Troesmis - A Changing Landscape.

Romans and the Others in the Lower Danube Region

in the First Century BC – Third Century AD, Cluj-Napoca, 2016, 151-164.

A CHANGING LANDSCAPE: THE ORGANIZATION OF THE ROMAN ROAD

NETWORK IN MOESIA INFERIOR

Adriana Panaite*

Abstract: The arrival of the Romans at the Lower Danube and transforming this area into the Roman province of
Moesia inferior lead to a radical change of the landscape. A wide space is occupied and organized by the army
resulting in an imperial province located by the border. This operation is carried out gradually - an expression of
policy of "small steps" practiced by the Romans - over several stages, military organization, including -
fortifications, roads, construction annexes along the roads, points of customs stations-, being doubled by civil
measures in order to integrate in the new administrative body the pre-Roman and the newly emerged
settlements, together with the Greek cities from the Black Sea Coast.
One of the main elements in roman organization of the territory is the roads network. The proper roads are absent
from the pre-roman landscape, they were rather some access routes. Their lines and directions can be
reconstructed based on the information gathered from archaeological sources: researched or only identified in the
field settlements and necropolis provide us valuable data for this. The Romans “modernized” them and also
constructed new ones in order to assure a good communication between the limes area and the inner part of the
province, but also with neighboring territories.
The first action in this regard is recorded in the time of Augustus and his followers, but who really establish an
integrated system of roads in the area is Trajan. He laid the foundations for the road system in Lower Moesia.
After his conquest of Dacia the limes stretches all the way to the mouth of the Danube. Gradually appearing new
branches filled out the communication network. The coast road was also modernized at this time and a road
parallel to the limes started to be constructed. Trajan’s successor started on the construction of the central road
through Dobrudja. In the form that will be designed by Trajan, to which are added the interventions of Hadrian,
the road system will keep the same organization until the end of Antiquity.

Keywords: Moesia inferior, limes, road, landscape, Trajan, settlement, fortification, necropolis.

The area of the Lower Danube consists of several separate units (Balkan Mountains, Dobrudja Plateau,
Danube Valley and Delta), real puzzle of ecosystems characterized by the variety of resources and
forms of habitat1.
The arrival of the Romans at the Lower Danube and transforming this whole area into the
Roman province of Moesia inferior lead to a radical change of the landscape. A sprawling space is
occupied and organized by the army, resulting in an imperial province located by the border. The
operation is carried out gradually - an expression of policy of "small steps" practiced by the Romans -
over several stages, military organization, with all necessary infrastructure (fortifications, roads,
construction annex roads, points of customs stations) being doubled by civil measures to integrate in
the new administrative body the local settlements and the Greek towns from the Black Sea Coast, to
which are added the new founded Roman settlements2. This differentiation in the organization and
administration of the conquered territories was accompanied by a different approach to the
indigenous population, what subsequently produced an impact on its ethnic composition and socio-

1 Geografia 1989, 27-65; Suceveanu, Barnea 1991, 19-21; Todorova et alii 2011, 9-31.
2 For the history of the province see Vulpe, Barnea 1968, 13-365; Suceveanu, Barnea 1991, 22-154; Todorova et
alii 2011, 237-303.
__________________________________________________________________________________
*Institute of Archaeology “Vasile Pârvan“, Bucharest, [email protected].

https://biblioteca-digitala.ro
152 Adriana PANAITE

economic development. Implementing their control on this area the Romans are using both the
diplomacy and the military fights3.
The most western part of the future Moesia inferior inhabited by the Moessi and the Triballi was
organized into a military prefecture in the time of Claudius (praefectura civitatium Moesiae et Treballiae)4
and from Ptolemy we know that the civitas Moesorum was Ratiaria and civitas Treballorum was Oescus5.
The Greek colonies on the Black Sea Coast received the status of civitates foederatae after the campaign
of Varro, and during Vespasian, they are only civitas stipendiariae. The kingdom of Rhoemetalces III
became the procuratorial province of Thrace in 45 AD6.
Implementation of Roman forms runs parallel with measures for the integration in the empire.
It is a well-known fact that along the borders (limes) near every military fortification there is always –
at least one – civil settlement depending on it and working for its benefit 7. The Roman authorities will
be concerned primarily of creating the infrastructure which ensures the cohesion of space, which
became functional in terms of production and trade, administration and military8.
Factors that determine the shape of space and the creation of a specific landscape have their
origin in an element of necessity: water and food supply, the need for raw materials, defense and
ability to respond quickly in case of attack, communication etc.9. Romans will impose a new system of
land ownership, of making agriculture and farming and will decisively influence the organization and
distribution of rural settlements10. Water provisioning and the access to row materials primarily stone
and clay create in the landscape aqueducts and quarries. Each settlement administrates a territory
whose limits are visibly marked on land. They all were well connected by a network of land routes.
With the passing of time next to them appear the cemeteries, flat or barrow11. All this is nothing else
than the basic elements of a new reality: Roman provincial landscape.
Roman landscape in the area, its appearance and structuring of, should be equally understood
as a response of the imperial authorities that take into account the features of this area, characterized
by frequent movements of population, a rather pastoral economy and the lack of urban organization 12.
One of the main elements characterizing the landscape is the roman roads. “They are not
simply physical structures enabling movement to a destination. They also embody issues of ideology,
power and identity, and are intimately involved with our social constructions of the world” 13. From
the Roman point of view building a coherent and functional system of roads is equal to the
introduction of a certain area under the direct control and administration of the Roman authorities.
The first road Romans constructed in the Balkans is Via Egnatia (fig. 2), described by Cicero as
via militares14. Its construction started in 148 BC after the final annexation of Macedonia and Greece to
the administrative system of Roman Empire. It connects Dyrrachium on the Adriatic Sea with
Constantinopol. Connections between Via Egnatia and Thrace were realized by roads crossing the
Rhodope Mountains, one from Nicopolis ad Nestum and another from Topiros, both heading to
Philippopolis15.

3 Batty 2007, 400-410, 428-430.

4 CIL V 1838 = ILS 1349; Matei-Popescu 2010, 36 – 37.
5 Ptolemy III, 9, 3; 10, 5.
6 Suceveanu, Barnea 1991, 22-35.
7 Ivanov 1999, 253-277; Ivanov 2004, 172-177, 180-181.
8 Ivanov 1999; Matei-Popescu 2010.
9 Aston 1985, 11-29.
10 Gerov 1988; Bărbulescu 2001.
11 Oța 2013.
12 Batty 2007, 350.
13 Witcher 1997, 60.
14 Fasolo 2005.
15 Madzarov 2009, 67-69.

https://biblioteca-digitala.ro
A Changing Landscape: the Organization of the Roman Road Network. in Moesia Inferior. 153

Fig. 1: Roman Roads in Moesia inferior (A. Panaite)

https://biblioteca-digitala.ro
154 Adriana PANAITE

The second important road was the Central (or the Diagonal) one (fig. 2). It was constructed in
the middle of the first century BC and represents the connection between the Western Europe, Balkan
provinces and Asia minor. According to some archaeologists it was constructed along an existing older
Thracian road16.
The proper roads are absent from the pre-roman landscape of the lower Danube area, they
were rather some access routes. The first actions in this regard are recorded starting with the time of
Augustus, but more visible in the time of Claudius and Nero 17 and with decisive actions recorded
from Vespasian onwords18.
In the first century AD fortifications activites were undertaken. Then started the first earthen-
wooden construction. The construction of the military forts and roads connecting them was carried
out from west to east in the chronological order fallowing the stages of the expansion of the province.
Along with the main west-est orientated road along the Danube, slowly transformed in the limes road,
some secondary roads are constructed along the main rivers. Each tributary’s mouth was invariably
guarded by a legionary or auxiliary garrison. Coming from the west the romans are interested in a
quicker connection with the already controled areas. In this respect, the best example is given by the
road connecting Oescus with Philippopolis19. Moreover, along others rivers which flows into the
Danube will also be built roads. The water corses and the topography of the region fulfill a very
important role. The second construction period is characterized by building of stone walls
fortifications during the reign of Trajan20, a period of real organization of the limes, continuing later,
during Hadrian, with the establishing of the southern border of the province. Old roads repairing or
construction of new ones is also a key-element in organizing the area.
The largest population that Romans meet at the Lower Danube is the Getae21. Information
about them appears in written sources, to which are added the archaeological information22. Even so,
reliable archaeological evidence is surprisingly limited.
Next to them, the ethnic mosaic that covers the territories that would form later Moesia inferior
consists of the Greeks from the Black Sea colonies, Scythian 23, Sarmatians24 and Bastarnae25.
In Dobrudja, the most eastern part of the future Moesia inferior, just a few of the Getae settlements
have been identified. What happens to them during the Roman times is very difficult to say26. According
to achaeologists’ opinion they continue to exist and gradually romanized. What is certain is that there
are attested by written and epigraphic sources Roman settlement bearing the indigenous name without
any important indigenous settlements being discovered in the nearby. On the other hand, the ancient
name of some Getae settlements is unknown to us, while in other cases the Roman settlements take over
the name of previous one. Based on the discoveries so far, there can be documented three groups of
Getae settlements and cemeteries: in the north of Dobrogea, dated mainly between 6th-4th BC, in southern
Dobrogea, dated 5th-3rd centuries BC and those developed in the territories of the Greek colonies on the
Black Sea coast. Because very few Getae settlements have been researched systematically and the
existence of most of them is established through surface or accidental discoveries, the information at our
disposal today does not allow for a thorough analysis of them

16 Jireček 1932; Jireček 1974; Madzarov 2009, 70.

17 Conole, Milns 1983, 183-200.
18 Batty 2007, 441-450.
19 Madzarov 2004.
20 Țentea 2016, 85-93.
21 Bâltâc 2011, 28-35.
22 Irimia 1980, 66-118; Irimia 1981, 67-122; Irimia 1983, 69-148; Irimia 2007, 137-235; Irimia 2010, 83-128.
23 Irimia 2000-2001, 299-315.
24 Bârcă 2006, 3-28; Bârcă 2013, 99-125; Oţa 2013, 317-320.
25 Babeş 1994, 164-166.
26 See for example Wells 2005, 49-88.

https://biblioteca-digitala.ro
A Changing Landscape: the Organization of the Roman Road Network. in Moesia Inferior. 155

Fig. 2: Via Egnatia, Diagonal Road and the access roads from Thrace to Moesia inferior (A. Panaite)

https://biblioteca-digitala.ro
156 Adriana PANAITE

Most part of these sites have somewhat stereotypical descriptions, most of the time
mentioning the ceramic fragments and/or construction materials, when, in fact, these stereotypes
relate to the methods of collection, interpretation and evaluation of the data for the whole territory. In
addition, there is still a lack of systematic coverage of the territory and no unitary method of
recording. The only observation that can be made is that there are both fortified and unfortified
settlements. In addition, few of them can be securely dated in later Latène, when witnessing an
intensifying of the Roman Empire actitvities in the Lower Danube region. Historical and
archaeological sources give data of a significant demographic development within the area inhabited,
but the pattern of occupation and settlement of the territory is still unclear. The existence of significant
variations within the types of Getae settlement is generally accepted and there are some studies
dedicated to producing typologies of Getae settlement27.
For the territory of Dobrudja there is information on 78 Getae settlements, in which 16
systematically investigated: Adâncata (Adâncata I and Adâncata II), Albeşti, Beştepe, Canlia-Gura
Canliei, Beidaud, Capu Dolojman, Cheia, Gura Dobrogei, Histria-sat, Mangalia, Rasova-Malu Roşu,
Sinoe-Zmeica, Tariverde, Satu Nou (Valea lui Voicu and Vadu Vacilor), Tulcea and Vama Veche.
From the same area there is information on 63 cemeteries, in which 11 systematically investigated:
Adamclisi, Bugeac, Canlia, Caraorman, Ceamurlia de Jos, Cernavodă, Enisala, Istria-sat, Murighiol,
Satu Nou, Teliţa28.
Analyzing field layout of the settlements one can notice there is a higher density in the
southern Dobrudja. In this area, better known, thanks to systematic archaeological excavations are
settlements from Adâncata29; one of them, Adâncata I, the author of the researches characterizes it as a
center of power, controlling the surrounding territory within a radius of 20-25 km, which later will be
(most probably30) the territory of the Roman city of Tropaeum Traiani, including also the settlement
near (or on) the city will raise later on 31. Adâncata I i sone of the few settlements which continue to be
functional in the period between I BC – I AD. Not far from here, at Floriile and to the south at Rositsa
(Bulgaria, Dobritch district), two Latin inscriptions were discovered, mentioning two princeps loci,
rulers of the of administrative formations of the native population during Roman time32. Fortified
settlement is likely to have been abandoned and the population moved to open settlements, which are
easily controllable areas. The presence of fortifications, which could represent coagulation points of
revolts could not be accepted by the Roman state, in a new zone included within the borders. In this
region this target will be taken up by the Roman camps along the limes.
Extensive research field carried on both sides of the Danube, more extensive South of the
Danube, between Svishtov and Krivina completes the data we have about the area in the pre-Roman
period and offers a possible model for territorial organization. It was noted that the North and North-
West region of Bjala (fortification located at South of Krivina and dated in the Latène period)
settlements occupy an area of about 10,000 square meters and are arranged like a network, the
distance of approximately 4-5 km each other and on the valley South of Svishtov, each settlement
occupies under 5000 m2 and the access to water is lacking. From these settlements comes a small

27 Irimia 2007, 137-141.

28 Irimia 1980, 66-118, especially 115 (map); Irimia 1983, 69-148, especially 75 (map).
29 Irimia 2007, 150-153.
30 The newest hypothesis regarding the limits of the territory belongs to A. Bâltâc (Bâltâc 2011, 109), who
believes that the status of municipium since the founding implies also a large territory, which does not reach
the Danube; In addition, there is no other important center in the area whose territory could limit the territory
awarded to Tropaeum. In the author's opinion the estimated area of land would be about 3500 km2.
31 Irimia 2007, 150-153.
32 Bâltâc 2011, 267-268.

https://biblioteca-digitala.ro
A Changing Landscape: the Organization of the Roman Road Network. in Moesia Inferior. 157

amount of pottery, which may be an indication for short periods of use or for their seasonal nature.
Most of them date back to the Hallstatt and data for the next era are much less common33.
The results of an extensive field research project conducted by a joint Bulgarian-British team
provide us a hint about how the landscape, incorporating Getae settlements continuing to exist, might
have looked after the Roman conquest. Towards the northern parts of the territory of Nicopolis ad
Istrum the interpretation of the survey’s results shows the existence of two different types of villas,
with and without associated settlements. “Those with associated settlements, which lie towards the
northern boundary of Nicopolis’ lands, may be estates that were not relocated when the city was
founded but continued to be owned by the Getae aristocracy. If so, the communities of estate-workers
living close by may have been natives who continued to be dependant upon the same landowning
families as they had been during the pre-Roman period. At any event, the distinction between the two
types of villa – and their geographical separation – remains a feature of the Roman landscape,
whatever the explanation for it may be” 34.
Other characteristics of this area landscape are the burial mounds. Although the information
at our disposal about the time of their construction is very scarce we can suppose that some of them
are dated during the Roman time. Originally, a funeral practice of the Thracian and Scythian elites
was also adopted by the Greeks and Romans 35, as it is proved by the excavations in the cemetery of
the Greek colony of Histria, located on the Black Sea coast36. According to a recent research, based on
an integrated programme of aerial photography and satellite remote sensing to identify and map
barrow cemeteries and settlements, there are 8758 burial mound on the southern parts of Dobrudja.
They are associated with the large towns and their road networks, being also relevant for the lanscape.
Preliminary results of this project allow the reconstruction of the secondary road network inside the
province and provide a glimpse on settlements patern, too37.
In the case of prehistoric tumuli we know that they were built in locations with good visibility.
Others may indicate movement lines whose age is difficult to determine. A comparison of the
archaeological map of the barrow cemeteries with the one resulting from the interpretation of satellite
images, shows a much higher density of them than it was previously assumed by traditional research
methods.
Another important observation is their concentration on a diagonal line extending from the
area Durostorum - Izvoarele, on the Danube to the Black Sea coast, to Callatis and further to the south.
This data also confirmed the existence of a inland route of travel starting from the Greek colonies,
whose previously route it could only be presumed based on Greek pottery discovered in settlements
located along it38.
The discovery of Greek artifacts primarily amphorae, proves the connections, above all
commercials, between Getae and Greeks from the colonies. In the settlements from Izvoarele, Satu Nou
and Adâncata supposedly even some emporia were functionning in the pre-Roman times39. Let us not
forget that along this route, in Roman times, there is a well documented Greek community at Urluia 40,
in territory administered by the city of Tropaeum.

33 Conrad, Stančev 2002, 673-684; Conrad 2006, 312-314; Conrad 2008, 68-81. See also Tomas 2009, 31-47.
34 Poulter 2007a, 361-384; Poulter 2007b, 51-101; Poulter 2007c, 583-595; Tsurov 2007, 581-583; Boyd 2007, 597-
609.
35 See for example Crowley 2009, 113-126, Eckardt et alii 2009, 65-98.
36 Alexandrescu 1966; Angelescu 2009, 1-17.
37 Oltean 2013, 202–219.
38 Irimia 2007, 168.
39 Irimia 2007, 169-174, especially 173-174.
40 Barnea 1969, 595-609, no. 2 and 3.

https://biblioteca-digitala.ro
158 Adriana PANAITE

A similar situation is well documented also for Axiopolis, which was involved in the transit
trade with cereals from the Romainian Plain (Bărăgan) along the Carasu valley, to Tomi41. This is also
the shortest link across Dobrudja, from the Black Sea coast to the Danube. The two paths of circulation
will be taken over by the Romans and later transformed into real "highways".
Ancient sources provide information about two operations of transfers of population in the
area, which according to sources would have been uninhabited. Performed during the first century,
the two well-known operations belong to Aelius Catus42 and Silvanus Aelianus43. Romanian
historiography has challenged, with various arguments - archaeologically included44, the
interpretation that the area would have been deserted, while Bulgarian historiography supports the
colonization of South Dobrudja with Thracian elements45.
Very likely the area was depopulated after frequent clashes in the area, but not so, as to arrive
at the idea of a desolate region. In the population transfers we have to see rather the imperial
authorities' actions organizing and strengthening the area near the border, doubled by an economic
interest46. This action was primarily of a fiscal nature, as is apparent from the inscription, which
praises Tiberius Plautius Silvanus Aelianus: ad praestanda tributa, but also with immediate
consequences: primus ex ea provincia magno tritici modo annonam p(opuli) R(omani) adlevavit 47. Allthough
we cannot trace this transfer in the archaeological data it is clear that it increased pressure on the food
and water supplies and on the environment in which the displaced people settled.
The existence of local Getae should be extended also to the Roman times, as it is demonstrated
not only by archaeological and epigraphic sources, dating from the second and third centuries, but
also by the toponims, especially those ending in -dava, belonging to the broader category of Geto-
Dacian toponims48.
The province of Moesia inferior was crossed by important, long-distance, north-south and east-
west routes (fig. 1). Because of its position, it was an important link between the Danube provinces,
Orient and Upper Italy and there was a particular military need to allow the passage of large bodies of
troops.
For the first time, Moesia inferior saw properly constructed roads built with military precision,
providing links between settlements and allow quick movement within province, both for civilians
and for the army, if needed.
Articles and monographies published in the last years gives us now an overview49 of the
Roman road network in the province of Moesia inferior. Though so far little traces of Roman roads are
preserved, their route can be reconstructed, especially based on milestones inscriptions and

41 Suceveanu 1977, 105; Suceveanu 1998, 45.

42 Strabo 7, 3, 10.
43 CIL XIV 3608; Conole, Milns 1983, 183-200.
44 Suceveanu 1977, 20, 21, 31-34.
45 Torbatov 1997, 507-514.
46 Mrozewicz 2013, 424-442.
47 Batty 2007, 404-405, 407 is of a slighty different opinion, according to him: „He (Catus n.n.) may not so much
have „transplanted” these Getae, as allowed them free access.”, as an element of deliberate policy of the
Romans bringing across of tribes considered friendly to secure territory. „Quite probably, Silvanus responded
to a situation which was already in motion – admiting refugees from wars which were occuring without
Roman participation, and brokering deals between the various factions”. In a recent article M. Boatwright
(Boatwright 2015, 122-146) argues that the populations transfer „were contested at Rome, because they did not
demonstrate Rome’s military superiority” (Boatwright 2015, 139).
48 Suceveanu, Barnea 1991, 34-39.
49 Madzarov 2004; Torbatov 2004, 76-96; Madzarov 2009; Panaite, Alexandrescu 2009, 429-455; Panaite 2011;
Panaite 2012a, 67-80; Panaite 2012b, 131-143; Panaite 2013, 69-76; Fodorean 2014, 40-45, 56-58, 116-148.

https://biblioteca-digitala.ro
A Changing Landscape: the Organization of the Roman Road Network. in Moesia Inferior. 159

carthographical sources50. The main roads in the area are the so-called limes road, along the Danube
and the road along the Black Sea coast.
The road along the Danube (limes) was primarily of strategic military importance.
Fortifications and both watch and signal towers were positioned along it at set distances. The road
started from Singidunum and ran in its entirety on the right bank of the river 51. Having reached the
mouth of the Danube it turned along the Black sea coast and ran to Constantinople.
Road construction along the Danube on the route Singidunum – Viminacium – Ratiaria – Oescus
– Novae – Durostorum and further to the river delta began in the reign of Tiberius 52 (work in the
Djerdap or Iron Gate) and was continued in the time of Claudius53. In 93–94 Domitian ordered a
reconstruction of this road, which was deteriorated for lack of use in the preceding years54. Trajan
continued its construction in preparation for his Dacian campaign, reaching across the whole area to
the Danube Delta55.
The road along the Black sea coast connected urban centers of ancient tradition, from the Delta
of the Danube to the later imperial capital in Constantinople56. Its role was mainly commercial,
although being the main route up from the south it had its strategic importance as well. Initially, this
Greek path was little more than a “country road”, so to speak, most of the traffic going by sea, but the
Romans transformed it into a proper road. During the numerous conflicts from the area this road had
mostly a military significance. For Lucullus and Hybrida’s campaigns this way represents the most
important access road to the north. Trajan also will use it during the war with Decebal. Exiled from
Rome, Ovid will travel the same way on his journey to the remote city of Tomi57.
There were another two roads parallel with the limes one, crossing Lower Danube area from
West to East, at the foot of the Balkan Mountains, passing through Bononia – Montana – Čomakovci –
Melta – Nicopolis ad Istrum – Marcianopolis – Odessos, and south to north, crossing Dobrudja, from
Noviodunum and Aegyssus to Marcianopolis, passing through Zaldapa, Tropaeum Traiani, Medgidia and
Ulmetum.
The central section of the road from Marcianopolis to Melta was built in the second part of the
reign of Trajan, immediately after the inauguration of the cities of Nicopolis ad Istrum and
Marcianopolis. At this time Melta was already a functioning station on the road from Oescus to
Philippopolis. The road was extended subsequently to the east, up to Montana, and subsequently to the
west, to Odessos. The construction of the other road was started with all likelihood in the time of

50 Panaite 2012b, 131-143; Panaite 2015a, 593-600.

51 Ivanov 1999, 277-290; Madzarov 2009, 131-184; Fodorean 2014b, 215-230.
52 The earliest information on road construction in the Iron Gates area is dated 33-34 AD. The construction
works in the area were made by legions (IV Scythica and V Macedonia) as results from two identical
inscriptions carved in stone at Gospodin Vir and Lepenski Vir: Ti. Caesare Au[g(usti) f(ilio)]/ Augusto
imperato[re]/ pont(ifice) max(imo) tr(ibunicia) pot(estate)/ XXXV leg(io) IIII Scyt(hica) leg(io) V Maced(onica). - cf.
Mirković 1996, 30, note 15.
53 The text of the inscription from the time of Claudius: Ti. Claudio Drusi f(ilio) Caesare/ Aug(usto) Germanico
pontif(ice) max(imo)/ trib(unicia) pot(estate) VI imp. XII p(atre) p(atriae) con)s(ule) desig(nato) IIII / leg(io) IIII
Scyth(ica) leg(io) V Mac(edonica) montibus ex[cisis an]con[ibus .../ Ma]r(tii) Macri leg(ati) Aug(usti) propr(aetore);
inscripţia se datează în anul 46. - cf. Petrović 1986, 41-52.
54 ILJug 55: Imp(erator) Caesar divi / Vespasiani f(ilius) Domi/[tianus] Aug(ustus) Germ(anicus) pont(ifex) / maximus
trib(unicia) pot(estate) XII / imp(erator) XXII co(n)s(ul) XVI censor / perpetuus p(ater) p(atriae) i[t]er Scor/fularum
vetu[s]tate [e]t / incursu Danuvi c[or]/ruptum operibu[s i]/teratis O(?)[---] / LEG[---]; ILJug 58: Imp(erator) Caesar
[divi] / Vespasian[i f(ilius) Domi]/[tianus Aug(ustus) Germani]/cus pont(ifex) m[ax(imus) tr(ibunicia) p(otestate) XII] /
impe[r(ator) XXII co(n)s(ul) XVI cen]/sor perp(etuus) [p(ater) p(atriae) iter Scor]/[f]ularum [vetustate et in]/cursu
Danu[vi corr]uptu[m] / oper[ibus iterat]is re[s]/titui[t ---.
55 Ivanov 1999, 277-290; Madzarov 2009, 131-184.
56 Suceveanu 1992, 195-223; Madzarov 2009, 184-202.
57 Batty 2007, 426.

https://biblioteca-digitala.ro
160 Adriana PANAITE

Hadrian, during the administrative reorganization of the province and, as it is also proved by some
milestones inscription58.
Connections between the main roads and both the settlements from inside or the camps on the
Danube were assured by secondary roads, developed with the passing of time and the consolidation
of the Romans across the region59. For some of them, especially those connecting the Danube with the
Black Sea coast it is possible to suppose older ways of trade and communication, as it is the case, for
example for the roads Durostorum - Callatis/Tomi and Axiopolis - Tomi mentioned above.
It is important to point out that the inland road network is based mainly on civil settlements -
cities. But, even for some of them, results or interpretations of the latest research seems to demonstrate
the existence of small wooden fortifications which were operating very short period of time, before the
founding of the cities, as is the case for example of Nicopolis ad Istrum60.
Roman road network in the province of Moesia inferior is organized during the reign of Trajan.
In preparation for the war with Dacians important military forces are displaced in the area, are built
military fortifications and Via Egnatia is repaired. All those actions show a carefully considered and
very strategically elaborated measures in the region, undertaken most probably in the personal
presence of the emperor himself. Based on information provided by the data founding of several cities
in Thrace were highlighted three major ways of advancing from south to north (fig. 2)61. In the eastern
part of the province a line is formed by the cities of Marcianopolis, Ulpia Anchialos and Ulpia Bizye. This
road goes further north in the direction of Tropaeum Traiani. From Marcianopolis a road was advancing
northwards directly to the legionary camp of Durostorum, on the Danube. A second line connects
Nicopolis ad Istrum, Augusta Traiana, Plotinopolis and Traianopolis with two important settlements on the
Danube – Sexaginta Prista and Novae. The third line is linking Ulpia Serdica, Ulpia Pautalia, Ulpia
Nicopolis ad Mestum, which were connected with Oescus and Ratiaria. All this lines are turned in very
important roads, used till the end of antiquity.
The military function of a road is perhaps the most important. The Roman army was thus „the
cause” and the „result” of the Roman roads network in the region. The road appears along with the
military conflicts, is built by the military and is mainly circulated by military units. But the army does
not influence only the roads; it is also the main factor to shape the economy and local production. The
numerous military troops quartered in the province and the civil settlements acompanying them need
food supply and building materials 62. As a consequence the landscape is transform by the appearance
of a lot of rural settlements and villas and a new way of making agriculture63.
The large military presence, which is normal for a border area, may give the impression of the
absence of cities. They are not lacking. Allthough less numerous they are developing both in the
hinterland of the province (Tropaeum Traiani, Montana?), and on the Danube, where, after leaving
legions appear a colonia, Oescus and municipia from Novae, Durostorum, Troesmis and Noviodunum.
Besides them there are other settlements resembling cities, some vici included64.
The reigns of Trajan and Hadrian are defining for the admnistrative and military organization
of the province. After the reorganization of the border between the Thrace and Moesia inferior, in 136
AD65, is following a period of peace. The region flourishes, a lot of veterans and newcomers are

58 Panaite 2012b, 131-143.

59 Panaite 2006, 57-80; Panaite 2010, 373-380; Gugl, Panaite forthcoming.
60 Vladkova 2000-2001, 100-107; Vladkova 2002, 30-35. Paunov, Topalilov 2013.
61 Boteva 2014, 195–204.
62 Duch 2015, 235-260
63 Bărbulescu 2001; Bâltâc 2011.
64 Tatcheva 2004, 43-81; Aparaschivei 2010.
65 There were found several inscriptions with an almost text identical which refers to setting boundaries inter
Moesos et Thraces in 136 AD by Antius Rufinus, special envoy of the emperor: Butovo (ILB 429), Hotnitsa (ILB
386), Maslarevo (ILB 358), Polski Senovets (ILB 390), Svishtov (ILB 357); Staklen (IGLN 72); east of the village

https://biblioteca-digitala.ro
A Changing Landscape: the Organization of the Roman Road Network. in Moesia Inferior. 161

settling down in the province. The region represents a gateway for both goods and people. The
imperial control of the area guarantees the stability and the good functionning of the economy and
trade, also the general development of the area. It is no less true that this is achived by an increasingly
accentuated military control, primarily on cities. As a consequence we can easily speak about the
militarization of the region, proved by a lot of small fortifications built in the territories of the cities,
near the mountain passes or along the roads 66.
It is still difficult to assess accurately what effect the Roman conquest and the subsequent
period of Roman occupation had on the development of the landscape 67. Clearly, large numbers of
new features were introduced, new types of settlement were constructed and new activities were
carried out.
There can be emphasized few aspects in which the landscape was transformed under the
roman rule: changes in pattern of rural settlements, changes in the nature of land use and agrarian
exploitation and changes in organizing the road network.
Roman elements were identified at different levels: administrative, military, economic, social
and so on. During this period this area gets a number of new features which are defining a new
reality. The Romans preserved some of the existing elements and added to them new ones; new
settlements and forms of organization and as an integrative element have developed a road network.
Topography and the water courses are the major factors in determining the access network
throughout the area. The main trade and communication routes give more structure than before to the
organisation of the landscape and the emergence of settlement. This influenced the location of the
military camps, which in turn influenced the construction of the road network. The Roman army was
clearly an important factor in Moesia inferior. Military sites are associated with the emergence of
romanised settlements, canabae and vici, which played an important role in the urbanisation of the
province. Many army veterans were colonised in the province as landowners (legionary veterans) or
as the inhabitants of towns and some of them became active in local municipal administration. Vici as
well as the canabae provided important centres for a large number of activities and services directed at
both the army and the civilians, including industry, trade, transport and religious activities. Through
their functions these sites had a huge impact and contributed to the rapid romanization of the
territory. More than in terms of administration or markets, the Roman army crucially influenced the
development of the rural landscape through the construction and maintenance of the communication
system. This influenced the location of settlements and made the whole province mechanism work.

of Roman, 100 km West of Novae (ILB 184; AE 2004, 1306). It might have been another one at Radanovo
(Gerasimova Tomova 1987, 17-21). - For their interpretation see Kolendo 1975, 83-94; Kolendo 1976, 45-67;
Bożilova et alii 1992, 87-90; Tomas 2009, 31-47. For the border between Moesia and Thrace see Tatcheva 2000,
60-61 and Tatcheva 2004, 86-89 (discussing also the previous bibliography).
66 Nikolov 1994, 125-131.
67 Panaite 2015b, 17-50.

https://biblioteca-digitala.ro
162 Adriana PANAITE

Bibliography

Alexandrescu, P. 1966, Necropola tumulară (Săpături 1955-1961), in: Condurachi, Em. (ed.), Histria II,
Bucureşti, 133-295.
Angelescu, M. 2009, Invetarierea tumulilor din zona Histria – un demers GIS, BCMI 20, 1-2, 1-17.
Aparaschivei, D. 2010, Oraşele romane de la Dunărea Inferioară, Iaşi.
Aston, M. 1985, The Landscape. Landscape archaeology and local history, London.
Babeș, M. 1994, Bastarni (s.v.), in: EAIVR, vol. I (A-C), 164-166.
Barnea, Al. 1969, Trei altare inedite de la Tropaeum Traiani, SCIVA 20/ 4, 595-609.
Batty, R. 2007, Rome and the nomads. The Pontic-Danubian Realm in Antiquity, Oxford.
Bărbulescu, M. 2001, Viaţa rurală în Dobrogea romană (sec. I-III p. Chr), Constanţa.
Bâltâc, A. 2011, Lumea rurală în provinciile Moesia inferior şi Thracia (secolele I-III p. Chr), Bucureşti.
Bârcă, V. 2006, Sarmații – aliați ai dacilor în războaiele contra Romei, in: Teodor E. S., Țentea, O. (eds.) Dacia
Augusti provincia. Crearea provinciei. Actele simpozionului desfăşurat în 13-14 octombrie 2006 la
Muzeul Naţional de Istorie a României, 3-28.
Bârcă, V. 2013, Nomads of the Steppes by the Danube Frontier of the Roman Empire in the 1st Century AD.
Historical Sketch and Chronological Remarks, Dacia N.S. 57, 99-125.
Boatwright, M. 2015, Acceptance and approval: Romans’ Non-Roman population transfers, 180 B.C.E – ca 70 C.E.,
Phoenix 69, 1-2, 122-146.
Boteva, D. 2014, Trajan and his cities in Thrace: Focusing on the two Nicopoleis, in: Piso, I., Varga, R. (Hrsg.),
Trajan und seine Städte. Colloquium Cluj Napoca (29 September – 2 Oktober 2013), Cluj-Napoca,
195-205.
Boyd, M. J. 2007, Geophysical survey and the rural settlement architecture on the Lower Danube and the transition
to Late Antiquity, in: Poulter, A. (ed.), The transition to Late Antiquity. On the Danube and Beyond,
London, 597-609.
Bożilova, V., Kolendo, J., Mrozewicz, L. (eds.), Inscriptions latines de Novae, Poznań.
Conole, P., Milns, R.D. 1983, Neronian frontier policy in the Balkans: the career of Ti. Plautius Silvanus, Historia
32, 2, 183-200.
Conrad, S. 2006, Archaeological survey on the Lower Danube: Results and Perspective, in: Guldager Bilde, P.,
Stolba, V.F. (eds.), Surveying the Greek Chora. The Black Sea region in a comparative perspective.
International Conference, Sandbjerg, Denmark (31 August – 3 September 2003), Aarhus, 309-331.
Conrad, S. 2008, Die Besiedlung um Iatrus und Novae an der Unteren Donau, in: Ivanov, R. (ed), Roman and
Early Settlements in Bulgaria, vol. III, Sofia, 68-81.
Conrad, S., Stančev, D. 2002, Archaeological survey on the Roman frontier on the Lower Danube between Novae ans
Sexaginta Prista. Preliminary report (1997-2000), in: Freeman, Ph., Bennett, J., Fiema Z.T.,
Hoffmann, B. (eds.), Limes XVIII. Proceedings of the XVIIIth International Congress of Roman
Frontier Studies held in Amman, Jordan (Septembrie 2000). BAR IntSer 1084, Oxford, 673-681.
Crowley, L. 2009, Creating a Community: The Symbolic Role of Tumuli in the Villa Landscape of the Civitas
Tungrorum, in: Driessen, M., Heeren, S., Hendriks, J., Kemmers, F., Visser, R. (eds.), TRAC
2008: Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference, Amsterdam
2008, Oxford, 113-126.
Duch, M. 2015, The impact of Roman army on trade and production in Lower Moesia (Moesia inferior), Studia
Europaea Gnesnensia 11, 235-260.
Eckardt, H., Brewer, P., Hay, S. Poppy, S. 2009 Roman Borrows and their landscape context: a GIS case study at
Bartlow, Cambridgeshire, Britannia 40, 65-98.
Fasolo, M. 2005, La Via Egnatia2. Viae Publicae Romane I, Roma.
Fodorean, F. 2014a, Pannonia, Dacia și Moesia în izvoarele cartografice antice, Cluj-Napoca.
Fodorean, F. 2014b, The Danubian road from Viminacium to Durostorum in the Roman itineraries, Dacia N.S. 58,
215-230.
Gerasimova Tomova, V. 1987, Zur Grenzbestimmung zwischen Möesien und Thrakien in der Umgebunung von
Nicopolis ad Istrum in der ersten Hälfte des 2. Jh. n. Chr., Tyche 2, 17-21.

https://biblioteca-digitala.ro
A Changing Landscape: the Organization of the Roman Road Network. in Moesia Inferior. 163

Gerov, B. 1988, Landownership in Roman Thracia and Moesia, Amsterdam.

Geografia 1989 - Geographia na Bâlgarija. Fizikogeografsko i sotsialno-ikonomitchesko raionirane, tom III, Sofia.
Gugl, C., Panaite, A. 2016 - Altstraßen und Fundstellen im Umland von Troesmis, in: Alexandrescu, C.-G., Gugl,
C., Kainrath, B. (Hrsg.), Troesmis I. Forschungen von 2010-2014. Cluj-Napoca.
Irimia, M. 1980, Date noi privind aşezările getice din Dobrogea în a doua epocă a fierului, Pontica 13, 66-118.
Irimia, M. 1981, Observaţii preliminare privind aşezarea antică de la Gura Canliei, Pontica 14, 67-122.
Irimia, M. 1983, Date noi privind necropolele din Dobrogea în a doua epocă a fierului, Pontica 16, 69-148.
Irimia, M. 2000-2001, Despre sciţi şi Sciţia Mică în ultimele secole ale mileniului I a. Chr., Pontica 33-34, 299-317.
Irimia, M. 2007, Considerații privind aşezările getice din Dobrogea şi problema existenței unor emporia în zona
Dunării inferioare, Pontica 40, 137-227.
Irimia, M. 2010, Centres de pouvoir gètes préromains au sud-ouest de la Dobroudja. Réalités archéologiques et
certaines considérations historiques, Pontica 43, 83-128.
Ivanov, R. 1999, Dolnodunavskata otbranitelna sistema mejdu Dorticum i Durostorum ot Avgust do Mavrikii,
Sofia.
Ivanov, R. 2004, Castra – Canabae – Vicus (in Bulgarian with English summary), in: Ivanov, R. (ed.),
Arheologija na bâlgarskite zemi/Archaeology of the Bulgarian Lands, vol. I, Sofia, 172-182.
Jireček, K. 1932, Voennijat pât ot Bâlgrad za Tzarigrad i Balkanskit prohodi. Bâlgarska Istoritcheska Biblioteka 4,
Sofia.
Jireček, K. 1974, Pâtuvanija po Bâlgarija, Sofia, 1974.
Kolendo, J. 1975, Témoignages épigraphiques de deux opérations de bornage de territoires en Mésie inférieure et en
Thrace, Archeologia 26, 83-94.
Kolendo, J. 1976, Miasta i terytoria plemienne w prowincji Mezji Dolnej w okresie wczesnego cesarstwa, in:
Jaczynowska, M., Wolski, J. (pod redakcją), Prowincje rzymskie i ich znaczenie w ramach
Imperium, Wroclaw, 45-67.
Madzarov, M. 2004, Rimskijat pât Oescus – Philippopolis, Veliko Tarnovo.
Madzarov, M. 2009, Prinos v historijata na pâtna mreja v Mezija i Trakija/ Contribution to the Development of
Roman Road System in the Provinces of Moesia and Thrace, Veliko Tarnovo.
Matei-Popescu, F. 2010, The Roman Army in Moesia inferior, Bucharest.
Mirković, M. 1996, The Iron Gates (Đerdap) and the roman policy on the moesian limes AD 33-117, in: Petrović, P.
(ed.), Roman limes on the Middle and Lower Danube, Belgrad, 27-40.
Mrozewicz, L. 2013, Resettlement into the Roman territory across the Rhine and the Danube under the Early Empire
(to the Marcomanic wars), Eos 100/ fasciculus extra ordinem editus electronicus, 424-442 (= Eos
57, 1987/1, 107-128).
Nikolov, D. 1994, Ohranata na pâtishtata v rimska Trakija i Mizija, in Poselishten jivot. Studies in settlement life in
Ancient Thrace. Proceedings of the IIIrd International Symposium „Cabyle”, 17-21 May 1993, Jambol, 125-
131.
Oltean, I. 2013, Burial mounds and settlement patterns: a quantitative approach to their identification from the air
and interpretation, Antiquity 87, 202–219.
Oța, L. 2013, Lumea funerară în Moesia inferior (sec. I-III p. Chr), Brăila.
Panaite, A. 2006, Drumuri romane din teritoriul oraşului Tropaeum Traiani, SCIVA 57/1-4, 57-80.
Panaite, A. 2010, Roman Roads from the territory of Histria (1st-3rd c. AD), in: Angelescu, M.V., Achim, I.,
Bâltâc, A., Rusu-Bolindeţ, V., Bottez,V. (eds.), Antiquitas Istro-Pontica. Mélanges d' archéologie et
d'histoire ancienne offerts à Alexandru Suceveanu, Cluj, 373-380.
Panaite, A. 2011, Drumurile romane în Moesia inferior (PhD-thesis, unpublished).
Panaite, A. 2012a, Written and archaeological sources for the reconstruction of the Roman roads network in the
province of Lower Moesia, Caiete ARA 3, 67-80.
Panaite, A. 2012b, Roman roads in Lower Moesia. Epigraphical evidence, Novensia 23, 131-143.
Panaite, A. 2013, Milestones indicating distances from Moesia inferior, Caiete ARA 4, 69-76.
Panaite, A. 2015a, Roman roads in Moesia inferior, in: Vagalinski, L., Sharankov, N. (eds.), Limes XXII.
Proceedings of the 22nd International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies Ruse, Bulgaria, September
2012. Bulletin of the National Archaeological Institute 42, Sofia, 593-600.

https://biblioteca-digitala.ro
164 Adriana PANAITE

Panaite, A. 2015b, Roman Landscape in Moesia inferior: Preliminary Observations, in: Boroneanţ, A. Popescu,
A.D. (eds.), What if: Administration and Politics in the Lands of Romania, Cluj-Napoca.
Panaite, A., Alexandrescu, C.-G. 2009, A „rediscovered” inscription from Dobrudja. Roads and milestones in
Scythia (3rd – 4th centuries AD), Pontica 42, 429-455.
Paunov, E. Topailov, I. 2013, Nicopolis before Nicopolis ad Istrum: what has been there?, Poster presented at the
Fifth Black Sea Antiquities Congress, Belgrade, 17-21 September 2013 (www.academia.edu/
Evgeni Paunov [accessed 12 January 2015]).
Petrovič, P. 1986, Rimski put u Đerdapu, Starinar 37, 41-52.
Poulter, A. 2007a, The Bulgarian-British research programme in the countryside and on the site of an early byzantine
fortress: the implications for the Lower Danube in the 5th to 6th centuries AD, in: Vagalinski, L.
(ed.), The Lower Danube in Antiquity (VI C BC – VI C AD). International Archaeological Conference
Bulgaria-Tutrakan, 6-7.10.2005, Sofia, 361-384.
Poulter, A. 2007b, The transition to Late Antiquity on the Lower Danube: the City, a Fort, and the Countryside, in:
A. Poulter (ed.), The transition to Late Antiquity. On the Danube and Beyond, London, 51-101.
Poulter, A. 2007c, Site-specific field survey: the methodology, in: Poulter, A. (ed.), The transition to Late Antiquity.
On the Danube and Beyond, London, 583-595.
Suceveanu, Al. 1977, Viaţa economică în Dobrogea romană, Bucureşti.
Suceveanu, Al. 1992, Die römischen Verteidigungsanlagen an der Küste der Dobrudscha, Bonner Jahrbücher 192,
195-223.
Suceveanu, Al. 1998, Fântânele. Contribuţii la studiul vieţii rurale în Dobrogea romană, Bucureşti.
Suceveanu, Al., Barnea, Al. 1991, La Dobroudja romaine, Bucarest.
Tatcheva, M. 2000, Vlast i sotzium v rimska Trakija i Mizija, Sofia.
Tatcheva, M. 2004, Vlast i sotzium v rimska Trakija i Mizija, kniga 2, Sofia.
Todorova, H., Iordanov, K., Velkov, V., Torbatov, S. 2011, Istorija na Dobrudza, tom I, Veliko Tarnovo.
Tomas, A. 2009, Inter Moesos et Thraces. A contribution to the studies on the rural hinterland of Novae in Lower
Moesia, Archeologia 58 (2007), 31-47.
Torbatov, S. 1997, The Getae în the Southern Dobrudja in the period of Roman domination: archaeological aspects, in:
Actes 2e Symposium international des etudes thraciennes „Thrace ancienne”, vol. II, Komotini, 507-514.
Torbatov, S. 2004, Road network in Thrace and Moesia (Ist – III rd C AD) (in Bulgarian with English summary), in:
Ivanov, R. (ed.), Arheologija na bâlgarskite zemi/Archaeology of the Bulgarian Lands, vol. I, Sofia, 76-
95.
Tsurov, I. 2007, Field survey in North Central Bulgaria, in: Poulter, A. (ed.), The transition to Late Antiquity. On
the Danube and Beyond, London, 581-583.
Țentea, O. 2016, About the roman frontier on the Lower Danube under Trajan, in: Panaite, A., Cîrjan, R., Căpiță,
C. (eds.), Moesica et Christiana. Studies in the honour of Professor Alexandru Barnea, Brăila, 85-93.
Vladkova, P. 2000-2001, Naj rannijat Nicopolis ad Istrum, Izvestija na Muzejte Veliko Tarnovo 15-16, 100-107.
Vladkova, P. 2002, The earliest Nicopolis ad Istrum, in: Ruseva-Slokoska, L., Ivanov, R., Dinchev, V. (eds), The
Roman and Late Roman City, The International Conference Veliko Turnovo 26-30 July 2000, Sofia,
30-35.
Vulpe, R., Barnea, I. 1968, Din istoria Dobrogei. Romanii la Dunărea de Jos, vol. II, București.
Wells, P. S. 2005, Creating an Imperial Frontier: Archaeology of the Formation of Rome’s Danube Borderland,
Journal of Archaeological Research 13, 1, 49-88.
Witcher, R. 1997, Roman Roads: phenomenological perspectives on roads in the landscape, in: Forcey, C.
Hawthorne, J., Witcher, R. (eds.), TRAC 7. Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Theoretical Roman
Archaeology Conference, Oxford, 60-70.

https://biblioteca-digitala.ro