Death circumstances and their pointing out on funerary inscriptions of the Roman Dacia
Raluca Chendea
As secondary information the cause of death may also be recorded. In this matter one may take into consideration three inscriptions of people killed by brigands, these being the only documents of this type existing in Dacia.[1] The inscriptions were discovered on the territory of Drobeta, a fact which may suggest the possibility that the mentioned brigands be the same in all three cases. In what concerns their identity, D. Tudor considers that it is the case of the fight of those oppressed against the Roman exploiters,[2] dissatisfied in relationship with this authority of the natives who took action along the great roads and in the timbered lands.
With reference to the contents of the epitaphs, the first two refer to men who are Roman citizens (as opposed to the case of the girl who had illirian reminiscences) and are both part of the order of the decurions, occupying important positions: L. Iulius Bassus was ‘quaestor’ and was assigned with the finances of the municipality,[3] and P. Aelius Ariortus quattorvir, was one of the four magistrates (two own the judging power and two function as ‘aedile’) assigned with the city administration.[4]
In the case of these two persons it is credible the idea that they would have been attacked due to the insatisfactions of the natives [5] but, the location where the inscriptions were discovered suggests that they were robbed out of sheer bad luck, hypothesis acceptable also in the case of the young girl [6]. She was not a Roman citizen, therefore the object of the crime would not be explained in the case in which these latrones would have been as it was specified, some individuals who compromised the Roman power. They are some brigands who will be punished for their deed, at least in the case of L. Iulius Bassus and of the young girl, their epitaphs specifying the fact that their death was avenged [7].
Other information is available also with reference to the specification of the cause of death, like: defunctus in militia [8] , sua manu cecidit [9] , bello interfectus [10] , parto primo post diem XVI relicto filio decessit [11] , information which, correlated with other details of the inscription may help in its more exact dating.
References:
1. C. Wolf, in Funeraria, p.208.
2. D.Tudor, in SCIV, 4, 1953, p.595
3. CIL, III, 1579 ; IDR, III/1, 71.
4. CIL, III, 1559 ; IDR, III/1, 118.
5. Idem, OltRom, p.156-157.
6. C.Wolf, op.cit., p.212
7. this formula can also be founded in others areas of the Empire: CIL,
III, 8242; CIL, XIII, 2282 ; CIL, XIII, 6429.
8. IDR, II, 205.
9. CIL, III, 1578; IDR, III/1, 85.
10. ILS, 2312.
11. ILS, 1914.
Abbreviation:
CIL = Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, Berlin.
ILS = Herm. Dessau, Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae, Berlin, I-III, 1892-1916.
IDR = Inscriptions of the Roman Dacia, Bucharest.
SCIV (A) = Sudies and researches of ancient history.
D.Tudor, OltRom = Dumitru Tudor, Oltenia romana , Bucharest, 1978.
| Do more:
Follow us on Twitter Subscribe via RSS |
One response so far
A very intriguing article, nevertheless, if I may point out some minor errors: L. Iulius Bassus, may be a Roman citizen, but the name Bassus is of Thracian origin…. he may be a peregrine who obtained Roman citizenship, thus changing his name into a Roman one, keeping the Thracian one as a “nickname” (cognomen)…. considering the fact that he was an official, he may be an ex-military officer who obtained citizenship after discharge, continuing his civil career as quaestor (his career should be pointed out in the inscription). Also, if the girl had a Roman style funerary monument we can’t disconsider the fact that she may have been the daughter of a Roman citizen who had a peregrine wife of Illyrian origin, thus the wife and children obtaining Roman rights after marriage.
Nevertheless, your interpretation of the three inscriptions seems corect, so keep up the good work