M O N T A N A Praesidium Regio Municipiu PDF

MONTANA
Praesidium, R egio, M unicipium

Rumen Ivanov, Krassimira Luka
Montana
І. Geographic location1 hot, and the spring and autumn are change
able. The region is prone to strong winds
Montana (Kutlovitsa/Ferdinand/Mihaylov – oceanic air masses coming from the west
grad) is located in presentday Northwestern northwest, and cold winds from the north
Bulgaria – in the western part of the Balkan/ east, especially in winter and spring. Fur
the Balkan Mountains (Stara Planina), the an thermore, the Balkan Mountains block these
cient Haemus mons. The small Shiroka Planina winds, and they are trapped in the region.
Mountain rises in front of it. Its continuation However, the lowlands are mostly covered
is the Verenishko Bardo Ridge, which is 624 with fertile alluvial soils, the black earths in
m high. To the east the Ogosta River valley the Danubian plain being formed on a loess
(the ancient Augusta fluvius) is situated. bed. In the foreBalkan light grey and dark
The climate here is moderatecontinental, grey forest soils predominate, and in the
the winter often is very cold, the summer is Balkan area – brown forest and mountain
1
In the current study R. Ivanov is author of the chapters ‚Geographic Location‛, ‚The Area before
the Roman Presence‛, ‚Name and Status of the Settlement and the Vicinity‛, ‚Historical Events‛, ‚Pro
vincial Belonging, Road Network and Customs Control‛, ‚Ethnic Composition, Classes and Religion‛,
‚Necropolises‛.
K. Luka is the author of the chapters ‚ C h r o n i c l e o f R e s e a r c h ‛ , ‚Archaeological Surveys‛,
Christianity‛ and ‚The Area during the Middle Ages‛, as well as of the historical events after the end
of the 5th c., the information about the Roman villa by the village of Urovene, arts and crafts (sculpture
and pottery production) as well as of the maps: Figs 3, 6, 7, 8, 20, 21, 42.
197
Thracian, Greek, Roman and Medieval Cities, Residences and Fortresses
meadow soils. The fertile soil, in combina As far as the etymology is concerned, there
tion with the climate, provides conditions for are a few opinions, but two of them are note
the production of cereals, fodder crops, and worthy. According to Academician Vladimir
even conditions for vegetablegrowing, vine Georgiev, the origin of the name has Dacian–
growing and fruitgrowing. Moesian roots and means ‚village‛, i.e. the
The region is characterized by a great va name Triballi means peasants (Georgiev, V.
riety of woods, frutescent and herbaceous 1978:80). The academic Dimitar Dechev pre
plants. The forest resources are represented sents another view. The name comes from
mainly by deciduous woods (oak, beech, that of the family which dominated and di
hornbeam, lime, ash, etc.), along the river val rected life in a certain area (the leaders also
leys there are willow, hazel, and poplar; in direct the religious and political life). Similar
the mountain areas there are mixed decidu in sound are epithets of deities such as Dio
ous – coniferous forests (beech, fir, spruce, nysus, Jupiter and others which indicate that
pine), and in the alpine areas the forests are the name actually bears a religious meaning
coniferous (fir, spruce, pine scrub). There are (Фол, А., T. Спиридонов 1983:80; Detschew,
bushes everywhere – briar, bramble, rasp D. 1976:41; Белитов, И. 1991:165).
berry bushes, blackthorn, and also cornel This large tribe was first mentioned by He-
tree and hornbeam. The fauna is also varied. rodotus (Hdt., IV, 49, 2). The name is pre
There are more than 150 kinds of nesting served for more than a millennium, and in
birds, more than 16 kinds of reptiles, 60 kinds the Early Middle Ages it started to be used
of mammals, and 20 varieties of fish. The in as a name for the Serbians (Белитов, И.
vertebrate fauna is also rich. 1991:165). Perhaps ‚the father of history‛
In the vicinity of Montana throughout the borrowed information from Hecataeus of Mi-
Roman age there were also wild animals. Ep- letus (Jacoby, F. 1908:432). The evidence prob-
igraphic and archaeological evidence tes tifies ably refers to an earlier age – the 6th c. BC.
to the presence of bears and bisons. In more The evidence of Herodotus indicates that the
ancient times in the Balkan Mountains, as Angros River ran through the Triballi plain,
well as in remote areas, there are traces of and flowed into the Istar (Danube). It is sup-
lions and aurochs (Нинов, Л. 1989:55–61; Ni posed that Brongos was the old name of the
nov, L. 1999:323-338). Morava River and Angros is considered to
The Ogosta River (Augusta fluvius) runs refer to the smaller Western Serbian Mora va
through Montana; it is 144 km long and is a River (Белитов, И. 1991:167 with refe-rence).
right tributary of the Danube. It consists of There are interesting things written about
three large and numerous small tributaries. the Triballi. For instance, their battle forma
At snowmelt it overruns its bed, and some tion had four rows. According to Joannes
times causes floods. Stobaeus ІV, 13, the first line consisted of the
weaker soldiers; the second included the ex
ІІ. The Area before the Roman Presence perienced ones; the third line was occupied
by the cavalry, and the last one included
Here the stress will be mostly on the two their women who stopped the deserters with
big tribal groups which played an impor insults, and threw stones at them. The com
tant part in the history of this region. We start mentaries are controversial; perhaps they
with the Triballi (Triballoi, Τριβαλλοί). A great were borrowed from Roman sources, describ
Thracian tribal community, inhabiting the ter ing some ‚tactical‛ schemes of the Gauls and
ritory between the valleys of the Morava River the Germans (Фол, А. 1975:24; Papazoglu, F.
(Morava fluvius) to the west, and the Iskar Riv 1978:36, 460).
er (Oescus fl.) to the east, is concerned.
198
MONTANA
Claudius Ptolemaeus’ ‚Geography‛ prob When Roman aggression started on the Bal
ably reflects the Late Trajan/ Early Hadrian kans in the first century BC, in the vast area be
period. Using this source, it should be consid tween the aforementioned rivers Morava and
ered that the administrative borders do not Iskar, the future conquerors came into contact
coincide with the ethnic areas (Papazoglu, F. with quite a lot of tribes. All of this is a sign
1978:65-66). He mentions Oescus Triballorum of the decentralization and weakening of the
(Gigen, Pleven reg.). A decree from December Triballi. Perhaps by then only a small group
4, 291 AD, at the time of Diocletian’s rule, was would still be called Triballi; it was located
issued in the city called Tribal(l)is. There is a in the subBalkan area of the presentday re
hypothesis that the city of Oescus was tem gions of Vratsa and Montana. In the 1st c. AD
porarily called such (Polaschek, E. 1937:2399). there were no longer independent Triballi.
The Triballi inhabited a vast region in the Everyone was subject to the new Roman au
Thracian Northwest (Белитов, И. 1991:183). thorities. Then the name was mentioned as an
At the end of the sixth century, the beginnings ethnic and geographical term only (Белитов,
of a political structure developed here. The И. 1991:183).
organization of the Triballi seems to have had The Scordisci initially settled between the
its apogee in the 5th and the beginning of the rivers Sava and Drava. In historical literature
4th c. BC. This is mostly expressed by tenden they are known from the 2nd c. BC. They are
cies to unification and centralization as well mentioned under two names – Scordisci and
as by raids, mainly to the south and east. The Scordisti (Домарадски, М. 1984:91). Some
Triballi managed to a great extent to remain authors call them Gauls or Celts, while others
independent from the strong Macedonian ru- number them among the Illyrians and even
lers nearby. However, gradually a process of the Thracians. In inscriptions from Delphi and
increasing tension developed. Frequent at Europa dated respectively in the 3rd and the
tacks on neighbouring tribes, or more accu 1st c. BC, the Scordisci are called Celts. There
rately those which had become neighbours is evidence of four invasions of the Scordisci
of the Triballi – Celts and Scordisci, Avtariati against the Triballi – in AD 298, 281, 280 and
and Bastarnae – began. 271. There is no later historical record. Per-
The vicinity of Montana was inhabited haps after AD 278 the Scordisci occu
by the Southeastern Mountain Triballi. The pied a part of the western lands of the Trib
hilly agriculture was characteristic for them. alli. The area of the Scordisci and especially of
They were occupied in stockbreeding, fruit the Triballi is rich in ore.
growing and vinegrowing. Of course, most After AD 179 the participation of the Scor
fertile were the areas along the river valleys. disci in the political life of the Balkans was
Undoubtedly they were experienced in the significant.
extraction of gold, and built houses of mud The Bastarnae moved to the Lower Stream
and stone. of the Danube. They defeated the Dardani,
In the valleys the settlements were most and thus they became temporary southern
frequently unfortified. Fortresses with vari neighbours of the Scordisci. In AD 168 Rome
ous functions were situated in the hilly and defeated Macedonia, and 20 years later the
mountain areas (often refugia, fortresses of new Roman province with the same name
the small settlement type, guard posts, etc.). was founded. Originally, it was not occupied
In the construction of the houses, many by the conqueror, and thus the Scordisci of
of which were large, the following materi ten undertook raids towards the rich south.
als were used: clay, beams, adobe and straw. A halfcenturylong peak in Scordisci power
The Triballi considered the sun their supreme is to be observed. No Roman operation here
deity. against them ended successfully.
199
It all ended in 84 BC. The Scordisci, Dardani opinion, it is associated with the words
and Maedi attacked Macedonia and parts of mons = mountain, and montani = highlanders
Greece in large numbers. They plundered a (Бешевлиев, В. 1963:33). This name can be as-
few centres among which the sanctuary in sociated with the hill Kaleto at the foot of
Delphi. The Romans sent a big army led by which a sanctuary functioned. The cult of the
Licinius Cornelius Scipio. That marked the be spring was practiced by the Thracians even
ginning of the end of the Scordisci. They were afterwards during the age of the Roman pres
finally defeated by Emperor Tiberius (14-37). ence (Монтана, І, 1987:17 with reference – by
Velizar Velkov).
ІІІ. Name and Status of the Settlement According to the second view, one of the
and the Vicinity two cohortes Montanorum which were re
cruited from the region of the Alps was sta
Since 1993 the city has been called Mon tioned here (Cichorius, 1901:316; Wagner,
tana which was its ancient name. The name W. 1938:168; Ritterling, E. 1927:86; Spaul, J.
of the settlement from the age of the perma 2000: 295-296; Велков, В. 1987:10). Professor
nent settling of the Slavs in the Early Middle Velizar Velkov believes that the case with the
Ages was Kutlovitsa. After the Liberation of name of the military unit that was at camp
Bulgaria from Ottoman Rule (1878), between in the region is similar to those with the set
1891 and 1945 the city was named after Kn tlement of Augustae (not far from here, by
yaz (later – Tsar) Ferdinand (the second ruler the village of Harlets, Vratsa reg., and 5 km
of the third and last Bulgarian Kingdom), inland from the Danubian bank). The castel
and after World War II it was named Mihay lum there was given the name of аla Augusta,
lovgrad (after the communist functionary stationed by the mouth of the river with the
Georgy Mihaylov). same name from the beginning of the 50s of
Ancient authors and itineraries do not men- the 1st c. It is even thought that the river run
tion Montana. Perhaps the settlement did not ning there (Augusta fluvius) obtained its name
lie on a major crossroads and probably it after this auxiliary unit. We must note that
was not large (Александров, Г. 1994:33). It the Thracian name has not been revealed
is not mentioned in the dozens of histori so far (Герасимова, В. 1970:24; Машов, С.
cal or geographical maps from the 17th18th 1980).
c. and even in the earlier times discussed by According to V. Velkov, it is possible that
us. This fact should be seriously taken into cohors Montanorum in the 1st c. AD was some
consideration because the other military gar where in Moesia or somewhere around Mon
rison in the hinterland of Moesia Inferior – tana (Велков, В. 1971:107). Such a unit was
Abritus is mentioned in a number of literary stationed somewhere in Moesia for a while
sources and a few maps (Иванов, Т. 1980). during the Claudius’ and Nero’s reign, and
Maybe that is because the battle between the afterwards it was sent to Pannonia. With re
Romans and Goths in which Emperor Decius spect to Domitian’s wars (81-96) against the
himself and his son Herennius died (June Dacians, it was returned for a while to West
251) took place there (around the nearby vil ern Moesia (the later Moesia Superior?). Prob
lage of Dryanovets – after G. Radoslavova ably it was in the area by Тimacum Minus (to-
and G. Dzanev). day’s Ravna, Serbia), stationed there to de-
After all, Montana lies not far from the Da- fend the road Ratiaria – Naissus, the defile by
nube River and from the centre Ratiaria, as Ravna and the rich mining regions there, all
well as from Serdica to the south. territories of the later province of Moesia Su-
There are two views about the origin of perior (Герасимова, В. 1970:25; Велков, В.
the name Montana. According to the first 1987:10, note 13-16).
200
MONTANA
TableІ
Сohors Montanorum
(after J. Wilkes 1969:473; J. Šašel 1983:782-786; B. Lörincz 1990:80; J. Spaul 2000:294-295)
Military unit and personnel Province Date Reference

I (Montanorum) Pannonia 05.09.85 CIL, XVI, 31
I Montanorum C.R. Pannonia 20.02.98 CIL, XVI, 42
I Montanorum Moes. Sup. 12.07.96 RMD, 6
I Montanorum C.R. Moes. Sup. 08/05.100 CIL, XVI. 46
I Montanorum Moes. Sup. 103/105 CIL, XVI, 54
I Montanorum Dacia 14.10.109 RMD, 148
Coh. I Montanorum Dacia 14.10.109 RMD, 148
I Montanorum Dacia 02.07.110 CIL, XVI, 163
I Mont. Syria Pal. 22.11.139 CIL, XVI, 87
I Montanor. Syria Pal. 07.03.160 RMD, 173
I Mont. Moesia Sup. 158/159 ZPE, 126:251
I Mont. Moesia Sup. 159/160 CIL, XVI, 111
I Montanor. Moesia Sup. 08.02.161 RMD, 55
ČezavaNovae,
Coh. I Mont. a.98/99 AE, 1976, 609
Serbia
H I Mon Mülbach CIL, III, 8074/21
Coh. Montanorum Šuplja Crkva Situla, 19, 841
Coh. Mont. Šuplja Crkva CIL, III, 15003
Co I Mont. Ravna AE, 1903,289
Coors (sic) Prima Montanorum Prishtina Situla, 19, 534
Ti.Cl.Mercurialis, praef. Ravna AE, 1903, 289
Cornelius Felicior, praef. caligati Dacia 14.10.109 RMD, 148
Buccus Staurni f.Fab. domo Brixia miles Šuplja Crkva Situla, 19, 841
Remmosa Conis f. miles Šuplja Crkva CIL, III, 15003
M. Herennius M.f. Polymita, Berens,
Dacia 14.10.109 RMD, 148
pedes veteranus
Septimius Dassius veteranus Prishtina Situla, 19, 534
Epigraphically, the name Montana is not neia) in Frygia (presentday Turkey) is con
mentioned until AD 134 and it was extra fines cerned. It mentions Montana as a praesidium.2
(Монтана, ІІ, № 151). A Latin inscription dis Cohors I Sugambrorum (Sygambrorum) (vet-
covered in the village of Išekli (Ishekli, Eume erana) is mentioned there; from here it was
2
JRS, XVI, 1926:74 = AE, 1927, No 95; Монтана, ІІ, No 151:
Pro salute Imp(eratoris) Caes(aris) divi Traiani / Parth(ici) fil(ii), divi Nervae nepotis Traiani / Hadriani Aug(usti)
domuique eius senatui Populiq(ue) / R(omani) et coh(ortis) I Cl(audiae) Sygambrorum / veteranae equitatae et
M(arcus) Iulius M(arci) / f(ilius) Fabia Pisonianus qui et Dion, praef(ectus) / fabrum et praef(ectus) coh(ortis)
s(upra) s(criptae) / domo Tyro metropolis Phoenices et Coeles Syriae / qui a Moesia(e) Inf(erioris) Montan(ensi)
praesidio / numerum in Asia(m) peruxit. / V(otum) s(olvit) l(ibens) m(erito).
201
transferred to Asia Minor. This auxiliary unit during the Principate – praesidium, regio and
is one of the first which came temporarily into municipium.
the newly founded province of Moesia (found As far as the purpose of the term praesidium,
ed according to a new hypothesis in AD 12 – used often during the age of the Principate as
Avram, A., or in AD 16 – Boteva, D. 2012:9-22). well as during Late Antiquity is concerned,
It took an active part in the suppression of the there are still some unclear points (Монтана,
local Thracian population during the events of ІІ, № 151; Николов, Д. 1994:125–131;
AD 2627. Торбатов, С. 2000:15–19 with reference; 2004).
Two types of seals on bricks originate from According to some experts, this term refers to
Montana; they indicate the presence of a mili a military camp in general. Here the stress is
tary unit and are related to building activ rather on the numbers of the garrison inside
ity: COH I SVG VE; COH I SYG VE (CIL, III, itself than on the building itself (Fabricius, Е.
12529; Добруски, В. 1895:330; Александров, 1926:576; Торбатов, С. 2000:15). Certainly,
Г. 1977а:59–60; on the military unit see: there is another opinion – that a synonym of
Герасимова, В. 1970:24). The hypothesis is castellum is regarded (Baatz, D. 1975:24-25).
that in Asia a numerus (?) was transferred Here we must remember the Latin inscription
which was led and left there by Pisonianius. from Pannonia (CIL, III, 3385), where it is men
The auxiliary unit was still in Moesia after AD tioned that to stop the penetration of latrunculi
45 when the neighbouring province of Thracia along the Danubian border, multiple praesidia
was founded. It is mentioned in a military di and burgi must be raised. It is clear that de
ploma from AD 75. Between 97 and 153 it re fensive fortifications for interior security are
mained in Moesia Inferior, in praesidium Mon- implied. We must mention five more inscrip
tanensium (Тачева, М. 2000:98–99). tions (three from the northern territories of
A statuette was found in neighbouring Da- Thracia near Moesia Inferior, and two from
cia (Cioioiul Nou); it is dedicated to a person the east and not far from the Pontic coast) – re
most likely related to Montana.3 spectively from the urban territories of Serdica
About the mid2nd c. is also the dating of (Sofia, Sofiya), Augusta Traiana (Stara Zagora),
the inscription discovered in the sanctuary Marcianopolis (Devnya – west of Varna), and
by the hill. It refers to Malia or Aemilia (?) or the last two monuments which originate from
Aemiliana, born in the capital Rome who ar colonia Flavia Pacis Deultensium (Develt, Debelt
rived here for the second time with her son, southwest of Burgas) and Bizye (Vize in Euro
and she is repeating the offering made before pean Turkey, by the Black Sea) (Кацаров, Г.
at the sanctuary (Велков, В., Александров, Г. 1926/27:107–112; Бешевлиев, В. 1952:33–36;
1994:№ 46 with reference).4 Mihailov, G. 1961; Мирчев, М. 1961:15–16;
The name occurs in an ara dedicated to Deus Буюклиев, Хр., Л. Гетов 1964:29–30; Rohde,
Aeternus during the age of the Severs (193-235) G. 1940:76-78; Velkov, V. 1978:176, note 18; Iva-
(Велков, В., Александров, Г. 1994:№ 68).5 nov, R., Bülow, G.v. 2008:30). They refer to the
The settlement has been attested to under building of praesidia, burgi and phruri (pruri).
three technical names which show its status They have been dated to between 152 and 155
3
AE, 1967, No.392: M(arcus) Opellius Maxsimus (sic) / [---Mo]ntanensium, Herculi / [---Aeq]uensium
/ ex voto.
4
Cum primum / veni Monta/nis et numina / vidi, deabus / votum vovi/ut potui, pos/ui.
Mallia vel Ae/miliana do/10 mo Roma fr[u] /mento [p]ubli/[co] cum fili[o] suo / m(onumentum)
restotui[t].
The name is in Ablative/Locative instead of Accusativ directionis.
5
Aeterno Maxi/mo deo. Pro / salute Monta/nen(sium) et L(uci) Civi /5 Sanctus, veteranus./ V(otum
s(olvit) l(ibens) m(erito).
202
MONTANA
AD and have been interpreted as defensive fa

cilities with military – police functions. They
maintained order and supported the admin
istration of the regions and they guaranteed
the control of the roads if there was any local
unrest (Forni, G. 1974:124-126).6
In the epigraphic evidence discussed here,
the number of praesidia was much smaller
than that of the other types of fortifications.
Perhaps they were larger in area and a consid
erably greater military potential was stationed
there. They were raised on strategically im
portant military – economic sites. That must
have been the case with Montana.7
A few inscriptions with different contents
originate from here; there is a common idea in
all of them that a municipium (?) is referred to.
We must start with a votive epigraphic record
(from the village of Gromshin in the vicinity
of today’s town of Montana) to the health of
the Emperors Marcus Aurelius and Lucius
Verus raised by the governor of the province – Fig. 1. Dedication to Diana by Q. Sabinus Veranus,
M. Servilius Fabianus. The territory of Montana II vir primus (after Монтана, 2, 1994, № 12) (photo
is mentioned, i.e. that could only happen after by Violeta Voeva)
the settlement had already been raised to the
rank of a municipium (see the commentary of that decuriones are concerned and the post II
Th. Mommsen в CIL, III, 12385). The date is (duo) vir primus = first city councillor, occurs
162 AD (Thomasson, B. 1984:136, No.93). 8 in a fourth one (Александров, Г. 1977а:57, №
In three other inscriptions it is supposed 12).9 (Fig. 1).
6
We are aware of such cases from other provinces of the Empire (Isaac, B. 1986:390-391; 1990:174-183;
Торбатов, С. 2000:16). Recently the opinion that these three types of fortifications represent a second
inner line of the Lower Danubian Limes, as some scholars in the recent past thought, has been categori
cally rejected (Mihailov, G. 1961:5-7).
7
A roadside fortification in the province of Arabia in present-day Jordan (Khirbet el-Khalde) is called
a Praesidium. It was raised and functioned actively in Diocletian – Constantine’s age; it reminds one of a
quadriburgium (54 × 33 m), yet in Notitia Dignitatum it is noted that a cohort was stationed there (Parker,
S. 1986:108-109). Along the Lower Danubian Limes we have epigraphic records of a number of praesidia
from the age of the First Tetrarchy. There are lots of unclear points concerning their characteristics, but
in general they were small in size and they seemed to resemble burgi (on more details about these forti
fications, see: Popescu, E. 1976: No.205; Florescu, G. 1924:88 sqq.; Polonik, P. 1935:20; TIR, L – 35:65; Ko
lendo, J. 1966:139 sqq.; Petrović, P. 1977:263-264; Scorpan, C. 1980:7; Sarnowski, T. 1988:125 ff.; 1990:855
ff.; Ivanov, R. 1996:161-167; Zahariade, M., N. Gudea 1997:78-79; Торбатов, С. 2000:17–19).
8
Montana, ІІ, No 59: I(ovi) O(ptimo) M(aximo). / Pro salute imp(eratoris) Caes(aris) M(arci) / Aureli(i)
Antonini Aug(usti) et / imp(eratoris) Caes(aris) L(uci) Aureli(i) Veri Aug(usti) /5 M(arcus) Servilius Fa
bianus , leg(atus) / Aug(usti) pr(o) pr(aetore), templum vetus/tate corruptum a solo / per reg(ionem)
Mont(anensium) restituit.
9
Monatanа, ІІ, No 101: *---------------] / [M]ontanus dec(urio) Mo(ntanensium) p(osuit) (the time of the
Severs – AD. 193-235).
203
However, as far as the urban status (by Here we should discuss briefly the term ter-
AD 162 and afterwards) of the settlement in ritoria (without an urban centre). Of course,
the southwestern district of Moesia Inferior some of the settlements grew into bigger cen
is concerned, there are a few opinions which tres subsequently. The nonurban territories
may look more plausible.10 are civitas, regio and territoria. Their area is not
Recently, M. Tacheva has also issued a view big and they were governed in a quasimuni
which is similar to that of other colleagues cipial way. Regiones do not fall under the pro
shared earlier (D. Tudor, R. Vulpe, N. Ran tective control of a certain legion or auxiliary
kov). 11 unit. However, on the orders of the governor
Montana, ІІ, No 116: [L(ucius) Ant(onius)] Proc/[lus] dec(urio) M(ontanensium ? ) / <vixit / [an]
nis L, me /5 [ns]is tres, L(ucius) / [Ant(onius)] Proc/[lus] et L(ucius) Ant(onius) Se/[n]eca et / L(ucius)
Ant(onius) Cassi /10 anus et L(ucius) / Ant(onius) Melli/or fil(i) / patri be/ne mere/15 nti posu/erunt.
Montana, ІІ, No 123: [----------] / [---] D(ecurio?) M(ontanensium?) vix(it) / *annis<+X, Val(erius) /
[Vale?]rianus---/ [---vix(it) a]nn(is)XV / [---]ris d[------] [--------] (the mid-3rd c.).
According to Margarita Tacheva, decurioni of Montana are regarded – dec. Mo(ntanensium), but not
decurioni for a municipium – dec. municipii.
10
Rankov, N. 1983:57-58: ‚< This interpretation of the meaning region, if correct, must cast further
doubt on the supposition that Montana definitely achieved municipial status. This assumption has been
based on two pieces of evidence: firstly, the references on four inscription to decuriones Montanensium
(Decuriones Montanensium: CIL, III, 7461; Kazarow, G. 1938: No 589; D. Tudor, Oltenia Romană, Bucha
rest 1968:527, No 381 at Cioroioul Nou in Oltenia; on this evidence for the municipial status of Montana
see the crtisism of R.Vulpe, Studia Thracologica, Bucharest 1976:294-296, 310); Professor Radu Vulpe has
rightly pointed out that, whilst this certainly indicates a municipal type of organization, it does not nec
essarily imply official municipal status, since these officials are found both in civitates peregrinae, such as
the territorium Dianensium (AE, 1911, No 16), and in vici, as attested to by the decurions of the vicani of
Trullenses (CIL, III, 12390; 14409); and secondly an inscription of A.D. 161-163 from Gromšin (Gromshin)
further down the Ogosta from Montana, in which the provincial governor records the reconstruction of
atemple per reg(ionem) Mont(anensium) (CIL, III, 12385). This has been taken to indicate municipal sta
tus for Montana at least from that date. Certainly, region can be used to mean a municipal territory and
no doubt that inscription set up in honour of the emperor by a provincial governor should imply the
term in a strict technical sense. But even in most official documents neither this term nor the word terri
torium, also often used to mean a municipally territory (E.g. Weiss, J. 1913:209-210), was thus restricted.
A good example of this is provided by an inscription of AD 138, only about twenty years before the
Montana inscription, found in Henchir el Begar in the province of Africa. This is the text of a Senatus
Consultum concerning markets to be held in regione Beguensi, Territorio Musulamiorum. From the
inscription it is clear that the region Beguensis was an area of imperial estates lying in the territory of
the tribe of the Musulami (CIL, VIII, 270). The evidence cited above clearly shows, I hope, that the term
region Montanensium regularly refers to an area under special military control and possibly even to a
region of imperial estates; this excludes its use as a municipal territory. We cannot prove that Montana
was not a municipium, but the Gromshin inscription certainly does not prove that it was.‛
11
Dianae. / Pro sal(ute) Q(uinti) / Sabini Ve/rani II v(iri) p/5 rimi, Macrin(us)/ arc(arius) pos(uit),
cur(ante) / Hilaro. Vite/lius d(edit) v(otum) s(plvit) l(ibens) m(erito). Fig. 1 Date: the second half of the 2nd
c. Prof. Velizar Velkov gives an example from Dessau, ILS (the number of the inscription is not given) II
vir(o) primo col(oniae) Iconii. Prof. Margarita Tacheva’s opinion about this abbreviation is the following
(Tatscheva, M. 1996:180): ‚< Die Lesung duov(ir) pr(imus) nehme ich als nicht überzeugend an; dagegen
sprechen die Ungewöhnliche Abkürzung des Amtes, das Fehlen bis heutzutage inschriftlich beweisener
Minicipal~mter aus region Montatensium, wie auch die persönlich Angaben über die Sabinii. Was eine
Zivilsiedlung in regio Montanensium betrifft, könnte sie auch ein vicus gewesen sein, wenn die zur Sep
timius Severus’ Zeit datierte Inschrift über einen primceps vici Tautiomosis in Betracht zögen.‛
204
MONTANA
territory of Montana‛ (Rankov, N. 1983:51-

56).14 From the second volume of Montana
(Mонтана, ІІ) we have at our disposal the fol
lowing inscriptions with beneficiarii consularis
– NoNo 1, 19, 35, 49, 56, 57, 95) (Fig. 2).
Monuments in the vicinity have been docu
mented from the village of Dolna Verenitsa
(Montana reg.), from the very close vicinity
of Vratsa – the villages of Gromshin and Sira
kovo, as well as regionarii from Almus and Au-
gustae, northeast and not far from here. From
more distant sites we know of ones from the
village of Obnova, Pleven reg., from the vil
lage of Koshov Dol by the city of Ruse, etc.
The basic functions of these police officers was
keeping the order, pursuit of rebels or bandits,
control of the roads and stations, and restora
tion of buildings. In our case it seems that the
exploitation and control of the gold and silver
deposits, their extraction, supervision and ex
Fig. 2. Dedication to Diana and Apollo and to the ploitation were of major importance15 (on these
provincial governor L. Iulius Severus from L. Iulius
topics see: Rankov, N. 1983:56-57; Speidel,
Macedo, beneficiaries consularis (159-160 г.) (after
Монтана, 2, 1994, № 49) (photo by Violeta Voeva) M. 1984:185-188; Sarnowski, T. 1988:99-104;
Божилова, В. 1987:30; Геров, Б. 1980:68, 78;
Герасимова-Томова, В. 1986:30–31; Николов,
of Moesia Inferior, soldiers, noncommisiant of Д. 1994:125–131; Иванов, Р. 1999:276; Тачева,
ficers and officers were recruited from exerci- М. 2000; 2004). According to M. Tacheva,
tus provinciae. At the head there was a centurio (Тачева, М. 2004:78) a civilian settlement with
regionarius,12 who was replaced by optio agens a big sanctuary (in our view it had been there
regione Montanense.13 A beneficiarius consularis earlier) occurred around the military camp in
of Thracian origin was also engaged in ‚the 134; it served the local, mostly mining popula
12
Montana, ІІ, No 39: [Ap]ollini /Sancto / C(aius) Iulius / Saturni/5 nus (centurio) /region/arius / ex
voto. Date: 225-250.
CIL, III, 12380; Montana, ІІ, No 134: [---------] / C(aius) Iul(ius) / Sa(t)urn/inus ce(n)turio r(e)/gionariu(s)
/ ex voto. Date: 225-250.
13
Monatana, ІІ, No 53: Dianae et Ap/ollini sacrum./ C(aius) Val(erius) Valens / optio leg(ionis) 5/ XI
Cl(audiae) agens / r(egione) Mont[an(ensium)]. / V(otum) s(olvit) l(ibens) [m(erito)]. Date: 161-163.
14
Rankov, N. 1983:51-52; Montana, ІІ, No 57: Diis sanctis,/ Deanae Reginae / et Apollini /Phoe
bo. 5/ Iul(ius) Mucaze/nus b(ene)f(iciarius) co(n)s(ularis) leg(ionis) / I Ital(icae), ag(ens) t(erritorii)
M(ontanensium),/ pro sal(ute) sua / et Iuliae, coniu(gis) / 10 eius, gratias / agens, v(otum) s(olvit) l(ibens)
m(erito).
15
Rankov, N. 1983:49 – ‚What, then, were beneiciarii consularis doing at Montana ? If we are right
to see Montana as the centre of a mining area then the answer may lie there. Several stationes of these
officers were located in mining areas of the eastern European provinces. In Dalmatia there was a station
at Skelani, in the silvermining area of the Drina valley, and another further down the valley at Doma
via, where the imperial procurator of the Pannonian and Dalmatian silver mines resided.‛ (Wilkes, J.
1969:125 with a full list of inscriptions of beneficiarii consularis in the area; on the mines: Davies, O.
205
tion. She believes that the theory that the terri This area was inhabited by the Thracian tribe
tory had no pronounced urban centre is more of the Dentheletae. It was entirely dependent
convincing. Prof. Tacheva supposes that the on the Roman authority in the neighbouring
raising of Montana into a municipium did not province of Macedonia. With an impressive
take place in AD 162 or until the end of the military contingent Crassus invaded and sub
2nd c. but much later – probably after the mid dued everything in his way.17
3rd c. (Тачева, М. 2004:79). In a Latin inscrip The newcomers from the north who were
tion from 256 AD, two types of population are left alive stampeded toward the great Euro
mentioned there – castrenses et cives Montan- pean river. The Roman military commander
enses – the civilian and the military popula conquered everything in his path. He passed
tion are topographically separated from the through the present-day Sofia Plain and con
military camp and the municipium.16 In Late tinued upwards along the valleys of the rivers
Antiquity the name of the city vanished from of Nishava and Timok (Timacus fluvius). The
the records, but its functioning as a religious crucial battle took place on the right Danubian
and cultural centre is beyond doubt. bank. It is not exactly sure where this bloody
event happened. According to some, the site
ІV. Historical Events is by the mouth of the Tsibritsa River (Kebros,
Ciabrus fluvius), which is not far from the re
The conquest of the Thracian lands on both gion of Моntana, but according to others it
sides of the Balkan Mountains started with the took place around Ratiaria (the future Roman
great campaigns of M. Licinius Crassus in 29 and colonia Ulpia Traiana Ratiaria). Surveys in small
28 BC (Геров, Б. 1949:3–4; Ivanov, R. 1997:473 sectors have been conducted so far in Mon
ff.; Иванов, Р. 1999:18–21). The Bastarnae and tana and its vicinity and there is no evidence
Daci crossed the frozen Danube and reached of burning from that time.
the presentday plain of Kyustendil (in to However, half a century earlier, the Thra
day’s Southwestern Bulgaria). The climate cians from the hilly areas rebelled against the
there is mild and the conditions are perfect Roman authorities. It is assumed that the area
for agriculture, stockbreeding and use of the around the Thracian fortress at Montana was
natural resources of the Osogovo Mountain. very active. It is not by chance that cohors I
1935; Wilkes, J. 1969:125, 363; Dušanić, S. 1977:872, note 19). In Dacia a bf.cos. is attested at Ampelum,
centre of one of the principal goldmining areas of the province and again the seat of an imperial procu
rator of mines. Another station possibly connected with goldmining lay at Micia, 12 miles south of the
Boicza district mines, the approaches to which were guarded by Micia’s auxiliary garrison (AE, 1930, No.
11 – Ampelum; On the mines see Davies 1935:201-202; CIL, III, 7859 – Micia; On the garrison see Wagner,
W. 1938:49050, 53; Gudea, N. 1977:872, note 19). Nor was it just gold and silver mines which attracted the
presence of these officers: on the very northernmost part of the Dacian frontier the salt-workings, an im
perial estate under an imperial procurator at Domneşti, were organised just like the mines as an imperial
estate under an imperial procurator, and not far to the west the beneficiarius consularis at Alsó – Kos{ly
(Caşei), stationed by the auxiliary fort which guarded the approach up the Szamos valley to Napoca,
perhaps had responsibility for the nearby salinae at Ocna Dejului (AE, 1930, No.11 – Domneşti; for the
procurator: AE, 1930, No.10; note that Pascua and salinae were administrated together, salt being essen
tial for the proper raising of livestock: Glodariu, I. 1977:960-961; CIL, III, 823, 825-827 – Alsó – Kos{ly).
16
CIL, III, Suppl., 12376 : Монтана, ІІ, № 5: *<burgum constitui] / [iussit] un[de latruncu/los o]
bservare[nt] / [pro]pter tutela[m] 5/ [ca]stresium (sic) et / [ci]vium Montanesium (sic),/ Maximo et G[la/
brione] [co(n)s(ulibus)].
17
Liv., Per., CXXXXIV: ‘<bellum adversus Basternas et Moesos et alias gentes a M.Crasso (ges
tum)<‛; Flor., Ii, 26: ‚<bellum a M.Crasso adversus Thracas<gestum<‛; Liv., Per., CXXXV: ‚<bel
lum Moesiacum<‛; Cassius Dio, LI, 23: ‚<τοῖς τε Δακοῖς καὶ <τοῖ> Βαστάρναις έπολέμησε<‛.
206
MONTANA
Sugambrorum was active there and took part terwards, there were small Thracian forti fi-
in the suppression of the unrests. cations across these lands. This region is in-
Now, let’s focus on the military contingent habited by the tribal group of the Triballi
here. The area of Montana is rich in natural (Белитов, И.). During the riots of AD 26-27,
resources, especially the extraction of aurifer the aforementioned cohors Sugambrorum was
ous sands. This forced the governor of Moesia put under the command of the governor Pop-
Inferior to take special precautions regarding paeus Sabinus (Tac., Ann., IV, 5).
the extraction of the precious material, its pro Many cohorts are called Sugambri (one
tection during transportation, as well as con of the numerous tribes of the Germani, also
trol over the local population. called Sygambri, Sucambri), and they are con
This hilly region had been in contact with nected with the history of a few Roman prov
the Roman world since the time related with inces: Moesia, Moеsia Inferior, Moesia Superi-
the annexation of Macedonia. Coins from or, Syria, Mauretania (CIL, XVI, 16, 56; VIII,
the 2nd and the 1st c. BC have been found 9362-9363, 20 999; XVI, 16, 44; Mirković, M.
here (Fig. 3), as well as pottery from Aretium 1968:178 ff.; RMD, 1997, 297, Table 2; Weiss,
(Arezzo) in Italy. Perhaps before the Romans P. 1977:227-268; 1999a:279-286; 1999b:287-
of М. Licinius Crassus arrived here and af 292).
T a b l e ІІ Co-
hortes Sugambrorum
(after М. Тачева 2000:101; J. Spaul 2000:245)
Location
Reference Military unit Province Year AD
of finding
RMD, 2 I Sugambrorum veterana Moesia 75 Timacum Minus
CIL, XVI, 22 I Sugambrorum tironum Moesia 78 Reg. Montanens.
ZPE, 1977:233 [I sugambror]um t[ir]onum Moesia Inferior 97
CIL, XVI, 44 I Sugambr. veterana 99 Tomis
CIL, III, 12529 I coh. Sug. ve Moesia Inferior 99-134 Praes. Mont.
Montana Praes. Mon-
I coh. Syg. Ve. Moesia Inferior 99-134
(Монтана, ІІ, № 151) tanens.
I Sugambrum (M.Val.
ILS, 2724 Syria Ante 134? Byllis, Maced.
Lollianus, Syr.)
I Cl.Syganbrum vet. Išecli (Eu-
AE, 1927, No.95 equitata (M.Iulius Piso- Asia 134 meneia),
nianus, praef. coh.) Frygia
I Cl. Sugambr.? (M.Ac. Giurgiu,
CIL, XVI, 78 Moesia Inferior ? 134?
Alexander, Palmyr.) Romania
<χώρτη ά Κλοδία Moesia Inferior –
IGBulg.,II, 591 145?
΢υγάμβρων οὐετράνα ? Thracia
RMD, 165 I Claud. Sugambr. [vet.] Moesia Inferior 145 Durostorum
ZPE, 1999a:279, Moesia Inferior –
I Cl. Sugambrum veterana 145146
No.10 Thracia
RMD, 50 [I Claud.] Sugamb[r. vet.] Moesia Inferior 153 Candidiana
ZPE,1999a:282, No.12 I Claud. Sugambr. Tironum Syria ? 153 Moesia Inferior ?
Kazanlak,
CIL, XVI, 106 I Cl*<+ Sugambr. Syria 157
Thracia
207
Fig. 3. Coin hoards from the 1st c. BC in the region of Montana (after Krassimira Luka)
Legend:
ancient settlement, known from the sources; coin hoard
4 – Staliyska Mahala (Paunov, E. , I. Prokopov 2002: 42, Kat. No. 62; 42-43, Kat. No. 63-64); 15 – Yakimovo
(Велков, В. 1987: 9; Paunov, E., I. Prokopov 2002: 45-46, Kat. No. 70-71); 24 – Mihaylovo (Dolna Gnoenitsa)
(Николов, Б. 1996: 108; Paunov, E., I. Prokopov 2002: 23, Kat. No. 11); 29 – Gradeshnitsa (Paunov, E.,
I.Prokopov 2002:27, Kat. No. 26; 64-65, Kat. No. 104); 30 – Beli breg (Герасимов, Т. 1966: 211; Paunov, E.,
I. Prokopov 2002: 20-21, Kat. No 6, Kat. No 30); 35 – Nikolovo (Велков, В. 1987: 9); 36 – Kalimanitsa (An-
cient villa № 1 Montana) (Paunov, E., I. Prokopov 2002: 28-29, Kat. No. 29); 38 – Baurene (Герасимов, Т.
1966: 211; Paunov, E. , I.Prokopov 2002: 20, Kat. No 4); 42 – Galatin (Paunov, E., I.Prokopov 2002: 64, Kat.
No. 103); 50 – Gorna Verenitsa (Герасимов, Т. 1937: 320; Paunov, E., I. Prokopov 2002: 26, Kat. No. 22);
64 – Dolno Ovirovo (Paunov, E., I. Prokopov 2002: 23, Kat. No. 12); 66 – Kravoder (vicus Vorovum Minor)
(Paunov, E., I. Prokopov 2002: 31, Kat. No. 36-37); 69 – Miziya (Bukyovtsi) (Герасимов, Т. 1967: 187; Pau
nov, E., I. Prokopov 2002: 22, Kat. No. 8; 23, Kat. No. 9); 70 – Krushovitsa (Paunov, E. , I. Prokopov 2002:
31, Kat. No. 38); 74 – Altimir (Paunov, E., I. Prokopov 2002: 19, Kat. No 1); 87 – Bukovets (Герасимов, Т.
1937: 320; Paunov, E. , I.Prokopov 2002: 21-22, Kat. No 7); 90 – Ohoden (Димитрова-Чудилова, С. 1972;
Paunov, E., I. Prokopov 2002: 36, Kat. No. 47); 93 – Tishevitsa (Paunov, E., I. Prokopov2002: 44, Kat. No.
68); 104 – Lazarovo (Strupen) (Герасимов, Т. 1964: 238-239; Paunov, E., I. Prokopov 2002:32-33, Kat. No.
39); 106 – Koynare (Герасимов, Т. 1964: 242; Paunov, E., I.Prokopov 2002: 65, Kat. No. 110); 114 – Komo-
shtitsa (Paunov, E., I. Prokopov2002: 30, Kat. No. 33-34); 115 – Rasovo (Paunov, E., I. Prokopov 2002: 39-
40, Kat. No. 5657; 73, Kat. No. 124); 116 – Medkovets (Paunov, E., I. Prokopov 2002: 70-71, Kat. No. 117).
208
MONTANA
We’ve already mentioned cohors I Montano-

rum earlier (Велков, В. 1971:107; Wagner, W.
1938:170-171; Rankov, N. 1983:41).
From Montana itself, a military diploma
from February 7, 78 AD originates; its holder
was pedes of cohors Cilicum and was called Per-
asius Publi f(ilius). The tribune of this cohort
is mentioned in an inscription from AD 147
(Velkov, V., Alexandrov, G. 1988:271-277).
After the transfer of Montana to the border
province of Moesia Inferior, vexillationes of le-
gio XI Claudia and legio I Italica arrived. In the
interior of the province there were two more
centres – Abritus, where there were auxiliary
troops in the region of the Ludogorie Plateau,
and the important Troyan Pass on the road Oes-
cus – Philippopolis, which was guarded by the
fort at Sostra. For the time being four auxiliary
units which were stationed there throughout
the age of the Principate have become known
epigraphically (Христов, И. 2006b; Eck, W., R.
Ivanov 2009). Undoubtedly, there were defen Fig. 4. Dedication to Diana in honour of a success
sive positions at the other Balkan passes but fully completed hunt of bears and bisons ordered
here it was most tangible. by the provincial governor Claudius Saturninus,
as ‚imperial hunting‛ (after Монтана, 2, 1994,
The earliest mention of vexillationes of legio
No 9) (photo by Violeta Voeva)
I Italica and legio ХІ Claudia dates from AD
147. We learn that from a recently discovered
Latin inscription with very valuable informa ing year – 148 – there were great celebrations
tion (Fig. 4). The organization of Venatio Cae- on the occasion of the 900 anniversary of the
sariana is concerned. An impressive military foundation of Rome (Velkov, V., Alexandrov,
contingent took part in bear and bisons hunt G. 1988: 271 ff.; Монтана, ІІ, № 9).
ing. Military personnel from cohors I Cilicum This inscription calls into question an ear
(Table ІІІ), legio I Italica et legio XI Claudia (vex- lier opinion (Геров, Б. 1980:77, бел. 91 with
illationes), classis Flavia Moesica was engaged in reference), and namely that regio Montanensis
this activity.18 The monument is dedicated to in the 2nd3rd c. was under the area of control
Diana and commemorates the successful hunt of legio I Italica (with main garrison at No-
in the region. The mention of the river Moe vae), from where they sent vexillationes to this
sian fleet implies that the wild animals were remote district. In the sixth decade of the 2nd
transported via the Danube and then probably c. there were outfits of legio XI Claudia here
the Black Sea, the Sea of Marmara, the Aegean from the considerably more distant garrison
Sea and the Mediterranean to the Eternal City. of Durostorum. This was probably imposed
At the time of Philip the Arab, in the follow because of the participation of legio I Italica
18
Velkov, V., Alexandrov, G. 1988:271, 277: Dianae/ Ti(berius) Claudius Ulpianu(s) / trib(unus) c(o)
h(ortis) I Cil(icum) cum vexilla/tionibus leg(ionum) I Ital(icae), XI Cl(audiae), class(is) 5/ Fl(aviae)
Mo(esicae) ob venationem / Caesarianam iniunc/tam a Cl(audio) Saturnino leg(ato) / Aug(usti) pr(o)
pr(aetore) ursis et vison/tibus prospere captis 10/ aram consecra/vit Largo et Mes/sallino co(n)s(ulibus).
209
T a b l e ІІІ
Cohors I Cillicum milliaria (sagittaria) (after J. Spaul 2000:397-398)
Diploma Province Date Reference

Cilicum Moesia 07.02.78 CIL, XVI, 22
Cohors Cilicum Moesia 07.02.78 CIL, XVI, 22
I Cilicum Moesia Superior 16.09.94 CIL, XVI, 39
I Cilicum Moesia Superior 16.09.94 Tyche, 13, 221
Cohors I Cilicum Moesia Superior 16.09.94 Tyche, 13, 221
I Cilicum Moesia Superior 12.07.96 RMD, 6
I Cilicum Moesia Superior 08.05.100 CIL, XVI, 46
I Cilicum Moesia Inferior 02.04.136 CIL, XVI, 78
lic Sag. Moesia Inferior 01.05.145 RMD, 165
I Cilicum Sag. Moesia Inferior 145146 ZPE, 124, 279
Coh. I Cilic. Sag. Moesia Inferior 148154 ZPE, 117, 252
I Cilic. Sag. Moesia Inferior 157 RMD, 50
Altar or votive tablet Place Date Reference
Coh. I Cili Mihaylovgrad (Montana) 144147 AE, 1987, 867
Cor. I Cil. Philippi Tomis (Constanța) AE, 1957, 192
Boundary stone Place Date Reference
Civ(itas) Ausdec. Adver. Dac.
Coh. I Cilic. 177-179 AE, 1957, 333
(Adamclisi, Moes. Inf.)
Dedicatory stone Place Date Reference
Cohor. Cil. Uxama EE, VIII, 144
Vexillat. Coh. I Cilic. Beyrouth AE, 1926, 150
ΖΠΕΙΡΑ ΠΡΩΣΗ ΚΙΛΙΚΘΝ Thyatira IGR, IV, 1213
CCilicum Musait Dun}reni 247 AE, 1981,743
Coh. I Cil. Musait Dun}reni AE, 1981, 741
Funerary tablet or stone Place Date Reference
Coh. I Cil. Naissus (Niš) CIL, III, 8250
Coh.I Cilicum Musait Dun}reni AE, 1981, 742
Coh. I Cili. Chersonesus CIL, III, 13751 b
Coh. I Cil. Tomis AE, 1957, 193
in the military actions of Emperor Antoninus west of Montana, there was a unit of cohors
Pius in Mauritania between 144 and 152 AD. Dacorum. It is assumed that military control
In our opinion, these hypotheses must be ig along the Valley of Ogosta River had to be
nored. strengthened because there were mines for
At the beginning of the 3rd c. (AD 204), by precious metals and their transportation had
the village of Kamenna Riksa, near and north to be secured.19
19
Rankov, N. 1983:58: ‚W. Wagner 1938:130 sees this unit as one of those which went to make up
a new unit, cohors Gemina Dacorum Gordiana milliaria, attested to on an inscription found between
Kamenna Riksa and Belimel and probably based in the same fort as the earlier unit; he suggests that the
new unit was put together from the remants of the earlier cohort and others after some disaster (CIL, III,
14211,9; Kalinka, E. 1906, No. 62).
210
MONTANA
In a few inscriptions, one of them dated pre

cisely to the age of Maximinus Thrax’ rule (235
238), NCR = N(umerus) C(ivium) R(omanorum) is
mentioned.20 There hardly was a unit with this
name after Caracalla’s reform?21 Here, there is
a controversial issue. In another view, the ab
breviation may be deciphered as N(umerus)
C(ollectus) R(egionarium) (On regionarii see:
Speidel, M. 1984:185-188).
In an inscription from AD 258 building ac
tivity conducted by cohors III Collecta is men
tioned. This military unit is known from other
inscriptions from this site (Монтана, ІІ, №№
4, 6, 80, 133) (Fig. 5). From the offered review
it can be seen clearly that the military presence
here was quite massive during the Principate
age.
Now we are about to discuss briefly two
inscriptions which later are to be considered
further. Margarita Tacheva discusses them on
the occasion of the restoration of a temple and
an altar as well as the situation in the region
in the troubled times among local population
when the region was transferred to the neigh
bouring province of Moesia Inferior.
‚<Finally I’m going to mention the resto
ration of the shrine of Iupiter Optimus Maxi-
mus in 162 AD in regio Montanensium (CIL, III,
12385 from Gromshin – vetustate corruptum), Fig. 5. Inscription – acclamation in honour of Em
destroyed ‚by age‛ according to an inscrip peror Valerian by cohors III Collecta. The dedica
tion, and the restoration of the votive altar at tion was organized by the tribune Aelius Maximus
the sanctuary of Diana and Apollo approxi (253 AD) (photo by Violeta Voeva)
mately at the same time. In fact, the second in
scription of the devout Roman lady (ILS 9775
– monumentum restituit) implies that in both for the elevation of Montana into a municip
cases the shrine and the inscription at anoth ium as V. Velkov and G. Alexandrov claim,
er sanctuary were not suffered damage over but of a wartime situation. It led through the
the years. Since the events of that time do not aforementioned inscriptions of the Thracian
speak of long preparations and celebrations provincial governors in AD 151156 about the
20
Монтана, ІІ, № 3: Numini perpetuo / d(omini) n(ostri) invictissimi / Imp(eratoris) Caes(arius) C(ai)
Iul(i) V(eri)/ [[Maximini]] Pii, Fe/5 licis, Aug(usti), Pont(ificis) / Maximo (sic), trib(unicia) / potest(ate),
p(atris) p(atriae) proco(n)s(ulis), / n(umerus) c(ivium) Romanorum [[Maximinia]]/ [[nus]] devotus / nu
mini maiesta/tique eius.
Монтана, ІІ, № 20: *Diana+e Reginae / *<S+ELEVCUS / *libr.?+arius n(umeri) c(ivium) [R(omanorum)]
/ [pro s]e et suos / [ex v]oto posuit.
21
Rankov, N. 1983:59: ‚<A numerus of Roman citizens is thus rather unusual. Possibly they were a
local militia, as V.Bozhilova 1976:41, note 8 suggests, perhaps formed out of newly-enfranchised natives
following on the Constitutio Antoniniana of A.D. ‛.
211
construction of fortresses and guard posts for vo (Герасимов, Т. 1937: 320), Kravoder (Ге-
the defense of Thracia.‛ (Тачева, М. 2000:88– расимов, Т. 1937: 320), Virovsko (Николов, Б.
89). As far as the incursion of the Costoboci in 1996: 52), Oryahovo(Герасимов, Т. 1937: 315),
AD 170 is concerned, there is no data about Knezha (Gerasimov, T. 1979: 135) (Fig. 6).
devastation (!?).22 The region was devastated by the great
Building activity of the aforementioned co- Gothic incursions in 376378. There is no in
hors III Collecta is a consequence of the Gothic formation about the fortress in particular,
invasions from the mid3rd c. (250251). The but numerous coin finds originate from the
great coalition led by the Gothic military nearby villages: Orsoya, Mihaylovo, Be lo-
commander Кniva, forced a crossing over tintsi (Александров, Г. 1994:41), Govezhda
the Danube in four directions. From east and (Герасимов, Т. 1938: 450; Александров, Г.
west they have been localized in the area of 1994:41), Krushovitsa (Николов, Б. 1996: 171–
Sexaginta Prista and further southwards and 172), Linitsa (Герасимов, Т. 1965:249). The ra-
southeastwards in presentday Northeastern vaging raids affected most of all the big villa
Bulgaria. The second spot was at the legionary estates, i.e. the owners of rich lands along the
camp Novae. That is where the Danube is nar Valley of the Ogosta River. Probably the local
rowest and the bank is not high. Here Kniva, exploited population took the side of the in
along with 70 000 men, crossed the river and vaders (Fig. 6).
headed towards Nicopolis ad Istrum (Nikyup), As far as the Hunnic invasions in Montana
the marketplace Discoduraterae (Gostilitsa) are concerned, we do not have any certain in-
and from there he passed Haemus mons. The dications. However, the city of Ratiaria on the
third direction was at Ulpia Oescus (Иванов, Danube was affected (Динчев, В. 2002:15),and
Р. 1999). From here, along the strategic road, in 408 Hunnic troops, led by Ildris, seized Ca-
one headed directly to Philippopolis (Plovdiv). stra Martis (Castramartis) (Атанасова, Й,
The last area of invasion was namely the Val 2005:12). By 453 in the vicinity of the same
ley of the Ogosta River by which Montana city, a small group of Huns as well as Sarma
was reached. Deposited coin hoards from that tians and Kemandri were given the right to
time have been discovered at many sites across live there as foederati.
the region of Montana: Orsoya (Добруски, At the very end of the 5th and the begin
В. 1890: 19), Mokresh, Komoshtitsa, Yaki mo- ning of the 6th c., the name ‚Bulgars‛ occurred
vo, Medkovets, Smirnenski, (Gerov, B. in sources (Vulgares/Bulgares, Βούλγαρι)
1963:141-143; Александров, Г. 1994:40), Kriv (Златарски, В. 1994:36–37); their attacks, ac
odol (Герасимов, Т. 1938: 450; Александров, cording to the reports of Marcellinus Comes,
Г. 1994:40), Sofronievo (Николов, Б. 1996: Cassiodorus and Ennodius, were localized
274; Gerasimov, T. 1979:141), Mihaylovo (Ге- from west to east around Sirmium, Horreum,
расимов, Т. 1937: 317–318; Николов, Б. Margum, the Tsurta River (Tsibritsa?) and the
1996: 108; Gerasimov, T. 1979: 138), Zamfiro- Iatrus River.23 It can be assumed that the area
22
We think Montana must have been affected by these invasions. It is not clear why the reserachers
have not come across such devastation so far.
23
In 499: ‚... Arist, commander of the troops of Illyricum headed< against the Bulgarian (Bulgares),
who were devastating Thracia. The battle took place by the Tsurta River.‛ (Marc. Com., Chr., 502 (X);
ЛИБИ, I, 1958, 317). In 535: ‚The patrician Cita clashed at Iatrus in Moesia with enemies – Bulgarians,
and came out victorious.‛ (Marc. Com., Chr., 535 (XII); ЛИБИ, I, 1958, 320). In 504 the Bulgarians took
part in the defense of Sirmium as allies of the Gepids against the Ostrogothian King Theodorich (Cass.,
Var., 504; ЛИБИ, I, 1958, 306). In 505 Bulgarians took part in the battle at Margus between the army of
Mundo supported by Picia – the military commander of Theodorich, and the Byzantine military forces
led by Sabinian (Ennod., Panagyricus, XII; Marc. Com., Chr., 505 (XIII); ЛИБИ, I, 1958, 299–302, 317).
212
MONTANA
Fig. 6. Coin hoards from the age of the Gothic invasions in the area of Montana (after Krassimira Luka)
Legend:
– ancient settlement, known from the sources; – coin hoard from the age of the First Gothic Inva
sion (250251); – coin hoard from the age of the Second Gothic Invasion (376378).
2 – Orsoya (Remetodia) (Добруски, В. 1890: 19); 5 – Smirnenski (Lukovets) (Александров, Г. 1994: 40);
15 – Yakimovo (Александров, Г. 1994: 40); 21 – Sofronievo (Николов, Б. 1996: 274; Gerasimov, T. 1979:
141); 24 – Mihaylovo (Dolna Gnoenitsa) (Герасимов, Т. 1937: 317-318; Николов, Б. 1996: 108; Gerasimov,
T. 1979: 138); 34 – Belotintsi (Александров, Г. 1994: 41); 41 – Krivodol (vicus Tautiomosis) (Герасимов, Т.
1938: 450); 54 – Govezhda (Герасимов, Т. 1938: 450); 62 – Zamfirovo (Герасимов, Т. 1937: 320); 66 – Kra-
voder (vicus Vorovum Minor) (Герасимов, Т. 1937: 320); 70 – Krushovitsa (Николов, Б. 1996: 171-172);
71 – Lipnitsa (Герасимов, Т. 1965: 249); 95 – Virovsko (Николов, Б. 1996: 52); 97 – Oryahovo (Aedbae ?)
(Герасимов, Т. 1937: 315); 102 – Knezha (Gerasimov, T. 1979: 135); 114 – Komoshtitsa (Александров, Г.
1994: 40); 116 – Medkovets (Александров, Г. 1994: 40); 117 – Mokresh (Александров, Г. 1994: 40)
of Montana, which falls between the last two be concluded that they must have lived some
sites, was also affected. According to V. Be where near the regarded district, since it is un-
shevliev, the early Bulgarian tribes launched likely that they undertook their raids from
these attacks from the region between the riv the settlements on the coast of the Black Sea
ers Tisa and Danube or the southern districts or even further from the Sea of Azov or the
of the Carpathian Mountains: ‚From the con Caucasian districts, because in that case the
stant mention of praefecture Illyricum, it can path of the invading Huns would have run
213
through Scythia Minor, which has not been With the settling of the Avars on the Mid
mentioned in any source.‛ (Бешевлиев, В, dle Danube another stage in the ethnic shift
1980:52, 54). Confirmation of such an idea is a was completed. The literary sources point to
late source (Riders to the Old Bulgarian trans a series of military actions undertaken by the
lation of the Chronicle of Manassas) where Avar Khaganate, the ultimate target of which
it is stated: ‚Under Emperor Anastasius the was the occupation of the region east of the
Bulgarians started to conquer this land. When Olt River.26 Very likely, the status of the lands
they crossed from Bdin and at first started to west of this river was in relation to the Avar
seize the Lower land of Ohrid and afterwards politic hegemony. However, the historical data
the entire land. Since the exit of the Bulgar regarding the region of ancient Montana dis
ians, it has been 870 years.‛ (Каймакамова, cussed here is indirect and the archaeological
М. 1993:36).24 evidence is insignificant. It is known that in AD
In the period after AD 534 when the Byz 582 the Avars destroyed the fortress of Augustae
antine military commander Belisarius trans (Машов, С. 1980:42), and in 586 the capital of
ferred his troops and thus started the bat Dacia Ripensis – Ratiaria, also fell (Динчев, В.
tle of Byzantine Empire in the Gothic war 2002:16). In the beginning of the 7th c. the Byz
(Ангелов, Д., 1965: 25–26), the names of An antine defensive system along the Valley of the
tes and Sklaveni occurred for the first time in Danube collapsed once and for all (Комша, М.
sources. In AD 548 they also come into contact 1992: 263–264), and at the end of the same cen
with the Illyrian territories of the Empire.25 A tury the area of Montana was already a border
study by S. A. Ivanov on the age of Justinian I territory between the Bulgarian State and the
shows that the Danubian Limes was fortified Avar Khaganate (Златарски, В. 1994:152).
most strongly from the area of the presentday
city of Orshova to the east to the mouth of the V. Provincial Belonging, Road Network
Iskar River and Oescus (Иванов, С. 1983: 42– and Customs Control
44). L. Hauptmann presumes contact with the
Byzantine Limes by Slavs who, while moving V/1. P r o v i n c i a l B e l o n g i n g
along the line which runs from the inner ridge
of the Carpathian Mountains and which leads The provincial border between Thracia
to the Tisa River, turned in the Valley of Wal and Moesia, later Moesia Inferior, was quite
lachia (Hauptmann, L. 1929:142). changeable throughout the age of the Princi
24
M. Kaymakamova links the data containing in the riders with the movement of the Bulgars of Ku
ber in the second half of the 7th c. (Каймакамова, М., 1993:39–40). However, in the text the time when
the Bulgars started ‚to conquer this land‛ has been precisely indicated – under Emperor Anastasius
(491-518).
25
In 548, the Sklaveni, crossing the Istros River ‚created a huge evil across whole Illyria as far as
Epidamnos<‛; in 550 ‚hordes of Sklaveni‛ appeared in the outskirts of Naissus; in 551 ‚a huge horde
of Sklaveni, attacking Illyricum, caused indescribable disasters there.‛ (Proc. BG.VII.29.11; VII.40.1-7;
VIII.25.1; Свод, 1994: 188–189; 194–197; 200–203).
26
According to the reports by Menandros, and earlier by Ioannes of Ephesus, in the second half of the
th
6 c., the Antes – Avars conflict was evolving (Io. Eph. II, III; Men. Fr. 6; Свод, 1994: 284–285, 316–317).
Besides the Antes, the Avar expansion was aimed against some Slavic tribes who have usually been lo
calized in the northeastern part of the Balkans (Men. Fr. 48). Against these tribes was the raid of Bayan
in 578. In 580 the Avar Khagan started building a bridge across the Sava River ‚< in order to go against
the Slavs and get across the Sava and enter the lands of the Byzantines, to cross the Istros afterwards and
turn against them<‛ (Men. Fr. 63). The same year an Avar emissary was attacked by Slavs in Illyricum
(Men. Fr. 64).
214
MONTANA
pate. It is considered that it was not until the three neighbouring provinces of Upper Moe
end of the 2nd c. that the ridge of the Balkan sia (Moesia Superior), Lower Moesia (Moesia
(Stara planina/ Haemus mons) became the per Inferior) and Thrace (Thracia). Thus, the bor
manent borderline, something which we do derline between the first two provinces was
not consider true.27 Moesia – Moesia Inferior moved to the west (the former border was the
is very long in the direction west – east. In its Tsibritsa River, the ancient Kiabros, Cebrus),
eastern district (the later Moesia Inferior) it and thus Almus (Lom) on the Danube passed
is very narrow in direction north–south. The from Upper to Lower Moesia. The aim was
border in some sectors reaches a width of just Moesia Inferior to be provided with a harbour
2540 km. From the mid1st c., when the prov by which to export the ore production from
ince of Thracia was founded (AD 45), to the the area of Montana (for more details about
beginning of the 2nd c., Montana belonged to the border see: Gerov, B.1979:213 ff.; Тачева,
this province. М. 2000). Perhaps by the village of Smolyantsi
Thracia was provincia inermis, there were on- (probably in Upper Moesia), the boundary
ly auxiliary units stationed here, in the hin between the two provinces turned eastwards
terland and especially in the hilly districts. (Gerov, B. 1979, Karte 1).
Of course, some of them were relocated here According to literary sources, between
from abroad. The aforementioned risings of 117 and 119 AD, in Dacia and Lower Moe
2627 AD, the removal of the Thracian strate sia, Barbarian tribes penetrated unexpect ed-
gies and the deprivation of land for the needs ly (Sarmatians, Iazyges and Roxolani).28 A few
of urbanization led to rebellions in the peri years later, in 124-125, Emperor Hadrian him-
ods under the rule of Hadrian and Antoninus self visited the two provinces. Undoubt ed-
Pius. The region of Montana was among the ly there was military reinforcement at the
troubled ones. weakest spots. Between 136 and 138 AD there
According to a hypothesis, the lands south is evidence of minting of monetary emissions
and near Montana belonged to Thracia, and on the reverse of which can be read – S. C.
Montana itself to Moesia Inferior (Алек- EXERCI(TUS) THRACIAE (Strak, P. 1933:149;
сандров, Г. 1994:33). According to another Тачева, М. 1994:115–124; 2000:66).
view, around the first quarter of the 2nd c., co- The region of Montana in general includes
hors I Claudia Sugambrorum was attested to in the lands in the drainage basin of the Ogosta
Montana (the inscription from AD 134 shows River.
this area already belonged to Moesia Inferior) The northeastern end reaches the village of
(Rankov, N. 1983:42) (Fig. 7). Gromshin a little more than 30 km from Mi
At first, the area around the present-day haylovgrad – Montana.
city of Berkovitsa and Montana belonged to During Aurelian’s rule, or more likely un
the province of Thracia. After AD 134136, der Diocletian, serious provincial reforms
changes happened between the borders of the took place. The Utus (Vit) River became the
27
Thus, for instance, emporion/emporium Discoduraterae (Gostilitsa, Gabrovo reg.) lies north of the Bal
kan and belongs to the urban territory of Augusta Traiana (Stara Zagora) – beyond the mountain and
even south of the neighbouring parallel mountain of Sredna Gora (more precisely in the area of Sarnena
Gora Mountain). This situation remained until the rule of Emperor Aurelian (270-275). Afterwards, in a
few years during the same age this marketplace passed to the territory of the city of Nicopolis ad Istrum
to the north of the Balkan Mountains. The same is valid for the urban northern territory of Serdica in
the province of Thracia, which passed to the north of the Balkan until the time of Aurelian – Diocletian.
28
The numismatic evidence of these events in today’s Northern Bulgaria has been unconvincing so
far (K.L.).
215
Fig. 7. Inscriptions, reliefs and votive tablets revealed within the territory of Montana (after Krassimira
Luka)
Legend:
• – ancient settlement, known from the sources; – inscription in Latin; – inscription in Greek;
– votive tablet of the Thracian Heros; 1) Area, reached by the circulation of the monuments of the
Thracian Heros; 2) Area, reached by the distribution of inscriptions in Greek.
1 – Lom (Almus) (Добруски, В. 1890: 17, 19; Басанович, И. 1894: 64; Добруски, В. 1900: 21-22; Геров, Б.
1953: Кат. №№ 16, 17, 205, 230; Филов, Б. 1911: 273, 275, Обр. 8); 2 – Orsoya (Remetodia) (Бассанович,
И. 1894: 66; Велков, В. 1964-1965: 6; Добруски, В. 1890: 20); 3 – Dobri dol (Геров, Б. 1953: № 184, № 199,
№ 224); 5 – Smirnenski (Lukovets) (Добруски, В. 1890: 35-36; Геров, Б. 1953: № 227); 6 – Dolno Linevo
(Шкорпил, К. и Х. 1892: 79); 8 – Stanevo (Labets) (Pomodiana) (Добруски, В 1890, 16; Бассанович,
И. 1894: 65-66; Добруски, В. 1900: 22, Фиг. 9; Геров, Б. 1953: № 200; Велков, В., Г. Александров
1994: №121; Ферјанчић, С. 2002: 285); 11 – Zlatiya (Kule mahala) (Тодоров, Я. 1928: 217, №№ 480-481;
216
MONTANA
Дякович, Б. 1900: 149; Геров, Б. 1953: № 233); 13 – Valchedram (Добруски, В. 1900: 31, Фиг. 13; Тодоров,
1928: 173); 19 – Harlets (Augustae) (Шкорпил, К. и Х. 1891: 151; Филов, В. 1911: 63; Тодоров, Я. 1928:
185, № 172; Геров, Б. 1949: №35; Машов, С. 1975: 38, Обр. 2); 23 – Manastirishte (Димитров, Д. 1942:
34, № 46; Геров, Б. 1953: № 201; Машов, С. 1975: 36-37, Обр. 1); 25 – Beli brod (Добруски, В. 1890:
13); 27 – Lehchevo (Дякович, Б. 1904: 30; Велков, В., Г. Александров Г. 1994: 40, № 92); 28 – Gromoshin
(Шкорпил, К. и Х. 1891: 148); 29 – Gradeshnitsa (Николов, Б. 1967: 222, Обр. 9; Машов, С. 1975: 39-40,
Обр. 6); 31 – Marchevo (Велков, В. 1987: 11, бел. 29); 33 – Ancient villa No 2 Montana (Александров, Г.
1980 b: 17, 43, 46-47); 34 – Belotintsi (Добруски, В. 1890: 13); 36 – Kalimanitsa (Ancient villa No 1 Montana)
(Александров, Г. 1977 а: 51-52, обр. 1; Александров, Г. 1983: 69, № 1; Велков, В., Г. Александров 1994:
31-32, № 63); 37 – Ohrid (Велков, В. / Александров Г. 1994: 53, № 129); 39 – Lipen (Николов, Б. 1996:
189); 41 – Krivodol (vicus Tautiomosis) (Венедиков, И. 1955: 201); 46 – Chelyustnitsa (Добруски, В. 1896:
434; Дякович, Б. 1904: 27); 47 – Belimel (Добруски 1896, 433-434); 48 – Kovachitsa (Филов, Б. 1912-1913:
332, Обр. 261; Велков, В., Г. Александров 1994: 36, № 77); 49 – Vidlitsa (Александров, Г. 1977 а: 59, №
14; Велков, В., Г. Александров 1994: 35, № 75); 51 – Dolna Verenitsa (Добруски, В. 1890: 13; Геров, Б.
1953: № 39; Божилова, В. 1976: 42-43); 52 – Georgy Damyanovo (Lopushna) (Дякович, Б. 1904: 12; Геров,
Б. 1953: № 271; Велков, В. , Г. Александров 1994: 31, № 61; 39-40, № 90; 49-50, № 119); 55 – Bistrilitsa
(Добруски, В. 1894: 94; Тодоров, Я. 1928: 172-173; Геров, Б. 1953: № 278); 56 – Gaganitsa (Велков, И. ,
Хp. Данов 1938; Велков, И. 1940-1942: 268; Велков, В. 1971: 106-106); 57 – Leskovets (Berkovitsa Munici-
pality) (Тодоров, Я. 1928: 198, № 299; Геров, Б. 1953: № 8; Велков, В. / Александров Г. 1994: 41, № 96);
58 – Kotenovtsi (Тодоров, Я. 1928: 45, 53, 198, № 297); 59 – Kostentsi (Тодоров, Я. 1928: 172, 198, 230);
60 – Komarevo (Berkovitsa Municipality) (Добруски, В. 1890: 10; Тодоров, Я. 1928: 18; Геров, Б. 1953: №
276); 61 – Berkovitsa (Добруски, В. 1890: 8-9; Шкорпил, К. , Х. Шкорпил 1892: 79; Тодоров, Я. 1928:
45, 52, 229, № 577; Геров, Б. 1953, № 274; Велков, В., Г. Александров 1994: 5-6, № 7); 66 – Kravoder
(vicus Vorovum Minor) (Велков, В. 1962: 31-32, Обр. 1); 67 – Lilyache (Велков, И. 1930-1931: 302-303,
Обр. 217); 68 – Chiren; 70 – Krushovitsa (Николов, Б. 1996: 171-172); 73 – Sirakovo (Тодоров, Я. 1928:
171; Николов, Б. 1967: 228-229, Обр. 20); 74 – Altimir (Геров, Б. 1953: №№ 22-23; Велков, В. 1962: 33-
34, Обр. 2; Николов, Б. 1967: 218-219, Обр. 2-3; Машов, С. 1975: 39, Обр. 5); 75 – Galiche (Николов,
Б. 1967: 219, Обр. 4); 79 – Byala Slatina (Шкорпил, К. и Х. 1891: 151, 153; Геров, Б. 1953: № 27); 81 –
Sokolare; 85 – Komarevo (Byala Slatina Municipality) (Геров, Б. 1953: № 252); 86 – Tlachene (Николов, Б.
1996: 287); 92 – Golyamo Peshtene (Геров, Б. 1953: № 249; Николов, Б. 1967: 221, Обр. 7); 93 – Tishevitsa
(Николов, Б. 1967: 232, Обр. 24); 97 – Oryahovo (Adabae ?) (Добруски, В. 1900: 59; Тодоров, Я. 1928:
234, № 614; Велков, И. 1930-1931: 304- 305, Обр. 221-223; Геров, Б. 1953: № 202-203); 98 – Leskovets
(Oryahovo Municipality) (Variana) (Николов, Б. 1967: 227, Обр. 18); 99 – Selanovtsi (Николов, Б. 1996:
264); 101 – Ostrov (Pedoniana) (Добруски, В. 1900: 29-30, фиг. 11; Тодоров, Я. 1928: 171); 104 – Lazarovo
(Strupen) (Николов, Б. 1996: 282); 105 – Enitsa (Геров, Б. 1953: № 28); 106 – Koynare (Шкорпил, К. и
Х. 1892: 107, Фиг. 17; Кацаров, Г. 1911: 176-179, Обр. 2; Геров, Б. 1953: № 259; Николов, Б. 1967: 224,
225, обр.13); 107 – Chomakovtsi (Добруски, В. 1890: 44-45; Шкорпил К. И Х. 1892: 104-105, Фиг. 15;
107, Фиг. 18; Геров, Б. 1950: 15; Геров, Б. 1953: № 30-31, 253-258, 293, 297; Машов, С. 1975: 38-39, Обр.
4); 108 – Sukache (Филов, Б. 1912-1913: 41-42, обр. 35; Тодоров, Я. 1928: 45; Николов, Б. 1967: 229-231,
Обр. 21-23; Николов, Б. 1996: 276; 109 – Gabare (Добруски, В. 1900: 34-35; Геров, Б. 1950: 15; Геров,
Б. 1953: № 260-261, 287; Машов, С. 1975: 40, Обр. 7); 111 – Gornik (Филов, Б. 1912-1913: 9; Геров, Б.
1953: № 299); 112 – Cherven bryag (Геров, Б. 1950: 15, бел. 4; Димитров, Д. 1942: 45, № 86; Геров, Б.
1953: № 395); 113 – Reselets (Дякович, Б. 1904: 6-7; Геров, Б. 1950: 15, бел. 4-5; Геров, Б. 1953: № 288;
Боянов, И. 2008: 333).
217
Fig. 8. Registered ancient sites and road thoroughfares on the territory of Montana (after KrassimiraLu-
ka)
Legend:
– ancient settlement, known from the sources; – unfortified settlement; – villa; – plain fortifi-
cation; – hill fortification; – quarry; – milestone column; – route of an ancient road
(1 – after Wendel, M. 2005: 146 ff.; 2 – after Добруски, В. 1890: 12; 3-5 –
after Григоров, В. 2011: 128-130, Обр. 1)
218
MONTANA
2 – Orsoya (Remetodia) (Добуски, В. 1890: 20); 4 – Staliyska Mahala (Добруски, В. 1890: 33, бел. 61);
8 – Stanevo (Labets) (Pomodiana) (Добруки, В. 1890: 17; Басанович, И. 1894: 56); 9 – Dolni Tsibar
(Добруски, В. 1890: 17; Дякович, Б. 1900: 148); 10 – Gorni Tsibar (Cebrus) (Дякович, Б. 1900: 149); 16 –
Virove (Дякович, Б. 1904: 29); 17 – Doktor Yosifovo (Valkova Slatina) (Дякович, Б. 1904: 29); 18 – Kozloduy
(Regianum) (Добруски, В. 1890: 37; Николов, Б. 1996: 149); 19 – Harlets (Augustae) (Машов, С. 1980;
Машов, С. 1990); 20 – Butan (Николов, Б. 1996: 33); 21 – Sofronievo (Николов, Б. 1996: 274); 22 – Hay-
redin (Николов, Б. 1996: 128); 24 – Mihaylovo (Dolna Gnoenitsa) (Николов, Б. 1996: 108); 26 – Furen
(Николов, Б. 1996: 299); 27 – Lehchevo (Александров, Г. 1971: 118); 29 – Gradeshnitsa (Николов, Б.
1967: 222); 31 – Marchevo (Добруски, В. 1890: 13; Дякович, Б. 1904: 30; Александров, Г. 1971: 118-119);
32 – Erden (Добруски, В. 1890: 13; Дякович, Б. 1904: 30; Александров, Г. 1971: 119-120); 33 – Ancient
villa № 2 Montana (Александров, Г. 1980 b); 34 – Belotintsi (Добруски, В. 1890: 13; Дякович, Б. 1904:
29; Александров, Г. 1980 b: 11); 36 – Kalimanitsa (Ancient villa № 1 Montana) (Миланов, М. 1978: 61;
Александров, Г. 1983); 39 – Lipen (Николов, Б. 1967: 189); 40 – Urvene (Николов, Б. 1967: 297; Машов,
С. ръкопис); 41 – Krivodol (vicus Tautiomosis) (Николов, Б. 1967: 166-167); 42 – Galatin (Николов, Б.
1967: 70); 43 – Osen (Николов, Б. 1967: 229); 44 – Smolyanovtsi (Дякович, Б. 1904: 28); 45 – Kamenna
Riksa (Дякович, Б. 1904: 26; Александров, Г. 1971: 123); 47 – Belimel (Александров, Г. 1971: 123); 52 –
Georgy Damyanovo (Lopushna) (Дякович, Б. 1904: 12; Александров, Г. 1971: 123-124); 53 – Glavanovtsi
(Дякович, Б. 1904: 12; Динчев, В. 2006: 85); 55 – Bistrilitsa (Александров, Г. 1971: 130-132); 56 – Gaganitsa
(Добруски, В. 1890: 10; Александров, Г. 1971: 127-130; Миланов, М. 1978: 62-65); 57 – Leskovets (Berko-
vitsa Municipality) (Александров, Г. 1971: 130-132; Миланов, М. 1978: 65-67, фиг. 4-5); 58 – Kotenovtsi
(Добруски, В. 1890: 14); 61 – Berkovitsa (Добруски, В. 1890: 10; Динчев, В. 2006: 85); 62 – Zamfirovo
(Александров, Г. 1971: 130); 63 – Draganitsa (Дякович, Б. 1904: 8); 64 – Dolno Ovirovo (Дякович, Б. 1904:
8); 65 – Botunya (Миков, В. 1928-1929: 31); 66 – Kravoder (vicus Vorovum Minor) (Велков, В. 1962: 31-32);
67 – Lilyache (Александров, Г. 1971: 119; Николов, Б. 1996: 187); 68 – Chiren (Велков, И. 1930-1931: 303;
Цветков, А. 1930-1931: 262; Николов, Б. 1996: 311); 69 – Miziya (Bukyovtsi) (Николов, Б. 1996: 212); 70
– Krushovitsa (Николов, Б. 1996: 171-172; Luka, K. 2003: 41); 71 – Lipnitsa (Николов, Б. 1996: 193); 72 –
Rogozen (Николов, Б. 1996: 255-256); 73 – Sirakovo (Николов, Б. 1967: 229, Обр. 20 б; Николов, Б. 1996:
270); 74 – Altimir (Милчев, А. 1958; Николов, Б. 1961 а; Николов, Б. 1961 b; Лука, К. / Машов, С. 2006);
78 – Bardarski geran (Николов, Б. 1996: 39-40); 80 – Borovan (Николов, Б. 1962: 36; Николов, Б. 1996: 17;
Luka, K. 2003: 41); 81 – Sokolare (Николов, Б. 1996: 272); 82 – Popitsa (Николов, Б. 1996: 243-244); 83 –
Tarnak (Николов, Б. 1996: 295-296); 84 – Vranyak (Николов, Б. 1996: 58); 86 – Tlachene (Шкорпил, К. и
Х. 1891: 155; Николов, Б. 1996: 287); 87 – Bukovets (Николов, Б. 1996: 30); 88 – Nivyanin (Джурилово)
(Николов, Б. 1996: 101); 90 – Ohoden (Дилов, И. И., И.Д. Дилов 2003: 15-18); 91 – Banitsa (Николов, Б.
1996: 9-10); 92 – Golyamo Peshtene (Николов, Б. 1967: 221, Обр. 7-8); 93 – Tishevitsa (Николов, Б. 1996:
286); 94 – Tsakonitsa (Николов, Б. 1996: 307); 96 – Varbitsa (Николов, Б. 1996: 66); 97 – Oryahovo (Aedabae ?)
(Добруски, В. 1890: 37); 98 – Leskovets (Oryahovo Municipality) (Variana) (Добруски, В. 1890: 37; Торбов,
Н. / Антонов, Д. / Найденова, Е. 2005); 99 – Selanovtsi; 101 – Ostrov (Pedoniana) (Добруски, В. 1890: 38);
102 – Knezha (Николов, Б. 1996: 144); 103 – Brenitsa (Димитрова, Д. 1985: 21); 104 – Lazarovo (Николов,
Б. 1996: 282); 105 – Enitsa (Николов, Б. 1996: 125); 106 – Koynare (Николов, Б. 1996: 152); 107 – Chomako-
vtsi (Николов, Б. 1996: 314-315; Велков, В. 1959: 171); 108 – Sukache (Николов, Б. 1967: 231); 109 – Gabare
(Димитрова, Д. 1985: 24; Николов, Б. 1996: 67-68); 113 – Reselets (Николов, Б. 1996: 253-254).
219
border not only between the two dioceses – The second road, until it reached Montana,
Тhracia to the east and Dacia to the west, but passed through the same villages as the first
also between two praefectures – Per Orientem one. Afterwards, it continued to the northeast
and Illyricum. towards Kravoder – the towns of Vratsa and
The province of Dacia Ripensis with capi then the town of Mezdra, making a sharp
tal city of Ratiaria fell within the diocese of turn to the southwest towards Lyutibrod –
Dacia. Its borders were the following in the Eleshnitsa – the Iskar Defile again and Serdi
territories of present-day Eastern Serbia ca (Wendel. M. 2005:147-148) (Fig. 8 – 1).
and Northwestern Bulgaria: to the east – the As early as the 19th c., V. Dobruski localized
mouth and the extent of the Vit River; to the the route of another ‚old cobblestone road‛
south – the ridge of the Balkan Mountains; to which from Montana ran through the villages
the west – along the watershed between the of Valkova Slatina (today’s Doktor Yosifovo),
rivers Timok and Morava; and to the north Slivovik, Brusartsi and from there it headed
– the Danube River in the section from Tali directly to Archar (Добруски, В. 1890:12). In
ata to the mouth of the aforementioned Vit geographical terms, this road represents the
River. shortest link between Montana and Ratiaria
Major centres were Oescus, Bononia, Castra and judging by the recently discovered vo
Martis, Zetnukortu, Montana, Augustae, Dier- tive inscription of dux Daciae Ripensis Aurelius
na, Pontes, Variana, Valeriana, Almus and oth Priscus, it ran through a great sanctuary lo
ers (Велков, В. 1959:76–78). cated by the presentday village of Drenovets
(Лука, К. 2011b: 533, oбр. 2) (Fig. 8 – 2).
V/2. R o a d N e t w o r k Montana was on the inner provincial Low
er Moesian road which ran parallel with the
An the beginning it was mentioned that Danubian road (Fig. 8 – 3). The thoroughfa
Montana is not marked in the ancient sourc res from Serdica and Ratiaria came together
es, which is a little odd. The settlement lies on in Montana. From there to the east they con
a road which connects three provinces. tinued towards Melta (Lovech) – Nicopolis
The road from Ratiaria (Moesia Superior) – ad Istrum (the village of Nikyup) – south of
Montana (Moesia Inferior) – Serdica (Thracia) is Abritus with a branch towards it – Marciano
concerned. Two of these cities became capi polis – Odessus on the Black Sea coast. Sec
tals of the new provinces founded at the end tions of the road have been localized by K.
of the third century – Dacia Ripensis (Ratiaria) Shkorpil (Григоров, В. 2011:130) (Fig. 8 – 5).
and Dacia Mediterranea (Serdica) (Велков, В. From the villages of Chomakovtsi (Велков,
1959:76 sq.; Иванов, Р. 1999:27–28). В. 1959:171) and Tlachene (Шкорпил, К. и Х.
According to M. Wendel, there were two 1891:155), situated near this road, mile-col
roads during Late Antiquity. The first road umns are known which refer to Late Antiq
started from Ratiaria and then to the south uity.29 Another road connecting Oescus with
west it ran through Ruzhintsi and Gyurgich, Montana probably ran through the villages of
and passed next to Kamena Riksa; after Altimir and Sirakovo (Григоров, В. 2011:130)
wards by Montana it ran straight southwards (Fig. 8 – 4).
– Zamfirovo – Draganitsa – Varshets – Osi It is assumed that another road from Dal
kovo – Iskar Defile – Serdica/Sofia (Wendel, matia also ran through Montana; it reached
M. 2005:146 ff.). Upper Moesia at Naissus (Niš/Nish) and to
D(ominis) n(ostris) Constantino [et Liciio] Augg. Crispo Constantino et Constantio <<<..
29
Caess. M(ilia) p <..
220
MONTANA
day’s Pirot, then continued towards Chip (138-161) was related to this family (Стоев,
rovtsi (in Upper Moesia again) – Montana, К. 2012:18–19).
and from there it ran northwards to the Da
nube.
VІ. Ethnic Composition, Classes
V/3. C u s t o m s C o n t r o l and Religion
Before AD 146 Montana had been a sta VІ/1. E t h n i c C o m p o s i t i o n

tion of the Illyrian customs. Recently M. Ta-
cheva (Тачева, M. 2000:79–92) made a se The civil population of Montana during
rious analysis of two newly discovered in the 2nd c. was to some extent similar to that
scriptions from there.30 On the basis of this ep- of the big urban centre of Ratiaria (Геров, Б.
igraphic record, she has tried to provide an 1952:81–82). Various ethnic groups were pre
approximate chronological scheme refer ring sent. Under the Severan dynasty (193-235) the
the people occupied in the organization of Thracian element occurs in the lands along the
the customs system. Here are the more impor- upper reaches of the Ogosta River (especially
tant conclusions (Тачева, М. 2000:87). Within in votive inscriptions). However, this process
the short interval between 146 and 157 AD, may have happened a little earlier.
conductor P.P. was T. Iulius Saturni- nus. That From Montana itself inscriptions of per
is namely when his liberated slave sons with Italic names, which can also be of
T. Iulius Capito was already circitor. Perhaps civilians, originate. We have even evidence of
at that time Q. Sabinus Veranus was conduc- connections between Montana and the capital
tor P.P. Illyrici Noricum, Moesia Superior, Dacia – Rome. A woman from there raised a votive
Superior. Within four years (157161) T. Iulius monument and then restored it again. The
Satirninus occupied the position P.P. Illyrici veterans contributed to the infiltration of Ro
utriusque et Ripae Thraciae, which undoubt manization and the Latin language in the re
edly gave him great powers. From AD 161 he gion and especially along the upper stream of
had become procurator Augustorum. Between the Ogosta River.
161 and 166 T. Iulius Capito was conductor P.P. Here, the Society of Dionysus was main
Illyrici et Ripae Thraciae. After 166 the office of tained mainly by Greek Anatolian settlers.
T. Iulius Capito was given to Iulius Ianuarius, The Greek names occur rarely in epigraphic
Iulius Capito, Iulius Epaphroditus conductores records, but do exist.
P.P. Illyrici et Ripae Thraciae. Of course, in Montana and vicinity persons
According to a new hypothesis based on of military origin have also been attested to.
epigraphic records from Gaul, Hispania and From the former city of Kutlovitsa a Latin in
Lower Moesia, T. Iulius Saturninus originates scription, unique for Lower Moesia, originates
from a famous and wealthy family which (it was discovered in 1880); it is dated to AD
was in close patronal relationship with the 155 after the names of the consuls. Seventy
family of the Annii. Emperor Antoninus Pius five men from a vexillatio of legio ХІ Claudia
30
Монтана, ІІ, № 21: Dianae Reginae./Pro salute Favo/rini et Secundiae/ vern(arum) T(iti)
Iul(i) Satur/nini c(onductoris) p(ublici) p(ortorii) Illyrici sub Iul(io) Capitone et Eup(oro)
circ(itoribus) p.p.Ascle/piades serv(us) vil(icus) et Lu/censia parentes.
According to M. Tacheva (Тачева, M. 2000:80), the publishers V. Velkov and G. Aleksandrov wrong
ly decipher the Gentile in singular but it is in plural and refers to the second circitor Eup(h?)orus.
Монтана, ІІ, № 12: Dianae./ Pro sal(ute) (Quinti) Sabini Ve/rani II viri p/r(imi) Macrin(us)/ arc(arius)
pos(uit) cur(ante) / Hilaro Vite/lius d(edit), v.s.l.m.
221
are regarded. They were garrisoned here and legionaries are listed and only one of them is
had been recruited from the first five cohorts of named Aurelius (dating 134135 AD). Howev
the legion.31 Later we will cite the commentary er, fourteen men are Aelii, which is the Gentile
of B. Gerov (Геров, Б. 1952:52–53). The legion name of Hadrian (Геров, Б. 1952:52 sq.).
aries have mostly imperial Gentile names and It is B. Gerov again who has forwarded the
the prevailing ones are Aurelii – 17, followed opinion that, as far as the presence of persons
by Valerii – 12, Iulii – 11, Flavii – 9, Aelii – 6, Ulpii of Thracian origin is concerned, there are no
– 2, Cocceius – 1. According to him, the great clear indications about that time and most
est number of names belongs to men who are likely this took place during the rule of Mar
newcomers in the unit during Emperor Had cus Aurelius (161180) and afterwards.32 In the
rian’s Principate (117-138) and in the first half same monument from Montana a beneficiariuis
of Antoninus Pius’ rule (138161). Boris Gerov consularis is mentioned as well as a physician
believes that this is particularly valid for those (medicus), who are of Greek origin. Recently,
who bear the Praenomen Аurelius, who could the idea of B. Gerov has been subject to serious
hardly inherit this name from their parents. analysis and has endured certain changes.33
He makes this assumption on the basis of an Auxiliary units have been registered in
inscription regarding legio VII Claudia (CIL Montana and the region. At some of them in
III, 8110), where thirtysix newly recruited their composition there are people from the
31
CIL, III, 7449: -------------------/ [Permissu ? T.Flavi] Longini leg(ati) Aug(usti) pr(o) pr(aetore) / vexil-
lat(io) leg(ionis) XI Cl(audiae) / sub cura Fl(avi) Maximi (centurionis) leg(ionis) eiusdem / Severo et Sa-
biniano co(n)s(ulibus), 5/ b(ene)f(iciarius) co(n)s(ularis) Ulpius Alexander,/ principales: tes(serarius)
Iulius Aeternalis,/ tub(icen): Aurelius Postumus, cornice[n]: Valerius Rufus, med(icus): Aurelius Arter
mo, im(m)unes ven(atores): Iulius Longinus et Fl(avius) 10/ Valerius ; c(o)hor(tis) I : Calpur(nius) Ter
tianus, / Valerius Felix, Fla(vius) Valens, Aurel(ius) Pedo, Fla(vius) (H)eracl(a), / Aurel(ius) Cerfonius ?;
c(o)hot(tis) II : Aurelius Appianus, Fla(vius) / Reginus, Aurelius C(h)aireas, Val(erius) Fronto, Iulius
15/ Claudianus; c(o)hor(tis) III: Iuliu(s) Horte(n)sis, Aelius / Marcial[i]s, Val(erius) Valens, Antoni(us)
Valens,/ Pontius Pontianus, Val(erius) Antonius, Val(erius) Rufus,/ Clau(dius) Ianuarius, c(o)hor(tis)
IIII: Ael(ius) Paulus, Aurel(ius)/ Germanus, Aurel(ius) Sanctus, Val(erius) Maximus, 20 / Anto(nius) Va
lens, Iul(ius) Valens, Val(erius) Longus, Ulp(ius)/ Bassus, Fl(avius) Primus ; c(o)hor(tis) V : Ael(ius)
Apollodoru(s)/ Aeli(us) Sabinus, Iul(ius) Flaccus, Aur(elius) Helenus,/ Aur(elius) Artemo, Cocceius
Long(us?), Atil(ius) Crispus, Aur(elius) Quadratus, Ael(ius) Apellles, Fl(avius) Alexander, Iul(ius) 25/
Nigrinus, Ael(ius) Antullinus, Ael(ius) Victorinus, Cervius / Maximus, Vl(erius) Firmus), Ael(ius) Fla
vius, Petro(nius) Valens, / [Au]r(elius) Longinus, Val(erius) Valens, Iul(ius) Alexander, Aur(elius) Ag
atho/[c]les, Iul(ius) C[a]pito, Umi(dius) Quadratus, Mum(mius) Celer, Tri[---] Valens,/ [F ?]l(avius) Ter
tius, Aur(elius) [Te]rtulianus, Fl(avius) Po[n]tianus, Mu[mm(ius)] Niger, 30/ Val(erius) Valens, Fl(avius)
Lo[n]ginus, Iul(ius) V[---] / [---] Aur(elius) Vindex, Aur(elius) Decimus, ---[Qui]ntus, Val[erius]---/ (uite)
leg(ionis) XI Cl(audiae).
32
Геров, Б. 1952:49–53. According to him, unquestionable evidence of recruitment among the per
egrinal element is the big list from Viminacium (Kostolac) (from AD 195), where the numerous Thracian
Cognomina testify to recruitment among the local Thracians.
33
In his PhD thesis, Kalin Stoev (2012) spatially and logically expressed his view that in the laterculus
from Montana of AD 155 there can be registered the first mass recruitment of the local settled popula
tion which was probably partly nonRoman in terms of civil right, but still ‚Romanized‛. Therefore,
the composition of soldiers of the vexillatio of legio XI Claudia at that time was more varied. Except for
the soldiers recruited locally among which there were successors of earlier settlers from the district lo
cated on the border between Upper and Lower Moesia, there were such the recruitment of whom was
predetermined by the permanent garrison at Durostorum. Here we are not going to discuss his theory
because the study is in print.
222
MONTANA
Western (Celtic origin) and maybe also from

the Eastern provinces (I Claudia Sugambrorum,
I Hispanorum, I Cilicum – with probable re
cruits from Cyprus). However, it must be not
ed that a part of the military contingent of the
auxiliary troops was barbarized or gradually
became barbarized over the years. According
to V. Velkov, the civilian settlement at Mon
tana occurred namely around the military
camp and the later municipium evolved from
an early settlement of the vicus type. The set
tling of soldiers from various sorts of troops
after the end of their service at similar camp
side settlements, often with their own govern
ment, is a frequent phenomenon in Moesia
Inferior and can be assumed here. The com
position of these settlements was quite varied
but traditions (including the name), character
istic of the homelands of the people serving at
the auxiliary units, must have been kept. This
may explain the presence of such Cognomini,
characteristic for the Gauls and the Lower
Danubian lands.
After the mid3rd c. the names of command
ers of auxiliary units occur. They are entirely
Roman with imperial Gentilicium and at the
same time they show the provincial origin of
their bearers (Геров, Б. 1952:83).
Fig. 9. Sculpture (torso) of an honoured person
from Montana (photo by Violeta Voeva)
VІ/2. C l a s s e s
There are very few epigraphic records re (Геров, Б. 1852:82). It is possible that there
garding the elite of Moesia Inferior compared were families of Italic origin which were solv
with the provinces along the Danube and the ing the problems of Montana (Fig. 9).
Rhine (Mrozewicz, L. 1982; 1989). The few studied villas indicate that they be-
There was a transit crossroads and link belonged to people with enviable financial re
tween the two cities in Upper Moesia and sources for this district. However, the evidence
Thracia, respectively – Ratiaria and Serdica. of leading persons in social, administrative
For the level of the two provinces, they were in and even religious life (despite the information
good state under the Antonines and especially about the sanctuary) is scarce.
under the Severan dynasty. It is not by chance Noteworthy is the name of T. Iulius Saturni-
that Montana is missing in itineraries and liter nus, his slaves and clients, and his big family
ary sources. (Тачева, М. 2000:87). His origin and qualities
Regardless of time when Montana became helped him acquire great power in a number of
a municipium there were representatives of the provinces of the Empire. It is very likely that this
local government who undoubtedly belonged man was in Montana in the years around the
to the provincial elite. These were members middle of the 2nd c. when his career flourished.
of provincial families and already Romanized His libertine T. Iulius Capito was probably here
223
In Montana there is data about a Roman

ized population, peregrines – most of all per
manently or temporarily settled merchants
who met the needs of the military and civilian
population.
There were many craftsmen in the city – lo
cals and foreigners, and liberated slaves. Slav
ery here was a frequent phenomenon – in the
villas, workshops and in quarries. The rural
community tried to protect the interests of
the poor local population as far as possible.
However, often rich landowners and veterans
managed to claim a part of this land.
On the periphery of Montana the local ru
ral Thracian population lived. Undoubtedly it
remained a little far from the process of Ro
manization.
VІ/3. R e l i g i o n
The big sanctuary in Montana developed

Fig. 10. Dedication to Diana (ara and statuette) by around the Karst spring with pure fresh water
C. Marius Victorinus centurio legionis I Italicae
at the foot of the hill. During archaeological
(after Монтана, 2, 1994, № 14) (photo by Violeta
Voeva)
surveys fragments of a large gable, columns
and epistyles were found here. There was
a large temple there for the construction of
in Montana or in Ulpia Oescus as servus vilicus, which white marble had been used, extracted
and afterwards as circitor (Тачева, М. 2000:87– from the nearby quarries along the southern
88). When Saturninus’ career declined, of slopes of the Balkan. At the foot of the hill the
course other families appear in the tax system rocks were used and niches for statues are cut
across these lands. This is shown by the third into them. They were of different sizes (one
member of the Julii here – Iulius Epaphroditus such is preserved and its height is 65 cm). The
(Стоев, К. 2012:19). People with considerable statuary figures are of bronze, marble or lime
wealth which grew even more with their work stone (Александров, Г. 1994:83–84). There are
in the new offices are regarded. also many area, some of which have statues
As part of the ‚military‛ elite we must raised on them. Often the inscriptions start
mention high military ranks such as tribunus, with the expression that the initiator is raising
tribunus cohortis, praefectus cohortis, praeposi- ‚aram cum sigillum‛ (Fig. 10).
tus (Монтана, ІІ, 1994:passim). However, we Some of the statues are coloured. This gives
must immediately note that these men occu them additional colouring especially at night
pied their positions for a short time and they processions to the light of torches. Red dye
hardly remained in Montana for a long time. can be seen on the belts of Diana while the col
The Latin epigraphic records where the our is purple on the statues of Mars. Often the
names with the rank of centurio (centurio, cen- marble is covered with wax.
turio regionarius) are mentioned are numerous Diana was most worshipped here and in
(Fig. 10). Of course, we should not refer them the region (maybe due to the fact that namely
to an upper social class, but in this militarized this big sanctuary was revealed) (Fig. 11). She
district their part was important by all means. is patroness of game and fruit trees, of forests
224
MONTANA
and mountains and of course, of the hunt. She

was worshipped by miners and there were
many of them in the district.34 The goddess,
as a ‚keeper of the balance‛ between nature
and man was honoured by the military men at
the garrison, too. Her name has been written
as Diana (16 monuments), Deana (10), Deana
Augusta (2) (Fig. 11), Deana Lucifera Augusta
(1), Diana/Deana Regina (7) (Fig. 13), Diana/
Deana Sancta (3), Diana Sancta venatrix (1).
We must mention the discovery of three mar
ble statues of Diana. The first is life size and
the other two are a little smaller. Of course,
only the torso of the three statues has been
found. The making of the ‚first‛ Diana is on a
very high provincial level. The wrap is made
so well that the folds are visible and even un
derneath the beautiful young athletic body
emerges (Fig. 27). Often on votive tablets
(Montana, Gaganitsa, Lyuta and Bistrilitsa),
Diana the Hunter is represented riding a deer
with a dog running next to them. The recently
discovered inscription which gives indica
tions of an undoubtedly successful hunt of Fig. 11. Dedication to Deanae (sic) Augustae by C.
bisons and bears from AD 147 is dedicated to Aemilius Donatus, centurio legionis XI Claudiae
Diana (Fig. 4). In another epigraphic record (after Монтана, 2, 1994, № 18) (photo by Violeta
the goddess is mentioned as ve(natrix). On a Voeva)
votive tablet from Gaganitsa the inscription
in Greek says ‚Artemis‛. That is the only evi
dence in Ancient Greek from the district, the statuette discovered in a cave with a spring
initiators of which are emigrants from the East near the village of Govezhda.
(Монтана, ІІ, № 33). The sanctuary is also dedicated to Apollo,
Thracians often identified Diana with Heca- her brother: Apollo (12), Apollo Phoebus (1),
te. Hecate (Hekate) has been attested to by a Apollo Sanctus (6) (Fig. 12).
34
Rankov, N. 1983:46 – ‚... The existence of a temple to Diana and Apollo here may also be significant
in that these are two of the deities represented on the small secondcentury copper coins known from
the mining districts of the Danubian provinces, especially in the Kosmaj region of Moesia Superior,
which were apparently used as a form of currency in these districts. S. Dušanić has suggested that the
coins representing Diana, the moon goddess, were destined for use in the silver mines, and those repre
senting Sol (or Apollo ?) for use in the gold mines. He supports his theory by reference to the known cult
of Diana in the silver mines of Bosnia and Serbia (Dušanić, S. 1977:58, note 12; he refers to CIL, III, 12723
– Domavia; CIL, III, 14546 – Koslaj; Starinar, V, 1885:35 – Kučajna; ŽA, XII, 1963:372-375) – Timacum
minus and compares the place names Zanes (Diana) and Argentares which he locates in the same region
of the Timok valley. He also suggests possible identification by miners of Diana with the earth-goddess,
quoting AE, 1967, No. 407, a dedication to [Di]anae et [Ter]rae Mat[r]i from the Dacian Salinae). If his
theory is correct, then the cult of Diana and Apollo at Montana may represent the two metals produced
by the Ogosta and Zlatitsa mines, silver and gold.‛
225
lief marble image of the Horseman, almost life

size, is kept at the RHM – Montana. He is rep
resented during hunting while he is stabbing
a wild boar with a sharp spear (Fig. 31). On a
votive tablet from the spring by the village of
Leskovets we read dedications to the Thracian
Heros (Eroni sancto) (Монтана, ІІ, № 96).
Diana and Dionysus can be noticed on vo
tive tablets from Montana and Valchedram
and there is a tablet originating from Mon
tana which represents Diana with the Three
Nymphs and Dionysus. Another votive tab
Fig. 12. Dedication to Apollo, initiated by P. Ae

lius Fronto, centurio legionis XI Claudiae (after
Монтана, 2, 1994, № 34) (photo by Violeta Voeva)
Besides his dedications, there are naturally

such of them both together: Apollo et Diana (1),
Deana/Diana et Apollo (5), Diana Regina et Apol-
lo Phoebo (1) (Fig. 13).
We must mention a Latin votive monument
of Latona (Leto, TN) – the mythical mother of
Diana and Apollo. In actual fact, such dedica
tions are rare (Монтана, ІІ, № 78).
Of course, there are quite a lot ‚official‛ de-
ities – I.O.M. (7), I.O.M. conservator (1), I(ovi)
O(ptimo) M(axio) S(oli) (1), Zeus (1), Iuno Regina
(2). A significant number of monuments and
votive tablets from the area are dedicated to
Zeus. Moulds with images of Zeus and Hera
have also been discovered. The merging of the
cult of Zeus and that of the Thracian Sabazios
has been established across these districts. Fig. 13. Dedication to Dianae Reginae et Apollini
The local population worshipped the Thra for the health of the governor of Moesia Inferior –
cian Horseman (Fig. 7). Four votive tablets Vitrasius Pollio. The initiator is C. Iulius Africanus,
have been discovered in Montana and two centurio legionis XI Claudiae (after. Монтана, 2,
tablets originate from Leskovets. A large re 1994, № 47) (photo by Violeta Voeva)
226
MONTANA
let represents Dionysus next to Silvanus. A

dedication to Dionysus is in Greek. A fam
ily (a priest and a priestess) raised a statue
of the deity. Probably a religious society of
Anatolian settlers here who came as crafts
men and merchants is regarded. This de
ity, highly worshipped by Thracians, too, is
well documented in Montana and its vicinity
(Александров, Г. 1990:30–37). The ancient
Italic deity Liber who offered fertility, was
syncretized across these lands with Dionysus
(Монтана, ІІ, № 70).
Fig. 15. Dedication to Aesculapius and Hygieia by

Publius Aelius Fronto, centurio legionis XI Clau
diae (photo by Violeta Voeva)
Silvanus is an ancient Roman deity of wild

nature, but was also worshipped as a found
er and patron of agriculture, guardian of the
home, the estate and the lands. Spring celebra
tions (for instance on March 17) were organ
ized in his honour. In six monuments (most of
them – votive tablets) we have evidence of this
deity, written as: Silvanus (2); Silvanus Deus
(2), Silvanus Sanctus (2), Silvano et Silvestri (2)
(Fig. 14). In one of the inscriptions the dedica
tion was made by a person named with the
theophoric name of this deity – Silvano sancto.
Silvane(n)sis ex v(oto) p(osuit) (Монтана, ІІ, №
87). The healerdeities Aesculapius and Hy
gieia were worshipped by both the military
and civil population (Fig. 15). They were writ
Fig. 14. Dedication to Silvanus (photo by Violeta ten as: Aesculapius (1), Hyg(ia) (2), Aesculapius
Voeva) et Hygia (1). We must mention a bronze statu
227
ette of Fortuna – the goddess of good fortune. In the area around Montana there are a
The lives of both military men and civilians number of sanctuaries of many worshipped
were unimaginable without luck. It is not acci deities. The closest one is that located high
dental that the expression ‚Fortuna imperatrix above the left bank of the Ogosta River (at the
mundi‛ was so popular. end of the presentday dam wall). Others lie
Among the military men, Hercules (2) and around the villages of Bistrilitsa, Govezhda,
Mars (1) enjoy great honour. The first demi- Gaganitsa, Leskovets, Lehchevo, and Pishur
god’s name is written in an inscription as ‚Al- ka (Александров, Г. 1994:82–83) (Fig. 7).
cidi (Herculi) salvatori‛. With this name he is
mentioned as a descendent of his grandfather VІІ. Chronicle of Research
Alcaeus, something which has been recorded
epigraphically for the first time within pre The first brief data about the Roman ruins
sentday Bulgaria. He is also mentioned as by Kutlovitsa (today’s Montana) we owe to
‚saviour‛. the Austro-Hungarian traveller Felix Kanitz
There are quite a lot of epigraphic records in 1871 (Kanitz, F. 1882:282). A more thorough
with initiators of Eastern origin – two images description is provided by the Czech historian
of Zeus Hypsistos (Montana and the vicinity), and traveller Konstantin Jireček, who later be
Mithra (Deus Invictus) in four monuments and came the Minister of Culture in the Principa
votive tablets from Montana and the village lity of Bulgaria after Liberation from Turkish
of Zlatiya, Numini Sara(p)i from the sanctuary rule (Иречек, К. 1974:342 sq.). He revealed
itself (Монтана, ІІ, № 81), Deus Aeternus (of the name of the city and issued in literature
Syrian origin, and he is syncretized with other the inscription in Latin on a marble slab from
deities). AD 155 discovered at the ruins of the fortress
A long Latin inscription with dedications in 1880 (CIL III 7449; Jireček, К. 1881:464 sq.).
to … Montis presidibus deis Nicovisi natis dei(s) The first epigraphic records from Montana
que in insula vaga Nil … has raised some dis were published in Suppllementum of CIL III
cussion (Монтана, ІІ, № 48 b). The dedica 7447-7451; 12370-12378; 12529, 14209.
tion is to ‚The patrons of the mountain‛ (per In the series of collections of folklore V.
haps the hill above Montana and the Balkan). Dobruski (Добруски, В. 1890:10–15), I. Ba sa-
Secondly, ‚the deities born in Nicivosus‛ are novich (Басанович, И. 1894:58–64) and B.
regarded. The authors of Montana, Volume Dyakovich (Дякович, Б. 1904:10–15) describe
ІІ, p. 24-25, are not aware of this geographic their personal observations on the ruins of the
term. Perhaps territories inhabited by the city which at that time was called Ferdinand.
Celts is concerned – for instance, ‚Nic‛ occurs At the beginning of World War I, in 1915,
in names such as Nic-arus (cognomen), Nic-er, during work on the spring supplying the
Niciola (river names), Nic-etus, Nici-acus (per newly proclaimed city with fresh water, the
sonal names). The second part ‚vosi‛ occurs sanctuary of Diana and Apollo was discov
in names: Vosio, Vosion (cognomen), in personal ered accidentally. The world political events
names – Vosis, Vo-solvia, Voss-illus (Holder, A. at that time, however, prevented its explo ra-
1963). Finally, the offering is dedicated to ‚the tion (Филов, Б. 1915:216 sq.; Велков, И.
deities of the vast island on the Nile‛. Two is 1934:447–467; 1940/42:269–271; Welkow, W.
lands are particularly important in the mid 1955:91-101; Милчев, А., Пеков, Д. 1965:43–
dle of the great African river – they are Phyle 45; Александров, Г. 1970:43–47; 1977:51–61;
and Elephantine. Maybe the first one is con 1980:34–41; Божилова, В. 1976:40–46; Bozhilo
cerned since there were famous sanctuaries of va, V. 1977:473-484; Rankov, N. 1983:40, 62;
Isis, Hathor and other Egyptian deities there Бинев, М. 2003:160–182). At that time, in the
(Kees, H. 1938:2019-2113). immediate vicinity of the spring (west of it),
228
MONTANA
Fig. 16. The ancient site ‚Kaleto‛ in the city of Montana. General plan of the archaeological excavations
(after Огненова-Маринова, Л. и др. 1987, План 2)
niches, hewn into the vertical rocks, were re Roman age, as well as in publications of sin
vealed; inside one of them there stood a mar gle finds (Велков, И. 1929:71; 1942:183–189).
ble statue of Diana, as well as many arae for Single finds have also been discussed and
statues with dedications. In 1928 the materials analyzed by D. P. Dimitrov (Димитров, Д.
related to religious life were included in the 1942:30–31 № 33).
study of Yanko Todorov on paganism in Moe The Greek epigraphic records from Mon
sia Inferior (Тодоров, Я. 1928). tana and its vicinity were published in the
In 1933 information about Montana was second volume of the corpus by Georgy Mi
published in a brief feature in the Encyclope haylov (Mihailov), containing the inscriptions
dia RE (Pauly – Wissowa) in German, and to discovered between the Danube and the Bal
a great extent the existing Bulgarian literature kan Mountains until 1958 (IGBulg. II, 1958:21-
was ignored in it (Fluss, M. 1933:201). 23, NoNo 480484).
Montana and what was known about it The greatest scientific importance belongs
were included in the studies of Ivan Velkov, to the analysis of the materials available from
related to the road connections during the Montana and its territory, issued by prof. Bo
229
ris Gerov in his studies on the border between graphic material from Montana and region,
Thracia and Moesia (Lower Moesia), as well including the monuments discovered during
as in his monumental study on Romanization rescue excavations at the sanctuary in 1986 by
in present-day Northern Bulgaria (Геров, Б. Velizar Velkov and Georgy Aleksandrov, was
1949:13 sq.; 1952:64–67; Gerov, B. 1979). published in a separate volume (Монтана, ІІ,
In 1971 the article of Velizar Velkov on the 1994). That is when G. Aleksandrov’s study
history of Montana was published (Велков, on the history, everyday life, culture and
B. 1971:105–114). It included the field ob ser- economy in the area of the upper and middle
vations of G. Aleksandrov (Alexandrov) reaches of the Ogosta River was issued; that is
about the defensive system in the PreRoman where the centre of Montana developed dur
and Roman ages in Montana and its adjacent ing the Roman age. The author gives informa
lands to the north of Haemus (Александров, tion from the age of the earliest finds to the
Г. 1971:115–133). present times (Александров, Г. 1994), and he
The British archaeologist N. B. Rankov also has paid great attention to the Roman period
wrote a thorough study regarding most of all and Late Antiquity (Александров, Г. 1994:31–
the rich epigraphic material from this area 102). The second chronological period in this
(Rankov, N. 1983:40-73). It treats a number of geographic area was included in V. Velkov’s
important issues about the status of Montana monograph on the city in Late Antiquity
and the military presence there. (Велков, В. 1959:76) when Montana belonged
Ten years ago material about Montana was to the newly founded province of Dacia Rip-
issued by Metodi Binev. He has made a col ensis.
lection in brief of all known historical and ar
chaeological data related to this site (Бинев, VІІІ. Archaeological surveys
М. 2003:160–182).
Finally, we should mention the study of The archaeological site ‚Kaleto‛ is located in
Krasimira Luka who actually represents a re the periphery of the presentday town of Mon
view of the archaeological excavations under tana, on the western bank of the Ogosta River,
taken in Mihaylovgrad which were published on the hill which dominates over the modern
in Volume I of the series ‚Montana‛ (Лука, К. site. The long surveys here were spread over
2008). two sectors: Eastern and Western (Figs 17, 18),
Regular archaeological excavations of the the first of which revealed the ruins of a large
sanctuary started in 1969 and the fortress on basilica structure (published as ‚Excavations at
the Kaleto Hill started being excavated in the sanctuary of Diana and Apollo‛ – Монтана,
1971, and since then the researchers G. Alek І, 1987), and the second one a fortification
sandrov, L. Ognenova – director of the first ex with an approximate area of about 1 hectare
cavations, and V. Bozhilova have issued in the (Динчев, В. 2006:85; Александров, Г. 1987).
specialized periodicals a considerable number In the sector of the Sanctuary (East) there are
of monuments (Александров, Г. 1977 b: 267 two chronological periods (or ‚complexes‛
sq.; Божилова, В. 1976:40 sq.). All materials according to the publication): 1. Sanctuary –
collected until 1987 were included in Volume I from the age of Augustus after parallels with
of the series ‚Montana‛ where the results from the sanctuary at Philippi (temenos of the sanc
the excavations of the sanctuary of Diana and tuary in earlier walls); and 2. Christian – after
Apollo at the foot of the hill and the surveys the beginning of the 4th c. (an Early Christian
of the fortress itself are presented in separate basilica35 and support wall from which the
chapters (Монтана, І, 1987). In 1994 the epi predominant part of the epigraphic material
35
The excavations of the Early Christian basilica were resumed in 2009 (Кабакчиева 2010 а; 2011).
230
MONTANA
known from Montana originates). The chro religious centre (Монтана, І, 1987:16). Since in
nology of the fortress (Western sector) is con substructure the basilica is directly over the
siderably more complex since ruins from the foundations of the earliest building identified
Chalcolithic, Bronze and Iron ages have been with a shrine, its construction is dated imme
revealed at the site. According to its researcher, diately after the destruction of the building
the fortress was built by the Thracians. After from the pagan stage (Монтана, І, 1987:17).
the Thracian revolt of AD 26, cohors I Sugam In fact, the dating of this sector is complicat
brorum settled here. This fortification, in his ed by the controversial information from the
view, was mentioned in 134 as a praesidium, in finds of coins (totally two), the first of which
161 as a municipium. In 253 porta praetoria with – of Constantius II (337361) was not discov
a tower was raised here, and in 258 – burgus ered inside a stratum, but over a stratum – ‚on
was raised, all attested to in inscriptions. The the terrace of this wall< (the dismantled wall
fortress survived over the next centuries and with spolia – note by Krassimira Luka)‛. This
there are traces of habitation here even during find has been used in the publication as a dat
the Middle Ages (Александров, Г. 1987:75–80; ing element of inscription No 25, announcing
1977b; Станилов, С., Г. Александров 1983b). the restoration of the destroyed temple which,
The study of the results from the archaeo according to V. Bozhilova, took place under
logical surveys raises some questions which Julian the Apostate (361-363) (Божилова, B.
do not allow us to agree with the aforemen 1987:32, № 25). The same inscription (wrongly
tioned chronological continuity of the site. referred on page 16 under No 24), discovered
over the earlier stratum in turn, gives grounds
VІІІ/1. E a s t e r n S e c t o r (Fig. 17) for dating of ‚this earlier fire‛ at the time ‚be
fore the cult in the pagan sanctuary declined‛
The sector is located at the foot of the hill (Монтана, І, 1987:16), or ‚at the proclamation
Kaleto and contains the ruins of a large late of Christianity as a state religion‛ (Божилова,
antique basilica building and its adjacent sup В. 1987:32). The upper stratum in turn ‚< con
port wall, inside which numerous arae with vincingly relates to the end of the pagan cult
inscriptions are walled in (the so called ‚wall and the destruction of pagan monuments‛
with the area‛). Despite the obvious construc (Монтана, І, 1987:16) or ‚< between AD
tion stage referring to the Late Antiquity, the 330 when Constantine the Great proclaimed
main interest of researchers in this sector has Christianity as a state religion and AD 337 –
always been focused on the sanctuary stage. a date implied by the coins from the second
Architectural remains (in fact they are the main architectural complex raised over the ruins of
part of the explored sector) are scarce and the the sanctuary ‚ (Монтана, І, 1987:17). i.e, ac
evidence –controversial. A major problem is cording to this information, we must assume
not only the dating of the studied structures, that between the aforementioned data, the
but also their internal chronology. Thus, for temple existing was destroyed, subsequently
example, according to the researchers of the – restored (after AD 361 according to the data
site, the foundations of the basilica are dug from the inscription) and at last – destroyed
into cultural strata with total thickness of 1.40 again (around AD 337 ?!) and afterwards a
m where two strata are clearly isolated – one Christian church was immediately raised over
of them is 0.50 m thick and the other is 0.30 its ruins.
m (i.e. their total thickness is 0.80 m and not The second coin find was discovered inside
1.40 m). The earlier of these strata is related to the filling (implectum) of the support wall
the destruction and subsequent restoration of and according to the researchers of Kaleto,
the temple existing at that site, while the later it belongs to Faustina (Монтана, І, 1987:17).
one is associated to the final destruction of the Actually, if the regarded coin is lateantique,
temple and its transformation into a Christian it should be associated with Fausta, Constan
231
Fig. 17. ‚Kaleto‛, Montana. Eastern sector ‚The Sanctuary‛. Plan and section (after Огненова-Маринова,
Л. и др. 1987, План 4 и План 5)
tine’s wife from 307 AD, who became Augusta refers the construction of the Christian tem
in 325 and was murdered in 326.36 Since a great ple to the time of another, fourth stage of the
amount of the area and stone plastics were re overall chronology of this sector. A last, fifth,
used for the construction of the regarded wall, stage has been marked by Christian graves
its chronological position can certainly be re dug into ‚a pavement‛ which they have de
ferred to the time after the demolition of the stroyed and which is linked with the level of
pagan shrine or to the beginning of the 4th c. the basilica building (Монтана, І, 1987:16 and
(according to the coin). fig. 20). Thus, at the established two cultural
This stage can be defined as a third one in strata, the chronology offered by the research
the overall chronology of the sector (without ers of this sector spans to five stages in total,
registered cultural stratum in the publication). about three of which there is categorically no
According to V. Bozhilova, ‚this wall later be- evidence in the stratigraphy of this site. In the
came the substructure of the Early Chris tian stratigraphic section of the sector (Fig. 17) not
basilica‛ (Божилова, B. 1987:20), which a single one of these cultural layers has been
36
I thank Assoc. Prof. PhD Dilyana Boteva who pointed out this inaccuracy (К. L.).
232
MONTANA
reflected, and neither has been the level to structures. The fact that the regarded support
which the substructures of the revealed archi wall ‚later became the substructure of an Ear
tectural ruins reach. ly Christian basilica‛ is reflected nowhere in
The aforementioned data make the inter the published graphic surveys (Божилова, В.
pretation of the lateantique complex situ 1987:20). On the contrary, in the stratigraphic
ated over the ruins of the ancient sanctuary section, as well as in the horizontal measur
extremely difficult. The orientation of the ba- ing (Fig. 17), it is documented as attached to
silica building makes a strong impression the northeastern wall of the basilica. i.e. there
with its declination along the axis E-W by 40°. are not enough categorical grounds either for
This fact is in contrast with the position of the the first dating (immediately after the demo
pagan shrine which, according to the applied lition of the pagan shrine) or for the second
plan (Fig. 17) (Монтана, І, 1987, plan 3 and one (later than the construction of the support
5) is orientated along the four cardinal points. wall). 37
The position of the temple in a direction dif It can be assumed that the flat refusal of the
ferent from that of the lateantique buildings researchers of this sector to admit and respec
suggests a different levelling of the ground in tively to register cultural layers belonging to
the early stage from that reflected in the pub the lateantique stage is the main reason for
lication; therefore, it should also be referred to the confused and sometimes paradoxical con
the time after the beginning of the 4th c. clusions related to its chronology.
The dating of the basilica building once If the coin finds (actually quite close in time)
‚not very long after the time of the rejection of are interpreted not as an indicator for the fi-
the pagan cult‛ (Монтана, І, 1987:17) and then nal date of the sanctuary or the opening date
later than the construction of the support wall of the Christian church (to such an interpreta
(the so called wall with the area) around AD tion leads the use of terms such as ‚over the
337 (Монтана, І, 1987:20) shows a documenta stratum‛, ‚on the terrace‛) but as identifying
tion which is not precise enough, on the basis a respective construction stage, then the coin
of which the building has been interpreted. of Constantius ІІ, discovered ‚over the lower
The lack of ‚a mound‛ between the spolia of stratum‛, should logically be referred to the
the temple and the substructure of the basilica upper stratum which must be likely referred
(Монтана, І, 1987:17) cannot be taken as proof to the unregistered and neglected lateantique
of the direct construction of the later building stage in the sector. On this basis the assump
over the ruins of the shrine since there hardly tion seems very likely that the entire complex
are many examples which can be cited when was constructed at once at a time determined
foundations of a solid building is on a mound by the two coin finds (the first half of the 4th c.)
without reaching a firm and sufficiently sta and that the revealed support and enclosing
ble ground. On the other hand, the photos walls were somehow related to the fortifica
added to the publication show a compara tion of the site meant to carry the weight of
tively identical technique of building of the quite a monumental building which the ba
ruins of the basilica and of the ‚support‛ and silica structure is (about 21 m length and over
the ‚fence‛ wall as well as of the transverse 10 m width according to the attached plan).
37
Surveys in 2009-2010 directed by Gergana Kabakchieva (National Institute of Archaeology with
Museum) of the Early Christian basilica established two construction stages, respectively – the first half
of the 4th c. and the second half of the 5th c., as well as the use of multiple spolia of tombstones and votive
monuments (Кабакчиева 2010a:331; Кабакчиева 2010b). We can only hope that a future more detailed
publication of these excavations would provide categorical and documentarily grounded data regard
ing the stratigraphic position of the basilica building toward the earlier stages in the sector.
233
The foregoing allows us to draw the follow К., Шкорпил, Х. 1891:148; Монтана, ІІ, № 59;
ing conclusions: Byala Slatina – Шкорпил, К., Шкорпил, Х.
1. The archaeological surveys at the so 1891:153). If we accept the foregoing reasons,
called ‚Sanctuary of Diana and Apollo‛ at the there are no grounds for the assumption that
foot of Kaleto Hill in Montana actually reveal the demolition and the subsequent restoration
a construction stage well documented by coins of the pagan shrine took place under Julian
in the first half of the 4th c. It is related to the the Apostate which would certainly have left
building of a support wall, for the construc clearly distinguishable stratigraphic traces. P.
tion of which a great amount of spolia from an Hristova has come to roughly the same con
earlier age was used. clusions independently of us (Христова, П.
2. There are no grounds for dating inscrip 1999:188–191).38
tion No 25 from the reviewed publication an 3. There is no archaeological data about
nouncing the restoration of the pagan shrine the dating of the so called ‚Sanctuary stage‛
in AD 361 or later than the other inscriptions in the discussed sector. The extremely scarce
revealed in the support wall. Its discovery si information from the field does not give any
multaneously with a coin of Constantius II grounds for the temenos of the sanctuary to be
does not contradict the overall characteristics localized namely on this site.
of the lateantique construction stage when 4. In the studied sector only two construc
multiple earlier ashlars with inscriptions tion stages have been stratigraphically prov
were reused as building material. In fact, V. en; the dating of the first one has not been es-
Velkov and G. Aleksandrov, even though they tablished, but it is earlier than the second
marked paleographic specificities characteris stage which refers to the first half of the 4th c.
tic for a later age, admit the use of ‚older for
mulas‛ in the regarded inscription (Монтана, VІІІ/2. W e s t e r n S e c t o r (Figs 18, 19)
ІІ, № 45). The expression ‚templum ... ex suo
restituit‛ is present in all building inscrip The obvious link of the sanctuary complex
tions known from the region from the age of with a military centre located at the same site
Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus (Ratiaria – or nearby is documented by the military men
Добруски, В. 1890:27; Gromshin – Шкорпил, known so far, over forty examples, who left
38
Here is the regarded Latin inscription – Божилова, В. 1987:32, № 25: Numin(i) sanct(o) deo aram
cum sig(illo)./ L. Attienus Iulianus pro sal(ute) suum / et suorum posuit et templum / dilapsum ex suo
restituit. The most characteristic linguistic unit in this inscription is templum dilapsum. Христова, П.
1999:188–189: The participle dilapsus is formed from the verb dilabor, which is very close to labi. It means
‚destruction‛ as a result of a long effort, i.e. destruction caused by time, collapse caused by the ages.
There are building inscriptions containing the term templum vetustate conlapsum/templum vetustate con-
labsum, templum vetustate corruptum from Lower Moesia. Here are some examples:
– Velkov, V. 1974:151-153: <I<R/ I<us leg(atus) / Aug(usti) pr(o) pr(aetore) templum / Dianae Ple-
stren/sis vetustate con/lapsum resti/tuit er Iul(ium) /<(centurionem) Leg(ionis) XI Cl(audiae) R.
Dating: the first half of the 3rd c? More likely (in our view the letter R in the end of the inscription is the
abbreviation Regionarius) the second half of the 2nd c. (Христова, П. 1999:1890–190).
– ILN, 1992:68, No.38: Imperatores [Caes(ares) Aurelius Antoninus] /et Aurelius Com[modus Augusti
?...ve.]/testate cinlabsu[m a solo restituerunt per] leg(ionem) I Ital(icam) P.Calburni*o<?+ / et cura(nte)
Mucio Maiore [leg(ato) leg(ionis) ?]. Dating: 176-180 AD.
– CIL, III, 12385 (the aforementioned epigraphic record from Gromshin: I(ovi) O(ptimo) M(aximo)./
Pro salute imp(eratoris) Caes(aris) M(arci) / Aureli Antonini Aug(usti) et imp(eratoris) Caes(aris) L(uci)
Aureli Veri Aug(usti)./ M(arcus) Servilius Fabianus leg(atus) / Aug(usti) pr(o) pr(aetore) templum vetus
tate corruptum a solo / per reg(ionem) Mont(anensium) restituit. Dating: 161-163 AD.
234
MONTANA
Fig. 18. ‚Kaleto‛, Montana. Western sector ‚The Big Tower‛. Plan and section (after Александров, Г.
1987, 59, План 3; 62, План 6)
235
Fig. 19. ‚Kaleto‛, Montana. Western sector ‚The Gate‛. Plan and section (after
Александров, Г. 1987, 61, План 5; 65, План 7)
236
MONTANA
dedications to the deities worshipped at the (for which there are clues), and on the other
sanctuary. According to the researcher of the hand, the decline of the functions of the sanc
western sector of the site, the military fortifi tuary (which predetermined the lack of infor
cation simultaneous with the sanctuary stage mation linked with epigraphic records) could
was located on the hill above the sanctuary ‚or explain this mismatch in time between the ep
was at the foot of the hill around the spring igraphic and archaeological facts. However, in
and has not been revealed yet‛ (Александров, this case, we should take as a final date of the
Г. 1987:75). In literature, for the time until AD sanctuary stage the middle of the 3rd c. or, we
134 this fortification is defined as a praesid- would have to agree that the construction of
ium and permanent camp of cohors I Claudia the military-fortification stronghold at this site
Sugambrorum (Sygambrorum) (Герасимова, marked the end of the existence of the sanctu
В. 1970:24). The transfer of vexilationes from ary of Diana and Apollo. As incompatible with
legio XI Claudia and legio I Italica has been the conclusions of the researchers of the site
documented in AD 155 and 160 (Тачева, М. this statement may look, at many places in the
2000:88; Иванов, Р. 1999:157, 170). In the first text G. Aleksandrov stresses that the fortifica
half of the 3rd c. the permanent presence of a tion structures dated in the mid3rd c. are dug
military unit NCR, deciphered as N(umerus) into a stratum containing fragments of marble
C(ivium) R(omanorum) (?) (or Numerus Coll. statues, reliefs and monuments with Latin in
Reg. – after M.Speidel 1984:185-188) is sup scriptions (Монтана, І, 1987:60–61, 76).
posed (Велков, В. 1987:10; Монтана, ІІ, №№ If we relate these observations to the al
3, 12, 20). ready discussed chronology at the eastern sec
In archaeological terms, this evidence, obvi tor of the site (Sanctuary), we should accept a
ously regarding the time from the end of the 50yearlong period within which the ground
1st c. (according to the information about the was not used – between the destruction of the
Sugambrian cohort) to the mid3rd c., is rep sanctuary in the mid3rd c. (according to the
resented by the presence of a stratum, dated data from the fortress) and the building of the
generally ‚not later than the second half of the complex of support walls at the beginning of
3rd c.‛ (Монтана, І, 61, 76). This dating is de the 4th c. (according to the coin, discovered in
termined by the data about the construction of the implectum of the wall). As it can be seen,
porta praetoria with a tower and burgus, known this data complicates even more the already
from two inscriptions, respectively from AD inexact dating of the site. Of course, during
253 and 256 (Велков, В., Александров, Г. archaeological surveys already finished and
1994, 4–5, №№ 5, 6). According to V. Velkov, without the needed graphic documentation, it
the first of the cited inscriptions suggests that is almost impossible to draw a grounded the
cohors III Collecta took part in these building sis supported by categorical data, regarding
works (Монтана, І, 10); the presence of this the chronology and respectively the logical
unit here is attested to by two more records dating of each of the construction stages. Here
with almost the same dating – 253 and 258 we can mention some indirect facts which
(Монтана, ІІ, № № 4, 33). G. Aleksandrov may have some connection to the information
identified the regarded buildings with the for known from the excavations of the discussed
tification facilities revealed west of the sector site.
(Монтана, І, 1987:76–66). The characteristic of the military stronghold
The strong contradiction between epigraph defined in an inscription from Phrygia by the
ic records about the military presence (the end term praesidium (Филов, Б. 1906:72), is rarely
of the 1st – the mid3rd c.) and the dating of the discussed in Bulgarian literature, first of all,
defensive facility (after the middle of the 3rd c.) due to the fact that such a fortification has not
should be noted. Of course, on one hand, the been studied in Montana. Another important
unstudied ruins of an early defensive facility fact is that it belongs to the category of mili
237
tary posts which are ‚supporting garrisons The lack of scientific interest directed at
in the inland‛ – this in Montana and perhaps these problems is partly predetermined by
the still unrevealed early fortification of Abri- the total lack of archaeological surveys in the
tus (Иванов, Р. 1999:170). Discussing the term same direction. Ten years ago the surveys at
praesidium, S. Torbatov distinguishes it from the castellum of Sostra by the village of Lomets
the burgi and phruri known from inscrip (Troyan reg.) started (Христов, И. 2006а:11–
tions of the Thracian provincial governors 13; 2006b). Despite the fact that the fortification
from AD 151156, bringing forward its more by the village of Lomets has been long known
special position in the system of the provin as an auxiliary camp on the basis of the in
cial inner security‛. Besides the location of the scriptions with official character revealed here
sites, most important from a strategic perspec (Христов, И. 2003:31–42), it was not until the
tive, he suggests considerably greater sizes of start of the surveys that its planning and de
the fortifications marked with this term, as fensive system corresponding to the standard
well as a garrison composed of professional characteristics of the Roman military camps
military personnel (Торбатов, С. 2000:17). studied along the Danubian Limes were made
It is noteworthy, however, that for the time clear (Иванов, Р. 1999:228–239, Христов, Ив.
being on the territory of Bulgaria there is no 2006b:112). Without entering into the details
archaeological evidence which could dem of these extensive problems, we will mention
onstrate the difference between the camps of just the fact that elements such as the rectan
the regular auxiliary troops, marked as castra/ gular plan, orientated roughly toward the four
castrum/castellum, and those, belonging also to cardinal points and located at a comparatively
professional military personnel, called prae- flat site, are not among the basic characteristics
sidia. According to S. Torbatov (Торбатов, C. of the fortification studied at Montana, i.e. the
2000:15, 19), ‚the term praesidium has obvi synchronous data about presence of auxiliary
ously never been distinguishable with suffi troops known from epigraphic records – 134
cient clarity and with any strict terminological AD for Montana (Монтана, І, 1987:75) and
exactness‛, yet, for the time before the end of 147 AD for Sostra (Христов, И. 2006b) – does
the 2nd c. the same author suggests an inter not correspond with respective simultaneous
pretation, first of all related to fortifications archaeological data from both sites or even the
designed for inner security. localization of the stronghold/ camp of coh. I
Actually, exactly the issue about the early Sugambrorum in Montana on Kaleto Hill.
military camps located outside the system of The data about two further similar and still
defensive fortresses along the border is the unstudied fortifications support the assump
main reason why Montana remained almost tion that the permanent camps of the Roman
entirely on the periphery of scientific interest, auxiliary troops across the territory of present
directed at the study of the Roman defensive day Bulgaria could hardly be identified with
system in our lands. The idea of doubling the sites of the type of that at Montana. It was in
Danubian linear defensive system (this time 1904 that B. Dyakovich defined as ‚a signifi
based on the data from the aforementioned cant Roman military camp‛ the ruins of a site
inscriptions from AD 151156) is not accepted localized by him around the village of Smoly
in contemporary scientific study (Торбатов, anovtsi (Montana Municipality). The camp
С. 2000:16). However, the data regarding the was ‚situated in the locality where the first
relocation of auxiliary troops along the major waters of the Tsibritsa River come together‛
thoroughfares in the interior (Герасимова, В. and ‚had a plan of a large square with a length
1970), the camps of which, if the data from about 190 × 150 steps‛ (Дякович, Б. 1904:28).
Montana is considered, should have flanked In 2008 the first surveys of Conbustica/Combus-
the most important passes of the Balkan tica known from Tabula Peutingeriana and lo
Mountains, is beyond doubt. cated by the village of Kladorub (Dimovo Mu
238
MONTANA
nicipality, Vidin region) in the neighbouring camp does not look so impossible. Moreover,
province of Upper Moesia, established a rec in the inscription announcing this building
tangular fortification with sizes of 140 × 110 m activity, the name of the military unit is ex
the opening date of which has been set in the plicitly mentioned – coh. III Collecta. Here we
first half of the 1st c. (Лука, K. 2009; 2010; 2011c). should pay attention to the fact that in the sec
Despite the scanty information so far, the co ond building inscription known from Mon
incidence in the basic characteristics of the en- tana, announcing the construction of a burgus,
listed sites with those ones already known this newly raised defensive facility is unam
from the Danubian Limes is obvious; in turn, biguously topographically distinguished from
this shows that the localization of a perma ‚castrensium et civium Montanensium‛.
nent military camp of an auxiliary unit in the Once again we should mention the ba
region of Montana was hardly an isolated sic characteristics which are derived by S.
case. However, logic suggests that this camp Torbatov regarding the term ‚burgus‛, and
should be sought on the plain sites or near the namely: small strongholds with secondary
site studied on Kaleto Hill and not over the but relatively independent function, square
fort. plan with sizes not larger than 10 × 10 m; at
Despite its comparatively hypothetical na least two floors and only one entrance, situ
ture, the assumption of the probable existence ated in the centre of one of the walls; the up
of another, still not localized military base in per floor is often supported by inner pylons
the vicinity of presentday Montana, allows us (Торбатов, C. 2000:19–21). The so called ‚big
to consider the reports about building activi tower‛ revealed at the westernmost part of
ties in the mid3rd c. from a different perspec the site (Fig. 18) corresponds almost com
tive. The use of the term porta praetoria unam pletely to the aforementioned characteris
biguously points at the military character of tics except for the plan which, in this case,
the fortification to which it belonged. The at may be explained by the requirements and
tempt by G. Aleksandrov to apply the specific restrictions imposed by the lay of the land.
terminology characteristic for the Roman mili According to the researcher of the site, G.
tary camps to the planning of Kaleto endures Aleksandrov, ‚the big tower was not raised
serious opposition. First of all, the presence of exactly simultaneously with the rest of the
porta praetoria and the establishment of a par fortress‛ (Montana, I, 1987:77), which sug
ticular entrance to the fortress as such should gests its original independent existence and
be made on the basis of distinguishing it from respectively – its identification with the burgus
the other entrances, in the case of military mentioned in the inscription from AD 256. In
camps – porta decumana, porta principalis dextra deed, despite the lack of a particular descrip
and porta principalis sinistra, which are obvi tion in the text itself, on Plan 6 in the publica
ously missing at the site discussed here (Fig. tion (Fig. 18) the curtain wall is represented as
19). Another fact which perplexes is the con being attached to ‚the big tower‛, i.e. without
struction of a special wall designed for sepa a constructive connection between them, and
rating via sagularis in the fortress (Монтана, discussing the existence of an earlier staircase
І, 1987:64), since the major function of this ‚at the westernmost part of the northern de
street was to provide open space needed for fensive wall, parallel with the inner line of
the movement of the soldiers along the cur the northern defensive wall (1.10 m from it)
tain wall while in the particular case, the open and near the tower (?!)‛, he mentions the cur
space is limited namely by the construction of tain wall itself, ‚the restored part of which
the regarded wall (Fig. 18). Considered from has an outlined connection by the tower‛
this perspective, the assumption about refer (Александров, Г. 1987:63). From all the above
ring the construction of porta praetoria and tur- it can be concluded that despite the represen
ris to the supposed and not localized military tation on the graphic plan as belonging to one
239
and the same stage (the big tower, its adjacent in the context of the foregoing assumptions
curtain wall, the eastern gate and the defen about the localization of the military camp ex-
sive wall in this sector) (Александров 1987, isting at this site outside the framework of Ka-
62, План 6; 67, План 7) (Figs 18, 19), after all, leto, we would have to assume an organic re-
G. Aleksandrov supports the idea of the origi lationship of the traces of habitation at the
nal independent existence of the regarded westernmost part of the hill with the sanctu
tower. From this we should assume that if the ary which was active here. Grounds for this
big tower was raised in correspondence with speculation are first of all the limited territory
the inscription about the construction of bur- over which ruins of the so called temenos of
gus in 256 AD, then the other explored sections the sanctuary have been studied, as well as
of the defensive facilities on Kaleto Hill were their subordinate position at the foot of the
raised at a later period. The identification of hill and not on the hill itself. Such a location
the Eastern gate and its adjacent tower with can hardly be referred to a significant sanctu
the aforementioned porta praetoria cum turre ary centre what undoubtedly functioned here.
from the inscription from AD 258 (Montana, It is a fact that there is a direct access to the
I, 1987:59-60) is the reason why in the publi spring taken as the central part of the sanctu
cation both dates of the defensive facility are ary; it is from the highest part of the hill as this
considered (simultaneous with the big tower can be seen from the postern revealed by G.
and later than the big tower). However, if we Aleksandrov (Montana, I, 1987:70). The pres
assume that the last inscription refers to an ence of a part of a solid wall with thickness
eventual military camp with its canabae, situ of 1.30 m (crossed by the southern curtain
ated somewhere else, then the second dating wall of the later fortress) (Montana, I, 1987:58)
seems convincing enough for the chronology (Fig. 18) also does not oppose the thesis that
of the stronghold on the hill as well as for the this part of the hill was an organic part of the
sanctuary located at its foot. The construction planning and architecture of the sanctuary.
of the defensive facility at this site after the be The latest surveys of a similar site in Mezdra
ginning of the 4th c. would explain the great which is a sanctuary in nature indicate an
amount of ruins used by the already inactive analogous situation in which on a similar hill
sanctuary and would fit logically into the mili dominating over the surrounding area, a sig
tary historical situation during and after the nificant religious center developed simulta
age of the Tetrarchy when such building ac neously and even later than the construction
tivities have been registered across the entire of the strong fortification facility at the same
territory of presentday Bulgaria. site (Торбатов, C., Ганецовски, Г. 2006:267).
Finally, we should express another assump Even though a new phenomenon which has
tion related to the earliest recorded buildings not been registered so far, the fortification of
from the Roman age on Kaleto Hill. Unfor important cultural centres with the purpose
tunately, the finds of coins from the time of of additional protection of the site does not
Augustus – Claudius mentioned earlier, as contradict logic. We already had the chance to
well as the finds of imported terra sigillata stress that the construction of defensive sys
with seals of Gellius (Montana, I, 1987:60-61), tems around civilian sites is explainable from
are not connected with the chronology of the the perspective of their importance as eco
earlier walls. In addition, exactly on the site nomic, cultural, and central places, probably
(or next to it) where these early structures dating from the time before the Roman con
were registered, there is a medieval dugout quest (Лука 2006:168).
which extends to 1 m under the level of the As a summary of the foregoing we must
floor of the big tower (Montana, I, 1987:72), make the following conclusions:
which drastically decreases the possibilities 1. The civilian settlement in Montana
for interpretation of the early walls. However, should be sought around or near the military
240
MONTANA
camp. The logic suggests that here, just like in of Claudius (4154) and the Flavian dynasty
a number of other cases, it is very likely that (69-96), it can be assumed that the Roman mil
the development of a canabae is concerned, the itary politic strategy from the middle and the
historical fate of which was directly connected second half of the 1st c. includes the stationing
with the military camp. of auxiliary troops at key locations, flanking
2. The sanctuary of Diana and Apollo which the passes of the Balkan Mountains.
was active at Montana was rather situated on Perhaps here the defense of the basic mili
Kaleto Hill itself, the topographic position of tary road thoroughfares with presence of aux
which is extremely suitable for the location of iliary units, located along the line of the Bal
such an important religious centre. The mar kan Mountains, is concerned; this fact is well
vellous examples of stone plastics revealed illustrated by epigraphic records from the time
in ‚the wall with the arae‛ suggest the exist until about the end of the 3rd c. (Fig. 9). Future
ence of a monumental building with a domi surveys in this direction would give rich infor
nant position in the area, the position of which mation regarding the area of occupation of the
must be sought on the highest spot of the hill. northern part of the Balkan Peninsula and the
The situation in Pautalia is similar; here, at the military strategic approach to the foundation
foot of the Hisarlaka Hill there was a big sanc and administration of the province of Moesia.
tuary while the city lay down in the valley. 4. The vicinity of Montana, many times
It can be assumed that on the basis of a pronounced as a key location for the military
comparison with the last surveys of the sanc and economic development of the province
tuary at Mezdra, this religious centre had (at of Moesia, must not and cannot be consid
least in the first years of its existence) its own ered a precedent against the background of
defensive system or it ‚inherited‛ one. Unfor the overall military politic development of
tunately, the opening date of the functioning the province or, more accurately, the thesis
of the sanctuary cannot be established on the of ‚a region without an urban centre‛ should
basis of the data from archaeological surveys be reconsidered. Grounds for this statement
here. According to the votive inscriptions ori- are given first of all by the extremely low de
ginating from here, this age can be set from gree of archaeological surveys of the ancient
the middle of the 2nd c. The decline of the sanc period, symptomatic of the whole territory of
tuary is not supported by enough categorical presentday Northwestern Bulgaria, a result
facts, either. What is only clear is that at the of which is the chronic ‚lack of information‛
time of Constantine the Great, quite signifi which is taken literally in a number of cases.
cant reconstructions were undertaken at this More particularly, this ‚lack of information‛
site (new levelling of the ground, document about the military camp at Montana should
ed by the construction of a system of terraces not be used as a proof for the lack of the camp
along the northern slope of the hill and sup itself.
port walls at them) and they are not consistent 5. The relocation of military units in the mid
with the earlier architectural structures. dle of the 2nd c., well documented by the epi
There is a great possibility that this recon graphic records from Montana, undoubtedly
struction is related with the building of the should be associated with the dynamic politi
fortification facility on the hill. cal events at that time (Тачева, М. 2000:88),
3. Cohors I Sugambrorum was stationed here but on the other hand, it is also related to the
even before the Dacian Wars of Emperor Tra situation change after the foundation of Dacia
jan (Тачева, M. 2000:101). Taking into consid Ripensis which led to the formation of a vast
eration the data from the latest surveys at the ‚protected area‛ which suggests the respec
fortification by the village of Kladorub (an tive changes in the border defense of this re
cient Conbustica), where the military presence gion. Regardless of the fact that it was divided
has been proven for the time between the rule between two different administrative units
241
Fig. 20. Territory between Ratiaria and Oescus. Discoveries of epigraphic records containing the names
of military auxiliary units (after Krassimira Luka)
Legend: – auxilia
(Moesia Superior and Moesia Inferior), as far as and its vicinity, which once again, due to ‚the
the military organization was concerned, this lack of information‛, is very rarely discussed
‚protected area‛ should demonstrate simul in scientific literature. Besides the inscription
taneous development. The two big centres on of Caius Valerius Valens optio legionis XI Clau-
the Danube – Ratiaria and Oescus/Ulpia Oescus diae agens regione Montanensium, which is sup
– obviously reduced their military contingents posed by V. Velkov and G. Aleksandrov to
and this process is well documented at Oescus, have been moved here from Montana (Велков,
while it can only be assumed for Ratiaria. The В., Александров, Г. 1994:27, № 53 = Монтана,
centres of Montana and Almus located in the ІІ), two more inscriptions are known from this
centre of this area certainly acquired impor site; they contain lists of military personnel;
tant strategic positions expressed in the relo one of them mentions the name of the mili
cation of legionary vexilationes. tary unit – legio I Italica (Геров, Б. 1953, № 16,
Noteworthy is the extraordinarily rich epi № 224). In fact, regardless of whether Almus
graphic material originating from Almus/Lom was the second military stronghold with units
242
MONTANA
Fig. 21. Territory between Ratiaria and Oescus. Discoveries of epigraphic records containing the name
of Legio I Italica, Legio XI Claudia and Legio V Macedonica (after Krassimira Luka)
Legend: – Legio I Italica; – Legio XI Claudia; – Legio V Macedonica
stationed there, the two legions – I Italica and remain unstudied, but it can be assumed that
XI Claudia – show a quite solid presence in ep- their more thorough archaeological explora
igraphic records in the entire zone of the so tion would yield the same amount of inscrip
called ‚protected area‛, more particularly be tions as at Kaleto in Montana. This fact alone
tween the two colonial centres of Ratiaria and means that the concentration of a great amount
Oescus (Figs 10-11). of inscriptions containing the names of mili
6. It is also noteworthy that the mapping tary personnel from both legions at a particular
of the inscriptions, containing the names of sanctuary centre does not lead to the conclu
these two military units, shows a concentra sion that the permanent camp of these military
tion around supposedly big sanctuary centres men was located near the sanctuary. The situ
within the considered region: at the village of ation with the inscriptions containing town of
Lilyache (Vratsa reg.), the village of Altimir fices is similar. Decurioni of colonia Ratiaria,
(near Byala Slatina), and the village of Kunino for instance (dec. col. Rat.), are known from the
(near Roman) (Fig. 7). Even today these centres distant centre of Timacum Minus (Ravna, Ser
243
bia) (Геров, Б. 1953, № 180). However, in the fore, Regio Montanensium should cover the re-
context of these speculations, the two building gion in which epigraphic records left by mili-
inscriptions from AD 256 and 258 announcing tary personnel from legio I Italica and le gio
the construction of burgus and porta praetoria XI Claudia have been registered, namely the
with a tower cannot be ignored by any means. territory between the two colonies – Ra- tia-
Unfortunately, both epigraphic records do not ria and Oescus. It is necessary to stress that
originate from the archaeological surveys but the methods adopted in scientific studies, ter
were revealed accidentally; the first was dis ritorially conforming to the administrative di-
covered in 1891 when stones were being ex vision of the Roman Empire, prevents (and is
tracted at Kaleto for paving the central street still preventing) the value consideration of
of the city (Бассанович, И. 1894:60); the sec troubled districts of that type at which the re
ond record was found at the end of the 19th c. garded ‚regio‛ covers a territory belonging at
again, on the northern foothill of Kaleto, near the same time to two provinces (Moesia Supe-
the old reservoir (Бассанович, И. 1894:56–57, rior and Moesia Inferior).
62). If we accept that the inscription announc 8. Considering the foregoing, it is clear that
ing the construction of a burgus refers to the regardless of the status of the civilian settle
so called ‚big tower‛ inside Kaleto itself, and ment (municipium or vicus with quasimunici
the second one refers to building activity con pal organization), regio Montanensium did not
ducted at the supposed military camp, then by any means represent a territory without a
the location of the latter should be sought un distinguished civilian centre, the urban terri
der the presentday city of Montana or, even tory of which (regardless of the fact whether
more particularly, the supposed civilian set there was or there was not such territory) can
tlement which probably developed around it, not be connected to and has no relation to regio
must also be localized within the framework Montanensium. The civilian centre probably
of the modern city. adopted the name of the military one which
7. The steady presence of military person is clearly named in the inscription from Phry
nel from legio I Italica and legio XI Claudia gia: Montan(ensi) praesidio (Монтана, ІІ, 1994,
over the entire territory between Ratiaria and № 151), which is confirmed by the formula
Oescus implies that the sense of the expres tion ‚castra et civitas Montanensium‛ in the in
sion ‚regio Montanensis‛ should rather be as scription from AD 256 (Монтана, ІІ, 1994, №
sociated with the military terminology, espe 5). It is obvious that this settlement centre oc
cially since two of the totally three inscrip curred and developed in direct relation with
tions about regio Montanensis are connected the military units stationed at this site (as with
with a military titulature: Aurel(ius) Titus, vex- the prevailing part of the significant civilian
ill(arius) eq(uitum) leg(ionis) I Ital(icae) Gor- di- structures in the province of Moesia) which is
anae Au(gustae) in reg(ione) Mont(anensium), further proof of its actual existence. The ques
and C(aius) Val(erius) Valens, optio leg(ionis) XI tion about the municipal rights of this centre,
Cl(audiae) agens r(egione) Mont[an(ensium)]. however, has no relation and does not have
All three known inscriptions which contain to be considered as a key issue regarding the
this expression were found at different sites character of regio Montanensium.
(the village of Gromshin, Montana and Lom) 9. The dramatic political events between
(Монтана, ІІ, 1994, №№ 22, 53, 59). Thus, the the Gothic invasions from the mid3rd c. and
data from Montana do not oppose but rather the rule of Constantine the Great are docu
confirm the opinion expressed long ago by D. mented at the site near Montana through the
Nikolov that the inscriptions where regions gradual decline of the functions of the sanc
are mentioned hint at military regions which tuary and and an entirely new defensive for
do not coincide with the administrative urban tification building in its place in the first half
territories (Николов, Д. 1983:92–93). There of the 4th c. In connection with the territory
244
MONTANA
of regio Montanensium we
must note an important
historical fact related to
the departure of the Ro
man forces of Transdanu
bian Dacia in 271272 AD.
Besides the displacement
of the Limes once again
along the Danube River,
this act had consequences,
one of which is a rarely
discussed fact – namely
the migration of a prob
ably numerous Roman
ized population in the ter-
ritories south of the Ro- Fig. 22. Mensa mensuaria from ancient villa No 3 by Montana. publ.
man border. In history a Монтана, 2, 1994, № 9 (after Александров, Г. 1984:22-23) (photo by
poorly studied phenom Violeta Voeva)
enon is mentioned and
namely the formation of
a new administrative unit over parts of the was extracted in two ways – by digging of au
territories of Moesia Superior, Moesia Inferi- riferous ore and by sieving which took place in
or and Thracia – the so called Dacia Aureliani the rivers Ogosta and Zlatitsa (the name comes
(Добруски, В. 1890:22). It cannot be left un from the Bulgarian word for gold – ‚zlato‛).
noticed that the point where these three prov After strong rains or in late spring the water
inces come together once again coincides with became very turbulent and broke smaller and
the former ‚protected area‛, the centre of larger pieces with auriferous veins. On the
which was occupied by regio Montanensium. river, in the plain areas, the deposits formed.
For the time being this extraordinarily inter It started with the processing of the stones
esting question can only be outlined as raising which took place in two ways. The first one is
problems, the study of which lies ahead and by long (up to 1.5 m and 0.40 m wide) stone
their study in detail will probably give valu troughs, which had grooves on the bottom.
able information regarding the formation and The auriferous sand is deposited in the cracks.
subsequent development of the lateantique This happens during the turbulent swift cur
province of Dacia Ripensis. rents on the upper parts of the river. In the
second way in places where the water is slow
er or its capacity is smaller, barrages are made
ІХ. Economy, Villas, Arts and Crafts and small basins are formed.
The mountain provides limestone and mar
ІХ/1. E c o n o m y ble used in various fields of everyday life. The
same is valid for wood material used for heat
In Montana and the region there are a num ing and building.
ber of natural resources which predetermined Stockbreeding is another basic branch. Os
a few basic sectors of the economy. The major teological analyses show the presence of cat
factor is the Balkan Mountains. In this area of tle, sheep and goats, pigs and poultry. Rivers
the mountain iron and lead, silver, and aurif naturally provide lots of fish and archaeologi
erous sands are extracted (Александров, Г. cal excavations have revealed an iron fishing
1974а:118–126; Миланов, М. 1978:57–71). Gold rod for big fish (100 m away from villa No 3
245
by the bank of the Ogosta River), as well as a The residential building consists of premises
tool with four horns similar to a big fork. At grouped in a block. Over time it was extend
night, using lanterns, some fish stayed mo ed, including the addition of an exedra for the
tionless on the bottom and experienced fish central room. To the west the large farming
ermen stuck them. In all of the three villas building is situated – a horreum and a stone
around Montana lead weights of different siz cutter’s workshop. To the south there are other
es have been found; these were used for fish buildings. This is where rooftiles and bricks,
ing rods (Александров, Г. 1994:49; Чолаков, as well as kitchenware, were produced. There
И. 2010:163). Among the domestic animals is a small premises which is supposed to have
there are dogs and cats. been inhabited by villicus.
Agriculture is also a basic branch – rye, bar- Villa No 2 is the largest one (Fig. 24). The
ley, millet, lentils, peas and some vegeta bles rooms are grouped around a rectangular pro
were grown here. From ancient villa No 3 at longed yard. At the northern part the main
Montana a mensa mensuaria originates, building of the owner (900 sq. m) is situated
found in the horreum of the villa which had – around a small courtyard there are about
the practical function to control the sale of ten premises. Some of them have hypocaustum
goods – perhaps cereals (Fig. 22). It repre installation. The central premises, which is in
sents a marble block inside which two meas terpreted as a diningroom – receptionhall,
ures with different sizes and the shape of an was later provided with an exedra. Next to
inverted cone are carved. Holes for the out this complex there is another heated building
flow of the measured foodstuff are driven called by the researcher G. Aleksandrov ‚a
(Александров, Г. 1984:22-23, oбр. 18-19). In building for slaves‛. A cattle-shed (?), two bal-
the vicinity of Montana wine production was nea and two horrеа have been revealed. Then
also developed. We must note a stone krater many additional facilities follow: the so called
with scenes from grapegathering on it dis ‚small residential building‛, a large farming
covered here. A woman who is picking grapes building with a horreum and a cattle-shed. Pot
is represented, as well as a man who is carry terykilns for tiles, a forge and a facility with
ing a full wicker basket and their two children pylons and a round plan (?) have also been
are walking on the gathered grapes. During documented. Almost all buildings are mor
excavations pruning knives for vines and a tared.
double mattock for working the vines have Villa No 3 (Fig. 25) – block premises form
been discovered. The votive tablets with im the central residential building. The important
ages of Dionysus also indicate the production premises and the one with the exedra have hy-
and consumption of wine. pocaustum installation. In the eastern part there
are workshops which are associated with met
ІХ/2. V i l l a s al working. Around another yard rooms of
the staff are grouped, as well as a large cattle-
Georgy Aleksandrov has studied three villas shed and a horreum. There is a building here
around Montana. They belonged to eminent the masonry of which is more solid, perhaps
wealthy people who inhabited them approxi designed for a vilicus (villicus). There is also
mately during the same age (Александров, Г. a third configuration of buildings – another
1983; 1994; Динчев, В. 1997; 2006:110–112). horreum (?), balneum, pottery-kiln and drying-
Villa No 1 (Fig. 23) – the representative part furnace for rooftiles and bricks (which have
of the, is situated around a yard with irregu not been marked on the plan).
lar shape; next and separated from it there is a According to the archaeologist G. Alek
small balneum (both are in the north) and oth sandrov (Александров, Г. 1980b: 53; 1983:73;
er farming premises with various purposes. 1984:35), villas No 1 and No 2 around Montana
246
MONTANA
Fig. 23. Plan of Villa No 1 by Montana (after Александров, Г. 1983: 41)
were raised in the second half of the 2nd c. and that age, i.e. before the Gothic invasions from
villa No 3 – in the age of the Severan dynasty the mid3rd c. A later dating is not impossible.
(193-235). According to V. Dinchev (Динчев, From 1982 to 1990, Spas Mashov studied a
В. 1997:40–41, 110, бел. 34; 2006:112), only the Roman villa rustica in the locality Rosenentsa
Latin inscriptions reused as spolia belong to by the village of Urovene, 18 km northeast of
247
Fig. 24. Plan of Villa No 2 by Montana (after Александров, Г. 1980 b: 12, oбр. 1)
Montana, which has not been published (Fig. plex. Similar to the other villas studied in the
26).39 Five buildings were revealed, and the re surroundings of Montana, this one also falls
searcher assumes the existence of ten to twelve into the so called type of ‚scattered villa com
more buildings belonging to the same com plexes‛ with buildings situated irregularly in
39
We express our gratitude to Spas Mashov who placed at our disposal his unpublished manuscript
‚Roman Villa Rustica by the Village of Urvene (Urovene), Krivodol Municipality‛, as well as the right
to publish for the first time the plan of the villa and the burial facilities related to it. We are using the
opportunity to discuss in greater detail the arrangement of this villa, as well as the basic conclusions of
its researcher and we hope that thus we are going to put into scientific circulation this extraordinarily
interesting archaeological site (K.L.).
248
MONTANA
relation to one another which, according to a roof supported by wooden columns. In situ
Spas Mashov, are due to the nonconcurrent here remains of a cart were found; it prob
existence of each of the buildings. ably stood under the shed at the moment of
The first of them (Building 1) has a rectan the fire. On the basis of the numerous finds
gular plan, orientated northsouth, and it is discovered under the ruins of the walls, the
provided with a wide exedra which is pen functional purpose of each of the premises
tagonal from the outside. From the east, al has been defined. From the shed through a
most along the entire length of the building a long passage access was to a warehouse hall
covered courtyard ran. Spas Mashov assumes (Room 6) inside which a great amount of pot
that the building had a hypocaust. Two con tery, glass vessels, as well as bronze and iron
struction stages have been established, and balances and scales were found. East of the
the initial stage of building is set in the end warehouse there was a dwelling (Room 4)
of the 3rd – the beginning of the 4th c., and the from which there was access to two smaller
demolition of the building is referred to the rooms (Rooms 2 and 3), used as workshops.
very end of the 4th c. West of the warehouse with a wide exit there
Baths (Building 2) have been studied east of was a store (Room 7).
the first building; they consist of a frigidarium, The date of the collapse of Building 4 is de
tepidarium and caldarium. The apodyterium termined by coins, and it has been set to the
and the frigidarium are in one. The rooms of very end of the 4th c. After the fire the build
the baths are arranged in a chain with a cal ing was no longer used except for the pas
darium to the north, in contrast with the an sage where a barrier wall was raised over the
cient building tradition. Traces of hypocaust adobe. The enclosed area was cleared out and
have been established in the tepidarium and hypocaust was constructed in the newly built
the caldarium. room.
Near the baths (1.20 m south of it) a build Building 5 consists of eleven rooms ar
ing with a rectangular plan and total area of ranged in a chain from south to north over
about 200 sq. m (Building 3) has been stud an area of about 550 sq. m. Two construc
ied. According to the researcher of the villa, tion stages have been established, and dur
the location of this building immediately by ing the second one, fragments of architectural
the baths indicates that both buildings did not elements, pieces of millstones and boulders
exist simultaneously and probably the baths were reused in the masonry. During the earli
were raised later. The earlier Building 3 was er stage, the central premises were with floors
used as a hayloft or a cattle-shed. of mortar plaster with a pink colour, while in
The fourth building in the complex (Build the premises raised later from the north and
ing 4) collapsed due to a devastating fire and south, the floors are of beetled clay. The cen
that is why its study provides plentiful ma tral part had a roof construction covered with
terial about its construction as well as about straight tegulae and the wings which were
the purposes of each room and the dating of added later were covered with curved tegulae.
the premises. The foundations of the building Seven openwork bronze belt appliques and
were built of quarry stones and mud and the three copper from the end of the 4th c.
construction is of adobe. As a result of the fire, were found in Building 5.
the walls collapsed inwards. The ceiling was In conclusion, we must stress that around
a wooden construction covered with straight Montana more than half of the villa com
and curved tegulae. plexes known from the region of presentday
The plan of the building is rectangular, Northwestern Bulgaria have been studied.
with dimensions of 23.60 × 17.70 m. An open According to V. Dinchev, during the Late Ro
air shed stretched along the entire length of man stage (the end of the 3rd c. to the 70s of
the building; it was opened to the south with the 4th c.) the evolution of villas in presentday
249
Fig. 25. Plan of Villa No 3 by Montana (after Александров, Г. 1984:12, oбр. 1)
250
MONTANA
Fig. 26. Plan of the villa by the village of Urovene (after Машов, С., Ръкопис)
251
Western Bulgaria was definitely more intense

that that in Central and Eastern Bulgaria.
This is explained by the different admin
istrative status of this territory and its inclu
sion in the borders of praefectura Illyricum
(Динчев, В. 1997: 135).
ІХ/3. A r t s a n d C r a f t s
During the Roman age, and especially after

the joining of the region to the border province
of Moesia Inferior, crafts flourished consider
ably. The goods of the craftsmen must have
been bought and used by the military and ci
vilian population as well as by persons pass
ing on private or official travels. There were
people here who produced tiles, water pipes,
tegulae et imbrices, tubuli, lids, etc. That was all
imposed by the construction and repair works
of buildings with military, religious and pri
vate purposes. With the growth of prosperity
of a part of the local elite, there was a need for
many and different materials, some of which
were even imported. Besides woodcutters
and carpenters, builders with different crafts
worked here – for the construction of the se-
werage and watersupply system, for the
building of hypocaustum installation, cisternae,
of pools with various sizes for their private
baths, for the construction of tombs/ mauso
leums. Some of the occupations are related to
the abundant wood and stone material nearby
(limestone and marble) and with the clay de
posits. Peasants in the area were occupied in Fig. 27. Statue of Diana with a bow and a short
traditional agriculture and stockbreeding. ened peplos (after Огненова-Маринова, Л. 1987:
There were many craftsmen here who made обр. 3) (photo by Violeta Voeva)
goods for the poor classes of the population
and especially for the female half of it. Tailors
were also needed for clothing. Italicae) is mentioned; he was argentarius (the
Of course, the main occupation in Montana monument was discovered in villa No 1)
and the vicinity was working in the mines – (Александров, Г. 1994:53).
extraction of metal (iron and lead), a part of Sculptures, mostly related to the cult at the
which was of very high value (especially the sanctuary of Diana and Apollo, originate from
gold extraction and the limited extraction of Montana. They are characterized by high ar
silver). The army strictly supervised the pre tistic quality. Their production in one and the
cise organization (production, documentation same iconography and style of local marble
and export) of the products. In an inscrip from Berkovitsa speaks of the existence of a
tion from here Pudentinus (centurio legionis I local atelier. The local coarsegrained marble
252
MONTANA
with a greyish shade was used for the bases of

the statues on which votive texts are written,
while the fine white or grey marble was used
for the statues. The name of one of the sculp
tors from Montana, Saturnius, has survived to
our times; he sculptured a votive statue at a
time when his wife was performing priestess
functions (Огненова-Маринова, Л. 1987:40–
41). On one votive inscription from the sanc
tuary in Montana an officina is mentioned –
the only state atelier known so far from epi
graphic records in Moesia Inferior (Тодоров, Я.
1928:171).
Among the monuments known from Mon
tana, the round sculpture prevails but there
are also openwork reliefs. The iconographic
prototype of votive sculptures from the sanc
tuary can be traced back to the 5th c. BC and
their production continued until the very end
of the pagan age, especially of those which
representing the superior deity worshipped at
the sanctuary – the goddess Diana (Ogneno
va-Marinova, L. 1987:173). The statue of Diana
with the bow and a shortened peplos (Fig. 27),
for instance, has high artistic qualities charac
teristic for the Hellenistic age. The garment is
reproduced with fine outlines over the body
enhancing its shape and the manner in which
the deep fold between the knees is made
Fig. 28. Statue of Diana with shooting with a bow
strongly reminds one of the Nereids from
(after Огненова-Маринова, Л. 1987: обр. 7 (photo
the Mausoleum at Halicarnassus (Огненова- by Violeta Voeva)
Маринова, Л. 1987:42–43).
A marvellous image of Diana shooting with
a bow (Fig. 28) represents the goddess in the terized by the smooth, polished surface of the
very moment of taking the arrow out of the naked body parts (Огненова-Маринова, Л.
quiver – iconography known from the famous 1982:147).
statue of Diana from Versailles, the prototype A wallpier, the frontal side of which is di
of which is sought among the works of Le vided into relief fields, represents the stand
ochares as well as of Damophones – a sculptor ing figure of Hermes (Mercurius) (Fig. 30).
from the 2nd c. BC and author of the statue of The wallpier probably belonged to a niche
Artemis Phosphorus/Phosphoros from Mess inside which the votive statue stood. The ico
ene (Огненова-Маринова, Л. 1982:149, бел. nography of this sculptural image is distin
15). guished from the Hellenistic one which was
The statue of Aesculapius (Fig. 29) reveals widespread even during the Roman age in the
an experienced master from the Flavian age monuments from Bulgaria. Instead of putting
who followed the traditions of classical art. the wings on both sides of the petasos, they are
Its execution follows the iconography estab on its top. His garment reminds one of mili
lished as early as the 5th c. BC, and is charac tary uniform and the clothing of the Eastern
253
lamis waving behind his shoulders and in his

lowered hand he is holding the game’s rear
legs (Огненова-Маринова, Л. 1987:50).
An accidental find of pottery moulds from
Montana shows that near the sanctuary a pot
ter’s atelier also worked. The find was discov
ered in 1883 and represents clay moulds for
casting of votive tablets with the image of dif
ferent deities: Zeus and Hera, Diana, Apollo,
Hermes, Heracles, Hygeia, Dionysus, and
Epona (Fig. 32) (Велков, Ив. 1940/1942). Ten
of the moulds are in the shape of aedicule and
two represent openwork round medallions.
The find contains a prepared votive tablet as
well as four ceramic seals for the decoration of
tableware (Ognenova-Marinova, L. 1987:174).
According to L. OgnenovaMarinova, this
find proves the existence of an atelier of a
craftsman who was making moulds of wax
and clay which were used for different pro
ductions – plastes imaginarius. The ceramic
moulds were used for casting models from
wax which in turn served for the production
of matrices for metallic decorations. Thus, the
find indicates indirectly the existence of a met
alworking atelier for the production of high
quality works of art (OgnenovaMarinova, L.
1987:175-176).
Analyzing the seals from the same find, A.
DimitrovaMilcheva expresses a similar view
– that the items discovered in Montana were
part of a greater production and in this particu
lar case they were designed for the production
of clay moulds for the production of relief pot
tery (Димитрова, А. 1961:31–32). In her view,
the potters from the local atelier themselves
Fig. 29. Statue (torso) of Aesculap – Aesculapius made the stamps which were needed for the
(after Огненова-Маринова, Л. 1987:обр. 21) (pho making of moulds (Димитрова-Милчева, А.
to by Violeta Voeva) 2008:142–143).
Remains of painting have been established
at villa No 2, and more precisely in the first
deities from the 2nd c. (Огненова-Маринова, and the fourth mausoleum (Александров, Г.
Л. 1987:50–51). 1994:93). The mortar plaster, on which there
A wonderful example of openwork sculp are traces of wallpaintings, actually con
ture is the image of the HerosHorseman in sists of two layers. The basic one, according
the scene ‚Return from Hunting‛ (Fig. 31). to the researcher G. Aleksandrov, is 34 cm
The horseman is riding to the right with a ch thick (fine sand, lime and thin straw). On
254
MONTANA
top the fine putty follows; it is very thin (up

to 4 mm). Inorganic paints were laid on it. At
first ‚al fresco‛ the lighter shades were laid
and on a part of them the dark colours were
added, already in the technique ‚al secco‛.
At the bottom there was a belt of wall-paint
ings imitating marble tiling (Александров, Г.
1994:93). Other traces of wall-paintings were
documented in Montana itself, on a building
on the top. In a room of the owner of villa No
1 by Montana the researchers came across co-
loured mosaics with parameters 3.90-3.72 m
(Александров, Г. 1974:3; 1994:94–96). The pe-
riphery is bordered with decoration in the
Meandros style. The central pane (2.38 × 2.18
m) consists of geometric ornaments enclosed
by three frames. In the circles, against a black
background, twice intertwined ovals stand
out (Solomon’s knot). The spaces between the
circles are filled with two or three rows each
and with rhombs of different sizes. It is made
in opus tessalatum. Underneath the pieces of
the mosaics a coin of Constantine the Great
was found; according to the researcher, it was
intentionally left there by the masters for luck.
Fig. 30. Wallpier with the portrait of Hermes – Fig. 31. Openwork marble relief of the Thracian
Mercurius (after Огненова-Маринова, Л. 1987: Heros (after Огненова-Маринова, Л. 1987:обр.
обр. 27) (photo by Violeta Voeva) 25) (photo by Violeta Voeva)
255
Fig 32. Ceramic moulds and stamps for production of votive tablets, decorations and artistic pottery
(photo by Krassimira Luka)
Х. Christianity of a togatus) and architectural elements. All

the brick steps from the colonnade of the ba
At the southeastern end of Kaleto Hill there silica were revealed. They are built of whole
is an Early Christian basilica (No 1) (Fig. 33). It and fragmented bricks on white mortar. The
served the residents of the hill and the valley. floor of the second basilica is plastered with
The building has a nave and two aisles with an pink mortar. Many fragments of glass for win
inscribed semiround apse. There are two side dows and large pieces of wallpaintings were
premises – respectively a prothesis and a di revealed. The second basilica was demolished
aconicon. Within the territories of the provinc in the second half of the 6th c. The latest coin
es Dacia Ripensis and Dacia Mediterranea such so far is from the age of Justin and Sophia
planning dos not occur often. The parameters (around 568-569).
of the basilica are 20.30 × 13.10 m. The founda Ruins of a small church – 14.10 × 5.40 m,
tions are not deep and at the western wall they were revealed on the high eastern part of the
are 0.80 m. The masonry of the building is of fortress (once again in the locality Kaleto) (Fig.
stone and brick. The construction took place 34). Access to the naos was from the west. The
in the first half of the 4th c. Its existence was church is singlenave, singleapse without a
very short. Perhaps a little after AD 361 it was narthex or additional premises, with a single
demolished (Чанева-Дечевска, Н. 1999: 221– entrance from the west.
223; Кабакчиева, Г. 2010: 330–331; 2011: 290). Six kilometers northeast of Montana, at the
In the second half of the 5th c. basilica No studied ancient villa No 2, a large building has
2 was built. Its sizes are 25.70 × 14.80/15.40 been revealed which was once reconstructed
m. The ruins of the earlier religious build and turned into a church (Fig. 35). Its length
ing were used. Both basilicas were dug more is 30.60 m and its width is 8.80 m. The plan of
deeply at the southern side of the rock bed (up the building is elaborate. The naos is raised
to 1.80 m). In the walls of both churches mul over the foundations of an earlier residential
tiple reused materials from the PreChristian building. To the east a semiround apse has
age are walled in – tombstones, votive inscrip been registered. To the west a wide spacious
tions, fragments of statues (especially a torso narthex can be seen. South of the naos more
256
MONTANA
Fig. 33. Plan of the basilica in Montana (after Кабакчиева, Г. 2011:291, oбр. 1)
rooms were added later, two of which are

provided with hupocaustum installation. The
western room was probably used as a baptis
terium (?).
According to N. Chaneva-Dechevska (Ча-
нева-Дечевска, Н. 1999:220), the church must
be dated to the very beginning of the 4th c. It
represents an example of continuity between
an ancient and an Early Christian building,
where only by adding two ecclesiastical forms
(an altar conch and a narthex) a residential
building can be transformed into a church.
The structure was demolished at the end of
Fig. 34. Plan of the so called ‚Garrison church‛ in

Montana (after Александров 1987, 61, План 5; 65,
План 7)
257
Fig. 35. Plan of the church at ancient villa No 2 by Montana (after Александров, Г. 1980b:41, обр. 15)
the 4th c. In our view the dating assumed for There is no narthex. The entrance from the
the construction of the church is too early. west leads to the naos.
In the opposite direction – 6.5 km southwest From northwest and southeast two at
of Montana, the ancient villa No 1 lies. South tached rectangular premises are visible. Per
of the pottery workshop a single-nave single- haps the first one served as a store for the of
apse church with sizes of 12.90 m (along with ferings left by the worshippers, while the sec
the apse) × 6.5 m has been revealed (Fig. 36). ond one was the residence of a cleric. Accord
ing to N. ChanevaDechevska, the church also
dates to the beginning of the 4th c. (?) (Чанева-
Дечевска, Н. 1999:221).
ХІ. Necropolises
The necropoles around Montana have not

been studied. They are known from casual
finds of tombstones such as the tombstone
of C. Valerius Felix, raised by his wife Vale
ria Saturnina (Fig. 37). The stone was discov
ered northwest of the fortress and south of the
road which leads from Montana to the west.
Another of the town necropoles is situated in
the locality Izdremets on the right bank of the
Ogosta River, across from the ancient fortress
and along the road towards Serdica (Монтана,
ІІ, 1994:46, 50). A great part of the tombstones,
Fig. 36. Plan of the church at ancient villa No 1 by however, were discovered reused in the later
Montana (after Александров, Г. 1983) walls of Kaleto and at other sites (Figs 38, 39).
258
MONTANA
Fig. 38. Tombstone of Ulpius Dometianus, soldier

from legio IIII Flavia (photo by Violeta Voeva)
Fig. 37. Tombstone of C. Valerius Felix,

raised by his wife Valeria Saturnina (af
ter Монтана, 2, 1994, № 120) (photo by
Violeta Voeva)
Fig. 39. Tombstone, raised by Aelia Ge

mella for her dead relatives – husband,
two sons and two daughters (photo by
Violeta Voeva)
259
Fig. 40. Plan of the necropolis at ancient villa No 2 by Montana (after Александров, Г. 1980b:44,
обр. 16)
During the surveys of the three villas, the tombs–mausoleums. Their entrances are from
archaeologist Georgy Aleksandrov man different directions. At two of the tombs the
aged to study the necropoles around them doorsteps of the entrances are built of re
(Александров, Г. 1994:79–82). The necropoles used marble blocks, one of which represents
around villas NoNo 2 and 3 have been thor a tombstone – stela with a Latin inscription.
oughly studied. The owners and their heirs The thickness of the walls reaches 1.101.20 m.
fenced the area for ‚those who passed into the In some areas three rows of parallel belts are
afterlife‛ with walls which were between 0.60 visible. At mausoleum No 4 the masonry is al
and 0.90 m thick. On the outer side at each most entirely of bricks. One marble sarcopha
36 m there are counterforts. These defensive gus was discovered inside; it is not ornament
measures indicate a certain degree of wealth ed and its lid is in the shape of a triangle with
of the facilities and the burial inventory inside acroteria (Александров, Г. 1994:80). There are
them. some notable features in the masonry of this
At villa No 2, the necropolis covers an area mausoleum which is the largest for the time
of 3 decares (Fig. 40). Noteworthy are four being. Its walls are 1.20 m thick and inside
260
MONTANA
them there is a tunnel (0.30 m high and 0.70 cropolis of the villa was located about 800 m
m wide) which is at the level of the threshold southeast of it and two mausoleums and a
and runs through the three walls of the facil singlechamber vaulted tomb have been stud
ity. The purpose is to maintain a constant tem ied within it (Fig. 41). Mausoleum No 1 rep
perature in order to preserve the wallpaint resents a solid building constructed of stone
ings. The tomb is slightly dug into the ground. with mortar. Three semiround apses, which
The exterior of the mausoleum is decorated. are inscribed in the octagonal shape, are
Thus, for instance, above the entrance there is raised around the square central art with sides
a gable with two acroteria at each end, each of 4.30 m each. According to Spas Mashov, the
of them 0.55 m high. Fragments of marble im- aboveground part of the mausoleum can be
post capitals have been found around the en- interpreted as a religious building related to
trance. Fragments of a cornice and columns rites in honor of the buried people.
have also been discovered. The roof is covered The entrance to the crypt was located from
with red flat roof tiles. the north and had a frame of marble slabs. It
Inside, the walls of the tombs are plastered leads to a central square premises which was
and there are murals on them, traces of which covered with a semispherical dome of bricks.
can be seen on larger fragments. Under the On the other three sides of this room, just un
stratum of the mausoleums one or two tombs der the apses of the overground part, there are
are dug in. Their construction is the following vaulted burial chambers, also built of bricks.
– they are rectangular in shape, built of bricks The entire crypt was plastered with fine white
and semicylindrical arches for a roof. mortar putty laid over rough plaster.
The necropolis at villa No 3 covers 2.5 de Another mausoleum has been studied east
cares and is smaller than the previous one. of the first one. It represents a rectangular
A tomb–mausoleum was revealed by G. building orientated eastwest. Two single
Aleksandrov (Александров, Г. 1994:80); it chamber tombs with different orientations ha-
was reached by eight steps, most of which ve been revealed inside it. According to Spas
are of marble. Afterwards a long and narrow Mashov, the two tombs belong to different
dromos is entered. The tomb itself is located ages and the orientation of the first one sets
to the north; it is built of bricks and its vault its construction in the pagan period, while the
is semi-cylindrical. At the bottom there is a second one is consistent with the Christian
niche with another tomb. The facility is built canon.
of bricks and plastered with mortar. There is a Northwest of Mausoleum No 1 of the villa
floor of stones, fragments of bricks and mortar by the village of Urovene, a singlechamber
underneath. Its thickness is impressive – 0.60 vaulted tomb has been revealed. It is orientat
m. The entire burial facility (two graves and a ed east-west. The floor of the tomb was paved
small passage) is covered with a semicylin with stone slabs and the semicylindrical vault
drical vault of bricks, arranged radially. From was brick. The southern and northern walls of
outside this entire structure is covered with the tomb are enveloped by a shell built of river
a stone shell. It is interesting that this shell boulders with dry masonry. In isolated areas
served as a foundation for a building above in the interior of the tomb, plaster of mortar of
the tomb which was also a mausoleum. a pale red colour has survived.
The tomb–mausoleum discovered at the According to the researcher of the complex,
villa by the village of Urovene which has an the two mausoleums were used between the
octagonal shape is of great interest.40 The ne end of the 2nd and the 4th c. and the single
40
We owe this information to the researcher of the villa by the village of Urovene – Spas Mashov. See
note 39.
261
Fig. 41. Plan of the necropolis at the villa by the village of Urovene (after Машов, С., Pъкопис)
chamber vaulted tomb was used during the ХІІ. The Area during the Middle Ages
second decade of the 4th c.
A stone sarcophagus originates from the The most popular fact regarding the me
presentday city of Montana (Mihaylovgrad). dieval stage in the area of Montana are the
The lid is of marble and represents a tomb so called Western Bulgarian Trenches or the
stone with the name of the deceased eighteen three defensive facilities known as Lomski,
yearsold woman and a relief portrait. This all Hayredinski and Ostrovski ramparts (Fig. 42).
was made by his husband, who was of Thra Most researchers of these problems set their
cian origin. construction in the age of the First Bulgar
The poor were laid on brick floors and cov- ian State (Рашев, Р., Иванов, П. 1986:19 and
ered with tegulae. On top they were cov the review there). According to V. Zlatarski,
ered with imbrices. Those who were a little they mark the western border of the Bulgar
richer had limestone stelae raised; today we ian state union from the period of its founda
gather data about their ‚curriculum vitae‛ tion to the annexation of the Avar Khaganate
from them. at the beginning of the 9th c.41, while, according
41
‚To the west the border initially ran along the Isakr River to the mouth of Panega River, along the
ridge Dryanovitsa by the village of Gabare; then it continued along the Ostrovski Trench and reached
the Danube where there was an earthenwork fortification on Alibash Hill; but later, when Khan Isperih/
Asparuh, according to the report by the Armenian geographer, drove back the Avars to the west, the
border from the outlet to the Iskar Defile ran along Vratsa Mountain to the north towards the Ogosta
River; along this river – to the village of Hayredin from where it coincided with the old trench existing
262
MONTANA
to other authors, the Western Bulgarian Ram give grounds to assume that they were built
parts are inner defensive lines and the west simultaneously or within a short interval of
ern border of the Bulgarian state itself reached time. Their purpose as defensive facilities is
the Timok River (Коледаров, П. 1979:25–26; determined by the steppe geomorphology of
Петров, П. 1981:245–247). The three ramparts the region and their frontal orientation to the
were consecutively studied in the 70s by G. west. However, there has been no categorical
Aleksandrov (Lomski Rampart)42, in 1978 by archaeological evidence of their dating. In the
R. Rashev and S. Mashov (Hayredinski Ram last study on this topic, V. Grigorov uses as
part)43 and in 20102011 by V. Grigorov (Os proof the dense settlement network in this re
trovski Rampart)44. Their positions at a com gion which in his view occurred by the second
paratively small distance from each other, as half of the 8th and the beginning of the 9th c.
well as the common elements of construction, (Григоров, В. 2011:131). Namely the early me
today, which runs directly northwards to the Danube west of the village of Kozloduy at the mountain
top Kiler-bair<Shkorpil associates this extension of the Bulgarian border with the extension of the
South-Balkan border which, in our view, is not quite compatible because the latter one in the range
submitted by Shkorpil, refers to the 9th c. (814815), i.e. at the time when the western border mentioned
here was displaced even further westwards‛ (Златарски, В. 1994:152 and note 5).
42
Lomski Rampart starts about 3 km east of the city of Lom and runs southwards to the road from
Lom to the village of Kovachitsa. Here G. Aleksandrov has localized a stronghold with rectangular shape
and sides of 35 to 40 m long. From here, the rampart runs in direction northsouth across the arable lands
of Mladenovo Quarter (the former village of Golnitsi). After a slight turn to the southwest the rampart
runs through the arable lands of the villages of Zemfir, 1.5 km away from the latter and 2-3 km from the
village of Traykovo. Afterwards, it makes a turn to the southeast where the highway Sofia – Montana –
Lom crosses it for the second time, exactly at kilometer 149. From here, southwards across the outskirts of
the village of Rasovo, the rampart reaches Dushilnitsa River, a left tributary of the Tsibritsa River. It runs
southwards between the villages of Yakimovo and Dalgodeltsi. The road from Dalgodeltsi to Yakimovo
crosses it about 300 m east of the last houses of Dalgodeltsi (Александров, Г. 1980c: 202–205).
43
From south to north the rampart emerges by the last houses at the northwestern part of Hayredin;
it reaches the western slope of Vlashkoselska Hollow. In the locality Pripeka, a branch parts from the
rampart at an acute angle. The length of the main rampart from Ogosta to the branch is about 3 km.
The branching section starts from the locality Pripeka and heads southwestwards. The rampart runs up
to the ridge of Lozarski Gred, crosses Valkova Hollow and heads towards the Ogosta River across the
village of Manastirishte. The length of the branching, according to Shkorpil, is 4.8 km. From the local
ity Pripeka, the rampart heads northwards with a declination of 15° to the northwest and follows this
direction with slight declinations to the west and north for 5 km, reaching Brestoveshka Hollow where a
microdam has been built. North of Brestoveshka Mountain the rampart changes its direction twice and
at 12 km from the branching it heads directly northwards following this orientation for 3 km. Fifteen
km from the branching the rampart follows direction 15° northwestwards, and at the 17th km the dec
lination from the north is 10°. After it crosses Yakva Hollow, the rampart reaches Berech Dam. Here it
is called by the residents of the city of Kozloduy ‚Shishmanov Okop‛ (‚The trench of Shishman‛, TN).
North of the dam the rampart reaches the road Kozloduy – Lom and afterwards it crosses a deep hollow
and reaches the high vertical bank of the Danube River about 6 km west of Kozloduy. The total length
of the rampart from the Ogosta to the Danube is 24 km (Рашев, Р., Иванов, П. 1986:13–14).
44
Of the three ramparts the Osogovski one is the longest – about 58 km. The trench starts from the east
ern end of the village of Ostrov, runs along the western slope of Alibash Hill and heads to the southwest.
Afterwards, it crosses the localities of Dimov Dol, Zahlupen Kladenets, Varbishki Dol and the watershed
between the rivers Skat and Gostilya. The trench passes between Tranak and Byala Slatina and west of
Vranyak it heads towards Ivanov Kladenets (between Vranyak and Tlachene). The southern end of the
trench reaches the foot of Usoya Mountain between Tlachene and Gabare (Григоров, В. 2011:128–130).
263
Fig. 42. Registered medieval sites on the territory of Montana and their dating according to the respec
tive publications (after Krassimira Luka)
Legend:
– settlement; – fortification; – necropolis; – defensive earthwork facility (1 – Lomski
Rampart; 2 – Hayredinski Rampart; 3 – Ostrovski Rampart)
dieval settlement structures, however (includ all settlements localized by him within the end
ing the settlement studied in Montana itself of the 6th and the 7th c. (Милчев, А. Ръкопис:
on Kaleto Hill), along with the data from the 120–123), while Zh. Vazharova sets the exist
necropoles, raise a number of questions, fore ence of the settlements along the river valley
most among them their chronology (Fig. 42). of Tsibritsa and Ogosta within the age of the
As early as the first studies of the region 9th11th c. (Въжарова, Ж. 196а:232–236). Fur
conducted by Zh. Vazharova and Prof. A. Mil- thermore, despite the fact that he defines the
chev in the 50s and the early 60s of the 20th c. settlement structures as ‚Early Slavic‛, the ne
(Мuлчев, А. Ръкопис; Въжарова, Ж. 1965а)45, cropoles from the same area are dated by Prof.
the two researchers have given dia metrically Milchev two centuries later – in the 9th10th c.
opposed dates of the settlements revealed by (Милчев, А. Ръкопис: 152–153). Some sound
them. Prof. Milchev dates almost ing surveys followed, consecutively conduct
45
In 1959-1962 Prof. Milchev undertook a large-scale survey along the river valley of Tsibritsa. He reg
istered and undertook partial excavations of a great amount of sites belonging not only to the medieval,
but also to the lateantique and the Roman ages, as well as to the Iron Age. The results of these surveys
are still unpublished today. The field scans of Prof. Milchev were followed in 1962-1963 by Zh. Vazharo
va’s surveys in the same area (the valleys of the rivers Tsibritsa and Ogosta) (Въжарова, Ж. 1965 а).
264
MONTANA
ed by the two researchers at the same sites: in vations in the area of Kozloduy. The dating
1957 Zh. Vazharova started excavations at the they suggest of the settlements localized by
medieval settlement in the locality Gradishteto them is the end of the 7th-9th/10th c. (Ангелова,
by the village of Yakimovo which were carried С., Колева, Р. 1994:132).
on by Prof. Milchev in 1958-1962 (Въжарова, As it can be seen, most of the data related to
Ж. 1965а:235, бел. 1; Милчев, А. 1963; Мил- the medieval stage in the region of Montana
чев, А. 1964:23; Милчев, А. Ръкопис: 124- have been gathered during field surveys and
139); in 1964 Milchev performed soundings the published materials are scanty and the
at the necropolis in the locality Greda by the dates set by the researchers should be accept
town of Valchedram which were carried out with reserve. The problems of dating and in
by Zh. Vazharova in turn (Милчев, А. ръ- terpretation of medieval sites in the discussed
копис: 152; Въжарова, Ж. 1965 b: 146-148; region can also be seen in the contradiction of
Въжарова, Ж. 1976: 345). Zh. Vazharova car the results of sites which are thoroughly stud
ried on the research of the necropoles in the ied, such as the two necropoles at Gradesh
locality Bosovite Kamani at the village of Gali nitsa and Galiche, with clearly different bur
che and in the locality Orehovski Dol by the ial custom and inventory, but comparatively
village of Bukyovtsi (today’s town of Miziya), identical dating: the second half of the 9th – the
started by B. Nikolov (Николов, Б. 1962: 33- beginning of the 11th c. – Gradeshnitsa (Mašov,
34; Въжарова, Ж. 1959; Въжарова, Ж. 1965 S. 1979:47) and the 10th11th c. (later – just the
а: 236; Въжарова, Ж. 1965 b: 123, 149-150; 10th c.) – Galiche (Николов, Б. 1962:33–34; Въ-
Въжарова, Ж. 1976: 220-246). жарова, Ж. 1965 а: 236; Въжарова, Ж. 1965 b:
In 1983 S. Stanilov and G. Aleksandrov publi- 123, 149–150; Въжарова, Ж. 1976:220–246).
shed some results from the surveys in Montana The consequences of ‚the largescale‛ sur
as well as of a necropolis partly excavated by veys of Prof. Zh. Vazharova and Prof. A. Mil
them in the locality Savini Blyasove at Valche chev in the vicinity of Montana which are
dram (Станилов, С., Александров, Г. 1983 а; characteristic for the gathering of enormous
1983 b). Both researchers refrain from giving a amount of materials and a strive for its analyz
particular dating of the necropolis the age of ing (but not for its documentation) for a very
which they simply set to ‚the Christian age‛ short time become most clearly visible by the
(Станилов, С., Александров, Г. 1983а:59), occurrence of the theory about the so called
while the existence of the medieval settlement ‚culture Valchedram – Yakimovo‛, the bear
in Montana has been set ‚widely in the 8th11th ers of which are defined as population formed
c.‛ (Станилов, С., Александров, Г. 1983 b:45). by ‚<the mixing of the Slavic group with the
In 1984 R. Rashev and P. Ivanov undertook nonRomanized local Thracian population‛ in
field scans in the area of Hayredinski Ram the 7th c. (!?) (Ангелова, С., Колева, Р. 1992:
part and they also localized a number of set 176). As stated, a serious flaw of this theory is
tlements which, in their opinion, could not be taking out of context and treating selected el
dated earlier than the 9th c. (Рашев, Р., Иванов, ements of the pottery complex (in this case –
П., 1986: 20–23). the handmade pottery) without subjecting this
In 1985-1986 S. Angelova and R. Koleva complex to overall analysis (Лука, К. 2011 а:
conducted field surveys and sounding exca 360).46 In fact, the modern surveys in the re
46
The discrepancy between the actual archaeological proofs and their interpretation was sensed by
Zh. Vazharova who, while discussing the settlement in the locality Gradishteto by the village of Yaki
movo, emphasized: ‚According to Milchev, this fortification had been inhabited by the Slavs since their
settling south of the Danube. Such a dating is inacceptable, because it is not supported by the actual
material. In our opinion, the fortress Gradishteto dates from the end of the 9th and the beginning of the
10th c.‛ (Въжарова, Ж. 1965 b: 135, бел. 1)
265
gion (performed over a limited area, but with on the left bank of the Skat River. The studied
precise archaeological documentation) show houses are rectangular in form, dug at 0.60
that the so called ‚Early Slavic‛ vessels origi 0.80 m below the ancient surface. Supporting
nating from Prof. A. Milchev’s excavations in facilities and parts of clay floor plaster have
Yakimovo and Valchedram, and published been registered at one of the houses. The heat
by S. Angelova and R. Koleva (Ангелова, С., ing facilities represent domed furnaces built
Колева, Р. 1992: 174, Табл. I/9, 12, 17-18; 175, of quarry stones in dry masonry with a rec
Табл. II; 177, Табл. III), have undoubted ana tangular plan, dug at 0.40 m below the floor of
logues among the materials dated to the end the house (Luka, K. 2009:247-249).
of the 3rd and the 4th c. from the same region The pottery vessels originating from the
and represent a part of the characteristics of houses belong to the same type of pots with
the Late Roman and lateantique culture of elongated proportions, slanted shoulders, a
Northwestern Bulgaria (Лука, К., Машов, С. slightly pronounced tall neck and a slightly
2006: 98, Табл. III/28-30; 101, Табл. ХI/151– inwards curved mouth. The pottery is marked
154; Luka, K. 2003; Лука, К. 2011 а: 364–365, with the sign of production on a slowly ro
269, Обр. 2/27–28).47 tating potter’s wheel. The decoration is su
The surveys carried out in 2001 and 2003 of perficially laid with simple motifs (Luka, K.
ruins of medieval houses in the locality Bres 2009:251-254). The comparative analysis of the
ta by the village of Altimir and at the ancient type of dwellings, heating facilities and pot
fortress Augustae by the village of Harlets tery originating from them date the settlement
provided abundant material belonging to the in the locality Bresta to the end of the 7th8th c.
medieval age which was thoroughly treated (or in the very beginning of the 9th c. (Luka, K.
by statistical methods and which allowed the 2009:254-257 with reference).
establishment of the characteristic features of The medieval settlement over the ruins of
the early medieval complexes in this region the ancient city of Augustae has been localized
in the context of their adjacent types of set within the framework of the ancient fortifica
tlement structures and residential facilities tion, but it does not extend outside it.48 The
(Luka, K. 2009; Лука, К., in print). medieval cultural strata are thin and lie di
The precise documentation of the archaeo rectly over the lateantique strata. There is no
logical artifacts allowed us to conclude: data about the reuse of the lateantique struc
The two settlements reflect the character tures during the Middle Ages. As remains of
istics of two consecutive chronological stages over-ground dwelling can be identified frag
of the medieval culture in Northwestern Bul ments of clay plaster with prints of thick poles
garia. The settlement in the locality Bresta is on them (Лука, К. In print: Fig. 3). The pot
situated on a terrace with southerly exposure tery originating from the medieval stratum of
47
A striking example of the ignorance of the characteristic features of coarse pottery used during the
ancient age in the region of Northwestern Bulgaria which continues even today is the inclusion of such
ancient pot made by hand in the medieval pottery originating from rescue field surveys in the area of
Vidin (Александров, С. и др. 2011:108-109, обр. 4/2). The regarded pot was defined as ‚a casual find
from the site‛ but despite that it gave grounds for the authors to link the complex with the pottery
Valchedram – Yakimovo and to date it in the 7th8th c. ‚as the team does not ignore the possibility for
dating even in the end of the 6th c‛.
48
During the field scans performed in the vicinity of the site in 2003 it was established that outside the
fortification facility there are no traces of habitation during the medieval stage (Машов, С., Ганецовски,
Г., Лука, К. 2004). The intact vessels published by S. Mashov (one of them has been identified as belong
ing to the Early Slavic Penkovska pottery – Ангелова, С. / Колева, Р. 1992:173-174,Табл. I/2) (Машов, С.
1980:43-45, Обр. 19-20), obviously belong to an unstudied necropolis on the outskirts of the settlement.
266
MONTANA
Fig. 43. Plan of the so called ‚Slavic sanctuary‛, revealed on Kaleto in Mon
tana (after Александров, Г. 1987:67, План 8)
Augustae, compared with that from the settle (Лука, К. In print: Fig. 8/71–72) refers the up
ment in the locality Bresta, indicates consider per chronological framework of this settle
ably better moulding of the vessels, extended ment to the first half of the 11th c.
shape and decoration, as well as reduction of In the context of this data, the medieval set
the number of bottoms with relief signs. The tlement studied on Kaleto Hill in Montana
pottery material from Augustae has a number shows a number of parallels with the data
of parallels in complexes dated after the mid from the medieval stratum over the ruins of
8th c49, while the presence of vessels belonging ancient Augustae. As such can be defined the
to the so called ‚cauldrons with inner ears‛ probable reuse of the lateantique defensive
49
The settlements by the villages of Huma, Kladentsi, Vinitsa, Pernik, Popina ‚Kaleto‛ and
‚Dzhedzhovi lozya‛, Garvan, Starmen, Chatalar, the medieval stratum above the ancient town of Abri-
tus (Лука, К., In print; with reference).
267
facility (including its reinforcement with an 1987:73 и обр. 2 – Жилище № 5/Dwelling No

additional wall built during the Middle Ages) 5) indicate a dating of the settlement not ear
(Александров, Г. 1987:74), the finds of plaster lier than the 10th – the beginning of the 11th c.
with prints of poles in them (Александров, The ‚Slavic sanctuary‛ revealed by S. Stani
Г. 1987:72, Dwelling No 3 and the use of fire lov and G. Aleksandrov on the hill (Станилов,
places50 instead of domed furnaces. The dat С., Александров, Г. 1983b; Александров, Г.
ing of the pottery material51 originating from 1987:68, План 8; обр. 31а, б) even today re
these houses cannot be accepted mostly due mains without any parallels in the study of
to the fact that in literature only nine vessels Bulgarian medieval culture (Fig. 43). The dat
originating from one single house are known ing of this sanctuary in the 8th c. on the basis
(Dwelling No 4) and from the so called ‚Slav of two pottery vessels (Станилов, С., Алек-
ic sanctuary‛ (Александров, Г. 1987:обр. 31; сандров, Г. 1983b:46, oбр. 9/а, в; 47) needs
Станилов, С., Александров, Г. 1983b:46, обр. further study. We can only hope for a future
9; 49, обр. 11). We will only mention that the precise publication of this undoubtedly inter
type of residential and heating facilities, the esting and probably abundant archaeological
topographic features of the medieval settle material, the complete publication of which
ment on Kaleto Hill and, last but not least – would provide categorical proof of the chro
the coin finds inside one of the houses from nology and characteristics of the medieval set
the period 1043-1050 AD (Александров, Г. tlement on Kaleto Hill in Montana.
50
The heating facility in Dwelling No 2, identified in the text as ‚a small furnace‛ can also be defined
as a ‚fireplace‛ as this can be seen on the photo of the same facility represented in Fig. 28 in the publica
tion (Александров, Г. 1987:72 and обр. 28). The same photo (unfortunately – the only one representing
the situation of the medieval structures towards the earlier ancient buildings) clearly shows the lack of
digging in at the medieval dwelling. Unclear and with no particular parallels so far is the statement of
the author about the presence of dugout dwellings on Kaleto Hill in Montana which at the same time
use the ancient walls found here (Александров, Г. 1987:72).
51
According to the author, ‚the 8th10th c., and some vessels such as the pot with a handle – by the end
of the 10th and the beginning of the 11th c.‛ (Александров, Г. 1987:73) and ‚from the beginning of the 8th
to the beginning of the 11th c. ‛ (Александров, Г. 1987:79).
268
MONTANA
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
LIST AND NUMBERING OF THE SETTLEMENTS MARKED IN MAPS

(after Krassimira Luka)
1 – Lom (Almus); 2 – Orsoya (Remetodia); 3 – Dobri dol; 4 – Staliyska mahala; 5 – Smirnenski (Luko
vets); 6 – Dolno Linevo; 7 – Kovachitsa; 8 – Stanevo (Labets) (Pomodiana); 9 – Dolni Tsibar; 10 – Gorni
Tsibar (Cebrus); 11 – Zlatiya (Kule mahala); 12 – Razgrad; 13 – Valchedram; 14 – Cherni vrah; 15 – Yaki
movo; 16 – Virove; 17 – Doktor Yosifovo (Valkova Slatina); 18 – Kozloduy (Regianum); 19 – Harlets
(Augustae); 20 – Butan; 21 – Sofronievo; 22 – Hayredin; 23 – Manastirishte; 24 – Mihaylovo (Dolna
Gnoenitsa); 25 – Beli brod; 26 – Furen; 27 – Lehchevo; 28 – Gromoshin; 29 – Gradeshnitsa; 30 – Beli
breg; 31 – Marchevo; 32 – Erden; 33 – Ancient villa No 2 Montana; 34 – Belotintsi; 35 – Nikolovo;
36 – Kalimanitsa (Ancient villa No 1 Montana); 37 – Ohrid; 38 – Baurene; 39 – Lipen; 40 – Urvene;
41 – Krivodol (vicus Tautiomosis); 42 – Galatin; 43 – Osen; 44 – Smolyanovtsi; 45 – Kamenna Riksa; 46 –
Chelyustnitsa; 47 – Belimel; 48 – Kovachitsa; 49 – Vidlitsa; 50 – Gorna Verenitsa; 51 – Dolna Verenitsa;
52 – Georgy Damyanovo (Lopushna); 53 – Glavanovtsi; 54 – Govezhda; 55 – Bistrilitsa; 56 – Gaganitsa;
57 – Leskovets (Berkovitsa Municipality); 58 – Kotenovtsi; 59 – Kostentsi; 60 – Komarevo (Berkovitsa
Municipality); 61 – Berkovitsa; 62 – Zamfirovo; 63 – Draganitsa; 64 – Dolno Ovirovo; 65 – Botunya;
66 – Kravoder (vicus Vorovum Minor); 67 – Lilyache; 68 – Chiren; 69 – Miziya (Bukyovtsi); 70 – Krusho
vitsa; 71 – Lipnitsa; 72 – Rogozen; 73 – Sirakovo; 74 – Altimir; 75 – Galiche; 76 – Malorad; 77 – Tar
nava; 78 – Bardarski geran; 79 – Byala Slatina; 80 – Borovan; 81 – Sokolare; 82 – Popitsa; 83 – Tarnak;
84 – Vranyak; 85 – Komarevo (Byala Slatina Municipality); 86 – Tlachene; 87 – Bukovets; 88 – Nivya
nin (Dzhurilovo); 89 – Devene; 90 – Оhoden; 91 – Banitsa; 92 – Golyamo Peshtene; 93 – Tishevitsa;
94 – Tsakonitsa; 95 – Virovsko; 96 – Varbitsa; 97 – Oryahovo (Aedabe ?); 98 – Leskovets (Oryahovo
Municipality) (Variana); 99 – Selanovtsi; 100 – Galovo; 101 – Ostrov (Pedoniana); 102 – Knezha; 103 –
Brenitsa; 104 – Lazarovo (Strupen); 105 – Enitsa; 106 – Koynare; 107 – Chomakovtsi; 108 – Sukache;
109 – Gabare; 110 –Drashan; 111 – Gornik; 112 – Cherven bryag; 113 – Reselets; 114 – Komoshtitsa;
115 – Rasovo; 116 – Medkovets; 117 – Mokresh.
269
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Александров, Г. 1970: Г. Александров. Антични паметници от Монтана (Михайловград). –

Археология, 12, № 3, 1970:43–48.
Александров, Г. 1971: Г. Александров. Антични крепости в района на Монтана (дн. Михайловград).
– In: Сб. Чипровци, София 1981:115–132.
Александров, Г. 1974а: Г. Александров. Добив на злато в района на античната Монтана (дн.
Михайловград). – In: Първи симпозиум по история на минното дело в Югоизточна Европа.
Варна 1974:118–126.
Александров, Г. 1974б: Г. Александров. Антична мозайка от Монтана. – МПК, № 4, 1974.
Александров, Г. 1977a: Г. Александров. Латински надписи от Монтана (дн. Михайловград). –
Векове, 6, № 5, 1977:52–61.
Александров, Г. 1977b: Г. Александров. Резултати от разкопките на ‚Калето‛ в Михайловград. –
ИМСЗБ, 1, 1977:267–292.
Александров, Г. 1980а: Г. Александров. Антични надписи и други находки от Монтана (Долна
Мизия). – Археология, 22, № 1, 1980:34-41.
Александров, Г. 1980b: Г. Александров. Антична вила № 2 край Монтана. – ИМСЗБ, 4, 1980:9–64.
Александров, Г. 1980c: Приноси към средновековното минало на Северозападна България. – In:
Сб. Българско Средновековие. Българо-съветски сборник в чест на 70-годишнината на проф.
Иван Дуйчев. София, 1980:201–211.
Александров, Г. 1983: Г. Александров. Антична вила № 1 край Михайловград. – ИМСЗБ, 8,
1983:37–81.
Александров, Г. 1984: Г. Александров. Антична вила № 3 край Михайловград. – ИМСЗБ, 9,
1984:9–45.
Александров, Г. 1987: Г. Александров. Резултати от разкопките на крепостта Монтана (1971–1982)
– Монтана. Т. 1. София 1987:54–85.
Александров, Г. 1990: Г. Александров. Паметници от култа на Дионис в Монтана. – Археология,
№ 1, 1990:30–43.
Александров, Г. 1994: Г. Александров. История на Монтана–Кутловица и района. Монтана 1994.
Александров, С. и др. 2011: С. Александров, В. Динчев, Т. Христова, Ф. Филипова, И. Цветков,
О. Миланова, Н. Казашки, А. Манев. Спасителни археологически проучвания в м. Гриндур,
землище на с. Антимово, община Видин. – АОР през 2010 г., София 2011:107–110.
Ангелов, Д. 1965: Д. Ангелов. История на Византия. Том 1. София 1994.
Ангелова, С., Р. Колева 1992: С. Ангелова, Р. Колева. За някои особености на раннославянската
керамика от северозападна България. – In: Приноси към българската археология. Том 1, София
1992:173–179.
Ангелова, С., Р. Колева 1994: С. Ангелова, Р. Колева. Ранносредновековна керамика от Козлодуй.
– ГСУ – ИФ, специалност Археология. Том 1, 1994:129–147.
Атанасова, Й. 2005: Й. Атанасова. Писмени извори и изследвания за Кастра Мартис. – In: Кастра
Мартис. Квадрибургий и кастел. София 2005:12–17.
Басанович, И. 1894: И. Басанович. Към епиграфиката и археологията на Горна и Долна Мизия. –
СбНУНК (= Министерски сборник), 11, 1894:55–67.
Белитов, И. 1991: И. Белитов. Трибалите в античната писмена традиция. – ИМСЗБ, 16, Враца
1990. София 1991:165–187.
Бешевлиев, В. 1963: В. Бешевлиев. Проучвания върху личните имена у траките. София 1963.
Бешевлиев, В. 1980: В. Бешевлиев. Българи-наемници в походите на Велизарий и Нарсес в
Италия. – In: Българско средновековие. Българо-съветски сборник в чест на 70-годишнината на
проф. Иван Дуйчев. София 1980:52–54.
Бинев, М. 2003: М. Бинев. Монтана (Montana). – In: (Р. Иванов, ред.) Римски и ранновизантийски
селища в България (Roman and Early Byzantine Settlements in Bulgaria). Том 2, София 2003:
160–182.
270
MONTANA
Божилова, В. 1976: В. Божилова, Надписи от светилището на Диана и Аполон при Монтана

(Михайловград). – Археология, 18, № 2, 1976:40–48.
Божилова, В. 1987: В. Божилова. Епиграфски паметници от светилището на Диана и Аполон. –
In: Монтана, Т. 1, София 1987:20–36.
Боянов, И. 2008: И. Боянов. Римските ветерани в Долна Мизия и Тракия (І–ІІІ в). София 2008.
Буюклиев, Хр., Л. Гетов 1964: Хр. Буюклиев, Л. Гетов. Два нови епиграфски паметника за
укрепителната дейност на Антонин Пий в Тракия. – Археология, № 1, 1964:29–33.
Велков, В. 1959: В(елизар) Велков. Градът в Тракия и Дакия през късната античност (IV–VI в.).
Проучвания и материали. София 1959.
Велков, В. 1962: В. Велков. Към въпроса за аграрните отношения в Мизия през ІІ в. от н.е. –
Археология, 4, № 1, 1962:31–34.
Велков, В. 1964/65: В. Велков. Приноси към историята на римските градове в България. І: Рациария.
– ТВПИ „Братя Кирил и Методий‛ – Велико Търново, ІІ/1, 1964–1965:1–24.
Велков, В. 1971: В. Велков. Приноси към историята на римските градове в България. Монтана. –
In: Сб. Чипровци (1688–1968). София 1971:105–114.
Велков, В. 1987: В. Велков. Монтана – исторически очерк. – Монтана, Том 1, София 1987:9–13.
Велков, В., Г. Александров 1994: В. Велков, Г. Александров. Епиграфски паметници от Монтана
и района. Монтана 1994 (= Монтана, ІІ).
Велков, И. 1929: И(ван) Велков. Стари римски пътища и селища в днешните български граници.
– БИБ, 2, № 4, 1929:44–71.
Велков, И. 1930/31: И. Велков. Новооткрити старини. – ИБАИ, 6, 1930–1931:302–313.
Велков, И. 1934: И. Велков. Фердинанд. – ИБАИ, 8, 1934:447–467.
Велков, И. 1940/1942: И. Велков. Принос към историята на религията на Мизия. – ИБАД, 14, 1940–
1942:183–189.
Велков, И., Данов, Хp. 1938: И. Велков, Хр. Данов. Новооткрити старини. – ИБАИ, 12, 1938:434–
435.
Венедиков, И. 1955: И. Венедиков. Два новооткрити паметника за религията на траките през
Римската епоха. – ИАИ, 19, 1955:195–205.
Въжарова, Ж. 1959: Ж. Въжарова. Славянският некропол в с. Букьовци, Врачанско. – Археология,
1, № 1–2, 1959:20–23.
Въжарова, Ж. 1965a: Ж. Въжарова. Средновековни обекти по долините на реките Цибрица и
Огоста (по материали от раззузнаването през 1962–1963 г.). – ИАИ, 28, 1965:231–245.
Въжарова, Ж. 1965b: Ж. Въжарова. Славянски и славянобългарски селища в българските земи
VI–ХI в. София 1965.
Въжарова, Ж. 1976: Ж. Въжарова. Славяни и прабългари по данни на некрополите от VI–ХI в. на
територията на България. София 1976.
Герасимов, Т. 1937: Т. Герасимов. Колективни находки на монети през 1934, 1935 и 1936 г. – ИБАД,
11, 1937:315–324.
Герасимов, Т. 1938: Т. Герасимов. Колективни находки на монети през 1837 и 1938г. – ИБАИ, 12,
1938:450-457.
Герасимов, Т. 1964: Т. Герасимов. Монетни съкровища, намерени в България през 1962 и 1963г. –
ИАИ, 27, 1964:237–248.
Герасимов, Т. 1965: Т. Герасимов. Монетни съкровища, намерени в България през 1964г. – ИАИ,
28, 1965:247–250.
Герасимов, Т. 1966: Т. Герасимов. Монетни съкровища, намерени в България през 1965 г. – ИАИ,
29, 1966:211–216.
Герасимов, Т. 1967: Т. Герасимов. Монетни съкровища, намерени в България през 1966 г. – ИАИ,
30, 1967:187–190.
271
Герасимова, В. 1970: В. Герасимова, Дислокация на римските помощни войски в провинция

Мизия от 44 до 86 г. от н.е. – Археология, 12, № 4, 1970:22–33.
Герасимова-Томова, В. 1986: В. Герасимова-Томова. Античното селище при с. Обнова, Плевенски
окръг. – Археология, № 2, 1986:26–32.
Геров, Б. 1949: Б. Геров. Романизмът между Дунава и Балкана от Август до Хадриан. Част І: От
Август до Хадриан. – ГСУ – ФФ, 45, 1948/1949: 1–69.
Геров, Б. 1950: Б. Геров. Северната граница на провинция Тракия. – ИАИ, 17, 1950.
Геров, Б. 1952: Б. Геров. Романизмът между Дунава и Балкана. Част ІІ: От Хадриан до Константин
Велики. – ГСУ – ФФ, 47, 1950–1952:17–409.
Геров, Б. 1953: Б. Геров. Романизмът между Дунава и Балкана от Хадриан до Константин Велики.
Част ІІ, 2. – ГСУ – ФФ, 48, 1952/1953.
Геров, Б. 1980: Б. Геров. Земевладението в римска Тракия и Мизия (I–III в.). – ГСУ – ФКНФ, 72, 2,
1977. София 1980:5–173.
Григоров, В. 2011: В. Григоров. Археологическо проучване на Островския вал до Кнежа. –
Археология, № 2, 2011:128–135.
Дилов, И. И., И. Д. Дилов 2003: И. И. Дилов, И. Д. Дилов. Оходен. Летописно-мемоарна сбирка.
Враца 2003.
Димитров, Д. 1942: Д. П. Димитров. Надгробните плочи от римско време в Северна България.
София 1942.
Димитрова-Милчева, А. 2008: А. Димитрова-Милчева. Луксозна керамика – импорт и местно
производство от Тракия и Мизия през I–III в. сл.Хр. – In: (Р. Иванов, съст.) Археология на
българските земи, Т. 3, София 2008: 119–161.
Димитрова-Чудилова, С. 1972: С. Димитрова-Чудилова. Съкровище от римски републикански
монети от с. Оходен, Врачанско. – Археология, № 2, 1972:23–32.
Димитрова, А. 1961: А. Димитрова. За производството на terra sigillata в нашите земи. –
Археология, 3, № 4, 1961:27–33.
Димитрова, Д. 1985: Д. Димитрова. Археологическите паметници във Врачански окръг. София
1985.
Динчев, В. 1997: В. Динчев. Римските вили в днешните български земи. София 1997.
Динчев, В. 2002: В. Динчев. Рациария (Ratiaria). – In: (Р. Иванов, ред.) Римски и ранновизантийски
градове в България. Том 1, София 2002:13–28.
Динчев, В. 2006: В. Динчев. Ранновизантийските крепости в България и съседните земи (в
диоцезите Thracia и Dacia). – РП, 35. София, 2006.
Добруски, В. 1890: В. Добруски. Археологически издирвания в Западна България. – СбНУНК, 2,
1890:1–45.
Добруски, В. 1896: В. Добруски. Материали по археологията на България. – СбНУНК, 13,
1896:398–442.
Добруски, В. 1900: В. Добруски. Материали по археологията на България. – СбНУНК, 16–17,
1900:3–146.
Домарадски, М. 1984: М. Домарадски. Келтите на Балканския полуостров. София 1984.
Дякович, Б. 1900: Б. Дякович. Бележки по археологията на крайдунавска България. – СбНУНК,
16–17, 1900:147–178.
Дякович, Б. 1904: Б. Дякович. Археологически излет в крайдунавска България. – СбНУНК, 20,
1904:1–56.
Златарски, В. 1994: В. Златарски. История на българската държава през средните векове. Том
1. Първо българско царство. Част 1. Епоха на хуно-българското надмощие. София 1994
(Академично издателство „Марин Дринов‚, второ фототипно издание).
Иванов, Р. 1983: Р. Иванов. Principales в римската войска на Горна и Долна Мизия (в дн. Северна
България) през Принципата. – Археология, № 2, 1983: 50–62.
272
MONTANA
Иванов, Р. 1999: Р. Иванов. Долнодунавската отбранителна система между Дортикум и

Дуросторум от Август до Маврикий. София 1999.
Иванов, С. 1983: С. А. Иванов. Оборона Византии и география ‚варварски‛ вторжений через
Дунай в первой половина VI вв. – ВВ, т. 44, 1983:27–47.
Иванов, Т. 1973: Т. Иванов. За планировката и архитектурата през римската императорска епоха.
– МПК, № 3, 1973:5–11.
Иванов, Т., С. Стоянов 1985: Т. Иванов, С. Стоянов. Абритус. София 1985.
Иречек, К. 1974: К. Иричек. Пътувания по България. София 1974.
Кабакчиева, Г. 2010b: Г. Кабакчиева. Новооткрит надгробен паметник с надпис от антична
Монтана. – In: Studia Classica Serdicensia, Т. I, Musarum Semper Amator, СУ „Св. Климент
Охридски‚, София 2010:471–479.
Кабакчиева, Г. 2010а: Г. Кабакчиева. Разкопки на раннохристиянската базилика в Монтана. –
АОР през 2009 г. София 2010:330–332.
Кабакчиева, Г. 2011: Кабакчиева, Г. Разкопки на раннохристиянска базилика в Монтана. – АОР
през 2010 г. София 2011:289–291.
Каймакамова, М. 1993: М. Каймакамова. Сведения за Куберовите българи в българското
летописание. – In: Studia protobulgarica e mediavalia Europensia. – In: Сб. в чест на член кор.
Веселин Бешевлиев. Велико Търново 1993:35–45.
Каниц, Ф. 1995: Ф. Каниц. Дунавска България и Балканът (Историко-географско-етнографски
пътеписни проучвания от 1860 до 1879 г.). София 1995.
Кацаров, Г. 1911: Г. Кацаров. Антични паметници из България. – ИБАД, 2, 1911:175–190.
Кацаров, Г. 1926/27: Г. Кацаров. Антични паметници из България. – ИАИ, 4, 1926–1927:107–112.
Коледаров, П. 1979: П. Коледаров. Политическа география на средновековната българска
държава. Първа част: от 681 до 1018 г. София 1979.
Комша, М. 1992: М. Комша. Этапы переселения славян на Балканском полуострове в VI–VII вв. –
Четвърти международен конгрес по славянска ахеология. (Доклади и съобщения). Т. 1, София
1992:361–376.
Лука, К. 2006: К. Лука. Находка от керамични калъпи за производство на съдове с апликирана
украса от крепостта Калето край Мездра. – Археология, 47, № 1–4, 2006:161–170.
Лука, К. 2008: К. Лука. Бележки върху датирането и интерпретацията на античния обект
„Калето‛ в град Монтана, Северозападна България. Докторантски изследвания по социални и
хуманитарни науки. Том 2. София 2010:33–62.
Лука, К. 2009: К. Лука. Сондажни археологически проучвания на античен обект „Калето‛ при с.
Кладоруб, община Димово. – АОР през 2008 г., 2009:437–441.
Лука, К. 2010: К. Лука. Археологически проучвания на ранноримски военен лагер и късноримско
селище Conbustica до с. Кладоруб, община Димово. – АОР през 2009 г., София 2010:327–329.
Лука, К. 2011a: К. Лука. Античната керамика от местността ‚Градището‛ при с. Якимово
(проучвания на проф. Ат. Милчев, 1959–1962 г.) (Предварително съобщение). – In: Collegum
Historicum, Т. 1, София 2011:358-374.
Лука, К. 2011b: К. Лука. Издирване на археологиески обекти на територията на община Димово
и община Белоградчик, Видинска област. – АОР за 2010 г., София 2011:531–533.
Лука, К. 2011c: К. Лука. Археологическо проучване на ранноримски военен лагер и късноримско
селище CONBUSTICА до с. Кладоруб, община Видин. – АОР през 2010 г., София 2011:287–289.
Лука, К. Под печат: К. Лука. Керамика от средновековния пласт над развалините на късноантич
ния град Augustae до с. Хърлец, община Козлодуй, Северозападна България. – Сборник в чест
на акад. Д. П. Димитров (под печат).
Лука, К., Машов, С. 2006: К. Лука., С. Машов. Структури и материали от Късната Античност. –
In: Алтимир-Бреста. Култов комплекс и селище. Библиотека „Български Северозапад‚, № 27,
Серия „Научни изследвания‛, № 17, Враца 2006:94–116.
Машов, С. 1975: С. Машов. Епиграфски паметници от Врачански окръг. – Археология, 17, № 3,
1975:36–43.
273
Машов, С. 1980: С. Машов. Августа. Augustae. Враца 1980.

Машов, С. 1990: С. Машов. Късноантичният кастел и ранновизантийският град Августа при
с. Хърлец, община Козлодуй. Локализиране, извори, топография и укрепителна система. –
ИМСЗБ, 16, 1990:2-45.
Машов, С. Ръкопис: С. Машов. Римска вила рустика при с. Урвене, община Криводол. Ръкопис.
Машов, С., Г. Ганецовски, К. Лука 2004: С. Машов, Г. Ганецовски, К. Лука. Спасителни
археологически проучвания на римски кастел и ранновизантийски град Августа при с. Хърлец,
община Козлодуй. – АОР през 2003 г., София 2004:104–115.
Миков, В. 1928–1929: В. Миков. Старини от разни крайща в България. – ИБАИ, 5, 1928–1929:
330–336.
Миланов, М. 1978: М. Миланов. Археологически обекти и находки в поречието на Златица. –
ИМСЗБ, 2, 1978:57–73.
Милчев, А. 1958: А. Милчев. Археологическо проучване в околностите на с. Алтимир, Оряховско.
– ГСУ – ФИФ, 1, LI, 1958 (за 1957):19–251.
Милчев, А. 1963: А. Милчев. Първи румъно-български семинар по въпроса за славяните в
Долнодунавския басейн и за балкано-дунавската култура в раннофеодалния период. –
Археология, 5, № 1, 1963:67–72.
Милчев, А. 1964: А. Милчев. Проучвания на раннославянската култура в България и на Плиска
през последните двадесет години. – Археология, 6, № 3, 1964:1–12.
Милчев, А. Ръкопис: А. Милчев. Археологическо проучване на долината на р. Цибрица (Якимово
и Вълчедръм, Михайловградска област). Непубликуван ръкопис.
Милчев, Ат., Д. Пеков 1965: Ат. Милчев, Д. Пеков. Новооткрити находки от Михайловград
(Монтана). – Археология, № 3, 1965:43–51.
Мирчев, М. 1961: М. Мирчев. Нови епиграфски паметници от Черноморието. – ИВАД, 12, 1961:
7–21.
Николов, Б. 1961а: Б. Николов. Грънчарска пещ при с. Алтимир. – Археология, 3, № 4, 1961:
51–53.
Николов, Б. 1961b: Б. Николов. Алтимир през вековете (Исторически очерк). Враца 1961.
Николов, Б. 1962: Б. Николов. Раннобългарски находки край Островския окоп. – Археология, 4,
№ 2, 1962:33–37.
Николов, Б. 1967: Б. Николов. Антични паметници от Врачанско. – ИАИ, 30, 1967:216–235.
Николов, Б. 1996: Б. Николов. От Искър до Огоста. София 1996.
Николов, Д. 1983: Д. Николов. Организация на градовете в римска Тракия. – In: Първи национален
симпозиум „Поселищен живот в Тракия‛, Ямбол 1982:90–100.
Николов, Д. 1994: Д. Николов. Охраната на пътищата в римска Тракия и Мизия. – In: Поселищен
живот в древна Тракия. III Международен симпозиум ‚Кабиле‛. Ямбол 1994:125–131.
Нинов, Л. 1989: Л. Нинов. Останки от лъв по българските земи. – Археология, 31, № 2, 1989:
55–61.
Огненова-Маринова, Л. 1982: Л. Огненова-Маринова. Античната скулптура в Монтана. – In:
България 1300. Институции и държавна традиция. Т. 2, 1982:143–149.
Огненова-Маринова, Л. 1987: Огненова-Маринова. Скулптурата от светилището на Диана и
Аполон. – Монтана І. София 1987:37–53.
Петров, П. 1981: П. Петров. Образуване на българската държава. София 1981.
Рашев, Р., Иванов, П. 1986: Р. Рашев, П. Иванов. Хайрединският вал. – ИМСЗБ, 11, 1986:9–26.
Свод, 1994: Свод древнейших письменных известий о славянах. Т. 1 (I-VI вв.). Москва 1994.
Станилов, С., Г. Александров 1983a: С. Станилов, Г. Александров. Ранносредновековен некропол
при град Вълчедръм. – Векове, № 5, 1983:56–59.
Станилов, С., Г. Александров 1983b: С. Станилов, Г. Александров. Средновековно езическо
светилище в развалините на Монтана. – Археология, 25, № 3, 1983:40–52.
274
MONTANA
Стоев, К. 2012: К. Стоев. Романизация на Горна и Долна Мизия по данни на антропонимията

(І–ІІІ век). София 2012 (автореферат).
Тачева, М. 1997: М. Тачева. История на българските земи в древността през елинистическата и
римската епоха. София 1997.
Тачева, М. 2000: М. Тачева. Власт и социум в Римска Тракия и Мизия. T. 1, София 2000.
Тачева, М. 2004: М. Тачева. За римските провинции Долна Мизия и Тракия (І–ІІІ в.). – In: (Р.
Иванов, съст.) Археология на Българските земи. Том 1, София 2004:49–75.
Тодоров, Я. 1928: Я. Тодоров. Паганизмът в Долна Мизия през първите три века след Христа.
София 1928.
Торбатов, С. 2000: С. Торбатов. Функционално и типологическо съдържание на късноантичната
фортификационна терминология. – Археологически вести, № 1, Приложение № 3. София
2000.
Торбатов, С. 2004: С. Торбатов. Терминология за фортификационните съоръжения през рим-
ската и ранновизантийската епоха. – In: (Р. Иванов, съст.) Археология на българските земи.
Том 1. София 2004:31–48.
Торбатов, С., Г. Ганецовски 2006: С. Торбатов, Г. Ганецовски. Проучвания на многослоен обект
„Калето‛ край Мездра. – АOP през 2005 г. София 2006:265–267.
Торбов, Н., Д. Антонов, Е. Найденова 2005: Н. Торбов, Д. Антонов, Е. Найденова. Археологически
проучвания в района на античния кастел Вариана през 2004 г. – АОР през 2004 г. София 2005:67–
168.
Ферјанчић, С. 2002: С. Ферјанчић, Насељавање легијских ветерана у балканским провинцијама
I–III век н. е. Српска академија наука и уметности. Балканолошки институт. Посебна издања
79. Београд 2002.
Филов, Б. 1906: Б. Филов, Помощните войски на римската провинция Мизия. – ИБИД, 2, 1906:
41–90.
Филов, Б. 1911: Б. Филов, Новооткрити старини. – ИАИ, 2, 1911:268–287.
Филов, Б. 1912/13: Б. Филов. Новооткрити старини. – ИАИ, 3, 1912–1913.
Филов, Б. 1915: Б. Филов. Светилището на Диана и Аполон при гр. Фердинанд. Археологически
вести. – ИБАД, 5, 1915.
Фол, А. 1975: A. Фол. Тракия и Балканите през ранноелинистическата епоха. София 1975.
Фол, А., Т. Спиридонов 1983: А. Фол, Т. Спиридонов. Историческа география на на тракийските
племена до ІІІ век пр.н.е. Том І/1. София 1983.
Христов, И. 2003: И. Христов. Состра. Проучване на римската крайпътна станция и кастел на
пътя Ескус – Филипополис. Т. 1. Велико Търново 2003.
Христов, И. 2006а: И. Христов. Состра. Римският град в полите на Хемус. Велико Търново 2006.
Христов, И. 2006b: И. Христов, Состра. Проучване на римската крайпътна станция и кастел на
пътя Ескус – Филипополис. Т. 2. Велико Търново 2006.
Христова, П. 1999: П. Христова. За порутените от старост храмове. – Thracia Antiqua (ThA 10). In
memoriam Georgi Mihailov. София 1999:188–191.
Цветков, А. 1930/31: А. Цветков. Новооткрити старини във Врачанско. – ИБАИ, 6, 1930–1931:
258–262.
Чанева-Дечевска, Н. 1999: Н. Чанева-Дечевска. Раннохристиянската архитектура в България IV–
VI в. София 1999.
Чолаков, И. 2010: И. Д. Чолаков. Римски и ранновизантийски метални инструменти от
територията на България (І – началото на VІІ век). (Ivo D. Cholakov. Roman and Early Byzantine
Metal Tools on the Territory of Bulgaria – the 1st – the Beginning of the 7th century). София 2010.
Шкорпил, К. и Х. 1891: К. и Х. Шкорпил. Антически надписи изъ разни крайща на България. –
СбНУНК, 4, 1891:146–155.
Шкорпил, К. и Х. 1892: К. и Х. Шкорпил. Надписи и изображения на конници изъ разни крайща
на България. – СбНУНК, 8, 1892:59–81.
275
Baatz, D. 1975: D. Baatz. Der römische Limes. Arch~ologische Ausflüge zwischen Rhein und Donau.
Berlin 1975 (2).
Bozhilova, V. 1977: V. Bozhilova. Ex-voto des militaries romaines du sanctuaire De Dianae et Apollon
près de Montana. – In: Akten des Internationalen Limeskongress, Székesfehérv{r, 1976. Budapest
1977:473-484.
Boteva, D. 2012: D. Boteva. Ancient Literary Tradition on Moesi/Moesia (Mid. 1st c.BC – Mid 1st c.AD).
In (L.Vagalinski, N. Sharankov, S. Torbatov eds.) The Lower Danube Roman Limes (1st – 6st C.AD).
Sofia 2012:9-22.
Davies, O. 1935: O. Davies. Roman Mines in Europe. Oxford 1935.
Detschew, D. 1976: D. Detschew. Die thrakischen Sprachreste. Wien 1976 (2).
Dušanić, S. 1977: S. Dušanić. Aspects of Roman Mining in Noricum,Pannonia, Dalmatia and Moesia
Superior. – ANRW, II/6, 1977.
Eck, W., R. Ivanov 2009: W. Eck, R. Ivanov. C. Iulius Victor, senatorischer Legat von Moesia Inferior
unter Valerianus und Gallienus und das Kastell Sostra-Siosta. – ZPE, 170, 2009:191-200.
Florescu, Gr. 1924: Gr. Florescu. Noi descoperiti archeologice la Seimeni Mari. – BCMI, XVII, 1924:88-92.
Fluss, М. 1933: M. Fluss. Montana. – RE, XVI, 1933:201.
Georgiev, V. 1978: V. Georgiev. La situation ethnique en Mysie inférieure et la nécropole destrésors de
Varna. – Studia praehistorica, No. 1-2, 1978:80 sqq.
Gerasimov, T. 1979: T. Gerassimov. Tresors monetaires trouves en Bulgarie au cours de 1968, 1969 et
1970. – ИАИ, 35, 1979:134-141.
Gerov, B. 1963: B. Gerov. Die gotische Invasion in Mösien und Trakien unter Decius im Lichte der Hort
funde. – In: Acta antique Philippopolitana. Serdicae 1963:128-146.
Gerov, B. 1979 : B. Gerov. Die Grenzen der römischen Provinz Thracia. – ANRW, II, 7/1, 1979:213-240.
Glodariu, I. 1977: I. Glodariu. Die Landwirtschaft im römischen Dakien. – ANRW, II/6, 1977:960 ff.
Hauptmann, L. 1929: L. Hauptmann. Les Rapports des Byzantins avec les Slaves et les Avares pendant
la seconde moitié du VI-ème siècles. – Byzantion: Revue internationale des études byzantines. T. IV
(1927-1928). Paris-Liege 1929:127-170.
Holder, A. 1964: A. Holder. Alt-keltischer Sprachschatz. Graz 1964.
Issac, B. 1990: B. Isaac. The Limits of Empire. The Roman Army in the East. Oxford 1990.
Ivanov, R. 1996: R. Ivanov. Der Limes von Dorticum bis Durostorum (1.6. Jh.). Bauperioden de Befesti
gungssystems und arch~ologische Ergebnisse 1980-1995. – In : (P. Petrović, ed.) Roman Limes on the
Middle and Lower Danube (Archaeological Institute, Belgrade. Cahiers des Portes de Fer, Monogra
phies 2), Belgrade 1996:177-182.
Ivanov, R. 1997: R. Ivanov. Das römische Verteidigungssystem an der unteren Donau zwischen Dor
ticum und Durostorum (Bulgarien) von Augustus bis Maurikios. – BRGK des DAI, Bd. 78, 1997
(1999):467-640.
Jacoby , F. 1908: F. Jacoby. Herodotus. – RE, Suppl., Band II, 1908:432.
Jirecek, K. 1881: K. Jirecek. Geographie und Epigraphie von Bulgarien. – Monatsberichte der Akademie
der Wissenschaften in Berlin 1881.
Kalinka, E. 1906: E. Kalinka. Antike Denkm~ler aus Bulgarien. Wien 1906.
Kanitz, F. 1882: F. Kanitz. Donau – Bulgarien und der Balkan, II. Leipzig 1882.
Kazarow, G. 1938: G. Kazarow. Die Denkm~ler des thrakischen Reitergottes in Bulgarien. Budapest
1938.
Kees, H. 1938: H. Kees. – In: RE, XIX/2, 1938:2109-2113.
Kolendo, J. 1966: J. Kolendo. Une inscription inconnue de Sexaginta Prista et la fortification du Bas-
Danube sous le Tetrarchie. Eirene, V, Praha 1966:139-154.
Lörinz, B. 1990: B. Lörinz. Pannonia. Règèsteti Kèziönyve. Budapest 1990:80.
Luka, K. 2003: K. Luka. Coarse ware from the area of the middle reaches of Skat River, Northewstern
Bulgaria. – Archaeologia Iuventa, 1, Sofia 2003:41-57.
276
MONTANA
Luka, K. 2009: K. Luka. Ceramics from Middle Age settlements in Bresta locality near the village of
Altimir (Biala Slatina Municipality, NorthWest Bulgaria). – Acta Terrae Septemcastrensis, VIII,
2009:245-261.
Mašov, S. 1979: S. Mašov. La necropole medievaale pres du village Gradešnica, dep. De Vraca. – ИАИ,
35, 1979 :31-47.
Mihailov, G. 1961: G. Mihailov. La fortification de la Thrace par Antoninus de Pieux et Marc Aurèle.-
Studi Urbinati, Nuova serie, B, XXXV, No. 1-2, Roma 1961.
Mirković, M. 1968: M. Mirković. Die Auxiliareinheiten in Mösien unter den Flavien. – Epigraphische
Studien, 5, 1968:177-183.
Mrozewicz, L. 1982: L. Mrozewicz. Rozwój ustrojo municypalnego a postery romanizacji w Mezji Dol
nej. Poznan 1982.
Mrozewicz, L. 1989: L. Mrozewicz. Arystokracja municypalna w rzymskich prowincjach nad Renem I
Dunajem w okresie wczesnego Cesarstwa. Poznan 1989.
Ninov, L. 1999: L. Ninov. Vergleichende Untersuchungen zur Jagd und zum Jagdwild w~hrend des
Neolithikums und Äneolithikums in Bulgrien.– Arch~logie in Eurasien, 6, 1999:323-338.
Ognenova-Marinova, L. 1987: L. OgnenovaMarinova. Un atelier de plastes imaginarius a Montana. –
ИАИ, 37, 1987:173-176.
Рapazoglu, F. 1978: F. Papazoglu. The Central Balkan Tribes in Pre-Roman Times. Amsterdam 1978.
Paunov, E., Prokopov, I. 2002: E. Paunov, I. Prokopov. An inventory of Roman Republican Coin Hoards
and Coins from Bulgaria (IRRCHBulg). Milano: Glsux, 2002.
Petrović, P. 1977: P. Petrović. Forteresse romaine a l’embouchure de la rivière Porecka dans les Portes
de Fer. – In: (J. Fitz, Hrsg.) Akten de XI. Internationalen Limeskongresses, Szekesfehervar. Budapest
1977:259-275.
Polaschek, E. 1937: E. Polaschek. Triballi. – RE, XII, 1937:2399.
Popescu, E. 1976: E. Popescu. Inscripțiile din secolele IV-XIII descoperite in Romậnia. București 1976.
Rankov, N. 1983: N. B. Rankov. A Contribution to the Military and Administrative History of Montana.
– In: (A. G. Poulter, ed.) Ancient Bulgaria. Papers Presented to the International Symposium on the
Ancient History and Archaeology of Bulgaria. University of Nottingham 1981. Nottingham 1983:
4073.
Rohde, G. 1940: G. Rohde. Neue Inschriftenfunde.- TTAED (Istanbul 1940) 65-79.
Sarnowski, T. 1988: T. Sarnowski. Wojsko rzymskie w Mezji Dolnej I na polnocnym Morza Czarnego.
Warszawa 1988 (= Novaensia 3).
Šašel, J. 1983: J. Šašel. Cohors I Montanorum. – In: Studien zu den Milit~rgrenzen Roms III. 13. Interna
tionalen Limeskongreβ, Aalen, Deutchland 1983, Stuttgart 1986:782-786.
Spaul, J. 2000: J. Spaul. Cohors. The Evidence for and a Short History of the Auxiliary Infantry Units of
the Imperial Roman Army. Oxford 2000 (2).
Speidel, M. 1984: M. P. Speidel. Regionarii in Lower Moesia. – ZPE, 57, 1984:185-188.
Strack, P. 1933: P. S. Strack. Untersuchungen zur römischen Reichspr~gung des II Jhdts., II: Die Reich
spr~gung zur Zeit des Hadrians. Stuttgart 1933.
Tatscheva, M. 1996: M. Tatscheva. Neues über Publicum Portorii Illyrici et Ripae Thraciae. – In: (P.
Petrović, ed.) Roman Limes on the Middle and Lower Danube (Archaeological Institute, Belgrade.
Cahiers des Portes de Fer, Monographies 2), Belgrade 1996:177-182.
Tudor, D. 1958: D. Tudor. Oltenia romană. București 1958.
Tudor, D. 1968: D. Tudor. Oltenia romană. București 1968 (3rd ed.).
Velkov, V. 1970: V. Velkov. Epigraphische Beitr~ge zur historischen Geographie der Moesia Inferior: 1.
Locus Subiati. 2. Vorovum Minus. – Studia Balcanica. Sofia 1970:55-60.
Velkov, V, 1974: V. Velkov. Der Kult der Diana Plestrensis in Moesia Inferior. – In: Actes du IX Con
grès International d’Etudes sur les Frontières romaines (Mamaia 1972). Köln-Wien-Bucharest 1974:
151153.
277
Velkov, V. 1978: V. Velkov. Die thrakische Stadt Bizye. – In: Studia in honorem Prof. Veselini Beševliev.
Sofia 1978:174-181.
Velkov, V. 1989: V. Velkov. Wulfila und die Gothi minores in Moesien. – Klio 71, No. 2, 1989:525-527.
Velkov, V., Alexandrov, G. 1988: V. Velkov, G. Alexandrov. ‚Venatio Caesariana‛. Eine neue Inschrift
aus Montana (Moesia Inferior). – Chiron, 18, München 1988:271-277.
Vulpe, R. 1976: R. Vulpe. Studia Thracologica. Bucharest 1976.
Wagner, W. 1938: W. Wagner. Dislokation der römischen Auxiliarformationen in den Provinzen Nori
cum, Pannonien, Moesien und Dakien. Berlin 1938.
Weiss, J. 1913: J. Weiss. Bauinschrift aus Troesmis. – JÖAI, XVI, Beibl., Wien 1913:209-210.
Weiss, P. 1977: P. Weiss. Neue Milit~rdiplome. – ZPE, 117, 1977: 227-268.
Weiss, P. 1999 a: P. Weis. Ein Diplom des Antoninus Pius für Moesia Inferior von Dez.145/ Dez. 146. –
ZPE, 124, 1999:279-286.
Weiss, P. 1999 b: P. Weiss. Diplomfragmente von Moesia Inferior. – ZPE, 124, 1999:287-292.
Welkow, W. 1955: W.Welkow. Nowe inskrypcje lacinskie z Montany (Moesia Inferior). – Archeologia
(Warszawa), VII, No 1, 1955:91-101.
Wendel 2005: M. Wendel. Karasura III: Die Verkehrsanbindung in frűhbyzantinischer Zeit (4.- 8.
Jh.n.Chr.). Langenweissbach 2005.
Wilkes, J. 1969: J. J. Wilkes. Dalmatia. London (Routledge) 1969.
Zahariade, M., N. Gudea 1997: M. Zahariade, N. Gudea. The Fortifications of Lower Moesia (A.D. 86-
275). Amsterdam 1997.
278

M O N T A N A Praesidium Regio Municipiu PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

M O N T A N A Praesidium Regio Municipiu PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

M O N T A N A Praesidium Regio Municipiu PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MONTANA

Praesidium, R egio, M unicipium

Military unit and personnel Province Date Reference

AD and have been interpreted as defensive fa­

territory of Montana‛ (Rankov, N. 1983:51-

We’ve already mentioned cohors I Montano-

Diploma Province Date Reference

In a few inscriptions, one of them dated pre­

Caess. M(ilia) p <..

Before AD 146 Montana had been a sta­ VІ/1. E t h n i c C o m p o s i t i o n

Western (Celtic origin) and maybe also from

In Montana there is data about a Roman­

The big sanctuary in Montana developed

and mountains and of course, of the hunt. She

lief marble image of the Horseman, almost life

Fig. 12. Dedication to Apollo, initiated by P. Ae­

Besides his dedications, there are naturally

let represents Dionysus next to Silvanus. A

Fig. 15. Dedication to Aesculapius and Hygieia by

Silvanus is an ancient Roman deity of wild

Fig. 23. Plan of Villa No 1 by Montana (after Александров, Г. 1983: 41)

Fig. 25. Plan of Villa No 3 by Montana (after Александров, Г. 1984:12, oбр. 1)

Western Bulgaria was definitely more intense

During the Roman age, and especially after

with a greyish shade was used for the bases of

lamis waving behind his shoulders and in his

top the fine putty follows; it is very thin (up

Х. Christianity of a togatus) and architectural elements. All

rooms were added later, two of which are

Fig. 34. Plan of the so called ‚Garrison church‛ in

The necropoles around Montana have not

Fig. 38. Tombstone of Ulpius Dometianus, soldier

Fig. 37. Tombstone of C. Valerius Felix,

Fig. 39. Tombstone, raised by Aelia Ge­

facility (including its reinforcement with an 1987:73 и обр. 2 – Жилище № 5/Dwelling No

LIST AND NUMBERING OF THE SETTLEMENTS MARKED IN MAPS

Александров, Г. 1970: Г. Александров. Антични паметници от Монтана (Михайловград). –

Божилова, В. 1976: В. Божилова, Надписи от светилището на Диана и Аполон при Монтана

Герасимова, В. 1970: В. Герасимова, Дислокация на римските помощни войски в провинция

Иванов, Р. 1999: Р. Иванов. Долнодунавската отбранителна система между Дортикум и

Машов, С. 1980: С. Машов. Августа. Augustae. Враца 1980.

Стоев, К. 2012: К. Стоев. Романизация на Горна и Долна Мизия по данни на антропонимията

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

AD and have been interpreted as defensive fa

In a few inscriptions, one of them dated pre

Before AD 146 Montana had been a sta VІ/1. E t h n i c C o m p o s i t i o n

In Montana there is data about a Roman

Fig. 12. Dedication to Apollo, initiated by P. Ae

Fig. 39. Tombstone, raised by Aelia Ge