Sei sulla pagina 1di 32



Reihe 1


begründet von Andreas Alföldi

herausgegeben von
Géza Alföldy (†), Frank Kolb und Winfried Schmitz

Band 61



herausgegeben von


Frontispiz: Carme Badia, Instituto Catalán de Arqueología Clásica

ISBN 978-3-7749-3866-3
Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen National-
bibliografie. Detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über <>

Copyright 2013 by Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn

Géza Alföldy in Tarragona 2011


Vorwort VII
ABASCAL, Juan Manuel: Dos cuestiones topográficas del conventus
Carthaginiensis para CIL II²: Egelesta y el trifinium provincial de
Hispania 1
BEUTLER, Franziska: Die zwei Amphitheater von Carnuntum und deren
Datierung 19
BIRLEY, Anthony: The Emperor Marcus Aurelius and the Sarmatians 39
BORHY László: Amphitheatralia Pannonica I. Die sog. Bauinschrift des
Militäramphitheaters von Aquincum 51
CHANIOTIS, Angelos: Hadrian, Diktynna, the Cretan Koinon, and the roads
of Crete. A new milestone from Faneromeni (Crete) 59
ECK, Werner: Die Fasti consulares der Regierungszeit des Antoninus Pius.
Eine Bestandsaufnahme seit Géza Alföldys Konsulat und
Senatorenstand. 69
FEHÉR Bence: Characteristics of Handwriting in the Inscriptions of
Aquincum 91
KOLB, Anne: Das severische Kaiserhaus in Solothurn? 117
KOVÁCS Péter: Géza Alföldy und CIL III2. Auch ein Beitrag zum Thema:
Géza Alföldy und Ungarn 123
KOVÁCS Péter: Territoria, pagi and vici in Pannonia 131
MAYER, Marc: Contribución al estudio de la epigrafía de Pollentia
(Alcúdia, Mallorca). Sobre HEp 2, 1990, 62 155
MITTHOF, Fritz: Überteuerter Weizen und private Munifizenz:
Bemerkungen zu zwei Weihungen aus Thuburnica und verwandten
Inschriften 163
MRÁV Zsolt: Septimius Severus and the cities of the middle Danubian
provinces 205
MROZEWICZ, Leszek: Municipium Cillitanum. Des études sur
l’urbanisation flavienne de l’Afrique du Nord 241
NÉMETH Margit: Andenken eines Kaiserbesuches in Aquincum 249
PEACHIN, Michael: Augustus’ Res Gestae and the Emerging Principate 255
PISO, Ioan: Die Inschrift von Albertirsa 277
PROHÁSZKA Péter: Einige römische Inschriften aus Siscia (Sisak,
Kroatien) nach einem Brief des Kaufmanns Paul Bitroff 285
ŠAŠEL-KOS, Marjeta: Ananca: Greek Ananke worshipped at Doclea
(Dalmatia) 295
SCHMIDT, Manfred G.: Inscriptiones Berolinenses Latinae 307
SOLIN, Heikki: Zu pompejanischen Wandinschriften 327

SZABÓ Ádám: Iuppiter Optimus Maximus. Zwei neue Altäre aus

Pannonien 351
VISY Zsolt: Beneficiarii auf Inschriften von Intercisa. Die Frage einer
Benefiziarierstation von Intercisa 359
WEBER, Ekkehard: Ein magister navaliorum in Carnuntum 377
ZERBINI, Livio: Echi delle guerre marcomanniche e della peste antonina
nelle testimonianze epigrafiche della Dacia romana 383

Index der Personennamen (VAJNER, Balázs) 391

Index der geographischen Namen (VAJNER, Balázs) 397



One of the most important areas of Roman provincial archaeology is research on the
territoria. Besides archaeological excavations of cities in several provinces research
on villas, larger estates and villages has come recently into prominence, even in our
region where after the fall of the communism several large-scale rescue-excavations
have been carried out. During these excavations the number of known villas or
villages has been multiplied. Unfortunately, the same does not apply to the
epigraphic sources. All the same, during the work on the new CIL III2 Pannonia
volume several new finds have been published in recent years. In my paper I intend
to summarize our knowledge on the epigraphy of the territoria in Pannonia.1 First, I
must deal briefly with the municipalization of the region from the age of Augustus
to the end of the second century; next I focus my attention on the smaller territorial
units, based on origo inscriptions of soldiers mainly from Rome, and boundary
stones. I shall deal separately with the question of the native civitates and the
canabae – military vici.

The municipalization of Pannonia and the Danubian provinces

As the ancient literary sources mention the towns in Illyricum only occasionally (i.
e. mostly because of imperial visits or campaigns, except in the case Sirmium as
imperial centre in the late Roman period2) the question can only be studied based on
the basis of epigraphic material, viz. the imperial names (‘Kaiserbeiname’) and the
tribus and the pseudotribus of towns.3 The municipalization in Pannonia and in the
whole region followed the ‘normal’ path, as was usually the case, except for the
cities along the coast of Dalmatia and those in Dacia where the native Dacian
population was wiped out or expelled and besides the veterans new settlers came ex
toto orbe Romano, as Eutropius stated (VIII.6).4 In the case of Pannonia (Fig. 1),

On the early history of the region see Mócsy 1974. Thanks to Anthony Birley for improving the
English text.
M. Mirković, Sirmium – its history from the I. century A. D. to 582 A. D. In: Sirmium I. Beograd
1971, 5-59.
B. Galsterer-Kröll: Untersuchungen zu den Beinamen der Städte des Imperium Romanum. ES 9,
1972, 44-145, G. Forni, Die römischen Tribus in Pannonien. Carnuntum Jahrbuch 2, 1956, 13-22 = id.,
Le tribù romane IV. Scripta minora. Roma 2006, 7-21, G. Forni, Le tribù romane III,1. Le pseudo-tribù.
Roma 1985.
On the towns in Illyricum and Pannonia see summarily Vittinghoff 1977, Mócsy 1962, 599-604, and
the detailed studies in Autonomous towns I and II. On the heavily disputed status of Gorsium: Alföldy
1997, Fishwick 2000.

after the foundation of the province a new veteran colony was founded at Emona at
the beginning of Tiberius’ reign (cp. the building inscriptions of the town walls: AIJ
170a-b) together with the oppidum Scarbantia Iulia (attested only by Pliny Nat. hist.
III.146), i. e. a municipium that later was re-founded.5 The next veteran colony,
Savaria, was founded under Claudius for the veterans of legio XV Apollinaris at
Carnuntum: one is mentioned as deduct(us) c(oloniam) C(laudiam) S(avariam): RIU
145, another as deducticius: RIU 149. Under Vespasian new coloniae (Sirmium and
Siscia along the river Save) were founded for men of the Ravenna fleet, as the text
of several military diplomas from the year 71 shows: deducti in Pannoniam: CIL
XVI 14, RMD 205, AÉp 2004, 1282. At the very end of the century a new veteran
colony, Poetovio, followed under Trajan (CIL III 4057: deduct(us) c(oloniam)
U(lpiam) T(raianam) P(oetovionensem) mission(e) agr(aria)) and after the division
of Pannonia in 106 AD the last veteran colony, Mursa, founded under Hadrian in the
130s for veterans of legio II adiutrix (cp. the building inscription CIL III 3280 =
10261). In southern Pannonia, i. e. in the land of the Pannonians, several civitates
peregrinae were so Romanized with Roman and Latin citizens under the Flavii that
civitas centres were elevated to the rank of municipia, as in the case of the Latobici
(Neviodunum / Municipium Latobicorum) or Iasi (Aquae Balisae / Municipium
Iasorum) or Varciani (Andautonia). The nuclei of later settlements in the interior,
especially in northern Pannonia, developed from military vici along the important
roads. These settlements survived the withdrawal of the military units and it seems
that several of them became municipia under Hadrian (Salla along the Amber road,
Mogetiana along the road Savaria-Aquincum or Mursella along the road Savaria-
Arrabona).6 Another way of development can be observed in the limes region in the
Danubian provinces too, where beside the legionary fortresses in most cases a
nucleus of a civilian settlement, a vicus was founded extra leugam, that was later
elevated to the rank of a municipium.7 On the other hand, around the fortresses
military towns, the canabae, developed (see below). In Pannonia the civilian vici
where the seats of the legates were placed i. e. Carnuntum and Aquincum, became
municipia already under Hadrian, and titular colonies under Septimius Severus.
Brigetio and most probably Vindobona were later elevated to the rank of
municipium, Brigetio probably under Septimius Severus (based on the RIU 773
building inscription of an Augustalis of Brigetio before 205 A. D.). It must also be
mentioned that in the Danubian provinces there are several exceptional cases where
there were no civilian nuclei and the canabae were privileged, as Singidunum in
Moesia superior or Potaissa and Porolissum in Dacia. The canabae could have also
been privileged and two different towns existed next to each other as in the case of

Kovács 2002.
On the early forts under Tiberius here see F. Redő, Municipium Aelium Salla. In: Autonomous towns
I, 191-235, M. Nagy, Mogetiana. In: Autonomous towns II, 75-83, Kovács 2003, E. Szőnyi, Mursella. In:
Autonomous towns II, 85-98.
See Mócsy 1953, Piso 1991, Kovács 2000.

Apulum a colony and a municipium.8 No similar situation occurs in Pannonia.

During the 3rd century (some of them only in the second half of the century) several
earlier municipia became titular colonies too, as Brigetio (only one single inscription
mentions the town as a colonia [CIL III 4355]) or Cibalae and Bassiana in the south.
Sopianae, an earlier important road junction station (between Sirmium and
Aquincum, Brigetio, Arrabona, Savaria) became a Roman town probably under
Gallienus (its status is uncertain).9 The municipalization of the province ended most
probably under Hadrian and no peregrine civitas survived his reign (see below). If
the tribal centre was a military fort/vicus as Cornacum/Sotin in the case of the
Cornacates the territory of the civitas became part of the nearest town (in this case
Cibalae). It seems that each Roman town had a peregrine predecessor, and the larger
civitates such as the civitas Boiorum were divided into several parts (more than

The Pannonian civitates and towns

Civitas Town ‘Kaiser- Tribus/  Source

beiname’ Pseudo‐
c. Amanti- Sirmium Flavia Flav. / Quir. RIU 1419, CIL III 3230,
norum 3243, 3320, 3685 = 10249,
7429, 12739, VI 3184,
31140, 31146, 32624, 37184,
X 3575,AÉp 1934, 178,
1993, 335, 1994, 1390, 1443,
ILJ 2960, Tit. Aq. 532, 600,
RIB 3080
c. Andizetum Mursa Ael. Ael. / Serg. Steph. Byz. 458.6, CIL III
(col.) 3279-3280 = 10261, 3288,
3560, 10305, 15141, 15145,
VI 3214, 3235, 32542,
32640, 37184, XVI 151,
AÉp 1948, 68, ILJ 1060,
3095, 3102, 3108
c. Azaliorum Brigetio Ant. CIL III 3355, 4281, 4294,
(mun.) 4322, 4323, 4330, 4334,
4336, 4338, 10388, 10534,

Cp. Piso 1991, Kovács 2000 and 2001.
J. Fitz, La Pannonie sous Gallien. Collection Latomus Vol. 148. Bruxelles 1976, 41-62, Nagy T.,
Sopianae. Egy új városmonográfia margójára. AntTan 33, 1987-1988, 239-240.

11007, RIU 521, 568, 573,

601, 674, TRH 27, 96, AÉp
2006, 1047, 1049
(col.) CIL III 4355
c. Azaliorum Mogetiana Ael. Ael. / CIL VI 32623-32624, RIU
(mun.) Sergia 660, ZPE 174, 2010, 284-
285 Nr. 9
c. Azaliorum Mogiones Ael. RMD 303
c. Belgitum? Volgum Ael. RIU 1244, 1253, AÉp 1979,
472, cp. Kovács 2003, 296
Anm. 153
c. Belgitum / Salla ILJ 1048, TRH 52
c. Boiorum Vindobona CIL III 1665, 4557, VI
41105, VIII 15583, ICUR
25130 (cf. I. Piso, Tyche 6,
1991, 171-177)
c. Boiorum Scarbantia Iul. / Flav. Plin. Nat. hist. III.146, RIU
(mun.) (Aug.) 134, 174, 196, ILS 8507
c. Boiorum Savaria Claudia Claudia CIL III 1221, 4070, 4154,
(col.) (Aug.) 4156, 4183, 4191, 4194,
4416, 11223, V 943, 1011,
VI 2710, 3272, 3276, 3287,
3300, 32624, 32640, 32830,
37206, IX 1095, XIII 6646,
8772, AÉp 1953, 93, 1973,
33, 1992, 1431, 1993, 334,
337, ILJ 1169, RIU 52, 99,
136, 139, 139, TRH 3, 83,
IGLS 1375
c. Boiorum Carnuntum Ael. Ael. / Serg. CIL III 4495, 4554, 11019,
(mun.) 143592, VI 32640, VIII
2675, XI 6358, XIII 8620,
AÉp 1934, 263, 1938, 167
(col.) S(eptimia) Sept. CIL III 11255, VI 32623,
A(urelia) 32624, AÉp 1956, 47, 1983,
A(ntoniniana) 776 = 1992, 1431
c. Boiorum Mursella CIL III 4490, RIU 372
c. Breucorum mun. ILJ 1048
(- - -)

c. Sisciano- Siscia Flavia Flav. / Quir. RIU 20, CIL III 3951, 4471,
rum 11029, VI 2644, 2689, 3180,
c. Colapia- 32523, 32624, 32640, 32628,
norum VIII 9761, XIII (falsely:
Aelia CIL VI 32533b)
Sept. (Aug.) Septimia CIL III 4193, XIII 8035
c. Cornacatum Cibalae CIL VI 32542, CIL III 3267
(col.) Aurelia CIL III 14038, VIII 2826,
ILJ 1054, AÉp 1980, 724-
725, RMD 312
c. Eraviscorum Aquincum Ael. Ael. / Serg. CIL III 10305, 10377, 10398,
(mun.) 143416, AÉp 2003, 1408,
1445-1446, Tit. Aq. 180
(col.) Septimia Ael. Sept. CIL VI 1057-1058, 3431,
AÉp 1954, 77, TRH 70, Tit.
Aq. 7, 237
c. Hercuniatum Iovia ?
c. Iasorum Aquae CIL III 4000, VI 3297, AIJ
Balisae / 586-587, ILJ 1132
m. Iasorum
c. Latobicorum Neviodunum Flavia Flav. / Quir. CIL III 3919, 3925, VI
/ mun. 32671
c. Oseriatum Mun. Fausti- CIL III 3974, VI 2494a,
nianum? 3241
c. Scordi- Bassiana ILJ 1048
scorum (mun.)
(col.) CIL III 3336, 64704 = 10197,
10203, 10205-10207, 15135,
AÉp 2005, 1240
c. Serretum Poetovio Ulpia Ulp. / Pap. CIL III 4015, 4022, 4050,
(col.) Traiana 4057, 4067-4069, 4101,
5427, 6700, 6761, 7429, VI
2579, 18878, 32640, 37184,
AIJ 279, 312, AÉp 2000,
c. Serapillorum Iovia? Civitas: It. Burd. 561.10, cf.
CIL III 10891 = AIJ464
c. Varciano- Andautonia Quir. CIL III 3679, 4008, 4010,
rum 4011

? Sopianae as oppidum: Amm. Marc.


The division of the territoria: territorium (regio) – pagus – vicus

Besides the extra-territorial imperial properties (imperial and sometimes other larger
private estates) – saltus and mine districts: cp. Front. De contr. agr. II 53, 2-15 (see
below) the provinces were divided into the territoria of the municipalities (coloniae
or municipia) and civitates peregrinae: Front. De contr. agr. 35,13-36, at si ad
provincias respiciamus, habent agros colonicos Italici iuris, habent et colonicos qui
sunt immunes, habent et colonicos stipendarios. Habent autem provinciae
municipales agros aut civitatium peregrinarum. Submunicipal territorial units,
settlements in the territorium of a municipality or a civitas peregrina were the vici,
castella and the pagi that were not dignified by the name of a civitas (Isid. Etym.
XV.2.11 vici et castella et pagi hi sunt qui nulla dignitate civitatis ornantur, sed
vulgari hominum conventu incoluntur, et propter parvitatem sui maioribus
civitatibus adtribuuntur).10 The home-town of the vicani was the res publica to
which the vicus belonged (Ulp. Dig. 50.1.30: Qui ex vico ortus est, eam patriam
intellegitur habere, cui rei publicae vicus ille respondet). The private estates (fundi)
were identified also on the basis of the territorium and pagus to which they
belonged, as shown by the Digest (Ulpian. Dig. XV.15.4 nomen fundi cuiusque, in
qua civitate et in quo pago sit) and the tabulae alimentationis: CIL XI 1147 and CIL
IX 1455 = ILS 6509 with the division pertica – pagus – fundus (also with the
adfines). The Pannonian subterritorial units (their full list can be found in the
Addendum below) are mainly known from the origo of soldiers, because they were
officially always conscripted vicatim: e.g. CIL VI 793, AÉp 1981, 134 milites …
quorum nomina cum tribus et patriis duobus tabulis aereis incisa continentur, P.
Berl. 11596R = BGU 1689 = ChLA X 422 [milites di]gesti per co(n)s(ules) et
nationes et [patrias],11 Pap. Corp. 41, 12: in oppido quo quisque pago civis
habitabat conscripsit milites (sc. Servius Tullius).12 These official provincia –
territorium – pagus – vicus divisions appear in funerary texts of praetorians and
other soldiers serving in Rome: e.g. natus ad Aquas Balizas pago Iovista vico
Cocconetibus (CIL VI 3297), nat(ione) Pannonio, pede Sirmiense, pago
Martio vico Budalia (CIL VI 32713 = ILS 2044), or Cibalis ex Pannonia

On the vici and pagi see summarily Th. Mommsen, RSt III, 112-120, 766, 792-799, A. Schulten, Die
Landgemeinden im römischen Reiche. Philologus 53, 1894, 629-686, PWRE VIIIA (1958) 2090-2094,
XVIII (1942) 2318-2339, M. Tarpin, Vici et pagi en Europe occidentale. Coll. E.F.R. 299. Rome 2002,
M. Sommer, Vicus. In: RGA 32 (2006), 337-348.
Speidel 1986, 474.
Th. Mommsen, Ges. Schrift. VI. Berlin 1910, 42-49.

i[nf(eriore)] pago August(o) vico S[---] (CIL II 2 127a = RMD 312 = 194).13 On
the other hand, in several funerary texts the full origo is not given. The legionary
soldiers normally mentioned only their home-towns, the auxiliary soldiers gave the
names of their tribes14 and there are cases where only the name of their province
and/or the pagus or vicus are given, but the town is omitted: CIL VI 37225 natione
Pannonica pago Traiani, AÉp 1914, 296 ex provincia Pannunia (!) vico Doecis.
The pagus can also be omitted: CIL VI 3300 natione Pannoniae superiore C(laudia)
Savari[a] vico Voleuci[o]nis. The same situation can be observed in military
diplomas: in several cases instead of the tribal name (normally a civitas) or home-
town only a vicus is given: e. g. RMD 204 Marsunnia (diploma of a fleet-soldier in
71 AD). Marsonia / Slavonski Brod was a settlement that was never privileged (it
was a road-station and fort of the late Roman fleet) along the river Save: Ptol. Geog.
II.14, Tab. Peut. Seg. IV, Not. Dig. Occ. XXXII.43, Rav. Geogr. IV.1915), CIL XVI
61 Aquin(co) (in the year 114), RMD 131 n(atione) Isaurus vico Calloso.16 It is
interesting to study the status of Aquincum before Hadrian. The gravestone RIU
1256 from Intercisa mentions the place of death as follows: Senio … in c(ivitate)
Er(aviscorum) in Acinco d(efunctus). That means that the Eraviscan died in the
territory of the civitas, in Aquincum. Here, the same territorial division can be
observed (civitas–vicus) as above. Based on this, the civilian settlement of
Aquincum before gaining municipal rank under Hadrian was a vicus (probably not
the civitas centre: see below) and part of the Eraviscan civitas.17 An altar dedicated
to Terra Mater that was found at Budaörs (near Aquincum) was erected by a pagus
and its at least four vici pro salute Augustorum (AÉp 2005, 1265). The altar clearly
shows the sacred function of the pagi with the lustratio pagi (cp. CIL IX 1618: that
is why the altar is dedicated to Terra Mater).18 It is more important that a large part
of the pagus where the altar originally stood was uncovered and it perfectly shows
how a late La Tène native Celtic settlement survived and developed under Roman
rule.19 It is also worth mentioning that several times canabae or military vici were
given as home-towns even in military diplomas, but the reason for this has to be
looked for elsewhere (see below): e.g. CIL VI 3198 = 32783 natus in Pannonia
inferiore domo Briget(i)one at legione(m) prima(m) at[i]utri(cem), CIL VI 2544
Castellum Vixillum (!), CIL VI 36351 territorium Arrabonensium, Tit. Aq. 503

Their list: Kolendo 1994 and Ricci 1993a-b and also see here below in the Addendum.
Th. Mommsen, Ges. Schrift. VI. Berlin 1910, 41-94.
S. Soproni (Hrsg.), Tabula Imperii Romani L-34. Aquincum – Sarmizegetusa – Sirmium. Budapest
1968, 78.
Speidel, 1986, 467-481, M. M. Roxan, Settlements of veterans of the auxilia – a preliminary report.
in: Roman Frontier Studies 1995. Oxford 1997, 483-491.
Nagy 1971, Kovács 1997-1998, 289.
Th. Mommsen, RSt III, 116-119, T. D. Stek, Cult places and cultural change in Republican Italy. A
contextual approach to religious aspects of rural society after the Roman conquest, Amsterdam
Archaeological Series 14. Amsterdam 2009.
K. Ottományi, Die spätlatènezeitlich-römische Siedlung von Budaörs. Acta ArchHung 2005, 67-131.

domo Cirpi, RMD 266 Vetusaliensis, CIL V 942 natus in M(oe)si(a) inferiore
castell(o) Abritanor(um). Almost all of them were Pannonians.
The native population lived in vici, whereas usually the Roman citizen settlers
(mostly magistrates and coloni) built villae rusticae.20 Based on the inscriptions of
the municipal magistrates, it has become possible actually to define the extent of the
municipal territoria, as in the cases of Aquincum, Carnuntum, Savaria or
Mogetiana.21 The villae and the surrounding vici were mentioned several times
together, as in the case of the vicus Caramantesium et villa from Intercisa: these
jointly erected an altar to Iuppiter at Intercisa (RIU 1065). The same situation
appears on an altar from the vicus Vindonianus just north of Aquincum in Budapest-
Békásmegyer which was erected in 229 AD by the possessores, villa-owners of the
vicus, and mentions another one that was erected in honorem vicanorum in the area
of a villa (possessio) with the permission of its equestrian owner petentibus vicanis
(Tit. Aq. 926).22 Besides pagi and vici in Pannonia no other civilian settlement form,
such as castellum, forum, conciliabulum is attested (either epigraphically, or among
the Pannonian place-names).23
The Pannonian vici were also presided over by two magistri, but they are hardly
attested epigraphically. The magistri vici, probably under Augustus’ reign, are
known only from Nauportus (CIL III 3776-3777), a vicus which was built municipii
instar (Tac. Ann. I.20) on the common border of Italy and Illyricum (Vell. Pat.
II.110.4 mentions the confinium of Nauportus and Tergeste as the border) and later
belonged to Italy as a vicus in the territory of Emona.24 The leading organization of
the civilian vici was the organization of the Roman citizens who lived together
within a peregrine community (cives Romani consistentes) and it was very similar to

Alföldy G., Municipális középbirtokok Aquincum környékén. AntTan 6, 1959, 19-30, Mócsy 1959,
passim, Gabler 1994, Visy 1994. P. Kovács, Nichtstädtische Siedlungen in Pannonien. in: Von Augustus
bis Attila. Stuttgart 2000, 73-78.
Mócsy 1959, passim, Kovács 2003. See maps 3-7 in: E. Tóth, Zur Frage der Stadt „Mogetiana”. in:
Pannonica provincialia et archaeologia. Budapest 2003, 318-320, 323-328.
Balla 1971.
P. Anreiter, Die vorrömischen Namen Pannoniens. Archaeolingua Ser. Min. 16. Budapest 2001. The
funerary inscription CIL VI 2544 of a praetorian mentions a Castellum Vixillum (sic!) in Pannonia
inferior, but on the anaology of other military vici given as origo (see above), the castellum can more
likely be identified with a Pannonian auxiliary fort, the name of which remains unknown (as is the case
with the auxiliary fort of Budapest-Albertfalva: see Kovács 1999, 56 n. 28).
P. Kovács, Summary. The Ancient world and Pannonia. In: B. Fehér – P. Kovács (Ed.), Fontes
Pannonia Antiquae I. Budapest 2005, 222-223. Contrast: M. Šašel Kos, Caesarian inscriptions in the
Emona basin? in: G. Paci (Ed.), Epigrafia romana in area adriatica. Actes de la IXe rencontre franco-
italienne sur l’épigraphie du monde romain. Macerata 1998, 101-112, ead., Caesar, Illyricum, and the
hinterland of Aquileia. In: L’ultimo Cesare. Scritti riforeme progetti poteri congiure. Roma 2000, 274-
304, ead., Appian and Illyricum. Ljubljana 2005, 481-483 (with a too early dating, which is
unacceptable). On the settlement see J. Horvat, Nauportus (Vrhnika). Acad. Scient. et Artium Slovenica,
Classis I. Historia et Sociologia, Opera 33. Ljubljana 1990, B. Mušič – J. Horvat, Nauportus – an Early
Roman trading post at Dolge njive in Vrhnika – The results of geophysical prospecting using a variety of
independent methods. Arheološki vestnik 58, 2007, 219-270.

that of the military vici (probably organized on the same basis as them were e.g. the
vicus of fleet soldiers / veterans (classici) or in Sexaginta Prista after the evacuation
of the fort), as in the case of several vici in the Dobrudja in eastern Moesia inferior,
thus Ulmetum: c(ives) R(omani) et Bessi consistentes vico Ulmeto CIL III 1421426,
IScM V, 63 or magister vici Ulmetensium or vico Ulmeto: IScM V,63-64, 69, vicus
classicorum: cives Romani consistentes vico classicorum: AÉp 1986, 986-990, 2003,
1550, vicus Quintionis: veterani et cives Romani et Bessi consistentes vico
Quintionis: IScM I, 324, 326-328, 330-332, vicus Secundini: c(ives) R(omani) et Lai
consistentes reg(ione) Ist(ri) vico Secundini: IScM I, 343-347, [- - -] vici
Vero[b]rittiani … mag(ister) vici: IScM V, 115, vicus Novus: c(ives) R(omani)
v/et(erani) vico Nov(- - -): IScM V, 233.25 All these vici belonged to a municipal
territorium (e.g. vici Quintionis and Secundini to the territory of Histria): cp. IScM I,
343: c(ives) R(omani) et Lai consistentes reg(ione) Ist(ri) vico Secundini.26

Boundary stones of municipalities, villages and villae

Boundary stones are extremely rare in Pannonia as opposed to Dalmatia and Moesia
inferior, where several boundary stones are attested from the first two centuries.
That was the result of the boundary disputes between communities and/or owners,
conductores (as in the case of Laberius Maximus’ horothesia: IScM V, 67-68) and
for this reason Dalmatia is several times mentioned in the Corpus Agrimensorum too
(Lib. Col. I 240,17-242,6).27 Moreover, the boundary stones in Dalmatia prove that
the edicta and map (ILJ 874: called forma Dolabelliana) of the first governor of
Dalmatia (after the division of Illyricum), P. Cornelius Dolabella, were still in use in
the second century (CIL III 9973 = ILS 5953 = ILJ 2871, ILJ 919, 2872, AÉp 2003,
1332).28 On the other hand, the corpus of the land-surveyors clearly shows that land
surveying was similarly carried out in Pannonia (e.g. there was centuriation even in
the case of Pannonian municipia and Hyginus mentions boundary disputes in the
province too: Hyg. De cond. agr. 84.8-16 L., De const. lim. 168.1-9 L.). The
boundary stones of Sirmium are explicitly mentioned in the corpus: Ordines

S. Lambrino, Le vicus Quintionis et le vicus Secundini. In: Mélanges de philologie, de littérature et
d’histoire anciennes offerts à J. Marouzeau par ses collègues et élèves étrangers. Paris 1948, 320-346,
Wolff 1976, 44-46, A.G. Poulter, Rural Communities (Vici and komai) and Their Role in the
Organization of the Limes of Moesia Inferior. in: Roman Frontier Studies 1979. BAR IS 71. Oxford
1980, 729-743, Bărbulescu 2001, L. Petculescu, The Roman Army as a Factor of Romanization in the
North-Eastern Part of Moesia Inferior. in: T. Bekker-Nielsen, Rome and the Black sea region.
Domination, Romanization, Resistance. Black Sea Studies 5. Aarhus 2005, 31-42.
Cp. Wolff 1976, 45.
J. Oliver, Texts A and B of the Horothesia Dossier at Istros. GRBS 6, 1965, 143-156, Wilkes 1970,
456-459 Appendix V, J. Wilkes, Boundary Stones in Roman Dalmatia. Arheološki vestnik 25, 1974, 258-
P. Kovács, Some notes on the division of Illyricum. In: I. Piso (Hrsg.), Provincia. Die römischen
Provinzen und ihre Anfänge. Cluj-Napoca 2009, 243-253.

finitionum: Faustus et Valerius vv. cc. Auctores p. 353 L. In Africa et in Galliis et

Sirmium, ubi pertica nostra definivit, talia signa constituimus. Itaque alios quadros
terminos constituimus, alios rotundos, alios tres in unum secundum formam.
Archaeologically, the centuriation system of Savaria and Carnuntum has been more
or less revealed.29 The problem is that these disputes are totally missing from the
Pannonian epigraphic material. The boundary stone from Beočin must be connected
to the foundation of the colony Sirmium and its centuriation: ILJ 3013 Age(r) / vici
Iosi/sta ads/ig(natus) … c(aput) a(gri) e(xcepti).30 The boundary stone RIU 735
from Pusztasomodor perhaps mentions the (centuria) or (striga) quinta in the
territorium of Mogetiana or Aquincum.31 Ulpius Karus’ villa rustica was near the
abovementioned pagus Herculius at Budaörs, as his lapides terminales show (AÉp
2005, 1272). The boundary stone AÉp 2002, 532a-c placed on the boundary line
(finis / Emonensium / Aquileiensium) between Aquileia and the earlier Pannonian
town Emona already belongs to the period when Emona was attached to Italy.32 An
interesting altar dedicated to the goddess Aecorna (RIU 135) in the second half of
the first century in Savaria was erected by the Emonienses, qui consistunt finibus
Savar(iensium), i.e. in the territory or outside the pomerium of Savaria.33

The question of the survival of the civitates peregrinae

As we could see the process of the municipalization in Illyricum almost ended
during Hadrian’s reign. The territoria of the earlier peregrine civitates became part
of the municipia and coloniae. Another question is arisen: what happened to the
civitates: did all of them cease to exist or did some of them survive? The question
can easily be studied in the case of Pannonia where the earlier organizations of the
tribal districts and their native leaders are well attested epigraphically from the
Flavian period to Hadrian’s reign. The following tribal leaders are known:
Civitas Boiorum: princeps: AÉp 1951, 64, RMD 205(bis).

A. Mócsy, Savaria utcarendszerének rekonstrukciójához – Zur Rekonstruktion des Strassensystems
von Savaria. ArchÉrt 92, 1965, 34-35, E. Tóth, Geschichte der Oberen Wart im ersten Jahrtausend. In:
Die Obere Wart. Festschrift zum Gedenken an die Wiedererrichtung der Oberen Wart im Jahre 1327.
Oberwart 1977, 81 Abb. 3, id., A savariai utcarendszer rekonstrukciója – Rekonstruktion des Insula-
Systems. In: Savaria, ArchÉrt 98, 1971, 151, Bödöcs A. – Kovács G., A római kori birtokrendszer
kialakítása és tájformáló hatása Pannóniában. Geodézia és Kartográfia 63, 2011/3, 20-25, A. Bödöcs,
Aerial archaeological substantiation of a Roman cadastre system’s predictive model. AARGNews 42,
March 2011, 20-28, Chr. Gugl, Limitatio Carnuntina. GIS-Analyse der römischen Zenturiation im Raum
Carnuntum (Niederösterreich). Anzeiger der philosophischen Klasse der ÖAW 140, 2005 61-126.
Mócsy 1959, 77, M. Mirkovic, Sirmium – its history from the I. century A. D. to 582 A. D. in:
Sirmium I. Beograd 1971, 81-82, Nr. 79
Mócsy A., Lapis terminalis Pusztasomodorról. Régészeti dolgozatok I.5, 1963, 74-79.
M. Šašel Kos, The boundary stone between Aquileia and Emona. Aquileia nostra 72, 2002, 57-70
(with an unacceptably early dating of the first century inscription).
P. Kovács, The merchants from Emona and the pomerium of Savaria. Münsterische Beiträge zur
antiken Handelsgeschichte 17, 1998, 100-120.

Civitas Eraviscorum: princeps: CIL 3546, 3379 = 10358, AÉp 2003, 1424
= 2005, 1241, RIU 1011, decurio: RIU 1347, tabularius: CIL III 10408
= AÉp 1941, 14, ARM(- - -): RIU 1066.
Civitas Azaliorum: princeps, ?: RIU 790, TRH 117.
Civitas Scordiscorum: princeps, praefectus: ILJ 280.
Civitas: Iasorum: princeps (RMD 205).
Civitas Andizetum: princeps (RMD 205).
In the case of the Eravisci a serious problem has arisen as the altars dedicated to
Iuppiter Optimus Maximus Teutanus came to light in Aquincum and at Bölcske (Tit.
Aq. 165-166, TRH 219, AÉp 2003, 1408-1424). This matches the IOM Karnuntinus
altars at Carnuntum-Pfaffenberg, where all of them were erected on the 11th of June,
even at the end of the 3rd century, pro salute adque incolumitate Augusti et Civitatis
Eraviscorum, and one of them was explicitly erected in finibus Eraviscorum (AÉp
2003, 1421). Some of the leading men had Roman citizenship, surely received under
Hadrian as their names show: P. Ael. Maximus: CIL III 10408 = Tit. Aq. 85 and
P(ublii) Aeli Septimus et Decoratus dec(uriones) m(unicipii) et ARM(- - -) c(ivitatis)
Er(aviscorum): RIU 1066. Their offices can be explained by the inference that they
were at the same time the leaders of the civitas and decurions of municipium Aelium
Aquincum founded under Hadrian. Based on these data, different hypotheses have
been proposed in order to explain the situation. A. Mócsy suggested that the
Eraviscan civitas survived in the form of attributio (attributed to the municipal
territory).34 Meanwhile J. Fitz proposed that the territory of the former civitas was
divided: in his view, the northern part became the territory of the municipium, the
civitas survived in the south.35 Other explanations were given by the late J. Fitz
when he interpreted the civitas in the 3rd century as a ‘Kultgemeinde’,36 and by E.
Tóth who identified the civitas with the town of Aquincum (and according to him,
Eravisci would mean the citizens of the town, a hypothesis that is completely

Mócsy 1951. His arguments were powerfully refuted by U. Laffi and others: U. Laffi, Attributio e
contributio. Pisa 1966, 67-69, 91, F. Grelle, L’autonomia cittadina fra Traiano e Adriano. Teoria e prassi
dell’ organizzazione municipale. Napoli 1972, 208, H. Wolff, Kriterien für latinische und römische Städte
in Gallien und Germanien und die ‚Verfassung’ der gallischen Stammesgemeinden. BJb 176, 1976, 104-
111 Anm. 197.
Fitz 1971. Fitz argued for his hypothesis that inscriptions of the magistrates of Aquincum are
unknown in this region, which is very poor in inscriptions, but he incorrectly explained the text of an altar
in Vajta that was erected by a decurion of Aquincum (RIU 1485 = AÉp 2004, 1173): cp. G. Alföldy,
Epigraphica Pannonica III. Inschriften aus dem Gebiet der Eravisker und vom Territorium von
Aquincum. Specimina Nova 2004, 24-26 Nr. 26. On the southern boundary of the former civitas and
Aquincum see P. Kovács, Megjegyzések a civitas Eraviscorum déli határának kérdéséhez. Studia
Epigraphica Pannonica 3, 2011, 46-51.
Fitz 1993, 420. The problem is that the civitas had fines, i. e. a territory even at the end of the 3rd c.
(AÉp 2003, 1421). In the case of a territorium dedicated to a god always the name of the deity is given in
genitive as finibus Teutani here. Cp. praedia Dianae Tifatinae: CIL X 3240, 3828 = ILS 251, fines
Dianae: CIL III 141951.

mistaken).37 The problem with these theories is that they cannot explain why a
peregrine civitas should have existed even during the tetrarchy. That is why I have
suggested another explanation: it cannot be excluded that ‘Civitas Eraviscorum’
became the place-name of the former tribal centre that can be localized in the 1st
district of Budapest (called Víziváros) south of Aquincum near the Late La Tène
oppidum on the Gellért hill.38 Here, the first military fort of the region under
Claudius can be localized, with a civilian vicus that survived the withdrawal of the
auxiliary unit under Trajan.39 Several similar cases are known from Gaul where
instead of the original name of the civitas centre the name of the civitas was used:
Tullum > civitas Leucorum, Andemantunnum > civitas Lingonum, civitas Redonum,
Limonum > civitas Pictonum.40 That the leading men had new citizenship under
Hadrian does not prove the later survival of the civitas either: while Aquincum was
elevated to the rank of a municipium under Hadrian, i.e. between 117 and 138 AD,
the exact date is uncertain. It seems to be more likely that these Eraviscans became
citizens before the grant of municipal status. In the case of the altar RIU 1066, they
enumerated their municipal cursus: earlier they were tribal leaders (they held the
office of the mysterious abbreviated ARM(- - -), which is not attested elsewhere and
cannot be expanded) and after the foundation of Aquincum they became decurions.
The question of the Pannonian veterans and their home as given in military
diplomas must be studied separately. It has been observed that in the case of several
Pannonian tribes, such as the Boii, the Eravisci and the Azali, the recipients of the
diplomas continued to use the tribal name even after the foundation of the municipia
of Carnuntum (or Savaria or Mursella), Aquincum or Mogetiana under Hadrian:
Boii: CIL VI 3308, AÉp 2008, 1111, Eravisci: CIL XVI 112, 123, 179, RMD 102,
103, 266, ZPE 173, 2010, 223 (the latest is dated to 167), Azali: CIL XVI 96-97, 99,
104, 180, RMD 430 (the latest is dated to 154).41 After the foundation of Aquincum
under Hadrian, for instance, the Eraviscan civitas ceased to exist but not all of them
received the citizenship, they remained peregrine Eravisci living in the territory as

E. Tóth, Die Iuppiter Teutanus-Altäre. In: Bölcske, 409-415. The problem is that it is totally
unproven that Aquincum was the ‘Civitas-Hauptort’ where Romanized Eraviscans settled down as in the
case of a ‘normal’ Pannonian municipium. E. g. the civitas Latobicorum with its centre in Neviodunum
became a municipium under the Flavii and was officially called municipium Latobicorum. The fact is that
the civilian vicus and town of Aquincum was founded by the Romans after the arrival of the legion, with
Roman settlers, merchants and veterans, as was the case in the vicinity of all legionary fortresses in the
provinces: see Nagy 1871 and Piso 1991. They never identified themselves with the native Eravisci,
which is why the term municipium Eraviscorum is epigraphically totally unknown. Another fact is that in
Aquincum several Eraviscans settled down and some of their leaders can be found among the magistrates
of the new town (cp. RIU 1122).
Kovács 1997-1998, P. Kovács, ActaArchHung 55, 2004, 386-389.
K. H. Kérdő, Das Alenlager und Vicus der Víziváros. In: P. Zsidi (Hrsg.), Forschungen in Aquincum
1969-2002: zu Ehren von Klára Póczy. Budapest 2003, 81-84, ead., Das Kastell von Aquincum-Víziváros
und sein Vicus. Specimina Nova 13, 2009, 93-110.
O. Hirschfeld, Kleine Schriften. Berlin 1913, 734-743.
See Kovács 2003.

incolae,42 which is why they served as auxiliaries. Otherwise, receipt of Roman

citizenship did not change the earlier status of a peregrine (i.e. it remained in force)
as the text of the Tabula Banasitana clearly shows: AÉp 1971, 534: civitatem
Romanam salvo iure gentis dedimus. To judge from the inscriptions CIL VI 773 and
AÉp 1981, 134 the soldiers were still enlisted cum tribus (!) et patriis even in the
240s. According to the papyrus P. Berl. 11596R = BGU 1689 = ChLA X 422 the
soldiers were [di]gesti per co(n)s(ules) et nationes et [patrias].43 The term natio and
its Greek equivalent, the ethnos, in many cases refer to the name of the province but
the natio can also denote the tribal name (e.g. in the case of Pannonian equites
singulares Augusti described as natione Varcianus and Boius: CIL VI 3257 =
32785a, 3308). In these cases the natio does not refer to the civitas either.44 That is
why Upper Pannonian auxiliary soldiers during the Jewish revolt under Hadrian
called themselves cives Sisc(iani) et Varcian(i) et Latobici in Samaria (AÉp 1909,
235 = 1938, 13). Similarly, Pannonian praetorians with Roman citizenship and
home-towns Cibalae and Mursa called themselves in Rome cives Cotini even under
Decius (CIL VI 2833 = 32542, 325444, 32557). The same situation can be observed
in the case of the fragmentary inscription CIL III 10608 = Tit. Aq. 7992 that was
erected to the veterans (?) and militibus leg. II ad. civi[bus] Eraviscis.45 As was
proposed by T. Nagy, I interpret this as meaning that these cives Eravisci (probably
in the 2nd half of the 2nd c.) were at the same time of Eraviscan origin and Roman
citizens (as they were legionaries).46

Military vici

Pannonian inscriptions can provide some new information on the long disputed
problems of the military territories of the Roman Empire.47 Besides the boundary
stones from Hispania, Germania and Dalmatia recording prata legionis or cohortis
(CIL II 2916a, 5807, AÉp 1935, 13 = 1961, 345, 1946, 17-19, 1982, 578, CIL III
13250, AÉp 1988, 923) only the territorium legionis II adiutricis is attested, where a
balneum was built under Severus Alexander (CIL III 10489 = Tit. Aq. 5). Such
territories cannot be identified with the territory of canabae or of auxiliary vici,
which in the Danubian provinces, especially in Pannonia, were simply called
territorium, e. g. in the case of canabae: Reginum: aedilis territorii contributi et

F. Vittinghoff, Römische Kolonisation und Bürgerrechtspolitik unter Caesar und Augustus.
Wiesbaden 1952, 20-22.
Speidel 1986, 474.
Th. Mommsen, Ges. Schrift. VI. Berlin 1910, 46.
Mócsy 1959. 264 Nr. 238/4, T. Nagy, Die Regierungsjahre des C. Caesar mit besonderer Rücksicht
auf Illyricum. ActaAntHung 29, 1981, 341 Anm. 28, Bölcske, 346 Anm. 128.
Nagy T., Az Óbuda “hatházi” felirat – Die Inschrift von Óbuda “Hatháza”. ArchÉrt 114-115, 1987-
1988, 18.
Mócsy 1972, Vittinghoff 1974, Bérard 1993, Kovács 1999.

k(anabarum) R(eginensium) – III 1437010, Troesmis: territorium Troesmensium –

IScM V 135, vici: Vetus Salina: territorium Vetussalinensium – III 10305, Matrica:
territorium Matricensium: RIU 1429, Arrabona: territorium Arrabonensium: CIL VI
36351, territorium Capidavense: III 12491, Sucidava: territorium Sucidavensium:
IDR II 190, Arcobadara: territorium Arcobadarensium: AÉp 2006, 1130 = 2007,
1190, Abritus: territorium Abritanorum: AÉp1985, 765, Chester-le-Street – RIB
1049.48 Who these Vetussalinenses or Matricenses were is demonstrated by a new
altar from Odiavum / Almásfüzitő (ZPE 174, 2010, 282 Nr. 5), which was erected
by the collegium fabrum Odiavensium, i. e. the Odiavenses were clearly the
inhabitants of the auxiliary vicus. A building inscription of a burgus from Montana
clearly shows the difference between the soldiers (castrenses) and the civilians
(Montanenses) as it was built in 256 [pro]pter tutela[m] [c]astrensium et [c]ivium
Montane(n)sium (CIL III 12376). These settlements were obviously vici because
their inhabitants were called vikani as several inscriptions from Britannia show (RIB
899, 1616, 1700). The most explicit case is known from Veluniate where they were
called vikani consistentes castell[o] Veluniate (RIB 3503). On the other hand,
sometimes they were called pagi as was Micia / Vecel in Dacia (IDR III/3, 69, 80)
or Rapidum in Numidia (CIL VIII 20834-35). The inhabitants of the canabae were
simply called canabenses: RIU 1499 (Székesfehérvár, originally in Aquincum), IDR
III/5, 74, 240, 438 (Apulum), IScM V, 155 (Troesmis), CIL XIII 5967 (Argentorate)
or canabarii: CIL XIII 6730, 11806 (Mogontiacum) (in Vindonissa also called
vikani: 5194-519549).
Another question arises: what was the status of these territoria?50 Normally, vici
were not dignified by the name of a civitas (Isid. Etym. XV.2.1) and the vicani
belonged to a res publica to which their vicus answers (Ulp. 50.1.30) (see above). In
this case however these settlements cannot be called a territorium, because only a
civitas (res publica) could have had a territory (Pomp. Dig. 16, 239, 8, Sic. Flacc.
De cond. agr. 135, 3-6): universitas agrorum intra fines cuiusque civitatis. At the
end of the enumeration of the settlement forms of Gallia Cisalpina in the lex Rubria
49 BC the word territorium is mentioned too: lex Rubria II, 3, 26, 53, 56, 58 (CIL I
22 592): o(ppido), m(unicipio), c(olonia), p(raefectura), f(oro), v(ico) c(astello)
t(erritorio)ve. It seems that the territoria were the other settlements that did not
belong to the earlier ones.51 For instance on the basis of Siculus Flaccus (De cond.
agr. 162, 27-163, 4) it is clear that there were areas dedicated to god(s) and their
collegia of priests. These were also called territoria (cf. Tac. Ann. III.62, SIG 747).
It is enough to mention the case of Diana Tifatina and Diana of Ephesus (cf. Strab.

Bérard 1992, Kovács 1999, Kovács 2001. In the case of Mogontiacum the word civitas was used:
CIL XIII 6727 civitas Mog[ontiac(ensium)].
In Argentorate and Mogontiacum the vicus was a district of the canabae: CIL XIII 5967, 6722: Cp.
the expression [G]enio vici ca[n]abar(iorum) et vi[ca]nor(um) canabensium and Wolff 1976, 38-44.
Kovács 2001.
Th. Mommsen, RSt III, 799, Liebenam 1900, 5.

14.1.26) where several cippi of these areas are attested (CIL X 3828 = ILS 251,
3240, AÉp 1966, 425 = IEph 459, CIL III 141951).52 It seems that there were several
other, non-privileged (below a colonia or a municipium) settlement forms
(praefectura, conciliabulum, vicus, castellum), especially in late Republican Italy,
that could also have had a territorium. In these cases they could also be called
territorium. Several praefecturae were treated as res publicae, civitates with a
territorium (cp. Sic. Flac. De cond. agr. 135, 1-2 civitates enim, quarum condiciones
aliae sunt, coloniae dicuntur, municipia, quaedam praefecturae, 163, 20-21
territoria inter civitates, id est inter municipia et colonias et praefecturas, 163, 27-
28 respiciuntur leges civitatibus datae, id est coloniis municipiisque et praefecturis,
Festus 262 L praefecturae eae appellabantur in Italia, in quibus et ius dicebatur et
nundinae aguntur … et erant quaedam earum rei publicae neque tamen magistratus
suos habebant). Normally, the praefecturae belonged to the territory of another
town (Agen. Urb. 80, 1-3 De contr. agr. coloniae quoque loco habent adsignata in
alienis finibus, quae loca solemus praefecturas appellare cp. Sic. Flacc. De cond.
agr. 160, 1-10, Front. De agr. qual. 26, 8-10, Hyg. De lim. const. 171, 5-7). The
possibility that other settlement forms could be res publicae / civitates is confirmed
by Isidore who gave the following definition on the word civitas in Orig. XV.2.7:
civitates autem aut coloniae aut municipia aut vici aut castella aut pagi appellantur.
Probably this phenomenon was mentioned in Festus’ explanation on the two types of
the vici (rural and municipals) too: 502 L Sed ex vicis partim habent rempublicam et
ius dicitur, partim nihil eorum et tamen ibi nundinae aguntur negoti gerendi causa,
et magistri vici, item magistri pagi quotannis fiunt that clearly distinguishes two
types of the rural vici.53 The Codes also mention the latter type of vici: Cod. Iust. qui proprios fines habebant.54 Based on the epigraphic material,
submunicipal territorial units were also called res publica as with vici, pagi and
castella in Africa, especially from the 3rd century55: e.g. CIL VIII 6356 res publica
castelli Mastar(ensis), CIL V 7749 = I 199, CIL VIII 8811 territorium Aureliese (cp.
AÉp 1963, 96 with the civitates LXIIII pagi Thuscae et Gunzuzi). In Africa even an
ordo of a vicus is attested (CIL VIII 17639) and magistri pagi aed. iurisdictionis
(CIL VIII 2095-96, 2103, 2114). The vicus of Verecunda was also a respublica
before granting of the municipium rank (CIL VIII 4206). In several cases these
submunicipal territorial units (called village republics) became seats of bishoprics as

Th. Mommsen, RSt II, 59.
On the interpretation of this problematical and corrupted passage: C. Letta, Vicus rurale e vicus
urbano nella definizione di Festo (PP.502 E 508 L.). RCulClMedioev 47, 2005, 81-96, E. Todisco, Sulla
glossa “vici” nel “De verborum significatu” di Festo. La struttura del testo. In: L. Capogrossi Colognesi –
E. Gabba (eds.), Gli statuti municipali. Pavia 2006, 605-614.
Tarpin 2002, 262-263.
S. Aounallah, Pagus, castellum et civitas. Études d’épigraphie et d’histoire sur la village et la cité en
Afrique romaine. Bordeaux 2010, 156-160 (summarily).

well.56 It is also worth mentioning that the lex Iulia municipalis (CIL 206=FIRA I
13, 83, 84, 108, 119, 2124, 126, 127, 130, 135), the lex Mamilia and Paulus Sent.
rec. IV.6.2 do not enumerate the territorium (and the castellum either). The military
territoria (CIL III 10489) and the areas around the auxiliary forts and legionary
fortresses can also belong to this special group. They could not be classified as a
regular vicus, pagus or town (municipium, colonia), therefore they were called
simply territorium. These settlements also had some kind of self-government (cp.
the ordo of Aquincum Tit. Aq. 359 or the curiales of Sucidava IDR II 190).
On the other hand, it also has to be mentioned that several times instead of the
word territorium one of its synonyms (mostly regio) was used.57 It is enough to cite
the case of Montana (a gold mine district under strict military control in Moesia
inferior with a praesidium (AÉp 1927, 95) and a garrison,58 where the territory was
also called territorium but is mainly known as regio: AÉp 1987, 881 (ag(ens)
t(erritorio) M(ontanensium)), 1957, 41 (a(gens) v(ico) [in] reg(ione)
Mont(anensium)), AÉp 1969/70, 577 (agens re(gione) Mont[an(ensium)]), CIL III
12385 (per re[g(ionem)] Mont(anensium)) (cp. CIL IV 4012=ILS 5387, CIL III
195). Several beneficiarius altars are known from Samum in Dacia with the
expression agens Samo cum regione Ans(- - -) (CBFIR 530-531, 525?, CIL III 822)
where the letters ANS can be most likely expanded as Ans(amenses), which would
mean the civilians of the area around the auxiliary fort of Samum (ad Samum), i.e.
the auxiliary vicus.59 In the case of the Jupiter altars from the Pfaffenberg close to
Carnuntum (Piso 2003, 6-11, 19) the expression intra leugam can also mean intra
territorium, to judge from an African milestone (AÉp 1979, 658) where the word
leuga was used instead of territorium (terminus leugae col. Canopitanae).60 That is
why the vicus (canabae) of Dimum could have had fines (IScM I, 67, l. 72-68, l. 71-
72: [a finibus ca]/[nab]arum Dimensium).
The leading social stratum in the canabae and vici was the organization of
veterani et cives Romani consistentes (with place-name or ad legionem …):
canabae: CIL III 3505 = Tit. Aq. 364 (Aquincum), Piso 2003, 6-11, 19
(Carnuntum), CIL III 6166 = IScM V, 154, IScM V, 135, 141, 154, 157 (Troesmis),
CIL III 7474, AÉp 1974, 571 (Durosturum), IDR III/5 38, 697 (Apulum), CIL XIII

L. Dossey, Peasant and empire in Christina North Africa. Berkeley–Los Angeles 2010, 110-114,
Leveau 1993.
Gerov 1988, 101-107, M. Speidel, Regionarii in Lower Moesia. ZPE 57, 1984, 185-188 = id.,
Roman Army Studies II. MAVORS VIII: Stuttgart 1992, 140-144.
Vékony G., Dákok, rómaiak, románok. Budapest 1989, 135-138, id., Dacians, Romans, Romanians.
Mathias Corvinus Publishing 2000, 111-112. The regio cannot be a civitas peregrina (cf. D. Isac, Vicus
Samum – eine Statio der Beneficiarier an der nördlichen Grenze Dakiens (mit Anhang von I. Bogdan
Cătăniciu). In: Der römische Weihebezirk von Osterburken II. Kolloquium 1990 und paläobotanische-
osteologische Untersuchungen. Stuttgart 1994, 205-217, 216) as there is no evidence for the existence of
peregrine civitates in Dacia.
Piso 1991 but see also Kovács 2000.

5197 (Vindonissa), CIL V 5747 (Moguntiacum), vici: AÉp CIL III 10305 (Vetus
Salina), RIU 1352 (Matrica), 1957, 97 (Abrittus), AÉp 1966, 356 (Sexaginta Prista),
IDR III/3 80-83 (Micia). These organizations were always led by two magistri (e. g.
CIL III 3505 = Tit. Aq. 364, 1008 = IDR III/5 74, 4298, 6162, 6166, RIU 596, RIB
899, IDR III/3 69, 80-83, 94, AÉp 1988, 986-990, IDR III/3, 69, 80-83, 94). If the
reading of A. Mócsy in the case of an altar from Gerulata (AÉp 1972, 445=1974,
502) is correct ([m]ag(ister) c(ivium) R(omanorum) i(ure) d(icundo))61 these
magistri were iure dicundo. In the light of this view the two magistri were the
magistrates who had the power intra territorium, as is found in Siculus Flaccus’
passage on the word territorium (De cond. agr. 135, 4-7): regiones (i. e. territoria)
autem dicimus intra quarum fines singularum coloniarum aut magistratibus ius
dicendi coercendique est libera potestas.62

Péter Kovács
Pázmány Péter Catholic University
Piliscsaba 2081 Egyetem u. 1 Hungary


Alföldy 1997 = G. Alföldy, Die Großen Götter von Gorsium. ZPE 115, 1997, 225-
Alföldy 1989 = G. Alföldy, Die regionale Gliederung in der römischen Provinz
Noricum. In: G. Gottlieb (Hrsg.), Raumordnung im Römischen Reich. Zur
regionalen Gliederung in den gallischen Provinzen, in Rätien, Noricum und
Pannonien. Kolloquium 1985. Schriften der Philosophischen Fakultäten der
Universität Augsburg 38. München 1989, 37-55.
Autonomous towns I = M. Šašel Kos – P. Scherrer – B. Kuntić-Makvić (Eds), The
Autonomous Towns of Noricum and Pannonia. Die autonomen Städte in
Noricum und Pannonien, Pannonien I. Situla 41. Ljubljana 2003.
Autonomous towns II = M. Šašel Kos – P. Scherrer – B. Kuntić-Makvić (Eds), The
Autonomous Towns of Noricum and Pannonia. Die autonomen Städte in
Noricum und Pannonien, Pannonien II. Situla 42. Ljubljana 2004.
Balla 1971 = Balla L., Possessores et vicani vici Vindoniani (Ad CIL III 10570 =
3626). DDMÉ 1971, 55-64.
Bérard 1992 = F. Bérard, Vikani, kanabenses, consistentes: Remarques sur
l’organisation des agglomérations militaires romaines. Epigrafia e Antichità
12, 1993, 61-90.

Mócsy 1980, 369 Anm. 28.
Liebenam 1900, 5.

Bérard 1993 = F. Bérard, Territorium legionis: camps militaires et agglomérations

civiles aux premiers siècles de l’empire. Cahiers du Centre G. Glotz III.
Paris 1992, 75-105.
Bölcske = Á. Szabó – E. Tóth (Hrsg.) Bölcske. Römische Inschriften und Funde.
Libelli Archaeologici – Régészeti Füzetek SN II. Budapest 2003.
Fishwick 2000 = D. Fishwick, The Sacred Area at Gorsium (Pannonia Inferior).
Phoenix 54, 2000, 309-331 = The imperial cult in the Latin West. Studies in
the ruler cult of the western provinces of the Roman empire III. Provincial
cult. 3. The provincial centre, the provincial cult. Leiden 2004, 149-172.
Fitz 1993-1995 = J. Fitz, Die Verwaltung Pannoniens in der Römerzeit. I-IV. Budapest
Gabler 1994 = D. Gabler, Die ländliche Besiedlung Oberpannoniens. In: H. Bender –
H. Wolff (Hrsg.), Die ländliche Besiedlung und Landwirtschaft in den
Rhein-Donau-Provinzen des Römischen Reiches. Passauer Universitäts-
schriften zur Archäologie 2. Passau 1994, 377-419.
Kolendo 1994 = J. Kolendo, La relation ville/campagne dans les provinces
danubiennes. Réalité et son reflet dans la mentalité. In: H. Bender – H. Wolff
(Hrsg.), Ländliche Besiedlung und Landwirtschaft in den Rhein-Donau-
Provinzen des römischen Reiches. Vorträge eines Internationalen
Kolloquiums von 16.-21. 1991 in Passau. Passauer Unversitätsschriften Bd.
2. Espelkamp 1994, 87-99.
Kovács 1997-1998 = P. Kovács, Civitas Eraviscorum. Antaeus 24, 1997-1998, 278-
Kovács 1999 = Kovács P., Castellum és vicus kapcsolata az alsó-pannoniai limes
mentén. Studia Classica – Series Historica 1. Piliscsaba 1999.
Kovács 2000 = P. Kovács, Consistentes intra leugam. In: Epigraphica I. Hungarian
Polis Studies 6. Debrecen 2000, 39-56.
Kovács 2001 = P. Kovács, The Pannonian canabae in the 3rd century. Laverna 12,
2001, 42-66.
Kovács 2003 = P. Kovács, Mogetiana und sein Territorium. In: Pannonica provincialia
et archaeologia. Budapest 2003, 277-306.
Kovács 2002 = Kovács P., Oppidum Scarbantia Iulia. AntTan 46, 2002, 147-190.
Kovács 2006 = P. Kovács, A woman from Arrabona in Rome. In: Epigraphica III.
Politai et cives. Studia sollemnia in honorem Geyzae Alföldy doctoris
honoris causa Universitatis Debreceniensis. Hungarian Polis Studies 13.
Debrecen 2006, 165-170.
Leveau 1993 = Ph. Leveau, Territorium urbis. Le territoire de la cité et ses divisions:
du vocabulaire aux réalités administratives. REA 95, 1993, 459-471.
Liebenam 1900 = W. Liebenam, Städteverwaltung im römischen Kaiserreiche.
Leipzig 1900.
Mócsy 1951 = A. Mócsy, Attributio Aquincumban és a város decurioi – Attributio
in Aquincum and the municipal decuriones. ArchÉrt 78, 1951, 107- 110.

Mócsy 1959 = A. Mócsy, Die Bevölkerung von Pannonien bis zu den

Markomannenkriegen. Budapest 1959.
Mócsy 1962 = A. Mócsy, Pannonia. PWRE IX. Supplementum. Stuttgart 1962, 515-
Mócsy 1972 = A. Mócsy, Das Problem der militärischen Territorien im Donauraum.
ActaAntHung 20, 1972, 133-168 = id., Pannonien und das römische Heer.
MAVORS VII. Stuttgart 1992, 125-160.
Mócsy 1974 = A. Mócsy, Pannonia and Upper Moesia: A history of the Middle
Danube provinces of the Roman Empire. London–Boston 1974.
Mócsy 1980 = A. Mócsy, Zu den Auxiliarvici in Pannonien. In: Studien zur antiken
Sozialgeschichte. Köln–Wien 1980, 365-376 = Pannonien und das
römische Heer. MAVORS VII. Stuttgart 1992, 161-173
Mráv–Ottományi 2005 = Zs. Mráv – K. Ottományi, A pag(us) Herc(ulius) és
vicusainak Terra Mater oltára Budaörsről. Specimina nova 19, 2005, 71-
Nagy 1971 = T. Nagy, Der Vicus von Aquincum. ActaArchHung 23, 1971, 59-81.
Nemeti – Bărbulescu 2006-2007 = S. Nemeti – M. Bărbulescu, Territorium
Arcobadarense. Ephemeris Napocensis, 16-17, 2006-2007 [2008], 107-118.
Piso 1991 = I. Piso, Die Inschriften von Pfaffenberg und der Bereich der canabae
legionis. Tyche 6, 1991, 131-169.
Piso 2003 = I. Piso, Jupiter Optimus Maximus auf dem Pfaffenberg/Carnuntum 1. Die
Inschriften. RLiÖ 41. Wien 2003.
Piso 2006 = I. Piso, Note sur le territorium Arcobadarense. AMN 43-44, 2006-2007,
Régészeti kézikönyv = Pannonia régészeti kézikönyve. Ed. Mócsy A. – Fitz J.
Budapest 1990.
Ricci 1993a = C. Ricci, Balcanici e danubiani a Roma. Attestazioni epigraphiche di
abitanti delle province Rezia, Norico, Pannonia, Dacia, Dalmazia, Mesia,
Macedonia, Tracia (I-III sec.). Parte I: I civili. In: Prosopographica. Poznań
1993, 141-173.
Ricci 1993b = C. Ricci, Balcanici e danubiani a Roma. Attestazioni epigraphiche di
abitanti delle province Rezia, Norico, Pannonia, Dacia, Dalmazia, Mesia,
Macedonia, Tracia (I-III sec.). Parte II: I militari. In: Prosopographica.
Poznań 1993, 175-208.
Šašel 1989 = J. Šašel, Die regionale Gliederung in Pannonien. In: Raumordnung im
Römischen Reich. Zur regionalen Gliederung in den gallischen Provinzen,
in Rätien, Noricum und Pannonien, München 1989, 57-73 = id., Opera
selecta, Situla 30. Ljubljana 1992, 690-706.
Speidel 1986 = M. P. Speidel, The soldiers’ home. In: Heer und Integrationspolitik.
Die römischen Militärdiplome als historische Quelle. Köln – Wien 1986,
Thomas 1964 = E. B. Thomas, Römische Villen in Pannonien. Budapest 1964.

Visy 1994 = Zs. Visy, Die ländliche Besiedlung und Landwirtschaft in

Niederpannonien. In: H. Bender – H. Wolff (Hrsg.), Die ländliche
Besiedlung und Landwirtschaft in den Rhein-Donau-Provinzen des
Römischen Reiches. Passauer Universitätsschriften zur Archäologie 2.
Passau 1994, 421-449.
Vittinghoff 1973 = F. Vittinghoff, Die innere Verfassung römischer Städte –
Möglichkeite und Grenze der Epigraphik im Donauraum. In: Akten des VI.
Internationalen Kongresses für griechische und lateinische Epigraphik.
Vestigia 17. München 1973, 85-92.
Vittinghoff 1974 = F. Vittinghoff, Das Problem des „Militärterritoriums” 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 1974, 109-124.
Vittinghoff 1977 = F. Vittinghoff, Zur römischen Munizipalisierung des lateinischen
Donau-Balkanraumes. Methodische Bemerkungen. in: ANRW II/6. Berlin –
New York 1977, 4-51.
Wolff 1976 = H. Wolff, Die constitutio Antoniniana und Papyrus Gissensis 40 I.
Köln 1976.

Addendum – The sources on Pannonia

Vici and pagi in Pannonia

CIL III 3673 Aquincum ?- - - - - - / pro salute / Aug(usti) / [v]icanis

Ba/soretensi/bus / Prisco P(- - -) C(- - -) / d(ecreto) d(ecurionum).
CIL III 11122 Carnuntum I(ovi) [O(ptimo) M(aximo)] / pagu[s - - -] / per
Li[cinium] / Licini[anum] / et Alli[um.
AÉp 1934, 264 Carnuntum Loca / pagi / Aeleni.
AÉp 2005, 1265 Budaörs Terr(a)e Matri pro s(olute) / [[I[mpp(eratorum)]
Phi[l]ip[po]rum]] / [[Augg(ustorum)]] pag(us) Herc(- - -) / vicus
Teuto(nis) / et Bataion(is) [et] / Anarti[or(um) et] / +++[et] / - - - - - -.
RIU 1065 Intercisa I(ovi) O(ptimo) M(aximo) / pro sal(ute) / ddd(ominorum)
nnn(ostrorum) / Impp(eratorum) Augg[g](ustorum) / vicus
Ca/ramantesi/um et villa.
RIU 1256 Intercisa Senio Comatonis f(ilius) nat(ione) Era(viscus) h(ic) <s(itus) e(st)
ann(orum)> XXX in c(ivitate) Er(aviscorum) in Acinco d(efunctus) ...
TRH 152 Szigetszentmiklós [I(ovi)] O(ptimo) M(aximo) / pro salute / Im(peratoris)
(H)adriani / Aug(usti) votum / Silv[a]nus Tesco/ris [fil(ius?)] mil(es)
co(hortis) / vico Cuetrone.
Tit. Aq. 140 Aquincum I(ovi) O(ptimo) M(aximo) vicus Res(- - -) / posuit d(ecreto)
d(ecurionum) // Blandius / Victorinus.

Tit. Aq. 399 Aquincum [- - -] veteran[i] et mili(tes) / et pagani v(otum) s(olverunt)

l(ibentes) m(erito) …
Tit. Aq. 926 Aquincum I(ovi) O(ptimo) M(aximo)] / Iunoni [Re]g(inae) Min[e]rvae
/ [c]eteris dis deabus[que] / omnibus possessor/[e]s vic[i] Vindoniani / ex
voto pusueru/nt q[u]or(um) no[m]in[a] / sunt / Aur(elius) Aep[ic]tetianu(s)
sac(erdos) / [A]ur(elius) Vettianus eq(uo) p(ublico) / Iul(ius) V]ctorinus
de[c(urio)] / [A]ur(elius) [I]anuarius vet(eranus) / Aur(elius) Tropimus
O[- - -] / [U]lp(ius) Candidianu[s63 - - -] / [A]ur(elius) Maximu[s - - -] /
Ant(onius) Quirin[us - - -] / III Id(us) O[ct(obres) Imp(eratore) d(omino)
n(ostro) Ale]/xan[dro Severo Aug(usto) III et] / Ca[s]si[o Dione II
co(n)s(ulibus)] // item M(arcus) Aur(elius) / Aepictetianus / dec(urio)
col(oniae) Aq(uincensium) / sacerdotalis in (h)onorem vic[an(orum)] / vici
Vindoniani // quae ara con/secrata est / [i]n possessione / Aureli Vetti/ani
eq(uitis) R(omani) per/missu eius/dem precario / petentibus / vicanis

Tituli externi
CIL VI 2494 Roma D(is) M(anibus) / Iul(ius) Nero / mil(es) coh(ortis) III
pr(aetoriae) / (centuria) Victoris / vix(it) an(nos) XXXVI / mil(itavit)
an(nos) XIII / oriundus in / Pannonia supe/riore pede / Faustiniano /
Aur(elius) Dassius / e[t] Iulius / Valerianus / her(e)d(es) b(ene) m(erenti) /
f(e)c(e)r(unt) // D(is) M(anibus) / [- - - Mevi]o Liciniano qui / [vix(it)
a(nnis) - - -]I m(ensibus) VII fecer(unt) Mevi/[us [- - -]us et Licinia
Eutychia / [filio(?) et sib]i suis posterisq(ue) eor(um) / [in] agr(o) p(edes)
III in fr(onte) p(edes) III.
CIL VI 2544 Roma D(is) M(anibus) / Pletorio Primo fisci / curatori coh(ortis) / IIII
pr(aetoriae) (centuria) / Silvani oriundus ex pro/vincia Panno(nia)
inferiore / natus castello Vixillo qui / vixit annis XXXV m(ensibus) IIII /
mil(itavit) an(nis) XV m(ensibus) VIII Veturia / Digna marito b(ene)
m(erenti) f(ecit).
CIL VI 3297 Roma D(is) M(anibus) / Ulpius Cocceius eq(ues) s(ingularis) d(omini)
n(ostri) / castris nov(is) t(urma) Kasti ex Pan(nonia) / sup(eriore) natus ad
Aquas Balizas / pago Iovista vic(o) Coc[co]/netibus stip(endiorum) XII
ann(orum) XXX [- - -] / Victor frater et Iul(ius) Proc[- - -] / [he]r(e)d(es)
CIL VI 3300 Roma Ulpius [I]an[u]arius eq(ues) s(ingularis) [t(urma)] Prisci /
kast(ris) priori(bus) qui vixit annis / XXVIIII mil(itavit) annis VIIII natio/ne
Pannoniae superiore C(laudia) Sa/vari[a] vico Voleuci[o]nis et Oc/tavius
Dignus eq(ues) s(ingularis) c[a]s[tris p(rioribus) he(res) / et Aur(elia)

As recently B. Fehér reads, in: Bujkáló adatok Aquincumból a nem-szabványos latin nyelvhasználatra,
in: FiRKák II, Győr 2012, 175, note 16.

Novana co(n)iux ka(rissima) sec(unda) he(res) / heredes b(ene) merenti

CIL VI 36351 Roma D(is) M(anibus) | Silvania Cresce[ntina vix]|it annis LX nata
[Panno]|nia Su[pe]r[i]ore ter[ritorio] | Ar(r)abone(nsium) Silban[ius - - -
]|us Silbania Rom[ana (?) - - -]|es matri et do[minae b(ene)meren]|ti
CIL VI 37213 Roma D(is) M(anibus) s(acrum) Aur(elio) Vero mil(iti) c(o)hor(tis)
VI pr(a)et(oriae) (centuria) Blicisi stup(endiorum) XIIII nat(ione) /
Pannon(io?) pede Sirmese pago Ma/rtio vico Budalia qui (vi)xit an(nos) /
XL m(enses) III d(ies) XV mil(i)t(avit) in l(egione) I Atiut/rice
stup(endiorum) IIII Aur(elius) Marcellus / et Aur(elius) Florinus Val(erius)
/ Avitianus et omnes com(m)anipuli sui / de re ipsius b(ene) m(erenti)
f(ecerunt) ex (denariis) L milibus.
CIL VI 37224 Roma D(is) M(anibus) s(acrum) / Val(erius) Pat<e>rnianus mi/lix (!)
coh(ortis) X pr(aetoriae) (centuria) Boni qui / vixit annis XL m(ensibus) III
/ dies X militavit in le/gione annis XI in prae/tor(i)am annu(m) et m(enses)
V / natione Pannonica / pago Traiani Val(erius) Ve/recundus et Iul(ius)
Pris/cianus (h)eredes huius / b(ene) m(erenti) f(ecerunt).
CIL V 892 Aquileia D(is) M(anibus) / Aur(elio) Clariano / Aur(elius) Maximianus /
m(iles) leg(ionis) primes (!) / atiu[tricis (!) p]os(uit) / fra[tri caris]simo /
nat[o in Pann(onia) (?) i]n[f]e/rio[re pago] Mar(tio) / vic[o - - -]diano /
an[n(orum) - - -]XVIII
AÉp 1914, 296 Bostra D(is) M(anibus) / in hoc moni/mento posita / sum ego
Val(eria) Con/stantia ex provin/cia Pannunia(!) vico / Doecis (q)uae vixit /
an(nos) XXXV cuius hunc / tit(u)lun(!) posuit Fl(avius) / Mercellinus
cen(turio) / virginiae suae / (a)ete(rna) s(ede) p(osita) ego h(ic) q(uiesco).
RMD 194 Porcuna/Obulco … M(arco) Aurelio Capitolini f[i]l(io) Valen/ti Cibalis
ex Pannonia i[nf(eriore)] pago / Augusto vico S[- - -] …

Villae rusticae – Fundi – Termini

AÉp 2005, 1272 Budaörs boundary stone Ulp(ii) Kari.
ILJ 3013 Beočin Age(r) / vici Iosi/sta ads/ig(natus) Ti(berio) Cl(audio) Pr/isco
pr(a)ef(ecto) / alae I c(ivium) R(omanorum) // c(aput) a(gri) e(xcepti).
RIU 1085 Intercisa I(ovi) O(ptimo) M(aximo) / pro sal(ute) / ddd(ominorum)
nnn(ostrorum) / Impp(eratorum) Augg[g](ustorum) / vicus
Ca/ramantesi/um et villa.

Military vici in Pannonia

CIL III 10305 = RIU 1442 = AÉp 2001, 1668 Vetus Salina [Templum et statu]am
Genii civib(us) R(omanis) / [et consist(entibus) terri]t(orii)
Vetuss(alinensium), quae M(arcus) Ulp(ius) / [- - - datis ex tes]t(amento)
(sestertium) X (milibus) n(ummum) fieri iusserât, / [M(arcus) Ulp(ius) IIvir

(?)] m(unicipii) Aq(uincensis) d(ecurio) col(oniae) Murs(ensium)

sacerd(os) / [prov(inciae) Pannon(iae) Inf(erioris) tr(ibunus) l]eg(ionis)
XII Fulmin(atae) memoriâm / [patris loco publico te]rritori ex (sestertium)
XXXX (milibus) n(ummum) fec(it).
RIU 1429 Matrica - - - - - - / [pro salute] / civerom[an]/or(um) (!) territ(orii)/
Matric/ensium Ael(ius) Vic[t/]/or vet(eranus) [leg(ionis)] II / ad[i(utricis)
Pater[no et] / [- - - co(n)s(ulibus)] / [v(otum) s(olvit) l(ibens) merito)].
CIL VI 36351 see above.
ZPE 174, 2010, 282 Nr. 5. Odiavum [I(ovi) O(ptimo)] M(aximo) et Iun(oni)
Reg(inae) /p(ro) s(alute) dd(ominorum) nn(ostrorum) Augg(ustorum) /
sac(rum) col(legium) fabr(um) / Odiavens(ium) / v(otum) s(olvit) l(ibens)

Fig. 1: Pannonia (after Mócsy)

(on the next page)