad 114)
46. a) RMA Cand(ido) II co(n)s(ule) Bacakale Drew-Bear 1994: no. 3.
(ad 105) j HE CCCXXVII ;
b) Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule) (ad 109)
47. RMA Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule) (ad 109) Afyonkarahisar Drew-Bear 1994: no. 2.
j Cand(ido) II co(n)s(ule) (ad 105)
HE CCCXXXV
48. a) []o cos CC (ad ?); b) [P]a[l(ma)] Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 29
II co(n)s(ule) (ad 109); c) RMA; Drew-Bear 1994: 823
fn. 276, 831 fn. 300.
374 Appendix
d) Cand(ido) II co(n)s(ule) j HE XV
(ad 105); e) DXCVI b(racchio) III
49. a) Cand(ido) II co(n)s(ule)(ad 105) Iscehisar Fant 1989: no. 32 AE
Pal(ma) II (ad 109) co(n)s(ule); b) 1984: 846 Christol &
[]R Vop(isco) co(n)s(ule)(ad 114) Drew-Bear 1986:
CXLIV; c) Cand(ido) II co(n)s(ule) j no. 35 Drew-Bear
HE VII ; d) RMA; e) Cand(ido) II 1994: 831 fn. 298.
co(n)s(ule); f ) XXX
50. a) b(racchio) tert(io) XXXV; b) Cand(- Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 41.
ido) II co(n)s(ule) [] (ad 105); c) V-
[FR] V[e]r(giliano) co(n)s(ule)
(ad 115)
51. a) RMA Pa(lma) II co(n)s(ule) Afyon Fant 1989: no. 30
(ad 109) j Cand(ido) II co(n)s(ule) Christol & Drew-Bear
(ad 105) HEC XXC jVFR [Vo]p(isco) 1986: no. 17. Drew-
co(n)s(ule) (ad 114) CLXIV; b) D XXXI Bear 1994: 830 fn. 295.
52. Cand(ido) II co(n)s(ulibu)s XL [] Afyon, ad 105 Fant 1989: no. 1062
Christol & Drew-Bear
1986: no. 11.
53. a) Cand(ido) II co(n)s(ulibu)s XLII Afyon, ad 105 Fant 1989: no. 26
(ad 105); b) RMA; c) R VIIII Christol & Drew-Bear
1986: no. 10 Drew-
Bear 1994: 751 fn. 13,
827 f., fn. 286.
54. Cand(ido) II co(n)s(ule) (ad 105) j HE Bacakale, ad 105 Fant 1989: no. 25.
CCXXCII
55. a) CXX[ . . . ] j RM(A?) P[ . . . ] j VFR Iscehisar Fant 1989: no. 462
Vo[p(isco)co(n)s(ule) ] (ad 114?)j D CIL III 7007 Ramsay
C[]; b) Sur(a) III (ad 107) 1882: no. 12.
56. a) Sura III co(n)s(ule) IL j DECCXXIII; Iscehisar, ad 107 Fant 1989: no. 522
b) DEDCCCXXX j R III CIL III 7021 Ramsay
1882: no. 19.
57. a) VFR Vop(isco) co(n)s(ule) (ad 114) Iscehisar, ad 107 Fant 1989: no. 452
DCLVI j RM(A?) Pal(ma) II (ad 109) CIL III 7006 Ramsay
co(n)s(ule); b) Sur(a) III co(n)s(ulibu)s 1882: no. 11.
(ad 107) j CXXV
58. a) Sur(a) II co(n)s(ule) (ad 107) j Iscehisar Fant 1989: no. 192
CXCIIII j Palma II co(n)s(ule) CIL III 7022.
(ad 109); b) caes(ura) b(racchio)
III j 1DCLXVI
59. a) Sur(a) III co(n)s(ule) HE CCXXII Afyon Fant 1989: no. 31.
(ad 107); b) RMA Pal(ma) II
co(n)s(ule) (ad 109)
60. RMA Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule) (ad 109) Bacakale Drew-Bear 1994: no. 4.
j Sur(a) III co(n)s(ule) (ad 107)
HE j CCXXXVII
61. a) loco IV b(racchio) III; b) Sur(a) III Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 40.
co(n)s(ule) II (ad 107) j CCXXXVIII ;
c) RMA Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule)
(ad 109); d) VFR Vop(isco) co(n)s(ule)
(ad 114); e) b(racchio) tert(io)
 Appendix 375
62. a) Sur(a) III co(n)s(ule) HE (ad 107) j Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 32
CCCLXXXIII; b) RMA Pal(ma) II Drew-Bear 1994: 833
co(n)s(ule) (ad 109); c) DCCCIV; fn. 311.
d) b(racchio) III; e) VFR Verg(iliano) j
co(n)s(ule) DCC j LX (ad 115)
63. a) VFR Verg(iliano) co(n)s(ule) Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 33
(ad 115); b) DCCLIII; c) Sur(a) III Drew-Bear 1994: 834
co(n)s(ule) (ad 107); d) HE CCCXXC; fn. 316.
e) RMA Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule) (ad
109); f ) DCCCII R
64. Brad(ua) co(n)s(ule) (ad 108) Afyon, ad 108 Fant 1989: no. 43
Drew-Bear 1994: 834
fn. 318.
65. a) P[a]l(ma) II co(n)s(ule), HE Afyon Fant 1989: no. 42
CCXVIIII (ad 109); b) Brad(ua) Drew-Bear 1994: 834
co(n)s(ule) (ad 108)j HE XIII fn. 317.
66. Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule) (ad 109) Bacakale, ad 109 Fant 1989: no. 44
67. VFR V[] j RMA Pa[l(ma) Iscehisar Fant 1989: no. 282
II co(n)s(ule)? (ad 109) ] CIL III 7042.
68. [ . . . ]r() co(n)s(ule) j [ . . . ]XIV jj Iscehisar, ad 109 Fant 1989: no. 62 AE
P(alma) II co(n)s(ule) jj P(alma) 1984: 848.
II co(n)s(ule)RMA
69. Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule)j HE XXXIII T Afyon, ad 109 Fant 1989: no. 47
Drew-Bear 1994: 835
fn. 321.
70. Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule) HE XXVI Afyon, ad 109 Fant 1989: no. 36
71. Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ulibu)s XLIX Afyon, ad 109 Fant 1989: no. 1082
Christol & Drew-Bear
1986: no. 13.
72. a) VFR Vop(isco) co(n)s(ule) (ad 114) j Afyon Fant 1989: no. 46.
DCXCII; b) Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule)
(ad 109) j HE CXVII
73. Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule) HE CXLI Bacakale, ad 109 Fant 1989: no. 49.
74. a) c (mille) VI R; b) Pal(ma) II Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 45.
co(n)s(ule) (ad 109) j HE CLXXIII;
c) VFR Vop(isco) co(n)s(ule) (ad 114)
j CCCXXXV
75. a) (mille) (mille) CIX b(racchio) III; Bacakale, ad 109 Fant 1989: no. 48.
b) Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule) HE CLXXIIX T
76. a) Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule) j HE CCLIX; Bacakale, ad 109 Fant 1989: no. 37.
b) VFR Verg(iliano) co(n)s(ule)
(ad 115)j DCCCCXI
77. a) RMA Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule) Bacakale, ad 109 Fant 1989: no. 35.
(ad 109); b) DCCLVII
78. a) RMA ANT; b) ANT CLX; c) RMA; Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 34.
d) VFR Verg(iliano) co(n)s(ule)
(ad 115); e) Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule)
(ad 109); f ) DCCXXC R
376 Appendix
79. a) BOARTSLI j DCCCXL j b(racchio) Iscehisar Fant 1989: no. 382
III C j XIIX j A Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule) CIL III 7017 Ramsay
(ad 109); b) NER Ve[rg(iliano)] 1882: no. 4.
co(n)s(ule) (ad 115)
80. a) DCCCLXIX Pal(ma) II co(n)s(ule) Bacakale Drew-Bear 1994: no. 7.
(ad 109) ; b) VFR Verg(iliano)
co(n)s(ule) (ad 114) ; c) CHR XCVI
81. a) CCCLXX; b) b(racchio) III XIIXXS; Iscehisar, ad 109 Fant 1989: no. 202
c) b(racchio) sec(undo) ; d) Pal(ma) II CIL III 7023.
co(n)s(ule) XVI
82. a) Orfito co(n)s(ule) (ad 110) HE XV; Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 50.
b) Orfito co(n)s(ule) (ad 110) HE XV;
c) VI b(racchio) III; d) VFR Verg-
(iliano) [c]o[(n)s(ule)] (ad 115) j
COM[-] CXCIV j co(n)s(ule) XIIX [-]
83. a) VFR Verg(iliano) co(n)s(ule) (ad Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 38
115); b) (mille) CI; c) CDXI b(racchio) Drew-Bear 1994: 835
II; d) b(racchio) secund(o) j Orf(ito) fn. 330.
co(n)s(ule) (ad 110) j []XVIII
84. a) VFR Vop(isco) j co(n)s(ule) (ad 114); Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 51.
b) (mille) DC[C]LX V;  c) []E?[]
Cels(o) j II co(n)s(ule) (ad 113?)
DCXXXIX; d) b(racchio) III;
e) Pi[sone] et Bol(ano)
 j co(n)s(ule)
(ad 111)
85. a) Pisone co(n)s(ule) (ad 111) j DSN; Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 52.
b) VFR Vop(isco)(ad 114)
86. a) RIVLEIIIACELS; b) VFR Vop(isco) Bacakale, ad 111 Fant 1989: no. 792
co(n)s(ule) (ad 114) ; c) Pisone Roder 1971: J1.
co(n)s(ule) (ad 111) j II co(n)s(ule);
d) DSN
87. Traiano j n(ostro) VI co(n)s(ule) DI Bacakale, ad 112 Fant 1989: no. 22
Drew-Bear 1994: 840
fn. 349.
88. VFR Vop(isco) co(n)s(ule) Bacakale, ad 114 Fant 1989: no. 53
89. R Vop(isco) co(n)s(ule) C[] j V[] Iscehisar, ad 114 Fant 1989: no. 1112
Christol & Drew-Bear
1986: no. 16.
90. VFR Vop(isco) co(n)s(ule) XXIIX Iscehisar, ad 114 Fant 1989: no. 1092
Christol & Drew-Bear
1986: no. 14.
91. a) VFR Vop(isco) co(n)s(ule) j CIII; Iscehisar, ad 114 Fant 1989: no. 1102
b) 1(mille) LXXIV j b(racchio) III Christol & Drew-Bear
1986: no. 15.
92. VFR Vop(isco) co(n)s(ule) j CCI j I Iscehisar, ad 114 Fant 1989: no. 472
co(n)s(ule?) CIL III 7008 Ramsay
1882: no. 13.
 Appendix 377
93. a) Vopisco hco(n)is(ule) j Bacakale, ad 114 Fant 1989: no. 54.
DLXXXVII; b) Vop(isco) co(n)s(ule)
DLXXXVII
94. a) Verg(iliano) co(n)s(ule) CXXC j R; Bacakale, ad 115 Drew-Bear 1994: no. 8.
b) CCXCI b(racchio) III
95. VFR Verg(iliano) co(n)s(ule)j CHR j Bacakale, ad 115 Drew-Bear 1994: no. 9.
RMA
96. a) DCCCXXVII R; b) R Verg(iliano) Afyon, ad 115 Fant 1989: no. 39
co(n)s(ule); c) CLXIIX Drew-Bear 1994: 841
fn. 350.
97. [ . . . ]co(n)s(ule?)j C j VFR Bacakale, ad 115 Fant 1989: no. 802
Verg(iliano) co(n)s(ule)j III b(racchio) Roder 1971: J2.
98. R Verg(iliano) co(n)s(ule) Iscehisar, ad 115 Fant 1989: no. 152
CIL III 7005A.
99. a) Verg(iliano) co(n)s(ule) Afyon, ad 115 Fant 1989: no. 55.
DCCXXXIV R; b) DC[C?]XXXIV
100. Hadriano III co(n)s(ule)j XIIII j R Bacakale, ad 119 Fant 1989: no. 58.
101. Hadr(iano) III [co(n)s(ule)] j (mille) Bacakale, ad 119 Fant 1989: no. 57.
CCCCXX[]
102. Hadr(iano) III co(n)s(ule)j (mille) Bacakale, ad 119 Fant 1989: no. 56.
CCCCLXIIII
103. a) Hadr(iano) III co(n)s(ule)j
 de XIV; Bacakale, ad 119 Fant 1989: no. 59.
b) XXIX R
104. Hadr(iano) III co(n)s(ule) de LIV Bacakale, ad 119 Fant 1989: no. 60.
105. a) Asiatico II co(n)s(ule)j XXVI; Afyon, ad 125 Fant 1989: no. 61.
b) VII R; c) X
106. a) CLIX j b(racchio) III; b) Ver(o) III Bacakale, ad 126 Fant 1989: no. 63.
co(n)s(ule) CCCXCVI
107. a) Ver(o) III co(n)s(ule)CCCXXX; Bacakale, ad 126 Fant 1989: no. 62
b) b(racchio) quart(o); c) CLXVI j Drew-Bear 1994: no. 10.
b(racchio) IIII
108. loc(o) V R j Rufin[o co(n)s(ule)] Bacakale, ad 131? Fant 1989: no. 64.
109. Augurin(o) cos j l(oco) C DVI R Roma, ad 132 Fant 1989: no. 92
Bruzza 1870: no. 257.
110. a) l(oco)DCCCXV R j Augurin(o) Ostia, ad 132 Fant 1989: no. 862
co(n)s(ule); b) XV Baccini Leotardi 1979:
no. 38.
111. [Imp(eratore) Ca]es[a]re IIII et Lepcis Magna ad Fant 1989: no. 752
Balbino co(n)s(ulibus) ratione [] 136? IRT 794b ZPE 75,
1988: 2914.
112. a) b(racchio) tert(io); b) b(racchio) III; Iscehisar, ad 136 Christol & Drew-Bear
c) Comm(odo) ehti Civic(a) 1987: no. 1.
co(n)s(ulibus)
 b(racchio) III j loco
XXVI Tul(lii?)
113. Comm(odo) et Civic(a) co(n)s(ulibus) Bacakale, ad 136 Fant 1989: no. 66.
loco VII, b(racchio) III j caesur(a) Tulli
7(centurionis)
378 Appendix
114. Commodo et Civic(a) co(n)s(ulibus)j Bacakale, ad 136 Fant 1989: no. 67.
caesur(a) Tulli 7(centurionis) loco XV j
b(racchio) III
115. a) L. Aelio j [C]aesare n(ostro) III et Roma, ad 136 Fant 1989: no. 102/
Baljbino co(n)s(ulibus) rationi j urbicae p. 251, 1ac Bruzza
sub cur(a) Irenaei j Aug(usti) lib(erti) 1870: no. 258 Dubois
proc(uratoris) caesura Tulli j Saturnini 1908: no. 199.
7(centurionis) leg(ionis) XXII
Prim(igeniae); b) off(icina) Pa(pia) j
n(umero) LXXVI; c) locus NII(?)CIA j
loc(o) XVI b(racchio)
116. a) A[elio etc. dot j Tu[lli etc.]; b) Roma, ad 136 Fant 1989: no. 112/
L. Aelio Caesare n(ostro) III j et Bal- p.252 f. no. 2ac
bino co(n)s(ulibus) rhaitioni j urbicae Bruzza 1870: no. 259
sub cur(a) Irenj[a]ei ; Aug(usti) lib(er- Dubois 1908: no. 200.
ti) proc(uratoris), caesura j [Tu]lli
Saturnini 7(centurionis) leg(ionis) j
XXII Prim(igeniae); c) off(icina)
Papi(a) j n(umero) XCIV j loco XX
117. a) Comm(odo) et Civic(a) co(n)s(uli- Bacakale, ad 136 Fant 1989: no. 68.
bus) b(racchio) III j loco XXV Tul(li);
b) b(racchio) III; c) b(racchio) tert(io)
118. a) L(ucio) Aelio Caes(are) n(ostro) II et Afyon, ad 137 Drew-Bear 1994: no. 11.
Balbino j co(n)s(ulibus) loco XXII
b(racchio) IIII;
 b) b(racchio) quart(o)
119. L. Aelio Caes(are) n(ostro) IIj ehti Bacakale, ad 137 Fant 1989: no. 69.
Balbino co(n)s(ulibus)j loc(o) XLI[]
120. L. Caes(are) n(ostro) II co(n)s(ule)j Bacakale, ad 137 Fant 1989: no. 65
loco CXXIII b(racchio) IIII Christol & Drew-Bear
1991: 123 fn. 46
Drew-Bear 1994: 808
fn. 194.
121. a) Camer(ino) co(n)s(ule)j loco Bacakale, ad 138 Fant 1989: no. 72.
XXVIIII; b) VE[]
122. Cam(erino) et Nig(ro) loco [] j Bacakale, ad 138 Fant 1989: no. 77.
b(racchio) III b(racchio) tert(io)
123. [Nig]ro et Cam(erino) co(n)s(ulibus) Bacakale, ad 138 Fant 1989: no. 76.
caes(ura) Tulli j loco XIIX b(racchio)
IIII
124. Cam(erino) et Nig(ro) co(n)s(ulibus) Bacakale, ad 138 Fant 1989: no. 78.
loco XXXX j [b(racchio)] IIII
125. Cam(erino) et [Nig(ro)] j [loco ] Bacakale, ad 138 Drew-Bear 1994:
XXXXIIX
 j CVSPOL no. 12.
126. b(racchio) II [] j Camerino Bacakale, ad 138 Fant 1989: no. 71.
c[o(n)s(ule)] j loco LXXX
127. Nigrino et Camer(ino) j de loco Iscehisar, ad 138 Christol & Drew-Bear
LXXXV de b(racchio) ter(tio) 1987: no. 4.
 Appendix 379
128. Nigrhinio et Camer(ino) j de loco Bacakale, ad 138 Fant 1989: no. 73
LXXXXV de br(acchio) ter(tio) Drew-Bear 1994: 767
fn. 49.
129. a) Cam(erino) et Nig(ro) loc(o) CXII j Bacakale, ad 138 Fant 1989: no. 74
b(racchio) IIII; b) b(racchio) quart(o) Drew-Bear 1994: 767
fn. 49.
130. Cam(erino) et Nic(rino) j loc(o) Bacakale, ad 138 Fant 1989: no. 75
XXCIII b(racchio) IIII Christol & Drew-Bear
1987: no. 3.
131. a) b(racchio) tert(io) j Cam(erino) et Afyon, ad 138 Christol & Drew-Bear
Nic(rino);
 b) loco
 CXXXVII b(racchio) 1987: no. 2 Fant
III 1989: no. 70?
132. Imp(eratore) Ant(onino) n(ostro) II Bacakale, ad 139 Drew-Bear 1994:
co(n)s(ule)j b(racchio) IIII loco LXII no. 13.
133. Imp(eratore) Ant(onino) n(ostro) II Iscehisar, ad 139 Christol & Drew-Bear
co(n)s(ule) j loco XCII b(racchio) IIII 1987: no. 5.
134. [Im]p(eratore) Ant(onino) III Iscehisar, ad 140 Fant 1989: no. 1202
co(n)s(ule) Christol & Drew-Bear
1986: no. 30.
135. a) Imp(eratore) Ant(onino) III co(n)s- Bacakale, ad 140 Fant 1989: no. 216
(ule) j loco XXXXVII j b(racchio) III ; Christol & Drew-Bear
b) b(racchio) tert(io) 1987: no. 6.
136. Imp(eratore) Ant(onino) n(ostro) III Dokimeion, ad Fant 1989: no. 1192
co(n)s(ule) j loco LXVI 140 Christol & Drew-Bear
1986: no. 29.
137. Prisc(ino) et Sever(o) co(n)s(ulibus) Afyon, ad 141 Fant 1989: no. 79.
loc(o) XXIIII b(racchio) IIII
138. Prisci(no) et Seve(ro) co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 141 Fant 1989: no. 1122
loco XLVI[I]I Christol & Drew-Bear
1986: no. 18.
139. b(racchio) tert(io) j Prisci(no) et Nuri Bey, ad 141 Fant 1989: no. 612
Sever(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j loco CVIII MAMA IV 6 Drew-
b(racchio) III Bear 1994: no. 14.
140. a) NONVB; b) Claro II co(n)s(ule) Ostia, ad 142 Fant 1989: no. 912
ex r(atione) j no CIII j Cl(audii) Baccini Leotardi 1989:
Zel[o(ti)] no. 42.
141. Claro II co(n)s(ule) j ex r(atione) Ostia, ad 142 Fant 1989: no. 91b2
Cl(audii) Zel(oti) j No CXXXV Baccini Leotardi 1989:
no. 43.
142. Flacco et Herod(e) co(n)s(ulibus) j loco Iscehisar, ad 143 Fant 1989: no. 1132
XI b(racchio) IIII Christol & Drew-Bear
1986: no. 19.
143. a) b(racchio) quart(o) j Flacco e t Iscehisar, ad 143 Christol & Drew-Bear
Herod(e)
 co(n)s(ulibus) j loco CLXVI 1987: no. 9.
b(racchio) IIII; b) IA
380 Appendix
144. a) b(racchio) tert(io); b) Flacco et Bacakale, ad 143 Fant 1989: no. 82.
Herod(e) co(n)s(ulibus) j loco CXXI
b(racchio) III
145. Flacco
 et Herod(e) co(n)s(ulibus) j loco Bacakale, ad 143 Fant 1989: no. 81.
CXXII b(racchio) III j b(racchio)
tert(io)
146. a) Flac(co)
 et Hero(de) co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 143 Christol & Drew-Bear
[l]oco
 CCXI[b(racchio) III]; 1987: no. 8.
b) b(racchio) tert(io)
147. a) Flac(co) et Hero(de) co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 143 Fant 1989: no. 80
loco CCXLIX b(racchio) III; Christol & Drew-Bear
b) b(racchio) tert(io) 1987: no. 7.
148. Maxi(mo) et Avi(to) co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 144 Christol & Drew-Bear
loco IX b(racchio) [] 1987: no. 13 Fant
1984: no. 2.
149. Maxi(mo) et Aivt(o)(!) co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 144 Christol & Drew-Bear
b(racchio) quart(o) j loco XIX 1987: no. 12.
b(racchio) IIII
150. a) Maxim(o) et Avit(o) co(n)s(ulibus) Bacakale, ad 144 Fant 1989: no. 83.
(ad 144) j loco XXV, b(racchio) vac.;
b) b(racchio) quart(o)
151. a) Maxi(mo) et Aivt(o)(!) co(n)s(uli- Ischeisar, ad 144 Christol & Drew-Bear
bus) j loco XXXIX
 j b(racchio) IIII j; 1987: no. 11.
b) b(racchio) quart(o)
152. Maxi(mo) et Avi(to) co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 144 Christol & Drew-Bear
loco CXIX b(racchio) III j b(racchio) 1987: no. 10.
tert(io)
153. M a[x(imo)
 et] Avit(o)
 co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 144 Fant 1989: no. 402
loco CCXLV j b(racchio) qua
 r(to) CIL III 7013 Ramsay
1882: no. 6 Christol
& Drew-Bear 1987:
p.85.
154. Claro II et Sever(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 146 Fant 1989: no. 212
loco CCXXXI j b(racchio) tert(io) j CIL III 7025 Christol
off(icina) Pela(goni) & Drew-Bear 1986:
no. 20.
155. Clar(o) II et Sever(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 146 Fant 1989: no. 84.
loco CCCX j b(racchio) tert(io) j
off(icina) Pelag(oni)
156. Clar(o) II e[t Severo co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 146 Fant 1989: no. 562
loc(o) LX[] j o(f )fi[cina] CIL III 7026 Ramsay
1882: no. 23.
157. Larg(o) et Mess(alino)[co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 147 Fant 1989: no. 322
loco
 CXC  j caesura Ael(ii) Ant[onini] j CIL III 14192.1
 r[t(o)]
b(racchio) qua Christol & Drew-Bear
1987: 87 f.
 Appendix 381
158. Largo et Messall(ino) co(n)s(ulibus) j Afyon, ad 147 Fant 1989: no. 85
loco XVI b(racchio) secund(o) j Christol & Drew-Bear
off(icina) Papia 1991: 123 fn. 45
Christol & Drew-Bear
1986: no. 21.
159. Larg(o) et Messal(lino) co(n)s(ulibus)j Iscehisar, ad 147 Fant 1989: no. 222
loco XXXVII repr(obatum) j off(icina) CIL III 7027.
Asiat(ici)
160. Largo et Messall(ino) co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 147 Fant 1989: no. 86
loco CCXCVI b(racchio) secund(o) Christol & Drew-
off(icina) Pelag(oni) Bear1987: no. 14
Drew-Bear 1994: 772
fn. 66.
161. Largo et Messal(ino) co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 147 Christol & Drew-Bear
loco CCXCVII R(b(racchio)?) 1987: no. 16.
quart(o) j off(icina) Pelag(oni)
162. Largo et Messal(lino) co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 147 Fant 1989: no. 87.
loco CCCXXIII b(racchio) prim(o) j
caesu(ra) Ael(ii) Antonini 7(centurio-
nis)
163. Largo et Messal(lino) co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 147 Fant 1989: no. 89.
loco CCCCXXIX b(racchio) secund(o) j
caesu(ra) Ael(ii) [A]ntonini 7(centur-
ionis)
164. Largo et Messal(ino) co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 147 Christol & Drew-Bear
loco CCCCXXXII b(racchio) quart(o) 1987: no. 15.
165. Largo et Messal(lino) co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 147 Fant 1989: no. 90.
loco CCCCXXXIII b(racchio) quart(o)
j caesu(ra) Ael(ii) Ant(onini) j 7(cen-
turionis)
166. Largo et Messal(lino) co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 147 Fant 1989: no. 88.
loco CCC[.]XIV b(racchio) secund(o) j
caesu(ra) [Ael(ii) Ant]onini 7(centur-
ionis)
167. Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 148 Christol & Drew-Bear
loco 1987: no. 25 Fant
1989: no. 111?
168. Torqu[a(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(ulibus)] Bacakale, ad 148 Fant 1989: no. 112
j loco [b(racchio)] j caesu[r(a) ] Drew-Bear 1994: 779
fn. 84.
169. Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 148 Christol & Drew-Bear
loco C[]
 j [] 1987: no. 19.
170. [Tor]qua(to) et Iulia n(o)
 Bacakale, ad 148? Drew-Bear 1994:
co(n)s(ulibus)j [loc]o XIIII j [] no. 18.
171. Torqua(to) et Iul[ian(o) co(n)s(uli- Bacakale, ad 148 Fant 1989: no. 91.
bus)] j loco XVII j caesur(a) Ael(ii)
[Ant(onini) centurionis]
382 Appendix
172. a) Torqua(to) et Iuli(a)n(o) co(n)s(u- Afyon, ad 148 Drew-Bear 1994:
libus) j loco XXI b(racchio) quart(o) no. 16.
j caesur(a) Ael(ii) Antonini
7(centurionis) ; b) 
173. a) Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) Bacakale, ad 148 Fant 1989: no. 92
co(n)s(ulibus) j loco XIIX b(racchio) Drew-Bear 1994: 775
quart(o) j caesur(a) Ael(ii) fn. 72 Christol &
Antonini; b)  Drew-Bear 1987:
no. 21.
174. Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j Synnada, ad 148 Fant 1989: no. 1012
loco XXXII b(racchio) tert(io) j CIL III 14402i Mon-
caesur(a) Ael(ii) Antonini ceaux, BullSocAnt
1900: no. 3.
175. a) Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(uli- Bacakale, ad 148 Fant 1989: no. 93
bus) j loco XLVI repr(obatum) j Drew-Bear 1994: 775
caesur(a) Ael(ii) Antonini fn. 71.
7(centurionis); b) 
176. Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 148 Christol & Drew-Bear
loco LIII b(racchio) tert(io)
 j caesur(a) 1987: no. 23 Fant
Ael(ii) Antonini 7(centurionis) 1989: no. 94.
177. a) Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(uli- Bacakale, ad 148 Christol & Drew-Bear
bus) j loco LV b(racchio) quart(o) j 1987: no. 24 Fant
caesur(a) Ael(ii) Antonini 7(centurio- 1989: no. 95? Drew-
nis) ; b)  Bear 1994: 775 fn. 71.
178. Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 148 Christol & Drew-Bear
loco LVI b(racchio) quart(o) j caesur(a) 1987: no. 28.
Ael(ii) Antonini 7(centurionis)
179. Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 148 Fant 1989: no. 96.
loco LXI b(racchio) tert(io)
180. Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 148 Drew-Bear 1994:
loco LXV b(racchio) secund(o) j no. 17.
caesur(a) Ael(ii) Antonini 7
(centurionis) off(icina) Asia(tici)
181. Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 148 Fant 1989: no. 97.
loco LXXXV b(racchio) tert(io)
182. br(acchio) quart(o) j Torqua(to) et Bacakale, ad 148 Fant 1989: no. 98
Iulian(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j loco XCIII j Drew-Bear 1994: 779
caesur(a) Ael(ii) Antoni(ni) fn. 82, 802 fn. 165.
7(centurionis)
183. Torqua(to) et Iu[li]an(o) [co(n)s(uli- Iscehisar, ad 148 Fant 1989: no. 1142
bus)] j loco XCIIII [b(racchio) ] j Christol & Drew-Bear
caesur(a) Ael(ii) A[ntonini]
 1986: no. 22.
184. Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 148 Fant 1989: no. 99.
loco CIII b(racchio) quart(o)
185. Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 148 Fant 1989: no. 100
loco CXIIII b(racchio) tert(io) j Drew-Bear 1994: 774
caesur(a) Ael(ii) Antonini fn. 68.
7(centurionis)
 Appendix 383
186. Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j Synnada, ad 148 Fant 1989: no. 1002
loco CXXIX b(racchio) seg(undo) CIL III 14402h
Monceaux, BullSocAnt
1900: no. 2.
187. Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j Synnada, ad 148 Fant 1989: no. 992
loco CXXIIX b(racchio) segun(do) CIL III 14402g Mon-
ceaux, BullSocAnt 1900:
no. 1.
188. Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 148 Drew-Bear 1994:
loco CLXIII b(racchio) quart(o) j no. 15.
caesu(ra) Ael(ii) Antonini
7(centurionis)
189. a) Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(uli- Afyon, ad 148 Fant 1989: no. 101
bus) j loco CLXXVI b(racchio) quar- Drew-Bear 1994: 774
t(o); b)  fn. 71 Christol &
Drew-Bear 1986:
no. 23.
190. Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j Afyon, ad 148 Fant 1989: no. 102
 j caesur(a) Ael(ii) Anto-
loco CCX IIX Christol & Drew-Bear
nini 7(centurionis) j b(racchio) 1987: no. 27 Drew-
secun(do) Bear 1994: no. 19.
191. Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 148 Fant 1989: no. 103
loco CCXXIIII repr(obatum) Christol & Drew-Bear
1987: no. 18.
192. [Tor]qua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(uli- Bacakale, ad 148 Fant 1989: no. 104
bus) j loco CCXXV, b(racchio) quart(o)
193. Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 148 Fant 1989: no. 105
loco CCXXXIIII j b(racchio) quart(o) Christol & Drew-Bear
1987: no. 26.
194. a) Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)[s(uli- Bacakale, ad 148 Christol & Drew-Bear
bus)] j loco CCXXXVI [] j [b(rac- 1987: no. 20 Fant
chio) quart(o); b)  1989: no. 106 Drew-
Bear 1994: 774 fn. 71.
195. a) b(racchio) qua(rto); b) loco j Bacakale, ad 148 Fant 1989: no. 107
CCXXXIIX;
 c); d) Torqua(to) et Drew-Bear 1994: 774
Iuli[an(o) co(n)s(ulibus)] fn. 71.
196. Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 148 Fant 1989: no. 108.
loco CCLXXV j b(racchio) quart(o)
197. a) Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(uli- Bacakale, ad 148 Christol & Drew-Bear
bus) j loco CCLXXVI j b(racchio) 1987: no. 22 Fant
quart(o); b)  1989: no. 109.
198. Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 148 Christol & Drew-Bear
loco CCLXX[X]X j b(racchio) quart(o) 1987: no. 29.
199. Torqua(to) et Iulia n(o)
 [co(n)s(uli- Iscehisar, ad 148 Christol & Drew-Bear
bus)] j loco CCXVI [] j r[e]pr(oba- 1987: no. 30.
tum)
384 Appendix
200. a)Torqua(to) et Iulian(o) co(n)s(uli- Bacakale, ad 148 Fant 1989: no. 110
bus) j loco CCXXCIX j repr(obatum); Christol & Drew-Bear
b)  1987: no. 17 Drew-
Bear 1994: 774 fn. 71.
201. a) Orfito et Prisco co(n)s(ulibus)j loco Bacakale, ad 149 Fant 1989: no. 114
XII b(racchio) III j caes(ura) PERCL-  Christol & Drew-Bear
DAED (?); b) XII 1987: no. 31 Drew-
Bear 1994: 783 fn. 102.
202. Orfito (et Pudente) co(n)s(ulibus) j Dokimeion, ad Fant 1989: no. 1152
off(icina) Ephe(sia) loco LXXIV 149 Christol & Drew-Bear
1986: no. 24 Drew-
Bear 1994: 800 fn. 157.
203. Orfito et Pudente j co(n)s(ulibus) Bacakale, ad 149 Fant 1989: no. 157
offi(cina) Ephes(ia) caes(ura) j Drew-Bear 1994: 800
Alex(andri) j loco LV b(racchio) IIII fn. 157.
204. Gallicano et Vetere j co(n)s(ulibus) Bacakale, ad 150 Fant 1989: no. 116
205. Gallicano et Vjetere co(n)s(ulibus) Bacakale, ad 150 Drew-Bear 1994:
no. 20.
206. a) Gallicano et Vetere j co(n)s(ulibus); Bacakale, ad 150 Fant 1989: no. 115.
b) off(icina) Pelag(oni) j loco XXIX
b(racchio) III
207. a) Gallicano et Vehteir(e) co(n)s- Ostia, ad 150 Baccini Leotardi 1989:
(ulibus); b) ex ra(tione) Cl(audi) no. 44.
Zel(oti) j no LXXVIII
208. a) off(icina) Ephe(sia) loco LXV[]j Iscehisar, ad 150 Christol & Drew-Bear
Callicano et Vete[re] j co(n)s(ulibus); 1987: no. 32.
b) b(racchio) II
209. Maxi et Sil(o) co(n)s(ulibus) j loco IX Iscehisar, ad 152 Fant 1989: no. 22 AE
b(racchio)
 [] 1984: 845 Christol &
Drew-Bear 1986:
no. 25 Drew-Bear
1994: 810 fn. 213.
210. Praesente et Rufino co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 153 Fant 1989: no. 117.
caheisura Ael(ii) Zosim[i] j loco L
b(racchio) II
211. Praesente e(t) Rufino co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 153 Christol & Drew-Bear
caesura Aeli(i) Zosimi j loco vac. j 1987: no. 33.
b(racchio) III
212. Commodi et Laterani co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 154 Christol & Drew-Bear
caes(ura) Zos(imi) j loco LIIII 1987: no. 34.
b(racchio) vac.
213. L(ucio) Ael(io) Aurel(io) Aug(usto) Bacakale, ad 154 Drew-Bear 1994:
fil(io) Commodo j et Laterano co(n)s- no. 23.
(ulibus) j caes(ura) Manli(i)
Alexandr(i)
214. L(ucio) Ael(io) Aur(elio) Aug(usto) Bacakale, ad 154 Drew-Bear 1994:
h f iil(io) Commodo j et Laterano no. 24.
co(n)s(ulibus) j caes(ura) Manli(i)
Ale xandri j loco CI R
 Appendix 385
215. Commodo et Laterano j co(n)s(ulibus) Bacakale, ad 154 Fant 1989: no. 118.
caes(ura) Zosimi j loco XXXIII
br(acchio) II
216. loco XIII 
j Commodo et Lateran[o] j Bacakale, ad 154 Fant 1989: no. 119
co(n)s(ulibus) caesur(a) Mahnili Alex-
 Christol & Drew-Bear
(andri) 1987: no. 35 Chris-
tol & Drew-Bear 1991:
139 fn. 122, 161 fn. 189
Drew-Bear 1994: 783
fn. 103.
217. loco V b(racchio) secu(ndo) j Silvano et Bacakale, ad 154? Fant 1989: no. 122.
Aujgurino co(n)s(ulibus) ex off(icina) j
Asiatici ex cae(sura) j Zosim(i)
218. loco j XXVI j b(racchio) II j Commodo j Bacakale, ad 154 Fant 1989: no. 121.
et Laterano co(n)s(ulibus) j caes(ura)
Ael(ii) Zos(imi)
219. Commodi et Lahtierani co(n)s(ulibus) j Afyon, ad 154 Drew-Bear 1994:
caes(ura) Manl(ii) Alexand(ri) j loco no. 22.
XXXX
220. Commodi et Laterani co(n)s(ulibus) j Afyon, ad 154 Fant 1989: no. 120
caes(ura) Manl(ii) Alexand(ri) j loco Drew-Bear 1994:
LV b(racchio) III I no. 21.
221. loco vac. b(racchio) vac. j Barbaro et Bacakale, ad 157 Fant 1989: no. 123
Regulo co(n)s(ulibus) (ad 157) j Christol & Drew-Bear
ex of (f) i(cina) Andae(vi) ex cae(sura) 1987: no. 36 Chris-
Alex(andri) tol & Drew-Bear 1991:
161 fn. 189.
222. a) loco IIII b(racchio) III j Barbaro Bacakale, ad 157 Fant 1989: no. 124.
et Regulo co(n)s(ulibus) ex off(icina)
Pela(goni) j ex cae(sura) Zosi(mi)
b) PAL
223. [lo]co XI b(racchio) pr[im(o)] j Bacakale, ad 157 Fant 1989: no. 125
[Ba]rbaro et Reg[u]j[lo c]o(n)s(ulibus)
 Drew-Bear 1994:
ex of(ficina) And[ae(vi)] j [ex ca]e- no. 25.
(sura) A le
 x(andri)

224. Tertullo et Sacerdote co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 158 Fant 1989: no. 128.
ex off(icina) contra caesura Zosi(mi) j
loco vac. b(racchio) quar(to)
225. a) Tertullo et Sacerdote co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 158 Fant 1989: no. 126.
ex off(icina) Pelagon(i) caes(ura) j
Zosim(i) loco IIII b(racchio) quar(to);
b) VLI
226. [Te]rtullo et Sacer[dote] co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 158 Christol & Drew-Bear
[ex] off(icina) Andaev(i) caes(ura) 1987: no. 37.
Alex(andri) j loco LIIII b(racchio) quar(to)
227. T e[rt]ullo
 et Sacerdote co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 158 Fant 1989: no. 127
ex of(ficina) Andaev(i) caesura j Christol & Drew-Bear
Alex(andri) j loco XCIX b(racchio) R 1987: no. 38 Chris-
tol & Drew-Bear 1991:
162 fn. 189 Drew-
Bear 1994: 779 fn. 82,
783 fn. 100, 795 fn. 142.
386 Appendix
228. [Q]uintillo et Prisco co(n)s(ulibus) j ex Iscehisar, ad 159 Christol & Drew-Bear
of(ficina) Andae(vi) caes(ura) j 1987: no. 41.
Alex(andri) loco XV b(racchio)
q[ua]rt(o)
229. Quintilio et j Prisco co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 159 Christol & Drew-Bear
loco XVII j caes(ura) Alex(andri)
 j 1987: no. 46 Fant
b(racchio) quar(to) 1989: no. 130.
230. Quintillo et Prisco co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 159 Fant 1989: no. 129.
ex off(icina) Andae(vi) caesur(a) j
Alex(andri) loco XVIII b(racchio)
tert(io)
231. Quintillo e(t) Prisco co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 159 Christol & Drew-Bear
ex of(ficina) Andae(vi) caesur(a) j 1987: no. 44.
Alex(andri) j loco XVIIII
b(racchio) tert(io)
232. Quintillo et Prisco co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 159 Fant 1989: no. 12 AE
ex of(ficina)Andae(vi) caesu(ra) 1984: 844 Christol &
Alex(andri) j loco CII b(racchio) Drew-Bear 1986:
ter(tio) no. 27: Drew-Bear
1994: 773 fn. 67, 793 f.
fn. 137.
233. [loco] XXXI b(racchio) vac. j [Quin- Bacakale, ad 159 Fant 1989: no. 141
tillo et] Prisco co(n)s(ulibus) j [ex Drew-Bear 1994:
off(icina) Asiat]ic(i) caes(ura) no. 29.
Zos(imi) j b(racchio) secund(o)
234. [Q]u[i]nt[i]llo et Prisco co(n)s(ulibus) Bacakale, ad 159 Fant 1989: no. 131.
j ex of(ficina) Andae(vi) caesur(a) j
Alex(andri) loco XXXIIII b(racchio)
tert(io)
235. Quintillo et Prisco co(n)s(ulibus) j ex Bacakale, ad 159 Fant 1989: no. 132.
of(ficina) Andae(vi) caheisura j
Alex(andri) loco XXXXI b(racchio)
tert(io)
236. Quin til[lo
 et Pris]c o co(n)s(ulibus) j ex Bacakale, ad 159 Drew-Bear 1994:
of(ficina) Andae(vi) caheisura j no. 27.
Alex(andri) loco XXXXII j b(racchio)
qu(arto)
 et Prisco [c]o(n)s(ulibus) j
237. Quin[t]i llo Bacakale, ad 159 Fant 1989: no. 133.
ex of(ficina) Andae(vi) caesur(a) j
Alex(andri) loco XCVI b(racchio)
tert(io)
238. [.]EIA j Quintillo et Pris[co] j Bacakale, ad 159 Fant 1989: no. 142.
co(n)s(ulibus) ex of(ficina) Andae(vi) j
caesu(ra) Alex(andri) loco c[..] j
b(racchio) quart(o)
239. Quintillo et P[ri]sco co(n)s(ulibus) j ex Bacakale, ad 159 Fant 1989: no. 134.
of(ficina) Andae(vi) caesur(a)
Alex(andri) j loco CXXV
b(racchio) tert(io)
 Appendix 387
240. [Qui]ntillo et j [Pri]sco co(n)s(ulibus) Bacakale, ad 159 Drew-Bear 1994:
ex j of(ficina)
 Andae(vi) caes(ura) j no. 26.
Alex(andri) j loco CXXXXIII j b(rac-
chio) q uart(o)

241. Quintillo
 et P[risco] j co(n)s(ulibus) ex Iscehisar, ad 159 Fant 1989: no. 1172
of(ficina) Andae(vi) j caes(ura) Christol & Drew-Bear
Alex(andri) j loco CXXXXVI j 1986: no. 26.
b(racchio) terti(o)
242. [Qui]ntillo et Prisco co(n)s(ulibus) ex Bacakale, ad 159 Christol & Drew-Bear
of(ficina) Andae(vi) j [c]aes(ura) 1987: no. 45 Fant
Alex(andri) j loco CXXXXIX 1989: no. 135
b(racchio) terti(o)
243. Quintillo et Prisco co(n)s(ulibus) j ex Iscehisar, ad 159 Christol & Drew-Bear
of(ficina) Andae(vi) caes(ura) 1987: no. 39.
Alex(andri) j loco CLXIII b(racchio)
tert(io)
244. Quintill[o et] Prisco co[s] j ex of(ficina) Bacakale, ad 159 Fant 1989: no. 136
Andae(vi) caes(ura) Alex(andri) j loco Christol & Drew-Bear
CLXXVIII j b(racchio) quart(o) 1987: no. 42.
245. Quintillo et Prisco co(n)s(ulibus) j ex Bacakale, ad 159 Fant 1989: no. 137
of(ficina) Andae(vi) caes(ura) Drew-Bear 1994:
Alex(andri) jj loco CLXXXII j no. 30, 804 fn. 173.
b(racchio) quar(to)
246. Quintillo et Prisco co(n)s(ulibus) j ex Bacakale, ad 159 Fant 1989: no. 138.
of(ficina) Andae(vi), caesu(ra) j
Alex(andri), de loco CXCVI, b(racchio)
qua[r(to)]
247. [Quint]illo et P[ris]jco
 co(n)s(ulibus) Iscehisar, ad 159 Drew-Bear 1994:
ex off(icina) j Andaev(i) caes(ura) no. 28.
A[lex(andri)] j loco CCLXXXII I j
b(racchio) tee(!)r(tio.)
248. Quintillo et Prisco co(n)s(ulibus) j ex Bacakale, ad 159 Fant 1989: no. 139
off(icina) Andae(vi) caes(ura) Christol & Drew-Bear
Alex(andri) j loco CCCLXXIIII j 1987: no. 43.
b(racchio) secun(do)
249. [Quintillo] et Prisco co(n)s(ulibus) j Afyon, ad 159 Fant 1989: no. 140
off(icina) Andae(vi), caes(ura) Christol & Drew-Bear
Alex(andri) j loco CCCLXXXXV[] j 1987: no. 40 Chris-
b(racchio) quar(to) tol & Drew-Bear 1991:
162 fn. 189 Drew-
Bear 1994: 802 fn. 162.
250. Bradua et Varo co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 160 Christol & Drew-Bear
off(icina) Pelag(oni) caesur(a) j Clau- 1987: no. 49.
diani loco vac. j b(racchio) quar(to)
251. Bradua et Varo co(n)s(ulibus) Afyon, ad 160 Fant 1989: no. 1182
off(icina) Eph[esia] j caes(ura) Christol & Drew-Bear
Claud(iani) loco VIIII b(racchio) [] 1986: no. 28.
252. Bradua et Varo co(n)s(ulibus) Bacakale, ad 160 Fant 1989: no. 143.
off(icina) Contra Pers(is) j caes(ura)
Claud(iani) j loco XIIII b(racchio)
quar(to)
388 Appendix
253. Bradua et Varo co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 160 Fant 1989: no. 232
off(icina) Pelag(oni) caes(ura) j CIL III 7029 MAMA
Claudian(i) b(racchio) qua(rto) j loco IV 7 JRS 2, 1912: 251
XVIII j b no. 5.
254. Bradua et Varo co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 160 Fant 1989: no. 147.
off(icina) Pelag(oni), caesur(a) j
Claudian(i) j loco b(racchio)
quar(to) XXII
255. Bradua et Varo co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 160 Christol & Drew-Bear
offi(cina) Andae(vi) caes(ura) j Efor( ) 1987: no. 47.
j loco XXVI R
256. Bradua et Varo co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 160 Fant 1989: no. 144
[o]ff(icina) Ephes(ia) caesur(a) j Christol & Drew-Bear
[Clau]diani loco LIX b(racchio) 1991: 121 f., fns. 37, 40
qu[ar(to)] Drew-Bear 1994: 800
fn. 157.
257. Bradua et Varo co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 160 Fant 1989: no. 145.
off(icina) Andae(vi) caesu(ra)
Alex(andri) j loco LX j R
258. Bradua et Varo co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 160 Fant 1989: no. 146.
off(icina) Pelag(oni) caesur(a) j
Claudian(i) j loco LXVI b(racchio)
quar(to)
259. Bradua et Varo co(n)s(ulibus) j Iscehisar, ad 160 Christol & Drew-Bear
off(icina) Andae(vi) caes(ura) j Fabi 1987: no. 48.
loco LXVII j b(racchio) quart(o)
260. Imp(eratore) Antojnino n(ostro) III et j Iscehisar, ad 161 Fant 1989: no. 242
Imp(eratore) Vero n(ostro) I j CIL III 7030 MAMA
co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) Pejlag(oni) IV 8.
caes(ura) []
261. Imp(eratore) Antonino n(ostro) III et j Iscehisar, ad 161 Fant 1989: no. 252
Imp(eratore) Ve[ro] n(ostro) [II] CIL III 7031 III
co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) j caes(ura) 12233.
Claudiani loco j DT
262. Imp(eratore) An[to]ni(no) no(stro) Roma, ad 161 Fant 1989: no. 122
I[II] j Imp(eratore) Vero II Bruzza no. 261.
co(n)s(ulibus) j caes[ura Cla]udiani
263. a) [I]mp(eratore) Antonino n(ostro) III Bacakale, ad 161 Fant 1989: no. 148
[e]t I[mp(eratore)]
 j Vero n(ostro) II Christol & Drew-Bear
co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) Anda[e(vi)] j 1987: no. 52 Chris-
caes(ura) Fabi loco X j R; b) loco X tol & Drew-Bear 1991:
154 fn. 163: Drew-
Bear 1994: 807 fn. 189.
264. Imp(eratore) Antonino n(ostro) III et j Iscehisar, ad 161 Fant 1989: no. 1222
Imp(eratore) Vero n(ostro) II Christol & Drew-Bear
co(n)s(ulibus) j off(icina) Pelag(oni) 1986: no. 32.
caes(ura) j Claudia(ni) loco XII j
b(racchio)quart(o)
265. Imp(eratore) Antonino j n(ostro) III et Bacakale, ad 161 Fant 1989: no. 149
Imp(eratore) Vero j n(ostro) II Christol & Drew-Bear
 Appendix 389
co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) Andae(vi) j 1987: no. 50 Chris-
caes(ura) Domes(tici) j loco XIII tol & Drew-Bear 1991:
b(racchio) quar(to) 154 fn. 163.
266. Imp(eratore) Antonino n(ostro) j III et Iscehisar, ad 161 Fant 1989: no. 1212
Imp(eratore) Vero n(ostro) II j Christol & Drew-Bear
co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) Andaev(i) j 1986: no. 31.
caes(ura) vac. j loco XVIII R
267. a) Imp(eratore) Antoni(no) III et j Vero Bacakale, ad 161 Fant 1989: no. 150.
II co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) j contr(a)
caes(ura) Dom(estici); b) b(racchio)
quar(to); c) loco XXVIII
268. a) Imp(eratore) Antonino n(ostro) III j Bacakale, ad 161 Fant 1989: no. 151
et Imp(eratore) Vero n(ostro) II cos j Christol & Drew-Bear
offi(cina) Pelag(oni) caes(ura) 1987: no. 51 Drew-
Claud(iani); b) R; c) loco XXXXV [] Bear 1994: 806 fn. 189.
269. Imp(eratore) Anto(nino) [II]I et A[.]A Iscehisar, ad 161? Fant 1989: no. 312
caes(ura?) j loco LIII repr(obatum) CIL III 14192.
270. Imp(eratore) Anto(nino) IIII et Arel j Iscehisar, ad 161? Fant 1989: no. 412
caes II cos j loco CCCXXXIII j CIL III 7024 Ramsay
repr(obatum) off(icina) Pela(goni) 1882: no. 7.
 j Rustico II et
271. b(racchio) quar t(o) Bacakale, ad 162 Christol & Drew-Bear
Aquilino co(n)[s(ulibus)] j off(icina) 1987: no. 55 Fant
Asiatic(i) caesur(a) j Domes(tici) loco 1989: no. 152.
LXII
272. Rustico II et Aquilino co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 162 Fant 1989: no. 153
off(icina) And(aevi) caes(ura) Christol & Drew-Bear
Dom(estici) j b(racchio) IIII loco 1987: no. 54.
CVI jvac. AN j loco LXXXXI j b(racchio)
quar(to)
273. [L]ae l[iano
 et] Pastore co(n)[s(uli- Bacakale, ad 163 Christol & Drew-Bear
bus)] j offi(cina) Asiat(ici) caes(ura) 1987: no. 56 Fant
Dom(estici) j loco LVIIII b(racchio) 1989: no. 154.
quar(to) j M X
274. a) Macrino et Celso co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 164 Fant 1989: no. 155.
off(icina) Asiat(ici) caes(ura) j
Dom(estici) j loco XXXIII b(racchio)
quar(to); b)
275. Macrino et Celso co(n)s(ulibus)j Iscehisar, ad 164 Fant 1989: no. 372
off(icina) Asiatic(i) caes(ura) CIL III 7032 Ramsay
Dom(estici) j b(racchio) [q]var(to) 1882: no. 3.
b(racchio) III j [l]oco XXXXIIII
276. a) Severo II co(n)s(ule) j ex rat(ione) Bacakale, ad 173 Fant 1989: no. 158.
Syr(i) j III; b) VII b(racchio) III;
c) b(racchio) tert(io)
277. Sever(o) II co(n)s(ule)j VIII Bacakale, ad 173 Fant 1989: no. 159.
278. a) II R j CIII; b) LVIII MS; c) A II; d) Bacakale, ad 175 Fant 1989: no. 160.
Iuliano et Peison(e) co(n)s(ulibus) j
offic(ina) Pelag(oni), caes(ura) III
Athenob(i) j loco II
390 Appendix
279. Iuliano et Peisone co(n)s(ulibus) j Bacakale, ad 175 Fant 1989: no. 161.
of(ficina) Pelag(oni), caes(ura) II
Athen[ob(i)] j loci XII b(racchio) II
280. Commodo dom(ino) [n(ostro) et Iscehisar, ad 177? Christol & Drew-Bear
Quintillo ] j co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) 1987: no. 63.
Neicae(nsis) []
281. loco XX[b(racchio?)] j Imp(era- Bacakale, ad 177 Fant 1989: no. 165
tore) Aug(usti) filio C[ommodo] j et Christol & Drew-Bear
Quintillo co(n)s(ulibus) [off(icina)? 1991: 140 fn. 125.
]j ca[es(ura)] Dom(estici)
282. a) of(fi)c(ina) Veria(na) caes(ura) Titi Bacakale, ad 177 Fant 1989: no. 167
j loc(o) II R Com(m)odo dom(ino) Christol & Drew-Bear
n(ostro) et Qvjintillo co(n)s(ulibus); 1987: no. 59 Chris-
b) T  ; c) LXV tol & Drew-Bear 1991:
121 fn. 37.
283. [Co]mmodo [d]om(ino) n(ostro) II et Iscehisar, ad 177 Christol & Drew-Bear
Martio
 Ve[ro II] j co(n)s(ulibus) 1987: no. 66.
off(icina) Lucilli(ana?) caes(ura) Titi
loc(o) II j b(racchio) tert(io)
284. [Commod]o do[m(ino) n(ostro)] II et Iscehisar, ad 177 Christol & Drew-Bear
Martio V[e]ro II co(n)s(ulibus) 1987: no. 65.
of[f(icina)] j [] d(e) caes(ura) Titi

loc(o) IIII b(racchio) q[u]art(o)
285. a) Com(m)odo d[om(ino) n(ostro) et Bacakale, ad 177 Fant 1989: no. 168
Qu]intill[o] j co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) Christol & Drew-Bear
Ver[i(ana)] caes(ura)
 Titi j loc(o) IIII 1987: no. 58 Chris-
b(racchio) quar(to); b) b(racchio) tol & Drew-Bear 1991:
quar(to) j T  121 fn. 37.
286. Com(m)odo do[m(ino)] j n(ostro) et Iscehisar, ad 177 Christol & Drew-Bear
Quintillo j co(n)s(ulibus) of(ficina) 1987: no. 60.
Com(m)od(iana) j caes(ura) Titi j
loc(o) X b(racchio) ter(tio)
287. C[o]m(m)odo [dom(ino) n(ostro)] et Bacakale, ad 177 Fant 1989: no. 169
Q[u]intillo j co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) Christol & Drew-Bear
Com(m)odiana caes(ura) Titi j loc(o) 1991: 128 fn. 57.
XI R
288. Com(m)odo dom(ino) n(ostro) et Bacakale, ad 177 Fant 1989: no. 164
Quin[til]
  co(n)s(ulibus) oh fi ic(ina)
lo Christol & Drew-Bear
Pelag(oni) caes(ura) Titi loc(o) XXIII j 1987: no. 61.
b(racchio) quar(to)
289. loco XXIX b(racchio)
 [] j Imp(era- Iscehisar, ad 177 Christol & Drew-Bear
tore) Aug(usto) filio Com(modo) 1987: no. 62. Fant 1989:
d[om(ino) n(ostro)] j et Quintillo no. 166.
co(n)s(ulibus) of(f )ic(ina) [] j
c[aes(ura)] Dom(estici)
290. LXVIII j b(racchio) o(!)uar(to)j Iscehisar, ad 177 Christol & Drew-Bear
Comodo dom(ino) n(ostro) et Qujintillo 1987: no. 57.
cq(!)(n)s(ulibus)
of h f iic(ina) Pela(goni)
 j caes(ura) Titi
291. Orfito et R[ufo
 co(n)s(ulibus) Bacakale, ad 178 Fant 1989: no. 172.
o]ff(icina) Com(m)od ian[a] j
 Appendix 391
caes(ura) Titi loc(o) []i[-] R IX j
ADN ex k(alendario) nov(o)
292. Orf[it]o
 et Rufo j co(n)s(ulibu)s Bacakale, ad 178 Fant 1989: no. 170
offi(cina) Neicaens(is) j caes(ura) Titi Christol & Drew-Bear
loc(o) III b(racchio) IIII 1987: no. 64 Christol
& Drew-Bear 1991: 121
fn. 37.
293. a) Orfito et Rufo co(n)s(ulibus) Bacakale, ad 178 Fant 1989: no. 171.
off(icina) Comm(odiana)
 caes(ura)
Titi loc(o) III b(racchio) quar(to); b) C
ANT loc(o) IIII j ANT[.]o[.]; c) 
294. [] Vero II co(n)s(ulibus) j vac. LXIII Iscehisar, ad 179? Christol & Drew-Bear
1987: no. 53.
295. Commodo dom(ino) n(ostro) II et Bacakale, ad 179 Fant 1989: no. 178
Martio j Vero II co(n)s(ulibus) rece p ti
 a Drew-Bear 1994: 809
Tito j n[o]men[e] ZNT IOVI[.] j [ . . . ] fn. 200.
b(racchio) quar(to)
296. [Commodo, dom(ino)] n(ostro) II et Bacakale, ad 179 Fant 1989: no. 176.
Martio Ver(o) j [II co(n)s(ulibus)
recep]ti a Tito nomene j [] b(rac-
chio) quar(to)
297. Commodo dom(ino) n(ostro) II j et Bacakale, ad 179 Fant 1989: no. 175.
Martio Vero II co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina)
j Comod(iana) caes(ura) Titi loc(o) I
b(racchio) quar(to)
298. Commodo dom(ino) n(ostro) II et Bacakale, ad 179 Fant 1989: no. 174.
Martio Ver[o] j II co(n)s(ulibus)
off(icina) Lucilli caes(ura) Titi loc(o) II
j b(racchio) tert(io)
299. [Comm]odo [dom(ino) n(ostro)] II et Bacakale, ad 179 Fant 1989: no. 173
Martio Vero II co(n)s(ulibus) of(ficina) Drew-Bear 1994: 793
j [Como]d(iana?), caes(ura) Titi loc(o) fn. 133.
IIII b(racchio) quart(o)
300. Commodo dom(ino) n(ostro) II et Bacakale, ad 179 Fant 1989: no. 177
[Martio Vero, co(n)s(ulibus) II] j Christol & Drew-Bear
recepti ex off(icina) Prusaen[(si)] j 1991: 122 fn. 38
in locqum lapidum quo s receper(at) j Drew-Bear 1994: 808 f.
promutuo Titus ex caesu(ra) Veteris j fns. 199, 200.
b(racchio) quar(to), loco XXV
301. Commo[do dom(ino) n(ostro) II et Bacakale, ad 180 Christol & Drew-Bear
Ma]rtio  V ero I I c[o(n)s(ulibus)]
 j off- 1991: no. 5.
(icina) Com(m)[o(diana) ca]es(ura)
T i ti loc(o) XI b(racchio) quar(to) j
COM
 III
302. a) In(!)p(eratore) L(ucio) Septi mio
 Bacakale, ad 194 Christol & Drew-Bear
Severo II et Clodio Albino j Caes(are) II 1991: no. 1.
co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) Smurnaiorum
caesura Diojnusi sub cura Maronis
Aug(usti) lib(erti); b) loc(o) IIII
b(racchio) III

392 Appendix
303. loc(o) XXXI b(racchio) IIII j Bacakale, ad 194 Christol & Drew-Bear
In(!)p(eratore) L(ucio) Septim(i)o 1991: no. 2.
Sev(e)ro II et Clodio j Albino
S(!)aes(are) II co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina)
Smurnaiojrum caes(ura) Aur(elii)
Dionusi sub cura j Maronis Aug(usti)
lib(erti) proc(uratoris)
304. a) VECYACIN j []EGNLO j []PH Ostia, ad 197 Orsi, NotSc 1921: no. 7.
[]; b) LOC TER j SEC j Laterano j
[et R]ufino j []
305. Laterano et Ruphino co(n)s(ulibus)j Ostia, ad 197 Fant 1989: no. 972
[] j [] sub c[ura]j []proc(ura- Orsi, NotSc 1921: 493 f.
toris) no. 5.
306. [l]oc(o) III b(racchio) ter(tio) j Later- Bacakale, ad 197 Fant 1989: no. 179.
ano et Rujfino co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina)
Pers(is) j caes(ura) Neophyti
307. loc(o) VIII b(racchio) sec(undo) j Late- Bacakale, ad 197 Christol & Drew-Bear
rano et Ruphijno co(n)s(ulibus) 1991: no. 3.
off(icina) Smur(naiorum) j
caes(ura) vac. Di(onusi?) vac.
308. loc(o)
 XXIII b(racchio) quar(to) j Iscehisar, ad 197 Christol & Drew-Bear
Laterano et Rufino j co(n)s(ulibus) 1987: no. 67.
off(icina) Bass(iana) caes(ura)
Osjtill(i) Elpidefo(ri)
309. a) sub c(ura) j lib(erti) (p)roc(uratoris) Punto Scifo, 197? Fant 1989: no. 932
j [..]s[..] j; b) loc(o) XXX b(racchio) I Orsi, NotSc 1921: 493 f.,
j[Latera]no et Ruf[ino] j caes(ura) N no. 1 2 Pensabene
1978: no. 6.
310. loc(o) [ . . . ] j Saturnino et Gal(lo) j Iscehisar, ad 198 Fant 1989: no. 822
co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) Urania Roder 1971: J4.
cae(sura) j Iul(ii) Neophyti
311. loc(o) I b(racchio) quar(to) COMM I j Iscehisar, ad 198 Christol & Drew-Bear
Sa{n}(tu)rnino et Gallo j co(n)s(ulibus) 1987: no. 68.
off(icina) Bass(iana) caes(ura)
Osjta(!)illi Elpidepho(ri)
312. loco II b(racchio) q[ua]
 r(to)COMM I Bacakale, ad 198 Fant 1989: no. 182
Saturnino j et Gallo co(n)s(ulibus) Christol & Drew-Bear
off(icina) He(r)culi(ana?) j cae(sura) 1987: no. 69 Chris-
Ostilli Elpidejpho(ri) tol & Drew-Bear 1991:
131 fn. 75, 139 fn. 104,
155 fn. 167.
313. loc(o) III b(racchio) quar(to) j Latera Bacakale, ad 198 Christol & Drew-Bear
[no et Rufi]jno co(n)s(ulibus) 1991: no. 4.
of[f(icina)] j caes(ura) Yac[inthi]
314. loc(o) VI b(racchio) qua r(to) COM I j Bacakale, ad 198 Fant 1989: no. 180
Saturnino et Gallo c[o(n)s(ulibus) Christol & Drew-Bear
off(icina)] j Sever(iana) caes(ura) 1987: no. 71 Christol
Aur(elii) The[ophili] & Drew-Bear 1991: 132
fn. 78.
 Appendix 393
315. lo c(o)
 V I b(racchio) quar(to) COM II Bacakale, ad 198 Fant 1989: no. 184
Saturnino et j Gallo co(n)s(ulibus) Christol & Drew-Bear
off(icina) Hercul(iana?) caes(ura) Ostil 1991: no. 6, 130 fn. 72.
(li) j Elpide(phori)
316. loc(o) VIIII vac. COMM I j Saturnino et Bacakale, ad 198 Fant 1989: no. 181
Gallo j co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) Christol & Drew-Bear
Herculi(ana?) caes(ura) j Ostilli 1987: no. 70 Chris-
Elpidepho(ri) tol & Drew-Bear 1991:
132 fn. 80.
317. [loc(o)] X b(racchio) quar(to) COM II Bacakale, ad 198 Christol & Drew-Bear
Saturnino e(t) Gallo co(n)s(ulibus) j 1991: no. 7.
[of]f(icina) Mar(tis/-tialis?) caes(ura)
Ulpi(i) Yacin(thi) vac.
318. loc(o) XIIII b(racchio) quar(to) Bacakale, ad 198 Fant 1989: no. 183.
COMM I Saturjnino et Gallo
co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) Hercujli-
(ana?) caes(ura) Ostilli
Elpidepho(ri)
319. loco XVIIII b(racchio) quar(to)(COM Bacakale, ad 198 Fant 1989: no. 185
I?) j Saturnino et Gal[lo] j co(n)s(uli- Christol & Drew-Bear
bus) off(icina) Bass(iana) caes(ura) 1991: 138 fn. 108, 155
Osjtill(i) Helpid(ephori) fn. 167.
320. loc(o) II b(racchio) tert(io) COM I j Bacakale, ad 199 Fant 1989: no. 187
Anullino II et Fronj tone
 co(n)s(ulibus) Christol & Drew-Bear
off(icina) Severi(ana?) j caes(ura) 1991: no. 8, 122 fn. 41,
Aur(elii) Theophilli 133 fns. 91, 92,
137 fn. 98.
321. loc(o) II[I? b(racchio) qu]ar(to), Bacakale, ad 199 Fant 1989: no. 186.
CO[M I] j Anullino II et Frontone j
co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) Hercul(iana?)
caes(ura) j Ostilli Helpidephor(i)
322. l[o]c(o) III[I] b(racchio) ter[t](io) Bacakale, ad 199 Christol & Drew-Bear
COM II j [A]nul[l]ino II e(t) Fronj tone
 1991: no. 9.
co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) Bassia(na) j
c[aes](ura)
 Ostil(l)i Elpijdephor[i]
323. loc(o) VIIII b(racchio) quar(to) COM Bacakale, ad 199 Christol & Drew-Bear
II j Anullino II et Frontone co(n)s(uli- 1991: no. 10.
bus) j off(icina) Bassia(na) caes(ura)
Ostill(i) Help[i]jdephor(i)
324. loc(o) LIII [b(racchio)COM ] j Bacakale, ad 199 Christol & Drew-Bear
Anullino II et Fro[ntone co(n)s(ulibus) 1991: no. 11.
off(icina)] j Horolog caes(ura) E[]j
Saturnino iuss[]
325. a) [. . . . ] l(oco) b(racchio) se(cundo) Punto Scifo, 200 Fant 1989: no. 952
COM ? Severo et(?) Vijctorino Orsi, NotSc 1921:
co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) Comodiana j 494-5: no. 3 4
caes(ura) Iuli(i) Gayri sub cura; b) Pensabene 1978: no. 10.
[. . . . ]gres[ . . . ]j avgger [..] j tor Iulii j
gayri[.. . . . ] j oph j eepictet[..] E
394 Appendix
326. loc(o) T b(racchio) pri(mo)[] Punto Scifo, 200 Fant 1989: no. 962
Vichtoijrin o et Severo co(n)s(ulibus) Orsi, NotSc 1921: 493 f.
off(icina) j [.. . . . . . . ]episco no 6 Pensabene 1978:
no. 11.
327. loc(o) III j b(racchio) II COM I j Severo Punto Scifo, 200 Fant 1989: no. 982
et Victojrino co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) j Pensabene 1978: no. 5.
hCoimodiana j Iuli(i) ss
328. loc(o) VI b(racchio) ter(tio) COM I Bacakale, ad 200 Fant 1989: no. 188
Severo
 j et Victorino co(n)s(ulibus) Christol & Drew-Bear
[off(icina)] j caes(ura) Neoph[yti]
 1991: no. 12; 140 fn.
125.
 j
329. loc(o) XXVIIII b(racchio) quart(o) Bacakale, ad 200 Fant 1989: no. 189
COM prim( ) Severo [[]] j et Christol & Drew-Bear
Victorino co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) j 1987: no. 72 Chris-
Sever(iana) vac. caes(ura) Aur(elii) tol & Drew-Bear 1991:
Thejophill(i) 122 fn. 41, 139 f. fn.
123.
330. [loc]o XXXX b(racchio) quar(to) COM Bacakale, ad 201 Fant 1989: no. 190.
I j [Mu]ciano et Fabiano co(n)s(ulibus)
off(icina) j Seve(riana) ca[e]s(ura)
Aur(elii) Theo(phili)
331. loc(o) XXI b(racchio) ter(tio) COM I j Bacakale, ad 202 Christol & Drew-Bear
dominis nn(ostris) invictis j piis L(ucio) 1991: no. 13.
S(eptimio) Severo III et Antojnino
co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) Sever(iana) j
caes(ura) Aur(elii) Theo p[hili]

332. loc(o) XXXI [b(racchio) . . . CO]M I j Bacakale, ad 203 Fant 1989: no. 191.
P(ublio) S(eptimio) Geta II et
Plautiano et P j II
co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) Sever(iana)
caes(ura) Aur(elii) Theophili
333. [loc(o)] b(racchio) tert(io)CO[M I] j Bacakale, ad 205 Christol & Drew-Bear
 r(elio) Antonino [II] j
M(arco) A[y] 1991: no. 15.
Aug(usto) et Sep(timio) Geta Caes(are) j
co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) Sever(iana)
caes(ura) A[ur(elii)] Theophili
334. [loc(o)] b(racchio) quar(to) COM I j Bacakale, ad 205 Christol & Drew-Bear
[M(arco) Aur(elio) An] tonino
 II et 1991: no. 16.
Sep(timio) Geta j [co(n)s(ulibus)
off(icina)] caes(ura) Ayr(elii)
Theop(hili)
335. lo[c(o)b(racchio)COM I] j M Bacakale, ad 205 Christol & Drew-Bear
Ay[r(elio) Antonino II Aug(usto) et Sep- 1991: no. 30.
(timio) Geta] j Cae[s(are)
 co(n)s(ulibus)
off(icina)caes(ura)]
336. loc(o) VIII b(racchio) tert(io) COM I j Bacakale, ad 205 Fant 1989: no. 192
M(arco) Ayr(elio) Antonino II et j Christol & Drew-Bear
Sep(timio) Geta co(n)s(ulibus) 1991: no. 14, 143 fn.
off(icina) Seveb(iana) caes(ura) j 139.
Ayr(elii) Theophil(i)
 Appendix 395
337. [loc(o)] XVIII
 b(racchio) quart(o) Bacakale, ad 205 Christol & Drew-Bear
COM I j [M(arco) Au]r(elio) Antonino 1991: no. 17.
II Ayg(usto) et Sep(timio) j [Geta-
C]aesar(e) co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina)
Sever(iana) caes(ura) j Aur(elii)
Theophil(i)
338. [loc(o)b(racchio)COM-] j Albino Bacakale, ad 206 Fant 1989: no. 196
et Aem[iliano]
 j co(n)s(ulibus) Christol & Drew-Bear
off(icina) Sever(iana) caes(ura)
 j 1991: no. 18, 147 fn.
Ayr(elii) Theophili 146.
339. loc(o) I b(racchio) sec(undo) C[OM] Iscehisar, ad 206 Christol & Drew-Bear
j Albino e(t) Aemili[ano 1987: no. 73 Fant
co(n)s(ulibus)] j off(icina) 1989: no. 195
Hercul(iana?) caes(ura) [Ostilli] Christol & Drew-Bear
j Helpid(ephori) 1991: 138 fn. 113, 146
fn. 145.
340. loc(o) III b(racchio) quar(to) COM I j Bacakale, ad 206 Fant 1989: no. 194.
Albino et Aemiliano co(n)s(ulibus)
off(icina) j Contra Persis caes(ura)
Herchuilan(i)
341. loc(o) VI [b(racchio) ] j Albino et Bacakale, ad 206 Fant 1989: no. 193
[Aemi]liano j off(icina) Contra Persis, Christol & Drew-Bear
caes(ura) j Herculan(ii) 1991: 146 fn. 145.
342. loc(o) XXXII [b]r(acchio) t(ertio) Iscehisar, ad 206 Christol & Drew-Bear
COM I j Albino et Aem(i)liano 1987: no. 74.
co(n)s(ulibus) j off(icina)
Comm(odiana) caes(ura) Herc(u)-
lan(a)
343. [] j COM I Pompeiano et VA(!)ito Iscehisar, ad 209 Christol & Drew-Bear
co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) Bassi(ana) j 1987: no. 75.
caes(ura) Ostil(li) Helpid(ephori)
344. [loc(o)]I b(racchio) ter[t(io)] j COM Bacakale, ad 209 Fant 1989: no. 197
I Pom[p]eij{a}ano
 et Avito co(n)s(uli- Christol & Drew-Bear
bus) off(icina) j Sever(iana) caes(ura) 1991: no. 19, 149 fn.
Theophil 149.
345. loc(o) XXXV b(racchio) tebt(io) j Bacakale, ad 209 Christol & Drew-Bear
COM I Pompeiano j et Avito 1991: no. 20.
co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) j Antoniana j
caes(ura) Neophyti
346. loc(o) XI b(racchio) quar(to) COM I K Bacakale, ad 210 Fant 1989: no. 198
j Faust(ino) vac. Christol & Drew-Bear
1987: no. 76
Christol & Drew-Bear
1991: 129 fn. 62.
347. a) loc(o) XVI b(racchio) quar(to) Bacakale, ad 210 Christol & Drew-Bear
CO M I j Faustino et Rufino 1991: no. 22.
co(n)s(ulibus) j off(icina) Bas(siana)
caes(ura) Ostil(ii) Helpid(ephori);
b) loc(o) XVI b(racchio) quar(to)
396 Appendix
348. loc(o) XXVII b(racchio) ter(tio) COM I Bacakale, ad 210 Fant 1989: no. 199
j Faustino et Rufino cos j off(icina) Christol & Drew-Bear
Bassiana caes(ura) Hostil(ii) j Elpide- 1991: no. 21, 150 fn.
phori 155.
349. loc(o) XC b(racchio) quar(to) COM I Bacakale, ad 212 Fant 1989: no. 200.
duabus Aspris co(n)s(ulibus) j
off(icina) Contra Pers(is) caes(ura)
Aur(elii) Theophili
350. loc(o) XXVII b(racchio) qua(rto) COM Bacakale, ad 213 Fant 1989: no. 201
I j I[m]p(eratore) Antonino Aug(usto) j Christol & Drew-Bear
IIII et Balbino II co(n)s(ulibus) j off(- 1991: no. 23.
icina) Bas(siana) caes(ura)
Helpidephori
351. loc(o) III b(racchio) ter(tio) COM I j Bacakale, ad 214 Fant 1989: no. 202.
Sabino co(n)s(ulibus)
352. a) loco b(racchio) quart(o) COM I j Bacakale, ad 217 Fant 1989: no. 204
Praesente; b) caes(ura) Nova Christol & Drew-Bear
1991: no. 24.
353. loc(o) VII b(racchio) quart(o) COM I j Iscehisar, ad 217 Christol & Drew-Bear
Prae(se)nte vac. 1987: no. 77.
354. a) loc(o) XI b(racchio) quart(o) COM I Bacakale, ad 217? Fant 1989: no. 205.
j Praesente ; b) caes(ura)
 Nova
355. loc(o) XV b(racchio) tert(io) COM I j Iscehisar, ad 217 Christol & Drew-Bear
Praesente vac. 1987: no. 78.
356. a) loc(o) XL b(racchio) quart(o) COM Bacakale, ad 217? Fant 1989: no. 203.
I j Praesente co(n)s(ulibus); b) caesura
357. a) loc(o) XXCII b(racchio) qu(arto); Bacakale, ad 217? Fant 1989: no. 206.
b) caesura
358. loc(o) XXVII b(racchio) quar(to) COM Bacakale, ad 218 Fant 1989: no. 207.
I j Antonino Aug(usto) et Advento
co(n)s(ulibus) j off(icina) Iuxta
Persidem j caes(ura) Phoenicem
359. Imp(eratore) Ant(onino) loc(o) IIX Bacakale, ad 218 Fant 1989: no. 209.
360. loc(o) XV b(racchio) quart(o) COM I j Bacakale, ad 218 Fant 1989: no. 208.
Anton(i)no Aug(usto)
361. Imp(eratore) Ant(onino) n(ostro) II Afyon, ad 219 Fant 1989: no. 210.
co(n)s(ulibus) j loco XCII
362. b(racchio) prim(o) j Imp(eratore) Bacakale, ad 219 Fant 1989: no. 211.
Ant(onino) n(ostro) II co(n)s(ulibus) j
loco XCIIII
363. Imp(eratore) Ant(onino) n(ostro) II Afyon, ad 219 Fant 1989: no. 212.
co(n)s(ulibus) j loco XCV
364. loc(o) VII b(racchio) ter[t(io) COM I] j Bacakale, ad 220 Christol & Drew-Bear
Imp(eratore) Anto[nino Aug(usto) III] 1991: no. 26.
j et Comaz[on(e) co(n)s(ulibus)] j
off(icina)
 Anton[iana
 caes(ura)]
 Appendix 397
365. [l]oc XIX b(racchio) quar(to)
 COM I j Bacakale, ad 220 Fant 1989: no. 215
Imp(eratore) Antonino Aug(usto) III j Christol & Drew-Bear
et Comazo(ne) co(n)s(ulibus) 1987: no. 79 Chris-
off(icina) Antonijana, caer(!)(sura) tol & Drew-Bear 1991:
Iuli(i) Neophyti 154 fn. 163.
366. loc(o) XVII b(racchio) quar(to) COM Bacakale, ad 220 Fant 1989: no. 214
Ij Imp(eratore) Ant[o]nino Aug(usto) Christol & Drew-Bear
III j et Comaz[o]n(e) co(n)s(ulibus) j 1991: no. 25.
off(icina) Iux(ta) Pe[r]s(idem),
cae(sura) Phoenic(is)
367. l[oc(o)] XXXVIII b(racchio) quar(to) j Bacakale, ad 220 Fant 1989: no. 213.
Imp(eratore) Antonino Aug(usto) III
368. loc(o) II b(racchio) te(rtio), COM [I] j Bacakale, ad 222 Fant 1989: no. 217.
Alexandro Aug(usto) co(n)[s(ule)] j
off(icina) Iux(ta) Pers(idem) caes(ura)
Mar(yllini) j Romae
369. loc(o) V b(racchio) quar(to) COM I j Bacakale, ad 222 Christol & Drew-Bear
Alexandro Aug(usto) co(n)s(ulibus) j 1991: no. 27.
off(icina) Sever(iana) caes(ura) Maryj-
(l)lin(i)
370. [loc(o)-] b(racchio) qvar COM I j A[l]
 Bacakale, ad 229 Fant 1989: no. 221
 et Dione II co(n)s(ulibus)
eIII  j Christol & Drew-Bear
off(icina) Sever(iana) caes(ura)
 1991: no. 28.
Maryllin(i)
371. loc(o) II b(racchio) quar(to) COM I j Bacakale, ad 229 Fant 1989: no. 219.
Alexandro Aug(usto) II[I] j et Dion(e)
II co(n)s(ulibus) of(ficina) Erc(uliana)
j [c]aes(ura) Iuli Ne[ophyti]
372. [loc]o V b(racchio) quar(to) [COM I?] Bacakale, ad 229 Fant 1989: no. 220
j Imp(eratore) [Alexa]ndro Aug(usto) Christol & Drew-Bear
III et Dione II co(n)s(ulibus) j 1991: 159 f.
off(icina) Sever(iana) [caes(ura)
M]aryllin(i)
373. loc(o) V b(racchio) pr(imo) T COM I j Iscehisar, ad 229 Christol & Drew-Bear
Alexanord (!) Aug(usto) III j et Dion(e) 1987: no. 80.
TI co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) Cresjcent(is)
caes(ura) Iul(ii) Neohpihy(ti)
374. loc(o) VIII [b(racchio) quar(to?) Bacakale, ad 229 Fant 1989: no. 218.
COM I] j [Alexandro Aug(usto)] j III et
Dion(e) II co(n)s(ulibus) of(ficina) j
Antoni(niana) caes(ura) [I]uli
Neojphyti
375. loc(o) [] COM I Se[vero et Quintiano] j Afyon, ad 235 Christol & Drew-Bear
[]co(n)s(ulibus) off(icina) Se[ver- 1991: no. 33.
(iana)] j [caes(ura)] Mary[llin(i)]
376. P loc(o) LXXIII b(racchio) quart(o) Bacakale, ad 236 Fant 1989: no. 222
COM I j Imp(eratore) Maximino Christol & Drew-Bear
Aug(usto) j et Africano co(n)s(ulibus) 1991: 132 fn. 81.
off(icina) Alex(andriana) j
caes(ura) Vari
398 Appendix
377. off(icina) Pel[ag( )] j loco vii, b(rac- Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 162.
chio) ii
378. a) iussu Aur(elii) [.]r[..]n j FRANS; Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 163.
b) D; c) repr(obatum)
379. Loc(o) XXXX b(racchio) quar(to) COM I Bacakale Christol & Drew-Bear
1991: no. 29.
380. caes(ura) Nova Bacakale Christol & Drew-Bear
1991: no. 31.
381. []COM I j [c]o(n)s(ulibus)
 j Bacakale Christol & Drew-Bear
[caes(ura) Maryl]lin 1991: no. 32.
382. [L]oc(o) XIII b(racchio) IIII jj de XXVI Iscehisar Fant 1989: no. 42 AE
jj d(e) XXVI jj RMA jj [ . . . ]ci 1984: 847.
r(ecognitum?)
383. [ . . . ]ippae Roma Fant 1989: no. 82
Bruzza 1870: no. 255.
384. [ . . . cos, off(icina)] j [- c.45 -] N, caes- Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 156.
(ura) Domes(tici) j loco xiiii,
b(racchio) quart(o)
385. EX RAP LIB j n(umero) CCCCXXI Roma Fant 1989: no. 13a2
Bruzza 1870: no. 262.
386. [ . . . C]AES Roma Fant 1989: no. 13b2
Bruzza 1870: no. 263.
387. []j sub cu[ra] Roma Fant 1989: no. 13c2
Bruzza 1870: no. 264.
388. G I P Roma Fant 1989: no. 142
Bruzza 1870: no. 265.
389.  Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 113
Drew-Bear 1994: 774
fn. 71.
390. loc(o) XXXX, b(racchio) quar(to), Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 223.
COM i
391. [c.12]j[c.17]j[c.18] Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 224.
392. b(racchio) secund(o) Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 225.
393. a) off(icina) [.c.3..], b(racchio) IIII, j Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 226.
caes(ura) Titi, loc(o) III; b) T!
394. a) b(racchio) tert(io); b) [ . . . ]NIO R Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 227.
c o s j DCCCCX; c) DCCCX j XV j
b(racchio) III
395. T! Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 228.
396. a) loco XVII; b) b(racchio) I Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 229.
397. loco CXXXIII j b(racchio) III j O[] Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 230.
VIOR
398. de loco CV Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 231.
399. loc(o) II, b(racchio) tert(io), COM I Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 232.
400. loco j b(racchio) III, b(racchio) ter(tio) Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 233.
401. a) loc(o) XVIII; b) loco X, b(racchio) II Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 234.
402. loco CLXIV j b(racchio) III Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 235.
 Appendix 399
403. a) E; b)AY; c) C (or ); d) E; e)  Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 236.
404. VVV Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 237.
405. B TERT Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 262
CIL III 7039.
406. RMA PR CLX[]j [] C B Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 272
CIL III 7040.
407. RMA PA R CLX j []C R Bacakale Fant 1989: no. 292
CIL III 12235.
408. a) RV COSS CXXXIX j CAD[I]I COSS ? Fant 1989: no. 342
CDXLVI, ; b) RNA PA B OART j II MAMA VII 134 IK
COS j VIR VOP COS BII j DCCXVI 62: 360.
CCXI
409. a) GXVICOI j IXXVIII j B TERT Iscehisar Fant 1989: no. 352
XXVII ; b) XXVII CIL III 12229.
410. a) FRVEPC COS j DCCCCLXXV; b) Iscehisar Fant 1989: no. 392
III CO RMA j B III j CAD II COSSCS CIL III 7016 Ramsay
IV; c) RV COSS j XLVLI; 1882: no. 5.
d) DCCCCLXXXVI; e) BQVART
411. a) EMES jXLIII j REPR; b) III Iscehisar Fant 1989: no. 432
CIL III 7028 Ramsay
1882: no. 9.
412. a) VLVII RIII; b) B TERT[]; c) []I Iscehisar Fant 1989: no. 442
(?)APRO CIL III 7035 Ramsay
1882: no. 10.
413. []ANO COS ANDAN IV Iscehisar Fant 1989: no. 512
CIL III 7033 Ramsay
1882: no. 18.
414. []M(?)R ANTONINO AV j EST- Iscehisar Fant 1989: no. 532
FEOR III CIL III 7034 Ramsay
1882: no. 20.
415. CCC j R III j IALIC COS Iscehisar Fant 1989: no. 572
CIL III 7005 Ram-
say 1882: no. 24.
416. DE DCCXXIX Iscehisar Fant 1989: no. 582
CIL III 7037 Ramsay
1882: no. 25.
417. [L]OCO XV Iscehisar Fant 1989: no. 592
CIL III 7036 Ramsay
1882: no. 26.
418. 11CX j TA! Iscehisar Fant 1989: no. 602
CIL III 7038 Ramsay
1882: no. 27.
419. []Cels[] Lepcis Magna Fant 1989: no. 742
IRT 794a.
420. []FRV[] Lepcis Magna Fant 1989: no. 762
IRT 794c.
400 Appendix
421. a) []i sub cura [] j [s]ub cura Lepcis Magna Fant 1989: no. 772
Hesp[erii] j []; b) [] lib(erti) IRT 794d.
proc(uratoris) [] j [] proc(ura-
toris) ex []
422. a) [] III co(n)s(ule) [] ; Lepcis Magna Fant 1989: no. 782
b) [Au]g(usto) co(n)s(ule) [] j IRT 794e.
[]I
423. L j Cae CCXCVIIIS Lepcis Magna Fant 1989: no. 812
Roder 1971: J3.
424. a) ex r(atione) Olyp(i?) Caes(aris); Ostia Fant 1989: no. 882
b) n(umero) CXVI Baccini Leotardi 1989:
no. 41.
425. a) D; b) l(oco) C 1XCIII j R Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1989:
no. 45.
426. CEL COS ex r(atione) Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1989:
no. 46 Pensabene
1994: 73, no. 19.
427. XXVII Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1989:
no. 47 127 Pensa-
bene 1994: 73, no. 17.
428. Hyac(inthi) Ca(esaris?) Ostia Fant 1989: no. 872
Baccini Leotardi 1979:
no. 40.
429. IMP Ostia Fant 1989: no. 902
Baccini Leotardi 1989:
no. 129 Pensabene
1994: 73, no. 18.
430. a) ex r(atione) O(lym)p(i) (?) Ostia Fant 1989: no. 92b2
Caes(aris) j n(umero) CDXXXIII; Bruzza no. 302 Lan-
b) CCCI j L DCCCLVI R(?) ciani, AnnInst 1868:
180.
431. sub c[]j lib proc j []s[] Ostia Fant 1989: no. 94a,b2
Orsi, NotSc 1921: 493 f.
no 2 Pensabene 1978:
no. 7?
432. RMA Afyon Fant 1989: no. 1072
Christol & Drew-Bear
1986: no. 12.
433. loco j X Dokimeion Fant 1989: no. 1232
Christol & Drew-Bear
1986: no. 33.
434. a) D XXI j []CI R j [l]oc(o) XIII Bacakale Christol & Drew-Bear
b(racchio) IIII j de XXVI ; b) RMA 1986: no. 34.
435. a) loco XXVIII; b) HER; c) LXXI[] Iscehisar Fant 1989: no. 7.
436. S d ATTAII Ostia Pensabene 1994: 74,
no. 21.
 Appendix 401
437. Epictetus Augus[] j proactor pro[] Rome, ad 206 Bruzza 1870: no. 279
j [l]oc(o) IIII j b(racchio) sec(undo) Dubois 1908: no. 207;
COM I j [Al]bino et Aemilian[o Christol& Drew-Bear
co(n)s(ulibus)] j [caes(ura)?] Aur(elii) 1991: 119 fn. 31, 171 fn.
Demetri(i) b[] j [sub cu]ra Aur(elii) 223.
Epity[nchani?] j VE CAVRT []

Pavonazetto and White Marble: Upper Tembris Valley

438. a) n(umero) XXXIIII; b) C(aesare) XVI Kurt Koy, 92 pavonazetto:
co(n)s(ule); c) C 
 MAMA X 122.
439. a) [] XXI j []o cos; b) co(n)s(ule) Alibey Koy, 92? white marble?:
C(aesare) X[VI?] Drew-Bear & Eck
1976: no. 16; Fant
1989: no. 642.
440. a) COS; b) M j XI; c) AN; d) RA Altintash, 109? Docimian marble
(RMA?) P(alma II co(n)s(ule?)) (with blue patches)
MAMA X 72.
Christol & Drew-
Bear 1986: 7580.
441. a) R Sil(vano) co(n)s(ule) (ad 156)j Kurt Koy, pavonazetto:
n(umero) CXIII; b) Vop(isco) MAMA X 124.
co(n)s(ule)(ad 114) j XXXIV;
c) Aeliano co(n)s(ule) (ad 116)
442. R Aeliano co(n)s(ule) (ad 116) j [] Kurt Koy pavonazetto:
XI I R S[i]lvan(o)
 cho(n)is(ule) (ad MAMA X 125.
156) j Vop(isco) co(n)s(ule) (ad 114)
n(umero) CCXLVI j XXIX
443. j X j XI X j R Aelian(o) co(n)s(ule) Cakrsaz (Soa), 116 white marble?:
Drew-Bear & Eck
1976: no. 25; Fant
1989: no. 732.
444. [A]elian(us) co(n)s(ule) (ad 116) Altintash Koy, 116 pavonazetto:
MAMA X 71;
Drew-Bear & Eck
1976: 315; Waelk-
ens 1985: 643.
445. R Aelian(o) co(n)s(ule) Alibey Koy, 116 white marble?:
Drew-Bear & Eck
1976: no. 17; Fant
1989: no. 652.
446. a) R AELj M  b) IEOE j LXVIII
 A C LO; Alibey Koy, 116? white marble?:
Drew-Bear & Eck
1976: no. 18; Fant
1989: no. 662.
447. Silvan(o) Kurt Koy pavonazetto:
MAMA X 123.
402 Appendix
448. [] co(n)s(ule) j n(umero) IX Kurt Koy pavonazetto:
MAMA X 126.
449. Rhod(
 ) NXIV Kurt Koy pavonazetto:
MAMA X 127.
450. DXC Kurt Koy pavonazetto:
MAMA X 128.
451. n(umero) IX Kurt Koy pavonazetto:
MAMA X 129.
452. X//// KurtKoy pavonazetto:
MAMA X 130.
453. n(umero) LXXXII Alibey Koy white marble:
MAMA X 94;
Drew-Bear & Eck
1976: 315 f.
454.  j LXXVII Alibey Koy white marble?:
Drew-Bear & Eck
1976: no. 19; Fant
1989: no. 672.
455. CXIIX j Alibey Koy white marble?:
Drew-Bear & Eck
1976: no. 20; Fant
1989: no. 682.
 C AE IIII j COS LXIII
456. CES Cakrsaz (Soa) white marble?:
Drew-Bear & Eck
1976: no. 21; Fant
1989: no. 692.
457. POPR XVII Cakrsaz (Soa) white marble:
Drew-Bear & Eck
1976: no. 22; Fant
1989: no. 702.
458. POPR XVIII Cakrsaz (Soa) white marble:
Drew-Bear & Eck
1976: no. 23; Fant
1989: no. 712.
459. HII j CVIII Cakrsaz (Soa) white marble?:
Drew-Bear & Eck
1976: no. 24; Fant
1989: no. 722.

Africano and Grey Marble: Teos

460. a) Frugi et Basso co(n)s(ulibus); Rome, 64 africano; Bruzza 1870:
b) HER Cae(saris?) j n(umero) XXXIII no. 138 Dubois 1908:
no. 430.
461. a) Frugi et Basso co(n)s(ulibus); b) HER Rome, 64 africano; Bruzza 1870:
Cae(saris) j n(umero) LI no. 139 Dubois 1908:
no. 431.
 Appendix 403
462. a) Rufo et Capitone c[o(n)s(ulibus)]; Rome, 67 africano; Bruzza 1870:
b) Lae(ti?) Cae(saris?) j n(umero) LX no. 140 Dubois 1908:
no. 432.
463. a) Imp(eratore) Vespasiano VI j Tito Rome, 75 africano; Bruzza 1870:
Caes(are) IIII co(n)s(ulibus), ; b) ex no. 147 Dubois 1908:
rat(ione) Laet(i) ser(vi) j n(umero) no. 439.
LXXXV
464. Imp(eratore) Vespasiano [VI] j Tito Rome, 75 africano; Bruzza 1870:
Caes(are) IIII co(n)s(ulibus) no. 148 Dubois 1908:
no. 440.
465. [Imp(eratore) Vespasia]no VI j [Tito Rome, 75 africano; Bruzza 1870:
Caes(are)] IIII co(n)s(ulibus) no. 149 Dubois 1908:
no. 441.
466. Imp(eratore) Vespasiano VII j Tito Rome, 76 africano; Bruzza 1870:
Caesar(e) V co(n)s(ulibus) no. 150 Dubois 1908:
no. 442.
467. a) [Imp(eratore)] Vespasiano VII j Rome, 76 africano; Bruzza 1870:
[Tit]o Caesar(e) co(n)s(ulibus); b) [e]x no. 151 Dubois 1908:
rat(ione) Laet(i) ser(vi) j n(umero) no. 443.
XXXXII
468. Imp(eratore) Vesp[] j Tito Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
Ca[esare ] no. 152 Dubois 1908:
no. 444.
469. a) Imp (eratore) Vesp(asiano) Rome, 77 africano; Bruzza 1870:
Caes(are) Aug(usto) VIII j Domit(iano) no. 153 Dubois 1908:
Caes(are) V co(n)s(ulibus); no. 445.
b) ex rat(ione) Tyc(hi?) Cae(saris) j
n(umero) LXXIII
470. a) Imp(eratore) Vesp(asiano) Cae(sare) Rome, 77 africano; Bruzza 1870:
Aug(usto) VI[II] j Domitiano V no. 154 Dubois 1908:
co(n)s(ulibus); b) ex rat(ione) Tyc(hi?) no. 446.
Cae(saris) j n(umero) XVIII
471. Imp(eratore) Vesp(asiano) Aug(usto) Rome, 77 africano; Bruzza 1870:
VIII j Domit(iano) Cae(sare) V no. 155 Dubois 1908:
co(n)s(ulibus) no. 448.
472. Imp(eratore) Vesp(asiano) Au(gusto) Rome, 77 africano; Bruzza 1870:
VIII j Domit(iano) Cae(sare) V no. 156 Dubois 1908:
co(n)s(ulibus) no. 449.
473. Imp(eratore) T(ito) Cae(sare) VIII Rome, 80 africano; Bruzza 1870:
co(n)s(ulibus) j Domitiano no. 157 Dubois 1908:
Cae(sare) VII no. 450.
474. Imp(eratore) T(ito) Cae(sare) Rome, 80 africano; Bruzza 1870:
Aug(usto) VIII co(n)s(ulibus) j VIII no. 158 Dubois 1908:
no. 451.
475. a) Imp(eratore) T(ito) Cae(sare) VIII Rome, 80 africano; Bruzza 1870:
co(n)s(ulibus) Domi(t)i(ano) C(aesare) no. 159 Dubois 1908:
VI j ex rat(ione) Laeti Caes(aris); b) ex no. 452.
rat(ione) Laeti Caes(aris) j n(umero)
XVIIII
404 Appendix
476. a) ex rat(io)n(e) Laeti Caes(aris) j Ostia, 80 africano bigio; Pensa-
n(umero) X; b) Imp(eratore) T(ito) bene 1994: 197 fig.1.
Cae(sare) VIII co(n)s(ule) j Domitiano
Cae(sare) VI
477. Imp(eratore) T(ito) Cae(sare) VIII j Ostia, 80 africano; Pensabene
co(n)s(ulibus) j Domitiano 1994: 198 fig.4.
Cae(sare) VI
478. a) [I]mp(eratore) T(ito) C(aesare) Ostia, 80 africano; Baccini
A(ugusto) VIII j [D]omitiano Cae(sare) Leotardi 1989: no. 1
VI co(n)s(ulibus); b) 1 CCC [.]XXIII Pensabene 1994: no. 6.
479. ? Ostia, 82 africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 167 Dubois 1908:
no. 460.
480. a) Imp(eratore) Domitian[o] Aug(usto) Rome, 86 africano; Bruzza 1870:
XII c[o(n)]s(ule); b) ex rat(ione) no. 168 Dubois 1908:
T yc(hi?) ser(vi) no. 461.
481. Imp(eratore) D[o]mitian[o] Aug(usto) Rome, 86 africano; Bruzza 1870:
XII c[o(n)]s(ule) no. 170 Dubois 1908:
no. 463.
482. Domitiano Aug[(usto) ] XII Rome, 86 africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 171 Dubois 1908:
no. 464.
483. Imp(eratore) Traiano Aug(usto) Ostia, 100 africano; Baccini
n(ostro) III co(n)s(e) j ex r(atione) Leotardi 1979: no. 3.
Spend(-) ser(vi) PME j XXXIX
484. [V]etere et Ae[li]jano co(n)s(ulibus) Ostia, 116 africano; Baccini
Leotardi 1989: no. 2.
485. a) Vetere et A(eliano) j [ . . ]CCONK V; Ostia, 116 africano; Baccini
b) ex rat(ione) Mul( ) j n(umero) CLII Leotardi 1989: no. 3.
486. a) [e]x rat(ione) Mul( ) j n(umero) Ostia, 116 africano; Baccini
CLVII; b) [V]ete[re et A]eliajno co(n)- Leotardi 1989: no. 4.
s(ulibus); c) l(oco) CCCXXVII R
487. Hadriano n(ostro) III Q(uinto) Ostia, 119 africano; Baccini
Dasumio Rustico co(n)s(ulibus) Leotardi 1989: no. 5.
488. a) Augurin(o) co(n)s(ule) j l(oco) Ostia africano; Baccini
CCXXIX j R (ad 132) b) Hadriano Leotardi 1989: no. 6.
n(ostro) III Q(uinto) Dasumio Rustico
c[o(n)s(ulibus)] (ad 119)
489. ex r(atione) Mami(i) Liciniani Rome, 124 africano; Bruzza 1870:
n(umero) I j Glabrione et Tebaniano no. 181 Dubois 1908:
co(n)s(ulibus) no. 474.
490. [A]ugurin(o) co(n)s(ule) j l(oco) Ostia, 132 africano; Baccini
DCLXXIII R Leotardi 1979: no. 6.
491. a) Augurin(o) co(n)s(ule) j l(oco) Ostia, 132 africano; Baccini
CCXXXIIX R; b) ex r(atione) Dac( ) j Leotardi 1979: no. 8.
n(umero) XVII
 Appendix 405
492. co(n)s(ule) j Augurin(o) j l(oco) Ostia, 132 africano; Baccini
CCXCVI R Leotardi 1979: no. 9.
493. a) Augurin(o) j co(n)s(ule) j l(oco) Ostia, 132 africano; Baccini
CC XIIX; b) [ -c.3 -]N j n(umero) Leotardi 1989: no. 7.
LVIIII j E
494. Augurin(o) co(n)s(ule) j lo(c)o CVII Ostia, 132 africano; Pensabene
1994: 56, fig. 56 Ostia
Inv. 36760.
495. IH j Claro II co(n)s(ule) ex j ra(tione) Ostia, 150 africano; Baccini
Cl(audi) Zel(oti) Leotardi 1989: no. 8.
496. ex ratione Lucili Erjma(e) et Claudi Ostia, 152 africano; Baccini
Soterici j Glabrioni (!) et Homuljlo Leotardi 1989: no. 9.
con(sulibus) []
497. ex ratione Lucili j Erma(e) et Claudi j Ostia, 152 africano; Baccini
Soterici j Glabrion(e) et Horm[ul]jlo Leotardi 1989: no. 10.
consuli(bus)
498. Rust(ico) II et Aq(uilino) co(n)s(ulibus) Ostia, 162 africano; Baccini
j n(umero) LXIIII Leotardi 1989: no. 11
Pensabene 1994: 56,
no. 16.
499. n(umero) LXIII j Ru[s]t(ico) II et Ostia, 162 africano; Baccini
A[q(uilino) co(n)s(ulibus)] j ex Leotardi 1989: no. 12.
r(atione) Sext(i?) et []
500. Rust(ico) II et Aq(uilino) j co(n)s(uli- Ostia, 162 africano; Baccini
bus) j ex r(atione) Sext(i?) et j Leotardi 1989: no. 13.
Her(mae?)
501. Rust(ico) II et j Aq(uilino) co(n)s(uli- Ostia, 162 africano; Baccini
bus) ex r(atione) Sext(i?) Leotardi 1979: no. 10.
502. Laeliano et Pasto(re) j co(n)s(ulibus) Karagol, 164 grey marble?; CIL III
Aur(elii?) Corn(eliano?) R j ORG j loco 419 a Bruzza 1870:
IIII jj IE no. 243 Dubois 1908:
no. 241 Beguignon
1928: no. 1 McCabe
1985: 266.1.
503. Orfito et Pud(ente) j co(n)s(ulibus) loco Karagol, 165 grey marble; CIL III
j CXLVI ex r(atione) Diod(-) 419 b Bruzza 1870:
no. 244 Dubois 1908:
no. 242.
504. Orfito et [Pud(ente)] j co(n)s(ulibus) Karagol, 165 grey marble; CIL III
loc(o) CXLIX j ex r(atione) Dio(d) 419 c Bruzza 1870:
no. 245 Dubois 1908:
no. 243.
505. Puden(te) et P[ollione?] j [c]o(n)s(ule) Karagol, 166 grey marble; CIL III
loc[o] CXX j ex r(atione) Dio(-) 419 g, (reads pol and
CXXXIIII cos)
Bruzza 1870: no. 246
Dubois 1908: no. 244
Beguignon 1928: no. 2,
fig.1 McCabe 1985:
266.2.
406 Appendix
506. [Pude]nte et Pol(lione) j [loc]o L j Karagol, 166 grey marble; Beguignon
Pu[dente?] 1928: no. 8 fig.3
McCabe 1985: 266.8.
507. Puden(te) et Pol(lione) co(n)s(ulibus) j Karagol, 166 grey marble; CIL III
loco XXII ex r(atione) Pol(-) 419 d Bruzza 1870:
no. 249 Dubois 1908:
no. 247.
508. Puden(te) et Pol(lione) co(n)s(ulibus) j Karagol, 166 grey marble; CIL III
loco XL ex r(atione) Di(-) 419 e Bruzza 1870:
no. 251 Dubois 1908:
no. 249.
509. Puden(te) et Pol(lione) co(n)s(ulibus)j Karagol, 166 grey marble; CIL III
loco LXV ex r(atione) Dio(-) 419 f Bruzza 1870:
no. 250 Dubois 1908:
no. 248.
510. l(oco) XI j Puden(te) et Pol(lione) Karagol, 166 grey marble; CIL III
co(n)s(ulibus) j loco CXXXVIII j ex 419 h Bruzza 1870:
r(atione) Dio(-) no. 247 Dubois 1908:
no. 245.
511. Pudente heti Pol[lione] Karagol, 166 grey marble; CIL III
co(n)[s(ulibus)]j loco CLXXX j 419 i Bruzza 1870:
ex r(atione) Dio(-) no. 248 Dubois 1908:
no. 246 McCabe
1985: 266.3
Beguignon 1928: no. 3.
512. n(umero) XXI Karagol grey marble; CIL III
419 l Dubois 1908:
no. 253.
513. loco IIII Karagol grey marble; CIL III
419 k Bruzza 1870:
no. 252 Dubois 1908:
no. 250 Beguignon
1928: no. 4 McCabe
1985: 266.4.
514. loc(o) XXVIII Karagol grey marble: CIL III
419 m Bruzza 1870:
no. 253 Dubois 1908:
no. 251 Beguignon
1928: no. 1, McCabe
1985: 266.5.
515. loco XXX Karagol grey marble?; CIL III
419 n Bruzza 1870:
no. 254 Dubois 1908:
no. 252 Beguignon
1928: no. 6 McCabe
1985: 266.6.
516. ex r[at(ione)] j loco [] Karagol grey marble; Beguignon
1928: no. 7, fig. 2
McCabe 1985: 266.7.
 Appendix 407
517. P n(umero) XXXI j [Au]r(elius) Karagol grey marble; Beguignon
Cor(nelianus) b(racchio) III 1928: no. 9, fig. 4
McCabe 1985: 266.9.
518. Cor(nelius?) j [] Karagol grey marble; Beguignon
1928: no. 10 McCabe
1985: 266.10.
519. L 1 CCXCL[.] j T Ostia africano; Baccini
Leotardi 1979: no. 4.
520. [.]III Ostia africano; Baccini
Leotardi 1979: no. 5.
521. n(umer)o CXXXXVI j ET (!)[.r]atione Ostia africano; Baccini
Lucili Herjmae soti[.]eni Leotardi 1989: no. 14.
522. a) n(umero) CXXXXIII; b) ETE Ostia africano; Baccini
[r]atione Lucili Herma() [s]oti[.]eni Leotardi 1989: no. 15.
523. a) n(umer)o CXXXIX; b) ETE [r]atione Ostia africano; Baccini
Lucili He[r]ma[e] j [soti.e]ni Leotardi 1989: no. 16.
524. a) n(umer)o CXLI; b) ETE [r]atione Ostia africano; Baccini
Lucili Hermae j soti[.]ni Leotardi 1989: no. 17.
525. NELVC j T j RIONIET j ON Ostia africano; Baccini
Leotardi 1989: no. 18.
526. VII j COS Ostia africano; Baccini
Leotardi 1989: no. 19.
527. a) AP; b) HER Cae(saris?) n(umero) Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
XXII no. 141 Dubois 1908:
no. 434.
528. HER Cae(saris?) n(umero) I Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 142 Dubois 1908:
no. 435.
529. HER Cae(saris?) n(umero) IIII Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 143 Dubois 1908:
no. 436.
530. HER Cae(saris?) j n(umero) VIII Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 144 Dubois 1908:
no. 437.
531. HER Cae(saris?) Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 145 Dubois 1908:
no. 438.
532. HE[] Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 146 Dubois 1908:
no. 439.
533. Pae cae j X V Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 175 Dubois 1908:
no. 468.
534. Pae cae j n(umero) XIIX Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 176 Dubois 1908:
no. 469.
408 Appendix
535. Paed cae j n(umero) III Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 177 Dubois 1908:
no. 470.
536. Lae(ti) Cae(saris) n(umero) V Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 160 Dubois 1908:
no. 453.
537. Lae(ti) Cae(saris) n(umero) XIV Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 161 Dubois 1908:
no. 454.
538. Lae(ti) Cae(saris) n(umero) LIX Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 162 Dubois 1908:
no. 455.
539. Lae(ti) Cae(saris) Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 163 Dubois 1908:
no. 456.
540. EDAIEC Cae Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 183 Dubois 1908:
no. 476.
541. [. . . . ]iser j [ . . ]XXX Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 165 Dubois 1908:
no. 458.
542. [ . . . ]aet ser(vi) j [ . . ]VIII Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 164 Dubois 1908:
no. 457.
543. ex rat(ione) Laet(i) ser(vi) j n(umero) Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
LXXX no. 166 Dubois 1908:
no. 459.
544. ex rat(ione) T yc(hi?) ser(vi) n(umero) Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
LXVIII no. 169 Dubois 1908:
no. 462.
545. ex rat(ione) Tyc(hi?) ser(vi) n(umero) V Ostia africano; CIL XIV
2016 Dubois 1908:
no. 447.
546. [ex] rat(ione) Tyc(hi?) ser(vi) Cae- Ostia africano; Pensabene
(saris) j n(umero) III 1994: 55, no. 10.
547. ex rat(ione) Mami(i) Licin(iani?) Rome grey marble; Bruzza
1870: no. 239 Dubois
1908: no. 237.
548. Pontiano et Atiliano co(n)s(ulibus) Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
ex ratione j redemptoris n(umero)  no. 182 Dubois 1908:
XXVIIII no. 475.
549. ex r(atione) Ces[] j [] Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
co(n)s(ulibus) no. 185 Dubois 1908:
no. 478.
550. []sar Dom[] Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 172 Dubois 1908:
no. 465.
 Appendix 409
551. []o Aug(usto) Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 173 Dubois 1908:
no. 466.
552. Cae(sare) Aug(usto) j n(umero) V Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 174 Dubois 1908:
no. 467.
553. []ae j []XII Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 178 Dubois 1908:
no. 471.
554. Cae[] j VI[] Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 179 Dubois 1908:
no. 472.
555. []Cae j []XXXXI Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 180 Dubois 1908:
no. 473.
556. Ner[] Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 184 Dubois 1908:
no. 477.
557. Cae() n(umero) CLIX j CIA Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 186 Dubois 1908:
no. 479.
558. Cn(aeo) Pompei(o) Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 187 Dubois 1908:
no. 480.
559. []CM[] Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 188 Dubois 1908:
no. 481.
560. CX LIII Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 189 Dubois 1908:
no. 482.
561. N Rome africano; Bruzza 1870:
no. 190 Dubois 1908:
no. 483.
562. B- AY Rome grey marble; Bruzza
1870: no. 240 Dubois
1908: no. 238.
563. TA Rome grey marble; Bruzza
1870: no. 241 Dubois
1908: no. 239.
564. V Rome grey marble; Bruzza
1870: no. 242 Dubois
1908: no. 240.

Portasanta: Chios
565. a) Rufo et Ca[pitone]; b) Ian(uarii) Rome, 67 Bruzza 1870: no. 191
Caes(aris) n(umero) CCL Dubois 1908: no. 486.
410 Appendix
566. Imp(eratore) Domit(iano) Cae(sare) Rome, 83 Bruzza 1870: no. 193
Aug(usto) VIIII j Petil(io) Rufo Dubois 1908: no. 488.
c[o(n)s(ulibus)]
567. Imp(eratore) Domit(iano) Cae(sare) Rome, 84 Bruzza 1870: no. 194
Aug(usto) X j [C. Oppio Sa]bino Dubois 1908: no. 489.
co(n)s(ulibus)
568. a) Imp(eratoris) Caesaris Domitian(i) j Rome, 8393 Bruzza 1870: no. 195
Augusti Germanici j n(umero) III; Dubois 1908: no. 490.
b) LIXIIII
569. Coll(ega) et Priscino co(n)s(ulibus) j Rome, 93 Bruzza 1870: no. 196
CC1XXXII R Dubois 1908: no. 491.
570. Colleg(a) et Priscino Rome, 93 Bruzza 1870: no. 197
Dubois 1908: no. 492.
571. a) Collega et [P]riscino co(n)s(ulibus); Ostia, 93 Baccini Leotardi 1989:
b) SVC III no. 64.
572. Veter(e) et Vale[nte co(n)s(ulibus)] j ex Rome, 96 Bruzza 1870: no. 198
r(atione) Suc(cessi) Caes(aris) VIIII Dubois 1908: no. 493.
573. [Vetere] et Vale[nte co(n)s(ulibus)] j [ex Rome, 96 Bruzza 1870: no. 199
r(atione) Su]cces(i) Cae[s(aris)] Dubois 1908: no. 494.
574. Caes(are) Traiano n(ostro) IIII Rome, 101104 Bruzza 1870: no. 200
co(n)s(ulibus) j ex rat(ione) j Thras Dubois 1908: no. 495.
Caes(aris) n(ostri) s(ervi) Laetiani
575. Caes(are) Traiano n(ostro) IIII Rome, 101104 Bruzza 1870: no. 201
co(n)s(ule) j ex rat(ione) j Thras Dubois 1908: no. 496.
Caes(aris) n(ostri) ser(vi) Laetiani
576. Gallo et Bradua co(n)s(ulibus) j ex Rome, 108 Bruzza 1870: no. 205
rat(ione) j Rest(ituti) et Hya(cinthi) Dubois 1908: no. 500.
Caes(aris) n(ostri) j n(umero) XI
577. Gallo et Bradua co(n)s(ulibus) j ex Rome, 108 Bruzza 1870: no. 207
rat(ione) j [Re]st(ituti) et Hy[a(cinthi) Dubois 1908: no. 501.
Caes(aris) n(ostri) ser(vorum)]
578. Gallo et Bradua co(n)s(ulibus) j ex Rome, 108 Bruzza 1870: no. 209
rat(ione) j Rest(ituti) et Hya(cinthi) Dubois 1908: no. 504.
Caes(aris) n(ostri) ser(vorum) j
n(umero) CXLIX
579. a) [Pal]ma II et Tullo co(n)s(ulibus) j ex Ostia, 109 Baccini Leotardi 1989:
rat(ione) j S vac. SER j n(umero) CXLVI, no. 65.
b) l(oco?)DCCXIIXR
580. Imp(eratore) Hadriano n(ostro) II Ostia, 118 Baccini Leotardi 1989:
co(n)s(ule) j ex rat(ione) j Rest(ituti) no. 66.
Caesaris n(ostri) ser(vi) j n(umero)
CXXIII
581. Galli(cano) et Vejte(re) co(n)s(ulibus) Ostia, 150 Baccini Leotardi 1989:
ex r(atione) Aurejli M[] no. 67 Pensabene
1994: 99, no. 37.
582. Commodo Caes(are) n(ostro) II Rome, 179 Bruzza 1870: no. 210
co(n)s(ulibus) j SEHTT []PX9 Dubois 1908: no. 505.
 Appendix 411
583. Ian(uarii) Cae(saris) n(umero) Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 192
XXXXV Dubois 1908: no. 487.
584. ex rat(ione) j Thras Caes(arum) Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 202
nn(ostrorum) j 1CDLIV Dubois 1908: no. 497.
585. ex rat(ione) j Thras Cae(saris) n(ostri) Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 203
CXVI Dubois 1908: no. 498.
586. ex rat(ione) j Thras Cae(saris) Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 204
n(umero) CLXIIX Dubois 1908: no. 499.
587. ex rat(ione) j Rest(ituti) et Hya(cinthi) Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 206
Cae(saris) n(ostri) ser(vorum) Dubois 1908: no. 502.
n(umero) CXLII
588. []cos j ex rat(ione) j Rest(ituti) Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 208
Caes(aris) n(ostri) ser(vi) n(umero) Dubois 1908: no. 503.
XXI
589. AA I V III j ex rat(ione) Ostia Pensabene 1994: 99,
no. 38.
590. [] j [] Caes(aris?) n(ostri?) j Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 211
CXXIII Dubois 1908: no. 506.
591. []VA j []S j []XIII Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 212
Dubois 1908: no. 507.
592. []ILA j [] Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 213
Dubois 1908: no. 508.
593. FRON Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 214
Dubois 1908: no. 509.
594. LXXIV Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 215
Dubois 1908: no. 510.
595. [-] j []CCCLXIX R Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 216
Dubois 1908: no. 511.
596. [] CDII R Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 217
Dubois 1908: no. 512.
597. l(oco) DCCCXL R Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 218
Dubois 1908: no. 513.
598. l(oco) 1 XCV R Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 219
Dubois 1908: no. 514.
599. a) No CXXXIIX, b) V, c) PI2, d) V Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1989:
no. 68.
600. l(oco) DCCXIX j R Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1989:
no. 69 Pensabene
1994: 44, fig.40.

Cipollino: Karystos
601. a) cae n II. CIA j CAE[.]IRVFO j Rome, 17? Bruzza 1870: no. 2
co(n)s(ulibus); b) cae n(umero) Dubois 1908: no. 281.
CXXIIX j CIA
602. [D]om(itiano) Caes(are) II co(n)s(ule) Rome, 73 Bruzza 1870: no. 3
Dubois 1908: no. 282.
412 Appendix
603. a) sub cura Minici j Sancti Rome, 132 Bruzza 1870: no. 4
proc(uratoris) Aug(usti) j pr(ob.) Dubois 1908: no. 283.
Crescente lib(erto) j n(umero) XLII;
b) Augurin(o) co(n)s(ule) j l(oco)
CXXCVI R
604. sub cura Minici Sa[ncti] j pr(ob.) Rome, 132? Bruzza 1870: no. 5
Crescente lib(erto) n(umero) I[] Dubois 1908: no. 284.
605. a) Augurin(o) co(n)s(ule) j l(oco) LXXX Rome, 132 Bruzza 1870: no. 6
R; b) l(oco) LXXX R; c) n(umero) LXV j Dubois 1908: no. 285.
Cae(?) N
606. a) Augur(ino); b) l(oco) XXVII R; Rome, 132 Bruzza 1870: no. 7
c) n(umero) LIV Caeh?is N Dubois 1908: no. 286.
607. a) Augurin(o) co(n)s(ule); b) n(umero) Rome, 132 Bruzza 1870: no. 8
XXXIV j Cae(?)s N Dubois 1908: no. 287.
608. a) Augurin(o) co(n)s(ule) j l(oco) Ostia, 132 Baccini Leotardi 1989:
CCCCXXXVI R; b) CA n(umero) no. 50 Pensabene
XC j CIA 1994: 86, no. 32.
609. Augurin(o) co(n)s(ule) j C Ostia, 132 Baccini Leotardi 1989:
no. 51.
610. Augurin(o) co(n)s(ule) j l(oco) Ostia, 132 Baccini Leotardi 1979:
DXCV R no. 43 Pensabene
1994: 86, no. 31.
611. Augurin(o) co(n)s(ule) Ostia, 132 Pensabene 1994: 177,
no. 118 CIL XIV
5242.
612. Serviano III co(n)s(ulibus) j ex rat(ione) j Rome, 134 Bruzza 1870: no. 9
Valentis j n(umero) VII Dubois 1908: no. 288.
613. Serviano III co(n)s(ule) j ex rat(ione) j Rome, 134 Bruzza 1870: no. 10
Valentis j n(umero) CXXXII Dubois 1908: no. 289.
614. [S]erviano III co(n)s(ule) j ex rat(ione) Rome, 134 Bruzza 1870: no. 11
j Valentis j LXXXIIII Dubois 1908: no. 290.
615. Pontiano co(n)s(ule) j ex r(atione) j Rome, 135 Bruzza 1870: no. 12
VRBEI Natalis j n(umero) II Dubois 1908: no. 291.
cf. Hirschfeld, 1905:
177, with fn. 2.
616. Pontiano co(n)s(ule) j ex r(atione) Rome, 135 Bruzza 1870: no. 13
Valentis j n(umero) CL XII Dubois 1908: no. 292.
617. L(ucio) Aelio Caesare n(ostro) II Karystos, 161 CIL III 12288.
c(onsule) j ex rat(ione) j Caecili
Marciani j n(umero) X VII.
618. ex M N Caesaris N R D A sub cur(a) Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 1
C(aii) Caerialis pr(ocuratoris) j subse- Dubois 1908: no. 278
q(uente) Sergio Longo 7(centurioni) leg- ILS 8717.
(ionis) XXII Primig(eniae) prob. j
Crescente lib(erto) vac. n(umero) VIIII jj
n(umero) VIIII; in red paint:
CXXX n(umero) VIIII
 Appendix 413
619. ex r(atione) j ! ZOES Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1989:
no. 56.
620. ex r(atione) Cla[] j XXC Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1979:
no. 55 Pensabene
1994: 39, fig. 31.
621. ex r(atione) j Orbi Natales j n(umero) Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 15
XXIIII Dubois 1908: no. 295.
622. a) Orbi Na[tales]; b) n(umero) Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 16
XXXVI j V Dubois 1908: no. 296.
623. Hyme(naei?) Cae j dom(-) n(umero) IX Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 17
Dubois 1908: no. 298.
624. Hyme(naei?) Cae Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 18
Dubois 1908: no. 299a.
625. Hyme(naei?) Cae Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 19
Dubois 1908: no. 299b.
626. n(umero) CL [] j Hyme(naei?) [] Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 20
Dubois 1908: no. 300.
627. a) n(umero) CC j Hyme(naei?) C[ae?] Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 21
?; b) A Dubois 1908: no. 301.
628. a) CLXXXIII; b) n(umero) VI j Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 22
Hyme(naei?) Cae j A H Dubois 1908: no. 302.
629. n(umero) CCCXXX j Hyme(naei?) j Z Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 23
Dubois 1908: no. 303.
630. Hy(menaei?) Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 24
Dubois 1908: no. 304.
631. Tha(myri?) Cae(saris) j Minui[..]til j Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 14
co(n)s(ule) Dubois 1908: no. 294.
632. T(h)amyri Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 25
Dubois 1908: no. 305.
633. Th(a)myr(i) Cae Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 26
Dubois 1908: no. 306.
634. VII T(ha)my(ri) Cae Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 27
Dubois 1908: no. 307.
635. Th(a)my(ri) C Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 28
Dubois 1908: no. 308.
636. Thamy(ri) Cae Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 29
Dubois 1908: no. 309.
637. Thamy(ri) C Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 30
Dubois 1908: no. 310.
638. Th(a)my(ri) Cae Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 31
Dubois 1908: no. 311.
639. n(umero) XLIII j Thamy(ri) C Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 32
Dubois 1908: no. 312.
640. a) n(umero) CV; b) Thamy(ri) j Cae Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 33
Dubois 1908: no. 313.
414 Appendix
641. Th(a)my(ri) Cae Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 34
Dubois 1908: no. 314.
642. L[] j [T]hamy(ri) C[] Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 35
Dubois 1908: no. 315.
643. a) Tha(myri); b) n(umero) LVI Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 36
Dubois 1908: no. 316.
644. n(umero) XIV j Th(a)my(r)e ZO Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 39
Dubois 1908: no. 319.
645. a) Th(a)my(r)e j n(umero) CLXVI ; Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 40
b) K H Dubois 1908: no. 320.
646. n(umero) CCXII j Th(a)my(ri) C Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 41
Dubois 1908: no. 321.
647. a) n(umero) CCCXLI T(ha)my(ri) C; Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 42
b) I [] CXI Dubois 1908: no. 322.
648. Ti Eup j CCXL Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 51
Dubois 1908: no. 331.
649. Cae n(u)m(ero) IX j C POL Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 52
Dubois 1908: no. 332.
650. CL PH Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 71
Dubois 1908: no. 351.
651. CL PH j n(umero) XIII Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 72
Dubois 1908: no. 352.
652. L PLI Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 73
Dubois 1908: no. 353.
653. CL PH Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 74
Dubois 1908: no. 354.
654. n(umero) CXXII j PH Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 75
Dubois 1908: no. 355.
655. n(umero) LXXX j PH Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 76
Dubois 1908: no. 356.
656. n(umero) CXLV j CL PH Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 77
Dubois 1908: no. 357.
657. n(umero) CXLV j CLA PHL Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 79
Dubois 1908: no. 359.
658. n(umero) CCXXXV j CL PH Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 78
Dubois 1908: no. 358.
659. Cae n(umero) I j CIA Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 81
Dubois 1908: no. 361.
660. Cae n(umero) I [] j CIA[]
 Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 82
Dubois 1908: no. 362.
661. Cae n(umero) XIV j CIA Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 83
Dubois 1908: no. 363.
662. Cae j n(umero) XVI j CIA Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 84
Dubois 1908: no. 364.
663. Cae j n(umero) XXVI j CIA Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 85
Dubois 1908: no. 365.
 Appendix 415
664. C 
k j C III j CIA Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 86
Dubois 1908: no. 366.
665. n(umero) XX j CIA Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 87
Dubois 1908: no. 367.
666. A j Cae n(umero) XXVIII j CIA Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 88
Dubois 1908: no. 368.
667. Cae n(umero) LIX j XIII CIA Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 89
Dubois 1908: no. 369.
668. Cae n(umero) LX j II CIA Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 90
Dubois 1908: no. 370.
669. Cae n(umero) LXI j CIA Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 91
Dubois 1908: no. 371.
670. a) Cae n(umero) LXXI, b) Cae Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 92
n(umero) j CIA Dubois 1908: no. 372.
671. Cae n(umero) CCXIII j CIA Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 93
Dubois 1908: no. 373.
672. DN III j CIA Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 94
Dubois 1908: no. 374.
673. a) C; b) l(oco) 1XXXVII j R; Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 98
c) n(umero) XXXI j CLA B Dubois 1908: no. 378.
674. a) R j L1XL; b) n(umero) IX j CL Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 99
Dubois 1908: no. 379.
675. a) l(oco) 1XI III R; b) n(umero) XVI Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 100
CLA B j AP j III
C
Dubois 1908: no. 380.
676. T Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 37
Dubois 1908: no. 307.
677. Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 38
Dubois 1908: no. 308.
678. []omy[] Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 43
Dubois 1908: no. 323.
679. & Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 44
Dubois 1908: no. 324.
680. a) &; b) caes n(umero) CXVI Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 45
Dubois 1908: no. 325.
681. n(umero) XXI Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 46
Dubois 1908: no. 326.
682.  Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 47
Dubois 1908: no. 327.
683. K Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 48
Dubois 1908: no. 328.
684. Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 49
2

Dubois 1908: no. 329.

685. AP P j I N Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 50
Dubois 1908: no. 330.
686. n(umero) IX j caes n(umero) Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 53
Dubois 1908: no. 333.
416 Appendix
687. Cae n(umero) j CLXI Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 54
Dubois 1908: no. 334.
688. n(umero) XXIIII j cae Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 55
Dubois 1908: no. 335.
689. n(umero) XXVI j caes n Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 56
Dubois 1908: no. 336.
690. Cae n(umero) L Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 57
Dubois 1908: no. 337.
691. Cae n(umero) LX Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 58
Dubois 1908: no. 338.
692. Cae n(umero) LXII Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 59
Dubois 1908: no. 339.
693. n(umero) LXV j caes n Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 60
Dubois 1908: no. 340.
694. Cae n(umero) CLIII Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 61
Dubois 1908: no. 341.
695. Cae n(umero) CCX Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 62
Dubois 1908: no. 342.
696. Cae n(umero) CCL Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 63
Dubois 1908: no. 343.
697. n(umero) CL j II Cae Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 64
Dubois 1908: no. 344.
698. DN CXXXII Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 65
Dubois 1908: no. 345.
699. DN CLX Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 66
Dubois 1908: no. 346.
700. a) DN CLXXXII; b) n(umero) LXXXII Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 67
Dubois 1908: no. 347.
701. n(umero) CXXXVI j M D j A N Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 68
Dubois 1908: no. 348.
702. N Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 69
Dubois 1908: no. 349.
703. No Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 70
Dubois 1908: no. 350.
704. HP Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 80
Dubois 1908: no. 360.
705. CL Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 95
Dubois 1908: no. 375.
706. CLA Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 96
Dubois 1908: no. 376.
707. n(umero) CX[] j CL [] Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 97
Dubois 1908: no. 377.
708. BI j n(umero) CXXIIX Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 101
Dubois 1908: no. 381
709. n(umero) XVI j XIIXXX N Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 102
Dubois 1908: no. 382.
 Appendix 417
710. XXVI [] Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 103
Dubois 1908: no. 383.
711. n(umero) LI Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 104
Dubois 1908: no. 384.
712. n(umero) LVI Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 105
Dubois 1908: no. 385.
713. LIX Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 106
Dubois 1908: no. 386.
kV
714. NL Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 107
Dubois 1908: no. 387.
715. LXXXII Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 108
Dubois 1908: no. 388.
716. XXCVI Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 109
Dubois 1908: no. 389.
717. IXC Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 110
Dubois 1908: no. 390.
718. XCVII Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 111
Dubois 1908: no. 391.
719. n(umero) LXXXXII Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 112
Dubois 1908: no. 392.
720. n(umero) XCVI Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 113
Dubois 1908: no. 393.
721. n(umero) CXVIIIIX Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 114
Dubois 1908: no. 394.
722. n(umero) CXX [] Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 115
Dubois 1908: no. 395.
723. CXXXX Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 116
Dubois 1908: no. 396.
724. CLXXIII Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 117
Dubois 1908: no. 397.
725. n(umero) CXC Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 118
Dubois 1908: no. 398.
726. n(umero) CXCVI Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 119
Dubois 1908: no. 399.
Bruzza 1870: no. 120
727. n(umero) j CC
CCXL Roma
Dubois 1908: no. 400.
728. n(umero) CCXIII Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 121
Dubois 1908: no. 401.
729. n(umero) CCXX j VXXI Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 122
Dubois 1908: no. 402.
730. n(umero) CCXXXI Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 123
Dubois 1908: no. 403.
731. CCXLIX Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 124
Dubois 1908: no. 404.
732. n(umero) CCCI Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 125
Dubois 1908: no. 405.
418 Appendix
733. a) l(oco) CCCXLIII Io CCCII; Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 126
b) A j CLXXVII Dubois 1908: no. 406.
734. n(umero) CCCXLVII Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 127
Dubois 1908: no. 407.
735. l(oco) DXC R Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 128
Dubois 1908: no. 408.
736. C1LXX j IIX7 Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 129
Dubois 1908: no. 409.
737. MIX j 1CLXX Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 130
Dubois 1908: no. 410.
Bruzza 1870: no. 131
j 11 C j
738. D H CXII Roma
Dubois 1908: no. 411.
739. VIII Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 132
Dubois 1908: no. 412.
740. []VII j []OI Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 133
Dubois 1908: no. 413.
741. V Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 134
Dubois 1908: no. 414.
742. XII Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 135
Dubois 1908: no. 415.
743. TA Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 136
Dubois 1908: no. 416.
744. T A Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 137
Dubois 1908: no. 417.
745. LDXI j F Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1989:
no. 52 Pensabene
1994: no. 34.
746. N Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1989:
no. 53.
747. 1 CCCXXX n(umero) IIII j C Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1989:
no. 54.
748. n(umero) LIII Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1989:
no. 55.
749. XXI Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1979:
no. 44.
750. a) l(oco) CXLIII, b) n(umero) CLXX, Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1979:
c) CL no. 45.
751. a) l(oco) 1 CLXVI j R; b) NP; c) PH Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1979:
no. 47.
752. XVX Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1979:
no. 48.
753. YR Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1979:
no. 49.
754. CCCCX[] Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1979:
no. 50.
755. a) n(umero) CCXLII; b) n(umero) Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1979:
CCXLII vac. CXXXIII j R no. 52.
 Appendix 419
756. CLV j R Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1979:
no. 56 Pensabene
1994: 40, fig. 34.
757. D 1 Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1979:
no. 57.
758. CXXV[] Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1979:
no. 58 Pensabene
1994: 86, no. 29.
759. CCCX[] Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1979:
no. 59 Pensabene
1994: 40, fig. 33.
760. D j N Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1979:
no. 60 Pensabene
1994: 41, fig. 35.
761. LXXIIII R Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1979:
no. 61.
762. l(oco) 1 CXL [] Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1979:
no. 62.
763. Fl(avii) Claudiani Styra Vanhove 1989.
764. 1 CCCXXXIII n(umero) III Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1989:
no. 54.
765. Cae(saris) n(ostri) j XIX j C M? P O L Ostia Pellegrino 1990: 219 fig.
6.7 Pensabene 1994:
131, no. 67.
766. a) Cae(saris) n(ostri) V I j C. Apol(-); Ostia Pellegrino 1990: 219
b) DXXXIIX j LXIVR; c) CLXXXI fig.8 Pensabene 1994:
131, no. 68.
767. I X CL XXXV Ostia Pensabene 1994: 131,
no. 69.
768. a) l(oco) 1 CCCXR j I; b) X C I I j X C A Ostia Pensabene 1994: 131,
no. 70.
769. XPTP Ostia Pellegrino 1990: 219,
fig.9 Pensabene 1994:
131, no. 71.
770. a) Dom[; b) CXXIV Ostia Pellegrino 1990: 219
fig.9 Pensabene 1994:
132, no. 72.
771. LXI Ostia Pensabene 1994: 132,
no. 73.
772. X Ostia Pensabene 1994: 132,
no. 74.
773. n(umero) XXXIX Ostia Pensabene 1994: 132,
no. 75.
420 Appendix
774. a) CLXIX; b) DXXI; c) XLIIX j H Ostia Pensabene 1994: 132,
no. 76.
775. HP Ostia Pensabene 1994: 132,
no. 77.
776. CCXII Ostia Pensabene 1994: 132,
no. 78.
777. DNGF Ostia Lugli & Filibeck 1935:
80 Pensabene 1994:
188, no. 180.
778. a) Fl(avii) St(i)l(i)c(onis); b) DXIX j Ostia Pensabene 1994: 194,
D.LIANI no. 187 CIL XIV 165a
Thylander 1952: 365.
779. CCCXLR Ostia Pensabene 1994: 198,
no. 7.
780. VE Ostia Pensabene 1994: 198 f.,
no. 8.
781. CE Rome Pensabene 1994: 214,
no. 27.
782. EP XLIIX Rome Pensabene 1994: 214,
no. 29.
783. CE Rome Pensabene 1994: 215,
no. 30.
784. a) EP XCVI; b) n(umero) XXIIX Rome Pensabene 1994: 215,
no. 31.
785. a) DLXXXIV; b) VE Rome Pensabene 1994: 216,
no. 33.
786. VE Rome Pensabene 1994: 216,
no. 35.

Giallo Antico: Simitthus

787. a) M(arco) Crasso c[o(n)]s(ule) j ex Roma; ad 64 Bruzza 1870: no. 220
r(atione) Lae; b) n(umero) Dubois 1908: no. 67.
CCCXCIIX
788. Sura III et Senici(one) II co(n)s(ulibus) Chemtou, 107 CIL VIII 14560
j ex rat(ione) Felicis Aug(usti) ser(vi) j Dubois 1908: no. 68
d(e) n(umero) DCXII XXX j (officina) Kraus 1993: 56f.
Tiluris
789. a) Orfito et Priscino f co(n)s(ulibus) j ex Chemtou, 110 CIL VIII 25637
rat(ione) Callist(i) j d(e) Dubois 1908: no. 73
n(umero) LXI (officina) Cer(ti); Kraus 1993: 55.
b) Orfito et Priscino f
co(n)s(ulibus) j ex rat(ione) Callist(i) j
d(e) n(umero) L d(e) n(umero) L
 Appendix 421
790. Orfito et Priscino co(n)s(ulibus) j ex Chemtou, 110 AE 1994: 1848 Kraus
rat(ione) Callist(i) j n(umero) DX 1993: Neu 1.
(officina) Cer(ti)
791. Orfito et Priscino co(n)s(ulibus) j ex Chemtou, 110 CIL VIII 14561
rat(ione) Callist(i) j [n(umero)] LIII Dubois 1908: no. 71
(officina) Cer(ti)
792. a) Orfito et Priscino co(n)s(ulibus) j ex Chemtou, 110 CIL VIII 14562
rat(ione) Callistjti(!) n(umero) XCIX Dubois 1908: no. 72.
(officina) Cer(ti)
793. Orfito et Priscino f(?) co(n)s(ulibus) j ex Chemtou, 110 CIL VIII 14563
rat(ione) Callist(i) j n(umero) CII Dubois 1908: no. 70.
(officina) Cer(ti)
794. Pisone et Bolano co(n)s(ulibus) j ex Chemtou, 111 AE 1994: 1874 Kraus
rat(ione) Felicis Aug(usti) ser(vi) j d(e) 1993: Neu 27.
n(umero) XXX of(ficina) no(va)
Cael(?)
795. Hadriani Aug(usti) co(n)s(ule) Roma, 118 Bruzza 1870: no. 221
n(umero) NCLXXII Dubois 1908: no. 78.
796. a) Domitiani Aug(usti) j ex rat(ione) j Ostia, 132 Baccini Leotardi 1979:
Felicis ser(vi); b) Augurin(o) no. 76.
co(n)s(ule) R j L DCCLXVII j FCL j
DINIR; c) NN CCXXCIII
797. a) Domitiani Aug(usto) j ex rat(ione) j Ostia, 132 Baccini Leotardi 1979:
Felicis ser(vi) ; b) Augurin(o) co(n)s(ule) no. 77.
j L DCCLXXIIX j R j DINTR FCL
798. a) Augurin(o) co(n)s(ule) j L DXXIIX j Ostia, 132 Baccini Leotardi 1979:
DINTR [F]CL j R; b) NTLVIII no. 78 Pensabene
1994: 107, no. 44.
799. Hadriani Aug(usti) d(omini) j n(umero) Chemtou, 133 CIL VIII 14564
C[] agr j Hibero co(n)s(ule) j SA Dubois 1908: no. 79.
800. (ex r)at(ione) Pluriani Aug(usti) Chemtou, 134 AE 1994: 1855 Kraus
l(iberti) j Iun (?) et Serviano III (con- 1993: Neu 8.
sulibus) n(umero)
801. Hadriani Aug(usti) j N(?) Iun(?) et Chemtou, 134 AE 1994: 1856 Kraus
Serviano III 1993: Neu 9.
802. Hadriani Aug(usti) d(omini) P j n- Chemtou, 134 CIL VIII 14565
(umero) vac. Cal j Serviano co(n)s(ule) j Dubois 1908: no. 81.
SA
803. Hadriani Aug(usti) j CV j (et) Ser- Chemtou, 134 AE 1994: 1857 Kraus
viano III (consulibus) 1993: Neu 10.
804. Hadriani Aug(usti) j Aelio Caesare II Chemtou, 137 AE 1994: 1868 Kraus
co(n)s(ule) j sub cura Agathae lib(erti 1993: Neu 21.
Augusti)
805. Hadriani Aug(usti) j loc(o) XXXV j Chemtou, 138 CIL VIII 14566
Camerino et Nig[ro co(n)s(ulibus) j Dubois 1908: no. 82.
su(b) cura Iul(ii) Galli[].
422 Appendix
806. Hadriani Aug(usti) d(omini) loc(o) j Chemtou, 138 AE 1994: 1869 Kraus
Camerino et Nigro co(n)s(ulibus) j sub 1993: Neu 22.
cura Agathae lib(erti)
807. Hadriani Aug(usti) d(omini) j loc(o) j Chemtou, 138 CIL VIII 25634
Camerino et Nigro co(n)s(ulibus) j sub Dubois 1908: no. 84.
cura Agathae lib(erti)
808. Hadrian(i) Aug(usti) d(omini) loc(o) j Chemtou, 138 AE 1994: 1866 Kraus
Camerino et Nigro co(n)s(ulibus) j sub 1993: Neu 19.
cura () Galli
809. [Antonini A]u(gusti) Pii d(omini) j Chemtou, 138 AE 1994: 1870 Kraus
[Camerino et] Nigro co(n)s(ulibus) j 1993: Neu 23.
[sub c]ura Galli
810. Hadriani Aug(usti) d(omini) j IND[ Chemtou, 138 Dubois 1908: no. 83.
lo]c(o) EGN j Camer(ino et) Nigro
co(n)s(ulibus) j []
811. Hadriani Aug(usti) d(omini) j loc(o) j Chemtou, 138 Dubois 1908: no. 84.
Camerino et Nigro co(n)s(ulibus) j sub
cura Agathae lib(erti)
812. [Antonini Augusti] Pii d(omini) j AL j Chemtou, 138 AE 1994: 1871 Kraus
[Camerino et] Nigro co(n)s(ulibus) j 1993: Neu 24.
[sub cura] Agathae li(berti Augusti)
813. Imp(eratoris) Antonini Aug [usti] j Chemtou, 139 or CIL VIII 25636
n(umero) DCCLI of[f(icina). ] j 140/145 Dubois 1908: no. 96
Imperatori Antonino et [] j sub cura Kraus 1993: 55.
Ag[athae]
814. Imp (eratoris) Antonini Aug[(usti) pii Chemtou, 141 CIL VIII 14571
d] j n(umero) vac. of(ficina) Cer[ti] j Dubois 1908: no. 89.
Stloga et Severo co(n)s(ulibus) j sub
D
cura Agatha[e][lib] j XX j
815. Imp (eratoris) Antonini Aug (usti) p[ii Chemtou, 141 CIL VIII 14572
d] j n(umero) vac. of(ficina) Cert[i] j Dubois 1908: no. 90.
Stloga et Severo co(n)s(ulibus) j sub
cura Agathae j LIR
816. Imp (eratoris) Antonini Aug(usti) pii Chemtou, 141 CIL VIII 14573
d(omini) j n(umero) vac. of(ficina) Cerii Dubois 1908: no. 91.
j Stloga et Severo co(n)s(ulibus) j su(b)
cura Agathae[]
817. Imp (eratoris) Antonini Aug(usti) pii Chemtou, 141 CIL VIII 14574
d(omini) j n(umero) vac. of(ficina) Cer- Dubois 1908: no. 92.
(ti) j Stloga et Severo co(n)s(ulibus) j
sub cura Agathae l
818. Imp (eratoris) Antonini Aug(usti) jj Chemtou, 141 CIL VIII 14575
d(omini) j n(umero) vac. of(ficina) Dubois 1908: no. 93.
Cer(ti) j Stloga et Severo co(n)s(ulibus) j
sub cura Agath[ae]
819. Imp (eratoris) Antonini Aug (usti) Chemtou, 141 CIL VIII 14576
pi[i d] j n(umero) vac. of(ficina) Cert[i] j Dubois 1908: no. 94.
Stloga et Severo co(n)s(ulibus) j
sub cura Agathae l
 Appendix 423
820. a) Imp(eratoris) Antonini Aug(usti) Chemtou, 141 CIL VIII 14577
P(ii) d(omini) j [n(umero)] LXIV of Dubois 1908: no. 95.
(ficina) al j Stloga et Severo co(n)s(uli-
bus) j [s]ub cura Agatiae (!) lib(ertus) j
b(racchio?) s(ecundo?) b) RO
821. Imp(eratoris) Antonini Aug(usti) Pii j Chemtou, 149 CIL VIII 14578
n(umero) DCVI of(ficina) Regia j Dubois 1908: no. 98.
Orfito et Prisco co(n)s(ulibus) j FPC
822. [Imp(eratoris) Antonini Aug(usti)] Pii Chemtou, 150 CIL VIII 14582
d(omini) j [n(umero)of(ficina) Dubois 1908: no. 102.
A]gripp(ae) j [Gallicano et Vete]re
co(n)s(ulibus)
823. Imp(eratoris) Antonini Aug(usti) Chemtou, 150 CIL VIII 14579
d(omini) j n(umero) CCCXLIII (offi- Dubois 1908: no. 99.
cina) Reg(ia) j Gallicano et Vet(ere) j
FPC
824. Imp(eratoris) Antonini Aug(usti) Pii Chemtou, 150 CIL VIII 14580
d(omini) j n(umero) D[] of(ficina) Dubois 1908: no. 100.
Agrippae j Gallicano et Vetere co(n)s-
(ulibus) j FPC
825. Imp(eratories) Antonini Aug(usti) Pii Chemtou, 150 CIL VIII 14581
d(omini) j n(umero) DXVII of(ficina) Dubois 1908: no. 101.
Agrippae j Gallicano et Vetere co(n)s-
(ulibus) j FPC
826. Imp(eratoris) Antonini Aug(usti) Pii Chemtou, 151 CIL VIII 14583
d(omini) j n(umero) CXXCIX of(ficina) Dubois 1908: no. 103.
Regia j Condiano et Maximo j FPC
827. (I)mp(eratoris) Antonini Aug(usti) Chemtou, 154 AE 1994: 1873 Kraus
Pii d(omini) j n(umero) of(ficina) j 1993: Neu 26.
(C)ommodo et Lateran(o consulibus)
BAB
828. Imp(eratoris) Antonini Aug(usti) Pii j Chemtou, 156 AE 1994: 1867 Kraus
n(umero) vac. of(ficina) j Silvano et 1993: Neu 20.
A(ugurino consulibus) j V
829. (I)m(peratoris) Antonini Aug(usti) Chemtou, 157 CIL VIII 14584
Pi(i) d(omini) j n(umero) [] off- Dubois 1908: no. 104
(icina) Iun(onis) j Barbaro et Regulo Khanoussi 1996:
(consulibus) j P C 1003 f.
830. [Impe]ratorum Caesarum j [Antoni]ni Roma, 161 Bruzza 1870: no. 222
et Veria Augustorum d(ominorum) j Dubois 1908: no. 108.
[]n(umero) IXX of(ficina) Aur(elii?)
[Ant]onino III et Vero II co(n)s(ulibus) j
PC j b(racchio) t(ertio)
831. Imp(eratoris) Antonini A[ug(usti)] j Roma, 161 Bruzza 1870: no. 223
n(umero) XXI j Antonino III [et Vero] II Dubois 1908: no. 107.
j []
832. Imp(eratoris) Antonini Aug(usti) Pii Chemtou, 161 CIL VIII 14585
n(umero) LX of(ficina) [] j Aurelio Vero Dubois 1908: no. 106.
C[ae]s(are) III et Commodo [II] j FPC
424 Appendix
833. Imp(eratore) L(ucio) Aurelio Vero III et Chemtou, 167 CIL VIII 14587
Q[u]adrato co(n)[s(ulibus)] j n(umero) Dubois 1908: no. 109.
XIIX of(ficina) nova Augustea j TAVT
834. [Orfit]o et Maximo co(n)[s(ulibus)] Roma, 172 Bruzza 1870: no. 224
j [ex no]vis lapicaedinis j Aurelianis Dubois 1908: no. 110.
j []ASU[]MO Caesare j [sub]
cura Iuliani proc(uratoris) Aug(usti)
835. n(umero) CCCV of(ficina) Genii Chemtou, 199 CIL VIII 14588
Montis j Imp(eratore) Commodo Dubois 1908: no. 111.
Aug(usto) IIII et Victorino [I]I
co(n)s(ulibus) j caesura Maximi
proc(uratoris)
836. n(umero) XII of(ficina) j Anullino II Chemtou, 199 AE 1994: 1860 Kraus
et Frontone co(n)s(ulibus) j caesura 1993: Neu 13.
Athenodori proc(uratoris)
837. n(umero) LIII of(ficina) Nova Aurel- Chemtou, 199 CIL VIII 14589
[iana] j [A]nullino II et Frontone co(n)s- Dubois 1908: no. 112.
(ulibus) j [ca]esura Athenodori proc(u-
ratoris)
838. n(umero) CCXXX . . of(ficina) Cael(i) j Chemtou, 201 AE 1994: 1861 Kraus
Luciano et Fabi(a)no co(n)s(ulibus) j 1993: Neu 14.
caesura Athenodo(ri) pro(curatoris)
839. a) ex rat(ione) j of(ficina) Age(ntii ?) Chemtou AE 1994: 1852 Kraus
Calist(i) lib(erti) Aug(usti); 1993: Neu 5.
b) n(umero) X
840. a) ex rat(ione) j of(ficina) Age(ntii ?) Chemtou AE 1994: 1853 Kraus
Calist(i) lib(erti) Aug(usti); 1993: Neu 6.
b) n(umero) CCCLXXIX
841. a) ex rat(ione) j of(ficina) Aga(thae) Chemtou CIL VIII 25693
Callist(i) li(berti); b) CCCCXIII Dubois 1908: no. 74
Kraus 1993: 56.
842. a) ex rat(ione) [of(ficina)] j Age(ntii ?) Chemtou CIL VIII 25639
Callis(i) lib(erti) Aug(usti); Dubois 1908: no. 75
b) n(umero) CDXLIV Kraus 1993: 56.
843. [ex ratione?] Callist(i) d(e) (?) ? AE 1994: 1877a, b
n(umero) CX de(?) cojl(umna) Kraus 1993: Neu 30.
p(edum) XXX
844. a) ex rat(ione) j Puteolani Ca(esaris?) j Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1979:
C; b) N1XXCVI no. 79.
845. a) l(oco?) 1DCCL j DINT(R) FCL Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1979:
[R?]; b) LDF (?) n(umero) CCCXLIIX; no. 80.
c) Cai j Puteolani j b
846. Puteolani Cae(saris?) j A[] Chemtou CIL VIII 14593
Dubois 1908: no. 117.
847. 1 D III j DINTF Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1979:
no. 81.
848. a) [ex] rat(ione) Felicis Au[g(usti)] Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1979:
s[e]r(vi); b) []lv no. 82 Pensabene
1994: 107, no. 45.
 Appendix 425
849. ex rat(ione) j Felicis []i Chemtou CIL VIII 25641
Aug(ustorum) j nn(ostrorum) Dubois 1908: no. 69.
DCCXXIIII
850. ex rat(ione) j Puteon(is?) l(iberti) Chemtou AE 1994: 1858 Kraus
A(ugusti) 1993: Neu 11.
851. ex[ratione] j [Sa]lutaris [] Chemtou AE 1994: 1859 Kraus
1993: Neu 12.
852. ex rat(ione) j of(ficina) Aga(thae) Henchir Frouri Dubois 1908: no. 74.
Callist(i) li(berti?)
853. Hadriani D [] j n(umero) vac. [] Chemtou CIL VIII 14567
Dubois 1908: no. 85.
854. TA j Hadriani Aug(usti) d(omini) j Chemtou CIL VIII 14569
n(umero) CXXCIII Fort[.]VQVAIVOI Dubois 1908: no. 87.
855. Hadriani Aug(usti) d(omini) n(umero) Chemtou CIL VIII 14568
CCLXIII j N[..]IR O NE cos j EP Dubois 1908: no. 86.
856. []es sub c[ura] j [p]roc(uratoris) Leptis Magna IRT 794g.
f[]
857. []ER[] ] []lib(erti) Leptis Magna IRT 794j.
pr[oc(uratoris)]
858. []nodori proc(uratoris) Chemtou AE 1994: 1862 Kraus
1993: Neu 15.
859. [An]tonin[i] j XXXI j[caesura Chemtou AE 1994: 1863 Kraus
No]vat[i?] 1993: Neu 16.
860. [Imperat]orum Caesa[rum] j []et Chemtou AE 1994: 1865 Kraus
Veri Aug(u)sti j [numero] LIV of[ficina j 1993: Neu 18.
[Laelia]no et Pastor(e)
861. Antonini Au[gusti Pii] j []reta et Vero Chemtou AE 1994: 1872 Kraus
c(onsulibus) 1993: Neu 25.
862. Antonino III co(n)s(ule) j DCC Chemtou CIL VIII 14570
Dubois 1908: no. 88.
863. a) []AILIS [caes]ura Nova(ti?) j Chemtou CIL VIII 14586
[]1 CXXX loc(o) XII j Tellur(is); Dubois 1908: no. 105.
b) [Imp(eratoris) A]ntonini Aug(usti)
j []atianam fecit
864. []et[] j caesur[a] j praef[] Chemtou AE 1994: 1864 Kraus
1993: Neu 17.
865. caes(ura?) N(ovati?) j n(umero) Chemtou AE 1994: 1875 Kraus
MCXXIIII j Tellur(is?) d 1993: Neu 28.
866. caesura Hymenaei Chemtou AE 1994: 1854 Kraus
1993: Neu 7.
867. a) n(umero) DCCXX; b) Corinth Chemtou CIL VIII 14594
Caes(aris servi) j C Dubois 1908: no. 119a.
868. a) []; b) Corinth Caes(aris servi) j C Chemtou CIL VIII 14595
Dubois 1908: no. 119d.
869. a) n(umero) CCXXI ; b) Corinth Chemtou CIL VIII 14596
Caes(aris servi) Dubois 1908: no. 119b.
426 Appendix
870. a) n(umero) DCCXXI; b) Corinth Chemtou CIL VIII 14597
Caes(aris servi) j C Dubois 1908: no. 119c.
871. (christogram) j off(icina) invenjta a Chemtou CIL VIII 14600
Diojtimo (palm twig) j agen(te) in r(ebus) Dubois 1908: no. 113.
872. lat(omia) IX Hiron(ymi?) Chemtou AE 1994: 1849 Kraus
1993: Neu 2.
873. n(umero) DCCXV Chemtou AE 1994: 1850 Kraus
1993: Neu 3.
874. X Abas[] Chemtou AE 1994: 1851 Kraus
1993: Neu 4.
875. Abas(canti) Cae[s(aris servi)] Chemtou Dubois 1908: no. 115.
876. P[o]R Cae j n(umero) (mille) (mille) Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 225
XLIII Dubois 1908: no. 120.
877. n(umero) CDXXCII j Glaeb Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 226
Dubois 1908: no. 121.
878. Cae Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 227
Dubois 1908: no. 122.
879. Sap Cae Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 228
Dubois 1908: no. 80.
880. Q Canusi Praenestini j N II Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 236
Dubois 1908: no. 118.
881. Corni j Cas j n(umero) DCC XX Chemtou CIL VIII 14591
Dubois 1908: no. 114.
882. Eutychi Chemtou CIL VIII 14592
Dubois 1908: no. 116.
883. (mille) (mille) (mille)CCXCIIX Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 229
Dubois 1908: no. 123, 1.
884. n(umero) (mille)CLXXV Roma Bruzza 1870: no.
230 Dubois 1908:
no. 123, 2.
885. DCCCXII Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 231
Dubois 1908: no. 123, 3.
886. DCCCXXII Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 232
Dubois 1908: no. 123, 4.
887. n(umero)CCCXCIIX Roma Bruzza 1870: no. 233
Dubois 1908: no. 123, 5.
888. XCIV Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1989,
no. 74 Pensabene
1994: 107, no. 42.
889. jjj Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1989,
no. 75.
890. a) C A, b) C A, c) CAE, d) j Chemtou CIL VIII 14598.
n(umero) XXIX, e) CCIII, f) DCCLIII
891. n(umero) CDXCII Chemtou CIL VIII 14599a
Dubois 1908:
no. 123,14.
 Appendix 427
892. n(umero) DCIII Chemtou CIL VIII 14599b
Dubois 1908:
no. 123, 10.
893. n(umero) DCCXV Chemtou CIL VIII 14599c
Dubois 1908: no. 123,
13.
894. [n(umero)] DCCXVIII Chemtou CIL VIII 14599d
Dubois 1908: no. 123,
15.
895. n(umero) DCCXIX Chemtou CIL VIII 14599e
Dubois 1908: no. 123, 8.
896. n(umero) DCCXX Chemtou CIL VIII 14599 f
Dubois 1908:
no. 123, 11.
897. n(umero) DCCLXVI Chemtou CIL VIII 14598g
Dubois 1908:
no. 123, 12.
898. n(umero) DCCCXXX Chemtou CIL VIII 14598h
Dubois 1908: no. 123, 9.
899. []loc(o) II p[] Leptis Magna IRT 794 f.
900. []ER[] j []VA[] Leptis Magna IRT 794 h.
901. []NEQVADOC[] j []XXXVI[ Leptis Magna IRT 794 k.
]
902. []ITIANA[] Leptis Magna IRT 794 l.
903. j& j Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 234
Dubois 1908:
no. 123, 6.
904. Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 235
Dubois 1908: no. 123, 7.
905. n(umero) XII Rome Dubois 1908: no. 123, 16.
906. XXXIIX Rome Dubois 1908: no. 123, 17.
907. n(umero) CXXI Rome Dubois 1908: no. 123, 18.
908. n(umero) IICCCXVIII Rome Dubois 1908: no. 123, 19.
909. n(umero) CCCXXIII Rome Dubois 1908: no. 123, 20.
910. n(umero) (mille) DDLLXIII Rome Dubois 1908: no. 123, 21.
911. n(umero) (mille) (mille) CCXIIV Rome Dubois 1908: no. 123, 22.
912. n(umero) (mille) (mille) CCLXXII Rome Dubois 1908: no. 123, 23.
913. n(umero) (mille) [] Rome Dubois 1908: no. 123, 24.
914. n(umero) X Rome Dubois 1908: no. 123, 25.
915. CCIII Rome Dubois 1908: no. 123, 26.
916. DCCLIII Rome Dubois 1908: no. 123, 27.
917. Rome Dubois 1908: no. 123, 28.
918. CZA Rome Dubois 1908: no. 123, 29.
919. CAE Rome Dubois 1908: no. 123, 30.
428 Appendix
920. + Rome Dubois 1908: no. 123, 31.
921. a) Hil(?) Cae(saris), b) n(umero) Rome Dubois 1908: no. 123, 32.
LVI j A
922. a) Hil(?) Cae(saris), b) n(umero) Rome Dubois 1908: no. 123, 33.
LVII j A
923. []ARA Rome Dubois 1908: no. 123, 34.
924. HSE Chemtou CIL VIII 14679
Dubois 1908: no. 124.
925. Hadrianus Augustus Antium Dubois 1908: no. 126;
Two plombs found in
1697 in a floor pave-
ment of yellow marble.
CIL XV 7956.
926. L.Coc(cei?) Antium Dubois 1908: no. 127;
CIL XV 7926.
927. Hadrianus Augustus Tivoli Dubois 1908: no. 128
CIL XV 7927, 3. Circular
plombe found in piece of
yellow marble in
Hadrians villa, Tivoli.
928. []A[] (F) Rome Dubois 1908: no. 129
CIL XV 7937a. Circular
plombe, inserted into a
piece of yellow marble.
929. Anepigraphic token showing picture of ? Dubois 1908: no. 130.
Hadrian

Granodiorite: Mons Claudianus

930. n(umero) II Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 1, no. 1.
931. IIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 2, no. 1.
932. V I Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 2, no. 2.
933. CEP n(umero) II Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 6, no. 1.
934. CEP n(umero) III Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 6, no. 2.
935. APOL j EPIKMOC Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:

217, quarry 7, no. 1.
936. a. AP9P ; b. I B L Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:

217, quarry 8/9, no. 1.
937. a. I E; b. RACLP; Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
c. LVI 217, quarry 8/9, no. 2.
 Appendix 429
938. a. RACLP ; b. LII ? Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
(same face) 217, quarry 8/9, no. 3.
939. a. RACLP ; b. LIX Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
(same face) 217, quarry 8/9, no. 4.
940. a. XL; b. LVIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 8/9, no. 5.
941. n(umero) III Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 8/9, no. 6.
942. a. RACLP ; b. XX// Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
(same face); c. XLVI 217, quarry 8/9, no. 7.
(another face)?
943. XLV Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 8/9, no. 8.
944. VIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 8/9, no. 9.
945. a. XLIX; b. XXII; Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
c. RACLP (all on 217, quarry 8/9, no. 10.
same face)
946. XXX Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 8/9, no. 11.
947. XXV Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 8/9, no. 12.
948. XXIX Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 8/9, no. 13.
949. XLIV Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 8/9, no. 14.
950. XLVIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 8/9, no. 15.
951. XXIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 8/9, no. 16.
952. a. XLI; b. XXXXI Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 8/9, no. 17.
953. a. XVIII ; b. RACLP ; Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
c. XXXII 217, quarry 8/9, no. 18.
954. XIIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 8/9, no. 19.
955. XVI Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 8/9, no. 20.
956. III Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 8/9, no. 21.
957. a. XXVI; b. VIII XXXVI Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 8/9, no. 22.
958. a. XXVII; b. RAQP Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
XXXII; c. n(umero) 217, quarry 8/9, no. 23.
XXXVI
430 Appendix
959. a. RACLP; b. XII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 8/9, no. 24.
960. a. 8 K L B; b. RACLP ; c. Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
XXIX; d. XIII 217, quarry 8/9, no. 25.
961. n(umero) I Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 10, no. 1.
962. n(umero) II (adjacent Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
block) 217, quarry 10, no. 2.
963. III (adjacent block) Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 10, no. 3.
964. EP j LAT j ?OC Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 11, no. 1.
965. C D T n(umero?) I Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 17, no. 1.
966. n(umero) II? Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 18, no. 1.
967. n(umero) III Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 18, no. 2.
968. n(umero) VI Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 18, no. 3.
969. n(umero) I Cb Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 18, no. 4.
970. a. Cb III; b. n(umero) III Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 19, no. 1.
971. Cb V Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 19, no. 2.
972. Cb VI Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 19, no. 3.
973. Cb VII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 19, no. 4.
974. Cb VIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 19, no. 5.
975. Cb Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 19, no. 6.
976. A Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 19, no. 7.
977. OepPELLIUS Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 19, no. 8.
978. II Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
217, quarry 20, no. 1.
979. a. RACIP (ad all on Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
same face of in situ 218, quarry 22, no. 1.
block); b. P D n(umero?)
XIII ; c. P R D (in red
paint); d. XL
 Appendix 431
980. a. P R D XIII; Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
b. RACLP; c. XLI 218, quarry 22, no. 2.
981. P D XV Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 22, no. 3.
982. a. P D n(umero?) III; Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
b. RACLP 218, quarry 22, no. 4.
983. P D XII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 22, no. 5.
984. P D n(umero) II Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 22, no. 6.
985. P D n(umero) V Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 22, no. 7.
986. P D VI Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 22, no. 8.
987. P D n(umero) VII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 22, no. 9.
988. a. RACLP ; b. P D XVII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 22, no. 10.
989. a. RA j CLP ; b. P D XVI ; Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
c. XXXIV
218, quarry 22, no. 11.
990. a. XXXIII; b. I E Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 22, no. 12.
991. P D C P n(umero) II Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 22, no. 13.
992. a. RACLP; b. XLIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
(same face) 218, quarry 22, no. 14.
993. `'`C Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
&C& j 218, quarry 22, no. 15.
'`C
994. Cb n(umero) VI Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 23, no. 1.
995. n(umero) IV Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 24, no. 1.
996. a. P D n(umero) VI ; Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
b. P R D VI (same face, 218, quarry 24, no. 2.
red paint); c. A CI
P (same face) ; d.
OC (same face).
997. XVIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 24, no. 3.
998. a. RACLP; b. XXXIII; Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
c. III (all on same face) 218, quarry 25, no. 1.
999. a. RACLP; b. II Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
(same face) 218, quarry 25, no. 2.
432 Appendix
1000. n(umero) VIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 30, no. 1.
1001. VII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 30, no. 2.
1002. n(umero) II Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 33, no. 1.
1003. n(umero) V Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 33, no. 2.
1004. T n(umero?) I Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 33, no. 3.
1005. Cb n(umero) I Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 36, no. 1.
1006. EP II Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 55, no. 1.
1007. a. III EP; b. DENI Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 55 no. 2.
1008. EP V Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 55, no. 3.
1009. a. EP VI; b. VII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 55, no. 4.
1010. a. EP VII; b. VII (in red Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
paint, prefix illegible) 218, quarry 55, no. 5.
1011. VIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 55, no. 6.
1012. I? Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 59, no. 1.
1013. a. II ; b. XXXIIX Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 59, no. 2.
1014. a. IV; b. XXXVII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 59, no. 3.
1015. a. V; b. RA P ; c. XXXIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 59, no. 4.
1016. a. VI; b. XXXIV Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 59, no. 5.
1017. a. VII; b. RACLI; c. Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
XXXV (same face as b.) 218, quarry 59, no. 6.
1018. a. RACLP; b. XL IX Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 59, no. 7.
1019. X Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 59, no. 8.
1020. XI Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 59, no. 9.
1021. XII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 59, no. 10.
1022. a. XIII; b. P R D (in red Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
paint on same face as a); 218, quarry 59, no. 11.
c. XXX
 Appendix 433
1023. a. XIV; b. RACLP; c. Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
XXXI (same face as b) 218, quarry 59, no. 12.
1024. XV Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
218, quarry 59, no. 13.
1025. a. XVI; b. RACLP; c. Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
XXXII (same face as b) 219, quarry 59, no. 14.
1026. XVII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 59, no. 15.
1027. XVIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 59, no. 16.
1028. XIX Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 59, no. 17.
1029. XX Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 59, no. 18.
1030. XXI Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 59, no. 19.
1031. XXII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 59, no. 20.
1032. a. XXIIII; b. RAC Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 59, no. 21.
1033. XXIIII (another stone Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
with the same number) 219, quarry 59, no. 22.
1034. XXV Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 59, no. 23.
1035. XXV (another stone Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
with the same number) 219, quarry 59, no. 24.
1036. XXVI Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 59, no. 25.
1037. XXVII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 59, no. 26.
1038. XXIIX Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 59, no. 27.
1039. XXIX Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 59, no. 28.
1040. a. I (east of quarry); Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
b. E (same face) 219, quarry 59, no. 29.
1041. III Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 60, no. 1.
1042. IV Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 60, no. 2.
1043. ` Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 60, no. 3.
1044. a. XXIII; b. RACLP Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
(same face) 219, quarry 60, no. 4.
434 Appendix
1045. a. XVI; b. RACLP Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
(same face) 219, quarry 60, no. 5.
1046. a. XVII; b. RACLP Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
(same face) 219, quarry 60, no. 6.
1047. a. XIIX; b. RACLP Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
(same face) 219, quarry 60, no. 7.
1048. RACLP XIX Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 60, no. 8.
1049. ACL (in red paint Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
RACLP, the only legible 219, quarry 60, no. 9.
part of many lines)
1050. a. RACIP; b. X Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
(same face) 219, quarry 61, no. 1.
1051. RACIP Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 61, no. 2.
1052. LIP Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 61, no. 3.
1053. a. RACLP; b. VIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 61, no. 4.
1054. KLR Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 61, no. 5.
1055. a. RACLP ; b. VIV Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 61, no. 6.
1056. VII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 61, no. 7.
1057. a. RACIP; b. VI Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 61, no. 8.
1058. EP NII NoV Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 62, no. 1.
1059. E N C P /// III Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 62, no. 2.
1060. `& Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 63, no. 1.
1061. a. I ; b. PRD I (in red Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
paint, same face) 219, quarry 65, no. 1.
1062. II Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 65, no. 2.
1063. I ? Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 67, no. 1.
1064. III Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 67, no. 2.
1065. n(umero) VII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 67, no. 3.
1066. RACLP Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 68, no. 1.
 Appendix 435
1067. CEPAIWNOC j Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
EPOOTOY j NIKO- 219, quarry 75, no. 1.
TYXAI
1068. C EP (foot of slipway) Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 75, no. 2.
1069. C PE n(umero) I (foot of Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
slipway) 219, quarry 75, no. 3.
1070. C PE (on small block Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
in wadi) 219, quarry 79, no. 1.
1071. a. IEP (on quarry Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
face); b. n(umero) I 219, quarry 83, no. 1.
1072. a. 8 0 0 ; b. LXXVI; Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
c. PD XLVI ; d. RACLP ; 219, quarry 84, no. 1.
e. R / / I (all on same
face)
1073. a. PD j XLVIII; b. KACLP Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 84, no. 2.
1074. 7 Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 84, no. 3.
1075. I Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 84, no. 4.
1076. a. RACLP ; b. LXXIX Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
219, quarry 84, no. 5.
1077. a. PD XLIIII ; b. LXXIIX ; Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
c. RAC / 219, quarry 84, no. 6.
1078. PD XXXII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 84, no. 7.
1079. a. 8 OC ; b. LXXIV Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 84, no. 8.
1080. a. PD XXXIIII ; Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
b. PACLP; c. LXXVI 220, quarry 84, no. 9.
1081. PACLP Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 84, no. 10.
1082. PD XXIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 84, no. 11.
1083. ex n(umero) XXVI Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 84, no. 12.
1084. PRD XXVI Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 84, no. 13.
1085. XIII RAD Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 84, no. 14.
1086. XVII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 84, no. 15.
1087. PD XL / Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 84, no. 16.
1088. a. PRD ; b. n(umero) III ; Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
c. n(umero) II 220, quarry 84, no. 17.
436 Appendix
1089. a. PRD XVII ; b. R LP ; Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
c. LVI 220, quarry 84, no. 18.
1090. PD XI IIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 84, no. 19.
1091. PD j LII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 84, no. 20.
1092. P Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 84, no. 21.
1093. II Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 84, no. 22.
1094. P Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 84, no. 23.
1095. PD n(umero) XXXIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
(near necropolis)

220, quarry 84, no. 24.
1096. a. ACLP; b. Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:

220, quarry 84, no. 25.
1097. a. IA ; b. PRD Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
n(umero) XVI 220, quarry 84, no. 26.
1098. LII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 84, no. 27.
1099. a. PD n(umero) IIII ;
Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
b. IH 220, quarry 84, no. 28.
1100. a. RACLP ; b. PD XXXVI Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 84, no. 29.
1101. a. P XVI ; b. RACLP Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 84, no. 30.
1102. a. n(umero) VI ; b. VIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 85, no. 1.
1103. C EP n(umero) IV Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 85, no. 2.
1104. C EP n(umero) IIII (on Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
block in front of fort) 220, quarry 85, no. 3.
1105. C EP n(umero) III Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
(adjacent block) 220, quarry 85, no. 4.
1106. a. XIX; b. LXXXVI; Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
c. CEP n(umero) X 220, quarry 90, no. 1.
1107. XXXIX Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 90, no. 2.
1108. n(umero) XXII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 90, no. 3.
1109. LXXXV Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 90, no. 4.
1110. P n(umero) XIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 90, no. 5.
1111. T n(umero) LXXXIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 90, no. 6.
 Appendix 437
1112. Sundial mark Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 90, no. 7.
1113. Cb Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 93, no. 1.
1114. Cb n(umero)III Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 93, no. 2.
1115. Cb n(umero)VI Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 93, no. 3.
1116. I III Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 93, no. 4.
1117. T n(umero) IIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 94, no. 1.
1118. n(umero) VII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 94, no. 2.
1119. CEP I n(umero)III Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 96, no. 1.
1120. 8 0 0 Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 99, no. 1.
1121. XXX Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 99, no. 2.
1122. XII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 99, no. 3.
1123. n(umero)I Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry102, no. 1.
1124. a. n(umero)I ; Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
b. T n(umero)I 220, quarry 103, no. 1.
1125. Tn(umero)II Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 103, no. 2.
1126. Tn(umero)IIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 103, no. 3.
1127. ` Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 105, no. 1.
1128. AM (on rock face Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
to west) 220, quarry 105, no. 2.
1129. C EP EXLATARPOCR Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
(on block just west of 220, quarry 109, no. 1.
loading ramp)
1130. Cb Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 113, no. 1.
1131. a. n(umero) II; b. II Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
(same face) 220, quarry 117, no. 1.
1132. III Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 117, no. 2.
1133. IIII Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 117, no. 3.
1134. VII V Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 117, no. 4.
438 Appendix
1135. a. VII ; b. V Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
220, quarry 117, no. 5.
1136. a. LATQOPHERAYM Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
PD ; b. XXXII ; c. RACLP 221, quarry 119, no. 1.
(all on same face)
1137. LAT COCHLAX PD Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
(on quarry face) 221, quarry 120, no. 1.
1138. `C`C Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
` `& 221, quarry 129, no. 1.
1139. a. RACLP (on roughout Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
of basin); b. A 221, quarry 130, no. 1.
(palmbranch)
1140. CAESARIS n(ostri?) T Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
n(umero?) VII 221, quarry unknown,
no. 1.
1141. XXXIIII (near-finished Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
stone near fort) 221, quarry unknown,
no. 2.
1142. LXI (as above) Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
221, quarry unknown,
no. 3.
1143 a. RACIP (on beam in Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
fort); b. XLVIII 221, quarry unknown,
no. 4.
1144. / ` (on rock Mons Claudianus Peacock & Maxfield 1997:
on west side of slipway 221, quarry unknown,
up from fort) no. 5.

Carrara Marble: Luna

1145. M. Crasso c[os.] j n(umero) Carrara, 27 CIL XI 6723/16 Dubois
CXIIX 1908: no. 30.
1146. []Tertull[o] c[o](n)s(ule) Rome /Palatino, 158? Bruzza 1870: no. 326
j []s event DLV Dubois 1908: no. 49.
1147. a) Col(oniae?) X IX j Carrara / Cava di CIL XI 6723/1a Dubois
FPS; b) Hilar(i) Gioia 1908: no. 1.
1148. Col(oniae?) Hilar(i) f j Carrara / Cava di CIL XI 6723/1b Dubois
P[.]AS Gioia 1908: no. 2.
1149. Col(oniae?) XLC j IO CIL XI 6723/1c Dubois
D
Carrara / Cava di
Gioia 1908: no. 3.
1150. Col(oniae?) XCVII Hilar(i) a Carrara / Cava di CIL XI 6723/1d Dubois
Gioia 1908: no. 4.
1151. a) Col(oniae?) CCCXVI j Carrara / Cava di CIL XI 6723/1e Dubois
PAE(?); b) Hilar(i) a Gioia 1908: no. 5.
1152. n(umero) XXXV 
. Luna AE 1997: 506.
1153. a) Hilar(i); b) CQXXX Luna AE 1998: 436c.
HILAR
 Appendix 439
1154. Col(oniae?) CXXV SOL A Carrara / Fossacava CIL XI 6723/5b Dubois
1908: no. 17.
1155. [C]ol(oniae) CXVIIIhI Carrara / Campo la CIL XI 6723/15 Dubois
Piana 1908: no. 29.
1156. Col(oniae) CIX Rome / Porta Sa. Dubois 1908: no. 40.
Sebastiano
1157. a) T(i)b(urtini?) lo(co) Carrara / Cava di CIL XI 6723/2a Dubois
CXLIII; b) Er(otis) Gioia 1908: no. 6.
C a es(aris
 servi?)
1158. a) T(i)b(urtini?) lo(co) Carrara / Cava di CIL XI 6723/2b Dubois
CXLIV, ; b) Er(otis) Gioia 1908: no. 7.
Caes(aris servi?)
1159. a) T(i)b(urtini?) lo(co) Carrara / Cava di CIL XI 6723/2c Dubois
CXLVII, ; b) Er(otis) Gioia 1908: no. 8.
Caes(aris servi?)
1160. a) T(i)b(urtini?) lo(co) Carrara / Cava di CIL XI 6723/2d Dubois
CXLII, ; b) Er(otis) Gioia 1908: no. 9.
Caes(aris servi?)
1161. [] VIIIIC j Er(otis) Carrara / Cava di CIL XI 6723/2e Dubois
Caes(aris servi?) Gioia 1908: no. 10
1162. a)Phil(onis) CCXXCIIII Carrara / Cava di CIL XI 6723/3a,:. Dubois
E INTER MANDR(?) VI Gioia 1908: no. 11.
j Phil(onis) C II F COR
MVT(?) j AED; b) A XII
COR Ioni[] j S CAPIT(?)
1163. Phil(onis) CX IIII D Teg. Carrara / Cava di CIL XI 6723/3b Dubois
j AED VIIII(?) Gioia 1908: no. 12.
1164. Phil(onis) I D
 Teg Carrara / Cava di CIL XI 6723/3c Dubois
COLj II Gioia 1908: no. 13.
1165. Phil(onis?) CCXXX SPIR(?) Carrara / Fossacava CIL XI 6723/5a Dubois
[O]PER(?) j S Cae 1908: no. 16.
1166. Abae(us) CCCXXIX b j Monte Strinato/Car- AE 1997: 510; Dolci 1997: 44,
PAVD rara fig. 11.
1167. Abae(us) X b j PAGA Monte Strinato/Car- AE 1997: 511; Dolci 1997: 43,
rara fig. 10.
1168. Abae(us) CCXVII A Figaia/Fantiscritti/ AE 1995: 492; Dolci 1995: 128.
Carrara
1169. Abae(us) CCLVII B j PVRB Figaia/Fantiscritti/ AE 1995: 493; Dolci 1995: 128.
Carrara
1170. Abae(us) H CXXD Rome / Porta del Dubois 1908: no. 33.
Popolo
1171. Abae(us) H(?) CXXCI Ostia Pensabene 1994: 204, no. 24.
1172. Ero(tis) [l]oc(o) (?) Rome / Porta del Dubois 1908: no. 42.
Popolo
1173. E[r]o(tis) C[aes(aris?)] j Rome Dubois 1908: no. 43.
n(umero) CXXII
440 Appendix
1174. Ero(tis) C[aes(aris?)] Tusculum CIL XIV 2670 Dubois 1908:
no. 44.
1175. a) Ephe(bi) Cae(saris?) Carrara / Fossacava CIL XI 6723/5d Dubois
IVNEM; b) Epheb(i) 1908: no. 19.
Aug(usti?)
1176. Eph(ebi) Aug(usti) Rome / Emporia? Dubois 1908: no. 41.
CCCCX II B
1177. Caes(aris) s(-) j CCCXLIIX Luna AE 1997: 508.
1178. Caes(aris) CCCXXCII j Luna AE 1997: 509.
Ap(-)
1179. Caes I[] j CCCXCIII Carrara / quarry near CIL XI 6723/8 Dubois 1908:
Torana? no. 24.
1180. Iul(ii?)Pr(imi?) X IIX BP Carrara / Fossacava CIL XI 6723/5e Dubois
1908: no. 20.
1181. Pri(mi) CCXXXX Rome / Porta del Dubois 1908: no. 31.
Popolo
1182. Eman(i) VD Rome / Porta del Dubois 1908: no. 34.
Popolo
1183. X Ruf(i) Rome / Porta del Dubois 1908: no. 35.
Popolo
1184. TI(berii?) IV(lii?) PRI(mi) Rome Dubois 1908: no. 45.
1185. A() T(iti) f(ilius) aed- Luna AE 1997: 504.
(ilis) NL e?
1186. A() T(iti) (filius) aed- Luna AE 1997: 505.
(ilis) m(etallorum?)
1187. TIH VII Luna AE 1997: 512.
1188. TH CDIIX Scalocchiella/Carrara AE 1998: 436b; Dolci 1998: 128.
1189. TH XXXVIEf Scalocchiella/Carrara AE 1998: 436b; Dolci 1998:
128.
1190. TH CCCVXX j VIIII Scalocchiella/Carrara AE 1998: 436b; Dolci 1998:
? 128.
1191. CCXXIIX ra(tio) Scalocchiella/Carrara AE 1998: 436d; Dolci 1998:
m(armorum) 130.
1192. []c[]X C[.]C Carrara / Cava di CIL XI 6723/4a Dubois
Gioia 1908: no. 14.
1193. TVXF(???) Carrara / Cava di CIL XI 6723/4b Dubois
Gioia 1908: no. 15.
1194. Pa (?) CC?XXIII Carrara / Fossacava CIL XI 6723/5c Dubois
1908: no. 18.
1195. XI XXX Carrara / near villa CIL XI 6723/9 Dubois 1908:
Grassi no. 25.
1196. D A IX Carrara / Chiaruccia CIL XI 6723/12 Dubois
1908: no. 26.
1197. a) MCXCLM; b) CCCLM Carrara / Sta Maria CIL XI 6723/13 Dubois
di Falleri 1908: no. 27.
 Appendix 441
1198. AR(?) CCXLIIII Carrara CIL XI 6723/14 Dubois
1908: no. 28.
1199. la(?) l]o]co XXXVIIII Rome / Porta del Dubois 1908: no. 32.
Popolo
1200. DXVI B PAS (?) Rome / Porta del Dubois 1908: no. 36.
Popolo
1201. PA(S?) DCXIV Rome / Ponte Salaro Dubois 1908: no. 38.
1202. XXVCC PAS (?) Rome / S.Agnese Dubois 1908: no. 37.
cemetery
1203. PA(S?) XXVII Ostia/Ponte della Dubois 1908: no. 39.
Rifolta
1204. loc(o) LVIIII 
. Luna AE 1997: 507.
1205. l(oco) CDXLI Rome / Via Appia Dubois 1908: no. 51/3.
1206. l(oco) DCCCX Rome / Presso la Dubois 1908: no. 51/4.
Magliana
1207. n(umero) CIIII Rome / Terracina CIL X 6337 Dubois 1908:
16, no. 51/5.
1208. n(umero) XXII 
Scalocchiella / Carrara AE 1998: 436a; Dolci 1998: 126.
1209. n(umero) VID Rome / Esquilin Dubois 1908: no. 51/11.
1210. n(umero) CCXXXXII Rome(?) ? Dubois 1908: no. 51/14
Bruzza 1870: no. 330.
1211. PAR II de XX RC j Pisa Dubois 1908: no. 54.
OCCCES j SAROC ONT j
CAEC. ST []
1212. CCCXXIX N(?) j [] Rome / Porta Salara Dubois 1908: no. 46.
1213. ACXX [] Rome / Porta del Dubois 1908: no. 47.
Popolo
1214. a) []EIME j []IIII; Rome / Emporia Dubois 1908: no. 48 Bruzza
b) P 1870: no. 327.
1215. CIX P Rome / Via Ostiense Dubois 1908: no. 50.
1216. D Rome / Porta del Dubois 1908: no. 51/1.
Popolo?
1217. F Rome / Porta del Dubois 1908: no. 51/2.
Popolo
1218. XXVIII Rome / Via Latina Dubois 1908: no. 51/6.
1219. XX j PO X Carrara / Fossacava CIL XI 6723/5f Dubois
1908: no. 21.
1220. pa(?)XCIX Carrara / Fossa CIL XI 6723/6 Dubois 1908:
Piccola no. 22.
1221. III Mo PAGE (?) Carrara / Fossa CIL XI 6723/7 Dubois 1908:
Piccola no. 23.
1222. q XCIXO Rome / Chiesa di Dubois 1908: no. 51/7.
S. Antimo
1223. R CCX Rome / Via Valeria Dubois 1908: no. 51/8.
442 Appendix
1224. P Rome / Porta del Dubois 1908: no. 51/9.
Popolo
1225. O XIX Rome / Concordia- Dubois 1908: no. 51/10.
temple
1226. MCXCIXM Rome(?) Dubois 1908: no. 51/12
Bruzza 1870: no. 328.
1227. []XXGLM[] Rome(?) Dubois 1908: no. 51/13
Bruzza 1870: no. 329.
1228. PE R XR j [] Rome / SS. Cosma ? Dubois 1908: no. 52.
1229. Sev j II II de XXXIII Ostia Dubois 1908: no. 53.

Parian and other White Marble: Paros

1230. Imp(eratoris) Dom(itiani) Rome, 8396 Bruzza 1870: no. 277
Aug(usti) j Germ(anici) per j Dubois 1908: no. 267.
Chrez(imum) lib(ertum) jj
XC (rev.)
1231. [I]mp(eratoris) Domitiani j Rome, 8396 Bruzza 1870: no. 278
Aug(usti) Germ(anici) loca j Dubois 1908: no. 268.
per Primum lib(ertum)
1232. Imp(eratoris) Domitiani Rome, 8396 Hirschfeld 1905: 163 fn. 4
Caesa(ris) j Aug(usti) Ger- Dubois 1908: no. 269 CIL
m(anici) loco CLXXV [?]j VI/8, 40849 ILS 8713.
per Primum lib(ertum) [?]
1233. R j Augurin(o) co(n)s-(ule) j Rome, 132 Bruzza 1870: no. 266
?(oco) CDXCVI Dubois 1908: no. 257.
1234. Augurin(o) j co(n)s(ule) j Ostia, 132 Baccini Leotardi 1989:
LIIXLIIX j R no. 104.
1235. a) M j NDLXIII; b) Auguri- Portus, 132 Baccini Leotardi 1989:
n(o) co(n)s(ule) j R j no. 118. See Fant 2001: 184,
L1DCCCVI table 6.
1236. a) n(umero) CLV j Praes(ente) Portus, 153 Baccini Leotardi 1989: no. 92.
et Ruf(ino) co(n)s(ulibus) j ex See Fant 2001: 184, table 6.
R(atione) Aur(elii) (G)eorgi;
b) l(oco) CCCLII j G
1237. n(umero) CLIIII j Praes(ente) Portus, 153 Baccini Leotardi 1989: no. 93.
et Ruf(ino) j co(n)s(ulibus) j See Fant 2001: 184, table 6.
ex R(atione) Aur(elii) Geor(gi)
1238. a) n(umero) CXLVII j Pra(e)s- Portus, 153 Baccini Leotardi 1989: no. 94.
(ente) et Ruf(ino) co(n)s(uli- See Fant 2001: 184, table 6.
bus) ex R(atione) A(urelii)
Geor(gi); b) l(oco) CCCCXIX j
G
 Appendix 443
1239. a) n(umero) CLXVII j Praes- Portus, 153 Baccini Leotardi 1989: no. 95.
(ente) et Ruf(ino) co(n)s(uli- See Fant 2001: 184, table 6.
bus) j ex R(atione) Aur(elii)
Geor(gi); b) l(oco) CCCLVII
1240. n(umero) CLII j Praes(ente) et Portus, 153 Baccini Leotardi 1989: no. 96.
Rufi(no) j ex R(atione) Aur(eli) See Fant 2001: 184, table 6.
Geor(gi) j II C
1241. a) Praes(ente) et Rufi(no) j ex Portus, 153 Baccini Leotardi 1989: no. 97.
R(atione) Aur(eli) Geor(gi); b) See Fant 2001: 184, table 6.
l(oco)CCC[] j LX j G
1242. a) NKh j l(oco) LXII j G ; b) LL Portus, 160 Baccini Leotardi 1989: no. 99
H j Brad(ua) et Varo co(n)s- Pensabene 1994: no. 58. cf.
(ulibus) j ex r(atione) Aur(eli) Fant 2001: 184, table 6.
G(eorgi)
1243. a) loc(o) .XXXV; b) Hermo j Portus, 163 Baccini Leotardi 1989: no. 102
loc(o) CDLXXV; c) Laelian(o) Pensabene 1994: 121,
j Past(ore) co(n)s(ulibus) j(ex) no. 54. cf. Fant 2001: 184,
r(atione) Sext(i) et j M[.]R table 6
1244. a) loc(o) j XXI j Hermo j loc(o) Portus, 164 Ostia inv. 39910 Baccini
DI j ; b) Macrino et Cejlso Leotardi 1989: no. 103
co(n)s(ulibus)ex R(atione) Pensabene 1994: no. 55. cf.
Sext(i?) ejt Her(mae?) Fant 2001: 184, table 6.
1245. FLSTLC j RLVC Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 267
Dubois 1908: no. 258.
1246. HERMO jloc(o) CCXCV Paros Bruzza 1870: no. 268
Dubois 1908: no. 259/1 CIL
III 487a.
1247. Hermo j loc(o) Paros Bruzza 1870: no. 269
Dubois 1908: no. 259/2 CIL
III 487b.
1248. PIZ Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 270
Dubois 1908: no. 260.
1249. CCCXV Paros Bruzza 1870: no. 271
Dubois 1908: no. 261 CIL
III 487f.
1250. Hermo j loc(o) CCCLXXXVI Paros Bruzza 1870: no. 272
Dubois 1908: no. 262 CIL
III 487c.
1251. Hermo j loc(o) Paros Bruzza 1870: no. 273
CCjLXXXXVIII Dubois 1908: no. 263 CIL
III 487d.
1252. Hermo j loc[] j [] j Paros Bruzza 1870: no. 274
n(umero) CCIIII Dubois 1908: no. 264 CIL
III 487e.
1253. R j CV j LXXX j 1 Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 275
DCCLXXVI Dubois 1908: no. 265.
1254. 1 C[] Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 276
Dubois 1908: no. 266.
444 Appendix
1255. Hermo j loc(o) CDLXXIV j Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1979: no. 87.
loc(o) LXXV See Fant 2001: 184, table 6.
1256. l(oco)CCCLXI j G Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1979: no. 88.
See Fant 2001: 184, table 6.
1257. l(oco) CCCLXVII j G Portus Baccini Leotardi 1989: no. 98.
See Fant 2001: 184, table 6.
1258. a) R j l(oco) 1CCCC j LXVII; Portus Baccini Leotardi 1989:
b) M j n(umero) CLIII no. 101. See Fant 2001: 184,
table 6.
1259. L1D Portus Baccini Leotardi 1989:
no. 120. See Fant 2001: 184,
table 6.

Parian and other White Marble: Pentelicos?

1260. Serbilio Pudente j et Fufidio Rome, 166 Bruzza 1870: no. 291
Pollione j co(n)s(ulibus) Dubois 1908: no. 255
caesura Cla(udii) Hier Ameling 1983b : 216 no. 199.
Attici et Apollojni Lupi []
1261. l(oco) 1 DCCCXXCVI j R Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1989: no.
112.
1262. a) 1 DCCCXX j L[.] N II Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1989: no.
[.] j I; b) CCCXXCVIII; c) A 113.

Parian and other White Marble: Hymettos

1263. painted: [Eu]tyches ex ra- Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 292 Dubois
(tione)[] j prob j [] 1908: no. 256.

Parian and other White marble: Greece?

1264. n(umero) XXX j M(arco) Portus, 161 Baccini Leotardi 1989:
Aur(e)lio Vero j III et L. no. 100.
V C(aesare) II
c(onsulibus) j ex r(atione)
Aur(eli) Lis()
1265. ex r(atione) M(arci) Iulii Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 280
Missi Dubois 1908: no. 271.
1266. CAE[] j CER[] Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 281
Dubois 1908: no. 272.
1267. AGR AVG Do(mitiani) XX j Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 282
III A NV AC Dubois 1908: no. 273.
1268. AGR AVG Do(mitiani) Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 283
DESA j NN XXXV AC Dubois 1908: no. 274.
 Appendix 445
1269. XXXIII Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 284
Dubois 1908: no. 275.
1270. []AB Rome Bruzza 1870: no. 285
Dubois 1908: no. 276.
1271. l(oco) 1DCCCLXXVI Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1989: no. 105
Pensabene 1994: 121,
no. 57.
1272. a) IIXXXIX; b) LXXIV Ostia Baccini Leotardi 1989: no. 106
1273. a) IR; b) III l(oco) Ostia Pensabene 1994: 122, no. 59
DCCCXXXCVII Baccini Leotardi 1989:
no. 121.
1274. a) n(umero) XXXXIIII ; Ostia Pensabene 1994: 122, no. 63
b) l(oco) DXXXVII j CC Baccini Leotardi 1989: no. 80.
1275. [..] R V A / T Ostia Pensabene 1994: 133, no. 87.
1276. T I C V Ostia Pensabene 1994: 180, no. 143.
1277. DNGNF Ostia Pensabene 1994: 181, no. 148.
1278. Fl(avii) St(i)l(i)c(honis) Ostia CIL XIV 165, Suppl. 2, p. 854
Lugli & Filibeck 1935: 80
Pensabene 1994: no. 181.
1279. n(umero) XXVII Ostia Pensabene 1994: 74, no. 23
co(n)s(ule?) Baccini Leotardi 1989: 114.
1280. CIXVIII j Mac(rino) et Cel- Ostia, 164 Fant 1989: no. 892.
(so) co(n)s(ulibus)j ex r-
(atione) Aur(eli) Suavis

Other Stones and inscribed seals on quarried marble

1281. n(umero) XX [] j Rome, 2 bc CIL VI/8, 40847
Caes(aris) A[ug(usti) Alfoldy 1992.
1282. Tr(aiani) Cae(saris)jL Rome, ad 98117 CIL VI/8, 40850.
1283. Imp(eratoribus) Rome, 1619 CIL VI/8, 40851.
An[tonino et]jVero
n(umero?) []
 Bibliography

Abascal, J. M., and G. Alfldy (1998), Zeus Theos Megistos en Segobriga, Archivo
espa~nol de arqueologa 71: 15768.
Abascal Palaz
on, J. M. (1994), Los nombres personales en las inscripciones latinas de
Hispania (Anejos de Antiguedad y cristianismo II), Murcia.
Adam, J.-P. (1999), Roman Building. Materials and Techniques, London & New York.
Adams, C. E. P. (2001), Who bore the burden? The Organization of Stone Transport
in Roman Egypt, in D. J. Mattingly and J. Salmon (eds.), Economies Beyond
Agriculture in the Classical World, London & New York, 17192.
Alarco, J., and R. Etienne (eds.) (1976), Fouilles de Conimbriga II:
e pigraphie
et sculpture, Paris.
Aleksandrov, G. (1977), Latinski nadpisi ot Montana (dn. Mihailovgrad), Vekove
5: 5161.
Alfldy, G. (1965a), Bevolkerung und Gesellschaft der Romischen Provinz Dalmatien,
Budapest.
(1965b), Epigraphisches aus dem Rheinland I, Bonner Jahrbucher 165: 17781.
(1969a), Die Personennamen in der romischen Provinz Dalmatia, Heidelberg.
(1969b), Epigraphica Norica, Epigraphische Studien 8: 134.
(1970), Patrimonium Regni Norici. Ein Beitrag zur Territorialgeschichte der
romischen Provinz Noricum, Bonner Jahrbucher 170: 16377.
(1974), Noricum, London & Boston.
(1975), Romische Sozialgeschichte, Wiesbaden.
(1987a), Epigraphisches aus dem Rheinland I, in G. Alfoldy, Romische
Heeresgeschichte. Beitrage 19621985 (MAVORS III), Amsterdam, 17781.
(1987b), Zum Kommando des romischen Heeres. J. B. Campbell: The Emperor
and the Roman Army 31 BC AD 235, in G. Alfldy, Romische Heeresgeschichte.
Beitrage 196285 (MAVORS III), Amsterdam, 1925.
(1989), Die regionale Gliederung in der romischen Provinz Noricum, in
G. Gottlieb (ed.), Raumordnung im Romischen Reich. Zur regionalen Gliederung in
den gallischen Provinzen, in Ratien, Noricum und Pannonien. Kolloquium an der
Universitat Augsburg anlasslich der 2000-Jahr-Feier der Stadt Augsburg vom 28. bis
29. Oktober 1985, Munich, 3755.
(1992), Unavvertenza dellarchitetto del tempio di Mars Ultor, in Studi
sullepigraWa augustea e tiberiana di Roma (Vetera 8), Rome, 334.
(1996), Spain, in A. K. Bowman, E. Champlin, and A. Lintott (eds.), The
Cambridge Ancient History. Second Edition. Volume X. The Augustan Empire, 43
BC AD 69, Cambridge, 44963.
(2000a), Provincia Hispania Superior, Heidelberg.
(2000b), Das Neue Edikt des Augustus aus El Bierzo in Hispanien, Zeitschrift
fur Papyrologie und Epigraphik 131: 177205.
 Bibliography 447
(2003), Altar eines BeneWziariers, in A. Szab
o and E. T
oth (eds.), Bolcske.
Romische Inschriften und Funde (Libelli Archaeologici Ser. Nov. No. II), Budapest,
21928.
(2004), Die illyrischen Provinzen Roms: von der Vielfalt zu der Einheit, in
G. Urso (ed.), Dall Adriatico al Danubio. LIllyrico nell eta greca e romana. Atti
del convegno internazionale Cividale del Friuli, 2527 settembre 2003, Pisa, 20720.
Alpers, M. (1995), Das nachrepublikanische Finanzsystem. Fiscus und Fisci
(Untersuchungen zur antiken Literatur und Geschichte 45), Berlin.
Alston, R. (1995), Soldier and Society in Roman Egypt. A Social History, London &
New York.
Ameling, W. (1983a), Herodes Atticus. I. Biographie (Subsidia Epigraphica. Quellen
und Abhandlungen zur griechischen Epigraphik 11), Hildesheim & New York.
(1983b), Herodes Atticus. II. Inschriftenkatalog (Subsidia Epigraphica. Quellen
und Abhandlungen zur griechischen Epigraphik 11), Hildesheim & New York.
Andreau, J. (1989), Recherches r
ecentes sur les mines a l
epoque romaine.
I. Propri
et
e et mode dexploitation, Revue Numismatique, 86112.
(1990), Recherches r
ecentes sur les mines a l
epoque romaine. II. Nature de la
main doeuvre; Histoire des techniques et de la production, Revue Numismatique,
21833.
Angeli Bertinelli, M. G. (1978), Culti e divinita della romana Luni nella
testimonianza epigraWca, Quaderni. Centro Studi Lunensi 3: 332.
Ardaillon, E. (1904), Metalla, in C. Daremberg, E. Saglio, and E. Poittier (eds.),
Dictionnaire des Antiquit
e s Grecques et Romaines dapres les Textes et les Monuments.
Tome troisieme, deuxieme partie, Paris, 184073.
Aubert, J.-J. (1994), Business Managers in Ancient Rome. A Social and Economic Study
of Institores, 200 BC AD 250 (Columbia Studies in the Classical Tradition 21),
Leiden, New York, & Cologne.
Austin, N. J. E., and N. B. Rankov (1995), Exploratio. Military and Political
Intelligence in the Roman World from the Second Punic War to the Battle of
Adrianople, London & New York.
Aymard, A. (1856), Les origines de la ville du Puy, in Congres scientiWque de France,
22esession, Le Puy, 1855. II, Paris, 323403.
Baccini Leotardi, P. (1979), Marmi di cava rinvenuti ad Ostia e considerazioni sul
commercio dei Marmi in eta romana (Scavi di Ostia X), Rome.
(1989), Nuove testimonianze sul commercio dei marmi in eta imperiale (Studi
pubblicati dallIstituo italiano per la storia antica. Fasc. XLIV), Rome.
Balboa de Paz, J. A. (1999), Un edicto Emperador Augusto hallado en El Bierzo,
Estudios Bercianos. Revista del Instituto de Estudios Bercianos 25: 4553.
Balil Illana, A., G. Pereira Menaut, and F. J. S
anchez-Palencia Ramos (1991),
Tabula Imperii Romani. Hoja K-29: Porto. Conimbriga Bracara Lucus Asturica,
Madrid.
Banti, L. (1931), Antiche lavorazioni nelle cave Lunensi, Studi Etruschi 5: 47597.
Barker, G. W. et al. (1997), The Wadi Faynan Project, Southern Jordan. A Preliminary
Report on Geomorphology and Landscape Archaeology, Levant 29: 1940.
448 Bibliography
Barker, G. W. et al. (1998), Environment and Land Use in the Wadi Faynan,
Southern Jordan. The Second Season of Geoarchaeoloy and Landscape
Archaeology (1997), Levant 30: 525.
(1999), Environment and Land Use in the Wadi Faynan, Southern Jordan. The
Third Season of Geoarchaeology and Landscape Archaeology (1998), Levant 29:
25592.
(2000), Archaeology and DesertiWcation in the Wadi Faynan. The Fourth
(1999) Season of the Wadi Faynan Landscape Survey, Levant 32: 2752.
Bastianini, G. (1986), Un ordine di scarcerazione: PBerol. inv 8997 (ChLA X 421),
in B. G. Mandilaras (ed.), Proceedings of the XVIIIth International Congress of
Papyrology, Athens, 2531 May, 1986, Athens, 3516.
Bauchhenss, G. (1986), Hercules Saxanus, ein Gott der niedergermanischen Armee,
in Studien zu den Militargrenzen Roms III. 13. Internationaler Limeskongress. Aalen
1983. Vortrage (Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Fruhgeschichte in Baden-
Wurttemberg, Band 20), Stuttgart, 905.
Beltr
an Mart
nez, A. (1939), Las monedas latinas de Cartagena, Murcia.
Benito Serra, P., and G. Bacco (1998), Forum Traiani: il contesto termale
e lindagine archeologica di scavo, LAfrica Romana 12: 121355.
Benndorf, O., and R. Heberdey (1898), VorlauWge Berichte uber die Ausgrabungen
in Ephesus, Jahreshefte des Osterreichischen Archaologischen Institutes 1: 5482.
Bennett, I. (1997), Trajan Optimus Princeps. A Life and Times, London & New York.
Benoit, F. (1932), Notes et documents darch
eologie arl
esienne. IX. Inscriptions
in
edites et nouvelles inscriptions du Mus
ee Lapidaire, M
e moires de LInstitut
historique de Provence, tome IX.
B
erard, F. (1992), Territorium legionis, Cahiers Du Centre Gustave-Glotz 3: 75105.
Bernand, A. (1969), Les inscriptions grecques de Philae. Tome I. Epoque ptol
e maique, Paris.
(1972), De Koptos a Kosseir, Leiden.
Bernand, E. (1988), Inscriptions grecques et latines dAkoris (IFAO/BE 103), Cairo.
(1992), A propos de lautel d
edi
e a Zeus Soleil, grand Sarapis, par larchitecte
alexandrin Apollonios, Wls dAmmonios, au Mons Claudianus, Zeitschrift fur
Papyrologie und Epigraphik 91: 2215.
(1999), Inscriptions grecques dHermoupolis Magna et de sa n
e cropole (IFAO/BE
123), Cairo.
Bernard, H., and C. Domergue (1991), Les lingots de plomb de l
epave romaine
Sud Perduto (Bouches de Bonifacio, Corse), Bulletin de la Soci
e t
e des Sciences
Historiques et Naturelles de la Corse 111: 4195.
Berti, F. (1985), La nave romana di Valle Ponti, Rivista Studi Liguri 51: 55370.
(1990), Fortuna Maris. La nave romana di Comacchio, Bologna.
Besnier, M. (1920), Le commerce du plomb a l
epoque romaine dapres les lingots
estampill
es, Revue Arch
e ologique 13: 21144.
(1921), Le commerce du plomb a l
epoque romaine dapres les lingots
estampill
es (suite et Wn), Revue Arch
e ologique 14: 98130.
Bilabel, F. (1927), Librarius, in W. Kroll (ed.), Paulys Real-Encyclopadie der
Classischen Altertumswissenschaften, Stuttgart, 1379.
 Bibliography 449
Bingen, J. (1992), Les architektones du Mons Claudianus, in J. Bingen, et al. (1992),
3955.
(1996), Dumping of Ostraka at Mons Claudianus, in D. M. Bailey (ed.),
Archaeological Research in Roman Egypt. The Proceedings of the Seventeenth
Classical Colloquium of the Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities, British
Museum, held on 14 December, 1993 (JRA Supplement 19), Ann Arbor, 2938.
(1997), Lettres priv
ees provenant de Raima, in J. Bingen, et al. (1997), 81112.
A. Bulow-Jacobsen, W. E. H. Cockle, H. Cuvigny, L. Rubinstein, and
W. V. Rengen (1992), Mons Claudianus. Ostraca Graeca et Latina. I. O. Claud.
1 a 190 (FIFAO 29), Cairo.
F. Kayser, and W. V. Rengen (1997), Mons Claudianus. Ostraca
Graeca et Latina. II. O. Claud 191 a 416 (FIFAO 32), Cairo.
Bird, D. G. (1972), The Roman Gold Mines of North-West Spain, Bonner Jahrbucher
172: 3664.
Birley, E. (1953), Marcus Cocceius Firmus. An Epigraphic Study, in E. Birley (ed.),
Roman Britain and the Roman Army. Collected Papers, Kendal, 87103.
(19634), Promotions and Transfers in the Roman Army II: The Centurionate,
Carnuntum Jahrbuch, 2133 ( E. Birley, The Roman Army. Papers 19291986
(MAVORS IV), Amsterdam 1988: 20620).
Birley, A. R. (1987), Marcus Aurelius. A Biography, London & New York.
(1992), Locus virtutibus patefactus? Zum Beforderungssystem in der Hohen Kaiserzeit
(Rheinisch-Westfalische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Geisteswissenschaften. Vortrage
G 318), Opladen.
(1995), An OYcer in Aurelians Army, in R. Frei-Stolba and M. A. Speidel
(eds.), Romische InschriftenNeufunde, Neulesungen und Neuinterpretationen.
Festschrift fur Hans Lieb (AREA 2), Basel, 1438.
(1999), Septimius Severus. The African Emperor, London & New York.
(2004), Britain 71105: Advance and Retrenchment, in L. De Ligt et al. (eds.),
Roman Rule and Civic Life: Local and Regional Perspectives. Proceedings of the Fourth
Workshop of the International Network Impact of Empire (Roman Empire, c. 200
B.C. A.D. 476), Leiden, June 2528: 2003, Amsterdam, 97112.
Bishop, M. C., and J. C. N. Coulston (2006), Roman Military Equipment. From the
Punic Wars to the Fall of Rome, Oxford.
Bl

azquez Mart
nez, J. M. (1989), Administracion de las minas en epoca romana.
Su evolucion, in C. Domergue (ed.), Minera y metalurgia en las Antiguas
Civilizaciones Mediterr
a neas y Europeas, Coloquio Internacional Asociado. Madrid,
2428 Octobre, 1985, Madrid, 11931.
Bleckmann, B. (1997), Dioikesis. II. Rom, in Der Neue Pauly. Enzyklopadie der
Antike. Band 3, Stuttgart & Weimar, 608.
Boatwright, M. T. (2000), Hadrian and the Cities of the Roman Empire, Princeton.
Bojanovski, I. (1982), Anticko rudarstvo u unutrasnjosti provincije Dalmacije u
svjetlu epigrafskih i numizmatickih izvora. LExploitation miniere dans lantiquit
e a
lint
erieur de la province de Dalmatie, a la lumiere des sources
epigraphiques et
450 Bibliography
numismatiques, Arheoloski radovi i rasprave. Acta et dissertationes archaeologica
89: 89120.
Boulvert, G. (1970), Esclaves et aVranchis imp
e riaux sous le Haut-Empire romain.
Role politique et administratif, Naples.
(1974), Domestique et fonctionnaire sous le Haut-Empire romain. La condition de
laVranchi et de lesclave du Prince, Paris.
Bowman, A. K. (1996a), Provincial Administration and Taxation, in A. K. Bowman,
E. Chapman, and A. Lintott (eds.), The Cambridge Ancient History. Second Edition.
Volume X. The Augustan Empire 43 BC AD 69, Cambridge, 34470.
(1996b), Egypt after the Pharaohs. 332 BC AD 642: From Alexander to the Arab
Conquest, London.
Brand, C. E. (1968), Roman Military Law, Austin.
Breeze, D. J. (1974), The Organisation of the Career Structure of the Immunes and
Principales of the Roman Army, Bonner Jahrbucher 174: 24592.
(1987), The Roman Army in Cumbria, Transactions of the Cumberland and
Westmorland Antiquarian and Archaeological Society 88: 922 ( Breeze and
Dobson 1993, 31730).
Breeze, D. J., and B. Dobson (1993), Roman OYcers and Frontiers (MAVORS 10),
Stuttgart.
Brodribb, G., and H. Cleere (1988), The Classis Britannica Bath-House at
Beauport Park, East Sussex, Britannia 19: 21774.
Brown, V. M., and J. A. Harrell (1995), Topographical and petrological survey of
ancient roman quarries in the Eastern Desert of Egypt, in Y. Maniatis, N. Herz, and
Y. Basiakos (eds.), The Study of Marble and other Stones used in Antiquity. Asmosia
III Athens: Transactions of the 3rd International Symposium of the Association for the
Study of Marble and other Stones in Antiquity, London.
Brun, J.-P. (2003), Le village dans les carrieres du wad al-Hammamat (Persou I), in
H. Cuvigny (ed.), La route de Myos Hormos. Larm
e e romaine dans le d
e sert Oriental
dEgypte. Praesidia du d
e sert de B
e r
e nice I (FIFAO 48/1), 9597.
H. Cuvigny, and M. Redd
e (2003), Le mystere des tours et la question des
skopeloi, in H. Cuvigny (ed.), La route de Myos Hormos. Larm
e e romaine dans le
d
e sert Oriental dEgypte. Praesidia du d
e sert de B
e r
e nice I (FIFAO 48/1), 20734.
Brunt, P. A. (1983), Princeps and equites, Journal of Roman Studies 73: 4275.
(1990a), The Fiscus and its Development, in P. A. Brunt (ed.), Roman
Imperial Themes, Oxford, 13462.
(1990b), Procuratorial Jurisdiction, in P. A. Brunt (ed.), Roman Imperial
Themes, Oxford, 16387.
(1990c),Publicans in the Principate, in P. A. Brunt (ed.), Roman Imperial
Themes, Oxford, 354432.
Bruun, C. (1991), The Water Supply of Ancient Rome. A Study of Roman Imperial
Administration (Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum 93), Helsinki.
(2001), Adlectus amicus consiliarius and a freedman proc. metallorum et
praediorum. News on Roman Imperial Administration, Phoenix 55/34: 34368.
 Bibliography 451
Bruzza, L. (1870), Iscrizioni dei marmi grezzi, Annali dell Instituto di
Corrispondenza Archaeologica 42: 106204.
Buckler, W. H., W. M. Calder, and C. W. M. Cox (1926), Monuments from
Central Phrygia, Journal of Roman Studies 16: 5394.
Bulat, M. (1989), Novi rimski natpisi is Osijeka. Neue romische Inschriften aus
Osijek, Osjecki Zbornik 20: 3151.
Blow-Jacobsen, A. (1992a), The Excavation and Ostraca of Mons Claudianus, in
Proceedings of the XIXth Congress of Papyrology, Cairo 25 September 1989, Vol. I,
Cairo, 4959.
(1992b), The Archive of Successus, in Bingen et al. 1992, 11136.
(1996), Mons Claudianus. Organisation, administration og teknik i et romersk
stenbrud fra kejsertiden (Studier fra Sprog- og Oldsidsforskningent), Copenhagen.
(1997a), The Correspondence of Dioscorus and others, in Bingen et al. 1997,
4368.
(1997b), The Correspondence of Petenephotes, in Bingen et al. 1997, 6980.
(1997c), Lists of Vigiles, in Bingen et al. 1997, 16592.
(1997d), On Smiths and Quarries, in B. Kramer, W. Luppe, H. Maehler, and
G. Poethke (eds.), Akten des 21. Internationalen Papyrologenkongresses Berlin,
13.19.8. 1995. Bd. I-II (APF Beihefte 3), Stuttgart & Leipzig, 13945.
(1998), TraYc on the roads between Coptos and the Red Sea, in O. E. Kaper
(ed.), Life on the Fringe. Living in the Southern Egyptian Deserts During the Roman
and Early-Byzantine Periods. Proceedings of a Colloquium Held on the Occasion of the
25th Anniversary of the Netherlands Institute for Archaeology and Arabic Studies in
Cairo 912 December 1996, Leiden, 6374.
(2001), Drinking and Cheating in the Desert, in T. Gagos and R. Bagnall (eds.),
Essays and Texts in Honor of J. David Thomas (American Studies in Papyrology 42),
Exeter, 11923.
and H. Cuvigny (2007), Sulpicius Serenus, procurator Augusti, et la titulature
des pr
efets de B
er
enice, Chiron 37: 1133.
and J. L. Fournet (1994), The identiWcation of Myos Hormos. New
papyrological evidence, Bulletin de lInstitut Francais dArch
e ologie Orientale 94:
2742.
Buonocore, M. (1998), Le iscrizioni imperiali deta Giulio-Claudia nella Regio IV.
Nuove proposte di lettura, Epigraphica 60: 4570.
Burnham, B. C. (1997), Roman mining at Dolaucothi. The implications of the
19913 excavations near the Carreg Pumsaint, Britannia 28: 32536.
Burnham, B., and H. Burnham (2004), Dolaucothi-Pumsaint. Survey and Excavations
at a Roman Gold-Mining Complex 19871999, Oxford.
Burton, G. P. (1976), The issuing of mandata to proconsuls and a new inscription
from Cos, Zeitschrift fur Papyrologie und Epigraphik 21: 638.
(1993), Provincial procurators and the public provinces, Chiron 23: 1328.
(1998), Was there a Long-Term trend to centralisation of authority in the
Roman Empire?, Revue de Philologie 72/1: 724.
452 Bibliography
Burton, G. P. (1999), Vectigal, in S. Hornblower and A. Spawforth (eds.), The
Oxford Classical Dictionary, 3rd edn. Oxford, 1583.
(2000), The resolution of territorial disputes in the provinces of the Roman
Empire, Chiron 30: 195215.
Caama~ no Gesto, J. M. (1984), Excavaciones en el campamento romano de Cidadela
(Sobrado dos Monxes, Coru~ na). Memoria preliminar de la campa~ na 1981,
Noticiario Arqueologico Hispanico 18: 23554.
(1989), Estampillas de la cohors I Celtiberorum halladas en el campamento
romano de Cidadela, Callaecia 11: 20928.
Campbell, J. B. (1984), The Emperor and the Roman Army 31 BC AD 235, Oxford.
(2000), The Writings of the Roman Land Surveyors. Introduction, Text,
Translation and Commentary (Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies.
Journal of Roman Studies Monograph 9), London.
Capenelli, D. (1989), Aspetti dellamministrazione mineraria iberica nelleta del
principato, in C. Domergue (ed.), Minera y Metalurgia en las Antiguas
Civilizaciones Mediterr
a neas y Europeas, Coloquio Internacional Asociado. Madrid,
2428 Octobre, 1985, Madrid, 13846.
Cauuet, B., C. Domergue, and M. Urteaga (2005), Mines et m
etallurgies en
Aquitaine et en Hispanie septentrionale sous les Julio-Claudiens, in LAquitaine et
lHispanie septentrionale a l
e poque julio-claudienne. Organisation et exploitation des
espaces provinciaux. Colloque Aquitania Saintes, 1113 septembre 2003 (Aquitania
Suppl
ement 13), Bordeaux, 42360.
Cavalieri Manasse, G., G. Massari, and M. P. Rossignani (1982), Guide
archeologiche Laterza. Piemonte, Valle dAosta, Liguria, Lombardia, Rome & Bari.
Cerskov, E. (1970), Municipium DD kod Socanica, Pristina & Belgrade.
Christol, M. (1990), Ti. Claudius Proculus Cornelianus, procurateur de la r
egion de
Th
eveste, in LAfrica romana, Atti del VII. Convegno di Studio (Sassari, 1517
dicembre 1989), Sassari, 893905.
(1999), Un aspect de ladministration imp
eriale: le procurateur des mines de
Vipasca, Pallas 50: 23344.
and S. Demougin (1990), De Lugo a Pergame. La carriere de laVranchi
Saturninus dans ladministration imp
eriale, M
e langes dArch
e ologie et dHistoire
de lEcole francaise de Rome 102/1: 159211.
and T. Drew-Bear (1986), Documents latins du Phrygie, Tyche 1: 4187.
(1987), Inscriptions de Dokimeion, in B. R
emy (ed.), Anatolica Antiqua/Eski
Anadolu. Receuil de travaux publi
e s par lInstitut Francais dEtudes Anatoliennes
dIstanbul, Istanbul & Paris, 83137.
(1991), Les carrieres de Dokimeion a l
epoque severienne, Epigraphica
53: 11374.
Ciongradi, C., A. Timofan, and V. B &arc a' (2008), Eine neue Erwahnung des
kastellum Starva in einer Inschrift aus Alburnus Maior. Studium zu epigraphisch
bezeugten kastella und vici im dakischen Goldbergwerksgebiet, Zeitschrift fur
Papyrologie und Epigraphik 165, 24966.
 Bibliography 453
Clauss, M. (1973), Untersuchungen zu den principales des romischen Heeres von
Augustus bis Diokletian. Cornicularii, speculatores, frumentarii, Bochum.
Cleere, H., and C. David (1995), The Iron Industry of the Weald, 2nd edn. CardiV.
Cockle, W. E. H. (1996), An Inscribed Architectural Fragment from Middle Egypt
concerning the Roman Imperial Quarries, in D. M. Bailey (ed.), Archaeological
Research in Roman Egypt. The Proceedings of the Seventeenth Classical Colloquium of
the Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities, British Museum, held on 14
December, 1993, Ann Arbor, 238.
Colls, D., C. Domergue, F. Laubenheimer, and B. Liou (1975), Les lingots d
etain
de l
epave Port-Vendres II, Gallia 33: 757.
R. Etienne, R. Lequ
ement, B. Liou, and F. Mayet (1977), L
e pave Port-Vendres
II et le commerce de la B
e tique a l
e poque de Claude (Archaeonautica 1), Paris.
C. Domergue, and V. Guerrero Ayuso (1986), Les lingots de plomb de
l
epave romaine Cabrera 5 (Ile de Cabrera, Bal
eares), Archaeonautica 6: 3180.
Corbier, M. (1974), Laerarium Saturni et laerarium militare. Administration et
prosopographie s
e natoriale. (Collection de lEcole Francaise de Rome XXIV), Rome.
Corsten, T. (1997), Die Inschriften von Laodikeia am Lykos. Teil 1 (Inschriften
griechischer Stadte aus Kleinasien 49/1), Bonn.
Costabile, F., and O. Licandro (2000), Tessera Paeimeiobrigensis. Un nuovo editto
di Augusto dalla Transduriana e limperium proconsulare del princeps, Minima
Epigraphica et Papyrologica 3/4: 147235.
Craddock, P. T. (1995), Early Metal Mining and Production, Edinburgh.
Crawford, D. J. (1980), The Emperor as Landowner (Review of G. M. Parassoglou,
Imperial Estates in Roman Egypt, Amsterdam 1978), Classical Review 30: 2513.
Crawford, M. H. (1996), Roman Statutes, London.
Cuvigny, H. (1992a), Inscription in
edite dun K
dans une carriere du Mons
Claudianus, in C. D
ecobert (ed.), Itin
e raires dEgypte. M
e langes oVerts au pere
Maurice Martin, Cairo, 7388.
(1992b), La mort et la maladie, in Bingen et al. 1992, 75109.
(1996a), The Amount of Wages paid to the Quarry-Workers at Mons
Claudianus, Journal of Roman Studies 86: 13945.
(1996b), Arbejderne, in A. Bulow-Jacobsen (ed.), Mons Claudianus. Organisation,
administration og teknik i et romersk stenbrud fra kejsertiden, Copenhagen, 1432.
(1996c), Ulpius Himerus, procurateur imp
erial: I Pan 53, Bulletin de lInstitut
Francais dArch
e ologie Orientale 96: 91101.
(1997a), La mort et la maladie, in J. Bingen (ed.), Mons Claudianus. Ostraca
Graeca et Latina II (O. Claud. 191 a 416), Cairo, 1941.
(1997b), Tableaux de Service, in J. Bingen (ed.), Mons Claudianus. Ostraca
Graeca et Latina II (O. Claud. 191 a 416), Cairo, 14163.
(1998), Kaine, ville nouvelle: Une experience de regroupement familial au IIe
s.e.chr., in O. E. Kaper (ed.), Life on the Fringe. Living in the Southern Egyptian
Deserts During the Roman and Early-Byzantine Periods. Proceedings of a Colloquium
454 Bibliography
held on the Occasion of the 25th Anniversary of the Netherlands Institute for
Archaeology and Arabic Studies in Cairo 912 December 1996, Leiden, 8794.
Cuvigny, H. (2000a), Mons Claudianus. Ostraca Graeca et Latina III. O. Claud. 417 a
631 (IFAO 38), Cairo.
(2000b), Procurator montis, in H. Melaerts (ed.), Papyri in honorem Johannis
Bingen octogenarii (P. Bingen), Leuven, 41518.
(2001), Claudius Lucilianus, pr
efet daile et de B
er
enice, in T. Gagos and
R. Bagnall (eds.), Essays and Texts in Honor of J. David Thomas (American Studies
in Papyrology 42), Exeter, 1714.
(2002), Vibius Alexander, praefectus et
epistratege de lHeptanomie, Chronique
dEgypte 77: 23848.
(2003a), Les documents
ecrits de la route de Myos Hormos a l
epoque gr
eco-
romaine, in H. Cuvigny (ed.), La route de Myos Hormos. Larm
e e romaine dans le d
e sert
Oriental dEgypte. Praesidia du d
e sert de B
e r
e nice I (FIFAO 48/2), Cairo, 26593.
(2003b), Le fonctionnement du r
eseau, in H. Cuvigny (ed.), La route de Myos
Hormos. Larm
e e romaine dans le d
e sert Oriental dEgypte. Praesidia du d
e sert de
B
e r
e nice I (FIFAO 48/2), Cairo, 295360.
(2003c), La soci
et
e civile des praesidia, in H. Cuvigny (ed.), La route de Myos
Hormos. Larm
e e romaine dans le d
e sert Oriental dEgypte. Praesidia du d
e sert de
B
e r
e nice I (FIFAO 48/2), Cairo, 36197.
(2005a), Ostraca de Krokodilo. La correspondence militaire et sa circulation.
O. Krok. 1151. Praesidia du d
e sert de B
e r
e nice (FIFAO 51), Cairo.
(2005b), Lorganigramme du personnel dune carriere imp
eriale dapres un
ostracon du Mons Claudianus, Chiron 35: 30953.
and G. Wagner (1986), Ostraca Grecs du Mons Claudianus, Zeitschrift fur
Papyrologie und Epigraphik 62: 6373.
Daguet-Gagey, A. (1997), Les opera publica a Rome (180305 ap. J.-C.) (Collection
des Etudes Augustiniennes. S
erie Antiquit
e 156), Paris.
Damian, Paul (ed.) (2003), Alburnus Maior I, Bucharest.
Dardaine, S. (1983), La gens Argentaria en Hispania, M
e langes de la Casa de
Vel
azquez 19: 515.
Daris, S. (2000), Legio XXII Deiotariana, in Y. Le Bohec and C. WolV (eds.), Les L
e gions
de Rome sous le Haut-Empire. Actes du Congres de Lyon, 1719 septembre 1998
(Collection du Centre dEtudes Romaines et Gallo-Romaines. ns 20), Lyon, 3657.
Davies, O. (1935), Roman Mines in Europe, Cambridge.
Davies, R. W. (1989), Service in the Roman Army, Edinburgh.
Deininger, J. (1965), Die Provinziallandtage der Romischen Kaiserzeit von Augustus
bis zum Ende des dritten Jahrhunderts n. Chr. (Vestigia 6), Munich.
De Laet, S. J. (1949), Portorium. Etude sur lorganisation douaniere chez les Romains,
surtout a l
e poque du Haut-Empire, Brugge.
Desjardins, E. (186785), G
e ographie historique et administrative de la Gaule
romaine. I, Paris.
Devijver, H. (197680), Prosopographia militiarum equestrium quae fuerunt ab
Augusto ad Gallienum, Leuven.
 Bibliography 455
Dise, R. L. (1991), Cultural Change and Imperial Administration. The Middle Danube
Provinces of the Roman Empire (American University Studies. Series IX. History 99),
New York, Bern, & Paris.
(1995), A reassessment of the functions of beneWciarii consularis, Ancient
History Bulletin 9: 7285.
Dixon, K. R., and P. Southern (1997), The Roman Cavalry from the First to the Third
Century AD, London & New York.
Dob
o, A. (1968), Die Verwaltung der romischen Provinz Pannonien von Augustus bis
Diocletianus. Die provinziale Verwaltung, Amsterdam.
Dobson, B. (1974), The signiWcance of the centurion and Primipilaris in the
Roman army and administration, in H. Temporini (ed.), Aufstieg und Niedergang
der Romischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der Neueren Forschung
II. Principat, Erster Band, Berlin & New York, 393434.
(1978), Die Primipilares. Entwicklung und Bedeutung, Laufbahnen und
Personlichkeiten eines romischen OYziersranges (Beihefte der Bonner Jahrbucher
37), Cologne & Bonn.
Dodge, H. (1988), Decorative stones for architecture in the Roman Empire, Oxford
Journal of Archaeology 7/1: 6580.
(1991), Ancient Marble Studies. Recent research, Journal of Roman Archaeology
4: 2850.
and B. Ward-Perkins (eds.) (1992), Marble in Antiquity. Collected Papers of
J. P. Ward-Perkins (Archaeological Monographs of the British School at Rome 6),
London.
Dolci, E. (19812), La localizzazione ed il rilevamento delle cave lunensi, Quaderni.
Centro Studi Lunensi 6/7: 4762.
(1983), Nuovi rilevamenti nelle cave lunensi. Notizie preliminari sui siti di
Tarnone e Fossa Ficola, Quaderni. Centro Studi Lunensi 8: 5388.
(1997), UnoYcina imperiale nelle cave lunensi: il sito del monte Strinato a
Carrara, Quaderni. Centro Studi Lunensi. ns 3: 2746.
(1998), Una cava lunense scoperta di recente a Carrara: il sito della
Scalocchiella, Quaderni. Centro Studi Lunensi. ns 4: 11538.
Domergue, C. (1966), Les lingots de plomb romains du Mus
ee Arch
eologique de
Carthagene et du Mus
ee Naval de Madrid, Ausgrabungen und Funde 39: 4172.
(1971), El Cerro del Plomo, Mina El Centenillo (Jaen), Noticiario
Arqueologico Hispanico 16: 267382.
(1983), La mine antique dAljustrel (Portugal) et les tables de bronze de Vipasca,
Paris.
(1986), Dix-huit ans de recherche (19681986) sur les mines dor romaines du
Nord-Ouest de la P
eninsule Ib
erique, in Actas I Congreso Internacional Astorga
Romana 2: 7101.
(1987a), Catalogue des mines et des fonderies antiques de la P
e ninsule Ib
e rique
(Publications de la Casa Velazquez. Serie Archeologie VIII), Madrid.
(1987b), Les lingots de plomb de l
epoque romaine de Valle Ponti
(Comacchio), Epigraphica 49: 10968.
456 Bibliography
Domergue, C. (1990), Les mines de la Peninsule Iberique dans lAntiquit
e Romaine
(Collection de lEcole francaise de Rome 127), Rome.
(1998), A view of Baeticas external commerce in the 1st c. A.D. based on its
Trade in Metals, in S. Keay (ed.), The Archeology of Early Roman Baetica (Journal of
Roman Archaeology. Supplement Series 29), Portsmouth, RI, 20115.
(2004), Le r
egime juridique des mines du domaine public a Rome. A propos
dun ouvrage r
ecent, M
e langes de la Casa Vel
azquez. ns 34/2: 22136.
and G. Herail (1978), Mines dor romaines dEspagne. Le district de la Valduerna
(Le
on). Etude g
e omorphologique et arch
e ologique, Toulouse.
and M. Leroy (2000), L
etat de la recherches sur les mines et les m
etallurgies en
Gaule, de l
epoque gauloise au haut Moyen Age, Gallia 57: 310.
and T. Martin (1977), Minas de Oro Romanas de la Provincia de Le
on II.
Huer~ na: Excavaciones 19721973 (Excavaciones arqueol
ogicas en Espa~na 94),
Madrid.
and C. Rico (2002), A propos de deux lingots de cuivre antiques trouv
es en mer
sur la cote languedocienne, in L. Rivet, M. Scialliano (eds.), Vivre, produire et

e changer: r
e Xets m
e diteran
e ens. M
e langes oVerts a Bernard Liou (Arch
eologie et
histoire romaine 8), Montagnac, 14152.
and P. Sillieres (1977), Minas de Oro Romanas de la Provincia de Le
on I. La
Corona de Quintanilla: Excavaciones 19711973. Las Coronas de Filiel, Boisan,
Luyego 1 y 2: Exploraciones 1973. (Excavaciones arqueol
ogicas en Espa~na 94),
Madrid.
P. Quarati, A. Nesta, and P. R. Trincherini (2006), Retour sur les lingots de
plomb de Comacchio (Ferrara, Italie) en passant par larch
eom
etrie et l
epigraphie,
in Mineria Antigua: estudios regionales y temas de investigacion actual, Anejos de
Archivo Espanol de Arqueologia, Instituto de Historia, CSIC, Madrid (forthcoming),
cf. http://eprintweb.org/S/ authors/All/ qu/Quarati/3 (August 11: 2007).
Dopico Ca
nzos, M. D. (1988), La tabula Lougeiorum. Estudios sobre la implantacion
romana en Hispania, Vitoria/Gasteiz.
Drger, M. (1993), Die Stadte der Provinz Asia in der Flavierzeit (Europaische
Hochschulschriften. Reihe III. Geschichte und Hilfswissenschaften 576),
Frankfurt, Berlin, & Bern.
Drew-Bear, M. (1979), Le nome Hermopolite: toponymes et sites (American Studies in
Papyrology 21), Ann Arbor.
Drew-Bear, T. (1994), Nouvelles Inscriptions de Dokimeion, M
e langes
dArch
e ologie et dHistoire de lEcole francaise de Rome 106: 747844.
and W. Eck (1976), Kaiser-, Militar- und Steinbruchinschriften aus Phrygien,
Chiron 6: 289318.
and C. Naour (1990), Divinit
es de Phrygie, in W. Haase and H. Temporini
(eds.), Aufstieg und Niedergang der Romischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im
Spiegel der Neueren Forschung. Teil II: Principat, Band 18. Religion (Heidentum: Die
Religiosen Verhaltnisse in den Provinzen [Forts.]). 3. Teilband, Berlin & New York,
19072044.
 Bibliography 457
Drexhage, H.-J., H. Konen, and K. Ruffing (2002), Die Wirtschaft der Romischen
Reiches (1.3. Jahrhundert). Eine Einfuhrung, Berlin.
Dubois, C. (1908), Etude sur ladministration et lexploitation des carrieres marbres,
porphyre, granit, etc. dans la monde romain, Paris.
Duncan-Jones, R. (1994), Money and Government in the Roman Empire, Cambridge.
Dupuis, X. (2000), Les III publica Africae. Un exemple de personnel administratif
subalterne en Afrique, Cahiers du Centre Gustave-Glotz 11: 27794.
Dusani
c, S. (1971a), The Antinous Inscription at Socanica and the metalla municipii
Dardanorum, Ziva Antika 21: 24161.
(1971b), The Heteroclite metalli on the Roman coins, Ziva Antika 21: 53554.
(1976), Le nord-ouest de la M
esie sup
erieure, in M. Mirkovi
c and S. Dusani
c
(eds.), Inscriptions de la M
e sie sup
e rieure. Vol. I. Singidunum et le nord-ouest de la
province, Belgrade, 95162.
(1977), Aspects of Roman mining in Noricum, Pannonia, Dalmatia and Moesia
Superior, in H. Temporini and W. Haase (eds.), Aufstieg und Niedergang der
Romischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der Neueren Forschung II.
Principat, Sechster Band. Politische Geschichte (Provinzen und Randvolker:
Lateinischer Donau-Balkanraum), Berlin & New York, 5294.
(1978), Mounted cohorts in Moesia Superior, in Akten des XI. Internationalen
Limeskongresses, Sz
e kesfeh
e rv

a r 1976, Budapest, 23746.
(1989), The Roman mines of Illyricum. Organization and impact on provincial
life, in C. Domergue (ed.), Minera y metalurgia en las Antiguas Civilizaciones
Mediterr
a neas y Europeas, Coloquio Internacional Asociado. Madrid, 2428
Octobre, 1985, Madrid, 14856.
(1990), The legions and the fiscal estates in Moesia Superior: Some epigraphic
notes, Arheoloski vestnik 41: 58596.
(19945), Epigraphical notes on Roman mining in Dardania, Starinar 456: 2734.
(2000), Army and mining in Moesia Superior, in G. Alfldy, B. Dobson, and
W. Eck (eds.), Kaiser, Heer und Gesellschaft in der Romischen Kaiserzeit.
Gedenkschrift fur Eric Birley (HABES 31), Stuttgart, 34364.
(2004a), The princeps municipii Dardanorum and the metalla municipii
Dardanorum, Ziva Antika 54: 532.
(2004b), Roman mining in Illyricum: Historical aspects, in G. Urso (ed.), Dall
Adriatico al Danubio. LIllyrico nell eta greca e romana. Atti del convegno
internazionale Cividale del Friuli, 2527 settembre 2003, Pisa, 24770.
Dworakowska, A. (1983), Quarries in Roman Provinces, Wroclaw.
Eck, W. (1979), Die staatliche Organisation Italiens in der hohen Kaiserzeit, Munich.
(1985), Die Statthalter der germanischen Provinzen vom 1.3. Jahrhundert
(Epigraphische Studien 14), Cologne & Graz.
(1994), M. Lucretius Iulianus, procurator augustorum. Zur Funktion und
sozialen Wertschatzung von Provinzialprokuratoren, Zeitschrift fur Papyrologie
und Epigraphik 100: 55976.
(1995a), Zur Durchsetzung von Anordnungen und Entscheidungen in der
Hohen Kaiserzeit: die administrative Informationsstruktur, in W. Eck, Die
458 Bibliography
Verwaltung des Romischen Reiches in der Hohen Kaiserzeit. Ausgewahlte und
erweiterte Beitrage. 1. Band (AREA 1), Basel & Berlin, 5579.
Eck, W. (1995b), Die Leitung und Verwaltung einer prokuratorischen Provinz, in
W. Eck (ed.), Die Verwaltung des Romischen Reiches in der Hohen Kaiserzeit.
Ausgewahlte und erweiterte Beitrage. 1. Band (AREA 1), Basel & Berlin, 32740.
(1995c), Prosopographica II, Zeitschrift fur Papyrologie und Epigraphik
106: 24954.
(1995d), Die staatliche Administration des romischen Reiches in der hohen
Kaiserzeit. Ihre strukturellen Komponenten, in W. Eck (ed.), Die Verwaltung des
Romischen Reiches in der Hohen Kaiserzeit. Ausgewahlte und erweiterte Beitrage. 1.
Band (AREA 1), Basel & Berlin, 128.
(1995e), Die Umgestaltung der politischen FuhrungsschichtSenatorenstand
und Ritterstand, in W. Eck (ed.), Die Verwaltung des Romischen Reiches in der
Hohen Kaiserzeit. Ausgewahlte und erweiterte Beitrage. 1. Band (AREA 1), Basel &
Berlin, 10378.
(1997a), Der Kaiser, die Fuhrungsschichten und die Administration des Reiches
(von Vespasian bis zum Ende des antoninischen Dynastie), in W. Eck (ed.), Die
Verwaltung des Romischen Reiches in der Hohen Kaiserzeit. Ausgewahlte und
erweiterte Beitrage, 2. Band (AREA 3), Basel & Berlin, 3146.
(1997b), Prokonsuln und militarisches Kommando. Folgerungen aus
Diplomen fur prokonsulare Provinzen, in W. Eck (ed.), Die Verwaltung des
Romischen Reiches in der Hohen Kaiserzeit. Ausgewahlte und erweiterte Beitrage, 2.
Band (AREA 3), Basel & Berlin, 187202.
(1997c), Die Bedeutung der Claudischen Regierungszeit fur die Administrative
Entwicklung des romischen Reiches, in W. Eck (ed.), Die Verwaltung des Romischen
Reiches in der Hohen Kaiserzeit. Ausgewahlte und erweiterte Beitrage, 2. Band (AREA
3), Basel & Berlin.
(1999), [II 3] Lucilius Capito, in H. Cancik and H. Schneider (eds.), Der Neue
Pauly. Enzyklopadie der Antike. Band 7, Stuttgart & Weimar, 465.
(2000), The Growth of Administrative Posts, in A. K. Bowman, P. Garnsey, and
D. Rathbone (eds.), The Cambridge Ancient History. Second Edition. Volume XI. The
High Empire, AD 70192, Cambridge, 23865.
(2001a), Praefectus castrorum, in H. Cancik and H. Schneider (eds.), Der Neue
Pauly. Enzyklopadie der Antike. Band 10, Stuttgart & Weimar, 243.
(2001b), Praefectus civitatium, in H. Cancik and H. Schneider (eds.), Der Neue
Pauly. Enzyklopadie der Antike. Band 10, Stuttgart & Weimar, 244.
(2001c), Spezialisierung in der staatlichen Administration des Romischen
Reiches in der Hohen Kaiserzeit, in L. DeBlois (ed.), Administration,
Prosopography and Appointment Policies in the Roman Empire. Proceedings of the
First Workshop of the International Network. Impact of Empire (Roman Empire, 27
BC AD 406). Leiden, June 28 July 1, 2000, Amsterdam, 123.
(2001d), Procurator, in H. Cancik and H. Schneider (eds.), Der Neue Pauly.
Encyclopadie der Antike. Band 10, Stuttgart & Weimar, 3669.
 Bibliography 459
(2004a), Koln in romischer Zeit. Geschichte einer Stadt im Rahmen des Imperium
Romanum (Geschichte der Stadt Koln. Band 1), Cologne.
(2004b), Augustus und die Grossprovinz Germanien, Kolner Jahrbuch 37: 1122.
and F. Fern
andez (1991), Sex. Marius in einem Hospitiumvertrag aus der
Baetica, Zeitschrift fur Papyrologie und Epigraphik 85: 21722.
and A. Pangerl (2005), Traians Heer im Partherkrieg. Zu einem Diplom aus
dem Jahr 115, Chiron 35: 4967.
A. Caballos, and F. Fern
andez (1996), Das senatus consultum de Cn. Pisone
patre (Vestigia. Beitrage zur Alten Geschichte 48), Munich.
Eder, W. (1980), Servitus Publica. Untersuchungen zur Entstehung, Entwicklung und
Funktion der oVentlichen Sklaverei in Rom (Forschungen zur Antiken Sklaverei),
Wiesbaden.
Edmondson, J. C. (1989), Mining in the later Roman Empire and beyond.
Continuity or disruption?, Journal of Roman Studies 79: 84102.
Egger, R. (1961), Die Stadt auf dem Magdalensberg. Ein Grosshandelsplatz. Die
altesten Aufzeichnungen uber den Metallwarenhandel auf dem Boden Osterreichs,
Graz, Vienna, & Cologne.
Eich, P. (2005), Zur Metamorphose des politischen Systems in der romischen Kaiserzeit.
Die Entstehung einer personalen Burokratie im langen dritten Jahrhundert (Klio
Beihefte 9), Berlin.
Elkington, H. D. H. (1976), The Mendip lead industry, in K. Branigan and
P. J. Fowler (eds.), The Roman West Country. Classical Culture and Celtic Society,
Newton Abbot & London, 18397.
Engelmann, H., and D. Knibbe (1989), Das Zollgesetz der Provinz Asia (Epigraphica
Anatolica 14), Bonn.
Fabian, K.-D. (1979), Vilicus, in K. Ziegler, W. Sontheimer, and H. Gartner (eds.),
Der Kleine Pauly. Lexikon der Antike in funf Banden. Band 5, Munich, 12723.
Fant, J. C. (1985), Four unWnished sarcophagus lids at Docimium and the Roman
imperial quarry system in Phrygia, American Journal of Archaeology 89: 65562.
(1988). The Roman Emperor in the marble business. Capitalists, middlemen or
philanthropists?, in N. Herz and M. Waelkens (eds.), Classical Marble:
Geochemistry, Technology, Trade. Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Research
Workshop on Marble in Ancient Greece and Rome. Geology, Quarries, Commerce,
Artifacts, Il Ciocco, Lucca, Italy, 913 May 1988, Dordrecht.
(1989a), Cavum Antrum Phrygiae. The Organization and Operations of the
Roman Imperial Marble Quarries in Phrygia (BAR International Series 482),
Oxford.
(1989b), Poikiloi lithoi. The anomalous economics of the Roman imperial
marble quarry at Teos, in The Greek Renaissance in the Roman Empire. Papers
from the Tenth British Museum Classical Colloquium, London 1986, London, 20618.
(1993a), Ideology, gift, and trade. A distribution model for Roman
imperial marbles, in W. V. Harris (ed.), The Inscribed Economy. Production and
Distribution in the Roman Empire in the Light of the Instrumentum Domesticum,
Ann Arbor, 14770.
460 Bibliography
Fant, J. C. (1993b), The Roman imperial marble trade. A distribution model, in
R. Francovich (ed.), Archeologia delle attivita estrattive e metallurgiche. V Ciclo di
Lezioni sulla Ricerca Applicata in Archeologia Certosa di Pontignano (SI)Campiglia
Marittima (LI), 921 settembre 1991, Florence, 7196.
(2001), Romes marble yards, Journal of Roman Archaeology 14: 16798.
Fern
andez Ochoa, C., M. Zarzalejos Prieto, P. Hevia G
omez, and G. Esteban
Borrajo (1994), Sisapo I. Excavaciones Arqueol
ogicas en La Bienvenida, Almod
ovar
del Campo (Ciudad Real), Toledo.
Fern
andez-Posse, M. D. (1988), La Corona y el Castro de Corporales II. Campa~ na de
1983 y prospecciones en La Valderia y La Cabrera (Le
on), Le
on.
and F. J. S
anchez-Palencia (1985), La Corona y el Castro de Corporales I.
Truchas (Le
on). Campa~ nas de 1978 a 1981, Le
on.
Fink, R. O. (1971), Roman Military Records on Papyrus (Philological Monographs 26),
Cleveland.
Fitz, J. (1972), Verwaltung der pannonischen Bergwerke, Klio 54: 21325.
(1990), Prosopographia Pannonica II, Alba Regia 24: 16996.
(19935), Die Verwaltung Pannoniens in der Romerzeit, Budapest.
Fitzler, K. (1910), Steinbruche und Bergwerke im Ptolemaischen und Romischen
Aegypten. Ein Beitrag zur antiken Wirtschaftsgeschichte, Leipzig.
Flach, D. (1978), Inschriftenuntersuchungen zum romischen Kolonat in
Nordafrika, Chiron 8: 44192.
(1979), Die Bergwerksordnung von Vipasca, Chiron 9: 399448.
(1985), Review of Claude Domergue. La Mine antique dAljustrel. Portugal et
les Tables de Bronze de Vipasca, Paris 1985 , Gnomon 57: 2013.
(1989), Teilpacht im Romischen Bergbau, in C. Domergue (ed.), Minera y
Metalurgia en las Antiguas Civilizaciones Mediterr
a neas y Europeas, Coloquio
Internacional Asociado. Madrid, 2428 Octobre, 1985, Madrid, 1337.
(1990), Romische Agrargeschichte (Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft.
3. Abt., 9. Teil), Munich.
France, J. (2001), Quadragesima Galliarum. Lorganisation douaniere des provinces
alpestres, gauloises et germaniques de lEmpire romain (Collection de lEcole
francaise de Rome 278), Rome.
Frank, T. (1959), An Economic Survey of Ancient Rome. Vol. 1: Rome and Italy of the
Republic, 2nd edn. New Jersey.
Franke, T. (2000), Legio XXII Primigenia, in Y. Le Bohec and C. WolV (eds.), Les l
e gions
de Rome sous le Haut-Empire. Actes du Congres de Lyon, 1719 septembre 1998
(Collection du Centre dEtudes Romaines et Gallo-Romaines. Nouvelle s
erie 20),
Lyon, 95104.
Frend, W. H. C. (1956), A third-century inscription Relating to angareia in Phrygia,
Journal of Roman Studies 46: 4656.
Galsterer, H. (1971), Review of Andr
as M
ocsy, Gesellschaft und Romanisation
in der romischen Provinz Moesia Superior, Amsterdam 1970 , Bonner Jahrbucher
171: 73843.
 Bibliography 461
(1988), Municipium Flavium Irnitanum. A Latin town in Spain, Journal of
Roman Studies 78: 7890.
Garc
a Bellido, A. (1966), Nuevos documentos militares de la Hispania Romana,
Archivo espa~ nol de arqueologa 39: 2440.
Garc
a-Bellido, M. P. (19945) Las torres-recinto y la explotaci
on des plomo en
Extremadura, Anas 78: 187218.
(1998), Legionsstempel aus der Zeit des Agrippa auf hispanischen Bleibarren,
Bonner Jahrbucher 198: 128.
Garc
a Merino, C. (1973), Las tierras del NO. de la Pennsula Ib
erica, foco
de atracci
on para los emigrantes de la Meseta en
epoca romana, Hispanica
Antiqua 928.
Geerlings, W. (1983), Ins Bergwerk verurteiltdie damnatio ad metalla.
Bergwerksarbeit und Christenvergfolgung, Der Anschnitt 35: 130136.
Gibson, E. (1978), The Rahmi Koc Collection. Inscriptions. Part I, Grave
Monuments from the Plain of Altintas, Zeitschrift fur Papyrologie und Epigraphik
28: 134.
Gonz
alez, J. (1986), The lex Irnitana. A new copy of the Flavian Municipal Law,
Journal of Roman Studies 76: 147243.
Greene, K. (2000), Industry and technology, in A. K. Bowman, P. Garnsey, and
D. W. Rathbone (eds.), The High Empire, AD 70192. The Cambridge Ancient
History. Second Edition. Volume XI, Cambridge, 74168.
Griepentrog, M. (1995), Bergbau im Umland von Munigua. Neue Ergebnisse zur
Wirtschaftsgrundlage der Stadt, in Provinzialromische Forschungen. Festschrift fur
Gunter Ulbert zum 65. Geburtstag, Espelkamp, 23752.
Gudea, N. (1977), Der Limes Dakiens und die Verteidigung der obermoesischen
Donaulinie von Trajan bis Aurelian, in H. Temporini and W. Haase (eds.), Aufstieg
und Niedergang der Romischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der
Neueren Forschung II. Principat, Sechster Band. Politische Geschichte (Provinzen und
Randvolker: Lateinischer Donau-Balkanraum), Berlin & New York, 84887.
and Th. Lobscher (2006), Dacia. Eine romische Provinz zwischen Karpaten
und Schwarzem Meer, Mainz.
Gustafson, M. W. (1994), Condemnation to the mines in the later Roman Empire,
Harvard Theological Review 87/4: 42133.
(1997), Inscripta in fronte: Penal tattooing in late antiquity, Classical Antiquity
16/1: 79105.
Habicht, C. (1969), Die Inschriften des Asklepeions (Altertumer von Pergamon
VIII/3), Berlin.
Haensch, R. (1992), Das Statthalterarchiv, Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung fur
Rechtsgeschichte 109: 209317.
(1997), Capita provinciarum. Statthaltersitze und Provinzverwaltung in der
romischen Kaiserzeit (Kolner Forschungen 7), Mainz.
(2000), Le role des oYciales de ladministration provinciale dans le processus
de d
ecision, Cahiers du Centre Gustave-Glotz 9: 25976.
462 Bibliography
Hagedorn, D. (1993), P. Hibeh II 273 217. Antrag auf Bezahlung von Saulen,
Saulenbasen und Kapitellen, Zeitschrift fur Papyrologie und Epigraphik 97: 97101.
and J. C. Shelton (1975), Zur Entlassung von Strafgefangenen im Romischen
Agypten, Zeitschrift fur Papyrologie und Epigraphik 18: 2258.
Haley, E. W. (1991), Migration and Economy in Roman Imperial Spain (Aurea Saecula
5), Barcelona.
Halfmann, H. (2001), Stadtebau und Bauherren im Romischen Kleinasien. Ein
Vergleich zwischen Pergamon und Ephesos (Istanbuler Mitteilungen, Beiheft 43),
Tubingen.
Hamilton-Dyer, S. (2001), The faunal remains, in V. A. MaxWeld and D. P. S.
Peacock (eds.), Survey and Excavation. Mons Claudianus. 19871993. Volume II.
Excavations: Part 1, Cairo, 249310.
Hanel, N., and P. Rothenhfer (2005), Germanisches Blei fur Rom. Zur Rolle des
Romischen Bergbaus im rechtsrheinischen Germanien im fruhen Prinzipat,
Germania 83: 5365.
Hankey, V. (1965), A marble quarry at Karystos, Bulletin du Mus
e e de Beyrouth
18: 539.
Harris, W. V. (2000), Trade, in A. K. Bowman, P. Garnsey, and D. W. Rathbone
(eds.), The High Empire, AD 70192. The Cambridge Ancient History. Second
Edition. Volume XI, Cambridge, 71040.
Hartmann, M., and M. A. Speidel (1991), Die Hilfstruppen des Windischer
Heeresverbandes, Jahresbericht der Gesellschaft Pro Vindonissa 333.
Hatch, M. J. (1997), Organization Theory. Modern Symbolic and Postmodern
Perspectives, Oxford.
Hauken, T. (1998), Petition and Response. An Epigraphic Study of Petitions to Roman
Emperors, 181249 (Monographs from the Norwegian Institute at Athens 2),
Bergen.
Heberdey, R. (1912), VorlauWger Bericht uber die Grabungen in Ephesos, Jahreshefte
des Osterreichischen Archaologischen Institutes 12: 15782.
Hengstl, J. (1981), Review of Georges M. Parassoglou, imperial estates in Roman
Egypt, Amsterdam 1978 , Gnomon 53: 3741.
H
erail, G., and L. C. P
erez Garc
a (1989), Int
eret arch
eologique dune
etude
g
eomorpho-litologique: Les gisements dor alluvial du nord-ouest de lEspagne,
in C. Domergue (ed.), Minera y metalurgia en las Antiguas Civilizaciones
Mediterr
a neas y Europeas, Coloquio Internacional Asociado. Madrid, 2428
Octobre, 1985, Madrid, 2134.
Herrmann, P. (1988), Chresimus, procurator lapicidinarum. Zur Verwaltung der
kaiserlichen Steinbruche in der Provinz Asia, Tyche 3: 11928.
(1990), Hilferufe aus romischen Provinzen. Ein Aspekt der Krise des romischen
Reiches im 3. Jhdt.n.Chr. (Berichte aus den Sitzungen der Joachim Jungius-
Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften E. V., Hamburg, Jahrgang 8, Heft 4), Hamburg.
(1998), Inschriften von Milet. Teil 2. Inschriften n. 4071019, Berlin & New York.
Herz, P. (2005), Der romische Staat und die Wirtschaft. Staatliche EingriVe in das
Wirtschaftsleben (Kontrolle von Ressourcen), in M. Polfer (ed.), Artisanat
 Bibliography 463
et
e conomie romaine: Italie et provinces occidentales de lEmpire. Acte du 3ecolloque
international dErpeldange (Luxembourg) sur lartisanat romain1416 octobre
2004, 1730.
Hill, W., R. Fehlbaum, and P. Ulrich (1994), Organisationslehre 1. Ziele,
Instrumente und Bedingungen der Organisation sozialer Systeme, 5th edn. Bern,
Stuttgart, & Vienna.
Hirschfeld, O. (1905), Die kaiserlichen Verwaltungsbeamten bis auf Diokletian, 2nd
edn. Berlin.
(1913), Der Grundbesitz der romischen Kaiser in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten
(1902), in O. Hirschfeld (ed.), Kleine Schriften, Berlin, 51675.
Hirt, A. M. (2004), Chresimus, procurator a marmoribus, und der Strassenbau.
Uberlegungen zu Logistik und Transportwesen kaiserlicher Steinbruche, in
R. Frei-Stolba (ed.), Siedlungen und Verkehr im Romischen Reich. Romerstrassen
zwischen Herrschaftssicherung und Landschaftspragung. Akten des Internationalen
Kolloquiums zu Ehren von Prof. Dr. H. E. Herzig, Universitat Bern, 28. und 29. Juni
2000, Basel, 11533.
Horn, H. G. (ed.) (1987), Die Romer in Nordrhein-Westfalen, Stuttgart.
Horster, M. (2001), Bauinschriften romischer Kaiser. Untersuchungen zu
Inschriftenpraxis und Bautatigkeit in Stadten des westlichen Imperium Romanum in
der Zeit des Prinzipats (Historia Einzelschriften 157), Stuttgart.
Isaac, B. (1991), The Roman army in Judaea. Police duties and taxation, in
V. A. MaxWeld and M. J. Dobson (eds.), Roman Frontier Studies 1989. Proceedings
of the XVth International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies, Exeter, 45861.
Johnson, A. (1987), Romische Kastelle des 1. und 2. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. in Britannien
und in den germanischen Provinzen des Romerreiches, Mainz.
Jones, A. H. M. (1960), The aerarium and the Wscus, in A. H. M. Jones (ed.), Studies
in Roman Government and Law, Oxford, 10214.
Jones, R. F. J. (1976), The Roman military occupation of north-west Spain, Journal of
Roman Studies 176: 4566.
Jones, G. D. B. (1980), The Roman Mines of Rio Tinto, Journal of Roman Studies 80:
14665.
Jones, C. P. (1987), Stigma: Tattooing and branding in Graeco-Roman antiquity,
Journal of Roman Studies 77: 13955.
Jones, G. D. B. (1991), Dating and Dolaucothi, Britannia 22: 21011.
and P. R. Lewis (1971), The Dolaucothi gold-mines, Bonner Jahrbucher
171: 288300.
and J. H. Little (1973), Excavations of the Roman Fort at Pumpsaint,
Carmarthenshire. Interim Report 1972, Carmarthenshire Antiquary 9: 328.
Jones, B., and D. J. Mattingly (1990), An Atlas of Roman Britain, Oxford.
Kambitsis, S. (1997), Papyrus Graux III (P. Graux 30) (Ecole Pratique des Hautes
Etudes, IVe Section. III Hautes
etudes du monde gr
eco-romain 23), Geneva.
Karwiese, S. (1995), Gross ist die Artemis von Ephesos. Die Geschichte einer der grossen
Stadte der Antike, Vienna.
464 Bibliography
Kaser, M. (1971), Das Romische Privatrecht. Erster Abschnitt. Das Altromische, das
Vorklassische und Klassische Recht, 2nd edn. (Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft
X.3.3.1), Munich.
and R. Kntel (2005), Romisches Privatrecht, 18th edn. Munich.
Kayser, F. (1993), Nouveaux textes grecs du Ouadi Hammamat, Zeitschrift fur
Papyrologie und Epigraphik 98: 11156.
Khanoussi, M. (1991), Nouveaux documents sur la pr
esence militaire dans la
colonie julienne-august
eenne de Simitthus (Chemtou, Tunisie), Comptes Rendus
de lAcad
e mie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 82439.
(1996), Les oYciales marmorum Numidicorum, in M. Khanoussi, P. Ruggieri,
and C. Vismara (eds.), LAfrica Romana. Atti de XII convegno di studio Olbia, 1215
dicembre 1996, Sassari, 9971016.
(1997), Le saltus Philomusianus et les carrieres de marbre numidique,
Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts, Romische Abteilung 104: 3757.
Kienast, D. (1996), Romische Kaisertabelle. Grundzuge einer romischen Kaiserchronologie,
2nd edn. Darmstadt.
(1999), Augustus. Prinzeps und Monarch, Darmstadt.
Kierdorf, W. (1967), Hospitium, in K. Ziegler and W. Sontheimer (eds.), Der Kleine
Pauly. Lexikon der Antike in funf Banden. Band 2, Stuttgart, 1234.
Klein, M. J. (1988), Untersuchungen zu den kaiserlichen Steinbruchen an Mons
Porphyrites und Mons Claudianus in der ostlichen Wuste Agyptens, Bonn.
Klemm, D. D. (1994), Chronologischer Abriss der antiken Goldgewinnung in der
Ostwuste Agyptens, Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts, Abteilung
Kairo 50: 188222.
and R. Klemm (1992), Steine und Steinbruche im Alten Agypten, Berlin.
Knapp, R. C. (1983), Roman C
ordoba (University of California Publications. Classical
Studies, Volume 30), Berkeley, Los Angeles, & London.
Koch, M. (1987), Neue Romische Inschriften aus Carthago Nova III, Madrider
Mitteilungen 28: 12734.
Kolb, A. (1993), Die kaiserliche Bauverwaltung in der Stadt Rom. Geschichte und
Aufbau der cura operum publicorum unter dem Prinzipat, Stuttgart.
Kolb, F. (1995), Rom. Die Geschichte der Stadt in der Antike, Munich.
Kolb, A. (2000), Transport und Nachrichtentransfer im Romischen Reich (Klio.
Beitrage zur Alten Geschichte. Beihefte Neue Folge 2), Berlin.
Kornemann, E. (1901), Collegium, in G. Wissowa (ed.), Paulys Real-Encyclopadie
der Classischen Altertumswissenschaft. Vierter Band, Stuttgart, 380480.
Korres, E. M. (1995), The ancient quarries at Mount Pentelikon, in Y. Maniatis,
N. Herz, and Y. Basiakos (eds.), The Study of Marble and Other Stones Used in
Antiquity. Asmosia III Athens: Transactions of the 3rd International Symposium of
the Association for the Study of Marble and Other Stones Used in Antiquity,
London.
Kozelj, T., and M. Wurch-Kozely (1995), Dragon-Houses of Southern Euboia.
Military Guard-Places of the Quarries, in Y. Maniatis et al. (ed.), The Study of
Marble and Other Stones Used in Antiquity: Asmosia III Athens. Transactions of the
 Bibliography 465
3rd International Symposium of the Association for the Study of Marble and Other
Stones Used in Antiquity, London, 1731.
Kraus, T. (1993a), Steinbruch- und Blockinschriften, in F. Rakob (ed.), Simitthus
I. Die Steinbruche und die Antike Stadt, Mainz, 5564.
(1993b), Die Felsreliefs am Tempelberg, in F. Rakob (ed.), Simitthus I. Die
Steinbruche und die Antike Stadt, Mainz, 7192.
J. Rder, and W. Mller-Wiener (1967), Mons ClaudianusMons
Porphyrites. Bericht uber die zweite Forschungsreise, Mitteilungen des Deutschen
Archaologischen Instituts, Abteilung Kairo 22: 109203.
Lang, A. (1911), Beitrage zur Geschichte des Kaisers Tiberius, Jena.
Laporte, J.-P. (1996), Notes sur laqueduc de Saldae (Bougie), LAfrica Romana
11: 71162.
Lassandro, D. (1995), I damnati in metalla in alcune testimonianze antiche, in
M. Sordi (ed.), Coercizione e mobilita umana nel mondo antico, Milan, 2717.
Lassere, J. M. (1980), Le peuplement de la colonia Iulia Augusta Numidica
Simitthus, Antiquit
e s Africaines 16: 2744.
Laubenheimer-Leenhardt, F. (1973), Recherches sur les lingots de cuivre et de plomb
d
e poque romaine dans les r
e gions de Languedoc-Roussillon et de Provence-Corse
(Revue Arch
eologique de Narbonnaise, Supp. 3), Paris.
Lazzarini, S. (2001), Lex metallis dicta. Studi sulla seconda tavola di Vipasca (Minima
epigraphica et papyrologica. Supplementa 2), Rome.
Le Bohec, Y. (1989a), La troisieme l
e gion Auguste, Paris.
(1989b), Les unit
e s auxiliaires de larm
e e romaine en Afrique Proconsulaire
et Numidie sous le Haut Empire, Paris.
(1992a), Notes sur les mines de Sardaigne a l
epoque romaine, in M. Bonello
Lai (ed.), Sardinia antiqua. Studi in onore di Piero Meloni in occasione del suo
settantesimo compleanno, Cagliari, 25564.
(1992b), Ti. Claudius Proculus Cornelianus, procurateur de la r
egion de
Theveste, Zeitschrift fur Papyrologie und Epigraphik 93: 10716.
(1994), The Imperial Roman Army, London.
Lega, C. (2003), Ratio marmoraria. Iscrizioni estemporanee sulle pareti di un
ambiente di eta romana nel complesso del Barco Borghese a Monte Porzio
Catone (RM), M
e langes dArch
e ologie et dHistoire de lEcole francaise de Rome
115/2: 56392.
Lefebvre, S. (1998), ProWls de carriere: douze procurateurs des Gaules et Germanies,
Cahiers du Centre Gustave-Glotz 9: 24764.
Leist, G. A. (1896), Auction. Romisch, in G. Wissowa (ed.), Paulys Real-Encyclopadie
der Classischen Altertumswissenschaft. Zweiter Band, Stuttgart, 22702.
Leone, A. (1988), Gli animali da trasporto nell Egitto Greco, Romano e Bizantino,
Rome & Barcelona.
(1998), Animali da trasporto nell antico Egitto. Una rassegna papirologica dalla
dinastia dei Lagidi ai Bizantini, Naples.
LeRoux, P. (1977), Larm
ee de la p
eninsule ib
erique et la vie
economique, in Arm
e e et
Wscalit
e dans le monde antique, Paris, 1416 octobre 1976, Paris, 34171.
466 Bibliography
LeRoux, P. (1980), Review of Inscriptions de la M
esie sup
erieure. Vol. I,
Singidunum et nord-ouest de la province, par M. Mirkovic et S. Dusanic ( . . . ),
Beograd 1976 , Revue des Etudes Anciennes 82: 3745.
(1982), LArm
e e romaine et lorganisation des provinces Ib
e riques dAuguste
a linvasion de 409, Paris.
(1984), Autour de la notion dinscription fausse, in Epigraphie hispanique.
Problemes de m
e thode et d
edition, Paris, 17580.
(1985), Procurateur aVranchi in Hispania: Saturninus et lactivit
e miniere,
Madrider Mitteilungen 26: 21833.
(1989), Exploitations minieres et arm
ees romaines: essai dinterpretation, in
C. Domergue (ed.), Minera y metalurgia en las Antiguas Civilizaciones Mediterr
a neas
y Europeas, Coloquio Internacional Asociado. Madrid, 2428 Octobre, 1985, Madrid,
17181.
(1992), Larm
ee romaine dans la P
eninsule Ib
erique sous lempire: Bilan pour
une d
ecennie, Revue des Etudes Anciennes 94: 23157.
(1995), Romains dEspagne. Cit
e s et politique dans les provinces IIesiecle av.
J.-C.IIIesiecle ap. J.-C., Paris.
(1999), Vectigalia et revenus des cit
es en Hispanie au Haut-Empire, in
Il capitolo delle entrate nelle Wnanze municipali in occidente ed in oriente. Actes de
la Xe Rencontre franco-italienne sur l
e pigraphie du monde romain. Rome, 2729 mai
1996, Rome, 15573.
Le Roy, C. (1961), Lakonika, Bulletin de Correspondance H
e llenique 85: 20635.
Lesquier, J. (1918), Larm
e e romaine dEgypte dAuguste a Diocl
e tien (MIFAO 41), Cairo.
Leveau, P. (1973), Laile II de Thrace, la tribu des Mazices et les praefecti gentis en
Afrique du Nord, Antiquit
e s Africaines 7: 10310.
Levick, B. (1999a), Tiberius, the Politician (rev. edn.), London & New York.
(1999b), Vespasian, London & New York.
(2000), The Government of the Roman Empire. A Sourcebook, London & New York.
Lewis, P. R. (1970), Roman Gold-Mining in North-West Spain, Journal of Roman
Studies 60: 16985.
Lewis, N. (1974), Papyrus in Classical Antiquity, Oxford.
(1989), Papyrus in Classical Antiquity. A Supplement, Brussels.
Lewis, M. J. T. (1997), Millstone and Hammer. The Origins of Water Power, Hull.
Lewis, P. R., and G. D. B. Jones (1969), The Dolaucothi Gold Mines I. The Surface
Evidence, Antiquaries Journal 49: 24472.
Lieb, H. (1998), Vindonissa und die romischen Lagerstadte, Jahresbericht der
Gesellschaft Pro Vindonissa, 636.
Liebenam, W. (1900), Stadteverwaltung im romischen Kaiserreiche, Leipzig.
Liermann, O. (1889), Analecta epigraphica et agonistica (Diss.), Halle.
Lintott, A. (1993), Imperium Romanum. Politics and Administration, London &
New York.
Liou, B., and C. Domergue (1990), Le commerce de la B
etique au Ier siecle de notre
ere. L
epave Sud-Lavezzi 2 (Bonifacio, Corse du Sud), Archaeonautica 10: 5694.
 Bibliography 467
Lo Cascio, E. (2005), The Emperor and his Administration. B. The age of the Severans,
in A. K. Bowman, P. Garnsey, and A. Cameron (eds.), The Cambridge Ancient History.
Second Edition. Volume XII. The Crisis of Empire A.D. 193337, 13755.
Locher, J. (1999), Topographie und Geschichte der Region am ersten Nilkatarakt in
griechisch-romischer Zeit (Archiv fur Papyrusforschung, Beiheft 5), Stuttgart &
Leipzig.
Long, L., and C. Domergue (1996), Le v
eritable plomb de L. Flavius Verucla et autres
lingots. L
epave 1 des Saintes-Maries-de-la-Mer, M
e langes dArch
e ologie et dHistoire
de lEcole francaise de Rome 107/2: 80067.
Lrincz, B. (1999), Onomasticon Provinciarum Europae Latinarum (OPEL). Vol. II:
Cabalicivs-Ixvs, Vienna.
(2000), Onomasticon Provinciarum Europae Latinarum (OPEL). Vol. III:
Labareus-Pythea, Vienna.
Mackensen, M. (2000), Erster Bericht uber neue archaologische Untersuchungen im
sog. Arbeits- und Steinbruchlager von Simitthus-Chemtou (Nordwest-Tunesien),
Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts, Romische Abteilung 107: 487505.
(2005), Militarlager oder Marmorwerkstatten. Neue Untersuchungen im
Ostbereich des Arbeits- und Steinbruchlagers von Simitthus/Chemtou (Simitthus
III), Mainz.
Maischberger, M. (1997), Marmor in Rom. Anlieferung, Lager- und Werkplatze in der
Kaiserzeit (Palilia 1), Wiesbaden.
Mangas, J. (1999), Los obligados por operae en las minas de Vipasca (Aljustrel,
Portugal), in J.-M. Pailler and P. Moret (eds.), M
e langes C. Domergue 2 (Pallas 50),
Toulouse, 24551.
Marquardt, J. (1884), Romische Staatsverwaltung. Zweiter Band, 2nd edn.
(Handbuch der Romischen Alterthumer 5), Leipzig.
Martin, S. D. (1989), The Roman Jurists and the Organization of Private Building in
the Late Republic and Early Empire (Collection Latomus 204), Brussels.
Mason, H. J. (1974), Greek Terms for Roman Institutions. A Lexicon and Analysis
(American Studies in Papyrology 13), Toronto.
Mateo, A. (1999), Manceps, redemptor, publicanus. Contribuci
on al estudio de los
contratistas publicos en Roma, Santander.
(2001), Observaciones sobre el r
e gimen jurdico de la minera en tierras publicas en

e poca romana, Santiago de Compostela.
(2003), Roman mining on public land: From the Republic to the Empire, in
J.-J. Aubert (ed.), Taches publiques et entreprise priv
e e dans le monde Romain,
Geneva, 12333.
Maxfield, V. A. (19945), The Imperial Porphyry Quarries Project, Journal of
Egyptian Archaeology 81: 1721.
(1996), The Eastern Desert forts and the army in Egypt during the principate,
in D. M. Bailey (ed.), Archaeological Research in Roman Egypt. The Proceedings of the
Seventeenth Classical Colloquium of the Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities,
British Museum, held on 14 December, 1993 (JRS Supplementary Series 19), Ann
Arbor, 919.
468 Bibliography
Maxfield, V. A. (2000), The deployment of the Roman auxilia in Upper Egypt and
the Eastern Desert during the principate, in G. Alfldy, B. Dobson, and W. Eck
(eds.), Kaiser, Heer und Gesellschaft in der Romischen Kaiserzeit. Gedenkschrift fur
Eric Birley (HABES 31), Stuttgart, 40744.
(2001), Stone quarrying in the Eastern Egyptian Desert with particular
reference to Mons Claudianus and Mons Porphyrites, in D. J. Mattingly and
J. Salmon (eds.), Economies beyond Agriculture in the Classical World, London &
New York, 14370.
(2002), Armies and quarries. A preliminary look at the evidence from Roman
Egypt, in P. R. Hill (ed.), Polybius to Vegetius. Essays on the Roman Army and
Hadrians Wall Presented to Brian Dobson, 6981.
(1997), Mons Porphyrites, Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 83: 13.
(1998a), The archaeology of an industrial landscape. An interim report on the
work of the Imperial Quarries (Mons Porphyrites) Project, in O. E. Kaper (ed.), Life
on the Fringe. Living in the Southern Egyptian Deserts During the Roman and Early-
Byzantine Periods. Proceedings of a Colloquium held on the Occasion of the 25th
Anniversary of the Netherlands Institute for Archaeology and Arabic Studies in Cairo
912 December 1996, Leiden, 18196.
(1998b), The Roman Imperial Porphyry Quarries Project, Gebel Dokhan,
Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 84: 1620.
(2001a), The Roman Imperial Quarries. Survey and Excavation at Mons
Porphyrites. Volume 1: Topography and Quarries, London.
(2001b), Survey and Excavation. Mons Claudianus. 19871993. Volume II.
Excavations: Part 1, Cairo.
and D. P. S. Peacock (1996), The Roman Imperial Porphyry Quarries Project,
Gebel Dokhan, Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 82: 1519.
McCabe, D. F. (1985), Teos Inscriptions. Texts and List, Princeton.
Meier, S. (1997), Blei-Fernhandel in romischer Zeit (2.Jh. v.Chr. - 4.Jh. n.Chr.),
Helvetia Archaeologica 109: 214.
Meiggs, R. (1973), Roman Ostia, 2nd edn. Oxford.
Meloni, P. (1990), La Sardegna romana, 3rd edn. Sassari.
Mendel, G. (1909), Catalogue des monuments grecs, romains et byzantins du
Mus
ee Imp
erial Ottoman de Brousse, Bulletin de Correspondance H
e llenique
33: 245435.
Mentella, G. (1990), Limprenditoria privata nelle cave Lunensi alla Luce di CIL XI
6946, in F. Rebecchi (ed.), Miscellanea di Studi Archeologici e di Antichita III,
Modena, 1339.
Meredith, D. (1952), The Roman remains in the Eastern Desert of Egypt, Journal of
Egyptian Archaeology 38: 94111.
(1953), The Roman remains in the Eastern Egyptian Desert (continued),
Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 39: 95106.
(1957), Inscriptions from the amethyst mines at Abu Diyeiba (Eastern Desert of
Egypt), Eos. Commentarii Societatis Philologae Polonorum 48/2: 11719.
 Bibliography 469
and A. Tregenza (1949), Notes on Roman Roads and Stations in the Eastern
Desert I: (a) from Qena to Bab El-Mukheiniq, (b) the Roman Station in W. Abu
Zawal, Bulletin of the Faculty of Arts, Fouad I University 11: 11526.
Merkelbach, R., and J. Stauber (2001), Steinepigramme aus dem griechischen Osten.
Band 3. Der Ferne Osten und das Landesinnere bis zum Tauros, Stuttgart & Leipzig.
Meyer, C. (1995), A Byzantine gold-mining town in the Eastern Desert of Egypt: Bir
Umm Fawakhir, 19921993, Journal of Roman Archaeology 8: 192224.
Millar, F. G. B. (1963a), The fiscus in the first two centuries, Journal of Roman
Studies 53: 2942 ( Millar 2004, 4772).
(1963b), Review of H. G. PXaum, Les carrieres procuratoriennes
equestres sous
la Haut-Empire Romain IIII, Paris 196061, Journal of Roman Studies 53: 194200
( The equestrian Career under the Empire, in Millar 2004, 1519).
(1964), Some evidence on the meaning of Tacitus Annals XII.60, Historia
13: 1807.
(1965), The development of jurisdiction by Imperial Procurators. Further
evidence, Historia 14: 3627.
(1967), Emperors at work, Journal of Roman Studies 57: 919 ( Millar 2004,
322).
(1984), Condemnation to hard labour in the Roman Empire from the Julio-
Claudians to Constantine, Papers of the British School at Rome 52: 12447 ( Millar
2004, 12050).
(1992), The Emperor in the Roman World, 2nd edn. London.
(1994), Latin in the epigraphy of the Roman Near East, in H. Solin et al. (eds.),
Acta Colloqui Epigraphici Latini. Helsinki 36 Sept. 1991 (Commentationes
Humanarum Litterarum 104), XXX, 40319 ( Millar 2006, 22342).
(2004), Rome, the Greek World, and the East. Volume 2. Government, Society, and
Culture in the Roman Empire, Chapel Hill & London.
(2006), Rome, the Greek World, and the East. Volume 3. The Greek World, the
Jews, and the East, Chapel Hill & London.
Minnen, P. v. (2000), Prisoners of war and hostages in Graeco-Roman Egypt, Journal
of Juristic Papyrology 30: 15563.
Mirkovi
c, M. (1975), Iz istorije Polimlja u rimsko doba, Godisnjak. Centar za
balkanolosa ispitivanja 14/12: 95108.
Mitchell, S. (1993), Anatolia. Land, Men, and Gods in Asia Minor. Volume I, Oxford.
(1999), The administration of Roman Asia from 133 BC to AD 250, in W. Eck
(ed.), Lokale Autonomie und romische Ordnungsmacht in den kaiserzeitlichen Provinzen
vom 1. bis 3. Jahrhundert (Schriften des Historischen Kollegs, Kolloquien 42), Munich,
1746.
Mitthof, F. (1994), Quittung eines Soldaten an   

uber
verschiedene Lieferungen. Eine Neuedition von P. Alex.inv. 463, Zeitschrift fur
Papyrologie und Epigraphik 102: 20712.
(2001), Annona militaris. Die Heeresversorgung im spatantiken Agypten. Ein
Beitrag zur Verwaltungs- und Heeresgeschichte des Romischen Reiches im 3. bis
6. Jh. n. Chr. (Pap Flor XXXII), Florence.
470 Bibliography
M
ocsy, A. (1962), Pannonia, in Paulys Real-Encyclopadie der Classischen
Altertumswissenschaften. Band IX, 516776.
(1970), Gesellschaft und Romanisation in der romischen Provinz Moesia Superior,
Amsterdam.
(1972), Das Problem der militarischen Territorien im Donauraum, Acta
Antiqua Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 20: 13368.
(1980), Zu den Auxiliarvici in Pannonien, in H. Galsterer and H. WolV (eds.),
Studien zur antiken Sozialgeschichte. Festschrift Friedrich VittinghoV, Cologne &
Vienna, 36576.
Mommsen, Th. (1887), Romisches Staatsrecht. Zweiter Band. 1. Abteilung (Handbuch
der Romischen Alterthumer), Leipzig.
(1899), Romisches Strafrecht, Leipzig.
Monthel, G., and P.-Y. Lambert (2002), La carriere gallo-romaine de Saint-Boil
(Saone-et-Loire), Gallia 52: 89120.
Mrozek, S. (1968), Die kaiserlichen Bergwerksprokuratoren in der Zeit des
Prinzipats, Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Mikolaja Kopernika w Toruniu. Nauki
Humanistyczno-Spoleczne. (Zeszyt 34. Historia IV), 4565.
(1969), Die Arbeitsverhaltnisse in den Goldbergwerken des romischen Dazien, in
M. N. Andreev, J. Irmscher, E. Polay, and W. Warkallo (eds.), Gesellschaft und Recht im
Griechisch-Romischen Altertum. Eine Aufsatzsammlung. Teil 2, Berlin, 13955.
(1977), Die Goldbergwerke im romischen Dazien, in H. Temporini and
W. Haase (eds.), Aufstieg und Niedergang der Romischen Welt. Geschichte und
Kultur Roms im Spiegel der Neueren Forschung II. Principat, Sechster Band.
Politische Geschichte (Provinzen und Randvolker: Lateinischer Donau-Balkanraum),
Berlin & New York, 95109.
Nachtergael, G. (1996), Un proscyneme dAssouan-rive gauche, Chronique
dEgypte 70/1: 33542.
Neesen, L. (1980), Untersuchungen zu den direkten Staatsabgaben der Romischen
Kaiserzeit (27 v.Chr.284 n.Chr.), Bonn.
Negri, G. (1985), Diritto minerario romano I. Studi esegetici sul regime delle cave
private nel pensiero dei giuristi classici, Milan.
Nelis-Cl
ement, J. (2000), Les beneWciarii: militaires et administratuers au service de
lEmpire (1er s.a.C.VIe s.p.C.) (Ausonius Publications. Etudes 5), Bordeaux.
and F. Wibl
e (1996), Aurelius Maximianus, b
en
eWciaire en poste a Martigny/
Forum Claudii Vallensium?, Vallesia 51: 271309.
Nesselhauf, H. (1937), Neue Inschriften aus dem romischen Germanien und den
angrenzenden Gebieten, Bericht der Romisch-Germanischen Kommission 27: 51134.
Nicholas, B. (1962), An Introduction to Roman Law, Oxford.
Nicolet, C. (1993), Le monumentum Ephesenum et la d
elimitation du portorium
dAsie, M
e langes dArch
e ologie et dHistoire de lEcole francaise de Rome 105/2: 92959.
Noeske, H.-C. (1977), Studien zur Verwaltung und Bevolkerung der dakischen
Goldbergwerke, Bonner Jahrbucher 177: 271415.
Nonnis, D., and C. Ricci (1999), Vectigalia municipali ed epigraWa: un caso dall
Hirpinia, in Il capitolo delle entrate nelle Wnanze municipali in occidente ed in oriente.
 Bibliography 471
Actes de la Xe Rencontre franco-italienne sur l
e pigraphie du monde romain. Rome, 27
29 mai 1996, Rome, 4159.
Nony, D. (1970), A propos des nouveaux procurateurs dAstorga, Archivo espa~ nol de
arqueologa 43: 195201.
Nuber, H. U. (1977), Romische Steindenkmaler aus St. Ulrich und Afra in Augsburg,
in J. Werner (ed.), Die Ausgrabungen in St. Ulrich und Afra in Augsburg 19611968
(Munchner Beitrage zur Vor- und Fruhgeschichte 23), Munich, 22761.
(1985), Ein Bergwerkspachter in Ratien, in E. Keller, D. Reimann, and H. Stlzl
(eds.), Die Romer in Schwaben. Jubilaumsausstellung 2000 Jahre Augsburg
veranstaltet vom Bayerischen Landesamt fur DenkmalpXege und der Stadt
Augsburg, Zeughaus, 23. Mai 3. November 1985, Munich, 1301.
Oleson, J. P. (1984), Greek and Roman Mechanical Water-lifting Devices. The History
of a Technology, Toronto & BuValo.
Oliver, J. H. (1989), Greek Constitutions of Early Roman Emperors from Inscriptions
and Papyri (Memoirs of the American Philosophical Society 178), Philadelphia.
Orejas, A. (1994), Les populations des zones minieres du Nord-Ouest de la
p
eninsule ib
erique (Bassin NO du Douro, LeonEspagne), Dialogues dHistoire
Ancienne 20/1: 24581.
(1996), Estructura social y territorio. El impacto romano en la cuenca noroccidental
del Duero, Madrid.
and F. J. S
anchez-Palencia (2002), Mines, territorial organization, and social
structure in Roman Iberia. Carthago Nova and the Peninsular Northwest, American
Journal of Archaeology 106: 58199.
and I. Sastre Prats (1999), Fiscalit
e et organisation du territoire dans le
Nord-Ouest de la P
eninsule Ib
erique: civitates, tribut et ager mensura
comprehensus, Dialogues dHistoire Ancienne 25/1: 18393.
rsted, P. (1985), Roman Imperial Economy and Romanization. A Study in Roman
Imperial Administration and the Public Lease System in the Danubian Provinces from
the First to the Third Century A. D., Copenhagen.
Orth, F. (1924), Bergbau, in W. Kroll (ed.), Paulys Real-Encyclopadie der classischen
Altertumswissenschaften. Supplementband IV, Stuttgart, 10855.
Ott, J. (1995), Die BeneWciarier. Untersuchungen zu ihrer Stellung innerhalb der
Rangordnung des Romischen Heeres und zu ihrer Funktion (Historia Einzelschriften
92), Stuttgart.
Panciera, S. (1957), Vita economica di Aquileia in eta romana, Aquileia.
Papageorgakis, J. (1964), Die antiken Brueche des Karystischen Marmors, Praktika tes
Akadimias Athinon 39: 26284.
Parassoglou, G. M. (1978), Imperial Estates in Roman Egypt (American Studies in
Papyrology 18), Amsterdam.
Parker, A. J. (1974), Lead ingots from a Roman ship at Ses Salines, Majorca,
International Journal of Nautical Archaeology 3: 1478.
(1992), Ancient Shipwrecks of the Mediterranean and the Roman Provinces (BAR
International Series 580), Oxford.
472 Bibliography
Pasali
c, E. (1967), Rolle und Bedeutung der romischen Eisenbergwerke in
Westbosnien fur den pannonischen Limes, in Studien zu den Militargrenzen
Roms. Vortrage des 6. Internationalen Limeskongresses in Suddeutschland (Beihefte
der Bonner Jahrbucher, Band 19), Cologne & Graz, 12730.
Patsch, C. (1899), Archaologisch-epigraphische Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der
romischen Provinz Dalmatien. Dritter Theil, Wissenschaftliche Mittheilungen aus
Bosnien und der Herzegowina 6: 154273.
(1900), Archaologisch-epigraphische Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der
romischen Provinz Dalmatien. Vierter Theil, Wissenschaftliche Mittheilungen aus
Bosnien und der Herzegowina 7: 33166.
Peacock, D. P. S. (1992), Rome in the Desert. A Symbol of Power, Southampton.
(1995), The Passio Sanctorum Quattuor Coronatorum. A petrological approach,
Antiquity 69/263: 3628.
(1996), A note on the distribution of porphyry and other rocks on Roman sites
in the Eastern Desert, in D. M. Bailey (ed.), Archaeological Research in Roman Egypt.
The Proceedings of the Seventeenth Classical Colloquium of the Department of
Greek and Roman Antiquities, British Museum, held on 14 December, 1993 (JRS
Supplementary Series 19), Ann Arbor, 202.
and V. A. Maxfield (1997), Survey and Excavation. Mons Claudianus
19871993. Volume I. Topography and Quarries (FIFAO 37), Cairo.
P
ekary, T. (1968), Untersuchungen zu den Romischen Reichsstrassen, Bonn.
(1979), Vectigal, in K. Ziegler, W. Sontheimer, and H. Gartner (eds.), Der Kleine
Pauly. Lexikon der Antike in funf Banden. Band 5, Munich, 1150.
Pe~na, J. T. (1989), P. Giss. 69: Evidence for the supplying of stone transport
operations in Roman Egypt and the production of fifty-foot monolithic column
shafts, Journal of Roman Archaeology 2: 12632.
(1998), The mobilization of state olive oil in Roman Africa. The evidence of late
4th-c. Ostraca from Carthage, in Carthage Papers. The Early Colonys Economy,
Water Supply, a Public Bath, and the Mobilization of State Olive Oil, Portsmouth, RI,
117238.
Pensabene, P. (1978), A cargo of marble shipwrecked at Punta Scifo near Crotone
(Italy), International Journal of Nautical Archaeology 7/2: 10518.
(1994), Le vie del marmo. I blocchi di cava di Roma e di Ostia. Il fenomeno del
Marmo nella Roma Antica (Itinerari Ostiensi 7), Rome.
(2002), Il fenomeno del marmo nel mondo romano, in M. De Nucio and
L. Ungaro (eds.), I marmi colorati della Roma imperiale, Venice, 367.
Petolescu, C. C. (1983), Numerus maurorum Hisp., Geri
on 1: 32730.
(1988), Cronica EpigraWca a Romaniei, Studii si Cercetari de Istorie Veche si
Arheologie 39: 4038.
Petrovi
c, P. (1979), Inscriptions de la M
e sie sup
e rieure. Vol. IV. Naissus-Remesiana-
Horreum Margi, Belgrade.
(1995a), Der romische Bergbau in Ravna. Archaologische Skizzen, in B. Jovanovi
c
(ed.), Ancient Mining and Metallurgy in Southeast Europe. International Symposium,
 Bibliography 473
Donji Milanovac. May 2025: 1990 (Archaeological Institute Beograd Monographs
27), Bor, 195202.
(1995b), Inscriptions de la M
e sie sup
e rieure. Vol. III/2. Timacum Minus et la
Vall
e e du Timok, Belgrade.
Pflaum, H.-G. (1948), Le marbre de Thorigny, Paris.
(1950), Les procurateurs
e questres sous le Haut-Empire romain, Paris.
(1955), Deux carrieres
equestres de Lambese et de Zana (Diana Veteranorum),
Libyca. Arch
e ologie, Epigraphie 3: 12354.
(19601), Les carrieres procuratoriennes
e questres sous le Haut-Empire romain
(Institut Francais dArch
eologie de Beyrouth. Bibl. arch
eologique et historique 57),
Paris.
(1970), La carriere de laVranchi imp
erial Saturninus. Sous-procurateurs
provinciaux
equestres et procurateurs dextraction aVranchi, Revue des Etudes
Latines, 297310.
(1971), Une lettre de promotion de lempereur Marc Aurele pour un
procurateur duc
enaire de Gaule Narbonnaise, Bonner Jahrbucher 171: 34966.
(1978), Les Fastes de la province Narbonnaise (XXXeme suppl
ement a Gallia),
Paris.
(1981), Scripta varia. La Gaule et lEmpire romain, Paris.
(1982), Les carrieres procuratoriennes
e questres sous le Haut-Empire romain.
Suppl
e ment (Institut Francais dArch
eologie du Proche Orient Beyrouth-Damas-
Amman. Bibliotheque arch
eologique et historique 112), Paris.
Piccottini, G. (1989), Archaologischer Atlas von Karnten, Klagenfurt.
(1994a), Gold und Kristall am Magdalensberg, Germania 72/2: 46777.
(1994b), Mithrastempel in Virunum, Klagenfurt.
H. Dolenz, F. Glaser, and R. Jernej (2002), Virunum, in M. Sasel Kos and
P. Scherrer (eds.), The Autonomous Towns of Noricum and Pannonia. Noricum,
Ljubljana, 10334.
Piso, I. (1993), Fasti Provinciae Dacicae I. Die senatorischen Amtstrager (Antiquitas.
Reihe 1. Abhandlungen zur Alten Geschichte 43), Bonn.
(2000), Les l
egions dans la province de Dacie, in Y. Le Bohec (ed.), Les l
e gions
de Rome sous le Haut-Empire. Actes du Congres de Lyon, 1719 septembre, 1998
(Collection du Centre dEtudes Romaines et Gallo-Romaines. Nouvelle s
erie,
no. 20), Lyon, 20525.
(2004), Gli Illiri al Alburnus Maior, in G. Urso (ed.), Dall Adriatico al Danubio.
LIllyrico nell eta greca e romana. Atti del convegno internazionale Cividale del Friuli,
2527 settembre 2003, Pisa, 271307.
(2005), La M
esie Sup
erieure et les D
ebuts de Sarmizegetusa, in M. Mirkovi
c
(ed.), Romische Stadte und Festungen an der Donau. Akten der regionalen Konferenz.
Organisiert von der Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung, Beograd, 1619 Oktober 2003,
Belgrade, 11924.
Poveda Navarro, A. M. (2000), Societas Baliarica. Una nueva compa~ na minera
romana de Hispania, G
erion 18: 293313.
474 Bibliography
Premerstein, A. V. (1901), A commentariis, in G. Wissowa (ed.), Paulys Real-
Encyclopadie der Classischen Altertumswissenschaften, Stuttgart, 75968.
Price, S. R. F. (1984), Rituals and Power. The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor,
Cambridge.
Quilici, L. (1974), Collatia (Forma Italiae. Regio I. Vol. X), Rome.
Rakob, F. (1993), I. Zur Siedlungstopographie von Chemtou/Simitthus, in F. Rakob
(ed.), Simitthus I. Die Steinbruche und die antike Stadt, Mainz, 116.
(1994), II. Das Romische Steinbruchlager (Praesidium) in Simitthus, in
F. Rakob (ed.), Simitthus II. Der Tempelberg und das Romische Lager, Mainz, 51139.
(1997), Chemtou. Aus der romischen Arbeitswelt, Antike Welt 28: 120.
Rankov, N. B. (1983), A contribution to the military and administrative history of
Montana, in A. G. Poulter (ed.), Ancient Bulgaria. Papers Presented to the
International Symposium on the Ancient History and Archaeology of Bulgaria,
University of Nottingham, 1981. Part II, Nottingham, 4073.
(1990), Frumentarii, the Castra Peregrina and the Provincial OYcia, Zeitschrift
fur Papyrologie und Epigraphik 80: 17682.
(1999), The governors men: The OYcium Consularis in provincial
administration, in A. Goldsworthy and I. Haynes (eds.), The Roman Army as a
Community. Including Papers of a Conference held at Birkbeck College, University of
London on 1112 January, 1997 (Journal of Roman Archaeology. Supplementary
Series 34), Portsmouth, RI, 1534.
Rathbone, D. (1993) Egypt, Augustus and Roman Taxation, Cahiers du Centre
Gustave Glotz 4: 81112.
(1996), The imperial finances, in A. K. Bowman, E. Champlin, and A. Lintott
(eds.), The Cambridge Ancient History. Second Edition. Volume X. The Augustan
Empire, 43 BC AD 69, Cambridge, 30923.
(2003), The control and exploitation of ager publicus in Italy under the Roman
Republic, in J.-J. Aubert (ed.). Taches publiques et entreprise priv
e e dans le monde
romain. Actes du Diplome dEtudes Avanc
e es, Universit
e s de Neuchatel et de
Lausanne, 20002002, Geneva, 13578.
Reinach, S. (1890), Inscriptions in
edites dAsie Mineure & de Syrie. Recueillies par
M. le capitaine Callier (18301834), Revue des Etudes Grecques 3: 4885.
R
emy, B. (1995), Inscriptions Latines dAquitaine (I.L.A.). Vellaves, Bordeaux.
Rengen, W. V. (1992), Les Laissez-Passer, in J. Bingen, A. Bulow-Jacobsen, W. E. H.
Cockle, H. Cuvigny, L. Rubinstein, and W. V. Rengen (eds.), Mons Claudianus.
Ostraca Graeca et Latina. I. O. Claud. 1 a 190 (FIFAO 29), Cairo, 6074.
(1995), A new Paneion at Mons Porphyrites, Chronique dEgypte 70: 2405.
(1997), La correspondance militaire, in Bingen et al. 1997, 193227.
Reynolds, J. (1982), Aphrodisias and Rome (Journal of Roman Studies Monographs
1), London.
Riccardi, E., and S. Genovesi (2002), Un carico di piombo da Rena Maiore
(Aglientu), LAfrica romana 14: 131129.
Richardson, J. S. (1976), The Spanish mines and the development of provincial
taxation in the second century b.c., Journal of Roman Studies 66: 13952.
 Bibliography 475
Ricl, M. (1997), The Inscriptions of Alexandreia Troas (Inschriften griechischer Stadte
aus Kleinasien 53), Bonn.
Ritterling, E. (1925), Legio, in W. Kroll (ed.), Paulys Real-Encyclopadie der
Classischen Altertumswissenschaft XII, Stuttgart, 1186830.
Rder, J. (1971), Marmor Phrygium. Die antiken Marmorbruche von Iscehisar in
Westanatolien, Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts 86: 253312.
Rder, G. (1993), Die Steinbruche des Numidischen Marmors von Chemtou, in
F. Rakob (ed.), Simitthus I. Die Steinbruche und die Antike Stadt, Mainz, 1753.
Rodr
guez Colmenero, A. (1997), Aquae Flaviae, I. Fontes epigr
aWcas da Gallaecia
meridional interior, Chaves.
Rostovtzeff, M. (1904), Geschichte der Staatspacht in romischer Kaiserzeit bis
Diokletian, Philologus Erganzungsband 9: 331512.
(1957), The Social and Economic History of the Roman Empire, 2nd edn. Oxford.
Rosumek, P. (1982), Technischer Fortschritt und Rationalisierung im Antiken Bergbau,
Bonn.
Rothenhfer, P. (2003), Geschafte in Germanien. Zur Ausbeutung von
Erzlagerstatten unter Augustus in Germanien, Zeitschrift fur Papyrologie und
Epigraphik 143: 27786.
(2005), Die Wirtschaftsstrukturen im sudlichen Niedergermanien.
Untersuchungen zur Entwicklung eines Wirtschaftsraumes an der Peripherie des
Imperium Romanum (Kolner Studien zur Archaologie der Romischen Provinzen
7), Rahden.
Royden, H. L. (1988), The Magistrates of the Roman Professional Collegia in Italy from
the First to the Third Century A.D. (Biblioteca di Studi Antichi 61), Pisa.
Sablayrolles, R. (1989), Ladministration des mines de fer en Gaule Romaine, in
C. Domergue (ed.), Minera y metalurgia en las Antiguas Civilizaciones Mediterr
a neas
y Europeas, Coloquio Internacional Asociado. Madrid, 2428 Octobre, 1985, Madrid,
15761.
(2005), Analyses d
economie antique: textes anciens et arch
eologie r
ecente,
in LAquitaine et lHispanie septentrionale a l
e poque julio-claudienne. Organisation
et exploitation des espaces provinciaux. Colloque Aquitania Saintes, 1113 septembre
2003 (Aquitania Suppl
ement 13), Bordeaux, 41522.
Sachers, E. (1932), Tabularius, in W. Kroll and K. Mittelhaus (eds.), Paulys Real-
Encyclopadie der Classischen Altertumswissenschaft. IVA, Stuttgart, 196984.
Sagui, L. (1993), Crypta Balbi (Roma): Conclusione delle indagini archeologiche nell
eserda del monumento romano. Relazione preliminare, Archaeologia Medievale
20: 40918.
Salama, P. (1951), Les voies romaines de lAfrique du Nord, Alger.
Salerno, F. (2003), Ad metalla. Aspetti giuridici del lavoro in miniera, Naples.
Samsaris, D. (1985), Une inscription latine in
edite trouv
ee pres des frontieres du
territoire de la colonie de Philippes, Klio 67: 45865.
(1987), Les mines et la metallurgie de fer et de cuivre dans la province romaine
de Mac
edonie, Klio 69: 15262.
476 Bibliography
S
anchez-Palencia, F. J. (1980), Prospecciones en las explotaciones aurferas del NO
de Espa~ na (Cuencas de los ros Eria y Cabrera y Sierra del Teleno), Noticiario
Arqueologico Hispanico 8: 22837.
(1986), El campamiento romano de Valdemeda, Manzaneda (Le
on). Ocupacion
militar y explotacion aurifera en el NW. peninsular, Numantia 2: 22734.
and L. C. Perez Garcia (1983), Las explotacionas auriferas y la ocupacion
Romana del Noroeste de la Peninsula Iberica, in Actas del II Seminario de
Arqueologia del Noroeste, Santiago de Compostela 1980, Madrid, 22746.
M. D. Fern
andez-Posse, J. Fern
andez Manzano, Y. Alvarez Gonz
alez, and
L. F. L

opez Gonz
alez (1990), La Zona Arqueol
ogica de Las Medulas (198889),
Archivo espa~nol de arqueologa 63: 24964.
S
anchez-Palencia Ramos, F. J., M. D. Fern
andez-Posse, J. Fern
andez Manzano,
and A. Orejas (1996), La zona arqu
e ologica de Las M
e dulas, Le
on. Gua
Arqueol
ogica, Le

on.
Santos Yanguas, J. (1983), Cambios y pervivencias en las estructuras sociales
indigenas. Sociedad indigena y sociedad romana en al area Astur, in Indigenismo
y Romanizacion en le Conventus Asturum, Oviedo, 91106.
Sasel, J. (1982), Zur Inschrift eines Zollbeamten aus dem Stadtgebiet des
obermosischen Ulpiana, Zeitschrift fur Papyrologie und Epigraphik 49: 21113.
Sastre Prats, I. (1998), Formas de dependencia social en el Noroeste peninsular
(Transici
on del Mundo Prerromano al Romano y Epoca Altoimperial), Le
on.
Saxer, R. (1967), Untersuchungen zu den Vexillationen des romischen Kaiserheeres von
Augustus bis Diokletian (Epigraphische Studien 1), Cologne & Graz.
Schfer, C. (1998), Spitzenmanagement in Republik und Kaiserzeit. Die Prokuratoren
von Privatpersonen im Imperium Romanum vom 2.Jh. v. Chr. bis zum 3.Jh. n. Chr.,
St. Katharinen.
Schallmayer, E., K. Eibl, J. Ott, G. Preuss, and E. Wittkopf (1990), Der romische
Weihebezirk von Osterburken I. Corpus der griechischen und lateinischen
BeneWciarier-Inschriften des Romischen Reiches (Forschungen und Berichte zur
Vor- und Fruhgeschichte in Baden-Wurttemberg 40), Stuttgart.
Scherrer, P. (1985), Zur Lage der statio Esc(ensis?) in Noricum, in M. Kandler,
S. Karwiese, and R. Pillinger (eds.), Lebendige Altertumswissenschaft. Festgabe zur
Vollendung des 70. Lebensjahres von Hermann Vetters dargebracht von Freunden,
Schulern und Kollegen, Vienna, 2557.
(1995), Ephesos. Der neue Fuhrer. 100 Jahre osterreichische Ausgrabungen 18951995,
Vienna.
(2002), Vom regnum Noricum zur romischen Provinz: Grundlagen und
Mechanismen der Urbanisierung, in M. Sasel Kos and P. Scherrer (eds.),
The Autonomous Towns of Noricum and Pannonia. Noricum, Ljubljana, 1270.
Scheuermann, A. (1957), Diozese, in T. Klauser and E. Dassmann (eds.),
Reallexikon fur Antike und Christentum. Band 3, 105362.
Schlee, D. (2007), Metal Mining in Upland Ceredigion. A Guide to the History and
Protection of our Metal Mining Heritage, Landeilo.
 Bibliography 477
Schneider, K. (1958), Vilicus, in K. Ziegler and W. John (eds.), Paulys
Real-Encyclopadie der Classischen Altertumswissenschaft. VII A.2, Stuttgart,
213641.
Schnurbein, S. V. (1971), Ein Bleibarren der 19. Legion aus dem Hauptlager von
Haltern, Germania 49: 1326.
Schnbauer, E. (1929), Beitrage zur Geschichte des Bergbaurechts (Munchner
Beitrage zur Papyrusforschung und antiken Rechtsgeschichte 12), Munich.
Shaw, I., and R. Jameson (1993), Amethyst mining in the Eastern Desert:
A preliminary survey at Wadi el-Hudi, Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 79: 8197.
J. Bunbury, and R. Jameson (1999), Emerald mining in Roman and Byzantine
Egypt, Journal of Roman Archaeology 12: 20315.
Shepherd, R. (1993), Ancient Mining, London & New York.
Sidebotham, S. E. (1996), Newly discovered Sites in the Eastern Desert, Journal of
Egyptian Archaeology 82: 18192.
and R. E. Zitterkopf (1991), Survey of the Abu Shaar-Nile road, American
Journal of Archaeology 95: 571622.
H. Branard, J. A. Harrell, and R. S. Tomber (2001), The Roman quarry and
installations in Wadi Umm Wikala and Wadi Semna, Journal of Egyptian
Archaeology 87: 13570.
Sijpesteijn, P. J. (1987), Customs Duties in Graeco-Roman Egypt, Zutphen.
(1993), Three small papyri from the Princeton collection, Aegyptus 73: 2732.
Sillieres, P. (1990), Les voies de communication de lEspagne m
e ridionale, Paris.
Simi
c, V. M., and M. R. Vasi
c (1977), La monnaie des mines romaines de lIllyrie,
Revue Numismatique 19: 4861.
Skegro, A. (2000), Bergbau der romischen Provinz Dalmatien, Godisnjak Jahrbuch
31: 53176.
Solin, H. (1996a), Die stadtromischen Sklavennamen. Ein Namenbuch. Drei Teile.
I. Teil: Lateinische Namen (Forschungen zur Antiken Sklaverei. Beiheft 2), Stuttgart.
(1996b), Die stadtromischen Sklavennamen. Ein Namenbuch. Drei Teile. II. Teil:
Griechische Namen (Forschungen zur Antiken Sklaverei. Beiheft 2), Stuttgart.
Sorge, A. (2002), Organization, in A. Sorge (ed.), Organization, London, 324.
Sotgiu, G. (1988), LepigraWa latina in Sardegna dopo il CIL X e lE.E. VIII, in W. Haase
and H. Temporini (eds.), Aufstieg und Niedergang der Romischen Welt. Geschichte und
Kultur Roms im Spiegel der Neueren Forschung. Teil II: Principat, Band 11. Politische
Geschichte (Provinzen und Randvolker: Sizilien und Sardinien; Italien und Rom;
Allgemeines). 1.Teilband: Sizilien und Sardinien, Berlin & New York, 552739.
Spaul, J. E. H. (1994), Ala2. The Auxiliary Cavalry Units of the pre-Diocletianic
Imperial Roman Army, Andover.
(2000), Cohors2. The Evidence for and a Short History of the Auxiliary Infantry
Units of the Imperial Roman Army (BAR International Series 841), Oxford.
Speidel, M. P. (1977), The Roman army in Arabia, in H. Temporini and W. Haase (eds.),
Aufstieg und Niedergang der Romischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der
Neueren Forschung. II. Principat, Achter Band. Politische Geschichte, Berlin & New York,
687730 ( Roman Army Studies I, Amsterdam, 1984, 22972).
478 Bibliography
Speidel, M. P. (19812), Noricum als Herkunftsgebiet der kaiserlichen Gardereiter,
Jahrbuch des Osterreichischen Archaologischen Instituts 53: 21344.
(1984), Regionarii in Lower Moesia, ZPE 57: 1858 ( Roman Army Studies II
(MAVORS VIII), Stuttgart, 1992, 1404).
Speidel, M. A. (1993), Miles ex cohorte. Zur Bedeutung der mit ex eingeleiteten
Truppenangaben auf Soldateninschriften, Zeitschrift fur Papyrologie und Epigraphik
95: 1906.
(1994), Scribonius Proculus: Curator aedium sacrarum et operum publicorum in
Rom oder in Luna? Uberlegungen zu CIL XI 1340, Zeitschrift fur Papyrologie und
Epigraphik 103: 20914.
(1996), Die romischen Schreibtafeln von Vindonissa (VeroVentlichungen der
Gesellschaft Pro Vindonissa), Baden.
(1998), Legio IIII Scythica, its Movements and Men, in D. L. Kennedy (ed.),
The Twin Towns of Zeugma on the Euphrates. Rescue Work and Historical Studies,
Portsmouth, RI, 163204.
(2000a), Geld und Macht. Die Neuordnung des staatlichen Finanzwesens unter
Augustus, in La r
e volution romaine apres Ronald Syme (Fondation Hardt.
Entretiens sur lantiquit
e classique. Tome XLVI), Geneva.
(2000b), Sold und Wirtschaftslage der romischen Soldaten, in G. Alfoldy,
B. Dobson, and W. Eck (eds.), Kaiser, Heer und Gesellschaft in der Romischen
Kaiserzeit. Gedenkschrift fur Eric Birley (HABES 31), Stuttgart, 6594.
(2001), Legio operosa felix, Electrum 5: 1536.
Steinby, M. (1978), Ziegelstempel von Rom und Umgebung, in H. Gartner (ed.),
Paulys Real-Encyclopadie der Classischen Altertumswissenschaft. Suppl. XV, Munich,
1489531.
Steinwenter, A. (1916), Instrumentum, in W. Kroll (ed.), Paulys Real-Encyclopadie
der Classischen Altertumswissenschaften. IX, Stuttgart, 15879.
Stevenson, G. H., and A. W. Lintott (1999), Clubs, Roman, in S. Hornblower and
A. Spawforth (eds.), The Oxford Classical Dictionary, 3rd edn. Oxford, 3523.
Stewart, N. S. (2002), The Technology and Control of Mining in Roman Britain
(DPhil Thesis), Oxford.
Stoll, O. (1998), Silvanus im Steinbruch. Kulturtransfer durch Soldaten der legio IIII
Scythica in Syrien?, in L. Schumacher (ed.), Religion Wirtschaft Technik.
Althistorische Beitrage zur Entstehung neuer kultureller Strukturmuster im historischen
Raum Nordafrika/Kleinasien/Syrien, St. Katharinen, 99145.
Strack, P. L. (1933), Untersuchungen zur romischen Reichspragung des 2. Jahrhunderts,
Stuttgart.
Strobel, K. (1987), Einige Bemerkungen zu den historisch-archaologischen Grundlagen
einer Neuformulierung der Sigillatenchronologie fur Germanien und Ratien und zu
wirtschaftsgeschichtlichen Aspekten der romischen Keramikindustrie, Munstersche
Beitrage zur Antiken Handelsgeschichte 6/2: 75115.
Strubbe, J. (1975), A group of imperial estates in Central Phrygia, Ancient Society 6:
22950.
 Bibliography 479
(1997), `` '&. Imprecations Against Desecrators of the Grave in
the Greek Epitaphs of Asia Minor. A Catalogue (Inschriften griechischer Stadte aus
Kleinasien 52), Bonn.
Syme, R. (1969), Pliny, the Procurator, Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 73: 20136.
Tckholm, U. (1937), Studien uber den Bergbau der Romischen Kaiserzeit, Uppsala.
Talbert, R. J. A. (1984), The Senate of Imperial Rome, Princeton.
Taubenschlag, R. (1955), The Law of Greco-Roman Egypt in the Light of the Papyri.
332 BC640 AD, 2nd edn. Warsaw.
Thomas, J. D. (1982), The Epistrategos in Ptolemaic and Roman Egypt. Part II.
The Roman Epistrategos (Papyrologica Coloniensia 6/2), Opladen.
(1998), Communication between the Prefect of Egypt, the Procurators and the
Nome OYcials, in W. Eck (ed.), Lokale Autonomie und romische Ordnungsmacht in
den kaiserzeitlichen Provinzen vom 1. bis zum 3. Jahrhundert (Schriften des
Historischen Kollegs. Kolloquien 42), Munich, 18195.
Thomasson, B. E. (1984), Laterculi Praesidium. Volumen I, Goteborg.
Todd, M. (1996), Pretia Victoria. Roman lead and silver mining on the Mendip
Hills, Somerset, England, Munstersche Beitrage zur Antiken Handelsgeschichte
15/1: 118.
Tomber, R. S. (1996), Provisioning the desert. Pottery supply to Mons Claudianus,
in D. M. Bailey (ed.), Archaeological Research in Roman Egypt. The Proceedings of the
Seventeenth Classical Colloquium of the Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities,
British Museum, Held on 14 December, 1993 (Journal of Roman Archaeology,
Supplement 19), Ann Arbor, 3949.
Tomovi
c, M. (1995), Roman mines and mining in the Mountain of Kosmaj, in
B. Jovanovi
c (ed.), Ancient Mining and Metallurgy in Southeast Europe.
International Symposium, Donji Milanovac, May 2025: 1990 (Archaeological
Institute Beograd Monographs 27), Bor, 20312.
(2000), Kraku lu Jordan and Gold Mining and Metallurgy in Antiquity,
Starinar 50: 15583.
Tranoy, A. (1981), La Galice romaine. Recherches sur le nord-ouest de la p
e ninsule
ib
e rique dans lAntiquit
e (Publications du Centre Pierre Paris 8), Paris.
Trincherini, P. R., P. Barbero, P. Quarati, C. Domergue, and L. Long (2001),
Where do the lead ingots of the Saintes-Maries-de-la-Mer Wreck come from?
Archaeology compared with physics, Archaeometry 43/3: 393406.
Van der Veen, M. (1998), A life of luxury in the desert? The food and fodder supply
to Mons Claudianus, Journal of Roman Archaeology 11: 10116.
(2001), The botanical evidence, in V. A. MaxWeld and D. P. S. Peacock (eds.),
Survey and Excavation. Mons Claudianus. 19871993. Volume II. Excavations: Part 1,
Cairo, 175247.
Vanhove, D. (1996), Archaeological description, in D. Vanhove (ed.), Roman Marble
Quarries in Southern Euboea and the Associated Road Systems, Leiden, New York, &
Cologne, 1644.
Velkov, V., and G. Aleksandrov (1994), Epigrafski pametnici ot Montana i raiona,
Montana.
480 Bibliography
Velkov, V., and G. Aleksandrov (1988), Venatio Caesariana. Eine neue Inschrift
aus Montana (Moesia Inferior), Chiron 18: 2716.
Veny, C. (196970), Diecisiete lingotes de plomo de una nave romana de Ses Salines
(Mallorca), Ampurias 312: 191219.
(1979), Nuevos materiales de Moro Boti, Trabajos de Prehistoria 35: 46579.
and D. Cerd
a (1972), Materiales arqueol
ogicos de dos pecios de la isla de
Cabrera (Baleares), Trabajos de Prehistoria 29: 299310.
Vetters, H. (1977), Virunum, in H. Temporini and W. Haase (eds.), Aufstieg und
Niedergang der Romischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der Neueren
Forschung. II. Principat, Sechster Band. Politische Geschichte (Provinzen und
Randvolker: Lateinischer Donau-Balkanraum), Berlin & New York, 30254.
(1980), Review of Geza Alfoldy, Noricum, London-Boston 1974 , Anzeiger fur
die Altertumswissenschaft 30: 3749.
Vittinghoff, F. (1953), Portorium, in Paulys Real-Encyclopadie der Classischen
Altertumswissenschaften XXII/1, 346400.
(1974), Das Problem des Militarterritoriums in der vorseverischen
Kaiserzeit, in Atti del convegno internazionale sul tema. I diritti locali nelle
province romane con particolare riguardo alle condizioni giuridiche del suolo. Roma,
2628 ottobre 1971, Rome, 10924.
Vives y Escudero, A. (1924), La moneda hisp
anica, Madrid.
Vulpe, R. (1976), Colonies et municipes de la Mesie inf
erieure, in R. Vulpe (ed.),
Studia Thracologica, Bucharest, 289314.
Waelkens, M. (1977), Phrygian votive and tombstones as sources of the social and
economic life in Roman antiquity, Ancient Society 8: 277315.
(1982), Dokimeion. Die Werkstatt der reprasentativen kleinasiatischen Sarkophage.
Chronologie und Typologie ihrer Produktion (Archaologische Forschungen 11),
Berlin.
(1985), From a Phrygian quarry. The provenance of the statues of the Dacian
prisoners in Trajans Forum at Rome, American Journal of Archaeology 89: 64153.
(1986), Die kleinasiatischen Tursteine. Typologische und epigraphische
Untersuchungen der kleinasiatischen Grabreliefs mit Scheintur, Mainz.
Wagner, W. (1938), Die Dislokation der romischen Auxiliarfomationen, Berlin.
Wagner, G. (1977), Legio IIII Scythica in Zeugma am Euphrat, in D. Haupt and
H. G. Horn (eds.), Studien zu den Militargrenzen Roms II. Vortrage des 10.
Internationalen Limeskongresses in der Germania inferior, Cologne & Bonn, 51739.
Wahl, J. (1993), Tres Minas. Vorbericht uber die archaologischen Ausgrabungen im
Bereich der Romischen Goldbergwerke 1986/87, in H. Steuer and U. Zimmermann
(eds.), Montanarchaologie in Europa. Berichte zum Internationalen Kolloquium
Fruhe Erzgewinnung und Verhuttung in Europa in Freiburg im Breisgau vom 4. bis
7. Oktober 1990, Sigmaringen, 12352.
Wallace, S. L. (1938), Taxation in Egypt from Augustus to Diocletian, New York.
Waltzing, J. P. (1895), Etude historique sur les corporations professionnelles chez les
Romains depuis les origines jusqua la chute de lEmpire dOccident. Tome I, Louvain.
 Bibliography 481
(1899), Etude historique sur les corporations professionnelles chez les Romains
depuis les origines jusqua la chute de lEmpire dOccident. Tome III, Louvain.
Ward-Perkins, J. B. (1971), Quarrying in antiquity. Technology, tradition and social
change, in Proceedings of the British Academy. Volume LVII, London, 13758.
(1992a), Nicomedia and the marble trade (papers of the British School at Rome
48 (1980)), in H. Dodge and B. Ward-Perkins (eds.), Marble in Antiquity. Collected
Papers of J. B. Ward-Perkins (Archaeological Monographs of the British School at
Rome 6), Rome & London, 61106.
(1992b), The roman system in operation (second shuVrey lecture), in H. Dodge
and B. Ward-Perkins (eds.), Marble in Antiquity. Collected Papers of J. B. Ward-
Perkins (Archaeological Monographs of the British School at Rome 6), Rome &
London, 2330.
Watson, A. (1998), The Digest of Justinian (2 vols.), Philadelphia.
Wattenbach, W. (1870), Passio Sanctorum Quattuor Coronatorum, Leipzig.
Weaver, P. R. C. (1972), Familia Caesaris. A Social Study of the Emperors Freedmen
and Slaves, Cambridge.
Weber, E. (1995), Wieder einmal: die statio Esc-, in M. A. Speidel and R. Frei-Stolba
(eds.), Romische InschriftenNeufunde, Neulesungen und Neuinterpretationen.
Festschrift fur Hans Lieb. Zum 65. Geburtstag dargebracht von seinen Freunden und
Kollegen, Basel, 1718.
Wedenig, R. (1997), Epigraphische Quellen zur stadtischen Administration in Noricum
(Aus Forschung und Kunst 31), Klagenfurt.
Wells, C. M. (1972), The German Policy of Augustus. An Examination of the
Archaeological Evidence, Oxford.
Werner, M. R. (1986), The Moesian limes and the imperial mining districts, in
Studien zu den Militargrenzen Roms III. 13. Internationaler Limeskongress, Aalen
1983: Vortrage, Stuttgart, 5614.
Wheeler, E. L. (2000), Legio XV Apollinaris: From Carnuntum to Satalaand
beyond, in Y. Le Bohec (ed.), Les l
e gions de Rome sous le Haut-Empire. Actes du
Congres de Lyon, 1719 septembre, 1998 (Collection du Centre dEtudes Romaines
et Gallo-Romaines. Nouvelle s
erie, no. 20), Lyon, 259308.
Wickert, L. (1931), Bericht uber eine zweite Reise zur Vorbereitung von CIL II, Suppl.
2, Berlin.
(1954), Princeps, in K. Ziegler (ed.), Paulys Real-Encyclopadie der classischen
Altertumswissenschaft. Band XXII/2, Stuttgart, 19982296.
Wierschowski, L. (1984), Heer und Wirtschaft. Das romische Heer der Prinzipatszeit
als Wirtschaftsfaktor, Bonn.
Wilkes, J. J. (1969), Dalmatia, London.
(2004), Cultural Identities in the Illyrian Provinces (2nd Century bc 3rd
Century ad): Some Old Problems Re-examined, in G. Urso (ed.), Dall Adriatico al
Danubio. LIllyrico nell eta greca e romana. Atti del convegno internazionale Cividale
del Friuli, 2527 settembre 2003, Pisa, 30918.
Willies, L. (1997), Roman mining at Ro Tinto, Huelva, Spain, Mining History 13/3:
129.
482 Bibliography
Wilmanns, J. C. (1995), Der Sanitatsdienst im Romischen Reich. Eine
sozialgeschichtliche Studie zum romischen Militarsanitatswesen nebst einer
Prosopographie des Sanitatspersonals (Medizin der Antike. Beitrage zur antiken
Medizin und zu deren Fortwirken 2), Hildesheim.
Wilson, D. R. (1971), Roman Britain in 1970. I. Sites explored, Britannia 2: 24388.
Wilson, A. (2002), Machines, power and the ancient economy, Journal of Roman
Studies 92: 132.
Winckler, A. (1895), Description de la voie romaine de Simittu-Colonia (Chemtou)
a Tabraca (Tabarka), Revue Tunisienne, 3847.
Winkler, G. (1969), Die Reichsbeamten von Noricum und ihr Personal bis zum Ende
der Romischen Herrschaft (Osterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Philosophisch-Historische Klasse. Sitzungsbericht, 261. Band, 2. Abhandlung),
Vienna.
(1977), Noricum und Rom, in H. Temporini and W. Haase (eds.), Aufstieg und
Niedergang der Romischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der Neueren
Forschung II. Principat, Sechster Band. Politische Geschichte (Provinzen und
Randvolker: Lateinischer Donau-Balkanraum), Berlin & New York, 183262.
Wollmann, V. (1989), Nouvelles donn
ees concernant la structure socio-ethnique de
la zone miniere de la Dacia superior, in C. Domergue (ed.), Minera y metalurgia en
las Antiguas Civilizaciones Mediterr
a neas y Europeas, Coloquio Internacional
Asociado. Madrid, 2428 Octobre, 1985, Madrid, 10718.
(1996), Minertul Metalifer, Extragerea Sarii si Carierele de Piatra n Dacia
Romana. Der Erzbergbau, die Salzgewinnung und die Steinbruche im romischen
Dakien (Bibliotheca Musei Napocensis XIII. VeroVentlichungen aus dem
Deutschen Bergbau-Museum Bochum 63), Cluj-Napoca & Klausenburg.
Wolters, R. (1999), Nummi Signati. Untersuchungen zur romischen Munzpragung
und Geldwirtschaft (Vestigia 49), Munich.
Woods, A. (1987), Mining, in J. S. Wacher (ed.), The Roman World, 61134.
Woytek, B. (2004a), Die Metalla-Pragungen des Kaisers Traian und seiner
Nachfolger, Numismatische Zeitschrift 111/12: 3568.
(2004b), Die Metalla-Pragungen des Kaisers Traian und seiner Nachfolger:
Supplementum, Mitteilungen der Osterreichischen Numismatischen Gesellschaft 44/
4: 1349.
Wright, R. P., and M. W. C. Hassall (1971), Roman Britain in 1970. II.
Inscriptions, Britannia 2: 289304.
Wuilleumier, P. (1948), Ladministration de la Lyonnaise sous le Haut-Empire, Paris.
Yalouris, E. (1986), Notes on the topography of Chios, in J. Boardman and
C. E. Vaphopoulou-Richardson (eds.), Chios. A Conference at the Homereion in
Chios 1984, Oxford, 14168.
Youtie, H. C. (1978a), P. Mich. inv 974: `` !'! !,
Zeitschrift fur Papyrologie und Epigraphik 28: 2458.
(1978b), Supplies for soldiers and stonecutters (P.Mich.inv. 6767), Zeitschrift
fur Papyrologie und Epigraphik 28: 2514.
 Bibliography 483
Zaninovi
c, M. (1977), The economy of Roman Dalmatia, in H. Temporini and
W. Haase (eds.), Aufstieg und Niedergang der Romischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur
Roms im Spiegel der Neueren Forschung II. Principat, Sechster Band. Politische
Geschichte (Provinzen und Randvolker: Lateinischer Donau-Balkanraum), Berlin
& New York, 767809.
Zawadzki, T. (1960), Sur une inscription de Phrygie relative au cursus publicus,
Revue des Etudes Anciennes 62: 8094.
Zucca, R. (1991), Le massae plumbae di Adriano in Sardegna, in A. Mastino (ed.),
LAfrica Romana. Atti dell VIII convegno di studio. Cagliari, 1416 dicembre 1990,
Sassari, 797826.
(2001), Additamenta Epigraphica. All amministratione della Sardegna da
Augusto all invasione Vandalica, in G. Angeli Bertinelli and A. Donati (eds.),
Varia Epigraphica. Atti del Colloquio Internazionale di EpigraWa. Bertinoro, 810
giugno 2000, Faenza, 51335.
Zwicky, H. (1944), Zur Verwendung des Militars in der Verwaltung der romischen
Kaiserzeit, Winterthur.
 Index of Sources
A) Inscriptions 1945: 80: 328
1948: 243: 139, 160
AE 1950: 83: 328
1892: 23: 81, 154, 336 1952: 192: 57
1897: 73: 114, 164 1952: 193: 58
1901: 22: 194 1952: 248: 108
1901: 23: 194 1952: 249: 179
1901: 132a,b,c: 164 1954: 85: 179
1903: 286: 58 1955: 221: 57
1905: 152: 139, 246 1956: 123: 134, 136, 246
1905: 163: 193 1957: 108: 53, 285
1907: 150: 76, 189 1957: 338: 193
1907: 151: 76, 189 1957: 341: 70, 193
1908: 21: 194 1958: 63: 57, 137, 153, 161, 258, 288
1908: 233: 124, 154, 270, 343 1958: 64: 57, 137, 153, 161
1910: 1: 120, 187, 340 1958: 156: 139, 246
1910: 2: 120, 188 1959: 124: 279
1910: 5: 120, 187 1959: 305: 150
1910: 98: 194 1959: 306: 150
1910: 172: 59 1959: 308: 128, 150
1911: 37: 130 1960: 167: 143
1911: 165: 59 1961: 358: 189
1913: 165: 118 1961: 359: 189
1913: 241: 285 1962: 183: 143
1915: 46: 139, 246 1962: 183a: 247
1920: 118: 175 1962: 288: 85, 89
1922: 9: 77, 155 1963: 109: 125
1922: 62: 176 1964: 275: 194
1924: 108: 144, 242 1965: 10: 132
1925: 87: 325 1965: 34: 150
1927: 95: 192 1965: 242: 144
1928: 17a: 144, 242 1965: 298302: 41
1928: 176: 120, 340 1966: 262: 144
1930: 11: 75 1967: 145: 189
1930: 86: 129 1967: 229: 120
1931: 119: 75 1967: 230: 120, 187
1933: 9: 75 1968: 227: 250
1933: 273: 121 1968: 228: 250
1934: 2: 143 1968: 229: 133
1934: 3: 115 1968: 230: 133
1934: 185: 193 1968: 231: 133
1934: 187: 193 1968: 408: 53, 132, 243, 284
1936: 60: 179 1968: 409: 132
1936: 131: 196 1968: 443: 272
1939: 301: 72 1969/70: 454: 53, 285
1940: 16: 325 1969/70: 459: 194
1941: 63: 132 1969/70: 577: 70, 192
1944: 27: 151 1971: 88: 325
 Index of Sources 485
1971: 120: 126 1987: 871: 192
1971: 181: 163, 274 1987: 872: 193
1971: 383: 130, 195 1987: 875: 193
1972: 70: 136, 270 1987: 876: 192
1972: 227: 126 1987: 881: 70, 193
1972: 257: 89 1987: 883: 192
1972: 282: 188, 230 1987: 884: 193
1972: 500: 131 1987: 886: 192
1972: 514: 58 1987: 887: 192
1972: 515: 58 1987: 888: 192
1972: 671: 196 1988: 954: 151
1973: 295: 230, 286, 288 1988: 961: 130
1973: 411: 57, 136, 153, 161, 239, 258 1988: 961 b: 195
1973: 412: 57, 137, 153, 161 1988: 961 c: 195
1973: 413: 57, 161 1988: 977: 135, 247
1973: 414: 137, 161 1988: 1028: 115, 353
1974: 153: 156, 348 1989: 629: 129
1975: 745: 70 1990: 353: 174
1978: 317: 174 1991: 902a: 101
1978: 327: 174 1991: 10002: 41
1978: 705: 57, 103 1991: 1344: 129, 341
1978: 706: 103 1991: 1681: 156, 164
1979: 307: 126 1991: 1691: 134, 136
1979: 414: 57, 153 1992: 1471: 150
1979: 448: 176 1992: 1820: 185
1979: 562: 194 1992: 1821: 184
1979: 656: 305 1992: 1822: 184
1980: 476: 156 1992: 1823: 185
1980: 582: 76, 189 1992: 1866: 134, 136
1980: 712: 68 1993: 1572: 185
1981: 475c: 126 1994: 885: 189
1981: 735: 57 1994: 1334: 284
1981: 724: 58 1994: 1512: 57
1982: 841: 58 1994: 1876: 304
1983: 390: 315 1994: 1878: 118
1983: 822: 151 1994: 1879: 118
1983: 927: 176 1994: 1880: 118
1984: 790: 58, 194 1994: 1881: 118
1985: 391: 316 1994: 1882: 184
1985: 485a: 81, 196 1994: 1883: 156, 164
1985: 743: 193 1994: 1884: 304
1985: 744: 193 1994: 1885: 118, 164
1985: 746: 192 1995: 846: 278
1985: 751: 192 1995: 1195: 53, 286
1985: 765: 68 1995: 1615: 221
1986: 333: 85 1996: 1189: 284
1986: 534: 68 1997: 504: 317
1986: 538: 285 1997: 1042: 282
1986: 629: 288 1998: 406: 348
1986: 646: 117 1998: 435: 317
1986: 674: 156, 164, 353 1998: 436c: 317
1987: 247: 192 1998: 671: 80, 126, 234, 341
1987: 792: 68 1998: 1016: 284
1987: 867: 192, 193 1998: 1573: 118
1987: 869: 192 1999: 915: 334
486 Index of Sources
1999: 1327: 192 CIG
1999: 1683: 102 3148: 98, 116, 117,
2000: 653: 101 298, 306
2000: 760: 334 3822: 113, 164, 353
2000: 923: 90 3883: 320
2002: 192: 94 4713e: 107, 108
2003: 1426: 161, 235 4713f: 107,
2003: 1512: 128, 150
2004: 1313: 58 CIL II
956: 41, 79, 125
AIJ 957: 41
524: 56 958: 41
1964: 85
Alfoldy 1969b 2269: 125, 163, 274
no. 34: 53 2389: 76, 189
2477: 121
Buckler, Calder, 2552: 120, 187, 340
& Cox 1926 2553: 120, 187
201: 192 2554: 187
2556: 120, 187
Bulat 1989 2598: 120, 359
36: 57, 148, 239 2633: 230
3136: 133
CBFIR 3271: 359
27: 142 4616: 359
431: 67, 72 5616: 121
4558: 67, 72
460: 67, 72 CIL II2/7
471: 161 334: 163, 274
472: 161 415a: 163, 274, 278
473: 161 441: 125, 163, 274
474: 161 699a: 278
475: 161 964: 189
530: 70 981: 77, 155
531: 70
5447: 130 CIL III
565: 129, 341 75: 178, 221
566: 129, 341 1883: 117
567: 130 346: 117
569: 67 348: 113, 164, 353
575: 67 493: 156, 353
580: 67 563: 157, 310, 353
581: 67 941: 273
595: 67 1085: 150
596: 67 1088: 76, 127, 234
5978:67 1149: 195
599: 67 1158: 222
604: 67 1260: 233, 271
6058: 67 1286: 150
610: 67 1289: 129, 341
647: 70 1293: 128
855: 187 1294: 130, 195
856: 187 1295: 129, 341
857: 187 1297: 127, 149,
858: 187 150, 232
 Index of Sources 487
1298: 341 7046: 114
1300: 151 7048: 114
1301: 150 7127: 135, 247
1303: 151 7146: 115, 116, 353
1305: 151 7420: 70
1307: 150, 233, 271 7833: 129, 341
1310: 128 7836: 128
1311: 128 7837: 128, 150
1312: 127, 360 7842: 151
1313: 127, 150, 232 8042: 135, 247
1314: 151 8151: 59, 131
1315: 150 8256: 58
1316: 130, 195 8333: 131, 270
1317: 130, 151, 195 8359: 72, 134, 160
1318: 151, 195 8360: 72, 134, 160
1319: 195 8361: 134, 136, 160
1322: 272 8363: 72, 134, 160
1333: 151 8371: 72
1335: 151 10305: 68
1457: 134 10821: 56
1576: 285 11505: 53, 131, 154
1577: 285 12067: 177, 179
1622: 127 12068: 177
1660: 59, 131 12069: 177
1661: 59, 131 12076: 179
1797: 140, 142 12237: 114, 164
1825: 142 12286: 114, 170, 171
1980: 174 12289: 157, 310, 353
1997: 74, 153, 162 12371: 70, 193
2073: 222 12379: 71
3937: 56 12380: 70
3953: 138, 161, 162, 236 12382: 193
4416: 137 12491: 68
4787: 53, 196 12529: 192
4788: 53, 284 12563: 128
4797: 55, 133 12720: 72, 134, 160
4798: 133 12721: 134, 136, 160
4800: 55, 133 12724: 134
4807: 53, 131, 154 12725: 134, 160
4808: 53, 131, 154 12727: 72
4809: 53, 148, 154, 239, 243, 285, 288 12728: 72, 134, 160
4822: 53, 131, 154 12729: 72
4828: 55, 133 12732: 133, 237, 249
4861: 53, 196 12733: 72, 134, 160
4987: 131 12734: 134, 160
5036: 55, 285 12736: 134, 160
5317: 132 12737: 134, 160
5480: 285 12739: 139, 160
5593: 285 12740: 139, 160
5620: 55 13240: 57, 137, 153
6302: 193 13329: 57, 137, 153
6313: 131, 270 1420719: 71
6575: 135 14209: 71, 153
6737: 117 142176: 194
6993: 117 142191: 134, 160
488 Index of Sources
14362 (p.2328, 197): 53, 132, CIL X
243, 284 1549: 326
14363: 53, 132, 243, 284 3964: 278
1437010: 68 7535: 81, 196
14437: 194 7537: 81, 196
14536: 131 7583: 141, 248
14541: 194 7584: 141, 248
14542: 194 7852: 126
14545: 194 7860: 141
14606: 153 8038: 143
151964: 170 8046/6b: 126
8073/1: 81, 101
CIL V 8073/2: 81, 101
810: 132, 284 8321: 81, 196
8459: 285
CIL XI
CIL VI 1315: 156
301: 346, 348 1319: 316
410: 345, 348 1320: 316
8482: 348 1322: 174
8483: 345, 348 1327: 316
8484: 156, 348 1340: 316
8485: 156, 348 1354: 315
8486: 157, 310 1355: 315
8531: 328 1356: 314
8619: 344 1377: 315
9634: 278 1384: 315
30731: 346, 348 3199: 348
30760: 345, 348 6945: 316
31863: 143, 247 6946: 316
32323: 94 6947: 316
33873: 326 6948: 316
33886: 347 6949: 316
41272: 143 6994: 315
41278: 250 7554: 143, 144, 247

CIL VIII CIL XII

822: 140, 144, 242, 248 671: 237, 244, 284
2728: 172 4398: 237, 287
4508: 282 5432 (p.857): 117
10570: 96
10589: 118 CIL XIII
12345: 140, 144, 242, 248 38: 90
14551: 118 1550: 81, 154, 336
14552: 118 1576: 89
14603: 185 1577: 89
18122: 172 1729: 133, 143, 237
23948: 140, 144, 239, 248 1797: 142
23963: 140, 144, 242, 248 1808: 141, 154, 162
25692: 118 1811: 88, 237, 287
25943: 92 1825: 154
26416: 92 3222: 101
4623: 175
CIL IX 4624: 175
3083: 112 4652: 175
 Index of Sources 489
5989: 176 I.Akoris
7694: 176 3: 178
8036: 175 12: 178
11833: 285 14: 178
16: 178
CIL XIV 18: 178
52: 124, 335 21: 178
4326: 144, 242, 287
4459: 144, 242, 248 IDR II
188: 135, 247
CIL XV 190: 68
737: 126
7315: 345 IDR III/3
7914: 101 37: 239, 286
86: 75
CILA II 228: 76,
25: 77, 124 127, 234
1052: 89 280: 150
281: 128
CILA III 282: 128
92: 359 283: 150, 271
288: 150
Domergue & Rico 2002
289: 150
145: 125
292: 128, 150
Dubois 1908 300: 129, 341
77: 118 302: 130, 195
97: 118, 306 307: 128
125: 118 310: 129, 341
278: 328 312: 130, 195
279: 170 314: 127, 149, 150
316: 341
EAstorga 318: 128
112: 120 319: 151
114: 120, 340 323: 151
115: 120 332: 128
116: 120 334: 151
118: 120 335: 130
148: 120 336: 151
339: 195
Eck, Caballos, & Fernandez 344: 130, 151
1996: 88 354: 151
358: 151
Engelmann Knibbe 1989: 624, 87, 99, 244, 359: 128
278, 282 364: 150
365: 150
Eph. ep. 366: 127,
II no. 823: 56 151, 360
V no. 163: 116 372: 151
VIII no. 26: 142 390: 271

FIRA2 IG V/1
101102: 92 1569: 156, 353

HEp IG XII/5
3, 1993, 21525: 41 253: 117, 157
490 Index of Sources
IG XIV 55: 319
2247: 347 75: 211
2421: 209 91: 212
105: 211
IGBulg 107: 53
2052: 58 108: 53
112: 211
IGLS I 113: 212
66: 177 127: 212
68: 176 131: 212
69: 176 133: 179
70: 176 158: 211
77: 176
ILA Vell.
IGLS III 24: 285
1137: 177 25: 285

IGLS V ILAfr
1998: 203 409: 305
428: 118
IGRR I
550: 209 ILER
1254: 108 1014: 189
1255: 107 5997: 189
1256: 107
ILJug
IGRR III 26: 194
15: 117 68: 58
768: 117 81: 161
1005: 177 83: 139, 160
157: 57, 137, 153, 161, 258, 288
IGRR IV 158: 57, 137, 153, 161
704: 113, 114 161: 57, 137, 153
1431: 98, 117, 298 162: 57, 137, 153
501: 58, 131, 270
IGUR II 503: 58, 131, 162, 234, 270
413: 347 504: 131
563: 194
IK 765: 154
11/1: 23: 116 775: 153
13/3: 652: 135 776: 153
13/3: 856: 115 778: 57, 137, 153, 161, 258
24/1: 697: 98, 100, 117, 298 779: 57, 136, 153, 161, 239, 286, 288
36/1: 148: 115, 353 780: 57, 161
39: 9: 117 781: 57, 137, 153, 161161
52: 258: 320 1297: 193
54: 193: 117 1308: 193
1312: 193
I.Ko.Ko 1378: 153
39: 109 13925: 58
41: 53, 109, 179, 209 1404: 58
48: 211 1413: 58
49: 211 1463: 74
52: 179 1517: 161
54: 319 1522: 161
 Index of Sources 491
1524: 161 3558: 195
1532: 161 3579: 90
1543: 161 4198: 55, 133
1572: 72 4424: 178, 221
1573: 72 5050: 94
1655: 74, 139 5587: 134
1685: 72 5795: 172
1690: 72 6579: 85
6870: 96
ILLPRON 6948: 359
51: 239 6971: 287
89: 285 7111: 68
148: 132, 243 7153: 272
151: 148, 239, 243, 285, 288 7228: 314
176: 55 8641: 88, 237, 287
604: 284 8717: 328, 330
720: 286 9011: 247
1482: 285 9019: 139, 246
1552: 285 9120: 175
9125: 187
ILS 9127: 187
215: 117 9130: 187
253: 117 9131: 188
254: 121 9174: 194
1097: 134 9195: 143, 144, 247
1143: 160 9473: 174
1347: 248
1358: 248 ILTun
1359: 141, 248 741: 140, 144, 239
1421: 135, 247
1442: 144, 242 I.Memnon
1443: 134, 136, 160 14: 111
1466: 53, 284
1467: 53, 148, 154, 239, I.Metr.
243, 285, 288 116: 221
1506: 55, 133
1532: 127 IMS I
1592: 124, 335 16: 59
1593: 127, 360 20: 59, 131
1594: 150, 232 46: 59, 131
1598: 345 97: 59, 193
1707: 348 98: 59, 194
1875: 278 99: 194
1876: 278 103: 59, 131, 234
2287: 174 105: 59
2305: 185 112: 194
2606: 193 116: 59, 194
2699: 112 117: 59, 194
2907: 175 118: 59, 194
3014: 150 119: 59, 194
3094: 138, 161, 162, 236 120: 194
3382: 151 1605: 59
3453: 175 167: 59
3454: 175 168: 60, 131,
3481: 348 234, 270
492 Index of Sources
IMS III/2 IRC I
79: 69, 193 101: 359
13: 69
1820: 69, 193 IRLeon
22: 69, 193 32: 120
23: 193 34: 120
29: 69, 193 40: 120, 187, 340
30: 193 41: 120
31: 68, 193
33: 193 IRPac
34: 193 121: 49, 124, 154, 163, 270, 343
3740: 69, 193 1226: 49
4352: 69, 193 128: 49
84: 69 13041: 49

IMS IV IRPL
104: 57 2: 133
135: 103 3: 250
136: 57, 103 7: 250
13: 133
IMS VI 14: 133
209: 58 55: 230
212: 58 75: 189
227: 194
236: 58, 194 IRT
241: 58, 194 275: 326

Inscr. Aqu. IScM V

I 404: 285 77: 68
I 1134: 285 135: 68
II 2139: 285
I.Th.Sy.
I.Pan 35: 177, 221
16: 221 107: 209
18: 21 159: 212
20: 20, 179
21: 20, 107, 169, 213, 308, 318, 319 Kayser 1993
22: 20, 169 11: 211
24: 22, 174 14: 211
29: 22
37: 14, 221 Khanoussi 1996
38: 108, 169, 209 5: 118
39: 14, 169, 172 32: 118
41: 169
42: 14, 107, 169, 179, 213, 221, 308, 318, Lex metallis dicta (LMD): 48, 49, 92, 93, 163,
319, 338 227 f., 254, 2629, 283, 339
47: 179
51: 23, 109, 179, 209 Lex metalli Vipascense (LMV): 48, 49,
53: 108, 169, 179 87, 92, 93, 189, 214, 227, 244,
56: 179 2646, 337
69: 110
Laubenheimer-Leenhardt 1973
I.Portes 16: 125
117: 212 24: 125
118: 212 7882: 125
 Index of Sources 493
MAMA IV 1680: 176
4: 113 1946: 176
10: 322 1953: 176
52: 164 2404.2: 191
53: 114 2404.3: 102
54: 114 2404.4: 102, 283
55: 164 2404.5: 102, 279, 283
62: 114 2404.6: 102, 279, 283
63: 114 2404.7: 102, 279, 283
66: 321 2404.8: 102, 279, 283
2404.9: 102, 279, 283
MAMA VI 2404.10: 102, 279, 283
378: 164 2404.11: 101, 279
2404.13: 101, 279
MAMA IX 2404.14: 101
198a: 322 2404.168: 101
2404.1922: 101
Mananes 1982 2404.24: 101, 103, 198
112: 187 2404.25: 191
148: 187 2404.2930: 101
2404.315: 102, 334
Milet, Inv.-Nr. 2404.36: 102, 334
288: 115 2404.39: 102, 279
2404.40: 279, 282
Monthel & Lambert 2002, 2404.41: 279, 282, 283
111 f.: 90 2404.42: 279
2404.43: 279
Nesselhauf 1937 2404.44: 279, 282, 283
80: 175 2404.45: 279, 282, 283
131: 175 2404.46: 279, 282
132: 175 2404.47: 279, 282
133: 175 2404.48: 279, 282
134: 175 2404.49: 279, 282
135: 175 2404.50: 279, 282
2404.51: 279, 282
Nuber 1977 2404.5355: 279, 282
233 f.: 148, 286 2404.5760: 279
2404.612: 102, 334
Piso 2005 2404.65: 101
fig. 2: 102 2404.66: 101
2404.72a: 101, 191
Reynolds 1982 2404.72b: 191
no. 15: 87 2481.6 ff.: 191

RHP Saxer 1967

72: 139 71: 174
129: 187
RIB 130: 188
998: 176 131: 187
999: 176 133: 187
1001: 176 134: 187
1005: 176 194207: 175
1008: 176 209: 175
1009: 176 2116: 175
1014: 176 222: 175
1016: 176 2346: 175
494 Index of Sources
2405: 175 41: 270
248: 175 42: 270
2503: 175 43: 233, 271
27981: 176 44: 233, 271
48: 271
SEG
IV 106: 347 K
XV 865: 108 527: 211
XVI 754: 220
XVII 755: 203 M
XXVIII 1210: 114 997: 52
XXXII 1203: 98
XXXVIII 1073: 115, 353 O.Bu Njem
XLV 2097: 221 75: 201
76: 201
Sotgiu 1988 77: 201
B106: 270
B115: 81, 196 O.Claud.
C113: 81, 196 2: 181, 218
3: 155, 207, 252
Syll.3 4: 155, 207, 252
837: 85 5: 155, 207, 252
6: 155, 207, 252
B) Papyri, ostraka, tabulae ceratae 7: 155, 207, 252
8: 155, 207, 252
BGU III 9: 155, 252
762: 219, 220 15: 209, 212
807: 217 16: 209
17: 209, 258
BGU VII 18: 209
1612: 178, 217 19: 108, 209
20: 209, 212
ChLA VI 21: 209
319: 201 22: 155, 209, 212, 252
236: 209
CIL III 2734: 209, 212
p. 9247: 271 3541: 209
p. 9302 III: 233, 271 48: 169
p. 934 f. V: 233, 271 49: 169
p. 937 VI: 271, 335 502: 169, 200
p. 944 ff. VIII: 233, 335 536: 200
p. 948: 232, 233 5773: 169, 200
p. 948 IX: 270 769: 170,
p. 948 X: 270 802: 200
p. 949 XI: 233, 270 115: 183, 213
p. 949, XII: 233, 271 11921: 183
p. 950 f. XIII: 233, 271 124: 182
p. 954 XVII: 271 125: 182
126: 182, 212, 218
IDR I 12730: 212, 218
31: 271 132: 212
33: 233, 271 133: 212
35: 233, 271 134: 218
36: 271 140: 218
40: 270 141: 169, 218
 Index of Sources 495
142: 218 357: 116, 125, 135, 156, 170, 182
143: 209, 258 358: 116, 156, 157
144: 182 359: 135, 182
146: 169 360: 170, 182
148: 169 361: 170
149: 169 362: 170, 218, 219
155: 155 363: 156, 157, 170, 182
156: 155, 207 364: 182
162: 212, 218 365: 155, 182, 207
174: 183 366: 156, 157, 182
175: 184 367: 156, 182
191211: 183 368: 170, 182
212: 183, 211, 212 369: 182
213: 183, 212 370: 170, 182
21423: 183 371: 182, 183
224: 183, 218 372: 182, 183, 213
226: 213 373: 182
227: 182 374: 182, 183, 213
229: 183, 213 375: 182, 183, 213
243: 207, 218 376: 182, 183, 212, 213
244: 155, 207 378: 182
245: 182, 207 379: 182
246: 181, 207 380: 108, 156, 182, 218
247: 181, 207 381: 182
248: 207, 218 382: 155, 182, 213
249: 207 383: 183
250: 156, 207 384: 184
2514: 207 386: 170
255: 215 387: 213
256: 215 388: 179
257: 213, 215 41734: 155
25863: 215 43648: 155
264: 213, 215 4503: 155
265: 215 455: 155
266: 183, 215 459: 155
267: 215, 218 461: 155
268: 215, 218 4635: 155
269: 215, 218 46987: 155
270: 213, 215 48993: 155
271: 213, 215 497: 155
272: 215 498: 155, 252
273: 182, 213, 215, 218 510: 155, 252
274: 213, 215, 218 518: 155
2757: 215 519: 155
278: 182, 215 52026: 155, 252
279: 182 527: 155, 252, 337
282: 156 528: 52, 155, 252, 337
286: 170 52931: 155, 252
287: 157, 183 532: 252
288: 183 5339: 155, 252
290: 156 540: 178, 179
300: 218 541: 178, 179
3048: 184 551: 155, 252, 253
309: 136, 184 558: 155
31056: 136, 184 562: 155
496 Index of Sources
563: 155, 252 5134: 207
570: 155 5201: 182
572: 155 5281: 207
576: 155, 252 5307: 207
577: 155 5398: 212
587: 52, 337 6038: 179
592: 155 6153: 207
596: 155, 252 6438: 211
597: 337 6467: 211
618: 155, 252 6483: 155, 160, 205,
251, 309
O.Claud. CdE 6969: 308
1: 209 7029: 213
7032: 213
O.Claud.inv. 7036: 213
369: 221 7042: 213
413: 179 7045: 213
415: 183, 184 7054: 213
539: 212 7149: 52
673: 183 7218: 108
746: 184, 212 7276: 214
1064: 212 7295: 108, 183, 204, 218, 221
1125: 212 7334: 211
1158: 155, 252 7363: 12, 179
1168: 212 7366: 155, 252
1190: 212 7737: 108
1252: 184, 210, 212 8175: 155, 253
1538: 155, 169, 183, 206, 208, 211, 8512: 212
218, 252 8686: 211
1550: 212 8696: 212
1814: 212 8815: 212
1870: 212
2055: 183 O.Claud. ZPE
2072: 212 1: 184
2212: 221
2238: 155, 253 O.Did.inv.
2575: 212 329: 110
2755: 209 484: 110
2795: 183 733: 111
2921: 14, 169, 183, 206, 208, 211, 218
3229: 155, 252 O.Eleph.DAIK
3260: 183 66: 211
3285: 52
3385: 210
OGIS
3666: 218
502: 85
3739: 183
4338: 209
4391: 209 OGIS II
4155: 14 660: 53, 109
4457: 207
4471: 168, 205 O.Krok.
4524: 211 87: 180
4739: 108
4852: 168, 205, 212 O.Tait I
4888: 180 245: 179
 Index of Sources 497
P.Alex.inv C) Literary Sources
463: 178, 217
Aelius Aristides or.
P.Amh. II 36.67: 222, 224
107: 217
108: 217 Appian Ill.
6: 239
P.Bodl I 29 f.: 239
14: 217
Cassiodor Chron.
P.Dura ad 596 a.U.c: 91
64: 201
129: 201 Cato agr.
64.1: 271
P.Giss. 144.3: 271
69: 215, 220 164.3: 271

P.Graux Cicero
30: 223, 334 Brut. 85: 207
Leg. agr. 1.5: 91, 275
P.Hibeh II 2.51: 275
273 217: 90 Phil. 2.19.48: 278
pro Caec. 58: 207
P.Lond II
328: 219, 220 CJ
9.49.4: 97
9.51.2: 97
P.Mich.
465: 177
466: 177 Coll.
11.8.3: 223
P.Oxy. 15.3.7: 333
498: 90
735: 217, 220 CTh
2118: 219 2.14.1: 223
3243: 216, 217, 220 16.5.40: 223
35957: 90, 319
Cyprian Ep.
RMR 76: 224
91: 201 77: 224
79: 224
SB
4534: 209 Dig.
4593: 179 1.16.7.1: 95, 178
5682: 209 2.1.20: 50
5683: 209 2.13.9.pr. 260, 340
5684: 209 3.4.1.pr.: 91, 287
8579: 109 4.6.1.1: 95
8580: 53, 109 4.6.7: 95
9230: 211 4.6.32: 95
11958: 90 4.6.34: 95
12168: 219 4.6.35.pr.: 95
12169: 215, 220 4.6.35.2: 203
1415562: 217 4.6.35.4: 95
498 Index of Sources
4.6.35.9: 95 Dio
4.6.401: 95 53.12.5 ff.: 357
7.1.9.pr.-7: 85 53.15.34: 121, 203, 357
7.1.9.23: 50 53.23.7: 88
7.1.13.5: 50, 85 53.25: 91, 279
8.4.13.1: 85 54.21: 121
10.1.7.pr.: 50 54.30.3: 99
18.1.77.pr.: 85 54.32.2: 358
21.2.66.1: 95 57.2.3: 94
23.5.18.pr.-1: 86 57.23.5: 96, 203
24.3.7.134:86 58.22.2 f.: 124
27.9.3.6: 50, 86 62.17.1: 317
27.9.4: 86 63.17.1: 316
27.9.5.pr.: 86 63.17.3: 316
28.1.8.4: 97
29.2.25.23: 97 Diodor
30.41.5: 50 5.10: 91, 279
34.8.3.pr.: 97 5.36.2: 276, 277
39.2.26: 85
39.4.1.5: 207 Epit.
39.4.9.78: 63 1.7: 335
39.4.11.pr.: 87, 244
39.4.13.pr.: 92 Eusebius De mart. Pal.
39.4.13.1: 85 7.34: 224
39.4.15: 91 8.1: 224, 333
39.4.16.11: 86, 244 8.13: 224, 333
40.5.24.5: 97 9.1: 333
47.12.3.4: 50 13.14: 224
48.13.8.1: 98, 100 13.2: 333
48.19.2.pr.: 223
48.19.8.4: 51, 333 Eusebius HE
48.19.8.6: 223, 224 4.23.10: 224
48.19.8.8: 224 8.12.10: 224
48.19.8.10: 224 9.1: 224
48.19.16.910:66
Eusebius Ap. const.
48.19.17.pr.: 97
8.10.15: 224
48.19.22.pr.: 223
48.19.23.pr.: 223 Eutropius
48.19.28.1: 223 8.6.2: 335
48.19.28.6: 223
48.19.38.pr.: 98, 100 Florus
48.22.7.19: 50 2.25.12: 73, 153, 231, 334, 358
49.14.12.pr.:97 2.32.5960: 230, 273, 334, 358
49.15.6.pr.: 98
49.15.12.17: 98 Frontinus De aquae ductu
49.16.1: 95 2.118: 106
49.16.12.1: 95
50.4.18.25: 50 Fronto Ad M. Caes.
50.12.8: 50 5.37: 250, 344
50.13.5.2: 97
50.13.5.3: 223 Gaius Inst.
50.15.4.2: 50 1.123: 256
50.16.17.1: 92, 235, 289 2.7: 86
50.16.239.8: 50 2.21: 86
 Index of Sources 499
Galen 10.32.1: 89, 323
XII 214241: 248
XIV 7: 248 Philostratus Vit. Soph.
2.550: 89, 323
HA
Alex. 20.3: 88 Plautus Pers.
M.Ant. 21: 124 5.86: 265
M.Aur. 21.7: 194
Sev. 12.1: 123 Pliny ep.
2.11.8: 223
Haer. 10.27.85: 129
9.1112: 333 10.41: 172
10.42: 172
Inst. 10.58.13: 223
2.1.40: 86 10.61: 172
10.62: 172
Josephus AJ 10.85: 344
18.158: 96
Pliny NH
Josephus BJ 33.6678: 251
3.540: 333 33.708: 34
6.418: 222, 224, 333 33.78: 91, 277, 279
33.80: 120
Livy 33.118: 235, 244, 277, 278, 289
26.47: 90 33.121: 278
34.21.7: 90, 235, 276 34.34: 87, 125, 163
39.24.2: 91, 235, 277 34.118: 91
42.12.9: 235 34.142: 243
44.18.3: 235 34.144: 243
44.29.11: 235 34.164: 277, 340
45.18.35: 91, 277 34.165: 88, 235, 279
45.29.11: 91 36.55: 23, 110, 156, 338
36.56: 23
Martial epigr. 36.57: 222, 319, 339
1.85.7: 265 36.135: 89
7.17.8: 265 36.158: 89
9.59.20: 265
10.78.1.5: 73 Plutarch Crass.
2.7: 88
Not. Dig. Or.
XIII 11: 239 Polybios
6.17: 90
Orosius hist. adv. pag. 34.9.811: 90, 235, 275, 276
6.21.24 f.: 335
Propertius
Paulus Sent. 4.5.29: 265
3.6.2: 97, 223
5.1.3: 207 Ptolemy
5.17.2: 223 2.4.10: 40
5.21a.1: 98 3.10.1: 192

Pausanias RGDA
1.18.9: 98 17:94
1.19.6: 89, 323 30: 94
6.21.2: 89, 323 32: 335
500 Index of Sources
Servius Ad Aen. Vegetius Mil.
8.1: 94 2.5: 94
2.7: 198, 199
Statius silv. 2.19 f.: 199
3.3.8790: 73, 124, 153, 343
5.1.94100: 344 Vitruvius
7.9.4: 278
Strabo
3.2.3: 278 Zonaras
3.2.10: 89, 90, 235, 275, 276, 277 8.19.8: 239
3.4.20: 121, 231, 357, 358
4.2.2: 358 D) Quarry Labels (Appendix nos.)
4.6.7: 91, 279
5.1.8: 53 AE
5.1.12: 91, 277, 279 1984: 844: 232
6.2.10: 91, 279 1984: 845: 209
7.7.4: 91 1984: 846: 49
8.5.7: 89 1984: 847: 382
12.3.40: 91, 277, 279 1984: 848: 68
12.8.14: 114, 164 1994: 1848: 790
1994: 1849: 872
Suetonius 1994: 1850: 873
Aug. 21.1: 335 1994: 1851: 874
101.4: 94 1994: 1852: 839
Tib. 9.2: 84, 335 1994: 1853: 840
49.2: 84, 89 1994: 1854: 866
Cal. 29: 223 1994: 1855: 800
Claud. 25.5: 100 1994: 1856: 801
Nero 31.3: 333 1994: 1857: 803
Vesp. 18: 366 1994: 1858: 849
23.2: 343 1994: 1859: 851
1994: 1860: 836
Tacitus Agr. 1994: 1861: 838
31.2: 102 1994: 1862: 858
32.4: 102, 224, 334 1994: 1863: 859
1994: 1864: 864
Tacitus Ann. 1994: 1865: 860
1.11.4: 94 1994: 1866: 808
2.6.2: 358 1994: 1867: 828
2.26: 335 1994: 1868: 804
4.15.2: 96, 203 1994: 1869: 806
4.20.1: 88 1994: 1870: 809
6.19: 84, 124, 336 1994: 1871: 812
11.20.2: 197 1994: 1872: 861
11.20.3: 197 1994: 1873: 827
13.1: 129 1994: 1874: 794
15.31: 96 1994: 1875: 865
15.32.3: 96 1994: 1877a,b: 843
1995: 492: 1168
Varro Ling. 1995: 493: 1169
5.94: 271 1997: 504: 1185
6.66: 271 1997: 505: 1186
1997: 506: 1152
Varro Rust. 1997: 507: 1204
2.9.7: 265 1997: 508: 1177
 Index of Sources 501
1997: 509: 1178 9: 496
1997: 510: 1166 10: 497
1997: 511: 1167 11: 498
1997: 512: 1187 12: 499
1998: 436a: 1208 13: 500
1998: 436b: 118890. 14: 521
1998: 436c: 1153 15: 522
1998: 436d: 1191 16: 523
17: 524
Baccini Leotardi 1979 18: 525
3: 483 19: 526
4: 519 39: 32
5: 520 40: 28
6: 490 41: 424
8: 491 42: 140
9: 492 43: 141
10: 501 44: 207
35: 29 45: 425
36: 33 46: 426
37: 38 47: 427
38: 110 50: 608
40: 428 51: 609
44: 749 52: 745
45: 750 53: 746
47: 751 54: 747
48: 752 55: 748
49: 753 56: 619
50: 754 64: 571
52: 755 65: 579
56: 756 66: 581
57: 757 67: 581
58: 758 68: 599
59: 759 69: 600
60: 760 74: 888
61: 761 75: 889
62: 762 80: 1274
76: 796 92: 1236
77: 797 93: 1237
78: 798 94: 1238
79: 844 95: 1239
80: 845 96: 1240
82: 848 97: 1241
87: 1255 98: 101
88: 1256 99: 1242
100: 1264
Baccini Leotardi 1989 101: 1258
1: 478 102: 1243
2: 484 104: 1234
3: 485 105: 1271
4: 486 106: 1272
5: 487 112: 1261
6: 488 113: 1262
7: 493 114: 1279
8: 495 118: 1235
502 Index of Sources
120: 1259 38: 677
121: 1273 39: 644
127: 427 40: 645
129: 429 41: 646
42: 647
Beguignon 1928 43: 678
1: 502 44: 679
2: 505 45: 680
3: 511 46: 681
4: 513 47: 682
5: 514 48: 683
6: 515 49: 684
7: 516 50: 685
8: 506 51: 648
9: 517 52: 649
10: 518 53: 686
54: 687
Bruzza 1870 55: 688
1: 618 56: 689
2: 601 57: 690
3: 602 58: 691
4: 603 59: 692
5: 604 60: 693
6: 605 61: 694
7: 606 62: 695
8: 607 63: 696
9: 612 64: 697
10: 613 65: 698
11: 614 66: 699
12: 615 67: 700
13: 616 68: 701
14: 631 69: 702
15: 621 70: 703
16: 622 71: 650
17: 623 72: 651
18: 624 73: 652
19: 625 74: 653
20: 626 75: 654
21: 627 76: 655
22: 628 77: 656
23: 629 78: 658
24: 630 79: 657
25: 632 80: 704
26: 633 81: 659
27: 634 82: 660
28: 635 83: 661
29: 636 84: 662
30: 637 85: 663
31: 638 86: 664
32: 639 87: 665
33: 640 88: 666
34: 641 89: 667
35: 642 90: 668
36: 643 91: 669
37: 676 92: 670
 Index of Sources 503
93: 671 148: 464
94: 672 149: 465
95: 705 150: 466
96: 706 151: 467
97: 707 152: 468
98: 673 153: 469
99: 674 154: 470
100 : 675 155: 471
101: 708 156: 472
102: 709 157: 473
103: 710 158: 474
104: 711 159: 475
105: 712 160: 536
106: 713 161: 537
107: 714 162: 538
108: 715 163: 539
109: 716 164: 542
110: 717 165: 541
111: 718 166: 543
112: 719 167: 479
113: 720 168: 480
114: 721 169: 544
115: 722 170: 481
116: 723 171: 482
117: 724 172: 550
118: 725 173: 551
119: 726 174: 552
120: 727 175: 533
121: 728 176: 534
122: 729 177: 535
123: 730 178: 553
124: 731 179: 554
125: 732 180: 555
126: 733 181: 489
127: 734 182: 548
128: 735 183: 540
129: 736 184: 556
130: 737 185: 549
131: 738 186: 557
132: 739 187: 558
133: 740 188: 559
134: 741 189: 560
135: 742 190: 561
136: 743 191: 565
137: 744 192: 583
138: 460 193: 566
139: 461 194: 567
140: 462 195: 568
141: 527 196: 569
142: 528 197: 570
143: 529 198: 572
144: 530 199: 573
145: 531 200: 574
146: 532 201: 575
147: 463 202: 584
504 Index of Sources
203: 585 262: 385
204: 586 263: 386
205: 576 264: 387
206: 587 265: 388
207: 577 266: 1233
208: 588 267: 1245
209: 578 268: 1246
210: 582 269: 1247
211: 590 270: 1248
212: 591 271: 1249
213: 592 272: 1250
214: 593 273: 1251
215: 594 274: 1252
216: 595 275: 1253
217: 596 276: 1254
218: 597 277: 1230
219: 598 278: 1231
220: 787 279: 437
221: 795 280: 1265
222: 830 281: 1266
223: 831 282: 1267
224: 834 283: 1268
225: 876 284: 1269
226: 877 285: 1270
227: 878 291: 1260
228: 879 292: 1263
229: 882 326: 1146
230: 884 327: 1214
231: 885 328: 1226
232: 886 329: 1227
233: 887 330: 1210
234: 903
235: 904 Christol & Drew-Bear 1986
236: 880 6: 19
239: 547 7: 21
240: 562 8: 22
241: 563 9: 40
242: 564 10: 53
243: 502 11: 52
244: 503 12: 432
245: 504 13: 71
246: 505 14: 90
247: 510 15: 91
248: 511 16: 89
249: 507 17: 51
250: 509 18: 138
251: 508 19: 142
252: 513 20: 154
253: 514 21: 158
254: 515 22: 183
255: 383 23: 189
257: 109 24: 202
258: 115 25: 209
259: 116 26: 241
261: 262 27: 232
 Index of Sources 505
28: 251 46: 229
29: 136 47: 255
30: 134 48: 259
31: 266 49: 250
32: 264 50: 265
33: 433 51: 268
34: 434 52: 263
35: 49 53: 294
54: 272
Christol & Drew-Bear 1987 55: 271
1: 112 56: 273
2: 131 57: 290
3: 130 58: 285
4: 127 59: 282
5: 133 60: 286
6: 135 61: 289
7: 147 62: 289
8: 146 63: 280
9: 143 64: 292
10: 152 65: 284
11: 151 66: 283
12: 149 67: 308
13: 147 68: 311
14: 160 69: 312
15: 164 70: 316
16: 161 71: 314
17: 200 72: 329
18: 191 73: 338
19: 169 74: 342
20: 194 75: 343
21: 173 76: 346
22: 197 77: 353
23: 176 78: 358
24: 177 79: 365
25: 167 80: 373
26: 193
27: 190 Christol & Drew-Bear 1991
28: 178 1: 302
29: 198 2: 303
30: 199 3: 307
31: 201 4: 313
32: 208 5: 301
33: 211 6: 315
34: 212 7: 317
35: 216 8: 320
36: 221 9: 322
37: 226 10: 323
38: 227 11: 324
39: 243 12: 328
40: 249 13: 331
41: 228 14: 336
42: 244 15: 333
43: 248 16: 334
44: 231 17: 337
45: 242 18: 338
506 Index of Sources
19: 344 7024: 270
20: 345 7025: 154
21: 348 7026: 156
22: 247 7027: 159
23: 350 7028: 411
24: 352 7029: 253
25: 366 7030: 260
26: 364 7031: 261
27: 369 7032: 275
28: 370 7033: 413
29: 379 7034: 414
30: 335 7035: 412
31: 380 7036: 417
32: 381 7037: 416
33: 375 7038: 418
7039: 405
CIL III 7040: 406
419a: 502 7042: 67
419b: 503 12227: 11
419c: 504 12228: 9
419d: 507 12229: 409
419e: 508 12233: 261
419f: 509 12235: 407
419g: 505 13653: 35
419h: 510 14192: 269
419i: 511 14192.1: 157
419k: 513 14402g: 187
419l: 512 14402h: 186
419m: 514 14402i: 174
419n: 515
487a: 1246 CIL VI/8
487b: 1247 40847: 1281
487c: 1250 40849: 1232
487d: 1251 40850: 1282
487e: 1252 40851: 1283
487f: 1249
7005: 415 CIL VIII
7005A: 98 14560: 788
7006: 57 14561: 791
7007: 55 14562: 792
7008: 92 14563: 793
7009: 6 14564: 799
7010: 8 14565: 802
7011: 8 14566: 805
7012: 27 14567: 853
7013: 153 14568: 855
7014: 30 14569: 854
7015: 35 14570: 862
7016: 410 14571: 814
7017: 79 14572: 815
7018: 40 14573: 816
7019: 40 14574: 817
7021: 56 14575: 818
7022: 58 14576: 819
7023: 81 14577: 820
 Index of Sources 507
14578: 821 6723/5a: 1165
14579: 823 6723/5b: 1154
14580: 824 6723/5c: 1194
14581: 825 6723/5d: 1175
14582: 822 6723/5e: 1180
14583: 826 6723/5f: 1219
14584: 829 6723/6: 1220
14585: 832 6723/7: 1221
14586: 863 6723/8: 1179
14587: 833 6723/9: 1195
14588: 835 6723/12: 1196
14589: 837 6723/13: 1197
14591: 881 6723/14: 1198
14592: 882 6723/15: 1155
14593: 846 6723/16: 1145
14594: 867
14595: 868 CIL XIV
14596: 869 165: 1278
14597: 870 2016: 545
14598: 890 2670: 1174
14599a: 891
14599b: 892 CIL XV
14599c: 893 7926: 926
14599d: 894 7927.3: 927
14599e: 895 7937a: 928
14599f: 896 7956: 925
14599g: 897
14599h: 898 Drew-Bear 1994
14679: 924 1: 31
25634: 807 2: 47
25636: 813 3: 46
25637: 789 4: 60
25639: 842 5: 45
25641: 849 6: 44
25693: 841 7: 80
8: 94
CIL X 9: 96
6337: 1207 10: 107
11: 118
CIL XI 12: 125
6723/1a: 1147 13: 132
6723/1b: 1148 14: 139
6723/1c: 1149 15: 188
6723/1d: 1150 16: 172
6723/1e: 1151 17: 180
6723/2a: 1157 18: 170
6723/2b: 1158 19: 190
6723/2c: 1159 20: 205
6723/2d: 1160 21: 220
6723/2e: 1161 22: 219
6723/3a, , : 1162 23: 213
6723/3b: 1163 24: 214
6723/3c: 1164 25: 223
6723/4a: 1192 26: 240
6723/4b: 1193 27: 236
508 Index of Sources
28: 247 39: 1203
29: 233 40: 1156
30: 245 41: 1176
42: 1172
Drew-Bear & Eck 1976 43: 1173
16: 439 44: 1174
17: 445 45: 1184
18: 445 46: 1212
19: 454 47: 1213
20: 455 48: 1214
21: 456 49: 1146
22: 457 50: 1215
23: 458 51/1: 1216
24: 459 51/2: 1217
25: 443 51/3: 1205
51/4: 1206
Dubois 1908 51/5: 1207
1: 1147 51/6: 1218
2: 1148 51/7: 1222
3: 1149 51/8: 1223
4: 1150 51/9: 1224
5: 1151 51/10: 1225
6: 1157 51/11: 1209
7: 1158 51/12: 1226
8: 1159 51/13: 1227
9: 1160 51/14: 1210
10: 1161 52: 1228
11: 1162 53: 1229
12: 1163 54: 1211
13: 1164 67: 787
14: 1192 68: 788
15: 1193 69: 849
16: 1165 70: 793
17: 1154 71: 791
18: 1194 72: 792
19: 1175 73: 789
20: 1180 74: 841
21: 1219 75: 842
22: 1220 78: 795
23: 1221 79: 799
24: 1179 80: 879
25: 1195 81: 802
26: 1196 82: 805
27: 1197 83: 810
28: 1198 84: 807
29: 1155 85: 853
30: 1145 86: 855
31: 1181 87: 854
32: 1199 88: 862
33: 1170 89: 814
34: 1182 90: 815
35: 1183 91: 816
36: 1200 92: 817
37: 1202 93: 818
38: 1201 94: 819
 Index of Sources 509
95: 820 123.26: 915
96: 813 123.27: 916
98: 821 123.28: 917
99: 823 123.29: 918
100: 824 123.30: 919
101: 825 123.31: 920
102: 822 123.32: 921
103: 826 123.33: 922
104: 829 123.34: 923
105: 863 124: 924
106: 832 126: 925
107: 831 127: 926
108: 830 128: 927
109: 833 129: 928
110: 834 130: 929
111: 835 199: 115
112: 837 200: 116
113: 871 207: 437
114: 881 237: 547
115: 875 238: 562
116: 882 239: 563
117: 846 240: 564
118: 881 241: 502
119a: 867 242: 503
119b: 868 243: 504
119c: 870 244: 505
119d: 869 245: 510
120: 876 246: 511
121: 877 247: 507
122: 878 248: 509
123.1: 883 249: 508
123.2: 884 250: 513
123.3: 885 251: 514
123.4: 886 252: 515
123.5: 887 253: 512
123.6: 903 255: 1260
123.7: 904 256: 1263
123.8: 895 257: 1233
123.9: 898 258: 1245
123.10: 892 259/1: 1246
123.11: 896 259/2: 1247
123.12: 897 260: 1248
123.13: 893 261: 1249
123.14: 891 262: 1250
123.15: 894 263: 1251
123.16: 905 264: 1252
123.17: 906 265: 1253
123.18: 907 266: 1254
123.19: 908 267: 1230
123.20: 909 268: 1231
123.21: 910 269: 1232
123.22: 911 271: 1265
123.23: 912 272: 1266
123.24: 913 273: 1267
123.25: 914 274: 1268
510 Index of Sources
275: 1269 334: 687
276: 1270 335: 688
278: 618 336: 689
281: 601 337: 690
282: 602 338: 691
283: 603 339: 692
284: 604 340: 693
285: 605 341: 694
286: 606 342: 695
287: 607 343: 696
288: 612 344: 697
289: 613 345: 698
290: 614 346: 699
291: 615 347: 700
292: 616 348: 701
294: 631 349: 702
295: 621 350: 703
296: 622 351: 650
298: 623 352: 651
299a: 624 353: 652
299b: 625 354: 653
300: 626 355: 654
301: 627 356: 655
302: 628 357: 656
303: 629 358: 658
304: 630 359: 657
305: 632 360: 704
306: 633 361: 659
307: 634 362: 660
308: 635 363: 661
309: 636 364: 662
310: 637 365: 663
311: 638 366: 664
312: 639 367: 665
313: 640 368: 666
314: 641 369: 667
315: 642 370: 668
316: 643 371: 669
317: 676 372: 670
318: 677 373: 671
319: 644 374: 672
320: 645 375: 705
321: 646 376: 706
322: 647 377: 707
323: 678 378: 673
324: 679 379: 674
325: 680 380: 675
326: 681 381: 708
327: 682 382: 709
328: 683 383: 710
329: 684 384: 711
330: 685 385: 712
331: 648 386: 713
332: 649 387: 714
333: 686 388: 715
 Index of Sources 511
389: 716 456: 539
390: 717 457: 542
391: 718 458: 541
392: 719 459: 543
393: 720 460: 479
394: 721 461: 480
395: 722 462: 544
396: 723 463: 481
397: 724 464: 482
398: 725 465: 550
399: 726 466: 551
400: 727 467: 552
401: 728 468: 533
402: 729 469: 534
403: 730 470: 535
404: 731 471: 553
405: 732 472: 554
406: 733 473: 555
407: 734 474: 489
408: 735 475: 548
409: 736 476: 540
410: 737 477: 556
411: 738 478: 549
412: 739 479: 557
413: 740 480: 558
414: 741 481: 559
415: 742 482: 560
416: 743 483: 561
417: 744 486: 565
430: 460 487: 583
431: 461 488: 566
432: 462 489: 567
433: 527 490: 568
435: 528 491: 569
436: 529 492: 570
437: 530 493: 572
438[a]: 531 494: 573
438[b]: 532 495: 574
439: 463 496: 575
440: 464 497: 584
441: 465 498: 585
442: 466 499: 586
443: 467 500: 576
444: 468 501: 577
445: 469 502: 587
446: 470 503: 588
447: 545 504: 578
448: 471 505: 582
449: 472 506: 590
450: 473 507: 591
451: 474 508: 592
452: 475 509: 593
453: 536 510: 594
454: 537 511: 595
455: 538 512: 596
512 Index of Sources
513: 597 49: 73
514: 598 50: 82
51: 84
Fant 1984 52: 85
2: 148 53: 88
54: 93
Fant 1989 55: 99
1: 3 56: 102
2: 4 57: 101
3: 5 58: 100
4: 13 59: 103
5: 14 60: 104
6: 2 61: 105
7: 435 62: 107
8: 7 63: 106
9: 16 64: 108
10: 12 65: 120
11: 1 66: 113
12: 15 67: 114
13: 17 68: 117
14: 18 69: 119
15: 23 70: 131
16: 24 71: 126
17: 25 72: 121
18: 26 73: 128
19: 36 74: 129
20: 37 75: 130
21: 39 76: 123
22: 87 77: 122
23: 34 78: 124
24: 43 79: 137
25: 54 80: 147
26: 53 81: 145
27: 41 82: 144
28: 42 83: 150
29: 48 84: 155
30: 51 85: 158
31: 59 86: 160
32: 62 87: 162
33: 63 88: 166
34: 78 89: 163
35: 77 90: 165
36: 70 91: 171
37: 76 92: 173
38: 83 93: 175
39: 96 94: 176
40: 61 95: 177
41: 50 96: 179
42: 65 97: 181
43: 64 98: 182
44: 66 99: 184
45: 74 100: 185
46: 72 101: 189
47: 69 102: 190
48: 75 103: 191
 Index of Sources 513
104: 192 159: 277
105: 193 160: 278
106: 194 161: 279
107: 195 162: 377
108: 196 163: 378
109: 197 164: 288
110: 200 165: 281
111: 167 166: 289
112: 168 167: 282
113: 389 168: 285
114: 201 169: 287
115: 206 170: 292
116: 204 171: 293
117: 210 172: 291
118: 215 173: 299
119: 216 174: 298
120: 220 175: 297
121: 218 176: 296
122: 217 177: 300
123: 221 178: 295
124: 222 179: 306
125: 223 180: 314
126: 225 181: 316
127: 227 182: 312
128: 224 183: 318
129: 230 184: 315
130: 229 185: 319
131: 234 186: 321
132: 235 187: 320
133: 237 188: 328
134: 239 189: 329
135: 242 190: 330
136: 244 191: 332
137: 245 192: 336
138: 246 193: 341
139: 248 194: 340
140: 249 195: 339
141: 233 196: 338
142: 238 197: 344
143: 252 198: 346
144: 256 199: 348
145: 257 200: 349
146: 258 201: 350
147: 254 202: 351
148: 263 203: 356
149: 265 204: 352
150: 267 205: 354
151: 268 206: 357
152: 271 207: 358
153: 272 208: 360
154: 273 209: 359
155: 274 210: 361
156: 384 211: 362
157: 203 212: 363
158: 276 213: 367
514 Index of Sources
214: 366 222: 159
215: 365 232: 253
216: 135 242: 260
217: 368 252: 261
218: 374 262: 405
219: 371 272: 406
220: 372 282: 67
221: 370 292: 407
222: 376 302: 35
223: 390 312: 269
224: 391 322: 157
225: 392 332: 11
226: 393 342: 408
227: 394 352: 409
228: 395 372: 275
229: 396 37b2: 20
230: 397 382: 79
231: 398 392: 410
232: 399 402: 153
233: 400 412: 270
234: 401 432: 411
235: 402 442: 412
236: 403 452: 57
237: 404 462: 55
642: 439 472: 92
653: 445 492: 6
662: 446 502: 27
672: 454 512: 413
682: 455 522: 56
692: 456 532: 414
702: 457 552: 30
712: 458 562: 156
722: 459 572: 415
732: 443 582: 416
12: 232 592: 417
22: 209 602: 418
32: 49 612: 139
42: 382 622: 9
62: 68 632: 10
82: 383 742: 419
92: 109 752: 111
102: 115 762: 420
112: 116 772: 421
122: 262 782: 422
13a2: 385 792: 86
13b2: 386 802: 97
13c2: 387 812: 423
142: 388 822: 310
152: 98 832: 29
162: 8 842: 33
172: 40 852: 38
182: 35 862: 110
192: 58 872: 428
202: 81 882: 424
212: 154 892: 1280
 Index of Sources 515
902: 429 JRS 18, 1928
912: 140 232: 9
91b2: 141 233: 10
922: 32
92b2: 430 Kraus 1993
932: 309 Neu 1: 790
94a,b2: 431 Neu 2: 872
952: 325 Neu 3: 873
962: 326 Neu 4: 874
972: 305 Neu 5: 839
982: 327 Neu 6: 840
992: 187 Neu 7: 866
1002: 186 Neu 8: 800
1012: 174 Neu 9: 801
1022: 19 Neu 10: 803
1032: 21 Neu 11: 850
1042: 22 Neu 12: 851
1062: 52 Neu 13: 836
1072: 432 Neu 14: 838
1082: 71 Neu 15: 858
1092: 90 Neu 16: 859
1102: 91 Neu 17: 864
1112: 89 Neu 18: 860
1122: 138 Neu 19: 808
1132: 142 Neu 20: 828
1142: 183 Neu 21: 804
1152: 202 Neu 22: 806
1172: 241 Neu 23: 809
1182: 251 Neu 24: 812
1202: 134 Neu 25: 861
1212: 266 Neu 26: 827
1222: 264 Neu 27: 794
1232: 433 Neu 28: 865
Neu 30: 843
IK
62: 360: 408 Lanciani, AnnIst 1868
180: 430
ILS
8713: 1232 MAMA IV
6: 139
IRT 7: 253
794a: 419 8: 260
794b: 111
794c: 420 MAMA VII
794d: 421 134: 408
794e: 422
794f: 899 MAMA X
794g: 856 71: 444
794h: 900 72: 440
794j: 857 94: 453
794k: 901 122: 438
794l: 902 123: 447
124: 441
JRS 2, 1912 125: 442
5: 253 126: 448
516 Index of Sources
127: 449 8/9, no. 14: 949
128: 450 8/9, no. 15: 950
129: 451 8/9, no. 16: 951
130: 452 8/9, no. 17: 952
8/9, no. 18: 953
McCabe 1985 8/9, no. 19: 954
266.1: 502 8/9, no. 20: 955
266.2: 505 8/9, no. 21: 956
266.3: 511 8/9, no. 22: 957
266.4: 513 8/9, no. 23: 958
266.5: 514 8/9, no. 24: 959
266.6: 515 8/9, no. 25: 960
266.7: 516 10, no. 1: 961
266.8: 506 10, no. 2: 962
266.9: 517 10, no. 3: 963
266.10: 518 11, no. 1: 964
17, no. 1: 965
Monceaux, BullSocAnt 1900 18, no. 1: 966
1: 187 18, no. 2: 967
2: 186 18, no. 3: 968
3: 174 18, no. 4: 969
19, no. 1: 970
Naumann, R. 1979. Der Zeustempel zu 19, no. 2: 971
Aizanoi, Berlin 19, no. 3: 972
80: 20 19, no. 4: 973
19, no. 5: 974
Orsi, NotSc 1921 19, no. 6: 975
1: 309 19, no. 7: 976
2: 431 19, no. 8: 977
3: 325 20, no. 1: 978
4: 325 22, no. 1: 979
5: 309 22, no. 2: 980
6: 326 22, no. 3: 981
7: 304 22, no. 4: 982
22, no. 5: 983
Peacock & Maxfield 1997, p.117221 22, no. 6: 984
1, no. 1: 930 22, no. 7: 985
2, no. 1: 931 22, no. 8: 986
2, no. 2: 932 22, no. 9: 987
6, no. 1: 933 22, no. 10: 988
6, no. 2: 934 22, no. 11: 989
7, no. 1: 935 22, no. 12: 990
8/9, no. 1: 936 22, no. 13: 991
8/9, no. 2: 937 22, no. 14: 992
8/9, no. 3: 938 22, no. 15: 993
8/9, no. 4: 939 23, no. 1: 994
8/9, no. 5: 940 24, no. 1: 995
8/9, no. 6: 941 24, no. 2: 996
8/9, no. 7: 942 24, no. 3: 997
8/9, no. 8: 943 25, no. 1: 998
8/9, no. 9: 944 25, no. 2: 999
8/9, no. 10: 945 30, no. 1: 1000
8/9, no. 11: 946 30, no. 2: 1001
8/9, no. 12: 947 33, no. 1: 1002
8/9, no. 13: 948 33, no. 2: 1003
 Index of Sources 517
33, no. 3: 1004 62, no. 2: 1059
36, no. 1: 1005 63, no. 1: 1060
55, no. 1: 1006 65, no. 1: 1061
55, no. 2: 1007 65, no. 2: 1062
55, no. 3: 1008 67, no. 1: 1063
55, no. 4: 1009 67, no. 2: 1064
55, no. 5: 1010 67, no. 3: 1065
55, no. 6: 1011 68. no.1: 1066
59, no. 1: 1012 75, no.1: 1067
59, no. 2: 1013 75, no. 2: 1068
59, no. 3: 1014 75, no. 3: 1069
59, no. 4: 1015 79, no. 1: 1070
59, no. 5: 1016 83, no.1: 1071
59, no. 6: 1017 84, no. 1: 1072
59, no. 7: 1018 84, no. 2: 1073
59, no. 8: 1019 84, no. 3: 1074
59, no. 9: 1020 84, no. 4: 1075
59, no. 10: 1021 84, no. 5: 1076
59, no. 11: 1022 84, no. 6: 1077
59, no. 12: 1023 84, no. 7: 1078
59, no. 13: 1024 84, no. 8: 1079
59, no. 14: 1025 84, no. 9: 1080
59, no. 15: 1026 84, no. 10: 1081
59, no. 16: 1027 84, no. 11: 1082
59, no. 17: 1028 84, no. 12: 1083
59, no. 18: 1029 84, no. 13: 1084
59, no. 19: 1030 84, no. 14: 1085
59, no. 20: 1031 84, no. 15: 1086
59, no. 21: 1032 84, no. 16: 1087
59, no. 22: 1033 84, no. 17: 1088
59, no. 23: 1034 84, no. 18: 1089
59, no. 24: 1035 84, no. 19: 1090
59, no. 25: 1036 84, no. 20: 1091
59, no. 26: 1037 84, no. 21: 1092
59, no. 27: 1038 84, no. 22: 1093
59, no. 28: 1039 84, no. 23: 1094
59, no. 29: 1040 84, no. 24: 1095
60, no. 1: 1041 84, no. 25: 1096
60, no. 2: 1042 84, no. 26: 1097
60, no. 3: 1043 84, no. 27: 1098
60, no. 4: 1044 84, no. 28: 1099
60, no. 5: 1045 84, no. 29: 1100
60, no. 6: 1046 84, no. 30: 1101
60, no. 7: 1047 85, no. 1: 1102
60, no. 8: 1048 85, no. 2: 1103
60, no. 9: 1049 85, no. 3: 1104
61, no. 1: 1050 85, no. 4: 1105
61, no. 2: 1051 90, no. 1: 1106
61, no. 3: 1052 90, no. 2: 1107
61, no. 4: 1053 90, no. 3: 1108
61, no. 5: 1054 90, no. 4: 1109
61, no. 6: 1055 90, no. 5: 1110
61, no. 7: 1056 90, no. 6: 1111
61, no. 8: 1057 90, no. 7: 1112
62, no. 1: 1058 93, no. 1: 1113
518 Index of Sources
93, no. 2: 1114 107, no. 42: 888
93, no. 3: 1115 107, no.44: 798
93, no. 4: 1116 107, no. 45: 848
94, no. 1: 1117 121, no. 54: 1243
94, no. 2: 1118 121, no. 55: 1244
96, no. 1: 1119 121, no. 57: 1271
99, no. 1: 1120 121, no. 58: 1242
99, no. 2: 1121 122, no. 63: 1274
99, no. 3: 1122 131, no. 67: 765
102, no. 1: 1123 131, no. 68: 766
103, no. 1: 1124 131, no. 69: 767
103, no. 2: 1125 131, no. 70: 768
103, no. 3: 1126 131, no. 71: 769
105, no. 1: 1127 132, no. 72: 770
105, no. 2: 1128 132, no. 73: 771
109, no. 1: 1129 132, no. 74: 772
113, no. 1: 1130 132, no. 75: 773
117, no. 1: 1131 132, no. 76: 774
117, no. 2: 1132 132, no. 77: 775
117, no. 3: 1133 132, no. 78: 776
117, no. 4: 1134 133, no. 87: 1275
117, no. 5: 1135 177, no. 118: 611
119, no. 1: 1136 180, no. 143: 1276
120, no. 1: 1137 181, no. 148: 1277
129, no. 1: 1138 188, no. 180: 777
130, no. 1: 1139 188, no. 181: 1278
?, no. 1: 1140 194, no. 187: 778
?, no. 2: 1141 198, no. 7: 779
?, no. 3: 1142 198, no. 8: 780
?, no. 4: 1143 204, no. 24: 1171
?, no. 5: 1144 214, no. 27: 781
214, no. 29: 782
Pensabene 1978 215, no. 30: 783
5: 327 215, no. 31: 784
6: 309 216, no. 33: 785
7: 431 216, no. 35: 786
10: 325
11: 326 Ramsay 1882
3: 275
Pensabene 1994 4: 79
55, no. 10: 546 5: 410
56, no. 16: 498 6: 153
99, no. 37: 581 7: 270
99, no. 38: 589 9: 411
73, no. 17: 427 10: 412
73, no. 18: 429 11: 57
73, no. 19: 426 12: 55
74, no. 21: 436 13: 92
74, no. 23: 1279 16: 6
86, no. 29: 758 17: 27
86, no. 31: 610 18: 413
86, no. 32: 608 19: 56
99, no. 38: 589 20: 414
99, no. 37: 581 22: 30
 Index of Sources 519
23: 156 J3: 423
24: 415 J4: 310
25: 416
26: 417 Vanhove, Ant. Class.
27: 418 51, 1989
22631: 763
Roder 1971
J1: 86 ZPE 75, 1988
J2: 97 p. 2914: 111
 General Index
A Aezani 85
Africa 25, 67, 92, 96, 98, 106, 117, 140,
a commentariis 114, 125, 150, 152, 155, 159, 243, 282
253, 254, 255 f. proconsularis 100, 140, 143, 173, 200,
aurariarum Delmatarum 74, 153, 241, 305, 306, 333
162, 255 africano 345
a lapicidinis Carystiis 1579, 310 labels on, 311 f., 324, 325, 327
a/ab marmoribus 158, 345 f., 34850, 354 Afyon 322
a rationibus 124, 243, 342, 343 f., 367 agens
Aalen 190 in rebus 304
ab epistulis 172 f., 250, 344 regione Montanensium 70 f.
ab instrumentis tabularii 150, 151, 253 territorio Montanensium 70
Abascal, Juan Manuel, 133, 2379, 249 ager
Abbir Cella 140, 241 propter Carthaginem Novam 91
Abritus/mod. Razgrad 68 Mattiacus 197
Abu Shaar 22 publicus 86, 91, 93
Abu Zawal 24, 108 Aglientu 104
Achaia 114 f., 143, 146, 172, 200, 341 Agrippa, see M. Vipsanius Agrippa
aciscularius, see akisklarios Aigiai 185
acisculus 212 Aiiobriga, see castellani
acta 255 Aila 196
actor argenti 72 Ain el-Djemala 92
ad cunicul(os) cal(cis/carios), see cuniculus Ain el-Ksir 119
Ad Matricem 74 Aini 177
adiutor tabulariorum 114, 151, 152, 159, aioutor kibariatou 155, 252
253, 256 Aka Cai 321
adlector ferrariarum 89 akisklarios 209, 211, 212
adsessor, see assessor Akmonia 322
adsignatio 266 Akoris 178, 217
adze, see acisculus, akisklarios akouarios 211
aedituus 150 ala 177, 179, 180, 198
aegri 183 Apriana 179
Aegyptus, see Egypt I Augusta 189
Aelius Antoninus (cent.) 171, 295, 296, 332 Commagenorum 177
Aelius Sostratus 128, 129, 152, 167 II Flavia Hispanorum c. R. 1869
L. Aemilius Paulus 91 Maur(orum?) 178
aeraria 84 Nigri 109
aerarium Tauriana torquata victrix c. R. 189
militare 94 I Thracum Mauretana 179, 221
Saturni 83, 85, 92, 93, 96, 97 f., 100, 105 f., Vocontiorum 177, 179
235, 337 Alabanda 115
aes alabaster 345
Cordubense 125, 163 quarries 53, 222, 255
Livianum 87 Alabastrine/mod. Qum el-Akhmar 53, 178,
Marianum 125, 163 222, 337, 361
Sallustianum 87 Alabastron 52, 337
Aesculapius 150 Alabastronpolis, see Alabastrine
 General Index 521
Alburnus Maior/mod. Ros ia Montana 3, 4, 5, Annell, see Dolaucothi
33, 46, 76, 126, 130, 232 Annia Lucilla 150, 271,
military presence 41, 44, 195 Annius Rufus (cent.) 169, 170, 172,
mining arrangements at 2324, 253, 254, 173, 332
2702, 342 M. Annius Syriacus 219
population 3, 272 f., 289, 335 annona 144, 156, 242
spatial layout 414 Anossa 219, 220, 320
Alexandria 122, 132, 160, 178, 179, 206, Anse Saint Gervais 279
209, 211 Ansi/s, kastellum, 42, 44
Alexandria Troas 321, 352 antikourator 108, 168, 183, 204 f., 218;
Alfoldy, Geza, 3, 536, 62, 83, 103, 122, 131, see also curator
132, 133, 161, 235, 249, 284, 285 Antimacheia 219, 220
Alibey 303 Antinoupolis 160
Aljustrel, see Vipasca Antiochia 176
Almaden 163, 278 Antiochia Pisidiae 352
Almus 70 f. Antium 99, 306
Alpers, Michael, 84, 93 L. Antoninus Albus 116
Alpes Antoninus Pius (ad 138161) 65, 97, 99, 100,
Ceutronum 87, 88 103, 117, 223, 306, 330, 337
Cottiae 238 M. Antonius Fabianus 139, 246
Graiae et Poenninae 238 Antonius Flavianus (praef.) 168, 179, 205
Maritimae 238 Aosta 91, 279
Alsace 176 Apameia/mod. Dinar 28, 116, 117
Alston Moor 191 Apameia-on-the-Orontes 185
Altintash 303, 322 Aphrodisias 244
alum mine 91, 279 apographa 219
amethyst mines 110 Apollo/Sol 65
Ampelum/mod. Zlatna Apollonopolis mikra 207
headquarters 74, 126, 159, 160, 161, Apulum/mod. Alba Iulia 75, 76, 127, 130,
165, 259 150, 195, 272, 286
military presence 195, 198, 310 Aquae Hypsitanae 126
municipal status 128, 165 aqueduct 34, 36, 44, 46, 58, 73 f., 77, 95,
population of 233, 2713, 335 172 f., 178, 198, 231
and procurators 3, 12630, 142, 146, 147, Aquileia 132, 243, 284, 285, 286
149, 165, 199, 2324, 258 f., 340 f., 360 Aquincum 161
subaltern staff 14952, 232, 2539 Aquitania, see financial procurator
amphitheatre 36 Arabia 177
amphodogrammateus 222 arca
anametretes marmaron 209, 210 ferrariarum 89, 236, 285
Anatolia, see Asia Minor Galliarum 89
Anausaro 60 arcarius 142, 286, 288, 364
Anavieja 189 regni Norici 55
Andreau, Jean, 5, 285 stationis Siscianae 138
angareia/aggarea 184, 219 archiereus ton Sebaston 321
Ankyronon 90 archimechanikos 212
Anicium/mod. Le Puy 89, 285 Archimedean screw 38, 40, 77
animal 168, 182 f., 200, 205, 214, 225, archimetallarchos 10911
252, 259 architekton 108, 109, 208, 211, 214, 209,
fodder/water 15, 180 f., 212, 214, 215 f., 258 f.
362, 366 archive 207, 210, 218, 232, 270, 308, 329
lines 13, 14, 22, 24, 32 central 172 f., 344
requisition 21820, 225, 254, 260, 356 gubernatorial 253, 254, 255
use 16, 30, 31 f., 46 procuratorial 2535, 259
see also apographa; camel; cursus; donkey; see also ab epistulis; acta; commentarii;
Egypt; hippiatros; kameloi; oxen; Demarion; headquarters; instrumenta;
potismos; transport tabula; tabularium
522 General Index
Arelate/mod. Arles 237, 238, 284 Artemision(in Ephesos) 116
Argaeli(?) 273 artodotes boethos kibariatou 155, 252
argentaria/ae 3, 102, 148 f., 226, 265, 279, Arulis/mod. Enesh 176
282 f. Ashmunein, el-, 52, 155, 160, 353
Dardanicae 58 Asia (province) 60, 85, 86, 1135, 116 f., 121,
Delmaticae 139 f. 122, 156, 164, 1713, 192, 200, 244, 250,
Delmaticae et Pannonicae 72 f., 1336, 298, 341
147, 161, 165 Asia Minor 49, 96, 106, 116, 117, 198, 208,
Pannonicae 139 f. 312, 320, 322, 332, 336, 351, 355, 367
Veb(-) 102 Asklepieion (Pergamon) 121
Argentarius 163, 278 askophora 211
argentarius 226, 233, 284; see also banker/ assessor ferrariarum 284 f.
broker assize system 164 f., 364; see also conventus
Argentiera 81 Assuan, see Syene
argentifodina, see argentaria Aston 101
Argithani 303 Astorga, see Asturica Augusta
Aries u 76 Asturia et Callaecia 189, 198, 250, 273, 274,
arithmos 52, 337 279, 359
Klaudianou 52 Asturia Transmontana 188, 274
arkarius, see arcarius Asturians 188, 230, 334
Arles, see Arelate Asturica Augusta/mod. Astorga 33, 34, 76,
army 1, 7, 8, 9, 54, 110, 111 f., 119, 120, 120 f., 133, 188, 199, 228 f., 340
156 f., 196201, 202, 206, 240 f, 344, Asyut, al-, 53
352 f. 357 f., 364 f., 368 Athens 98, 306, 339
demand for metals 1968, 357, 364 Attaleia 139, 246
and governors 130, 256 C. Attius Alcimus Felicianus 1403, 145, 167,
and mines 4, 5, 36, 44 f., 53, 58, 6871, 76, 237 f., 240, 241, 248
81 f., 93 f., 106, 119 f., 126, 129 f., 151, Auchendavy 98
152, 162, 18596, 232, 253, 259, 358 auction 87, 226 f., 264 f., 266, 290
and mining 197 f., 232, 240, 358, 364 Dutch 265
peace-time use of, 936 Aude 287
and quarries 31, 109, 16885, 204 f., Augusta Vindelicum/mod. Augsburg 148,
208 f., 212, 225, 251, 255, 294, 318, 239, 286
330, 362 Augustales 286
quarrying expertise 172 f., 294, 332, 344, Augustus (27bc-ad14) 55, 87, 88, 94 f., 99,
3535, 356, 363, 364, 368 104, 110, 230, 334, 338, 345, 357
supply of (Egypt), 2158, 220, 260, 362, 366 auraria/e 84, 150
see also agens; ala; beneficiarius; camp; Dacicae 74, 76, 159, 195, 232, 253, 255, 364
centurio; classis; cohors; commilitones; Delmatae 74, 255
contubernium; coxa; curator; decurio; aurifodina Victumularum 91, 277, 279
disciplina; eques legionis; equites M. Aurelius Eutyches (proc.) 120, 167
singulares; exercitus; fort; frumentarius; Aurelius Firmus (proc.) 120, 167
governor; imaginifer; immunes; legatus; M. Aurelius Marcio (proc.) 111, 112, 251,
legio; librarius; librator; limes; miles; 321, 348, 349, 353
numerus; officium; optio; order; patrol; M. Aurelius Septimius Heraclitus 216
praefectus; praesidium; praetoriani; Aurelius Verecundus 134, 135, 167
principalis; principia; protector; aurilegulus 272; see also legulus
regionarius; signifer; statio; stationarius; auxiliary units 59, 68 f. 75, 76, 94, 96, 111 f.,
tirones; tribunus; tubicen; 119, 168201, 204, 358 f.; see also ala;
valetudinarium; veteranus; vexillarius; cohors; numerus
vexillatio; vigiles; war Avala 59, 131
M. Arrius [Iu?]nianus 134, 135 Aventine 345, 346
L. Arruntius Maximus 121, 249 Aveyron 81, 154
Arsinoite nome 206, 216, 219, 223, 334 C. Avidius Heliodorus 222
Artaxata 176 Azuaga 77, 155, 163
 General Index 523
B Bello 156
bellow 16
Bab el-Mukheniq 16 bellowsmen, see phusates
Bacakale / Dokimeion 10, 106, 114, 164, Bembibre 230
219 f. beneficiarius 179
military presence 96, 1714, 294, 295, 330, consularis 42, 44, 57, 58, 64, 67, 70, 71, 74,
332, 361, 363 75 f., 130, 161, 192, 195, 199 f., 235
procurators 113, 300 f., 361 legatus legionis I Minerviae 142, 240
quarrying arrangements 6, 113, 174, 206, procuratoris Augusti 120, 129 f., 148 f.,
291303, 304, 305, 31831, 338, 339, 186, 195, 199 f., 232, 235, 340 f., 360
3515, 362 f., 365, 366, 367 Berenike 10912, 17981; see also Mons
spatial layout 27 f., 31, 32, 91 Berenicides
staff 156, 164, 257, 361 beryl mines 110, 179
Baccini Leotardi, Paola, 313, 324 Beryllus (proc.) 49, 123 f., 154, 163, 166, 270,
Bad Durkheim 175 343
Bad Ischl, see statio Escensis Berytus 352
Bad Munstereifel 190 Bessa, see aurifodina Victumularum
Bad Sassendorf-Heppen 104, 280 Bibali 273
Badia 22, 24 bigio 345
Q. Baebius Modestus 125, 126 Bila 74
Baetica 78, 85, 154, 155, 163, 189 Bir Aras 24
ingots 2749, 281 Birley, Anthony, 172
military presence 189 f. Birley, Eric, 172
mines 88, 89, 163, 235, 359, 360 Bisericuta, see Alburnus Maior
and procurators 77, 124 f., 147, 155, 162, Biterrois 125
166, 335 Blace 67
Baetis 163, 281 Bocs a-Vasiova 76
Bagradas 1, 27 Bodmin 191
Baia de Cris 74, 76 boethos kibariatou 155, 252
Bajna Basta 67, 72 Bolcske 161, 235
Balea, see Alburnus Maior bona 93
Baleares 280 caduca 84, 336
banker/broker 233, 265, 271; see also damnatorum 83, 84, 93, 97, 336
argentarius Bona Dea Apollinaris 346
Banos de Bande 188 Bona Dea Subsaxana 346
Banti, Luisa, 29 Bononia/mod. Bonn 142, 171, 175, 178, 240
barber 48, 49, 214, 227, 284; see also koureus Bor 69, 194
Barco Borghese 350 Bordj Helal 119
Baridustae 44, 335 Bosnia-Herzegovina 33, 73, 74
Baridustarum, kastellum, 44 Bostra 177
Basanites 210, 308 Bottle 191
basilikos grammateus 217, 219 Bou Cha 140
M. Bassaeus Rufus 249 Boueib, el-, 211
bath 13 f., 18, 20, 25, 32, 45, 49, 58, 93, 126, Boulvert, Gerard, 2, 256
133, 154, 189, 191, 212, 227; see also Bozica 58
conductor balinei Bracara Augusta 121, 273
Bath 101 bracchium 292 f., 294 f., 299, 300, 302, 329
Bavaria 55 Bradford quarries, see Mons Porphyrites
Beauport Park 191 Brana de Folgueirosa 35
Bedizzano, see Luna/Carrara Brattia/mod. Brac 176
Bedu 156, 180 breviarium totius imperii 94, 106
bekhen 53, 112 Breza, see Haedum castellum Daesitiatium
Belalcazar 163 brigands 44, 194, 198; see also Bedu; latrones;
Belia 24 latrunculus
Bella Vista 40 Brigantes 334
524 General Index
Brigetio 170 Cakirsaz 303
Brilon 104, 105, 190, 280, 334, 335 Calagurris 189
Brisevo 56, 137, 153 calcaria 224; see also chalk pit
Bristol 101 Caledoni 224, 334
Britain 4, 368 Calgacus 224, 334
ingots 101, 102, 279, 340, 358 Callaecia, see Asturia et Callaecia
military presence 81, 176, 1902, P. Calpurnius Macer Caulius Rufus 172
197, 198 Cn. Calpurnius Piso 87, 88
mining in 32, 33, 3538, 80, 81, 82, 106 camel 14, 16, 32, 90, 108, 180, 212, 214,
Britannia, see Britain; plumbum 218, 219
Brodica 73 requisition of 219, 363
Brohltal 171, 175, 176, 178 see also kameloi
Brough-on-Humber 191, 358 camp 79, 186, 190, 196, 219
Brough-on-Noe 191 auxiliary 68, 188, 193, 195, 358
Brough-upon-Stainmore 191 legionary 59, 170, 175, 188, 195, 272
Brskovo 72 at Simitthus 25, 27, 185, 225
Brunholdisstuhl 175 Campingeddus 196
Brunt, Peter 3, 48, 84 f., 93, 98, 236, 242, 287 Campus Martius 345 f.
Bruton 101 canabae 68
Bruun, Christer 126, 346 canal 46, 95, 172, 176, 197, 333
Bruzza, Luigi 5, 6, 290, 301 Canalgrande, see Luna/Carrara
Buch 190 Canalie, Le, see Luna/Carrara
Bugojno 74 Cantabrian wars, see war
Bulla Regia 143 Cantabrians 188
Bulow-Jacobsen, Adam 110, 184, 210, 211, Capanelli, Danielle, 3
212, 308, 309, Capidava 68
bureau, see headquarters; Palatine bureaux capital, provincial 54, 117, 159, 163, 199
Burnham, Barry 36 Cappadocia 170, 171, 238
Busovaca 74 Caracalla 86, 97, 244
Caralis/mod. Cagliari 141
C caravan 156, 181 f., 218; see also porea
Carcinadas 81
Cabezas de los Pastos 39, 40, 79 career, see procurator
Cabezo de los Silos 39 Caria 115
Cabrera 104, 275, 279, 280, 281, 283 Carinthia 53
Caddas, see Aquae Hypsitanae Carmel 279
Cadinj 72 Carnic, see Alburnus Maior
C. Caelius Martialis 141, 143, 145, 166, 247 Carnicul Mare, see Alburnus Maior
Caerwent 191 Carnuntum 137
Caesarea Maritima 64 Carpeni hill, see Alburnus Maior
Caesarea Mauretania 139, 246 Carrara, see Luna
caesarianus 252 f. Carreg Angharad Fychan 35
caesura 89, 118, 205, 2937, 299, 300, 301, Carthage 27, 156, 305
306 f., 308, 309, 322 f., 328, 330, 331 Carthago Nova/mod. Cartagena 89 f., 91,
caesura-holder 257, 2937, 31823, 329 189, 235, 2757
centuriones 171, 294, 318, 330 Carucedo, Lake of, see Las Medulas
duration 295 f. Casa de Reina 77, 155
and imperial freedman/slaves 294 f., 308, Cassius Ligurinus 131, 167, 234
318, 320 castellani
private contractors 294 f., 323, 318, 320, Aiiobrigiaecini 230
330, 331; local background of, 3202; Paemeiobrigenses 230, 334
obligations 296 f., 319 f., 330 castellum 42, 44, 74, 191, 230, 273
and procurators 205, 296, 306 f., 309, 330 Berense 273
caesura-officina system 293302, 329, 330 Castor and Pollux 156
Caius/Caligula (ad 3741) castra peregrinorum 174, 196
 General Index 525
Castra Regina/mod. Regensburg 68 classis 94, 198, 358
castro 229 f. Alexandriana 178, 179
Castro de Corporales, see Corporales Britannica 191, 192
Castrocalbon 188 Germanica 175
Castromao 230 Misenensis 196
Castuera 189 see also nauarch; trierarch
Castulo 76, 123, 155, 275 Claudius (ad 4154) 87, 125, 154, 197, 203,
Catabolum 185 222, 338, 339, 348 f., 358
Caurel, El 230 Claudius Etruscus 124, 343
Cauuet, Beatrice 36 Ti. Claudius Macro 132, 284
Cava della Carbonera, see Luna/Carrara Claudius Paternus Clementianus 132, 243, 284
Cava dei Fantiscritti, see Luna/Carrara Ti. Claudius Proculus Cornelianus 134, 135,
Cava Gioia, see Luna/Carrara 136, 140, 166, 246
Cava del Polvaccio, see Luna/Carrara Ti. Claudius Subatianus Aquila 221, 222
Celeia 132 Ti. Claudius Xenophon 134, 135, 136, 167,
Celtici Supertamarci 273 247
Centenillo, El 76, 155, 273, 276 Claudiana, see latomeia Claudiana
centesima argentariae stipulationis 226 Claudianus, see Mons Claudianus
centralization, see constraints D. Clodius Septimius Albinus 123
centurio 8, 98, 137, 153 Clunia 189, 222, 273
frumentarius 22, 169, 174, 195 f., 201, 332 Clwyd 279
at mines 119 f., 186 f., 193, 194, 196 M. Cocceius Firmus (cent.) 98
at quarries 107, 108, 156, 168, 169, 170, cohors
1758, 1813, 185, 208, 209 II Flavia Afrorum equitata 184
as quarrying specialists 6, 96, 1704, 201, III Alpinorum 176
259, 293 f., 295, 310, 330, 332, 363 I Apamenorum equitata 179
regionarius 70 f. II Asturum 175
Ceotina 72 II Aurelia Nova milliaria eq. c. R. 194
Ceres Augusta 128, 150 V Callaecorum Lucensium 193 f.
C. Cerialis 114 f., 146, 310 I Celtiberorum 1868, 199
Cerro de Malatrigo 163 I Flavia Cilicum equitata 107, 169, 179
Cerro Muriano, see Mons Marianus II civium Romanorum 175
Cerros Marianos, see Mons Marianus Dacorum 193
Cetate hill, see Alburnus Maior I Dardanorum 194
chalk pit 86, 92; see also calcaria II Aurelia Dardanorum 68, 69, 193
chalkeus 209, 210, 212 Delmatorum 194
Chalon-sur-Saone 191 equitata 179, 180, 198
charcoal 20, 30, 43, 45, 231 Facundi 179
chartera, see tax Flori 179
Charterhouse-on-Mendip 81, 101, 103, 191, I Gallica 1869
358 I milliaria Hemesenorum 132
cheirographon 337 I Hispanorum Cyrenaica veterana 195
Chemtou, see Simitthus II Hispanorum Cyrenaica 177
Cheshunt 101 II Ituraeorum equitata 12, 179
Chiemsee 55 III Ituraeorum equitata 169, 177, 179
Chios 116, 295, 309, 312 f., 327, 331, 352 I Lusitanorum equitata 179
Chresimus (proc.) 1157, 351, 353 II Nerviorum 191
Christians 224, 333; see also convicts; Nigri 179
damnatio Nigri Cameresina 179
Christol, Michel, 300, 301, 302 I Ulpia Pannoniorum milliaria
Cilicia 185, 224, 238, 312, 333, 357 equitata 193
cinnabar, see minium quingenaria 37
cipollino 28, 114, 158, 170, 171, 310 f., 325, I Sardorum 196
329, 335, 345 I Sugambrum veterana equitata 71, 192
civitas 50, 69, 84, 89 II Thracum 179
526 General Index
cohors (cont.) ferrariarum ripae dextrae 237, 287
I Thracum Syriaca 68, 69, 193 of mines 2 f., 124, 228, 235
II Varcianorum 175 of services at Vipasca 48, 214, 226 f., 256,
XXVI voluntariorum 175 264, 284
XVIII voluntariorum c.R. 193 see also manceps; promagister
coinage, see copper; nummi metallorum; confectores aeris 124, 163
token money confiscare 85
colere 267 confiscation 48, 83, 84, 87, 163, 333
collegialite inegale 3, 5, 119, 122, 129 Conimbriga/mod. Condixa-a-Velha 274
collegium 153, 206, 3148 consilium 173
aurariarum 273 constraints, organizational 4, 79, 10, 17,
domesticum 315 303, 39, 44, 46 f., 277
fabrum 315 and centralization 342 f., 3535, 365, 368
familiae publicae 315 and quarry labels 32831, 351
Feroniae 348 and responsibilities 202, 204, 228, 231,
funeraticium 271 f., 314 f. 245, 257, 259, 338, 363
Sardiatensium 43 consular date 291, 293, 294, 296, 301, 302,
see lapis Salvioni 304, 306, 309, 310, 312, 313, 314
colonia 48, 50, 106, 272, 273, 286, 315, 317 contract, work 90, 213, 232 f., 253 f., 257,
m(etalla?) D(omaviana) 72 270 f. 272, 338; see also locator; opus
Colonnata, see Luna/Carrara aurariaum
colonus 59, 86, 92, 244, 270, 271, 272 contractor 5, 45, 254, 259, 261, 288,
argentariarum Dardanicarum 58, 131, 162, 366, 368
270 of building work 316 f., 325 f., 352, 354
metalli Vipascensis 49, 123, 269 f. of custom duties 63 f.
at Vipasca 124, 227 f., 229, 234, 257, and ingots 2746, 279, 283, 289
2619, 290 and marble imports 301 f., 324
Comacchio 189 of mines 88, 90 f., 124, 198, 233 f., 235,
comes metallorum per Illyricum 239 253, 256, 271, 273, 2749, 289,
C. Cominius Leugas 20, 221 f. 258, 368
commentarii 254, 255 at quarries 174, 316, 328 f., 330 f., 338,
commilitones 175, 177 355, 363, 365, 366
commissura 299 f., 330 small-scale 4, 229, 231, 276 f., 287, 288,
commoda 93, 154, 336 f. 318 f.
Commodus (ad 18092) 118, 122 of work force 213, 226, 355
Companhia Mineira Transtagana 226 see also caesura-holder; colere; colonus;
Comum/mod. Como 243 conductor; corpus; lex; locatio censoria;
Concepcion 228 locatio-conductio; lustrum; msthosis;
condemnation, see damnatio misthotes; occupator; publicanus;
conductor redemptor; societas; socius; vectura
balinei 48, 227 contrascriptor officinarum 153, 257
as employer 270 contubernium 21
ferrariarum 53, 154, 242 f., 244; function conventus 121
2357, 239, 255, 260, 2879, 361, 363 f., Bracarensis 188
367; replacement 236, 241; status/ Cluniensis 273 f.
origin 243, 286 Uxamensis 274
ferrariarum Noricarum 55, 132, 24 convicts 2, 4, 51, 73, 93, 97 f., 223 f., 255,
fer(rariarum) N(oricarum) P(anno- 333 f., 343, 353, 364, 365
niarum) D(almatarum) 138, 148, 243, at quarries 6, 16, 32, 53, 100, 134 f., 200,
285, 288 2226, 260, 330, 338, 355, 366
fer(ariarum) N(oricarum) p(artis) d(imi- see also amphodogrammateus; bona; camp;
diae) 285 damnatio; emperor; governor; ida;
ferrariarum Pannonicarum itemque poena metalli; prisoners; servus
provinciarum transmarinarum 57, 135, poenae; strategos; war
136 f., 148, 239, 286, 288 Coombe Crag 176
 General Index 527
copper 83, 87, 197, 290 cursus
coinage 59, 64, 66, 72 f., 342 clabularius 220
ingots 125, 279, 280 publicus 219
mines 39, 41, 69, 73, 79, 85, 88, 91, 123, velox 220
136, 196, 228, 234 f., 245, 248, 265, 269, Q. Curtius Rufus 197
277, 278, 333, 360 custom duty, see tax; Zarai
see also aeraria; confectores aeris Cuvigny, Helene 111, 112, 180, 206, 207, 210,
Corbieres 287 213, 215, 251, 252, 272, 308, 319, 330,
Corbulo, see Cn. Domitius Corbulo 342
Corduba/mod. Cordoba 77, 125, 163, 274, Cyprus 65, 248, 333, 357
278
Corinth 143 D
C. Cornelius Gallus 88
L. Cornelius Sulla 277 Dacia 5, 68, 111, 165, 233, 234, 239 f., 247,
cornicen 176 286, 336, 360
Cornwall 191 military presence 195, 198
Corporales 119, 120, 187 mining administration 12630, 146, 149,
corpus 153, 287 152, 159, 165, 166 f., 199, 234, 239, 253,
Corsica 143, 280 256, 2703, 286, 335, 360; districts 3,
Corta de Covas, see Tresminas 414, 746
Corta Dehesa, Lago, see Rio Tinto Dacia Apulensis 130, 135, 149, 232, 247,
Corta dos Lagoinhos, see Tresminas 341 f.
Corta da Ribeirinha, see Tresminas Dacia Superior 130
corvee labour, see workforce Dacians 335
M. Cosconius Fronto 141, 143, 145, 237, 238, Dalea, see Alburnus Maior
248 Dalmatia 3, 33, 43, 73, 82, 106, 133, 162, 166,
Cossitianus Firmus (proc.) 137, 138, 167, 194, 222, 239, 240, 272, 273, 334, 335,
cost 66, 203, 282 343, 358
for emperor 33642 mining districts 56, 57, 604, 713,
of mining 267 f., 283 13840, 153
of quarrying 366 Dalmatians 73, 233, 334; see also Baridustae;
Cothi, see Dolaucothi 36 Pirustae; Sardiatae
Coto Fortuna 275 damnatio
council, provincial 89 in metallum 978, 223 f., 333
counterfeiting, see nummi metallorum ad opus (publicum) 333
coxa 180 see also ministerium metallicorum; opus
crane 30, 176, 210, 212; see also kasiotes; metalli
mekanarios Danube
L. Creperius Paulus 139, 166, 246, frontier 71, 194, 241, 359
Crete 91 river 69, 70, 71
Cris ul Alb 76 Danubian provinces 65, 125, 152, 172, 336
Crkvine 154 army presence 1926
Crypta Balbi 346, 348 customs district/stations 66 f., 71, 82, 106,
Cuenca de Boeza 230 361
cult, imperial 116, 321 mining districts 56, 64, 67, 81 f., 106, 260,
Cumberland 176 272 f., 366, 367
cuniculus 177, 268 and procurators 137, 146, 147, 23246,
curator 289, 342, 368
aedium sacrarum et operum Dardania 66, 102, 194, 195
publicorum 316 f. Dardanians 194, 233
of forts 109, 180 f. Dardanorum municipium/mod.
at Mons Claudianus 108, 168, 182 f., Socanica 58, 131, 143, 153, 162, 166,
204 f., 251 f. 194, 234, 257, 270, 273
see also antikourator; kourator; Dea Orcia 59, 130
principalis debitor fisci 268
528 General Index
Deceangli 334 Domergue, Claude, 4, 5, 79, 83, 105, 123, 163,
decurio (army) 119 f., 157, 168 f., 177, 180, 228, 262, 265 f., 269, 274, 276 f., 281
182, 183, 1868, 208, 221 dominium ex iure Quiritum 86
decurio 70, 314 f. dominus 87
Deir el-Atrash 24 praedii 86, 244
dekanos 210 Domitian (ad 8196) 99, 106, 116 f.
Delphi 174 Domitius Antigonus 141, 144 f.
Demarion, archive of, 217 Cn. Domitius Corbulo 197
demosios himatismos 223, 335 f. L. Domitius Eros 134, 135, 136, 166.
depositum irregulare 271 Q. Domitius Marsianus 141, 143, 145, 166,
Derbyshire 191, 279, 247
Deus Aeternus 150 Domitius Ulpianus 50, 51, 85 f., 92, 95, 97,
Diana 65, 70 100, 207, 224, 333
Didymoi (fort) 110 Domus Tiberiana 23; Transitoria 22
dies natalis 119 donativum 88
Dii Mauri 118 donkey 14, 16, 32, 157, 205, 214, 218, 362
dioecesis 114 door-stone 297, 303, 312, 321 f.
diploma 173, 219 dorea 87
disciplina Augusti 95 Douro 33
dispensator 202, 215, 217, 255, 256 f., 364 dowry 86
aurariarum 128, 150 f., 256 Drachenfels 175
marmorum Numidicorum 118, 164 drainage 35, 38, 39, 45, 46, 77, 268
and mines 74, 77, 142, 153, 154 f., 159, draught-animal, see animal
162, 253, 255, 257 Drew-Bear, Thomas, 294, 298, 299, 300, 301,
and quarries 155 f., 157 f., 164, 252 f., 257, 302, 324
310, 352, 361 Drina 72, 133, 161, 335
district 106, 193 Drumus , see Alburnus Maior
customs 56, 60, 524, 66, 106, 23841, 289, Drusus 358
361 Dubois, Charles, 5, 83, 89, 109, 158, 304, 315,
mining 4851, 5367, 716, 87, 93, 94, 317, 318, 323
189, 2268, 362, 363 Duerna 34, 76, 119, 123, 148, 188, 340, 341
quarrying 513, 99, 108, 119, 146, 160 Dulgi Del 71
see also arithmos; dioecesis; fines; massa; duo/umviri 59, 128
metallum; numerus; patrimonium; duplicarius 180, 182
regio; station; tax; Terminus; Termunes; Dura Europos 176
territorium Dusanic, Slobodan, 3, 569, 64, 65, 69, 73,
Diva Slatina 71 130, 285, 342
Docimean marble 322; see also marmor duty, see tax; Zarai
Synnadicum, pavonazetto
doctor, see hippiatros; iatros; medicus E
Dodge, Hazel, 327, 330
Dokimeion, see Bacakale Eastern Desert (Egypt)
Dolaucothi 5, 33, 35, 368, 39, 45, 46, 81, district 512, 146
191, 358 and emperor/state 83
Dolci, Enrico, 29 headquarters 160, 163
Dolno Kobile 58 military presence 170, 172, 17984, 198,
Dolno Ujno 58 200, 356
domain, see district; estate mines 110 f.
Domavium/mod. Srebrenica procurators 1079, 1113, 20419, 225 f.,
as headquarters 160 f. 254, 337 f., 341, 350, 356, 362, 363
migration to, 72, 273 quarries 6, 10, 1224, 28, 30, 31, 32, 38, 53,
mines near, 71, 72, 133, 165 106, 222, 355
municipium 72, 1335, 160, 165 staff 155, 156 f., 255, 258, 336, 337, 350
and procurators 73, 1335, 138, 139, 147, see also metallarches; Mons Claudianus;
237 f., 240, 245, 249 Mons Ophiates; Mons Porphyrites;
stations near, 67, 161, 235 noumeros; praesidium
 General Index 529
Ebro 189 Epaphroditos Sigerianos 52, 107, 169, 213,
Eck, Werner 129, 163, 173, 300 220, 308, 318 f., 323, 328, 335, 338, 365
Edfu 177, 221 eparchos 109
Egypt 4, 6, 63, 87, 135, 177, 200, 250, 319 f., orous Berenkes 112
336, 342, 352, 357 see also praefectus; procurator
administration of 200, 220, 223, 341 Ephesos 28, 1157, 135, 247, 278, 298
army and quarries 177 f., 198, 200, 356 Epiacum/mod. Whitley Castle 191
convicts 222 f., 224, 255, 333, 334 epichrea tou metallou 168, 204
marble of 98, 222, 319, 338, 356 Epirus 239
procurators in 109113, 146, 149, 361 epistrategos 135, 160, 219
quarrying districts 53 f. epiteretes 182; see also stationarius
supply of quarries 207, 2157, 218 f., 220, eptropos
221 f., 224, 260, 337, 341, 356, 362, 366 chartareas 122
see also amphodogrammateus; apographa; ton latomon/e[ion] 115
basilikos grammateus; diploma; Eastern ton metallon 52, 1079, 146, 160, 168, 183,
Desert; epistrategos; ida; idios logos; 20426, 248, 350
komarchos; liturgy; mers; nome; ousai; Norikou 132
praefectus Aegypti; pragmatikos tou orous 111
nomou; presbuteroi komes; sitologos; taxeos Kuntilianes 122
strategos; trapezitai demoson ton metallon Oulpaskenson 50, 123, 163
Eifel 190 see also procurator
Eileithyaspolis/mod.el-Kab 177, 221 eques legionis 189
Eisenerz 53 equestrians, see ordo equester
Elba 243 equipment, quarrying 168, 183, 204, 253,
Elovitsa 71 257 f.; see also epichrea
emerald mines 109 f.; see also smaragtario equites singulares 54
Emerita 273 ergastulum 25
Emona 57 ergates 183, 209, 210
emperor 62, 64, 65, 69, 88, 97 f., 316, 338 f., ergazomene dekana 218
344, 366 ergepistates 157
and army 946, 197 Erglodd 35
building projects 105, 116 f., 317, 319 ergodotes 168, 208, 210 f.
and costs of mines/quarries 336 f., 338 f., estate
353 imperial 56, 87 f., 92 f., 96, 114, 117, 126,
and imperial finances 85 f., 93, 96, 105 f. 203, 250, 320
and human resources 172 f., 3326 private 85 f., 88, 122, 124 f., 244, 257, 277,
and ingots 81, 1005, 280 f., 283 360
and marble 222, 305 f., 319, 339; as see also dioecesis; dominium; ousia;
gift 98100, 117, 298, 305 f., 332, patrimonium; praedia; saltus; tractus
339, 354 Euboea, see Karystos
and mining administration 227, 263, 264, Euphrates 176
281, 339 f. exercitus Illyricani 241
and procurators 203, 254, 332, 335, 359 f. exploitation, mode of, see mining; quarrying
and quarrying procedures 315, 330, 332,
339, 353 f.; seconding of specialists 169 f., F
1724, 179, 201, 332
see also a rationibus; breviarium; consilium; faber ferrarius 153
disciplina; estate; familia Caesaris; fabrica 25
fiscus; iussum; largitio; liberalitas; familia Caesaris 1, 52, 55, 105, 107, 207 f.,
libertus; ownership; Palatine bureaux; 241, 256, 336 f.
procurator summarum rationum; allocation to mines/quarries 332, 335 f.,
rationales; Rome; senate; senatus 353, 364; costs of, 338, 343
consultum; servus at mines 72, 93 f., 149, 153, 253; quae est
Emporium 345, 346, 347, 355 in metallis 81, 154, 336
entola 206 f., 216, 252 at quarries 119, 156, 207, 252, 355
530 General Index
familia Caesaris (cont.) T. Flavius Polychrysus (proc.) 124, 166
and quarry labels 294 f., 305, 3103, 318, T. Flavius Verecundus (proc.) 137, 167, 288
320, 323, 327, 330, 354 L. Flavius Verucla 101, 104, 280, 282, 283, 335
see also libertus; phameliarioi; servus; Flavius Verus Metrobalanus 138, 167, 236,
subaltern staff 245
Fant, J. Clayton 6, 83, 99, 2926, 299302, fleet, see classis
324, 326, 342, 345, 366 Flintshire 102, 334
Fatireh el-Beida 108, 109 Fluminimaggiore 81, 101
Fayoum 206, 211 Foca 72
Feldkirchen 53, 196 Fojnica 74
ferraria 57, 13640, 142, 143, 147, 148 f., 238, Fojnicka 74
245, 287, 288, 289 Foot village, see Mons Porphyrites
Memmiae Sosandridis 88 foreman, see ergodotes
see also iron mines Forum Clodii 143, 144
ferrum facere 86, 244 Forum Traiani/mod. Caddas 80, 141
financial procurator 5, 94, 117, 120, 153, 199, fort 135, 1824, 31, 368, 51, 68, 73, 110,
253, 359 112, 175, 179182, 184, 188, 1904, 197,
of Dacia Apulensis 129 f., 135, 149, 232, 358
247, 341 Fortuna Domestica 150
of Dalmatia 162, 255 Fossacava, see Luna/Carrara
and mining procurators 129 f., 149, 199, France 104, 125; see also Gaul
232, 341, 342, 360 France, Jerome 60
of Pannonia Superior 162 Frascati 350
proc. Asturiae et Callaeciae 5, 1203, 133, freedman, see libertus
148, 166, 231, 249, 250, 340, 341, 342, Friesach 53, 55, 72, 285
359 frontier, see limes
proc. provinciae Britanniae 113; Hispaniae frumentarius 174; see also centurio
citerioris 121, 133, 357, 358, 359; furnace, smelting 29, 45, 56, 59, 72, 77, 198,
Hispania superior 123; Lusitaniae 92, 258, 268, 269, 283; see also officina
123, 148, 341; regni Norici 55, 132 f., 249
proc. provinciarum Galliarum Lugdunensis G
et Aquitanicae 141, 142, 154, 162, 238
see also aerarium; beneficiarius; fiscus; Gaganitsa 71
headquarters; procurator; province Galanitsa 71
fines 57 Galenos of Pergamon 248
metalli Vipascensis 48, 49, 226, 264 Galeria do Pilar, see Tresminas
metallorum 48, 49, 50 Galicia, see Asturia et Callaecia
putei 266 Galicians 273; see also Argaeli; Bibali; Celtici
fiscus 92 f., 97 f., 203, 227 f., 254, 256 Supertamarci; Interamici; Seurri; Zoelae
Caesaris 85, 92, 93, 100, 105, 106, 337, 339 gallery 346, 38 f., 41, 43, 45, 56, 79, 268
castrensis 328 Gallia, see Gaul
provinciae 92, 93, 96 Gallia Narbonensis 117, 238, 278, 285, 288
public 82, 84, 92, 97 f., 235 gauge 16, 29
at Vipasca 92 f., 2629, 290 Gaul 84, 335, 340, 357
see also a rationibus; aerarium; arca; bona; and contractors 284, 367
breviarium; confiscare; confiscation; and ingots 101, 191, 277, 280, 281
cost; debitor; financial procurator; mines in 5, 81, 879, 106, 358
patrimonial procurator; patrimonium; and procurators 125, 136, 1405, 147, 237,
portorium; publicare; quaestor; 2402, 243 f., 248, 260, 336, 342, 361
rationales; res privata; revenues; vicesima quarries 86, 90, 210
hereditatium staff 81, 154
fistulae 105 see also Tres Galliae
Fitzler, Kurt 6, 83, 111, 318 Gauri, see Alburnus Maior
Flach, Dieter 92, 123, 226, 2627, 341 Gebel Abu Diyeiba 110
Flavius Diadumenus (proc.) 108, 109 Gebel Dokhan, see Mons Porphyrites
 General Index 531
Gebel Fatirah, see Mons Claudianus Govezhda 71
Gebel Gulab 209 Gracanica, see Ulpianum
Gebel Silsilis 209, 212 Gradiste 69
Gebel el-Teir 178 grammateus 109, 155, 252; see also
Gebel el-Toukh 177, 209, 221 amphodogrammateus; basilikos
Gebel Umm Kabu 110 grammateus
Gebel Zabara 110, 111 granito bianco e nero 23; see Tiberiane
gens granodiorite 12, 16, 291
Gigurrorum 230 Graupius, Mons, 334
Susarrorum 230 Greece 84, 117, 171, 303, 317
Germania 4, 175 f., 178, 190, 197, 238, 316 Gromsin 70
Inferior 171, 175, 247 ground sluicing 33 f., 36, 73 f.
Superior 175, 178 Grugua 196, 270
see also plumbum; provincia Guadalquivir, see Baetis
Germanicus (15 bc-ad 19 ) 103, 358 Guberevac 59, 66, 131, 194
Gesoriacum/mod. Boulogne 191 guild of weavers 223, 334
giallo antico 25, 27, 31, 99, 118, 205, 206, 291, Gurina 53
3047, 3248, 339, 345, 351 gymnasium 115, 298
Ginik 114
Glamoc 74, 139 H
gold 65, 83, 100, 276, 342, 358, 368
ingot 103, 198, 231 Habad-Bradoaia, see Alburnus Maior
mines 85, 86, 89, 91, 100, 136, 277, 287, Habes 177
289, 342, 358; Dacia 41, 43, 74, 76, 126, Habicht, Christian, 121
129 f., 152, 195, 199, 2324, 245, 253, Hadrian (ad 117138) 67, 121, 174, 223, 330,
256, 26973, 335, 360; Dalmatia 153, 338, 359
334; Egypt 110 f.; Moesia 56, 69, 71, 73, coinage 56, 65, 73
193; Noricum 53, 103, 131; Northern ingots 81, 101 f.
Italy 91, 277, 279; Spain 35, 76, 77, 84, marble gifts 98100, 298, 332, 339
119, 147, 148, 186, 198, 199, 22831, 245, nail-tax 87, 244
274, 279, 334, 359 quarry labels 99, 305, 306, 310, 329
mining and geology 338, 41, 44 f., 91, and Vipasca 92, 123, 263, 265, 339
232 f. Hadrians Wall 176
see also auraria; aurifodina; aurilegulus; Haedum castellum Daesitiatium/mod. Breza 74
Dolaucothi; legulus Haensch, Rudolf 159, 162, 163, 198, 253, 254,
Gonnesa 81, 196 255
Gorazde 72 Haghio Pneuma 288
Gordian III (ad 23844) 97 Haghios Nikolaos, see Karystos
Goricka 56, 66 Halapic 74
Gornji Slimeni 74 Hallstatt 53
Gornji Vakuf 73 Haltern 190
Gorno Kobile 58 Haltwhistleburn 176
Gorno Ujno 58 hamaxa 218
governor 8, 117, 123, 132, 178, 196, 199 f., hammer mill, see ore crushing machine
201, 203, 254, 256, 316, 364 harbour 116
allocation of soldiers 57, 64, 130, 151, 195, Harbour Gymnasium (Ephesos) 116, 117
199201 Harris, William 83
and convicts 51, 222 f., 260, 333 headquarters 46, 71, 73, 74, 124, 142 f.
and mines/quarries 73, 126, 201, 231, 235, definition 159
256, 276, 289, 341, 356 of governor 196, 199
and quarry specialists 95, 172 f., 179 House of Procurator (Vipasca) 50, 163
see also acta; archive; assize; beneficiarus; procuratorial 50, 54, 74, 114, 116, 121, 126,
commentarii; headquarters; 130, 149, 1524, 156, 15965, 180, 253,
instrumenta; legatus; librarius; 259, 364
praefectus; presidial procurator; see also acta; archive; assize; commentarii;
proconsul; procurator; protector; instrumenta; officium; subaltern staff;
strator; tabula; tabularium tabula; tabularium
532 General Index
Heita, el- 24 iatros 1832
Henchir Frouri 118 Ibar 67
Henchir en-Naam 140, 241 Iberia, see Spain
Heptakomia 215 Iberian Peninsula, see Spain
Heptanomia 160 ida 222
Herakleia-on-Latmos 115 idios logos 338, 341
Herakleides 219 idiotai 276
Hercules 170, 171, 316, 346 Idylle 175
Saxanus 175 Iglesiente 80, 81, 196
Hermoupolis 160, 209 Igren, see Alburnus Maior
Herodes Atticus, see L. Vibullius Hipparchus Illyrians 270, 272, 273, 335
Ti. Claudius Atticus Herodes Illyricum 5, 88, 239, 240, 241, 342 f.; see also
Herreras 79, 228 publicum portorium Illyrici
Herrmann, Peter 115 f. imaginifer 186, 187, 199
Hibeh, el- 90 immunes 119
hippiatros 183, 209 immunitas 84
Hirschfeld, Otto 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 82, 83, 109, perpetua 334
113, 164, 236, 285, 287, 288, 301, 323, India 214
324, 325 ingot 4, 47, 56, 59, 62, 81, 102, 105125, 155,
Hispalis/mod. Sevilla 77, 124, 162, 163, 281 191, 231, 283, 367
Hispania Citerior (Tarraconensis) 123, 133, incisions on 104 f., 197; numerals 190,
155, 164, 222, 357, 359 280 f.
Superior 123 and mining arrangements 27484, 358
see also Spain mould marks on 57, 64, 67, 69, 81, 1015,
Hizarlyka near Razgrad, see Abritus 189 f., 191, 197 f., 261, 274, 278, 27984,
Hohenstein 53, 131 f., 138, 148, 154, 239, 289, 334
243, 284, 285, 288, origin of 189 f.
honorarium 203 owners of 274, 275, 279, 282, 283; army
honoratiores 216 62, 103, 18991, 197 f.; emperor 81,
Hop-Botar, see Alburnus Maior 1015
horologium 298 stamps on, 59, 89, 1025, 189, 190, 191,
Horrea 197, 256, 261, 279282, 289
Galbana 347 trade and portoria 105, 190, 2802, 367
Lolliana 345 see also copper; gold; iron; lead; lex; mining;
Petroniana 347 nomos; plumbum; portorium; seal/tag;
Hosh, el- 212 societas; socius; tax; tin
hospital 182 f., 194, 201; see also aegri; injuries/illness, see aegri; hippiatros;
hippiatros; iatros; valetudinarium hospital; iatros; medicus;
hospitium 52, 155, 353 valetudinarium
privatum 230 instrumenta 256
House of the Procurator, see headquarters Interamici 273
hudrophora 218 Ionia 115
hushing 336, 44 Irni 85
Huttenberg 53 iron 29, 55, 65, 83, 89
hydraulic machine 177 ingots 56, 192, 212
hydraulic mining 337, 446, 73 f., 245 mines 2, 3, 53, 56, 58, 69, 73 f.; and
Hydreuma 12, 15, 24, 183, 220 army 190, 192, 197, 358; and
Hymenaeus Thamyrianus 1579, 310, 335, contractors 2768, 2849, 361, 363,
353 365, 367; legal status of 83, 85, 88,
Hymettos 352 89, 90, 91; and procurators 131, 133,
13645, 147 f., 161, 229, 23545, 249 f.,
I 260, 360 f., 364; and subaltern staff
153, 154
Ianus 42 production/trade restrictions 86 f., 244,
Iasos 115 289, 367
 General Index 533
slag 16, 56, 65, 242, 243 Jasenovik 69
supply of 45, 53, 197, 212, 358 f., 364 Jewish war, see war
tools 45, 53, 212 Jones, Barry 36
see also adlector; arca; assessor; conductor; jurisdiction, see law; procurator
faber; ferraria; ferrum facere; iudex; lex;
manceps; massa; nails; officina; K
promagister; ratio; societas; socius;
statio; stomoma; stomoterion; Kacanik 67
tabularius; tax; vectigal; vilicus Kaimaz, see Tricomia
Iscehisar, see Bacakale/Dokimeion Kaine/mod. Qena 14, 24, 207, 215 f., 218
Isis 18, 19, 150 Kalna 69
Megiste 20 kameloi
Myrionyma 20, 169 kuriako 218
Noreia 143, 285 paganiko 218 f.
Italia, see Italy see also camel
Italians 273, 275, 276, 277, 322 Kamena Riksa 193
Italy 65, 85, 86, 100, 105, 111, 127, 203, 242, Kamenica 59, 60
272, 281, 286, 333 Karagol 311, 312, 327
ingots 101, 189 Karasu 176 f.
marble in 98, 164, 354 Karilovtsa 71
mines 91, 243, 279 Karthago, see Carthage
see also Luna/Carrara Karystos 10, 30, 31, 106, 325, 354, 362, 367
Iudaea 333 quarry arrangements 309, 310 f., 325, 327,
iudex arcae ferrariarum 89 330 f., 351 f.
Iulia Domna 128 layout 28 f.
Iulia Mamaea 134 military presence 96, 170 f., 173 f., 332
C. Iulius Agathopus 136, 137, 153, 239, 286, officials at 1579, 310, 335, 353, 361
288 and procurators 114, 146, 361
M. Iulius Apollinaris 128, 129, 150, 152 kasiotes 210, 212
C. Iulius Caesar 91 kastellum, see castellum
C. Iulius Celsus 141 Khanoussi, Moustapha, 118
M. Iulius Macer 137, 167 kibariates 155, 206 f., 252 f., 258, 337; see also
C. Iulius Silvanus Melanio 133, 135, 141, 143, aioutor kibariatou; artodotes boethos
145, 147, 160, 167, 2379, 240, 245, kibariatou; boethos kibariatou
249 f. kings
Iulius Tacitianus 134, 135, 167 Norican 55
Iuno Regina Minerva 128 Numidian 100
Iuppiter 189 Kirkby Thore 191
Maximus Dolichenus 348 Kiseljak 74
Optimus Maximus Aeternus Kjustendil, see Pautalia
Conservator 150 Klecovce 58, 67,
Tavianus 127 kleroi 87
ius Klieningbach 53
Italicum 86 knekites 221 f.
metallorum ac vectigalium 84 f., 89 Kolb, Anne, 157
occupandi 263, 267 Kolovorat 72
iussum 202 komarchos 178
P. Iuventius Agathopus 53, 109112 Konjuh 60, 194,
P. Iuventius Rufus 109111 Koptos 52, 1102, 17982
Kornemann, Ernst, 314 f.
J Kosmaj 59, 64, 67, 72, 131, 166, 193,
194, 201
Jadar 72 Kosovska Mitrovica 58, 67
Janjevo 57 kourator metallou Klaudianou 182
Japra 56, 153, 286 koureus 214
534 General Index
Kraig 53 Lavant 53
Kraku lu Jordan 73 Lavezzi 281; see also Sud-Lavezzi
Kraus, Theodor 304, 305 law, see assize; convict; damnatio; debitor;
Kresevo 74 disciplina; dowry; ferrum facere; iudex;
Krio Nero, see Karystos ius; legatus; lex; nomos; poena;
Krokeai 156, 257, 352, 353, 361 procurator; pupillus; rei publicae causae
Krokodilo/mod. al-Muwayh 179, 180, 211 abesse; restitutio in integrum; tutelage;
Kruft 175, 176 usufruct; Zarai
Kucajna 73 Le Bohec, Yann 81, 126
Kumanovo 58, 67, 194 Le Puy, see Anicium
Kursumlija 57 Le Roux, Pascal 4
Kursumlijska Banja 57, 60, 66 lead 81, 83, 102, 105, 191, 197, 281, 340,
Kurt Koy 114, 303 358 f.
black 279
L ingot 4, 57, 59, 64, 67, 69, 81, 89,
1015, 18991, 198, 2746, 27984,
labels (on quarried stone) 5, 6, 261, 290331 334 f., 358
changes of formulae 2914, 3027, 309, isotopes 104, 280
310, 312, 313, 32932, 339, 353 mines 39, 579, 69, 713, 76, 81, 88, 190,
cubic measurements 307 f. 191, 197, 234, 235, 240, 270, 27780,
formulae 32831, 351 3346, 340, 358
function of 291, 319 see also fistulae; lex; plumbum; seal;
and inventories 302, 303, 307 societas; socius; tessera
Latin language 6, 174, 3513 leat, see technology (aqueduct)
and ownership 99, 305 Lebanon 67
see also bracchium; caesura; commissura; Lece 57
consular date; locus; numero; officina; lectica 322
promutuo; R; ratione, ex; recipere; lecticarius 322
reprobatum; sub cura legatus 230 f., 194, 334
labour, see workforce iuridicus 121, 359
laccarius 155, 252 legionis 142, 144, 172, 240
Laet, Siegfried de 62, 200 pro praetore 132
Lagunazo, El 228 legio 188
Laktasi 57 XIX 190
Lambaesis 134, 185, 246 I Adiutrix 196
Lambrechtskogel 55 II Adiutrix 161
Lanciani, Rodolfo 345 XV Apollinaris 169, 170, 171, 172, 173
land, public, see ager publicus II Augusta 176, 191
language, see labels III Augusta 172, 184 f.
Laodiceia ad Lycum 28, 116 VIII Augusta 175, 176
lapicaedina 304 VII Claudia 68, 193,
lapidicina 86, 221 XI Claudia 70, 71, 192 f.
lapis ophyte 23 III Cyrenaica 109, 111, 177, 178, 196
lapis Salvioni 314 f., 317 f. XXII Deiotariana 169, 178
Laplje Selo 57, 60, 66 IIII Flavia Firma 76, 194 f.
largitio 94 X Fretensis 193
Lascours 278 III Gallica 177
Lasva 74 XVI Gallica 190
Latin, see labels VII Gemina 76, 120, 121, 123, 1869,
latomeia Claudiana 29; see also Karystos 198, 199
Latomi 312 X Gemina 175, 176, 186
latomion 111 XIII Gemina 41, 44, 75, 76, 130, 151,
latrones Dalmatiae atque Dardaniae 194 170, 195
latrunculus 97 XIIII Gemina 137, 175
Lauriacum 174 I Italica 70, 192 f.,
 General Index 535
II Italica 134, 174, 196 as procurator 2, 3, 6, 114, 117, 203, 258 f.,
III Italica 134, 174 335, 340, 343 f.; at marble bureau 348,
IIII Macedonica 189 350, 3594, 367; of mines 3, 41, 50, 57,
I Minervia 142, 175, 240, 79, 11930, 131, 142, 1469, 159, 162 f.,
XXII Primigenia 144, 170, 171, 173, 175, 165, 2268, 231 f., 2324, 253, 340 f.,
293, 294, 310 342, 343, 35961, 362, 363, 364, 367; of
XXI Rapax 175 quarries 1079, 146, 338, 341, 3546,
IIII Scythica 176, 177, 361 f.
II Traiana 221 subaltern functions 76, 113 f., 128, 131 f.,
XXX Ulpia 175 141, 14955, 1579, 162, 207, 255 f.,
XX Valeria Victrix 176, 346
VI Victrix 175, 176 see also familia Caesaris; subaltern
Legio/mod Leon 121, 188, 198, 230, 358 staff
legulus librarius 130, 142, 151 f., 159, 198, 253
aurariarum 271 f. consularis 152, 194 f., 256
auri 271 officii praefecti territorii 68
see also aurileguli librator 172
Leon, see Legio M. Licinius Crassus 88
Lepcis Magna 301, 325, 326, 327 Lillebonne 101
Lepsius quarries, see Mons Porphyrites Lim 72
Lesquier, Jean, 111, 112 limes 71, 97 f., 175, 190, 240 f., 358 f.
lessee, see contractor limestone quarry 177 f.
Lety, see Alburnus Maior Limici 273
Lewis, Peter 36 Lipara 91, 279
lex Lippe 190, 335, 358
censoria 91, 278 lthos Synnadikos 114; see also marmor
ferrariarum 87, 244 liturgy 219, 225
on lead mining 340 Livia Drusilla 87, 88
metallis dicta (LMD) 24, 39, 48 f., 92 f., Ljubija 56 f., 136 f., 147, 153 f., 161 f.,
123, 154, 163, 227 f., 244, 254, 257, 23541, 245, 257 f., 286, 288
2619, 283, 290, 339, 341 Llandovery 37, 38
metalli Vipascensis (LMV) 24, 48 f., 87, locatio censoria 276 f.
93, 226 f., 244, 2646, 337 locatio conductio 91, 270, 288, 31820
portorii Asiae 624, 66, 87, 244, 278, operis faciendi 90, 297, 319 f., 324, 326,
282, 367 330, 366
see also adsignatio; argentarius; auction; rei 297, 318
barber; centesima; colere; colonus; locator 270
commoda; conductor; contractor; locus 293, 294, 309, 313
cuniculus; debitor; fines; fiscus; ius; locus putei 266
iussum; liberalitas; locus; nomos; Lodge Crag 176
occupare; occupatio; occupator; pars; Lojane 58, 194
pittacium; portorium; possessio; praeco; Lolling 53
pretium; proprietas; puteus; scriptura; Lom
shoemaker; societas; socius; stipulatio; Lomnica 58
tax; territorium; usurpare; venditor; Lopate 58, 67, 194, 198
vicus Loznica 72, 73
liber 48, 202, 207 Lucus Augusti/mod. Lugo 121, 122, 123, 188,
liberalitas 263, 265, 339 f. 189
libertus 89, 109 f., 149, 163, 202, 222, 2725, Lugdunensis, see financial procurator
278, 285, 287 f., 315 f., 323 Lugdunum/mod. Lyon 81, 88, 133, 1405,
libertus Augusti 93, 121 f., 127, 150, 154, 162, 237 f., 2402, 249, 255, 286,
154, 163, 250 f., 315, 323, 337, 343 f., 352 364
and labels 294 f., 305, 310, 311, 314 f. Lugo, see Lucus Augusti
327 f. Lukovo-Valakonje 69
536 General Index
Luna/Carrara 10, 89, 317 knekites; labels; lapis ophyte; limestone;
layout 29 f., 31 lthos; marmor; Parian; pavonazetto;
military presence at 174, 332 Pentelic; Phrygian; porphyry;
quarry arrangement 3148, 295, 309, 323, portasanta; professions; quarry-to-order;
329, 331, 352 quarry-to-stock; quarrying; Rome;
staff 156, 157 f., 350 sandstone; seal; subaltern staff; Teian
Lunensian marble, see marmor grey; tufa; vectura; wagon; whetstone;
Lusitania 78, 122, 147, 166 f., 189, 226, 273, white marble
274, 359 Marcomannic war, see war
lustrum 276, 302 Marcus Antonius 88
Lutudarum 279 Marcus Aurelius (ad 16180) 3, 99, 118, 140,
Luyego 76, 119, 120, 123, 162, 186, 187, 199, 194, 344, 360
231, 232, 250, 360 Marignac 90
Lykabettus quarries, see Mons Porphyrites marmor 158
Lyon, see Lugdunum Chium 312
Lacedaemonium 156
M Lunensium 156, 316, 350
Synnadicum 98, 114, 164, 298
Maas 197 see also marble
Macedonia 89, 91, 195, 235, 239, 277, 288 Marmorata 6, 311, 344
machine, see hydraulic machine; ore crushing Marquardt, Joachim 82 f.
machine Mars 65
L. Macrius Macer 127, 128, 151, 166 Marseillan 125
Maeander 28, 116, 351 massa
Maecenas 87, see also Maikenatiana ousai ferrariarum 88
Magacela 189 Mariana 124, 335
Magdalensberg 53, 103, 131 Massa Carrara 314
Magdola 215 Mateo, Antonio 4, 262, 269, 277 f.,
Mahamid, el- 177, 221 340, 359
Mainz, see Mogontiacum Matrica/mod. Szazhalombatta 68
Maischberger, Martin 324, 345 f. Mauretania Caesariensis 139, 172, 246
Majdanpek 73 Maxfield, Valerie 16, 172
Malacalzetta 81 Maximianon/mod. al-Zarqa 52, 179, 180
Malaga 85 Mazarron 275
Mallorca 280 Mechernich 190
manceps 285, 287, 288, 289 medicus 278; see also iatros
ferrariar(um) [-]I et provinciae Raetiae Mediolanum/mod. Milan 286
itemque Daciarum trium 148, 239, 286 Medjerda, see Bagradas
vectigalis massae ferrariarum Memmiae Medulas, Las 1, 4, 5, 34 f., 231, 363
Sosandridis 237 mekanarios 212
mandatum 203, 238, 243, 359 Memmia Sosandris 88, 287
Manicheans 333 Memphis 206, 211
marble 1, 23, 85 f., 1157 Mendip, see Charterhouse-on-Mendip
bureau 350 f., 353 f.; evolution 348350; mercator 281 f.
location 3447 mers 219
import / distribution of 83, 89, 98 f., Meses 74
116 f., 156, 158, 164, 297, 301 f., 316 f., Meseta 274
319, 322, 3248, 331, 338 f., 342 f., metal, see copper; gold; iron; lead;
354 f., 365, 366, 367, 368 f. mines; mining; minium; nails; ore;
samples 222, 339, 356 plumbum; silver; slag; stomoma; tin;
transport 28, 29, 30 f., 46 f., 21820 vectigal
yards 5, 158, 290, 3447, 355 metallarches 53, 10911, 112, 146, 361; see
see also animal; bekhen; bigio; cipollino; also archimetallarchos
Docimean; emperor; giallo antico; metallikos 58
granito bianco e nero; granodiorite; metallon 6, 52, 109, 111, 146, 123, 177
 General Index 537
metallum/a 4, 67, 76, 82, 857, 89, 92, 97 f., by emperor/state 4, 5, 44 f., 22932, 233,
100, 109, 138, 1479, 155, 177, 191, 367
223 f., 246, 262, 269, 333 f., 342 f., 344, geology and deposits 339, 43, 53, 103,
356 248
Aeliana Picensia 65, 73 opencast 1, 4, 338, 457, 76, 77, 197, 277,
Albocrarense 120, 148, 166, 359 340, 358, 359, 363
Antonianum 88, 91, 235, 279, 290 organizational implications of 446, 245
Aureliana 59, 65 pre-Roman 36, 37, 43
Caesariana 98, 100, 106 underground 33, 357, 3841, 43, 457,
Caesaris Augusti 69, 103 76, 79, 197, 233, 245, 270, 277, 358, 363
Dardanicum/a 64 f., 102, 153 see also colonus; conductor; constraints;
definition 6, 4851, 362 district; ius; lex; manceps; metal;
Delmatica 65 metallarches; metallikos; migration;
Imperatoris Augusti 57, 103 mines; nomos; nummi metallorum;
Lutudarense 102, 282 occupator; officina; ore; ownership;
Norica 56, 65 procurator; publicanus; resettlement;
Pannonica 65, 72 slag; societas; socius; subaltern staff;
Pannonica et Delmatica 1336 tablet; technology; vectigal; wages;
Sama/lutariense 88, 91, 235, 279, 290 workforce
Ulpianum 57, 59, 64, 65 ministerium metallicorum 224
Ulpianum Delmaticum 65 minium 91, 235, 278, 368
Ulpianum Pannonicum 65 Miniya, al- 53
Vipascense/ia 48, 49, 50, 94, 123 f., 148, Misenum 333
226, 254 msthosis 318 f.
see also district; fines; massa; metallon; misthotes ton metallon 52, 107, 169, 213,
nummi metallorum; patrimonium; 220, 308, 318, 323, 355; see also
territorium conductor
M. Mettius Rufus 221 Mithras 59, 132, 284
Micia 75, 195 Mitthof, Fritz, 178, 215 f.
migration 32, 72, 233, 273 f., 276, 289, 336, Mlava 73
366; see also population; resettlement Mocsy, Andras 57, 65, 138, 273, 285
Milan, see Mediolanum Moesia 50, 106
miles 93, 151 f., 189, 194 Moesia Inferior 70, 153, 172 192, 198, 239,
Milet 28, 1157, 351 240
military, see army Moesia Superior 71, 103, 173, 240
miner, see workforce coinage 646
mines/pits, see aeraria; alum; amethyst; districts 4660, 61, 62, 6870, 73, 82, 270,
argentaria; argentifodina; auraria; 343
aurifodina; beryl; calcaria; chalk; copper; military presence 1935, 198
emerald; ferraria; iron; lead; locus; procurators 130 f., 166, 234, 239
metallum; mining; puteus; realgar; salt; subaltern staff 153
silver; sulphur; sulpuraria; topaz Mogontiacum/mod. Mainz 144, 171, 175,
Minicius Sanctus 114 f., 146, 341 285
mining Mommsen, Theodor 113, 292, 302,
by army 5, 197 f., 232, 240, 358, 364 Monoekos 288
arrangements: at Alburnus Maior 232 f., mons 112
2703; and ingots 1015, 27484, 289; Mons Berenicides 111
at Vipasca 4, 39, 93, 227 f., 254, 259, Mons Claudianus 51 f., 319
2619, 271, 290, 339, 363, 365, 367 and emperor 106, 332, 338 f., 351, 354,
by contractors/lessees 4, 5, 45, 88, 902, 366 f.
2324, 236, 243, 255, 260, 261, 273, military presence 96, 16873, 178, 17985,
27484, 287, 289 f., 358, 363 f., 365, 200, 201, 204, 205
367 f.; companies 91, 271, 2749, 2824, and praefectus Aegypti 220 f., 224, 341, 356
367; individuals 271, 274 f., 276 f., and procurators 52, 1079, 117, 160,
279 f., 2824 2046, 225, 259, 361, 362, 363
538 General Index
Mons Claudianus (cont.) N
quarrying arrangements 4, 6, 205, 291,
3079, 314, 318, 319, 320, 323, 326, nails 56, 87, 244, 105, 244, 281, 358; see also
328 f., 330, 331, 365 tax
spatial layout 10, 126, 17, 18, 22, 24, 31, Naissus 69
32, 51, 224 Nanstallon 191
subaltern staff at 1557, 225, 2513, 255, Nanului Valley, see Alburnus Maior
256 f., 258, 259, 350, 365 Naq el-Teir 16
supply of 168, 254; with provisions/ Narbo/mod. Narbonne 237, 287
water 181 f., 21418, 362; with nauarch 178
animal 21820, 362 Nava de Ricomalillo 273
workforce at 52, 20614, 272, 336, 337 f., navicularius 281, 282
342 necessitates 94
Mons Coryphaeus 176 negotiator marmorarius 346
Mons Marianus 77, 124 f., 163, 274 Nelis-Clement, Jocelyne 129, 191,
Mons Ophiates 10, 32, 51 f., 106, 209 Nemesis Pia 153
military presence at 169, 179, 180, 184, 200 neokoros 99, 100, 116
and procurators 1079, 109 f., 113, 160 Nepet/mod. Nepi 348
spatial layout 23 f. Nero (ad 5468) 22, 87, 1013, 191, 317, 333
Mons Porphyrites 106, 221 f., 224, 338, 341, Nerva (ad 968) 101
367 Neumarkt 53
contractors at 213, 220, 308, 318 f. Nicaea/mod. Iznik 298
district of 51 f., 361 Nicoma[chus] (proc.) 137
military presence at 169, 174, 179 f., 181, Nicomedia 172
184, 200 Nile/Nile valley, see Egypt
and procurators 1079, 160 Noeske, Hans-Christoph 3, 74, 75, 126, 128,
spatial layout 10, 14, 1622, 24, 30, 31, 32 129, 151, 195, 232, 233, 271, 272
subaltern staff 155, 209 nome 90, 2157, 219, 223, 334, see also
supply of 216, 220 Arsinoite nome; Oxyrhynchite nome
Mons Smaragdus 110 nomos georuchikos 63, 87, 244, 278
Montana/mod. Mihailovgrad 70 f., 153, 185, Nonius Datus 172, 173
192 f., 199 Noreia (goddess) 131
Monte Porzio Catione 350 Noreia (place) 53, 154
Monte Strinato, see Luna/Carrara Noricum 3, 536, 72, 103, 131 f., 138,
Monteponi 81 148, 174, 196, 239 f., 243, 2846,
Moors, see war 336, 343
mould marks, see ingot mining districts in 536, 60, 82, 83, 106,
Mrozek, Stanisaw 3 132, 154, 167, 250, 285
munera 227 f. Noricus, natione 54
municipium 57, 58, 68, 70, 85, 89 f., 95, 128, Norroy 175
131, 133, 160, 228, 273, 317 f. North-West quarries, see Mons Porphyrites
authorities/elite of 54, 72, 128, 134, 243, noumeros Porphurtou 52
272, 284, 286, 287, 314, 316 Novaesium/mod. Neuss 190
building projects 178, 316 Novi Pazar 67
status 57, 72, 128, 165, 273 L. Novius Rufus 123
territory 48, 50, 54, 55, 56, 106 Novo Brdo 57
see also decurio; ordo; ownership Novopazarska Banja 58, 67
Munigua 85, 89 Nuber, Hans Ulrich, 286
Muniguense, municipium, see Munigua numero 301, 304, 306, 307, 308, 309, 312, 329
Mures ul 74 numerus (army)
Mursa 57, 136, 137, 148, 239, 286, 288 Maurorum Hispanorum 130, 195
Muwayh, al- 179 civium Romanorum 193
Mylasa 115, 321, 351, 353 numerus (subdivision of phameliarioi) 52,
Myos Hormos 52, 112, 17982 53, 337; see also noumeros
 General Index 539
Numidia 91, 134, 172, 224 as mining procurators 57, 1469, 165, 234,
Numidian marble 98100, 119, 332, 339; 24851, 258, 259, 260, 332, 335, 336,
see also giallo antico 3604, 367 f.; of argentariae 1336, 146,
nummi metallorum 58, 59, 6466, 67, 139 f., 160, 246 f., 360; of aurariae 127
72, 82 9, 146, 149, 159, 165, 234, 253, 342, 360;
Nurra 81 of ferrariae 1369, 1405, 146 f., 2359,
nutricius 157 2414, 247 f., 361
nymphs 125, 156 see also collegialite inegale; vir egregius
ordo senatorius 88, 122, 132, 141, 172, 223,
O 316 f., 354
ore
Oberaden 358 crushing machine/hammer mill 35, 37, 45,
occupare 266, 267 46
occupatio 259, 266 taxation of 55, 62, 66, 199, 244, 278, 282
occupator 93, 227, 228, 2619, 277, and Vipasca 4, 48, 93, 227 f., 259, 2629,
289, 290 290, 340, 363
ocrea 212 see also gold; iron; lead; lex; mining;
officiales, see officium minium; nomos; silver; vena signata
officina (furnace) 268, 283 Orejas, Almudenas, 4, 231
ferrariae 161 f., 235, 236, 257, 258, Oresac 69
364 organization 7
officina (workshop) 176, 293, 294, 296, Orientals 270, 271, 272, 336
297300, 3046, 32831, 338, 345 origo Cluniensis 274
marmorum 25 Orlea hill, see Alburnus Maior
names of 296, 297, 298, 299, 304, 305, Orontes 176,
330, 338 Ors, Alvaro d, 262
officium 93, 149, 154, 156, 163, 253 rsted, Peter, 284, 285
annonae 156 Orth, Ferdinand, 83
praef(ecti) territ(orii) 6870, 199 Ostia 105, 124, 333
Ogas ul Bs ies ului 76 and iron mines 144, 242, 287
Ogosta 71, 193 and marble imports 114, 300 f., 304, 312,
oikonomos 155, 252 f., 257 322, 324 f., 327, 3502, 355
Kasaros 215, 253 and procurators 144, 145, 278, 335
Olisipo 273 Ostruznika 74
Ombos 209 Ott, Joachim, 129
operae 231 ousai Maikenatiana 87
opes publicae 94 f. ownership 7, 85, 938
opsonion 206 by emperor (patrimonium) 55, 57, 82, 83,
optio 70, 157, 174, 220 84, 93, 98 f., 1006, 281, 305 f.336, 362
tabellariorum stationis marmorum 345, of marble 99, 305 f.
346, 348, 349 of mines 2, 4, 5, 7, 83, 8289, 903, 106,
opus 273; at Vipasca 45, 245, 254, 2629, 290,
aurariarum 232 f., 270 367; and ingots 4, 81, 1015, 190, 197 f.,
marmorum 169 2746, 278284, 289, 358
metalli 223 f. by municipalities 2, 85, 89, 106, 317
publicum 333 private 2, 82, 859, 106, 124, 2629, 273
privatum 95 of provincial land 86 f., 88
Orb 278 of quarries 7, 83, 85 f., 89 f., 96, 98100,
order, circular 156, 1802 305 f.
ordo 128 by state 2, 82, 83, 84, 88, 903, 936, 97 f.,
colonorum 131, 162, 234 98100, 2629, 281, 288 f., 336, 362, 367
municipii Domavianorum 72, 134 see also contractor; labels; lex; possessio;
ordo equester 1,2,3,6, 68, 105, 107 f., 112, proprietas; societas; socius
119, 1203, 124, 125, 132, 148 f., oxen 16, 29, 219, 322
173, 203, 223, 231, 284, 3402, 344, Oxyrhynchos 90
354, 356 Oxyrhynchite nome 90
540 General Index
P Pentelicon 89, 323, 352
Pergamon 49, 50, 121, 122
Paemeiobriga, see castellani; tabula Perge 117
pagano 183 f., 20614, 2158, 225, 252, 257, Perseus 91
338, 355; see also kameloi paganiko Persia 214
Palatine bureaux 1, 5, 8, 9, 105, 165, 332, 333, personnel, see subaltern staff; workforce
336, 340, 343 f., 353, 354, 368 Persou 53, 112; see also Wadi al-Hammamat
Paleochora 157, 310 Petova Crvka 67
Palestine, see Syria-Palaestina Petra 177
Pamphylia 117, 139 Petrohan 71
Pan 109 C. Petronius Celer 172
Paneion 20, 209 M. Petronius Mamertinus 222
Pannonia 3, 148, 166, 260, 272, 286 T. Petronius Priscus 141, 144, 145, 166, 242,
Inferior 68, 132, 161, 238, 239 248
mining districts in, 56, 57, 60, 61, 64, 73, Pflaum, Hans-Georg, 2, 3, 115, 122, 129, 139,
106, 140, 343 140, 141, 143, 144, 241
Superior 56, 162, 236, 238, 239 Phaeno/mod. Wadi Faynan 224, 333
Papirius Rufus (proc.) phalangarios 212
parasphenarios 212 phalanges 212
parasphenia 212 phameliarioi 52, 155, 168, 183, 184, 2068,
Parassoglou, George, 87 20814, 2148, 225, 252, 257, 258, 308,
Paredones, Los, see Regina 3368, 355; see also arithmos; numerus
Parian marble 313, 324 f. pharmaxarios 209, 210, 211, 212
Paros 157, 303, 309, 313, 324, 331, 352 Philadelphia 178
pars Philae 221,
dimidia ad fiscum pertinens 93, 2629, Philippi 288
268, 269, 285 Phrygia 67, 90, 96, 113 f, 116, 192, 322
fisci 263 quarries 113 f., 295, 297, 366
occupatoris 262 f., 264 Phrygia (as patrimonial district), see
putei 264 procurator provinciae Phrygiae
Patkoua 180 Phrygian marble 28, 98, 332, 339; see also
patrimonial procurator 5, 96, 117, 253, 342, Docimean; pavonazetto
343, 359 phusates 210, 212
provinciae Achaiae 114 f., 143, 146, 341, Pianul de Jos 76
361 Piccotini, Gernot, 103
provinciae Asiae 117, 156, 341 Pincum/mod. Veliko Gradiste 73
of Baetica 163 Pincus/mod.Pek 65, 73
provinciae Ph/Frygiae 113 f., 164, 321, Pirustae 44, 233, 272, 335
341, 348, 361 Pistis 81, 101
see also patrimonium; procurator pit 59, 86, 92, 227, 254, 259, 262, 268, 277
patrimonium 824, 85, 87, 98, 106, 142, 144 pittacium 266, 267
regni Norici 3, 536, 103, 132 f., 359, 362 pittakion 181 f.
patrol 182, see also probole; vestigatio Planes, see Rio Tinto
patronus 127, 133, 142 Planier 125
Pautalia/mod. Kjustendil 58 platearios 211
pavonazetto (marble) 27, 28, 98, 113, 116, Pljevlja 67, 72
164, 171, 206, 220, 291303, 304, 305, plumbum 101, 282
320, 322, 324, 325, 326, 327, 328, 330, Briganticum 102, 334
331, 339 Britannicum 101, 102, 103, 191, 279, 282
pay, see wages Deceanglicum 102, 334
Peacock, David, 51 Germanicum 101, 104, 105, 280, 282, 283
pearl fishery 109 f. 358
Pek, see Pincus Lutudarense 102, 279, 282
Pensabene, Patrizio, 300 nigrum 279
Pentelic marble 89, 323 podes, see anametretes marmaron
 General Index 541
poena metalli 223, 224 Asturiae 359
Poetovio 162 Callaeciae 359
Polemon 215, 216 civitatis/gens/natio 69
Pompeioupolis 91 cohortis 184, 188, 193
Pomponius Faustianus 108, 221 iure dicundo 284
Ponferrada 230 and Mons Claudianus 108,168, 179, 183,
Pontus-Bithynia 91, 117, 172, 224, 272, 278, 200, 211, 204, 206
298 montis Berenicidis 111 f., 180 f.
population 181, 272 f., 289, 334 f. praesidiourm et montis Beronices 111
see also Alexandria; Asia Minor; Baridustae; territorii 6870, 193, 193, 199
Brigantes; castellani; castellum; castro; urbi 333
Dalmatians; Dardanians; Deceangli; see also eparchos
Fayoum; Galicians; gens; Illyrians; praepositus 157, 178, 350
Italians; migration; Orientals; origo aurariarum (?) 129
Cluniensis; Pirustae; Pontus-Bithynia; ab optime Imperatore Traiano operi
resettlement; Sardiatae; Syene; Syria; marmorum monti Claudiano 169, 172,
Syria-Palaestina; Thebaid; Uxamenses; 332
vicus ex statione marmorum 346, 348 f.
populus Simittuensis 118 vectigalis ferrariarum, see procurator
M. Porcius Cato 90, 235, 276 f. praeses, see governor; praefectus; presidial
M. Porcius Verus 132 procurator; proconsul
porea 182, 218 praesidium 111 f., 168, 179 f., 1803, 185
Porolissum 135, 247 praetor 95
porphyry 98, 219, 224, 333 praetoriani 54
black 20, 221 pragmatikos tou nomou 216
red 17, 21, 51, 221 f., 338 f. presbuteroi komes 178, 216 f.
Porsuk, see Tembris presidial procurator 94, 147, 148, 172, 253,
Port-Vendres 125, 155, 280, 281 359
portasanta 312 f., 325 of Mauretania Caesariensis 172
Porticus Aemilia 345 proc. et praefectus provinciae
portorium 62, 99, 105, 200, 281, 286, 287 Sardiniae 125 f., 333, 341, 360
Asiae 60, 62 f., 64, 117, 282 provinciae Noricae 131 f., 143, 154, 243,
see also lex; publicum portorii Illyrici; 284, 359
quadragesima Galliarum; quattuor regni Norici 132
publica Africa pretium 93, 2629, 339
Portugal 2, 4, 5, 48, 123 Prijedor 137, 138, 153
Portus 290, 310, 313, 325, 326, 327, 345, 350, Prijepolje 72
351, 355 primiscrinius officinae 71, 153
Posadas 39 princeps
possessio 86, 90, 105, 227, 263, 264, 266, 267 duplicarius 193
possession, see possessio of Splonum 272
potismos 212 tabulariorum 350
Potpec 72 princeps, see emperor
pottery production, see locatio conductio principalis 177, 180, 186, 199; see also
operis faciendi duplicarius; sesquiplicarius
Pozoblanco 163 principia 23
praeco 227 prisoners 6, 2225, 333 f., 366; see also
praedia 80, 86, 125 f., 341, 360; see also demosios himatismos; guild; stola
dominus praedii Prizren 67
praefectus 195, 359 proactor 303
Aegypti 53, 107, 108, 114, 200, 209, probator 6, 114, 170, 171, 300, 310, 3
21620, 2203, 225, 255, 260, 334, 341 f., probatus 310
356 probole 182
annonae 144 Proconnesus 333
542 General Index
proconsul 50, 96, 116, 173, 333 ad vectigal ferrariarum Gallicarum 138,
procurator 2 f., 5 f., 55, 122, 15965, 164; 141, 145, 147 f., 162, 237, 238, 240, 245,
2024, 220, 357, 369 247, 361
career and experience 3, 113, 121 f., 158, in Africa 143
2379, 24651, 259 annonae provinciae Narbonensis 144
cui mandatum est 203, 340 argentariarum 133, 134 f., 160, 165;
and emperor/Palatine bureaux 5, 92, 332, Pannoniarum et Dalmatiarum 3, 72 f.,
335 f., 3402, 344, 357, 368 13340, 146 f., 160, 161, 234 f., 237 f.,
of mines 41, 58, 59, 67, 71, 73, 76, 79, 125, 240, 245, 246, 247, 248, 342, 360;
131, 166 f., 198, 234, 248, 259, 342, 359, Pannonicarum 139 f., 342;
360; and superprovincial mandates 133, Delmaticarum 139 f., 342
147, 148, 149, 165, 237, 239, 240, 241, aurariarum 165; (Dacicarum) 12630,
243, 244, 284, 285, 287, 289, 332, 360, 150, 151 f., 147, 232, 233, 234, 246, 253,
361, 362, 363, 368 342, 360; Delmatarum 162
omnium rerum 203, 338 familiarum gladiatoriarum ( . . . ) 238
powers and responsibilities 2 f., 5, 8, 114, ferrariarum 57, 1405, 146, 165, 235, 237,
121, 1459, 165, 198, 2024, 234, 245, 238, 2405, 247, 255, 260, 288, 289, 342,
250, 256, 25860, 342, 362; at Alburnus 361, 364; et annona Ostiensis 144, 242;
Maior/Ampelum 3, 233 f., 253, 254; at et arg(entariarum) (?) in provincias
Vipasca 48, 49 f., 93, 106, 2268, 245, XXIII 133, 147, 237, 249; Galliarum
254, 259, 262, 264, 266, 363, 367 ; in 1405; Pannonicarum 13640, 153,
nothwestern Spain 22832,233, 245, 161 f., 235 f., 240
260, 363; in Egypt/Eastern Desert 6, hereditatium 144
107 f., 20426, 255, 259, 337 f., 341, 352, kalendarii Vegetiani 134
355 f., 3624; in Danube provinces 232 lapicidinarum 115
5, 364, 368; and iron mines 23546, 287, marmorum 113 f., 344, 348, 349, 350, 351,
289, 363 f. 354; m(armorum)N(umi-
private 109 f., 243, 285, 288 dicorum?) 1179, 164
and provincial administration 92, 129, massae Marianae 124, 335
142, 149, 201, 21425, 231, 260, 356 metalli Albocrarensis 120, 148, 359
of quarries 113 f., 155, 163 f., 200, 20426, metallorum 59 67, 74, 112, 139, 165, 201;
259, 296, 300 f., 303, 306 f., 309 f., at Villals/Luyego 76, 119 f., 123, 187,
319, 323, 329 f., 338, 341, 352, 354 f., 231, 232
361 f. m(etallorum) D(ardanicorum) 58, 131,
and social status 129, 1469, 165 146, 162, 234
see also acta; archive; beneficiarius; metallorum et praediorum 80, 125 f., 147,
collegialite inegale; colonus; 149, 234, 341, 360
commentarii; conductor; contractor; metallorum Pannonicorum et Da/elma-
district; eptropos; financial procurator; ticorum 1336, 140, 146, 148, 160 f.,
headquarters; instrumenta; labels; lex; 245, 246
mandatum; mining; occupator; metallorum Vipascensium 2, 3, 4850,
patrimonial procurator; presidial 92 f., 123 f., 147, 148, 163, 2268, 245,
procurator; pronoetes; quarrying; 254, 259, 262, 264, 266, 359
rationem reddere; restitutor metallorum; Miniciae 143
subaltern staff; subprocurator; tabula; montis Mariani 77, 124, 148, 163, 165, 359
tabularium montis Berenicidis 111 f.
procurator patrimonii provinciae Narbonensis 143
a pacticiis 122 praediorum 126
a marmoribus 1157, 345, 346, 348, 351 praepositus splendidissiumus vectigalis
ad census in Gallia accipiendos ( . . . ) 143 ferrariarum 138, 139, 146, 148, 161, 162,
ad census Britanniae 143 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 245, 260
ad census Gallorum 143 provinciae Syriae ad rationes putandas 134
ad ferrarias 141, 143, 145, 247 publici portorii vectigalis Illyrici 240
ad patrimonium 144 sociorum miniariarum 278
 General Index 543
procurator (cont.) publicare 84 f.
summarum rationum 124, 343 publicum portorii
summi choragi 113 Illyrici 55, 56, 60, 239 f., 241, 24, 361, 362,
usiacus 341 367
XX (vicesimae) hereditatium ( . . . ) 242 ripae Thraciae 239
professions (mining/quarrying), see Publilius Memorialis 141, 143, 144, 145, 247
akisklarios; akouarios; anametretes Pulst 131
marmaron; archimechanikos; pump 40
architekton; aurilegulus; chalkeus; Pumsaint, see Dolaucothi
dekanos; ergates; ergepistates; ergodotes; Punto Scifo 322
kasiotes; lecticarius; legulus; mekanarios; pupillus 86
phalangarios; pharmaxarios; phusates; Puteoli/mod. Pozzuoli 326
platearios; sklerourgos; smaragtario; puteus 264, 268
sphurokopos; stone-cutter; stonemason argentarius 263, 265, 266
Prokuplje 67 universus 262, 263, 266
promagister f[errariarum] provinciarum see also locus putei
Narbonensis Lugdunensis Aquitanicae Pyrgari, see Karystos
Belgicae 237, 238, 244, 284
promutuo 296 f. Q
pronoetes 53, 109
proprietas 86, 93, 2626, 269 Qattar 24
proskunema 109, 177 Qreiya 24
prospection 23, 34, 36, 43, 340 quadragesima Galliarum 60, 66, 144, 238,
protector consularis 176 240, 241, 243, 289, 361
province 48, 86, 98, 99, 100, 105, 114, 146, quadrantes, see nummi metallorum
339, 366 quaestor 173
administration of 2, 5, 7, 8, 56, 64, 89, 92, quarry-to-order 326 f., 339, 354 f., 365
94 f., 96, 105, 106, 117, 121, 143, 159, quarry-to-stock 326 f., 339, 355, 365
172 f., 179, 199 f., 203, 217, 255, 257, quarrying 1 f., 4, 5, 6 f., 50 f., 86, 200,
335, 340, 3579, 362 by army 96, 16885, 197, 198, 200 f., 364 f.
and metalla 50 f., 333, 344, 362 arrangements 68, 254, 290 f.;
and mines 73, 81, 83, 106, 121, 148 f., differences 32831; at Bacakale/Upper
164 f., 231, 235, 237 f., 254, 260, 284, Tembris valley 171, 291303, 322 f.; at
287, 289, 332, 335 f., 338, 342, 357, 359, Luna/Carrara 89, 3148; at Mons Clau-
360, 363 f., 367 f. dianus 213, 3079, 328 f.; at Simit-
and quarries 31, 106, 172 f., 178, 200, 217, thus; 98100, 3047; standardisation
219, 222 f., 225 f., 336, 338, 353, 356, 364 327, 355; at other quarries
see also angareia; assize; capital; conventus; 30913
council; Danubian provinces; district; by contractors 5 f., 254, 293300, 316,
Egypt; fiscus; Illyricum; immunitas; 31823, 338, 365 f., 368
kings; liturgy; migration; munera; operae; and convicts/prisoners 97 f., 200, 223 f.,
population; portorium; requisition; 333, 338, 343
revenues; tax; tributum; vectigal districts 513
provincia 114, 146, 341 and emperor/state 6, 83, 84, 89, 91, 96,
Caesaris 105, 121, 172, 203, 357, 358 97, 98100, 106, 200 f., 254, 317,
Germania 4, 190, 280, 334, 335, 358 332, 335, 336, 338 f., 342 f., 353 f., 356,
Ph/Frygia, see procurator 368
populi Romani 172 and local wealth 321 f., 366
Transduriana 230, 231 and marble bureau 6, 350 f., 3516
proximus rationum/a rationibus 113 and organizational implications 9, 31 f.,
Prusa 298 46 f., 185, 200, 328 f.
Ptolemais Hermiu/mod. el-Menshije 177 private 85 f., 89 f., 106
Ptolemies 87 and procurators 6, 10719, 146, 160,
publicanus 85, 91, 92, 207, 242, 275, 277, 278, 1635, 20420, 225 f., 254 f., 258 f., 340,
279; see also societas publicanorum 341 f., 3614
544 General Index
quarrying (cont.) regnum Noricum 53, 55, 132, 243; see also
and subaltern staff 1559, 2513, 254, 256 f. patrimonium; procurator
topographies 2531, 328 f. regula 322
see also angareia; animal; camp; caravan; regulations, mining, see lex
cursus; Eastern Desert; Egypt; epichrea; rei publicae causa abesse 95, 203
ergastulum; fabrica; governor; injuries; Reinhardsmunster 176
labels; lapicaedina; lapidicina; latomeia; reliefs 25, 132, 321 f.
latomion; marble; marmor; ocrea; opus Rena Maiore 101, 104
marmorum; ownership; pittakion; reprobatum 300
podes; porea; professions; province; requisition 96, 105, 178, 21620, 225, 254,
quarry-to-order; quarry-to-stock; 260, 356, 362, 366
skopelos; stomoterion; teretes; transport; res privata 106
tools; vigiles; water supply; workforce resettlement 4, 73, 198, 22931, 233, 260,
quattuor publica Africae 243 273, 334 f.
Qum el-Akhmar, see Alabastrine restitutio in integrum 95
restitutor metallorum 49, 124, 270, 343
R revenues 64, 88 f., 91 f., 105, 173, 235 f., 241,
243, 255, 257, 279, 289, 33642, 343, 357,
R (barred R) 300 359, 3658
Raetia 55, 148, 239, 240, 286 Rgoste 69
Raima 218 Rhine 104, 172, 175, 190, 197, 240, 280, 334,
Rakob, Friedrich, 27, 304 358
Q. Rammius Martialis 107, 220 Richardson, John 276
Rammius quarries, see Mons Porphyrites Richborough 101
ramp 16, 20, 21, 22 Rio Eria 188
Rankov, Boris, 71, 75, 193 Rio Tinto 39, 40 f., 79, 125, 162, 166, 228,
Rathbone, Dominic, 82 273, 359
ratio 105, 198 roads 16, 22, 2431, 46, 60, 112, 117, 181; see
domus Augusti 328 also servitus viae; via publica
ferrariarum 140, 142, 154 Robert, Louis 115
marmoraria 350 Roder, Joseph 268, 304
marmorum 156 Romania 4, 33, 41, 239
marmorum Lunensium 156, 348 f., 350 Rome (city of) 5, 8, 65 f., 92, 101, 118, 122,
urbica 328 1579, 171, 174, 196, 333, 335, 336
rationales 124, 343; see also a rationibus; building projects 99, 328, 338, 339, 353,
procurator summarum rationum 354, 355, 365, 366
ratione, ex 301 f., 305, 309, 310, 311, 313, and cinnabar 278
3238, 329, 331 curators of buildings 316 f.
rationem reddere 203, 340 fire of (ad 64) 156, 317
Ravna, see Timacum Minus and iron mining 144, 2425
realgar mines 277 f. marble bureau 6, 156, 158, 342, 34453,
receipt for advanced payment 179, 206, 208, 354
216, 252, 330, 337 marble, imports, and yards 5, 6, 83, 89, 99,
recipere 296, 300 105, 113 f., 158, 170, 171, 209, 261,
Red Sea 110, 181, 214 f. 290 f., 294, 3005, 3102, 3228, 355,
redemptor 91, 3237, 352 368
marmorarius 326 and procurators 113, 122, 127, 144 f.,
operis 324, 325 2425, 248, 250, 278, 289, 335, 361
see also ratione, ex tile production 320
Regensburg, see Castra Regina Ros ia Montana, see Alburnus Maior
regie directe/indirecte, see mining Ros ia valley, see Alburnus Maior
Regina/Los Paredones 77, 155 Rosinos de Vidriales 188
regio 114 Rostovtzeff, Michael 2
Montanensium 70 f., 193, 199 Rudnica 153
regionarius 70 f., 126 Rudnik 59 f., 131, 167, 234, 270
 General Index 545
ruina montium 34 Saweita, el- 178
Rusman 69 Scalochiella, see Luna/Carrara
Ruteni 336 Schaidberg 53
M. Rutilius Lupus 209 Scherrer, Peter 55, 286
Schnurbein, Sigmar von 190
S school 49
L. Scribonius Libo 316
Sablayrolles, Rene 88, 143, 144, 287 f. scriptura praeconii 227
sacerdos 286 Scupi/mod. Skopje 58, 60, 67
Saint-Beat 90 seal/tag, lead 99, 170, 191, 275
Saint-Boil 90 sebakh 13, 15, 18
Saintes-Maries-de-la-Mer 101, 104 Sedatus Augustus 153
Saint-Valery-sur-Somme 101, 103, 190, 198 Segobriga 133
salarium 203 Seleuceia Pieria 176
salary, see wages semisses, see nummi metallorum
Salassians 91, 277, 279 Semlach 53
Saldae 172, 173 Semna, see Mons Ophiates
C. Sallustius Crispus 87, 88 C. Sempronius Urbanus 130, 135, 341
Salona/mod. Split 57, 74, 127, 153, 162, 174, senate 87, 91, 94 f., 98 f., 105, 235, 245, 277,
176, 255 360; see also ordo senatorius
salt mines 51, 53, 76, 91 f., 97 f., 287 senatorial rank, see ordo senatorius
saltus 88 senatus consultum 91, 98, 100
Burunitanus 96 de Cn. Pisone patre 87
Philomusianus 96, 185 A. Senecius [-] Contianus 128, 150, 167
Salvioni, Salverio, 314 T. Sennius Sollemnis 89
San Dionisio, see Rio Tinto L. Septi[-] Petro[nianus] 139, 166, 246,
San Giorgio 81 Septimius Severus (ad 193211) 86, 98, 118,
San Giovanni 81 123
San Nicolao 81, 196 Q. Septueius Clemens 243, 285
Sana (river) 56 Serapeion (Ephesos) 117
Sancti Petri 283 Sergius Longus (cent.) 1704, 175, 310, 332
sanctuary, see temple Serra de Caveira 228
Sandaracurgium 91, 277, 278 Servitium 57
sandstone 177, 221 servitus viae 278
Sanski Most 56, 153 servus 48, 73, 86, 97 f., 124, 163, 205, 222,
Santa Colomba 274 223, 228, 244, 256, 271, 274, 278, 284 f.,
Santa Maria da Cidadela 188 287, 295, 3148, 324
Santalla facies, see Las Medulas alienus 207
Saqia, el- 24 Caesaris 52, 53, 93, 107 f., 128, 131, 149
Sarapis 14, 18, 20, 107, 108, 169, 177, 308; see 55, 1568, 163, 207, 213, 253, 256, 257,
also Zeus 294, 303, 305, 3113, 315, 318 f., 3224,
sarcophagus 31, 43, 297, 303, 239, 286, 297, 327, 337, 346, 348
303, 322 colonorum Lunensium 317
Sardiatae 43, 335 fisci 97
Sardinia 7981, 101, 105, 106, 125 f., 148, poenae 97
196, 198, 224, 234, 333, 341 publicus 315, 317
Sarmizegetusa 64, 130, 199, 272, 286 sociorum vectigalis ferrariarum 144, 242
Sassenay 101 see also familia Caeasaris; subaltern staff;
Sastre Prats, Ines, 4, 230 vicariani; vicarius;
Satala 170 Ses Salinas 280
Saturn 25 sesquiplicarius 180, 182
Saturninus (proc.) 49 f., 1213, 163, 167, settlement (near mines/quarries), see
250 f. castellani; castellum; castro; colonia;
Sauerland 104 f., 280, 334 district; migration; municipium;
Savaria 137 population; vicus; workforce
546 General Index
Seurri 273 sklerourgos 157, 183, 206, 210, 211, 212, 213,
D. Severius Severus 111 skopelos 16, 22 f., 180, 184, 224
Severus Alexander (ad 22235) 88, 172 skuteus 214
Sevilla, see Hispalis slag 16, 20, 33, 39 f., 56, 59, 71 f., 80
sevir Augustalis 286, 287 f. collector of 48, 227, 248
Sextus Marius 72, 77, 84 f., 88, 124 f., 163, Slatina 58, 71
335, 360 slave, see servus
shafts 35 f., 38 f, 45, 76, 228, 232, 248, 253, slipway 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23, 29, 30, 46,
263 f., 270 51
shipwreck 81, 101, 1035, 125, 155, 189, 256, Slot 69
274 f., 279, 280 f., 322, 355 smaragtario 110
shoemaker 87, 214, 227, 244, 284; see also smith, see chalkeus
skuteus Smyrna 98100, 117, 298, 306, 321, 339
shrine 23 Snailbeach 101
Siebengebirge 175 Snead 101
Sierra de Cartagena 39, 275, 280 Sobrado dos Monxes 188
Sierra Morena 77, 155, 162, 273, 275, 276, Socanica, see Dardanorum municipium
281 societas 228, 254, 262, 274 f., 278 f., 282, 286,
Siftlitz 53 315, 358
signifer 120, 176, 186 f., 199 argentariarum fodinarum montis
Sil 34, Ilucronensis (?) 275
C. Silius 88 argentifodinarum Rotenensium/sis 278
Silvanus 124, 287, 316, 335 Ba(eculonensis?)/Ba(edronensis?)/Ba
silver 65, 83, 100, 197, 198, 290, 342 (learica) 275 f.
mines 3, 85 f., 88, 91, 100, 228, 269, 287, C(astulonensis?) 276
289; Britain 81, 102, 191, 279, 358; ferrariarum 237, 284,
Gaul 278, 335; Dalmatia 72; montis argentarii Ilucronensis (?) 275
Macedonia 91, 277; Moesia 579, 69, montis Ficarensis 275
71, 73, 193, 234 ; Sardinia 80 f.; publicanorum 163, 228, 276 f., 290
Spain 39, 41, 76, 79, 84, 90, 91, 123, 235, Sisaponensis 163, 274, 277 f., 283, 290
2626, 269, 2758, 290 Vesc(-) 275, 279
and procurators 133, 135 f., 139 f., 146, socius/i 262, 267 f., 279, 282, 287
147, 234, 237 f., 245, 249, 360, aerar(ii) /aerar(iarum) (fodinarum?) 278
see also argentaria ferrariarum 144, 242, 244
Simitthus/mod. Chemtou 1, 6, 10, 2832, 51, Lutudarenses 279
91, 106, 156 f., 200, 205, 220, 225, 260, miniariarum 278
291, 309, 318, 320, 332, 338, 339, 361 f. Novaec(-) 279
366 Romae 279
layout 257 vectigalis ferrariarum 144, 242, 287
military presence 184 f. Soknopaiou Nesos 178, 217, 219
ownership of 98100 soldier, see army, miles
procurators at 1179, 163 f. Soli 248
quarry arrangements 3047, 32331, Sopot 194
3515 Sotiel Coronada 39, 45, 79, 228,
see also giallo antico South-West village, see Mons Porphyrites
Singidunum 59, 195 Spain 5, 66, 90, 120, 357
Sirmium 59, army in 18690, 198, 199, 358, 359
Sisak, see Siscia districts 4850, 769, 81 f.
Sisapo/mod. La Bienvenida 91, 163, 235, and emperor/state 84, 90 f., 106, 339 f.,
277 f., 343 f.
Siscia/mod. Sisak 56, 57, 138, 161, 162, 165, forced/free labour 22931, 233, 260, 273 f.,
23640, 245 334, 358, 366
Sitnica 58, 67 headquarters 162 f.
sitologos 215, 217 mines in 1, 4, 5, 32, 336, 3841, 44 f.,81,
Skelani 67, 72, 161, 111, 235, 363
 General Index 547
mining arrangements / ingots 4, 26270, stone, see marble
2749, 280, 281, 283, 290 stone-cutter 90
procurators 11925, 133, 147, 148, 199, stonemason 321 f., see sklerourgos
22632, 234, 245, 249, 250, 358, 359, 360, strategos 2157, 219, 222
363, 368 Stratonicea 85
staff 154 f. strator legati 194
Speidel, Michael A., 176, 316 f. Strubbe, Johann, 113 f.
Speidel, Michael P., 70 Styra, see Karystos
sphurokopos 20912 Styria 53
Split, see Salona sub cura 59, 137, 174, 234, 345
Splonum 272 on quarry labels 113, 118, 300 f., 306 f.,
Srbica 57, 58, 60, 67 310, 328 f., 330
Srebrenica, see Domavium subaltern staff 1 f., 7, 55, 96, 165, 202, 352 f.,
St. Veit an der Glan 53 365 f.
staff, see familia Caesaris; subaltern staff and emperor 335 f.
Stari Majdan 56, 153 and headquarters 15965, 253, 259
state, see aerarium; ager; emperor; fiscus; opes and mines 58, 71 f., 81, 93, 127, 142,
publicae; ownership; tributum; vectigal 14955, 236, 25460, 241
T. Statilius Optatus 141, 143, 144, 145, 166, promotion and tenure 159, 251, 256, 258,
247 259, 343 f., 348
statio 5563 and quarries 6, 32, 1559, 2513, 25460,
aquarum 346 201, 362
Aquar(um) Bas() 57 responsibilities 2518
argentariarum Pannonicarum e[t see also a commentariis; a lapicidinis
Delmaticarum . . . ] 161, 235 Carystiis; a/ab marmoribus; ab
beneficiarii consularis 58, 64, 71, 72, 75, instrumentis tabularii; adiutor
76, 130, 161, 200 tabulariorum; aioutor kibariatou;
Esc(ensis) 55 arcarius; artodotes boethos kibariatou;
ferrariarum fori Ostiensis 144, 242 boethos kibariatou; caesarianus;
hereditatium 156 contrascriptor officinarum; dispensator;
Lamu/d(-) 58, 60 grammateus; kibariates; laccarius;
M(-) Dard(anorum) 58 librarius; officium; oikonomos;
marmorum 6, 156, 342, 3447, 34851, phameliarioi; praepositus; primiscrinius
354, 355; officinae; proactor; pronoetes;
patrimonii 345 f. subsequens librariorum; subtesserarius;
Petobiensis et Moesiae r(-) aq(-) 57 tabellarius; tabularius; tesserarius;
Sisciana 138, 235, 236 vilicus
Ulp(ianensis) 57 subprocurator aurariarum 76, 1279, 146,
vectigal ferrariarum 162, 165 151, 234, 360
see also marble bureau; optio; tabellarius; subsequens librariorum 150 f., 159, 253, 256
vilicus subtesserarius 155, 252
stationarius 182, 200, 220; see also epiteretes Sucidava/Celei 68, 135, 247
stations, customs Sud-Lavezzi 280, 281
and mining districts 5564, 66 f., 69, 82, Sud-Perduto 280, 281
200 Sugambri 335
and portorium Asiae 60, 62 f., 282 Suhodolpotok 74
stipendium 86 Suk el-Khemis 96
stipulatio 226, 227 Sulla, see L. Cornelius Sulla
Stobi 195 Sulmona/mod. Sulmo 111, 243
Stojnik 59, 67, 193, 194, sulphur mines, see sulpuraria
stola 223, 333, see demosios himatismos; P. Sulpicius Scribonius Proculus 316, 317
prisoners Ser. Sulpicius Similis 220 f.
Stoll, Oliver, 176 sulpuraria 85, 224
stomoma 212 Sulumenli 219, 320, 321
stomoterion 212 Sumadjia 59
548 General Index
supply, see animal; Egypt; Mons Claudianus; Talet el-Zerqa 24
quarrying; requisition; water supply Tarentaise 87
Sussex 192 tarif, customs, see Zarai
Suvodol 194 Tarina, see Alburnus Maior
Sveti Nikola 71 Taul Secuilor, see Alburnus Maior
Syene/mod. Assuan 178, 180, 205, 209, 211, Taul Tapului, see Alburnus Maior
221 tax/taxation 62 f., 64, 95, 99 f., 117, 121 f.,
Synnada 28, 113 f., 116, 164, 219, 301, 303, 200, 207, 217, 219 f., 222, 2413, 257,
320 f., 361; see also Bacakale; marmor 337, 357, 362
Syria 84, 185, 208, 272, 336, 355, 357 on nails and use of iron 87, 244
Syria-Palaestina 193, 208, 224, 242, 333, 336, on ore/metals 55, 62 f., 66 f., 82, 105 f.,
355 199, 244, 278, 281 f., 360, 367
Szabadegyhaza 132 on sales 49, 226 f.
Szazhalombatta, see Sucidava see also district; portorium; publicum
Szekely, see Alburnus Maior portorii Illyrici; quadragesima
Galliarum; statio; station; tarif;
T tributum; vectigal; vicesima
hereditatium
Tabarka 25, 27 technical expertise, see centurio; emperor;
tabellarios, see tabellarius governor
tabellarius 156 f., 160, 181 f., 211 technology, mining, see aqueduct;
stationis marmorum 345 f. 34850 Archimedean screw; crane; cuniculus;
see also optio drainage; galleries; ground sluicing;
tablet hushing; hydraulic mining; ore crushing
bronze 40, 230 machine; pillars; pits; prospection;
writing 44, 70, 232 f., 254 f., 270 f., 289 pump; ruina montium; shafts; tunnel;
see also lex water wheel
tabula Tegare 139
ansata 116, 176 Tehna 178
cerata, see tablet Teian grey marble 311 f., 325, 327
Lougeiorum 230 Teisendorf 285
Paemeiobrigensis 230 f. Teliucu Inferior 239, 286
Peutingeriana 57 Tembris/Porsuk 116, 291, 302 f., 321, 322,
Zoelarum 230 329
tabularium 255, 342 f., 344 temple 14, 18, 20, 32, 435, 90, 107, 109, 116,
tabularius 108, 113 f., 1502, 155 f., 131, 150, 169, 221
158, 159, 202, 204, 2513, 255 f., 309, Teos 116, 295, 309, 311 f., 324, 325, 327, 331,
364 351; see also africano
a marmoribus 346, 348, 349, 350 teretes 184,
aurariarum Dacicarum 127, 149, 150, 232 kellon phamilas 208
ferrariarum 142, 162 artou phamilas 208
Porphyritis et aliorum metallorum 52, 160, see also epiteretes
353 Terminus 72
provinciae Lusitaniae rationis Terminus Liber 72
patrimonii 142 Termunes 55, 285
provinciae Sardiniae 126 Terra Mater 57, 59, 131, 1368, 153, 161, 234,
rationis ferrariarum 81, 140 f., 154, 162 235, 257
rationis marmorum Lunensium 156, 318, territorium 6870, 106, 193, 227
348, 349, 350 metallorum 4851, 52, 53, 59 f., 76, 82
see also ab instrumentis tabularii; adiutor Montanensium 70
tabulariorum; tabularium tessera 144, 242, 278
Tackholm, Ulf 2, 4, 5, 7, 82, 83, 270 hospitalis 125, 163, 188, 230
tag, see seal nummularia 144, 242
Tainaron 89 tesserarius 155, 157, 186 f., 199, 251 f., 258
Talabriga 273 Teutoburg 190
 General Index 549
Tharsis 228 trierarch 175, 178
Thebais 179, 204, 206, 215, 216, 224, 333 triumphal insignia 197
Themistes 216 Troesmis 68
theta nigrum 314, 317 tubicen 176
Thorigny, Marble of, 89 tufa quarries 175 f.
Thracia 56, 58, 71, 96, 239 Tullius Saturninus (cent.) 171, 173, 175, 293,
Tiber 344, 345, 346, 350 294, 296, 332
Tiberiane 10, 22 f.; 24, 32, 51 f., 106, 108, tunnel 33 f., 36, 38 f., 435, 56, 72, 74, 172,
337, 338; subaltern staff 207, 251 f., 255 176, 198, 232, 263 f., 270
Tiberioupolis/mod. Kirgil 322 Turicevac 58, 66
Tiberius (ad1437) 23, 81, 82, 84 f., 88, 89, Turienzo 274
94, 110, 154, 335 f., 338, 358, 360 Turkey 113, 291; see also Asia, Asia Minor
Tiffen 53, 131 f., 196, 284 tutelage 86
Timacum Minus/mod. Ravna 6870, 193, Twrch, see Dolaucothi
198, 199 Tyriaion/mod. Ilgin 303
tin 83, 277
ingot 125, 155, 256 U
tirones 209
Titienus Verus (proc.) 131, 167, 234 Ulpia Traiana/mod. Xanten 175
Titus (ad 7981) 102, 222, 333 Ulpian, see Domitius Ulpianus
Tivoli 99, 306 Ulpiana, see Ulpianum
token money 64 f.; see also nummi Ulpianum/mod. Gracanica 57, 58, 60, 67,
metallorum 165
toll, see tax, Zarai Ulpius Aelianus (proc.) 92, 123, 166, 227
Tomus , see Alburnus Maior (Ulpius) Chresimus, see Chresimus
tools 18, 20, 2931, 33, 36, 39, 41 f., 446, M. Ulpius Chresimus (proc.) 52, 107, 109,
53, 56, 66, 72 f., 77, 80, 179, 200, 117, 351
204, 212, 225, 231, 254, 276, 319, 321 f., M. Ulpius Eutyches (proc.) 120, 166, 359
366 M. Ulpius Hermias (proc.) 127, 128, 151, 166
see also acisculus; parasphenia; regula; Ulpius Himerus (proc.) 52, 108, 109, 205,
stomoma 251, 309
topaz mines 109 f. Umm Balad 24
Toplica 57 Urium, see Rio Tinto
Topusko 56 Uskoplje 73, 74
Torano, see Luna/Carrara Ustikolina 72
tractus 114 usufruct 85 f., 287
Tragin 53 usurpare 266, 290
Trajan (ad 98117) 64, 66, 106, 143, 1703, Uxama, see conventus
195, 335, 344, 345 Uxamenses 274
Tralles 28, 1157, 253, 353
Transduriana, see provincia V
Transpadana 286
transport, see angareia; animal; gauge; Vaidoaia, see Alburnus Maior
hamaxa; lectica; marble; ramp; roads; Valdemeda 188
slipway; vectura; wagon Valeria Messalina 125
trapezitai demoson 223 Valerius Super 133, 135, 167
Travnik 74 valetudinarium 194, 201
M. Trebius Alfius 284 Van der Veen, Marijke, 215
Trepca 58 Varosluk 74
Tres Galliae 238 vectigal 84, 88, 89, 92, 94, 105, 106, 235 f.
Tresminas 5, 35, 45, 76, 189, 274 ferrariarum 138, 144, 165, 235 f., 260, 287,
tribunus 109, 111, 132, 193 288
tributum 86, 94, 102, 121, 230 f., 334 ferrariarum Gallicarum 138, 237
Tricomia/mod. Kaimaz 113, 348, 353 Illyrici 5860, 66 f.
550 General Index
vectigal (cont.) stat(ionis) Aquar(um) Bas(-) 57
massae ferrariarum Memmiae stationis Petobiensis et Moes(iae) r()
Sosandridis 88, 237, 287 aq() 57
metallorum 92 stat(ionis) Ulp(ianensis) 57
and mines 903, 235 f., 237, 242 f., 246, Villals 76, 119, 120, 123, 162, 166, 186, 187,
255, 260, 2769, 287, 288 f., 359, 361, 188, 199, 232, 250, 340, 360
365, 367 Villefranche-de-Rouerge 81, 154
pittaciarum 266 Viminacium 69, 73, 139, 246
see also arca; arcarius; district; ius; mancps; Vindobona/mod. Vienna 170
procurator; socius; statio; station; vilicus Vipasca 49, 122, 214, 343
vectura 302 and emperor 332, 339 f., 359
Veii 85 district 4850, 51, 56
Veleia/mod. Iruna 188 as headquarters 50, 163
Veliko Gradiste, see Pincum military presence 93, 124, 189
vena signata 278 mining arrangements at 4, 39, 45, 93, 228,
venatio 192 229, 233, 234, 2619, 270, 271, 272, 283,
venditor 226 284, 290, 339 f., 365, 367, 368
Vercellae 91, 277, 279 procurators at 49, 50, 92 f., 106, 1224,
verna 128, 153, 155, 156 2268, 231, 236, 245, 251, 254, 259, 343,
Vespasian (ad 6979) 102, 156, 280, 283, 340, 359, 363
359, 366 subaltern staff 154, 163, 337
vestigatio 181 see also lex
veteranus 194 M. Vipsanius Agrippa 304
veterinary, see hippiatros vir egregius 59, 128, 131, 134, 136; see also
Vetus Salina 68 ordo equester
vexillarius 175, 193 Virunum (Zollfeld) 54, 55, 132, 154, 284
vexillatio 76, 120, 123, 162, 168, 1746, Visconti, Pietro Ercole 5, 290
1868, 190, 192, 199, 204, 250 Visnjika 74
via publica 60, 62; see also roads; servitus viae Vitez 74
Vibius Alexander (praef.) 108, 168, 177, 183, Vitovnica 73
204 f. C. Vitrasius Pollio 222, 339
C. Vibius Postumus 73, 231, 334 Vittinghoff, Friedrich, 62,
L. Vibullius Hipparchus Ti. Claudius Atticus Vizianus 58, 60
Herodes 89, 323 Vlasina 58
vicariani, 1579 Volcanus 59, 130,
vicarius 124, 131, 154, 158 f. Vranica 74
dispensatoris 71 Vrbas 73, 74, 231, 334
ouikarios Kasaros oikonomou 215 Vucitrn 58, 67
rationalium 124, 343
vice-curator, see antikourator W
vicesima hereditatium 156
Vicianum 57, 58 Wadi Abu Maamel, see Mons Porphyrites
Victumulae, see aurifodina Victumularum Wadi Barud, see Tiberiane
vicus 23, 68 Wadi Gemal 110, 179
metalli Vipascensis 48, 49 Wadi al-Hammamat 52 f., 10913, 179, 209
Pirustarum 44, 233 12, 252, 308, 319.
vigiles 184, 213 Wadi al-Hudi 110
vilicus 57, 59 f., 72, 81, 128, 132, 136, 150, Wadi Nuqrus 110
152, 154, 156, 253, 257, 278, 284, 286, Wadi Sheikh 178
288, 336 Wadi Sikait, see Mons Smaragdus
ferrariarum 153, 257 Wadi Tuweiba 196
magister 314, 315 Wadi Umm Fawakhir 111, 179
Moes(iae) r(ipae?) s(uperioris?) 56 Wadi Umm Hussein, see Mons Claudianus
officinae ferrariae 137, 153, 161 f., 235, Wadi Umm Sidri, see Mons Porphyrites
236, 257 f., 259, 364 Wadi Umm Wikala, see Mons Ophiates
 General Index 551
wages/pay 8, 44, 93 f., 121, 136, 154, 172 f., Winkler, Gerhard, 285
179, 199, 201, 2068, 213, 215 f., 225, Wollmann, Volker, 76
231, 233, 252, 254, 261, 270, 272, 336 f., work procedures, see quarrying
342, 355, 357 f., 362; see also workforce 49, 261, 342, 365 f., 368
cheirographon; commoda; entola; at mines 36, 40 f., 414, 45 f., 73, 90 f.,
honorarium; opsonion; receipt for 110, 197, 22834, 245, 2704, 279, 289,
advanced payment; salarium; 358, 363, 364; settlement 35, 37, 3842.
stipendium at quarries 302, 90, 108, 168 f., 183 f.,
wagon 16, 22, 29, 30, 46, 211, 218, 322; see 200, 205 f., 20618, 220, 222 f., 254,
also hamaxa; lectica 25860, 316, 319, 324, 3336, 337,
Wales 5, 35, 38, 39, 191, 279, 334; see also 3546, 362, 364, 366; recruitment 206,
Dolaucothi 213, 225, 363; settlement 12, 15, 17 f.,
war 66, 83, 222, 333 f., 366 203, 25, 30 f.
Cantabrian 334 see also arithmos; army; camp; castellani;
Clodius Albinus 123 castellum; castro; collegium; contract;
Dacian 66, 143, 170, 195, 335 convicts; damnatio; ergastulum; fabrica;
Iugurthine 100 familia Caesaris; injuries; migration;
Jewish 222, 224, 333 mining; numerus; opus aurariarum;
Marcomannic 129, 130, 146, 149, 150, 152, pagano; phameliarioi; population;
193, 232, 233, 234, 272 prisoners; professions; quarrying; reliefs;
Moors (ad 172/3) 124, 189 resettlement; skopelos; technology; theta
Pannonian 73, 231, 334 nigrum; vicus; vigiles; wages; water
Second Punic 90 supply
see also prisoners Woytek, Bernhard, 646
Ward-Perkins, John, 83, 327
watchtower, see skopelos X
water-skins 211 f., 218
water supply 196, 336, Xanten, see Ulpia Traiana
distribution list 160, 168 f., 206, 20811,
214, 252, 308 Y
Eastern Desert 15 f., 18, 20, 23, 27, 3033,
108, 180 f. 200, 20814, 217 f., 224, 252, Yorkshire 102, 334
254 f. Yugoslavia 32 f.
see akouarios; askophora; ergazomene
dekana; hydrophora; potismos; water- Z
skins
water wheel 379, 46, 79 Zabargad 110
Weald 192 Zarai 282
weaver, see guild Zarqa, al-, see Maximianon
Weaver, Paul, 158 Zarza, La 39, 79, 228, 273
Weissenbach (Tragin) 53 Zawiet Sultan 178
Wells 101 Zeleznik 59, 73
Westmoreland 191 Zeugma 176
Weston-under-Penyard 81 Zeus
Weyer 285 Helios Sarapis 12, 13, 107, 108
whetstone 91 Megistos 178
white marble 27, 29, 113, 290 f., 297, 302 f., Zlatitsa 71
313, 320, 321, 322, 342, 345, 351, 367 Zlatna, see Ampelum
Whitley Castle, see Epiacum Zlatno Guvno 74
Wiesenau 53 Zoelae 273
Wieting 53, 132, 284, 285 Zuc 57