Constantine, The Sarmatians, The Goths and Pannonia

More ModoqueDie Wurzeln der europischen Kultur

und deren Rezeption im Orient und Okzident

Festschrift fr Mikls Marth

zum siebzigsten Geburtstag

More ModoqueDie Wurzeln der europischen Kultur

und deren Rezeption im Orient und Okzident

Festschrift fr MiKls MaRth zum siebzigsten Geburtstag

Forschungszentrum fr humanwissenschaften der Ungarischen akademie der Wissenschaften

Budapest 2013

herausgegeben vonPl Fodor, Gyula Mayer, Martina Monostori,

Kornl szovk und lszl takcs

Erschienen mit Untersttzung des Nationalen Kulturfonds(Nemzeti Kulturlis Alap, NKA)

Die Redaktion des Bandes erfolgte in Zusammenarbeit mit der Forschungsgruppe fr Altertumswissenschaft der UAW

Autoren, 2013

ISBN 978-615-5133-06-0

Umschlaggestaltung von Jnos Lengyel mit Bentzung des Titelblattes von Operum Aristotelis Tomus II, Genf 1597

Verantwortlicher Herausgeber: Pl Fodor, Generaldirektor des Forschungszentrums fr Humanwissenschaften der UAW

Druckvorbereitung: Team des Forschungszentrums fr Humanwissenschaften der UAW

Leiterin: va KovcsLayout: Imre Horvth

Druck: Kdex Kft.Verantwortlicher Leiter: Attila Marosi

Pter Kovcs

Constantine, the Sarmatians, the Goths and Pannonia

The young Constantine had to participate in one of Galerius campaigns against the Sarmatians where he fought gallantly as the Origo Constantini reports: II 3: nam et in Sarmatas iuvenis equestris militans ferocem Barbarum capillis tentis raptum, ante pedes [sub] Galerii imperatoris adduxerat. Deinde Galerio mittente per paludem equo ingressus suo, viam ceteris fecit ad Sarmatas, ex quibus plurimis stratis Galerio victoriam reportavit.1 The same story appears later in Zonaras account: XII 33: , . . . .2

Constantines stay as hostage in Galerius court and his attempts to kill him occur several times in the works of the pro- Constantine authors (e. g. Lactantius, De mortibus persecutorum 24, 24; Prax. FGrH 219; Aurelius Victor 40, 2; Epitome de Caesaribus 41, 2; Eusebius, Vita Constantini I 19).3 The historical value of the story seems to be dubious as, Origo Constantini dates it between Diocletians abdication (May 305) and Constantines travel to his father in Britain (summer of 305): 2, 4: Tunc eum Galerius patri remisit (cf. Lactantius, De mortibus persecutorum 24, 28; Aurelius Victor 40, 24, Epitome de Caesaribus 41, 23; Eusebius, Vita Constantini I 2021, Zosimos II 8, 29, 1). This date seems to be refuted by the fact that Galerius IVth and Vth Sarmaticus title must be dated between 306 and 308,4

1 Anonymus Valesianus: Origo Constantini I. Ed. I. Knig. Trier 1987, 7071.2 The history of Zonaras from Alexander Severus to the death of Theodosius the Great. Transl.

Th. M. Banchich E. N. Lane. Ed. Th. M. Banchich. New York 2009, 146 n. 154.3 Ensslin, W.: Galerius Maximianus. In PWRE XIV. Stuttgart 1930, col. 2525.4 Corcoran, S.: Galerius Maximinus and the titulature of the third tetrarchy. BICS 49

(2006) 23140; Barnes, T. D.: Constantine. Dynasty, religion and power in the Later Roman Empire. MaldenOxford 2011, 5253, 17980 Appendix B, contrast: Kovcs, P.: Fontes Pannoniae Antiquae in aetate tetrarcharum I. Budapest 2011, 18586.

194 PTER KOVCS

when Constantine was surely in Britain.5 Lactantius also mentioned Galerius attempts, among even the campaigns, but he also added the adverb saepe, i. e. he supposed a longer interval than MaySummer 305: 24, 4: Nam et [in] insidiis saepe iuvenem adpetiverat, quia palam nihil audebat, ne contra se arma civilia et, quod maxime verebatur, odia militum concitaret, sub obtentu exercitii ac lusus feris illum obiecerat. Based on these, the event mentioned in the Origo and Zonaras work must be dated earlier. During the rst tetrarchy Constantines participation in the war against the Persians is attested. The campaign can likely be identi ed with the Sarmatian war in 302 when Galerius took the imperial title Sarmaticus for the third time.6

Constantine already assumed (among others) the victory titles Sarmaticus max. and Gothicus max. before 316.7 It seems to be highly likely that he used Galerius, Maximinus Daias (before 313) and Licinius (between 313318) victory titles as he had no chance to gain a victory over the Sarmatians yet (and as Addendum 2 clearly shows). It must be supposed that Constantine used Licinius title Sarmaticus because Licinius gained a victory over the Sarmatians around 310 (cf. CIL III 5565 = ILS 664 altar from Noricum which is dedicated to Victoria ob victoria facta V K(alendas) Iulias). Around 315 Constantine assumed the title Gothicus max. and it seems to be obvious that Licinius was the one he had to ght against the Goths. No other source mentions this campaign but the ablative absolute edomitis ubique barbarum gentium populis of the building inscription of Tropaeum can refer to this event too (ILS 8938).8 The problem is that Licinius supposed title Gothicus

5 Barnes, T. D.: The new empire of Diocletian and Constantine. Cambridge, MALondon 1982, 69; Kienast, D.: Rmische Kaisertabelle. Grundzge einer rmischen Kaiserchronologie. Darmstadt 19962, 298; Barnes (n. 4) 5256, 6162. If the data Sarmaticus III of the military diploma RMD 78 dated to January 306 is erroneous it cannot be excluded that there was a campaign against the Sarmatians in 305 under Constantines command. This possibility would con rm the account of Anonymus Valesianus.

6 Barnes (n. 4) 53. On the campaign see Kovcs (n. 4) 185.7 Barnes, T. D.: The victories of Constantine. ZPE 20 (1976) 14955; Arnaldi, A.:

La succesione de i cognomina devictarum gentium e le loro iterazioni nella titolatura di Constantino il Grande. In Contributi di storia antica in onore di Albino Garzetti. Genova 1976, 175202; Grnewald, Th.: Constantinus Maximus Augustus. Herrschaftspropaganda in der Zeitgenssischen berlieferung. Historia Einzelschriften 64. Stuttgart 1990; Kienast (n. 5) 4244, 302; Corcoran (n. 4).

8 Romanae securitatis libertatisq(ue) vindicibus / dd(ominis) nn(ostris) Fl(avio) Val(erio) Constantino [[et Liciniano]] / [[Licinio]] Piis Felicibus aeternis Augg(ustis) / quorum virtute et providentia edomitis / ubique barbar{ar}um gentium populis / ad con rmandam limitis tutelam etiam / Trop(a)eensium civitas auspicato a fundamentis / feliciter opere constructa est / Petr(onius) Annianus v(ir) c(larissimus) et Iul(ius) Iulianus v(ir) em(inentissimus) praef(ecti) praet(orio) numini eorum semper dicatissimi.

CONSTANTINE, THE SARMATIANS, THE GOTHS AND PANNONIA 195

max. is not attested (in 318 he was still Sarmaticus and Germanicus max., cf. ILS 679).9 If the bellum Cibalense must be dated two years later (316 instead of 314 as the Consularia Constantinopolitana dated it: Chronica Minora I p. 231) it has to be supposed that Licinius title Gothicus was falsely omitted in the African insciption.

Constantine as emperor (when he gained control over Pannonia and the Lower Danube provinces in the civilian war against Licinius in 31631710) he also had to deal with the problems caused by the Sarmatians (and the Goths) in Pannonia and Moesia along the so-called ripa Sarmatica at least three times. In my paper I intend to study the sources and the chronology of these events. All sources can be found in the Addendum in chronological order.

Campaigns of the years 322 and 323

Despite the fact that several sources (see Addendum) mention Constantines rst Sarmatian campaign and several persons, people and places of the events are known, the chronology (322 or 323) and the identi cation of these persons are heavily disputed.11 The problem of the dating is caused

9 Andreotti, R.: Licinius (Valerius Licinianus). In Dizionatio depigra co di antichit romane IV. Ed. E. Ruggiero. Roma 1959, 9791041, 1032; Kienast (n. 5) 195.

10 Seeck, O.: Regesten der Kaiser und Ppste fr die Jahre 311 bis 476 n. Chr. Stuttgart 1919, 163; Benjamin, C.: Constantinus 2. In PWRE IV. Stuttgart 1900, coll. 101819; Vogt, J.: Die vita Constantini des Eusebius ber den Kon ikt zwischen Constantin und Licinius. Historia 2 (1954) 46371; Schlumberger, J.: Epitome de Caesaribus. Untersuchungen zu heidnischen Geschichtsschreibung des 4. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. Vestigia 18. Mnchen 1974, 19798; Habicht, Ch.: Zur Geschichte des Kaisers Konstantin. Hermes 86 (1958) 36078; Alfldi, M. R.: Die Niederemmeler Kaiser bel: zum Datum des ersten Krieges zwischen Konstantin und Licinius. BJ 176 (1976) 183200; Barnes, T. D.: Constantine and Eusebius. London 1981, 6667; Barnes (n. 5) 73, 82; Knig (n. 1) 11826; Kienast, D.: Das bellum Cibalense und die Morde des Licinius. In Roma renascens. Beitrge zur Sptantike und Rezeptionsgeschichte. Festschrift fr Ilona Opelt. Ed. M. Wissemann. Frankfurt am Main 1988, 14971; Grnewald (n. 7) 10812; Eutropii Breviarium ab urbe condita Eutropius, Kurze Geschichte Roms seit der Grndung. Ed. F. L. Mller. Palingenesia 56. Stuttgart 1995, 296; Eusebius: Life of Constantine. Eds. A. Cameron S. G. Hall. Oxford 1999, 233; Paschoud, F.: Zosime. Histoire nouvelle I, livres III. Paris 2000, 20810; Banchich (n. 2) 199200; T. Barnes (n. 4) 103104.

11 Seeck (n. 10) 172, C. Benjamin (n. 10) col. 101326, col. 1020; Patsch, C.: Beitrge zur Vlkerkunde Sdosteuropas 2. Banater Sarmaten. AAWW 62 (1925) 181216, 1619; Schmidt, L.: Die Ostgermanen. Mnchen 1934, 81; Alfldi, A.: Epigraphica IV. Art 2 (1941) 5556; Alfldi, A.: Aquincum a ksrmai vilgban. In Budapest trtnete I. Budapest 1942, 67677; Jrdnyi-Paulovics, I.: Nagyttnyi kutatsok. Rgszeti Fzetek 3. Budapest 1957, 57, 5154; Andreotti (n. 9) 9791041, 102324; Mcsy, A.: Pannonia. In PWRE IX. Supplementum. Stuttgart 1962, col. 515776, col. 572; Nagy,

196 PTER KOVCS

by that fact that the Chronica do not mention this campaign and its date but based on other sources it is sure that the campaign must be dated before Licinius death in 324. Another problem is that Constantine had two dif erent campaigns (against the Sarmatians and the Goths) in this period (in 322/323 and 332/334) and these people are almost always mentioned together in the sources (Eusebii vita Constantini IV 6; Aurelius Victor 41, 13; Sozomenus I 8,9; Socrates I 18, 4; Theoph. Chronographia p. 27, 3128,2; Zonaras XIII 2) or the Sarmatians were ommitted (Eutropius, X 7; Origo Constantini, V 21). All these passages refer to the events of 332 and 334 and the campaigns were described in these works only after Licinius death (and/or the foundation of Constantinople). Only the Origo Constantini V 21 mentions that there was another campaign of the emperor against the Goths just before the war against Licinius. This is why the hypothesis has been arisen that there would have been only one campaign in 323 and Anonymus Valesianus would have mentioned mistakenly the Goths instead of the Sarmatians.12 This hypothesis contradicts the data of other sources. A fragment of Petrus Patricius con rms a Sarmatian campaign before the civilian war (187A) and it mentions Constantines golden coinage referring to the victory. It is also added that these coins were not

T.: Buda rgszeti emlkei. In Budapest memlkei II. Budapest 1962, 13116, 59 j. 387; Thompson, E. A.: The Visigoths in the time of Wul la. Oxford 1966, 10; Stallknecht, B.: Untersuchungen zur rmischen Aussenpolitik in der Sptantike (306395 n. Chr.). Habelt Dissertationsdrcke Reihe Alte Geschichte 7. Bonn 1969, 34; Mcsy, A.: A rmaibarbr szomszdsg utols vszzada haznk terletn Das letzte Jahrhundert der rmischbarbarischen Nachbarschaft auf dem Gebiet unseres Landes. Cumania 1 (1972) 83101, 8687; Publilii Optatiani Porfyrii carmina II. Commentarium criticum et exegeticum. Ed. I. Polara. Corpus Scriptorum Latinorum Paravianum. Torino 1973, 4857, 5859, 11011, 27779; Barnes, T. D.: Publilius Optatianus Poprphyrius. AJPh 64 (1975) 4049, 17980, 182; Barnes (n. 7) 15253; Soproni, S.: Der sptrmische Limes zwischen Esztergom und Szentendre. Das Verteidigiungssystem der Provinz Valeria im 4. Jahrhundert. Budapest 1978, 11617; Barcel, P.: Roms auswrtige Beziehungen unter der Constantinischen Dynastie (306363). Regensburg 1981, 5153; Barnes (n. 10) 76, 258; Barnes (n. 5) 75; Wolfram, H.: Geschichte der Goten. Von den Anfangen bis zur Mitte des sechsten Jahrhunderts. Entwurf einer historischen Ethnographie. Mnchen 1979, 6263; Zosimus: Neue Geschichte. Eds. O. Veh S. Rebenich. Stuttgart 1990, 307308 Anm. 45; Grnewald (n. 7) 14749; Nagy, M.: The Hasdingian Vandals in the Carpathian Basin. A Preliminary Report. Specimina nova 9 (1993) 15784, 15859; Kienast (n. 5) 299; Paschoud (n. 10) 213; Garam, . Patay, P. Soproni, S.: Sarmatischen Wallsystem im Karpatenbecken. Rgszeti Fzetek II, 23. Budapest 20032, 60, 6970; Kulikowski, M.: Constantine and the northern Barbarians. In The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Constantine. Ed. N. Lenski. Cambridge 2006, 35960; Kulikowski, M.: Romes Gothic wars from the third century to Alaric. Cambridge 2007, 101102; Banchich (n. 2) 199200; Barnes (n. 4) 106.

12 Barnes (n. 7) 15253; Barnes (n. 5) 75.


accepted by Licinius.13 Indeed, several mints of Constantine mention the victory: aeses minted at London, Lyon, Trier, Arles and Sirmium with the legend SARMATIA DEVICTA, aurei and medaillons minted at Trier with the legends PRINCIPIA IVVENTVTIS / SARMATIA and GAVDIVM ROMANORVM / SARMATIA. All these mean that there had to be an interval between the victory and the war against Licinius when these aurei were minted, circulated and they were refused by Licinius. Based on this, the Sarmatian campaign could not be the casus belli of the war either. According to Origo Constantini, V 21 the Goths invaded rst Thracia and Moesia and after these came Constantines action (the same but distorted version of the event appears in Ioannes Lydus work (De magistratibus, II 10; III 31, 40). The campaign became the casus belli of the civilian war because during the campaign Constantine broke the status quo of 317 and entered at Licinius territory: Sed hoc Licinius contra dem factum questus est, quod partes suae ab alio fuerint vindicatae. In Constantines coinage there is no reference on this event. The problem cannot be explained by confusion ( Goths would have been mentioned instead of Sarmatians) because Constantines Sarmatian campaign in Pannonia did not reach Licinius territory. According to the treaty of 317 Moesia II, Scythia minor and Thracia belonged to Licinius reign: Origo Constantini, V 18 quo facto pax ab ambobus rmata est, ut Licinius Orientem, Asiam, Thraciam, Moesiam, minorem Scythiam possideret. In my opinion the situation is clear there were two dif erent campaigns against the Sarmatians in Pannonia and Moesia I and later a campaign against the Goths on the Lower Danube. Based on the coinage the Sarmatian war had to happen at least one year earlier. Porfyrius data concerning the Goths were totally neglected (see below).

Most of the data concerning the Sarmatian campaign can be found in the poems of the contemporary Christian poet, Optatianus Porfyrius who mentions several place-names. His longest account can be found in carmen VI. In this poem (wrote during his exile14) he wanted to celebrate Constantines victory over the Sarmatians and it alludes to several events of this war. According to Porfyrius account rst there was a Sarmatian invasion into province Valeria that was successfully repelled. Its place was also given: Campona victrix, an auxiliary fort at Budapest-Nagyttny south of Aquincum (lines 1821). The next known place of the campaign is Margum in Moesia prima (lines 2225). It is generally accepted that the emperor chased the enemy across the Danube in Sarmatia and he entered

13 Brizzi, G.: La vittoria sarmatica di Constantino e la propaganda liciniana. Alba Regia 17 (1976) 5963.

14 PLRE Optatianus 3; Barnes (n. 11) 17980.

198 PTER KOVCS

again at Roman soil by Margum in Moesia I where there was another victorious battle in the presence of the emperor (cf. the term caelestia facta in line 23) (another possibility cannot be ruled either: see below). The witness of these events (and the captives) was Bononia (testis) where the booty was distributed (lines 2628). A problem (that also shows Porfyrius was not an eyewitness of the events but he call himself factorum gnarus vates (line 17) or testis (line 33) is that he mentioned testis Bononia vicina with Margum. Margum can be identi ed with Oraje in Moesia I. Bononia can be identi ed with Vidin in Dacia ripensis east of Margum or with Banotor in Pannonia II west of Margum, both lies about at the same distance from Margum (c. 200 km). The former Bononia can be found on the ripa Gothica, the latter one on the ripa Sarmatica. Bononia with its counter-forti cation Castellum Onagrinum was the most important stratetegic point near Sirmium.15 Neither of them can be ruled out but the identi cation with the Pannonian Bononia seems to be more likely.16 Based on these three place-names the date of the campaign could be established too as O. Seeck pointed out. In the year 322 several edicts issued by Constantine at Sirmium and at Bononia (that also supports the identi cation with the Pannonian Bononia):17

Date Place Cod. Theod.

23. May Sirmium II.4.2, 18.2

12. June Sirmium IV.8.4

6. July Bononia XI.27.2

20. July Sirmim IV.8.5

26. July Savaria I.1.1

Unfortunately, this date cannot surely be con rmed by the date of the games in the circus at Rome ob Vict(orias) Sarmaticas on the 27th of July, because it goes back probably to the victories of Marcus Aurelius over the Sarmatians (and Marcomanni on the 30th) (Inscriptiones Italicae XIII,

15 Eadie, J. W. Petrovi, P.: The destruction and reoccupation of Bononia. In Sirmium IV. Beograd 1982, 118.

16 Patsch, C.: Beitrge zur Vlkerkunde Sdosteuropas 3. Die Vlkerbewegung an der unteren Donau in der Zeit von Diokletian bis Heraklius 1. Bis zur Abwanderung der Goten und Taifalen au Transdanuvien. AAWW 208/2 (1928) 17.

17 Seeck, O.: Die Zeitfolge der Gesetze Constantins. ZRG 10 (1889) 18889; Seeck (n.10) 172.


2, 42 Fasti Chronographi a. CCCLIIII)18 and it has nothing to do with Constantine.19

Another problem has been caused by the fact that Porfyrius other poems have been left out of consideration in the point of view of the military history (with the exception of Polara, 1973). In poem VII wrote at the same time as carmen VI 20 he mentions again the victories over the Barbarians, esp. the Sarmatians: lines 3132: Tantorum merita statues captiva tropaea, victor Sarmatiae totiens. More interesting is that in lines 2021 he mentions indomiti reges who were defeated or killed in battle (in bello sternens) or treaty (foedus) was signed. Rausimodus must be among the kings, and the foedus highly likely means the peace treaty between the Romans and Sarmatians.21 In poem XVIII (wrote around 324 [and not later]22) Porfyrius refers again to Constantines victories over the Sarmatians and Goths several times. Moreover, in lines 1112 he mentions again the Sarmatian king: Vincere orenti Latiales Sarmata ductu rex tibi posse Getas uiso dat limite, ultor. The Goths are mentioned again in line 8 (Sic et victa refert exortos Dacia Francos) where the abandoned province Dacia concerns to its new inhabitants, the Goths. More interesting is line 5 where the followings are mentioned: the famous (campo clarus) and wild (torva) commander of the Goths (obviously a king), Getas (in the Nominative) died (lumina perdit).23 The person can also be identi ed with Rausimodus (see below).

A similar account to Porfyrius poem VI can be found in Zosimus work (II 21) where he also described the Sarmatian invasion and Constantines campaign. According to Zosimus, rst the Sarmatian king, Rausimodus from the Maeotis sailed across the Danube and attacked a strongly garrisoned town and they tried to burn the wooden part of the wall. As Constantine arrived he fell on them from the rear taking many prisoners and killing others. The rest ed back across the river with the intention of later ravaging Roman territory again. Constantine followed and killed many of them including the

18 Salzman, M. R.: On Roman Time: the codex-calendar of 354 and the rhythms of urban life in late antiquity. Berkeley 1990, 13738; Curran, J.: Pagan city and Christian capital. Rome in the fourth century. Oxford 2000, 22130; Herz, P.: Neue Forschungen zum Festkalendar der rmischen Kaiserzeit. In Praxis der Herrscherverehrung in Rom und seinen Provinzen. Eds. H. Cancik K. Hitzl. Tbingen 2003, 5558.

19 Contrast: Lippold, A.: Konstantin und die Barbaren (Konfrontation? Integration? Koexistenz?). SIFC 85 (1992) 377; Kulikowski (n. 11 [2006]) 359.

20 Polara (n. 11) 35.21 Polara (n. 11) 5859; Barnes (n. 11 [1975]) 180.22 Polara (n. 11) 107109; Barnes (n. 11 [1975]) 182.23 Polara (n. 11) 10910. The latest event in the poem is Constantines eastern conquest in

324 (lines 67, 1315).

200 PTER KOVCS

Sarmatian king but spared the life of the rest who sought mercy. After the campaign he returned to his headquarters with the captives.

It is heavily disputed especially by German scholars24 that Zosimus account would concern Constantines campaign of 322 in Pannonia against the Sarmatians. On the other hand, the Hungarian and international research accepts generally the identi cation of Porfyrius and Zosimus story.25 The problems are the following:

1. Rausimodus name obviously seems to be German.2. In Zosimus account the Sarmatians came from the Maeotis (region

of the Azovian sea).3. The work of Zosimus is not continuous. There is ve-year-long lack

between 317322 (cf. II 2021). Based on this, the historical work would continue with the campaign against the Goths in 323 just before the civil war.

4. Chapter 22 continues the story with the captives and the following war against Licinius.

5. Zosimus story does not follow the story of Porfyrius exactly (the events around Margum and Bononia are missing).

6. There is no mention in this poem of Porfyrius (carm. VI) on the death of king Rausimodus.

7. Zosimus cannot be identi ed with the auxiliary fort of Campona. He describes a civilian town that had a strong garrison.

A generally accepted hypothesis is given by S. Paschoud and it says Zosimus mixed the war against the Sarmatians in 322 and the war against the Goths in 323. At the beginnning of the chapter he described the events of the war in 322 (par. 12) but he nished it with the events of the war in 323 (par. 3) but this possibility must be ruled out. In chapter 22 Constantine distributed the captives and later he came the Thessalonica where he built a harbour. The building has been nished and the war against Licinius broke out. Zosimus apparently omitted to mention the campaign against the Goths. Zosimus war cannot be the casus belli because of the interval between the campaign and the civil war when the harbour was built.

24 Patsch (n. 16) 18; Schmidt (n. 11) 81 Anm. 2; Vetters, H.: Dacia Ripensis. Schriften der Balkankommission. Antiquarische Abteilung XI. Wien 1950, 22 Anm. 21; Stallknecht (n. 11) 34 Anm. 20; Paschoud (n. 10) 213 n. 31; Wolfram (n. 11) 6263 Anm. 17.

25 Stein, E.: Histoire du Bas-Empire I. Paris 19592, 104; Seeck (n. 10) 172; Thompson, E. A.: Constantine, Constantius II., and the Lower Danube frontier. Hermes 84 (1956) 378; Alfldi (n. 11 [1942]) 676 n. 48; Nagy, T. (n. 11) 59, n. 397; Mcsy, A.: Pannonia and Upper Moesia. LondonBoston 1974, 27778; Pannonia rgszeti kziknyve. Eds. Mcsy A. Fitz J. Budapest 1990, 47.


In my opinion, the problems can be interpreted in a dif erent way:1. There is no problem with Rausimoduss name. It can be German

but this fact does not exclude the possibility that he was the king of the Sarmatians26 (cp. the name of the Sarmatian subreguli under Constantius II: Rumo and Fragiledus27). We have data on the very strong relationship between the Sarmatians and the German tribes north of the Lower Danube provinces (cp. the Sarmatians ed to the Victovali and the Vandals: Ammianus Marcellinus XVII 12, 19) or the mixed tribe Transiugitani ( Ammianus Marcellinus XVII, 12, 12). Another (as we shall see less likely) possibility is that Rausimodus was a German (Vandal) king who attacked the Romans in Eastern Pannonia along the ripa Sarmatica.28

2. The mention of the Sarmatians from the Maeotis is obviously topos generally used by the historians.29

3. Zosimus could continue his account also with events of 322 A. D.4. The distribution of the booty, esp. of the captives after the battle at

Bononia was mentioned by Porfyrius (Carmina VI 2628) and by Zosimus (II 22, 1) too.

5. Zosimus story really does not follow exactly Porfyrius. The dif erences can come from the fact that Porfyrius was an eyewitness of the events and Zosimus lived centuries later (around 500). On the other hand, the two stories agree in several details: a. the attack of a settlement. b. Constantines personal presence. c. chase of the Barbarians across the Danube. d. campaign in Sarmatia. e. the Barbarians king was planning to cross again () the river by Zosimus = events around Margum and Bononia by Porfyrius. f. the distribution of the booty. g. mention of the Sarmatian king (cf. Porfyrius, Carmina XVIII 1112). No similar details are known in the case of the campaign agains the Goths.

6. Porfyrius mentioned Rausimodus elsewhere as rex Sarmata (cf. XVIII 1112) and he must be among the indomiti reges who were partly killed in battle (in bello sternens) mentioned by Porfyrius (VII 2021). On the other hand, the death of Getas in line 5 of poem XVIII can refer also to Rausimodus therefore the other hypothesis cannot be ruled out either.

7. Zosimus obviously did not know the name of Campona that is why he mentioned the fort as . According to him, this town had a strong garrison. Another important detail is that the fort had wooden superstucture

26 Already Alfldi (n. 11 [1941]) 55 Anm. 130; Nagy, T. (n. 11) 105 j. 397.27 Harmatta, J.: Danubius Sarmatas ac Romana disterminet. Antik Tanulmnyok 46 (2002)

14344.28 McsyFitz (n. 25) 49 n. 10; Nagy, M. (n. 11) 15859.29 Jrdnyi-Paulovics (n. 11) 6; Nagy, T. (n. 11) 59 n. 397.

202 PTER KOVCS

and the Sarmatians could have set re to this part of walls. It is very little known about the superstucture of the Roman stone forti cations.30 The wooden superstucture in the case of the auxiliary forts seems to be dubious but stone superstucture could have had timber elements as well like gates, shutters and rampart walk.31 During a siege these elements could catch re. Another possibility is that here we nd the well-known process that in the 4th c. the auxiliary vici were abandoned and the civilians moved into the fort. Later these forts could also be called as polis.32

There is another possibility to interpret the sources. There were two dif erent attacks led by two dif erent commanders against the Romans. The former one was the attack of Campona that was followed by Constantines expedition in the Barbaricum. During this campaign there was another attack (introitus) executed by another Sarmatian tribe from the Bnt against Margum. In this case Rausimodus is the commander of the latter attack and he has got nothing to do with the siege of Campona. Porfyrius described the whole campaign but Zosimus mentioned only its 2nd part. In this case the polis could be identi ed with Margum. We cannot rule out this possibility because it seems to be unlikely that the Sarmatians with Rausimodus after their defeat at Campona would have attacked again another Roman province several hundred kms further meanwhile Constantines troops destroyed their home. One cannot forget that the inner problems of the Sarmatians (Sarmatae liberi et servi, Limigantes-Argaragantes) had to exist already in this period (see below).

Summarily, we can come to the conclusion that the Sarmatians invaded in 322 the provinces Valeria ( Campona) and Moesia I ( Margum) but their attacks were successfully repelled by Constantine (most probably their king was Rausimodus was killed in battle). Constantine signed a peace treaty with them ( Porfyrius, Carmina VII 10) similarly the Goths who appeared in Licinius and Constantines army as well (Origo Constantini V 27; Jordanes, Getica XXI 111112). Goths had to be among the Barbarian mercenaries of Licinius who according to Socrates account wanted to revolt just before his death (Socrates, Historia Ecclesiastica I 4). Porfyrius poem VI and Zosimus work give a detailed account. Constantine received the victory title Sarmaticus for the rst time (cf. CIL VI 40776) and the emperor used his victory for propaganda (in his coinage). No similar details are known in the

30 Bidwell, P. Miket, R. Ford, B.: Portae cum turribus. Studies of Roman fort gates. British Archaeological Reports 206. Oxford 1988, 180211.

31 BidwellMiketFord (n. 30) 207209, 21114.32 Kovcs, P.: Vicus s castellum kapcsolata az als-pannoniai limes mentn. Piliscsaba 1999,

12331.


case of the campaign against the Goths but the two dif erent events cannot be identi ed on the basis of Porfyrius data in poem VII and XVIII.

Campaigns in 332 and 334

Constantine after his victory over Licinius continued his building activity along the Lower Danube and a result of this a stone bridge was built across the Danube between Sucidava and Oescus (dated to 328 by the Chronicon Paschale), the fort Constantiana Dafne (Spantov) was also built and a small part of the former province Dacia reconquested in Oltenia from the Taifali (RIC 7 298 (bronze medaillon, 328330, Rome), 3637 (gold, silver, 328329, Constantinople), Ap 1939, 19, Jul. Caes. 329C, Chronica Minora I p. 233; Eusebius, Vita Constantini I 8, 2; Aurelius Victor 41, 18; Epitome de Caesaribus 41, 13; Proclus, De aedibus 4, 6, 34; Theoph. p. 28, 1921; Cedrenus p. 517, 2324; Michael Syrius, Chronica 7. 3 p. 259/133b. 54fb; Anonymus, Vita Constantini 25, 33 (BHG 364) and cp. his victory title Dacicus maximus: CIL VI 40776).33 Probably the Taifali defeated this time Constantine (a short episode magni ed by the anti- Constantine propaganda) (Zos. II 31, 3) and a part of them probably resettled in Phrygia (vita Sancti Nicolai 17, PG 116, 33734). All these activities have nothing to with the Sarmatians who appear in the written sources again in 332 A. D.34

33 Alfldi, A.: Die Donaubrcke Konstantins des Groen und verwandte historische Darstellungen auf sptrmischen Mnzen. ZN 26 (1926) 16174; Patsch (n. 16) 1928; Thompson (n. 25); Demougeot, .: Constantin et la Dacie. In Crise et redressement dans les provinces europennes de lEmpire (milieu du IIIe milieu de IVe sicle ap. J. C. Ed. E. Frzouls. Strasbourg 1983, 91112; Bleckmann, B.: Constantin und die Donaubarbaren. JbAC 38 (1995) 3866, 3953.

34 Benjamin (n. 10) col. 1022; Seeck, O.: Geschichte des Untergangs der antiken Welt IV. Berlin 19214, 45, 382; Seeck (n. 10) 181; Alfldi, A.: Il tesoro di Nagyttny. RIN 34 (1921) 11390; Alfldi, A.: A nagyttnyi pnzlelet. Orszgos Rgszeti Trsulat vknyve 1 (1923) 6572; Patsch (n. 11); Patsch (n. 16) 2833, Schmidt (n. 11) 226228; Alfldi (n. 11 [1941]) 5658; Schmidt, L.: Geschichte der Wandalen. Mnchen 1942, 1516; Alfldi (n. 11 [1942]) 67879; Thompson (n. 25); Barkczi, L.: Transplantation of Sarmatians and Roxolans in the Danube Basin. AAntHung 7 (1959) 44353; Mcsy (n. 11 [1962]) col. 573; Nagy, T. (n. 11) 5960; Thompson (n. 11) 1117; Stallknecht (n. 11) 3436, 4042; Harmatta, J.: Studies in the history and the language of the Sarmatians. AAASzeged 13 (1970) 4950; Mcsy (n. 11 [1972]) 8789; Mcsy (n. 25) 27980; Barnes (n. 7) 151; de Jonge, P.: Philological and historical commentary on Ammianus Marcellinus XVII. Groningen 1977, 31516; Soproni (n. 11 [1978]) 11617; Barcel (n. 11) 5457; Barnes (n. 10) 250; de Jonge, P.: Philological and historical commentary on Ammianus Marcellinus XIX. Groningen 1982, 202; Barnes (n. 5) 79, 258; Brockmeier, B.: Der Groe Friede 332 n. Chr. Zur Auenpolitik

204 PTER KOVCS

Much more sources mention the events of 332 and 334 but very few exact details are known. It seems to be sure that in 332 (based on the Chronicle tradition) the Goths invaded the Sarmatians successfully and based on the foedus of 322 the Sarmatians asked the Romans for help (Origo Constantini VI 31). The Roman troops commanded by the young Constantine Caesar (Origo Constantini VI 31, Iul. Or. I, 9D) defeated the Goths on the 20th of April in the land of the Sarmatians (the place is given by the chronicles), the Romans invaded Gothia and after great losses (100.000 victims) the Goths asked for peace and a new, in the following decades stabile foedus was signed by them (Eusebius, vita Constantini IV 5, Jul. Or. I 9D, Caes. 329A, Lib. LIX 29, Eutropius X 7, Sozomenos I 8, 9, Origo Constantini VI 31, Socrates I 18, 4, Philost. II. Frag. 5, Jordanes, Getica XXXIV 178 (cp. Ammianus Marcellinus XXVII 5, 1).35 A vague data of Jordanes (the entire chapter is coming from Priscus Frag. 8 (FGH 4, 83) with the exception of this remark) can probably be connected to his year where he reports on the death of king Vidigoia by the dolus of the Sarmatians in the Tisza region (Getica XXXIV 178).36 The victory appear also in Constantines coinage (medaillons with legends DEBELLATORI GENTIVM BARBARARVM / GOTHIA (RIC 7, 531, 534 ( Trier) and aeses VICTORIA GOTHICA (RIC 7, 306 Rome). Most probably the famous triumphal monument, the Column of the Goths was built in Constantinople after this victory with the inscription on the pedestal Fortunae / reduci ob / devictos Gothos (CIL III 733 = ILS 820 = AE 1999, 1506 (cf. Ioannes Lydus, De mensibus IV 132)37 and the possibility cannot be ruled out either that the Gothic games in 49 February are connected

Konstantins des Groen. BJ 187 (1987) 79100; Knig (n. 1) 17377; Wolfram (n. 11) 6467; Grnewald (n. 7) 14950; Heather, P.: Goth and Romans. Oxford 1991, 10715, 332489; Nagy, M. (n. 11); Kienast (n. 5) 300; CameronHall (n. 10) 31112; Soproni (n. 11 [2003]) 60, 6970; Kulikowski (n. 11 [2006]) 363; Kulikowski (n. 11 [2007]) 8386; Barnes (n. 4) 165.

35 Barcel (n. 11) 5456, 11314, Brockmeier (n. 34). On the dispute of the Reichsangehrigkeit of the Goths after 332 see Stallknecht (n. 11) 531, 343, 4042; contrast: Chrysos, E.: Gothia Romana. Zur Rechtslage des Fderatenlandes der Westgoten im 4. Jh. Dacoromania 1 (1973) 5264 (without any convincing evidence).

36 Wolfram (n. 11) 64.37 Peschlow, U.: Betrachtungen zur Gotensule in Istanbul. In Tesserae. Festschrift fr Josef

Engemann. Jahrbuch fr Antike und Christentum Ergnzungsband 18. Mnster 1991, 21528; Stichel, R. H. W.: Fortuna Redux, Pompeius und die Goten. MDAI(I) 49 (1999) 46792; Mango, C.: The triumphal way of Constantinople and the Golden Gate. DOP 54 (2000) 17778; Dark, K. R. Harris, A. L.: The Last Roman Forum: the Forum of Leo in Fifth-century Constantinople. GRBS 48 (2008) 6569; Croke, B.: Poetry and propaganda: Anastasius I as Pompey. GRBS 48 (2008) 46263.


to this victory (Inscr. It. XIII 2, 42 Fasti Chronographi a. CCCLIIII). This possibility can be con rmed by a data of the Origo Constantini VI 31 that 100,000 Goths died during the campaign because of fames and frigor, i. e. they died in the winter. Constantine recieved the victory title Gothicus maximus (and probably Sarmaticus maximus too) for the second time in this year (CIL VI 40776). With the exception of Marcus Aurelius victories over the Sarmatians and Marcomanni only the victories of the Constantine dynasty can be seen in the Fasti.

Two years later, in 334 the Sarmatians appear again in the written sources, this time because of their inner social (ethnic) con icts (Eusebius, vita Constantini, IV 6, Sozomenos, I 8, 9, Hieronymus, Chronicon, 233f, Ammianus Marcellinus, XVII 12, 18; XIX 11, 1; Origo Constantini VI 32, Chronica Minor I p. 234, Jordanes, Getica XXII 114115; XXXI 161). First of all, Constantine had to ght again against the Sarmatian, qui dubiae dei probantur (Origo Constantini VI 32), i. e. they broke the peace treaty of 322, probably invaded Pannonia again. It is interesting fact that the invasion reached Campona again (as in 322) based on the huge (10585 pieces) bronze coin hoard hidden in the fort (the latest coin is dated to 334).38 The auxiliary fort was rebuilt after the invasion of 322 or 334 and the new fan-shaped angle towers were built. Here, similarly to the neigbouring auxiliary fort of Matrica (Szzhalombatta) a new version of the fan-shaped towers can be observed. The earlier semi-circular towers in the retentura were totally pulled down and new towers were built, meanwhile in the praetentura the earlier towers were only partly demolished and the new ones were added to the existing walls.39 The events of 334, based on the Origo Constantini (VI 32 and the vita Constantini IV 6) and Ammianus Marcellinus account (XVII 12, 18; XIX 11, 1) can be reconstructed as follows: the free Sarmatians (Sarmatae liberi or Arcaragantes) armed their slaves (Sarmatae servi or Limigantes) who were numero praeminentes in the previous war, who rebelled successfully against them and the free Sarmatians had to ee from the Bnt (they could return after the campaign of Constantius II in 358: Ammianus Marcellinus XVII 13, 24 and cp. XVII 13, 4 on their land by the river mouth of Tisza, XVII 13, 19 on the names Amicenses and Picenses from the names of the forts of Acumincum and Pincum). They partly ed to the Victovali ( Ammianus Marcellinus XVII 12, 18), partly asked

38 Alfldi (n. 34 [1921]); Alfldi (n. 34 [1923]).39 Jrdnyi-Paulovics (n. 11) 4, 78, 2932; Flep, F.: A nagyttnyi rmai tbor. In

Budapest memlkei II. Budapest 1962, 64352, 646; Flep, F.: Campona. In PWRE Supplementum XI. Stuttgart 1968, 361; Kovcs, P.: Matrica Excavations in the Roman fort at Szzhalombatta (19931997). PiliscsabaBudapest 2000, 4954.

206 PTER KOVCS

for reception. Constantine translated around 300.000 Sarmatians in Italy, Thracia, Macedonia and Scythia, i. e. far from the limes and Sarmatia (Origo Constantini VI 32).40 The transplantation of the Sarmatians was supervised by the emperor personally who stayed in July and August in Singidunum (5th of July: Codex Theodosianus X 5, 12) and Viminacium (4th of August: Codex Theodosianus XII 1, 21).41 Despite earlier speculations (based on this data) the Sarmatians did not settle down in Pannonia. Several attempts tried to key the Sarmatian campaigns (or under the tetrarchy) to the building of the Devils Dyke ( Csrsz-rok) in the Great Hungarian Plain42 that seems to be quite realistic but unfortunately, these sources did not mention the dyke.43 In the Fasti of the Chronographer of the year 354 another ludi Sarmatici are mentioned between 25 November and 1 December (Inscr. It. XIII 2, 42, Fasti Chronographi a. CCCLIIII). As I mentioned above in the Fasti almost only the games/victories of the dynasty are enumerated I see no other possibility than to connect these games to the events around 334. In this case there was a Roman campaign one year earlier in 333 against the dubiae dei Sarmatians (Origo Constantini VI 32 in Sarmatas versus est) and the Roman troops gained a decisive victory only at the end of November. The peaceful solution (i. e. transplantation of the Sarmatians) was carried in the next year. In 334 Constantine received the title Sarmaticus maximus for the third time (CIL III 40776).44

Another uncertain data of Jordanes concerns the victory of Goths over the Vandals in the region of the river Maros during the reign of Constantine (after king Ariarichs death) when the new king, Geberich defeated the Vandals of king Visimar who according to Jordanes account would have ed to Pannonia ( Jordanes, Getica XXI 114115; XXXI 161).45 The validity of this account seems to be doubtful because no other source mentions a resettlement of the Vandals in Pannonia and the earlier attempts (Nagy 1993) to show out their archaeological material in Pannonia seems to be

40 Barkczi (n. 34).41 Seeck (n. 10) 182.42 Soproni, S.: Limes Sarmatiae. Art 96 (1969) 4352 (= Limes Sarmatiae. A Mra Ferenc

Mzeum vknyve 1969/2, 11733); Mcsy (n. 11 [1972]) 86; Soproni (n. 11 [1978]) 11327; Soproni (n. 11 [2003]).

43 I intend to deal with the problem in detail in another paper.44 Based on the imperial titulature of the inscription CIL III 40776 Constantine received the

victory title Sarmaticus maximus three times. On the earlier opinions see Barnes (n. 5) 258; Kienast (n. 5) 302.

45 Schmidt (n. 11) 106; Schmidt (n. 34) 1213; Courtois, Ch.: Les Vandales et lAfrique. Paris 1955, 3435; Nagy, T. (n. 11) 106 j. 403; Mcsy (n. 11 [1962]) 567, 711; Wolfram (n. 11) 66; McsyFitz (n. 25) 49 j. 16; 240 j. 27; Nagy, M. (n. 11); Castritius, H.: Die Vandalen: Etappen einer Spurensuche. Stuttgart 2007, 4344.


doubtful. These nds (e. g. 4th century cremation graves) can probably be connected to the Carpi.46 On the other hand, the victory of the Goths over the Vandals in this period cannot be ruled out (cp. their earlier victory over the Vandals and the Gepidae under the tetrarchy: Pan. Lat. XI.17.1) and the Goths could use the possibility of the events of 334. The sources do not mention that the Arcaragantes would have ed also to the Vandals (similarly to the Victovali) but the Vandals were most probably the allies of the Sarmatians and the Goths could have Romes permission (based on the foedus of 332) to campaign against the allies of the dubiae dei Sarmatians. Another possibility is that Jordanes information concerns the receptio of the Sarmatians.

Addendum 1

Optatianus Porfyrius CarminaCarmen VI 1435.Ostentans artem vinciri, scrupea praebetSarmaticas, summe, strages, et tota peractauota (precor, faueas) sub certo condita uisu.Factorum gnarum tam grandia dicere vatemiam totiens, Auguste, licet. Campona cruorehostili post bella madens artissima totocorpora fusa solo, submersas amne repletovictrix miretur turbas aciemque ferocem.Plurima conarer, Phoebeo carmine gaudens,Margensis memorare boni caelestia,introitus et bella loqui perculsa ruinis,quis devicta iacet gens duro Marte caduca.Testis magnorum vicina Bononia praesenssit voti compos, excisaque agmina cernensdet iuga captivis et ducat cetera praedas.Grandia victori molimur proelia plectrodicere, nec satis est, votum si compleat oreMusa suo: quaecumque parat sub lege sonare,scruposis innexa modis, perfecta Camenisvult resonare meis, et testis nota tropaea

46 Tth, E.: Karpen in der Provinz Valeria. Zur Frage der sptrmischen eingegltteten Keramik in Transdanubien. Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae 2005, 36391. On the sources see Kovcs (n. 4) 17479.

208 PTER KOVCS

depictis signare metris, cum munere sacromentis devotae placarint fata procellas.

VII 2022.Indomitos reges seu pacis lubrica victoraut bello sternens aut mitis foedere, nutuesse tuos facis agrosque exercere tuorum.

3133Tantorum merita statues captiva tropaea,victor Sarmatiae totiens. en, accipe, clareductor...

XVIII 58Torva Getas campo clarus ut lumina perdit, vult curvo turmae felix sua comminus ictu Armenii dux ferre levis, sol, te quoque pila. Sic et victa refert exortos Dacia Francos.

1112 Vincere orenti Latiales Sarmata ducturex tibi posse Getas uiso dat limite, ultor.

Coins

RIC 7, 358361, 364A (medaillon, Trier, 322325), 446 (medaillon, Trier, 324), 532533, 536 (medaillon, Trier, 332333) Constantinus CaesarPRINCIPIA IVVENTVTIS / SARMATIA

RIC 7, 364, 367 (solidus, Trier, 322325) Constantinus CaesarGAVDIVM ROMANORVM / SARMATIA

RIC 7, 289290 (aes, London, 323324), 209, 212, 214, 219, 222 (aes, Lyon, 323), 429, 435438 (aes, Trier, 323324), 257258 (aes, Arles, 322325), 48 (aes, Sirmium, 324325) Constantine, Crispus, Constantinus CaesarSARMATIA DEVICTA

RIC 7, 531, 534 (medaillon, Trier, 332333) Constantine


DEBELLATORI GENTIVM BARBARARVM / GOTHIA

RIC 7, 306 (medaillon, aes, Rome, 332333) ConstantineVICTORIA GOTHICA

Inscriptions

CIL III 733 = ILS 820 = AE 1999, 1506 (cf. Ioann. Lydus De mens. IV 132)Fortunae / reduci ob / devictos Gothos.

CIL 40776 Imp(erator) Caes(ar) Fl(avius) Constantinus / P(ius) F(elix) vict(or) ac triumfat(or) August(us) / pont(ifex) max(imus) Germ(anicus) max(imus) IIII Sarm(aticus) max(imus) III / Gothic(us) max(imus) II Dac(icus) max(imus) trib(unicia) potest(ate) XXXIII / consul{i} VIII imp(erator) XXXII p(ater) p(atriae) p(roconsul) ...

(Inscr. It. XIII,2, 42 Fasti Chronographi a. CCCLIIII) Mensis Februarius / habet dies XXVIII C pridie ludi Gottici / D Non(ae) ludi / E VIII Idus ludi / F VII ludi dies Aegyptiacus / G VI ludi / H V Gottici c(ircenses) m(issus) XXIIII Mensis Iulius / habet dies XXXI ... H VI Vict(orias) Sarmaticas c(ircenses) m(issus) XXIIII ... C III / Vict(orias) Marcomannas c(ircenses) m(issus) XXIIII ... Mensis November / habet dies XXX ... A VII ludi Sarmatici / B VI ludi / C V ludi / D IIII ludi / E III ludi / F pridie ludi // Mensis December / habet dies XXXI / G Kal(endae) Decemb(res) Sarmatici c(ircenses) m(issus) XXIIII

Addendum II

The victory titles of Licinius and Constantinus (after Barnes 1976, Arnaldi 1976, Grnewald 1990, Kienast 1996, 4244 and Corcoran 2006).

210 PTER KOVCS

Galerius MaximinusDaia

Licinius Constantinus Year Source

Ger. max. VISar. max. VPer. max. IIBrit. max.Carp. max. VMed. max.Adi. max.

Sarm. 308 Ap 2002, 1293

Ger. max. VIISar. max. VPer. max. IIIBrit. max. IICarp. max. VIArm. max.Med. max.Adiab. max.

(no title) (no title) (no title) 310 CIL III 6979

Ger. max.Sar. max.

311/312 ILAlg 7867a

Ger.Sar.

313 Eus. IX.10.7

Sar. max. (no title) Sar. max. 313 Ap 1987, 1008d

Ger.Sar.

(no title) Ger.Sar.

313 Ap 1987, 1010

Sar.Ger. Pers.

(no title) Ger.Sar.Pers.

313 IAlg 3956

Ger.Sar.

? CIL VIII 10156 = 22246

Ger. max.Sar. max.

rst half of 314

CIL VIII 22017

Ger. Sar.

before 315

CIL IX 6061= X 6966


Galerius MaximinusDaia

Licinius Constantinus Year Source

Germ. max.Sar. max.Brit max.Pers. max.Adiab. max.Med. max.Goth. max.

315 ILS 8942

Sar. max.Ger. max.Goth. max.

315 CIL II 481, ILS 695

Sar. max.Ger. max.Brit. max.

315 ILAlg 7868

Sar. max.Ger. max.

318 ILS 679

Ger. max. IIISar. max.Brit, max.Arab. max.Med. max.Arm. max.Goth. max.

second half of 318

ILS 696

Sar. max.Ger. max.Goth. max.

319 Ap 1995, 348 = 2003, 364

Germ. max.Goth. max.Sar. max.

324 Pap. Oxy. 889

Goth. 331 ILS 6091 = MAMA VII 305

Ger.Sar.Goth.

333/335 ILS 705

Ger. max. IIIISar. max. IIIGoth. max. IIDac. max.

337 CIL VI 40776

Documents

Constantine, The Sarmatians, The Goths and Pannonia