Verfügbarkeit: Plemenske zajednice u Iliriku | Technische Universität München

Plemenske zajednice u Iliriku: predurbane administrativne strukture u rimskim provincijama između Jadrana i Dunava ; (I - III vek)

Gespeichert in:

Bibliographische Detailangaben
Beteilige Person:	Grbić, Dragana 1977- (VerfasserIn)
Format:	Buch
Veröffentlicht:	Beograd Balkanološki Inst. SANU 2014
Schriftenreihe:	Posebna izdanja / Balkanološki Institut 125
Schlagwörter:	Geschichte 1-300 Stammesgesellschaft Verwaltung Römisches Reich Illyrien
Links:	http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=027947317&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=027947317&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA
Beschreibung:	PST: Tribal communities in Illyricum. - In kyrill. Schr., serb. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache
Umfang:	386 S. Ill., graph. Darst., Kt. 24 cm
ISBN:	9788671790840

Internformat

MARC


LEADER	00000nam a2200000 cb4500
001	BV042512834
003	DE-604
005	20150505
007	t\|
008	150420s2014 xx abd\| \|\|\|\| 00\|\|\| srp d
020			\|a 9788671790840 \|9 978-86-7179-084-0
035			\|a (OCoLC)908617458
035			\|a (DE-599)BVBBV042512834
040			\|a DE-604 \|b ger
041	0		\|a srp
049			\|a DE-12
084			\|a 7,41 \|2 ssgn
100	1		\|a Grbić, Dragana \|d 1977- \|e Verfasser \|0 (DE-588)143868152 \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Plemenske zajednice u Iliriku \|b predurbane administrativne strukture u rimskim provincijama između Jadrana i Dunava ; (I - III vek) \|c Dragana Grbić
264		1	\|a Beograd \|b Balkanološki Inst. SANU \|c 2014
300			\|a 386 S. \|b Ill., graph. Darst., Kt. \|c 24 cm
336			\|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|b n \|2 rdamedia
338			\|b nc \|2 rdacarrier
490	1		\|a Posebna izdanja / Balkanološki Institut \|v 125
500			\|a PST: Tribal communities in Illyricum. - In kyrill. Schr., serb. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache
648		7	\|a Geschichte 1-300 \|2 gnd \|9 rswk-swf
650	0	7	\|a Stammesgesellschaft \|0 (DE-588)4338396-8 \|2 gnd \|9 rswk-swf
650	0	7	\|a Verwaltung \|0 (DE-588)4063317-2 \|2 gnd \|9 rswk-swf
651		7	\|a Römisches Reich \|0 (DE-588)4076778-4 \|2 gnd \|9 rswk-swf
651		7	\|a Illyrien \|0 (DE-588)4095923-5 \|2 gnd \|9 rswk-swf
689	0	0	\|a Römisches Reich \|0 (DE-588)4076778-4 \|D g
689	0	1	\|a Illyrien \|0 (DE-588)4095923-5 \|D g
689	0	2	\|a Stammesgesellschaft \|0 (DE-588)4338396-8 \|D s
689	0	3	\|a Verwaltung \|0 (DE-588)4063317-2 \|D s
689	0	4	\|a Geschichte 1-300 \|A z
689	0		\|5 DE-604
810	2		\|a Balkanološki Institut \|t Posebna izdanja \|v 125 \|w (DE-604)BV000007645 \|9 125
856	4	2	\|m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment \|q application/pdf \|u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=027947317&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA \|3 Inhaltsverzeichnis
856	4	2	\|m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment \|q application/pdf \|u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=027947317&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA \|3 Abstract
940	1		\|n oe
942	1	1	\|c 306.09 \|e 22/bsb \|f 09015 \|g 496
942	1	1	\|c 351.09 \|e 22/bsb \|f 09015 \|g 496
943	1		\|a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-027947317

Datensatz im Suchindex

_version_	1819361426901303296
adam_text	С а д ρ ж a j Увод .......................................... її 1. ИЗВОРИ ЗА ПЕРЕГРИНЕ ЗАЈЕДНИЦЕ ИЛИРИКА ........... ιγ í.i. ПЛИНИЈЕ СТАРИЈИ. Географске књиге Енциклопедије природе као извор за административну историју царства ....... ΐ9 í.i.i. Плинијева поглавља о Илирику .................. 20 í.i.i.i. Неколико спорних места код Плинија .............. 29 1.1.2. Плинијеви извори за dvžŕaŕes Далмацијеи Паноније ...... З2 1.1.2.1. Барон ................................... 35 1.1.2.2. Агрипина карта и Август ...................... Зб 1.1.2.3. Formulae provinciarum........................ 42 1.1.3. Историјски слојеви Плинијевог текста и спискови племенских заједница ................. 45 1.1.4- Спискови перегриних заједница код Плинија Старијег .... 50 1.1.4.1. Civitates quaefuerunt ......................... 5і 1.1.4-2. Перегрине заједнице у доба Принципата — формула из Августовог времена ................ 51 1.2. ДРУГИ КЊИШКИ ИЗВОРИ ЗА ПЕРЕГРИНЕ ЗАЈЕДНИЦЕ ДАЛМАЦИЈЕ И ПАНОНИЈЕ .... 54 1.2.1. Апијан .................................. 5б 1.2.2. Страбон ................................. 6ι 1.2.3- Клаудије Птолемеј .......................... 6з 1.3. ОДНОС КЊИШКИХ И ЕПИГРАФСКИХ ИЗВОРА ЗА ПЕРЕГРИНЕ ЗАЈЕДНИЦЕ ДАЛМАЦИЈЕ И ПАНОНИЈЕ .... 68 2. CIVITATES PEREGRINAE ИЗ ПЛИНИЈЕВОГ СПИСКА ........ γι 2.1. CIVITATES ДАЛМАЦИЈЕ .......................... γι 2.1.1. Civitates Скардонитанског конвента ............... γι 2.1.1.1. Civitas lapodum ............................ 72 Натписи 1-9.............................. 78 2.1.1.2. Civitates Liburniae ........................... 81 Натписи 10-13............................. 87 2.1.2. Civitates Салонитанског конвента................. 89 2.1.2.1. Civitas Delmatarum .......................... 89 Натписи 14-46............................. 1O4 2.1.2.2. Civitas Deurorum ............................ 113 2.1.2.3. Civitas Ditionum ............................ 115 Натписи 47-49............................. 119 2.1.2.4. Civitas Maezeor um........................... 120 Натписи 5О-57 ............................. 123 2.1.2.5- Civitas Sardeatium ........................... 126 Натписи 58-64............................. 13O 2.1.3. Civites Наронитанског конвента .................. іЗЗ 2.1.3.1. Civitas Cerauniorum.......................... 133 2.1.3.2. Civitas Daversorum........................... 134 Натписи 65-66............................. 137 2.1.3.3. Civitas Desitiatium........................... 139 Натписи 67-70............................. 143 2.1.3.4. Civitas Docleatium........................... 145 Натписи 71-74............................. 148 2.1.3.5. Civitas Deretinorum.......................... 149 Натпис 75................................ 150 2.1.3.6. Civitas Deraemistarum......................... 151 Натпис 76................................ 153 2.1.3.7. Civitas Dindariorum.......................... 153 Натпис j~j................................ 156 2.1.3.8. Civitas Glinditionum.......................... 156 2.1.3.9. Civitas Melcumanorum......................... 158 Натписи 78-79............................. i6i 2.1.3.10. Civitas Nare{n)siorum......................... 162 Натписи 80-81............................. i66 2.1.3.11. Civitas Scirtariorum.......................... 167 Натпис 82................................ i68 2.1.3.12. Civitas Siculotarum........................... 169 2.1.3.13. Civitas Vardaeiorum.......................... 170 2.2. CIVITATES ПАНОНИЈЕ ........................... 173 2.2.1. Civitates Паноније у Плинијевом списку ............. 174 Географски списак заједница Паноније ............. i74 2.2.1.1. Civitas Servetům ............................. 174 2.2.1.2. Civitas Serapillorum.......................... 176 2.2.1.3. Civitas lasorum............................. 177 Натписи 83-85............................. i82 2.2.1.4. Civitas Andizetum............................ 183 Натписи 86-88............................. 187 2.2.1.5. Civitas Colapianorum......................... 189 Натписи 89-93............................. 192 2.2.1.6. Civitas Breucorum........................... 194 Натписи 94-104............................ 199 „ Абецедна листа заједница Паноније .............. 203 2.2.1.7- Civitas Arviatium ............................ 203 2.2.1.8. Civitas Azaliorum ............................ 204 Натписи 105-126 ............................ 209 2.2.1.9. Civitas Amantinorum ......................... 223 НатПИС 127............................... 22б 2.2.1.10. Civitas Belgitum ............................ 227 2.2.1.11. Civitas Catariorum ........................... 227 2.2.1.12. Civitas Cornacatium .......................... 229 НатПИСИ 128-132............................ 232 2.2.1.13- Civitas Eraviscorum ........................... 235 Натписи 133-184 ............................ 241 2.2.1.14- Civitas Hercuniatium .......................... 266 Натпис 185 ............................... 267 2.2.1.15- Civitas Latobicorum ........................... 268 Натпис i86 ............................... 271 2.2.1.16. Civitas Oseriatium ........................... 271 2.2.1.17. Civitas Varcianorum .......................... 272 Натписи 187-191 ............................ 274 2.2.2. Civitates y Панонији ван Плинијевог списка ........... 276 2.2.2.1. Civitas Boiorum ............................. 276 Натписи 192-204 ........................... 279 2.2.2.2. Civitas Scordicorum ........................... 285 Натписи 205-210........................... 288 2.2.2-3- Cives CotinP. ............................... 291 3. УРЕЂЕЊЕ, ЖИВОТ И СУДБИНА ПЛЕМЕНСКИХ ЗАЈЕДНИЦА У ИЛИРИКУ У ДОБА ПРИНЦИП ATA ......... 293 3.1. ФОРМИРАЊЕ ПЕРЕГРИНИХ ЗАЈЕДНИЦА И РИМСКА ПОЛИТИКА ПРЕМА Д0МАЋЕМ СТАНОВНИШТВУ 293 3-1.1. Дефинисање територија перегриних заједница........... 298 3-1.2. Унутрашња организација перегриних заједница .......... 3°i 3.2. УПРАВА НАД ПЛЕМЕНСКИМ ЗАЈЕДНИЦАМА ........... Зоб 3-2.1. Војна управа над племенским заједницама ............. Зоб 3-2.2. Аутономија племенских заједница .................. Зо8 3-3- МЕСТО ПЛЕМЕНСКИХ ЗАЈЕДНИЦА ДАЛМАЦИЈЕ И ПАНОНИЈЕ У ПРОЦЕСУ УРБАНИЗАЦИЈЕ . ... 312 4- TRIBAL COMMUNITIES IN ILLYRICUM Pre-urban Administrative Structures in the Roman Provinces Between the Adriatic and the Danube .................... 319 Appendix: Реципијенти војничких диплома из племенских заједница Далмације и Паноније ............... 333 Конкорданце издања натписа .......................... 339 Места из античких писаца ............................ 342 ЛИТЕРАТУРА .................................... 345 Скраћенице .................................... 345 Издања текстова античких писаца ...................... 347 Библиографија.................................. 349 Индекс ......................................... 365 Илустрације ..................................... 379 TRIBAL COMMUNITIES IN ILLYRICUM Pre-urban Administrative Structures in the Roman Provinces Between the Adriatic and the Danube Summary This book represents an effort to supply, through a historical-epigraphic approach, an overview of data about the native communities (civitates peregrinae) in the Roman province of Illyricum during the Principate (first — third centuries ad), that is the provinces of Dalmaţia and Pannonia which were created by the division of Illyricum after the Dalmatian-Pannonian up¬ rising (ad 9). Today, this expansive area between the Adriatic and the Danube covers parts of Austria, Hungary, part of Slovenia, Croatia, Montenegro, parts of western Serbia and the north-western part of Albania. The communities discussed here are communities of natives, organized based on their tribal structure, whose inhabitants belonged to the indigenous population and were chiefly of peregrine status — legally speaking, foreigners in the Roman state.1 Some tribes (primarily in the maritime region) had a de¬ fined legal relationship with Rome since the time of the Republic, before Illyri¬ cum was formally organized as a province. The two most decisive stages in the transformation of tribes into peregrine civitates are Tiberius Pannonian war (bc 12-9) and the restructuring of the province after the Dalmatian-Pannoni¬ an uprising (ad 6-9). A large number of tribes of the interior were conquered during the Pannonian war. Those tribes were consequently transformed into peregrine communities and the province of Illyricum was expanded to the banks of the Danube. After the Dalmatian-Pannonian uprising, caused by heavy taxation and mass recruitment, was quelled in ad 9, the province of II- 1 This kind of administrative form is marked by the term civitas with the ethnonym in genitive plural (e.g., civitas Delmatarum, civitas Azaliorum, civitas Breucorum, etc.) or simply the ethno¬ nym in nominative plural (Delmatae, Eravisci). Scuhulten 1895, 515; Kornemann 1903,301-302. 32O Племенске заједнице у Илирику lyricum was divided into two provinces, later to be named Dalmaţia and Pan¬ nónia.2 Territories and borders of peregrine communities, now divided be¬ tween two provinces, were also redefined. The system introduced at this time remained, in most cases, current during the whole Principate. In consolidating the provinces, one of the priorities of the Roman ad¬ ministration was the organization of local populations. Organization here en¬ tails the forming of communities, delimiting their territories and imposing taxes. Although these civitates were organized based on their tribal structure and retained a certain degree of autonomy when dealing with internal matters, from the moment Roman rule was established they stopped being indepen¬ dent tribes and became defacto Roman administrative units. The primary goal of the Roman administration was to divide the indigenous population into administrative and legal units, which is the first step towards their integra¬ tion. The transformation of free tribes into civitates entailed the establishment of rule within territorial units and the establishment of required institutions. They mainly fell under the category of civitates stipendiariae or tributariae, depending on whether they were communities in sentorial or imperial prov¬ inces, which is to say liable to pay taxes and subject to the interference of the governor. The focus in this work is to situate in space and time all the native, non- Roman communities in Dalmaţia and the Pannonias, whose existences is con¬ firmed by evidence, and to create a corpus of communities of this area during the Principate. One of the crucial tasks in achieving this is determining, with the greatest possible precision, the exact position of peregrine communities and their territories. This is needed, firstly, to determine the geographic distri¬ bution of inscriptions for each community and, secondly, to be able to perceive the geopolitical and strategic logic of the Roman administration. Following from our first question is the issue of how the tribal communities were gov¬ erned over. It is, further, important to determine their ethnic composition, a matter inextricably linked with their formation. Special attention is given to questions of the continuity, the transformation and the Romanization of tribal communities or, conversely, recognizing the absence of these processes. One of the central issues is the question of how long the communities existed as in¬ dependent administrative units. Strictly speaking, the process of urbanization falls outside the scope of this book, however in certain places I have found it necessary to touch slightly upon the forming of towns on tribal territories and the complex issue of parallel existence of communities and towns, their mu¬ tual relations and, lastly, the matter of Latin rights of communities and towns formed on tribal territories. Pannonia was further divided into Upper and Lower Pannonia during the reign of Trajan. Драгана Грбић з21 Much has been written on the native population of the provinces of Dal¬ maţia and Pannonia in scholarship concerned with political history, onomas- tics, the army, ore-mining, Romanization, urbanization and so on; little could have been said about the tribal communities of this region without the results of such studies. In the category of synthetic scholarship, the most important works are G. Alfoldys Bevölkerung und Gesellschaft der römischen Provinz Dalmatien (1965X3 and A. Mócsy s Die Bevölkerung von Pannonién bis zu den Markomannenkriegen (1959).4 The main focus of these books is the Romani¬ zation of the indigenous populations of these provinces. They presented and interpreted the chief results of research at the time of their writing, and laid the foundations for further research. However, more than half a century has passed since these studies had first been published. Since then, a significant quantity of new epigraphic evidence has come to light, evidence which allows us to confirm or abandon some of the earlier premises, and to draw new con¬ clusions as well. Furthermore, a more detailed analysis of Pliny s chapters dem¬ onstrates that some things might be interpreted differently than heretofore. Of the ancient sources I have used, the greatest emphasis has been laid on epigraphic documents and chapters from book three of Pliny the Elder s Natural History {Naturalis historia), which allow us to know with certainty the number of the communities and their names. The reason why these several chapters from Pliny s geographical books, which reflect mostly the situation in the first half of the first century ad, are a first-rate source for peregrine com¬ munities lies in the fact that Pliny used official documents. His geographical books in fact, present a rather important source for the way provinces were organized as well as for the status of provincial communities and towns, which is to say as a source for the ethnography and the provincial history of the Em¬ pire. Pliny provides lists of communities taken over from official documents, the provincial formulas {formulae provinciarum), making them for that reason a significant source for research of provincial communities and for adminis¬ trative history in general. Therefore, in the case of Illyricum as well, Pliny s chapters are an important starting point in research of the issues concerning the indigenous populations of Dalmaţia and Pannonia, and how these were integrated into the Roman state. The lists of communities this author provides testify to the existence of about fifty peregrine civitates in the provinces of Dalmaţia and Pannonia. The majority of those communities have been epi- graphically attested as well. In addition, with the support of epigraphy, their continued existence can be followed throughout the first three centuries after 3 J. J. Wilkes capital monograph on the province of Dalmaţia (1969) is firmly based on Alföldys results and conclusions in regard to the native structures. 4 The monograph on Pannonia and Upper Moesia from 1974 chiefly summs up the results of his earlier book. 322 Племенске заједнице у Илирику Christ, as can their life and the process of Romanization; or we can, on the other hand, observe some legal and administrative changes which might have affected them. Epigraphic evidence on native civitates is, chiefly, much younger than the lists of communities provided by Pliny. The lists themselves mostly reflect the situation from the time of Augustus. Data contemporary to the au¬ thor — which might in turn have testified to a change in status of some of the communities up to the Flavian era — are almost completely absent from the chapters at hand or appear only in the form of a few scattered traces. A thor¬ ough analysis of all of the source material shows that most of the tribal com¬ munities from Pliny s lists are epigraphically attested. Only a few communities remain without epigraphic attestation, which might indicate that either they had not maintained their status as autonomous administrative units for long, or more likely that they merely left no trace behind them on account of their small populations which were, furthermore, likely only quite slightly Roman¬ ized, if they were Romanized at all The book is divided into three parts. (§1) The first part discusses the sources that testify to the tribes in Dal¬ maţia and Pannonia — the literary sources first and foremost. As already mentioned, the greatest focus is on Pliny s chapters from the third book of his Natural History (NH III 129-152, § 1.1; § 1.1.1) discussing these provinces. An analysis of these chapters should make it possible to date the information on the communities with greater precision and, to the extent that that is possible, link the groups of data with the sources they are derived from. In chapter § 1.1.1.1, 1 reconsider some places from Pliny s chapters which present with prob¬ lems in the manuscript tradition, places which are nevertheless important for the identification of some tribes. In chapter § 1.1.2, 1 discuss the issues of Pliny s sources for the civitates of Dalmaţia and Pannonia. Special attention is given to the most important sources: Varro (§ 1.1.2.1), Agrippas map (§ 1.1.2.2.) and the formulae provinciarum (§1.1.2.3). Next, it was necessary to define more clearly the historical layers of the text (§ 1.1.4.) and, in these layers, separate the lists of peregrine communities as they were during the Principate (§ 1.1.4.2.) — which form part of my research in this study — from the historical layer reflecting the situation in the Republican era (§ 1.1.4.1.) — to which belong the names of communities Pliny mentions as civitates quae fuerunt. Lastly, I consider the important matter of identifying communities from Pliny s lists with tribes mentioned by other authors writing about the tribes and their communities in this region — Appian (§ 1.2.1), Strabo (§ 1.2.2) and Claudius Ptolemy (§ 1.2.3) — so that data derived from narrative sources can be compared with Pliny s records and epigraphic evidence (§ 1.3). The second part, titled (§ 2), Civitates peregrinae from Pliny s List , dis¬ cusses the peregrine communities of Dalmaţia and Pannonia, and forms the core of the book. This whole part is conceived as a catalogue of peregrine com- Драгана Грбић 323 munities, including a catalogue of inscriptions (nos. 1-210). Their order fol¬ lows Pliny s lists. The communities of Dalmaţia (§ 2.1) are, as in Pliny s account, divided into three conventus iuridici: conventus Scardonae (§ 2.1.1), conventus Salonae (§ 2.1.2), and conventus Naronae (§2.1.3). The civitates of Pannonia (§ 2.2) are, then, divided into two categories: those that are mentioned by Pliny (§ 2.2.1) and those that are not but are otherwise attested (§ 2.2.2). The communi¬ ties belonging to the first group are subdivided according to Pliny s lists, which I have classified as a) the alphabetical list (NH III 147), and b) the geographical list (NH III 148). The epigraphic texts are, for greater ease of use, grouped according to the civitas they relate to and are placed after certain chapters; I have also pro¬ vided continuous numeration for them. The catalogue contains only the most important inscriptions: monuments that explicitly mention individual civi¬ tates; their organizational units; or individual members of communities whose origo is mentioned in the text; and, in smaller numbers as they are more rare, those monuments which can be securely linked to the community in question. In my research, I have also considered such monuments as were found in ter¬ ritories ascribed to specific communities, in order to analyze the ethnic origin and the legal status of their populations, their administrative organization and any changes that possibly affected them, including the creation of municipia with Roman or Latin rights in tribal territories, and so on. However, deter¬ mining territorial borders is not always such an easy task. It is at times unclear whether inscriptions can and should be ascribed to a given community based on their geographical or chronological distribution. This is possible only when the text includes the name of the communities or the ethnicons, or ifit can be otherwise safely confirmed that the place of discovery belongs to the civitas in question. I have, consequently, considered such inscriptions in my study but left them out of the catalogue. (§ 3) The third part — Organization, Life and Fate of Tribal Commu¬ nities in Illyricum during the Principate — contains my final reflexions. It is comprised of several synthetic chapters which concisely discuss the central issues relating to tribal communities in these provinces. These conclusions can be briefly summarized as follows. (§ 3.1) During the consolidation of the province, one of the priorities of the Roman administration was the organization of the local population. Or¬ ganization here entails the forming of communities, delimiting their territories and imposing taxes. The chief goal was to place the indigenous population into an administrative and legal framework, which is the first step towards their integration into the Roman state. To transform free tribes into peregrine communities meant to establish rule within geographical units and to establish the required institutions within these administrative units, throughout the Ro¬ man province. While the civitates were indeed organized based on their tribal 324 Племенске заједнице у Илирику structure and retained a certain degree of autonomy when dealing with inter¬ nal matters, they stopped being tribes as soon as Roman rule had been estab¬ lished, and they became, instead, Roman administrative units. Some stages in the founding of peregrine communities are described by Tacitus (Tac. Agrie. 21). In discussing Corbulo s efforts to organize the Frisians as a peregrine com¬ munity, Tacitus, among other things, says: senatum, magistratus, leges imposuit (Tac. Ann. XI 19). Further, in Agrícola, he describes the process of transform¬ ing native tribes into civitates in Britain, as well as their Romanization, which can be taken as a model for this mechanism. Examples can, of course, be found elsewhere as well. All jurisdiction in the province was in the hands of the governor, and only matters of lesser importance could be resolved within the communities themselves. With this in mind, an important step in the organization of a pro¬ vincial population was to introduce juridical districts — conventus iuridici, iurisdictiones. The seats of juridical districts were in towns, and they would be periodically visited by the governor so he could preside over trials and perform other duties concerning the petitions and requests of provincial communities, as well as some other tasks. Pliny the Elder testifies to the existence of conven¬ tus iuridici in three Spanish provinces, Dalmaţia and Asia. They are further attested by epigraphic documents in several other provinces; nonetheless it is generally considered that they existed in all the provinces. Members of the native communities were obliged to perform certain duties for the Roman state, including the payment of taxes, enlistment in mili¬ tary units, and others as well, depending on the circumstances: for example, working in the ore-mines and quarries, or maintaining the roads, the system of the ripa and so on. In some places the process of pacification went ahead with¬ out any disturbances, while in some cases severe measures had to be taken, such as confiscating tribal lands, displacements of the population, enforced recruitment, forced labour and so on. Concerning a systematic displacement of native peoples, one can point to the example of the dislocation of the Ar- diaeu belonging to a period earlier than the one discussed here. According to the testimony of Strabo and Pliny, the population was reduced and moved into the interior, where they were forced to cultivate infertile soil. During the Principate they formed a rather minuscule peregrine community (§ 2.1.3.13.), whose territory in this period it is, furthermore, exceedingly difficult to locate. After the Dalmatian-Pannonian uprising was suppressed, the powerful tribe of the Pirustae, dwelling in the eastern part of Illyricum (Liv. XLV 26; Veil. Pat. II 115.1) did not have an autonomous community. Contrary to the opinions of Alföldy, Wilkes and others, namely that after Batos revolt the Pirustae were broken up into three communities — the Ceraunii (§ 2.1.3.1), the Scirtarii (§ 2.1.3.11) and the Siculotae (§ 2.1.3.12) — their territory may in fact have been incorporated into the imperial domain in metalliferous eastern Dalmaţia. Dis- Драгана Грбић 325 placement and forced labour befell other tribes, e.g. the tribe of the Delma¬ tae who, however, preserved their autonomous civitas. In all probability, one ought to suppose a rather expansive area throughout which the Delmatae were displaced: for, besides the belt around the river Drina, and the extreme East of Dalmaţia (§ 2.1.3.12, civitas Siculotarum), they were also moved into the region belonging to the Desidiates, which is to say to another area with thriving min¬ ing activity. It is evident that we should assume several stages of displacement during the first and second centuries ad. The Pirustae, the Delmatae and the Sardeates were transported into mining areas of Dacia throughout the second century, where they have left epigraphic evidence. Besides Dacia, we must as¬ sume that the Delmatae were present in the ore-mines of Upper Moesia as well. Undoubtedly, there had been other cases of such displacement of indigenous populations, albeit ones that have been less plainly documented. It is, however, possible that some tribes could have been treated bet¬ ter than others since the very beginning. A more favourable treatment was dependent on the tribes relationship, which is to say the tribal aristocracy s relationship, with Rome. That would seem to be the case with the Eravisci and Azali, judging, for instance, by the fact that they were allowed to mint coins with their ethnicon. They had been in a more favourable position compared to other tribes since the beginning of the first century; this state of affairs is confirmed by epigraphic evidence for this civitas as well, which retained its special status up to the end of the third century (§ 2.2.1.13). Further, Vespasian rewarded loyal populations of Pannonia, the ones that had supported him dur¬ ing the civil war of 68-69, with privileges in the form of citizenship and Latin rights, and by founding towns as well. (§ 3.1.1) The demarcation of the borders of peregrine civitates, which covered a significant portion of the total provincial territory, was an important step: their territories had to be drawn into the cadastral plan (forma provin¬ ciáé), which required that a taxable territory be surveyed and well-defined (cf. Hyg. 205L; P. Brunt, JRS 71,1981,171 = 345: CIL X 3852). Every civitas was taken to form a single unit, and the demarcation of individual peregrine communi¬ ties was typically achieved by using the gromatic formula ager per extremi- tatem mensura comprehensus. This formula refers to surveying the terrain by its outer borders (Front. Deagr. qual. I 4 . FIRA 85). Ethnic and tribal borders did not have to, as a rule, serve as the chief pa¬ rameter in the division of the provincial land and the delimiting of the borders of territories. When demarcating borders, just as in other considerations, Ro¬ mans were led by political and geostrategic reasons of a practical nature. Some tribes could be divided between several administrative units or, conversely, several tribes could be combined into a single community. Strabo (XIII 4.12) testifies to such practices. In a passage that discusses organizing conventus iu- ridici in Asia, he says that Rome gave no heed to the original borders between 32б Племенске заједнице у Илирику the tribes. With the establishment of peregrine civitates in the reorganization of the province after the Dalmatian-Pannonian uprising, there was a tendency to create larger territorial units by joining several disbanded autonomous civi¬ tates into a larger administrative unit on the one hand, while on the other we can clearly observe in some places a fragmentation of larger ethnic units into smaller communities. Opposing as these measures might appear at first blush, they are in fact governed by the same principle. The Romans generally tended to establish a system that would be as efficient as possible and would retain its vitality for as long as possible, which often entailed artificial divisions and was dependent on circumstances on the ground. Accordingly, two types of native communities can be discerned: (b) civitates created from tribes, containing whole ethnic groups; and (b) civitates created by a political intervention by the Roman state, with populations typically separated out of a larger ethnic group. The reorganization of the provincial structures began immediately upon the quashing of the uprising in ad 9. Tiberius started to put things in order in the province but his efforts were interrupted by Augustus death (Veil. Pat. II 123.1-2); for this reason he sent his son Drusus in his place (Veil. Pat. II 125.4; Tac. Ann. II 44.1; II 48.5). The greatest engagement in the matter of reorgani¬ zation is traced to P. Cornelius Dolabella, who was the governor of Dalmaţia during Tiberius reign. It was during Dolabellas governorship (ad 14-21) that the cadastral plan was drawn up — the forma Dolabelliana (ILJug 874); some later governors would refer back to this plan when intervening in disputes be¬ tween provincial communities.5 Many boundary inscriptions provide invalu¬ able testimony to the delimiting of territories, and frequently to the internal structuring of the communities. (§3.1.2) There were no significant alterations in the way of life of the tribal communities after Roman rule had been established. The changes brought on by Romanitas were usually slow to come, especially in places where a proper urban setting was lacking and where there was no greater outside influence. Native institutions in the communities indeed had Latin names, nevertheless they remained, in essence, indigenous. It would do well, now, to consider the opinion that the social division within the communities of Dalmaţia was decuria-gens-civitas, while in Pan¬ nónia it was centuria-gens-civitas. This opinion is founded on a combina¬ tion of the information on decuriae from Pliny s list (Plin. NH III § 141-142) and several epigraphic documents. The fact remains that we cannot with full certainty say what Pliny s decuriae are supposed to denote. It is, in fact, less 5 Cf. § 2.4. In adjudicating such a lawsuit, the governor of the province would assign a iudex (iudex datus...), while the surveying was typically entrusted to a legionary centurion or to an auxiliary officer. Драгана Грбић 327 likely that these decuriae can be ascribed to an indigenous social division, as is assumed by some scholars. Considering the manner in which Pliny men¬ tions tribal civitates of the two juridical districts of Dalmaţia {viribus discriptis in decurias, Plin. NH III 142), the terms may in fact be designating the size of the free population in numbers, for fiscal and military purposes, and not as the social division of these tribes. A striking parallel to such comprehen¬ sive statistical data on communities given by Pliny is provided in his chapter which discusses the conventus iuridici of Hispánia Citerior (Plin. NH III 28); there he gives the number of free people in individual communities: hominum liberorum capitum tot. The term centuria, mentioned in the inscription from Petrovac (no. i24)is more likely to stand for a centuria of hostages, rather than indicating the social division of Pannonian communities. Regarding the issue of territorial organization of the peregrine commu¬ nities themselves, epigraphic material testifies to the fact that the civitates in Illyrican provinces, as far as their internal territorial structure goes, were sub¬ divided into smaller organizational units: pagi, vici, castella, just as in the other provinces. The names of individual settlements of all three types are known, as are their governing structures (e.g. magistri vici, magistri pagi, princeps cas¬ telli). While the whole territory of a given community was considered a single unit in its relationship with the state, first and foremost in the matter of taxes and other duties, the tribal territory nevertheless consisted of a series of small¬ er units, mainly rural ones. The form of territorial division in Dalmaţia best attested is the castellum. Inscriptions mention inhabitants of numerous castella among the Delmatae: Barizaniates, Lizaviates, BariduumlBaridustae, castel- lum Plana, Osiniates, castellum Starva, Tariona/Tariotae, and so on; among the Docleatae, Salthua castellum has been attested; among the Desidiates, Hedum castellum, and so on. The terms regio and territorium are used in the context of various territorial categories: tribal, urban, ore-mining, military, and so on. In connexion to peregrine communities, territorium has been attested in several inscriptions, although, apparently, it is not used as a terminus technicus. (§ 3.2) In the first century ad, peregrine communities were placed un¬ der the control of Roman officers, the praefecti civitatium. This function was sometimes performed by legionary centurions or prefects of auxiliary units stationed on the territory of the civitas or in its vicinity. The principle govern¬ ing the appointment of a prefect of a peregrine community, and the question of whether several communities in the same region would be under the control of the same prefect, are known to us only in the roughest of sketches. Based on the sources available, we can observe a number of alternate forms; however, very little can be said of the system which determined the selection of prefects. It is possible that the praefecti civitatium were appointed according to local needs. Numerous examples indicate that several peregrine communities, most often neighbouring ones, could be entrusted to the rule of a single prefect. 32.8 Племенске заједнице у Илирику Such is the case, for instance, of Baebius Atticus who, as the primus pilus of the legion V Macedonica in the reign of Claudius, was the prefect of the peregrine civitates Moesiae et Treballiae in the neighbouring province of Moesia, and af¬ ter that he was the prefect of the civitatium in Alpis Maritumis {CIL V 1838 and 1839). His experience in governing over the peregrine communities in Moesia was clearly decisive in his appointment to the prefecture over the Alpine per¬ egrine communities. Such prefecture is attested among the Iapodes and the Li- burni in Dalmaţia during the Dalmatian-Pannonian uprising. A single prefect is attested, bello Batoniano, as presiding over these two communities (no. 2). Further, we know that, during Nero s reign, a certain [—] Marcellus was the preaefectus civitatium of the Maezaei and the Daesidiates, with the addition of another Dalmatian peregrine community — most likely of the Melcumani (no. 51). In Pannonia, a military prefecture is attested for the community of the ColapianU governed over by a centurion of the Legio XIII Gemina (no. 89), a L. Antonius Naso; L. Volcatius Primus (no. 105, 106) was the praefectus ripae Danuvii et civitatium Boiorum et Azaliorum early in the Flavian epoch, which shows that Danubian peregrine communities were co-ordinated with the ripa Danuvii. It is generally assumed that military control over the native structures ceased by the end of the first century. A. Mócsy surmised that the cessation of military rule over peregrine communities of southern and western Pannonia was linked to the founding of towns under the Flavians. However, many of the communities never gained municipal status and remained peregrine. It would be advisable, then, to discuss the end of military rule over peregrine civitates somewhat more cautiously. While it is true that military prefects of communities are no longer featured in inscriptions in the Flavian era at the latest, the civitates for which prefects have been attested did not in fact change their status. The cessation of military control is most likely linked to socio¬ political circumstances in the province. As there was no longer any danger of insurrections, the tribal aristocracies remained loyal to the Roman administra¬ tion. Aside from that, the large number of Italian colonists in regional urban centres, army veterans settled in the area, and the standing armies, all acted as a factor of Romanization of the indigenous structures. A continued mode of control can, however, be observed in the third century. In addition to mili¬ tary prefects, the peregrine communities of some areas might be entrusted to centuriones regionarii (nos. 107,108, cf. § 3.2.1, Tab. 2); they were tasked with military and administrative supervision over an area {regio) which lacked civic institutions. These are attested in other provinces as well, in connexion to the governing of peregrine communities and civic structures in general. After military prefects were no longer appointed to rule over the per¬ egrine communities, governing was given over to a council of native chiefs {principes). The council members were chosen from the tribal aristocracy, loy¬ al to the Roman administration. The council was entrusted with lower ranking Драгана Грбић з29 law-trials (iure gentium) and the internal organization of the community. They were, in addition, responsible for gathering taxes for their civitas, which was possibly the main task of this body. The term used for the leaders of peregrine communities: princeps, prin¬ ceps civitatis is attested in all of the western provinces. Occasionally, native terminology is used instead of the Roman one, for instance in Gallic commu¬ nities — vergobret. Some scholars have conjectured that among the Pannon¬ ian Eravisci (§ 2.2.1.13, no. 140) an ar(e)m{agos) is likely attested, however the restoration of that abbreviation is questionable. In the sources for Illyricum, this institution is generally marked by the word princeps, and only in the com¬ munity of the Iapodes do we find a function named praepositus as well (cf. § 3.2.2,Table 3). A number of tribal chiefs of the Iapodes bear the title princeps et praepositus Iapodum; Alföldy (1965, 40-41) was of the opinion that principes I praefecti could preside over certain Iapodian settlements (πόλεις) or other organizational units, with a praepositus as their superior.The only parallel to this case is to be found among the Scordisci, where we have an attestation for one T. Flavius Proculus (no. 205), with his title of princeps praefectus. Judging by the epigraphic material, the nature of the function of the tribal principes was collégial. In the community of the Azali two chiefs of the community are attested: Aurel(ii) Vegabius et Valentis (no. 111); one document mentions two tribal principes for the community of the Boii (170): Caledo Sammonis and Cobromarus Tosiae (cf. § 3.2.2, Table 4a). Inscriptions show that principes governed over individual settlements within the peregrine community (§ 2.1.2.1), as observed already in the exam¬ ple of the Docleatae, where we have attestation for Agirrus Epicadif. princeps k{astelli) Salthua(e) (no. 72). G. Alföldy (1965,177) offered a similar inference for the community of the Iapodes, concluding that praepositi may have pre¬ sided over a body formed by the principes. In the matter of the citizenship status of the tribal aristocracy, monu¬ ments show that some principes would indeed be awarded Roman citizenship, while the names of some chiefs are written in their peregrine forms. Most of the native chiefs who were also Roman citizens bear the imperial gentile name {Flavius, Cocceius, Ulpius, Aelius, Aurelius). In the majority of cases those are individuals who had been awarded Roman citizenship. Regarding this, we should mention the important military diploma dat¬ ed April 5th, 71 (no. 170), issued to the centurion Velagenus Covionis ƒ. from the tribe of the Eravisci. Among the signed witnesses of the diploma, there are ňve principes of Pannonian peregrine communities of the Iasi, Andizeti, Brueci and Boii: (1) T. Flavi Sereni princiipis) lasorum, (2) Licconis Davi f. princiipis) Breucorum; (3) CaledonisSammonis f. princiipis) Boiorum; (4) Cobromari To- siaef. princiipis) Boioru<m>; (5) Breuci Isticani f . princiipis) Antizit{ium). Of the five chiefs mentioned in the document, only the princeps of the community Племенске заједнице у Илирику of the łasi bears tria nomina, while the names of the other tribal leaders are all peregrine. The fact that the testes of this diploma are not Roman citizens places this document among the special cases. One of the two native chiefs of the Boii community who signed the diploma is attested on a number of epi- graphic monuments from the home territory of his own community. In these monuments our Cobromarus Tosiae ƒ. is remembered as T. Flavius Cobroma- rusy which is to say a person with Roman citizenship; members of his family were, however, still peregrini (§ 2.2.2.1). It is a conceivable inference that the other chiefs were individually awarded Roman citizenship when they testified, as a reward for their support to the Flavian party (§ 3.3) Romanization is the process of acculturation of an indigenous population through different mechanisms, and it influences all spheres of life, including spiritual and material culture. The impact of Romanization can be observed in the knowledge and use of the Latin language, the acceptance of Roman cults, adjusting names to correspond to Roman naming conventions, adopting an epigraphic habit and, finally, in the process of urbanization. This process did not evolve everywhere at the same rate; accordingly, its results dif¬ fered in different areas, which we must ascribe to local circumstances. The social level and the level of political structuring were not equal among all the tribes which were transformed into civitates in the first century. One must first presuppose social, economic, military and other reasons, all of which acted as a Romanizing influence on the indigenous population. It is worth repeating Sherwin-Whites (1973, 222) statement that: Loyalty to Rome is marked in the West and in the Danubian provinces by a process which, though commonly called Romanization, is really self-Romanization . Reasons to preserve tribal communities and the peregrine status of the populations could be many. First of all, we can assume one of those reasons was the mobilization of peregrines for the auxilia. Further, various economic interests may have been in play, especially when it concerns finding the appro¬ priate workforce for labour in the ore-mines. There are a number of important, general preconditions for one peregrine community to attain municipal status. The first condition was the existence of a settlement of an urban type; next, the presence of a higher, Romanized indigenous social class, which was capable, with its numbers and its finances, to form the urban aristocracy, which is to say to participate in the civic government; and, lastly, a sufficient number of Ro¬ man citizens, a significant number of whom ought to be settlers. The support of patrons could also be an important factor among the successful petitions. A preparatory adaptation stage was necessary first. At the beginning of the first century, these conditions were fulfilled only by communities in Liburnia; consequently, many peregrine civitates in this area were granted municipal status already in the first century. When it comes to Pannonia, however, in the first century urban structures existed only on the western and southern Драгана Грбић edges of Pannonia — areas with the greatest traffic and communications, and larger concentrations of Roman settlers. The proximity of a settlement to wa¬ terways was another important factor in its socio-economic development and urbanization. One wave of municipalization occurred during the reign of the Flavians. The sheer number of the municipiu Aelia speaks to the importance of Hadrian for the urbanization of the province; according to available infor¬ mation, he founded eight municipiu in Pannonia, which is not necessarily the final number (three of those municipiu were attested only in the second half of the previous century). The founding of several towns in Dalmaţia can also be traced back to this emperor s reign. Several towns were founded during the reign of Marcus Aurelius and emperors of the Severan dynasty. A town founded on the territory of any given tribal civitas need not in¬ corporate the whole community. It is wholly conceivable that smaller commu¬ nities could be integrated whole. However, this cannot be taken to be a strict rule, as is further implied in the cases of some smaller communities which, in all likelihood, did not change their administrative status. Epigraphic material suggests that, in a great number of cases, the civitas continued to exist while only part of the tribal territory was taken from the community and joined to the civic unit. For instance, the territory belonging to the community of the Delmatae, which covered a rather expansive area, saw the founding of multiple towns: Rider, Delimnium, Salvium, Mangům. They were formed by the urbani¬ zation of individual settlements in the tribal territory, and probably fulfilled the conditions for municipal status by being awarded Latin rights. Epigraphic monuments originating from the territories of these towns show that the na¬ tive element formed the majority of the population, a great number of whom did not possess Roman citizenship. The tribal territory of the lapodes was frag¬ mented in much the same way, creating several municipiu . Metulum, Arupium and perhaps Raetinum; however, information on them is quite scarce. The ter¬ ritory of the Iasiy possibly in the reign of Hadrian, saw the founding of the municipium lasorum. From the thermal springs located near the settlement was created the municipium Aquae, on the territory of the Daesidiates in Dal¬ maţia (§ 2.1.3.3). There are no clear indications, for either town, on whether the urban territory encompassed the whole peregrine community. However, urbanization did not necessarily entail the dissolution of the peregrine com¬ munity. Epigraphic evidence indicates that most peregrine communities were maintained after the towns were founded, which is to say that they were not incorporated into the newly founded municipia. More recent epigraphic testi¬ monies (largely military diplomas, which are official documents that, further¬ more, allow reliable dating) shows that some communities indeed still existed after the founding of towns on their territories or in their immediate vicinity; these towns were previously thought to have encompassed the neighbouring tribal civitates. For example, the community of the Andizetes is epigraphically 332 Племенске заједнице у Илирику attested in ad 154, while the colony oïMursa was founded already in the reign of Hadrian {CIL III 3279 = 10260. Steph. Byz. 458). Civitas Boiorum is attested in the year ad 145, during the reign of Antoninus Pius, which is also a later date than the time when the towns surrounding it were founded (§ 2.2.2.1). A document was recently discovered which extends the terminus ad quem for the existence of the community of the Scordisci to ad 146, that is after the presumed founding-date of the municipium of Bassianae, also occurring dur¬ ing Hadrians reign (§ 2.2.2.2). The community of the Breuci (§ 2.2.1.6) was also likely preserved, though diminished, since it is difficult to imagine that Cibalae covered the whole territory of the community, which appears to have been rather vast. In addition, the community of the Cornacates still existed in the middle of the second century. The civitas Eraviscorum is epigraphically at¬ tested throughout the third century. All these examples speak to the continued existence of civitates in this area. After the founding of towns, tribal communities might have been left with reduced territories, but they would continue to exist as administrative and political units. It can be safely assumed that this was the case also with numerous communities which cannot be linked to any sort of urban structure. Their administrative status did not change after the Constitutio Antoniniana, at a time when the significance of the sharp contrast between towns of differing legal statuses had already begun to fade. In conclusion, it would do well to note that this topic, by its very nature complex and extensive, in many ways exceeds the more modest limits imposed on this book. Many questions and problems were left aside so that the results of the main direction of my research could be presented as succinctly and effec¬ tively as possible. Hopefully, the documentation collected for these purposes, as well as the book itself — whatever its limitations — will prove themselves useful in further research.
any_adam_object	1
author	Grbić, Dragana 1977-
author_GND	(DE-588)143868152
author_facet	Grbić, Dragana 1977-
author_role	aut
author_sort	Grbić, Dragana 1977-
author_variant	d g dg
building	Verbundindex
bvnumber	BV042512834
ctrlnum	(OCoLC)908617458 (DE-599)BVBBV042512834
era	Geschichte 1-300 gnd
era_facet	Geschichte 1-300
format	Book
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>02376nam a2200493 cb4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV042512834</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20150505 </controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t\|</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">150420s2014 xx abd\| \|\|\|\| 00\|\|\| srp d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9788671790840</subfield><subfield code="9">978-86-7179-084-0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)908617458</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV042512834</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">srp</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">7,41</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Grbić, Dragana</subfield><subfield code="d">1977-</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)143868152</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Plemenske zajednice u Iliriku</subfield><subfield code="b">predurbane administrativne strukture u rimskim provincijama između Jadrana i Dunava ; (I - III vek)</subfield><subfield code="c">Dragana Grbić</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Beograd</subfield><subfield code="b">Balkanološki Inst. SANU</subfield><subfield code="c">2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">386 S.</subfield><subfield code="b">Ill., graph. Darst., Kt.</subfield><subfield code="c">24 cm</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="490" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Posebna izdanja / Balkanološki Institut</subfield><subfield code="v">125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">PST: Tribal communities in Illyricum. - In kyrill. Schr., serb. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="648" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1-300</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Stammesgesellschaft</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4338396-8</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Verwaltung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4063317-2</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Römisches Reich</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4076778-4</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Illyrien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4095923-5</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Römisches Reich</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4076778-4</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Illyrien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4095923-5</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Stammesgesellschaft</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4338396-8</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="3"><subfield code="a">Verwaltung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4063317-2</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1-300</subfield><subfield code="A">z</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="810" ind1="2" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Balkanološki Institut</subfield><subfield code="t">Posebna izdanja</subfield><subfield code="v">125</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-604)BV000007645</subfield><subfield code="9">125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=027947317&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltsverzeichnis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=027947317&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="n">oe</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">306.09</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09015</subfield><subfield code="g">496</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">351.09</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09015</subfield><subfield code="g">496</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="943" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-027947317</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
geographic	Römisches Reich (DE-588)4076778-4 gnd Illyrien (DE-588)4095923-5 gnd
geographic_facet	Römisches Reich Illyrien
id	DE-604.BV042512834
illustrated	Illustrated
indexdate	2024-12-20T17:13:14Z
institution	BVB
isbn	9788671790840
oai_aleph_id	oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-027947317
oclc_num	908617458
open_access_boolean
owner	DE-12
owner_facet	DE-12
physical	386 S. Ill., graph. Darst., Kt. 24 cm
publishDate	2014
publishDateSearch	2014
publishDateSort	2014
publisher	Balkanološki Inst. SANU
record_format	marc
series2	Posebna izdanja / Balkanološki Institut
spellingShingle	Grbić, Dragana 1977- Plemenske zajednice u Iliriku predurbane administrativne strukture u rimskim provincijama između Jadrana i Dunava ; (I - III vek) Stammesgesellschaft (DE-588)4338396-8 gnd Verwaltung (DE-588)4063317-2 gnd
subject_GND	(DE-588)4338396-8 (DE-588)4063317-2 (DE-588)4076778-4 (DE-588)4095923-5
title	Plemenske zajednice u Iliriku predurbane administrativne strukture u rimskim provincijama između Jadrana i Dunava ; (I - III vek)
title_auth	Plemenske zajednice u Iliriku predurbane administrativne strukture u rimskim provincijama između Jadrana i Dunava ; (I - III vek)
title_exact_search	Plemenske zajednice u Iliriku predurbane administrativne strukture u rimskim provincijama između Jadrana i Dunava ; (I - III vek)
title_full	Plemenske zajednice u Iliriku predurbane administrativne strukture u rimskim provincijama između Jadrana i Dunava ; (I - III vek) Dragana Grbić
title_fullStr	Plemenske zajednice u Iliriku predurbane administrativne strukture u rimskim provincijama između Jadrana i Dunava ; (I - III vek) Dragana Grbić
title_full_unstemmed	Plemenske zajednice u Iliriku predurbane administrativne strukture u rimskim provincijama između Jadrana i Dunava ; (I - III vek) Dragana Grbić
title_short	Plemenske zajednice u Iliriku
title_sort	plemenske zajednice u iliriku predurbane administrativne strukture u rimskim provincijama izmedu jadrana i dunava i iii vek
title_sub	predurbane administrativne strukture u rimskim provincijama između Jadrana i Dunava ; (I - III vek)
topic	Stammesgesellschaft (DE-588)4338396-8 gnd Verwaltung (DE-588)4063317-2 gnd
topic_facet	Stammesgesellschaft Verwaltung Römisches Reich Illyrien
url	http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=027947317&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=027947317&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA
volume_link	(DE-604)BV000007645
work_keys_str_mv	AT grbicdragana plemenskezajedniceuilirikupredurbaneadministrativnestruktureurimskimprovincijamaizmeđujadranaidunavaiiiivek

Verfügbarkeit

‌

Inhaltsverzeichnis