PIOTR DYCZEK

CENTRE D’ARCHÉOLOGIE MÉDITERRANÉENNEDE L’ACADÉMIE POLONAISE DES SCIENCES

ÉTUDES et TRAVAUXXX

2005

What, where, when, and why.....On some dipinti and stamps

from the Pontic region

PIOTR DYCZEK70

It is not without some trepidation that I undertake this article for the volume in honorof Zofia ���������, an eminent scholar and expert in the field. I had not realized until Istarted collecting material for this text what scrupulousness, patience, perseverance andcomprehensive knowledge Professor ��������� has always represented in her work. Toparaphrase words from another sphere and time, hardly ever do objects so small require soHerculean an effort for their secrets to be revealed.

My interest in stamps and dipinti grows from a study of the finds originating from theexcavations at Novae, where this category of epigraphical evidence is frequent in the as-semblage of pottery sherds belonging to amphorae. Naturally, the inscriptions cannot bestudied out of a broader context. The provisional results of various petrographic and otherstudies have indicated the presence among the finds from Novae of a certain group ofpottery containers originating from the Black Sea manufacturing centers (Fig. 1).

Whole and fragmentary amphorae have been found in an area designated as Sector IV,situated in the praetentura of the fortress of the First Italic Legion. They come from twolegionary buildings: the baths and a hospital1 (Fig. 2). The baths were erected in the sec-ond half of the 1st century A.D. and dismantled by the end of the age.2 The construction ofthe valetudinarium fell in the early 2nd century A.D. and it was not abandoned until thetimes of Caracalla.3 The amphorae were gathered in the tabernae of the baths and in thesmall vestibules preceding the rooms for patients in the hospital, as well as in special

1. Localisation of Novae in Moesia Inferior (after J. KOLENDO, V. BOLOVA, Inscriptions greques et romaines deNovae (Mésie Inférieure), Bordeaux 1997, Fig. 1.

1 P. DYCZEK, Novae – Western Sector (Section IV), 1997–1999, Archeologia 51, 2000, pp. 89–96; ID., Rzymskiszpital legionowy w Novae, Archiwum Historii i Filozofii Medycyny 63, 2, 2000, pp. 113–128.

2 P. DYCZEK, Novae – Western Sector, 1996, Archeologia 48, 1998, pp. 43 f.3 P. DYCZEK, Remarks on supply of the Roman army from the point of view of the valetudinarium at Novae

(Moesia Inferior), Limes XVIII. Proceedings of the XVIIIth International Congress of Roman Frontier Studiesheld in Amman, Jordan (September 2000), BAR IS 1084 (II), 2002, pp. 685–694.

71ON SOME DIPINTI

amphorae stores inside the hospital.4 Typologically, these vessels are not very varied, rep-resenting all of five types: Zeest 64-94/Dyczek 28,5 Zeest 75/Dyczek 32,6 Zeest 77/Dyczek33,7 Zeest 90/Dyczek 258 and Zeest 93/Dyczek 299 (Fig. 3).

2. Castrum of Legio I Italica (elaborated P. Dyczek, J. Janowski).

4 P. DYCZEK, Remarks on the Roman Amphorae at Novae from the first to the third century A.D., Novensia 9,1997, pp. 91–96.

5 P. DYCZEK, Roman Amphorae of the 1st–3rd centuries A.D. found on the Lower Danube. Typology. Warsza-wa 2001 [= Roman Amphorae], pp. 202 f.

6 Ibid., p. 233.7 Ibid., p. 239.8 Ibid., pp. 173–176.9 Ibid., p. 221.

PIOTR DYCZEK72

Amphorae of the first type, Dyczek 28, differ considerably in details of the form, whilepreserving the same principal tectonic features and the general characteristic of the ce-ramic matrix. The clay used in their manufacture is of a light brown color, hence Zeest’sclassification of “svetloglinjenyje”.10 In reality the ceramic matrix can vary from light redto light brown (Munsell soil color chart codes 5YR 7/2, 5YR 7/3, 7.5YR 7/4, 7.5YR 7/6,7.5YR 8/4, 10YR 7/4). Sand is apparent in quantities in the break, and so are plagioclases,crushed pottery and black pyroxene particles. Repetitive features of shape include a slightlyeverted rim forming a narrow roll on the outside. The long slender neck tends to bulgea bit at the point of handle attachment. The handles consist of two joined rolls of clay. Theplain heart-shaped body terminates in a small cylindrical solid foot.

The multitude of variants encompassed by this amphora type has resulted in the amphorae beingclassified differently by Russian archaeologists11 as well as by scholars from other countries.12

3. Types of amphorae from North Black Sea region (after the author).

10 I. B. ZEEST, Keramieskaja tara Bospora, Materialy i issledovanija po arheologii SSSR 83, 1960,[= Keramieskaja tara], pp. 118.

11 I. S. KAMIENIECKIJ, Svetloglinjanyje amfory iz Ni�nie-Gnilovskovo gradiša, KSIA 94, 1963, pp. 15 f;D. V. DEOPIK, O. JU. KRUG, Evoljucja uskogorlych svetloglinienych amfor z profilovanymi rukami, S.A. 3,1972, pp. 111; D.B. ŠELOV, Les amphores d’argile claire des premiers siècles de notre ère en Mer Noir, BCH,suppl. XIII, 1986 [= Les amphores], pp. 385–400; S. JU. VNUKOV, Priernomorski amfory I v. do n.e.–II v. n.e.(morfologija), Moskwa 2003 [= Priernomorski amfory], pp. 117 f.

12 H. S. ROBINSON, The Athenian Agora. Pottery of the Roman Period. Chronology V, Princeton-New Jer-sey 1959 [= Athenian Agora], pp. 51, 93; A. RADULESCU, Amfore romane �i romano-bizantine dîn Scythia Mi-nor, Pontica 9, 1976 [= Amfore romane], pp. 102, Pls. I 2, 2a, 3, 3 a; C. SCORPAN, Contribution à la connaisancede certains types céramiques romano-byzantins (IV–VII siècles) dans l’espace Istro-Pontique, Dacia XXI, 1977

73ON SOME DIPINTI

In my opinion, the typological series Zeest 64, 94, 104, 105 and perhaps the small formZeest 50 constitute a single typological series.13

Various scholars have also pointed out the formal ties of the discussed type withamphorae of the Dressel 28 and Gauloise 3 form.14 While such formal ties indeed exist, thedifferent genesis, separate areas of occurrence and the chronology of these types lead onerather to conclude that the similarities are due to an independent quest for an optimal formtaking into consideration volume and the mode of transport. These containers are not big,0,73 m in height at most,15 yet thanks to their specific form they had a relatively capaciousvolume, reaching from 4 to 8 liters of liquid (about 8 choinices).16

Both Rhodian17 and Coan18 products have been suggested as the source for this type ofamphora. However, physico-chemical analyses carried out on the material from Novaehave proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the manufacturing centers for these contain-ers were located at Sinope.19 Recently other scholars have begun to share this view.20

The place of manufacture considered, it is hardly surprising that containers of this type arewidespread in the Bosporan Kingdom and adjacent territories. Finds have been reported from:Tanais,21 Olbia, Scythian Neapolis, Iluraton Kimeryk, Tiritake, Mirmekion, Ker �Pantikapaion,Fanagoria etc.22 Amphorae of this type were especially popular among the Carpes whopopulated the region of modern Moldavia between the Prut and the Dniester in the 2ndand 3rd centuries A.D.23 They are also present on many sites in both the Moesia provinces,24

[ = Contribution]. p. 260; A. OPAIT, Consideratii preliminare asupra amforelor romane �i romano-bizantine dînDobrogea, Peuce VIII, 1980 [= Consideratii], p. 301; J. W. HAYES, The Villa Dionysos Excavation. Knossos,the Pottery, BSA 78, 1983 [= Villa Dionysos], p. 144; B. BÖTTGER, D.B.ŠELOV, Amphorendipinti aus Tanais,Pontus Septentrionalis I, Tanais 1, Moskau 1998 [= Amphorendipinti], p. 32.

13 DYCZEK, Roman Amphorae, p. 202.14 F. LAUBENHEIMER, Les amphores gauloises sous l’Empire. Recherches nouvelles sur leur production et

leur chronologie, Collection d’École Française de Rome 114, 1989, type 3; D.P.S. PEACKOCK, D. F. WILLIAMS,Amphorae and the Roman economy. An introductory guide, London 1986, class 29, 31; G. BERTUCCHI, Lesamphores massalietes à Marseille: les differentes productions, Études massalietes 2, 1992, Fig. 2, type 6,7

15 Ibid., 147.16 loc.cit.; ŠELOV, Les amphores, p. 397; OPAIT, Consideratii, pp. 301–302.17 I. B. BRAŠINSKIJ, Standarty rodoskih amfor, Kratkije soobš�enija Instituta arheologii AN SSSR 156, 1978

[= Standarty], pp. 11–16.18 E. M. ŠTAERMAN, Keramieskije klejma i� Tiry, Kratkije soobš�enija Instituta materialnoj kultury

XXXVI, 1951, p. 39; ŠELOV, Les amphores, p. 400.19 DYCZEK, Roman Amphorae, pp. 214 f.20 VNUKOV, Priernomorski amfory, pp. 147–150.21 T. M. ARSEN’EVA, S. NAUMIENKO, Kompleks nahodok i� podvala MB II–III v. po Chr., Vestnik Tanaisa I,

1994, pp. 73–74, Fig. 16, 1.22 ZEEST, Keramieskaja tara, pp. 118, 121–122; BRAŠINSKIJ, Standarty, p. 184; D. B. ŠELOV, Uskogorlyje

svetloglinienyje amfory pervih vekov našej ery. Klasyfikacija i hronologija, Kratkije soobš�enija Institutaarheologii AN SSSR 156, 1978, p. 19, type F; A.V. KROPOTKIN, V.V.KROPOTKIN, Severnaja granica razprostrenie-nija amfor rimskovo vremeni v ���������Evropie, in: Mogilniki �������������kultury, ed. V.V. KROPOTKIN,Moskva 1988, p. 170, Fig. 1.

23 GH. BICHIR, Archaeology and History of the Carpes, BAR IS 16, 1976, p. 3.24 L. BJELAJAC, Amfore Gornjo Mezijskogo Podunavlja, Beograd 1996, [= Amfore], pp. 66–67; A. BARNEA

et al., Tropeum Traiani I, Bucure�ti 1979, 179, Pl. 144, 3; S. SANIE, Douna mici depozite de amfore romane

PIOTR DYCZEK74

Lower Moesia in particular, e.g.: Aegyssus, Callatis, Dimum, Dinogetia, Kaliakra, Novio-dunum, Odessos, Tomi, Troesmis, Tropeum Traiani. Single examples of the type have beenrecorded in assemblages from the Athenian Agora, Corinth, Crete, Ostia and Rome.25

The first amphorae of this type are known from 1st century B.D. contexts, but they didnot become widely popular until the 2nd and 3rd centuries A.D. At Novae sherds of theseamphorae were discovered in assemblages together with fragments of terra sigillata from south-ern Gaul from before A.D. 79, a bronze coin of Drusus of A.D. 23 and a denarius of MarcAntony.26 At Barbo�i examples of these amphorae came from contexts dated by coins of MarcusAurelius, Septimius Severus, Severus Alexander, Gordian III, Philip Arab and Gallien,27 whilethe vessels discovered at Tanais originated from the first half of the 3rd century A.D.28

Stamped inscriptions are seldom found on these amphorae. When they do occur, theyconstitute the names of producers, e.g.: ���� ��� �� ��� ���� ��� ���� �� and���� – presumably abbreviations of names, either Diomedes or Diomenes.29 Abbrevia-tions of names were much more frequently rendered in paint on the vessel’s walls, sug-gesting that they referred to wine manufacturers responsible for the content of thesecontainers. Some are abbreviations of Greek names: ���������������� �������

���������������; others like ���������� -�� are apparently Iranian in origin, suchnames being characteristic of the Sarmatian inhabitants of Tanais.30 To judge from theabove, it would appear that the inscriptions refer to the contents, providing data on thespecific lot of wine and giving names of the owners presumably.

Wine was the chief product transported in these containers. Most of the inscriptionsexecuted in red paint on the surface of the vessels refer to the contents. The dipinti can befound in one of three positions: under the rim or in the upper part of the neck, in themiddle part of the neck and on the shoulders. Statistically speaking, all three positionswere equally eligible.31 Some of these inscriptions record the vessel’s volume, e.g. � or �,

descoperite în Moldavia, Studii �i Cercet�ri de Istorie Veche 19, 1968 [= Douna mici], pp. 349–350; GH. BICHIR,Ceramica de import amfore, Bucure�ti, 1973, pp. 90–92; ID., Archaeology and History of the Carpes, BAR IS16, 1976 [= Archaeology], pp. 80–81; RADULESCU, Amfore romane, p. 102; SCORPAN, Contribution, pp. 269–270; OPAIT, Consideratii, pp. 325–326; SANIE, Douna mici, pp. 130–144, Pls. 28, 31, 32, 35, 37, 4; A. SUCEVEANU,Les thermes romains, Histria VI, 1982, p. 104, Pl. 10.

25 K. W. SLANE, The Deposit from the Early Roman Cellar Building, Hesperia 55, 1986 [= Deposit], p. 298;HAYES, Villa Dionysos, p.147; C. PANELLA, Oriente e Occidente, considerazioni sul alcune anfore “egee” di etàimperiale, Ostia III. Studi Miscellanei 26, 1986, p. 628, Fig. 27.

26 M. ����������, ��!"���#��$�$�%�&�'�(�%����������)*��+,�������+��4 w principia w Novae, Novensia 11,1997, p. 185.

27 S. SANIE et al., Noi descoperiri de ceramica romana cu inscriptie în Moldova, Studii �i Cercet�ri deIstorie Veche 26, 1975, [= Ceramica romana], pp. 191–195; S. SANIE, Civilizatia Romana la est de Carpati ��romanistatea pe teritorium Moldovei, Secolele II î.e.n. – III e.n., Ia�i 1981, pp. 130, 134.

28 K. V. KOSTRIN, Issledovanija smolistovo osadka i� drevnih amfor najdenyh pri razkopkah Tanaisa, S.A. 3,1971, p. 265.

29 B. F. GAJDUKIEVI-, Keramieskij kompleks II v. po Chr. $� Mirmekija, Kratkije soobš�enija Institutaarheologii AN SSSR 95, 1963, p. 29; BICHIR, Archaeology, p. 81; SANIE et al., Ceramica romana, pp. 191–197;ID., pp. 138–144, Pls. 35, 36, 37.

30 BÖTTGER, ŠELOV, Amphorendipinti, pp. 74–80.31 Ibid., p. 40.

75ON SOME DIPINTI

and ��.32 Others describe the contents. A good example is a dipinti executed in black paint– a rarity with regard to these amphorae – on a vessel from the Athenian Agora: ����� ��

���������/!����"��#��, which means that “the wine, which had been seasoned in a doliumfor a year, was poured into the amphora in the fourteenth year of Hadrian’s reign”, that is,in A.D. 131.33 Another inscription, from Skalistoje in the Crimea, says: $!��� %&&&' (�)��

�)* ��$+� �,*, which means “sample from pithos 19, from which 12 jugs have been drawn”34.The following two inscriptions were recorded on amphorae found at Tanais: (�)��

�* ��$���� ��-*, that is, “(sample) from the first pithos, from which 477 jugs were drawn”and $!����+�� (�)�� )* ��$���� ��*, which means that this was a sample from the ninthpithos, from which 330 jugs were drawn.35

Dipinti often specify the kind of wine, for example: �������is red wine and �� !"��� isthe famed Phalernian wine. Of considerably greater interest, however, are the dipinti whichrefer to contents other than wine. They inform not merely of the products that were theobject of trade exchange, but, in an indirect manner, of the economic life of Tanais. Thefollowing have been noted: #"$%������$��� or barley beer, &� ' or milk, (� �))'�or honey.There are also other special products, like barley flour recorded with the abbreviation ���,presumably � ��)', balsam or *� +'(��, some sort of dye – *�((', and dates – *� '���.36

An unusual substance, ��./)0� or crude oil, has been recorded on many amphorae.37

This was presumably used as fuel in lighthouses, perhaps also in oil lamps and for domes-tic use.

Amphorae classified as Zeest 93/Dyczek 29 are occasionally mistaken with the previ-ous form and its variant D in particular,38 all the more so as they are also commonplace inassemblages of the 2nd and 3rd centuries A.D. in similarity to the Dyczek 28 type ofvessel. The rim is everted and triangular in section. A short conical neck gently turns intothe shoulders which join it to the heart-shaped body with shallow ridging. A small, undis-tinguished, hollow foot has a concave underside. The color of the clay used in the manu-facturing of these amphora is identified as 5YR 7/8, 2.5YR 7/8 on the Munsell soil colorcharts. The maximum height of the vessels is 0.97 m and the volume is 17 liters.

The source of origin of these vessels has yet to be conclusively identified. Some scholarsbelieve they were manufactured in Kos.39 This suggestion appears to be confirmed by thefrequent occurrence of grains of pyroxene in the clay matrix of many of these amphorae.Other scholars argue for another location, namely the central part of the Bosporan King-

32 BICHIR, Archaeology, p. 81.33 ROBINSON, Athenian Agora, p. 51, Pl. 59.34 N. A. BOGDANOVA, I.I. GUŠCINA, Novyje mogilniki II–III vv. Po Chr. u c. Skalistoje v Krimu, Kratkije

soobš�enija Instituta arheologii AN SSSR 112, 1967, p. 136, Figs. 47, 48.35 D. B. ŠELOV, Tanais i Ni�nyj Don v pervyh vekah našej ery, Moskva 1972 [= Tanais], p. 159; BöTTGER,

ŠELOV, Amphorendipinti, p. 100.36 BöTTGER, ŠELOV, Amphorendipinti, pp. 84–90.37 KOSTRIN, Issledovanija, p. 264; ŠELOV, Les amphores, p. 161; BöTTGER, ŠELOV, Amphorendipinti, pp. 90–92.38 D. B. ŠELOV, Uskogorlyje svetloglinienyje amfory pervih vekov našej ery. Klasyfikacija i hronologija,

Kratkije soobš�enija Instituta arheologii AN SSSR 156, 1978, p. 18; BöTTGER, ŠELOV, Amphorendipinti, pp. 28–30.39 ŠTAERMAN, Keramieskije klejma, p. 40; see also: PEACOCK, WILLIAMS, Amphorae, p. 108.

PIOTR DYCZEK76

dom, perhaps even Tanais itself.40 Finally, they could have been produced in at least twoother centers on the Black Sea, one of these being the coastal area around Dobrudja. Hy-potheses abound, but there is still no agreement on where exactly these amphorae couldhave been produced. The prevalent view nowadays is to localize the manufacturing cen-ters in the southern regions of Pont.41 In similarity to the previously discussed type, theseamphorae are also widespread in the northern Black Sea littoral as well as on the lowerDanube.42

Stamped necks are a characteristic feature of these amphorae. Interestingly, among theobviously Greek names: � �� ��1� ���� ���� ��� ��� � ���� ��� �� ���

���� ����� ��,43 there also occur Roman ones: ��2.��) – Rufus.Dipinti identifying the volume are rarer, e.g., ie or 15 ksestai; the same is true of red-

painted abbreviations of names, both Greek and Roman, just as in the case of the stamps,e.g. ���� �4� 5�� � �� 6�. These may have been the names of negotiatores.

Amphorae classified as Zeest 75/Dyczek 32,44 were made of well-kneaded clay ofa reddish-orange color, 5YR 7/8, 2.5YR 7/8 according to the Munsell soil color charts.Since they also occur on the Lower Danube, they have been recorded in Opait’s, Scorpan’sand Kuzmanov’s typologies.45 The rim has a triangular section and characteristic undercutat the base. The widening neck is finely ridged, the oval body also covered with denseribbing. Unlike the previously described type, Dyczek 32 vessels attain a height of 1.38 mand a volume up to 60 l.

The centers of the northern Black Sea littoral and of the southern littoral perhaps, too,have been indicated by some scholars as the place of manufacture of this type of containers.Pantikapaion, Fanagoria and the European part of the Kimmerian Bosporus have been sug-gested.46 Nonetheless, one should keep in mind V. Grace’s theory about the production ofthese vessels on the islands of Samos or Kos.47 These amphorae can be found in the BlackSea littoral and in Moesia, and apart from that they occur singularly in Athens and Rome.48

Red-painted dipinti occur occasionally on the surface of these vessels. On the groundsof paleographic studies, most of these inscriptions appear to have been executed by theowners of the amphorae. Two kinds of painted inscriptions can be distinguished. The firstidentifies in ksestai the mass/volume of the product transported in these vessels, e.g. 7 ��,

40 T. N. KNIPOVI-, Tanais, Moskva-Leningrad 1949, pp. 73, 136, draw. 28, 29; ARSENIEVA, NAUMIENKO, Ko-mpleks nahodok, pp. 70–71, Fig. 13, 2, 4.

41 BöTTGER, ŠELOV, Amphorendipinti, p. 30.42 DYCZEK, Roman Amphorae, p. 223.43 ŠELOV, Les amphores, p. 142, Fig.46; ZEEST, Keramieskaja tara, Pl. XXXVII, 91; ŠELOV, Tanais, p. 121;

BöTTGER, ŠELOV, Amphorendipinti, p. 30.44 DYCZEK, Roman Amphorae, pp. 233 f.45 SCORPAN, Contribution, p. 272; OPAIT, Consideratii, p. 308, G. KUZMANOV, Rannovizantijska keramika ot

Trakija i Dakija (IV – naaloto na VII v.), Razkopki i Prou�vanija XIII, 1985, pp. 11–12.46 BöTTGER, ŠELOV, Amphorendipinti, p. 43.47 V. GRACE, Stamped Wine Jar Fragments, Hesperia 10, 1956, p. 70; OPAIT, Consideratii, p. 308.48 KNIGGE et al., Die Ausgrabungen im Kerameikos 1988/89, Archäologischer Anzeiger 3, 1991, pp. 385–

386, Fig. 23.

77ON SOME DIPINTI

or ksestai 54. A schematic branch is drawn next to some of the dipinti. The other type ofpainted inscription consists of abbreviations of Greek names: �� 8 ��%7������'� ���

8 ���%����' or ��9������ ��� 8 ���%,��:;�' or ���,:;�.49

The said branch motif appears to be of particular interest. It is believed to be a sketchedimage of a grapevine or olive branch.50 To my mind, it is rather a pictograph signifyingherbs/spices, most likely marjoram. There are two observations in favor of this idea. Firstly,the Greek measure recorded on the amphorae surface is too small with respect to the vol-ume of these vessels. It could mean that the product filling the container had little masseven though it occupied substantial space. Secondly, the dipinto CAM also occasionallyincludes an identical branch motif incorporated into the letters. Similarly, the dipinto -�<

has the final letter treated as a branch. And this abbreviation, I strongly believe, should beread as "��=�>��, meaning marjoram. The spice is known to have been imported fromthe southern regions of Pont.51 Amphorae with the branch pictograph could have beenused in the transport of herbs and spices, while the abbreviation served to inform the buyerwhich kind exactly was packed inside. On the whole, however, these amphorae were usedfor the transport of olive or other oil,52 although there are some who would defend the ideathat wine was the transported commodity in this case.53

The next type of amphora, Zeest 77/Dyczek 33, in use from the 1st to the middle of the4th century A.D., is of interest in view of an unique stamp – Faustina – found on thehandle of one of the vessels. In a few cases, branches are also sketched on the body of thevessels. These amphorae have everted hooked rims and a cylindrical neck. Ridges arefound below the rim and on the collar. The clay used for the manufacture of these contain-ers was an orange-red or pink color, identified by the Munsell soil color chart codes 10R7/8, 2.5YR 7/8. The vessels were produced in an unspecified center in the Pont region andits occurrence is limited to virtually the Pont region alone, mainly in rural settlements.

The Zeest 90/Dyczek 25 amphora type belongs among the most frequent findsfrom the middle54 and lower Danube, among others, Dinogetia, Durostorum, Histria,Murighiol, Novae, Sexaginta Prista, Sacidava, Tomi, Buridava, Corabia, Drobeta, M.tâsaru,Sl.veni, Stolniceni, Sucidava, Orlea, Romula.55 They are also known from the Black Sea

49 ŠELOV, Les amphores, p. 161; BöTTGER, ŠELOV, Amphorendipinti, p. 105.50 BöTTGER, ŠELOV, Amphorendipinti, p. 86.51 J. I. MILLER, The Spice Trade of the Roman Empire, 29 B.C. to A.D. 641, Oxford 1969, p. 116.52 D. B. ŠELOV, Ekonomieskaja �izn Tanaisa. Antinyj gorod, Moskva 1963, p. 124; ID., 1989, p. 108.53 V. H. BAUMANN, La céramique utilitaire du IVe siècle fabriquée par l’officina romana de Valea Morilor

(Teli/a départament Tulcea), Études sur la céramique romaine et daco-romaine de la Dacie et de la Mésie In-férieure I, Timi�oara 1997, p. 46.

54 M. H. KELEMEN, Roman Amphorae in Pannonia IV, Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hun-garicae XLV, 1993, pp. 46–49.

55 G. STEFAN, Santierul Arheologic Garv.n (Dinogetia), Studii �i Cercet�ri de Istorie Veche 4, 1957; E.CONDURACHI, Santierul Histria, Materiale �i Cercet�ri Arheologice 6, 1959, p. 287, Fig. 9,1; SUCEVEANU, Lestermes, pp. 104, 108, 112; P. ALEKSANDRESCU, Nekroploa tumulara, Histria II, 1966, p. 213, Pl. 100. VI, 1;SCORPAN, Contribution, p. 275, Fig. 11; BICHIR, Archaeology, p. 39, Pl. XXXV, 11; G. POPILIAN, Ceramika Ro-mana dîn Oltenia, Craiova 1976 [= Ceramika Romana], Pl. XV, pp. 195–199.

PIOTR DYCZEK78

littoral56 and from many Mediterranean sites, such as Ostia, Malta, Athens, Kencherai,Knossos, Paphos, Berenice and Mellieha.57 This state of affairs results in the amphoraappearing in various classifications under different designations58. These vessels have fourdistinctive formal features: distinctly profiled rim, massive handles bent at a sharp angle inthe upper part, conical neck and egg-shaped body. They were made of clay occurring invarious shades of red to light brown, corresponding to the Munsell soil color chart codes:2,5Y 8/4, 2,5YR 5/6, 6/4, 6/6, 6/8, 5YR 7/4, 7/6, 7,5YR 7/4, 10R 6/8.

Although the height of these vessels reaches merely 1.0 m, the maximum volume couldreach even 60 liters of liquid.

As to the origins of the group agreement is lacking. Some scholars have suggested Kosas a possible place of manufacture on the grounds of stamps, primarily with the Greekname of a producer, �545�, who is said to have worked in the island.59 A Dalmatianorigin has also been considered.60 In my belief, the amphorae were made in Asia Minor.61

Most archaeologists, however, favor a Pontic source for this type.62

The said amphorae are interesting to archaeologists mainly because of the stamps anddipinti. The stamps were impressed usually on the upper part of the handle, less oftenunder the rim. Although written in Greek letters, the names can sometimes be Roman aswell63: ������ 1 ���� -� ���������� %��'������ 1 ���� ���������

� ������� �� ���� -545�� ��������� ��1%6��'� �� ��� -�6������

-545�? ��� ���� �����%���'� -���%��'� %����'����� ����.-��/��.-�

�����%��'� � �����.Data on the volume, given in sextarii, appears merely on a few of these containers,

although there are some examples bearing Greek measures of volume. A red-painted dipintion an amphora from Corabia, reading � ��764, corresponds to 82 sextarii, that is, 44-45liters.

56 ZEEST, Keramieskaja tara, p. 117; G. D. BELOV, Stielko djejatelnaja mastierskaja v Chersonese, Kratkijesoobš�enija Instituta arheologii AN SSSR 116, 1969, p. 83, Fig. 24; ARSENIEVA, NAUMIENKO, Kompleks nahodok,pp. 151–153, Figs. 30, 31, 32: U.B. UENCEV, U. JA. JURO-KIN, Amfory s voronkovidnym gorlom iz prierno-morija, Chersonesski Sbornik IX, 1998, [= Amfory], pp. 100–109.

57 PANELLA, Oriente e Occidente, pp. 624–625, Figs. 22, 24; J. A. RILEY, Coarse Pottery, Excavations at SidiKhrebish Benghazi (Berenice) II, LibyaAnt V, 1979, p. 206; ROBINSON, Athenian Agora, pp. J 50, M 235, P 16074,56, Pl. 11; p. 106, Pl. 28; SLANE, Deposit, p. 298, Fig.18, p. 125; HAYES, Villa Dionisos, p. 147, Figs. 22, 46, 49.

58 DYCZEK,Roman Amphorae, pp. 173–176.59 ŠTAERMAN, Keramieskije klejma, p. 42.60 D. TUDOR, Importul de vin �i untdelemn in provincja Dacia, Apulum VII, 1968, p. 398.61 DYCZEK, Roman Amphorae, pp. 182 f.62 VNUKOV, Priernomorski amfory, pp. 128 f.63 D.TUDOR, Oltenia Romana, Bucure�ti 1968 [= Oltenia Romana], p. 161, Nos. 76, 77; C. C. PETROLESCU,

Note epigrafice (VII), Studii �i Cercet�ri de Istorie Veche 35, 1984, pp. 196–197; I. I. RUSSU, Inscriptile Grecestidîn Dacia, Studi �i Comunicari 12, 1965, p. 63; POPILIAN, Ceramika Romana, p. 141; ARSENIEVA, NAUMIENKO,Kompleks nahodok, p. 149, Fig. 28, 4, No. 154; pp. 153–154, Fig. 32, 2, No. 103; ��0120�, JURO-KIN, Amfory,p. 105; BJELAJAC, Amfore, p. 58; V. EFFIMIE-ANDRONESCU, Stampila pe o amfore de productie locala cu imitarealiterelor grecesti, Studii �i Cercet�ri de Istorie Veche 18, 1967, pp. 401–421.

64 TUDOR, Oltenia Romana, p. 467.

79ON SOME DIPINTI

There also occur names of alleged producers of the products inside the containers orthe Greek and Roman negotiatores, e.g.: Sex. Cor. Ta., read as Sex(tus) Cor(nelius) Ta(urus).Other names include: Ta(tianus), Ant(onius) (sextarii), P(ublius), Athe(naeus) orAthe(odotus), or Athe(nodoros).

Few of the dipinti actually refer to the contents. It is clear that olive oil was the mostfrequent commodity. An inscription in Latin has even been preserved: OLEVM.

From Novae we have a Greek inscription, of which the only word to be legible is������� [...], (Fig. 4) identifying the source of the product. On another amphora fromthe valetudinarium the text reads: ����� � (Fig. 5); this is a combination of twoGreek words: ���8 derived from almh, meaning “salt, brine”, and �"��!��/�"��!���, mean-ing “oyster”. Thus, we have proof from Novae that amphorae of Dyczek 25 type containeda kind of salsamenta or to be more precise, garum made from oysters.

Amphorae of this type also provide the sole examples of what I firmly believe aredipinti giving the intended vessel recipient. The set of letters: LE V M, LVMPF, LVMANT,LVMVAL surely stands for Legion V Macedonian.65 And the inscriptions: LEG I ITAL,G I IT presumably refer to the First Italic Legion (Fig. 6).

This review of amphora types and stamps and dipinti found on the vessel surface testi-fies to the intensity of the trade exchange in the Pontic region under Roman domination.The old trade contacts not only had not been interrupted, but continued to prosper in theirown right. Three legions stationed along the lower Danube, a harbor of the Danubian fleetand Roman garrisons in the Crimea were all excellent pretexts for trading, both by theGreeks and by the Romans, who supplied the army with olive oil, wine and salsamentamanufactured in the Black Sea and Azov Sea littoral. The predominance of inscriptions inGreek clearly indicates who played an overbearing role in this trade.

65 See: R. IVANOV, Ziegel- und Dachziegelstempel mit Bezeichnung der Legion und der Garnison am unternDonaulimes (Bulgarien), Limes cura di Giancarlo Susini, Bologna 1994, pp. 8–9.

4. Dipinti – amphora type Dyczek 25 (after the author).

PIOTR DYCZEK80

The questions posed in the title can be answered briefly as follows:What ? – Basic commodities, but also some luxury goods.Where ? – From the Pontic region to the Roman garrisons on the lower and middle

Danube, but also to important centers around the Mediterranean.When ?– Mainly from the 1st to the 3rd century A.D.Why ? – Because haulage of goods on a massive scale was cheap by ship; because the

prices of the goods were not exorbitant compared to quality, because Greek and Romannegotiatores cooperated to achieve the highest profit and the presence of the military legionsensured a capacious market, which led in turn to growing production and the enrichmentof the entire region.

34���)�������$�5��&67�)*8�(�9$� ��$����$�8�&��������$�

5. Dipinti of type of salsamenta (drawing by J. :�)��#).

6. Dipinti Legio I Italica (drawing by J. :�)��#).