of Amisias = the present Ems, situated at the head of the homonymous
river. It corresponds to fortress no. 9 on the map of the Limes com-
mission, at the present place called Heftrich, close to Feldberg, the
summit of the mountain Taunus. Singularly enough, this obviously im-
portant fortress is not mentioned directly in historical literature, but we
may identify it with the castle built in the Taunus by Drusus and
restored by Germanicus. Cf Tacitus, "Annals" I, 56, describing the
undertakings of Germanicus: "posito castello super vestigio paterni prae-
sidii in monte Tauno, expeditum exercitum in Chattos movit." — The
map of the Limes Commission contains a fortress called Ems, registered
as no. 4, but in reality no. 6. We suppose that this place is not the
ancient Amisia, which ought to lie at the head of the Ems, not west of
this river, where the fortress no. 4 (6) of the Limes is situated.
Munition, town on the river Amisias, = a Roman "munitio", or
"fortress". The Latin word is most likely no proper noun, but simply
marks the place of an anonymous fortification. It may be identified
with the mediaeval Walhesdorf, now Wallsdorf, if this place-name is to
be translated "village of the Roman" ; but of course it is equally possible
that Wallsdorf is founded by a German with the name Walh i. e. Roman.
— At any rate, the existence of advanced Roman fortifications outside
the Limes is confirmed through the excavations undertaken by the Limes
Commission in other regions. In the neighbourhood of the "munitio"
concerned, we also find traces of Roman population, e. g. the mediaeval
Thabernae i. e. "taverns", now Dauborn, situated a little west of the
River Vidros, upper part = the present Wetter. The latter form is
the exact linguistic correspondence to Vidros, according to the law of
"High German sound-shift" ("Lautverschiebung").
Northern end of the mountain Abnoba = the advanced wing of the
Limes in the Wetter district. Roman place-names like Leitcaster, now
Leihgestern, still accompany the remnants of the Limes in these regions.
Kanduon or Kaiduon, town east of Amisia and Abnoba, directly
south of the western end of the mountain Melibokos, = the present
Kohden, east of the town Ems and of the Limes (= Abnoba), and
74 PTOLEMY S MAPS OF NORTHERN EUROPE
directly south-west of Vogelsberg which forms the western continuation
of the mountains Ron and Thiiringer Wald (= Melibokos).
Mattiakon, town of the second class, inside the line Vidros-Abnoba
= Aquae Mattiacae, "the Baths of the tribe Mattiaci", now Wiesbaden,
inside the Limes; fortress no. 31 on the map of the Limes Commission.
The Aquae Mattiacae are mentioned by Ammianus Marcellinus XXIX, 4.
Like the present Wiesbaden, Mattiakon seems to have been a fashionable
place for mineral baths.
Melokabos, town on the eastern side of the Abnoba, directly in the
middle of its extension from the north towards the south =: the present
Miltenberg, directly in the middle of that part of the Limes which runs
from the north towards the south; fortress no. 38 on the map of the
Limes Commission. Stephanus of Byzance mentions the "ethnicon Me-
lokabenos" which would imply that the place had a certain importance,
but according to Alfr. Holder, "Altceltischer Sprachschatz", art. Melokabos,
the statement of Stephanus is not true. The position of Miltenberg
corresponds to that of Melokabos, as it commands the place where the
Limes leaves the river Main. From the linguistic point of view, the
correspondence is not quite exact, but the geographical coincidence is
so striking that it leaves scarcely any doubt of the identity. If Melokabos
is a Ptolemaic metathesis of Melibokos, as R. Much suggests (see Holder,
1. c), the change into Miltenberg would be less difficult to understand.
The metathesis might also be of popular origin, for the German forms
of ancient names along the Rhine, Neckar and Danube contain several
cases of such irregularities^).
Eastern outline of the Abnoba, between Melokabos and Lokoriton =
the part of the Limes called Vallum Trajani, between Miltenberg and
Western outline of the Abnoba south of Melokabos = i) the fortifica-
tion wall between the rivers Main and Neckar, called the Miimling Line;
2) the middle part of the river Neckar. Notice the south-eastward
turning of the southern Abnoba, corresponding to the curving of the
Lokoriton, town on the eastern side of the Abnoba, at the southern
end of this mountain = the mediaeval Loricha, now Lorch, at the southern
end of the Vallum Trajani; fortress no. 63 on the map of the Limes
Commission. Loko-riton is a Celtic name, meaning the "Ford of Lokos",
consequently, a rivulet or brook running through the place must have
had the name Lokos. From the linguistic point of view, the corre-
spondence with Loricha is not quite exact, but the geographical coin-
^) Borbetomagus, *Borvetomagus = Wormaza, Worms; Armissa = Rems; Brocomagus
= Brumagad, Brumpt; Alkimoenis =^ Altmtihl; Fergunnia :=r Franken Hohe.
§ 2 1. LOCAL PROTOTYPE /I* 75
cidence seems to exclude doubts of the identity. Cf. the linguistic
irregularities mentioned above.
Northern outline of the mountain Albia (perhaps continued by the
Sudetian mountains) = the part of the Limes called Vallum Hadriani.
Albia is the mountain called die rauhe Alb or die schwabische Alb.
Grauionarion, town north of the Albia and east of the Abnoba =
Grinarione on the Tabula Peutingeriana. It may be the present Groningen
situated north of the Vallum Hadriani and east of the Vallum Trajani.
Setuako-ton, town south-east of Lokoriton, = Septemiaci on the Tab.
Peutingeriana. The termination -ton seems to reflect the road distance
(VII), added after Septemiaci.
The eastern and southern outline of the Albia would coincide with
the north-western frontier of the Roman province called Ra^tia; Ab may
have contained the demarkation line. The name of the Roman province
persists till our days exactly in these regions, as Riesz, in mediaeval
times Retia, Rezi.
The western outline of the Albia would coincide with the upper course
of the river Neckar.
Southern end of the Albia = southern end of the Schwarzwald, the
so-called Belchen, which is connected with the southern parts of the Alb.
The Helvetian desert in Prot. Ad may have represented the same
mountain which appeared as Abnoba on the collective orographic map of
Germany, Prot. A, and thus would mean the Schwarzwald. In the
Burney MS., the map represents the Helvetian desert by a long line
running in the direction SW-NE exactly where the Schwarzwald ought
to be situated, cf. Fig. 8. But it may not yet be regarded as certain
that this design is of classical origin.
Bomoi Flavioi, town of the second class, on the western outline of
the Albia = Aris Flavis on the Tabula Peutingeriana, the present Rott-
weil, situated on the upper course of the Neckar. As its name shows,
the town contained a temple with altars of the Imperial Flavian family,
and consequently must be regarded as a district capital. This degree of
importance is reflected by the Ptolemaic vignette. It is also noteworthy
that the Latin name has been translated into Greek.
Tarodunon, town of the second class, north-west of Bomoi Flavioi =
Tenedone on the Tabula Peutingeriana = the mediaeval Zartuna, now
Zarten, south-west of Rottweil. The town occupies a central position in
the inner valley of the river Dreisam, whereas the entrance of this valley
is dominated by the large city of Freiburg. We may suppose that the
importance of the classical Tarodunon was due to the same factors which
have made the present Freiburg grow large.
C. Miiller in his edition of Ptolemy sets forth a series of suggestions
in order to identify the Ptol, towns within the eastern area of Prot. Ab,
'j^ Ptolemy's maps of northern Europe
viz. Devona — Dewangen; Kantioibis = Gunzenhausen, fortress no. 71
on the map of the Limes Commission; Bibakon = Biburg^); Brodentia
= the mediaeval Brenza or Prenza, now Brenz, situated on a homonymous
river which debouches into the Danube; Riusiaua = Biricianis on the
Some of the towns concerned are situated within the Albia, whereas
the others form a fringe closely connected with this mountain. Conse-
quently, we may take it for granted that they belonged to the special
map of the Limes region. If Miiller's suggestions be correct, the ar-
rangement would however have been more or less confused. As Prof. C.
Mehlis is in near future publishing a detailed study of the Ptolemaic
towns ("Petermanns Mitteilungen"), we think it adviseable to refrain from
positive statements till this special research of the topographical expert
Alkimoenis on an anonymous affluent of the Danube is obviously named
after the river Alcmona, now Altmiihl, debouching into the Danube west
of Regensburg. But it is not absolutely certain that the town and river
actually belonged to Prot. Ab.
Prot. Ab must be called well verified both from topographic, statistical
and linguistic points of view, partially also from the literary. Its indivi-
duality is still more self-evident than that of Prot. Aa.
Regarding the Limes district, Ab has the same unrivalled importance
as Prot. Aa regarding the geography of ancient Denmark, The light
shed by this document on the working of the Roman military topo-
graphers must be called literally astonishing. Ab is equally important
from the linguistic point of view, because it gives valuable information
concerning the distribution of nationalities. We notice that the names
inside the Roman Limes district are nearly all Celtic, the Imperial colony
Arae Flaviae forming the only exception. Traces of German nationality
appear on the frontier, viz. in the termination -is, added to the Non-
German names Alkimoen(is) and Kantioib(is). Advanced Roman positions
on German ground are marked by the names Amisia, Munition and
Grauionarion, both of the latter showing the type of the vulgar Latin
tongue. Cf. Fig.s 30 & 31.
^) The name Biburg occurs repeatedly in the Danubian region. One is situated north
of the Vallum Hadriani, a little east of Gunzenhausen; another on the southern side of the
Danube, near the end of the Vallum.
§ 22. LOCAL PROTOTYPES Ac, Ad. & At 'J J
§ 22, LOCAL PROTOTYPES Ac, Ad & Ae = DACIA
a. Summary of Contents.
Ac is a physical map of Dacia, with probably few or no towns.
Executed perhaps before the Roman conquest. Correctly amalgamated
with A. Cf. Fig. 13.
Ad & Ae are itineraries, describing Dacia; c6ntaining rivers, tribes, roads
and towns. Ad and Ae are partially duplicates of eachother; scattered
duplicates besides occur in Bi, B2 & F. Latin marks. Executed after
the Roman conquest of Dacia 105 A. D. — Affinities with the Tabula
Peutingeriana (— the Anonymus Ravennas). The prototypes seem to
have been amalgamated before the times of Ptolemy; the map resulting
is roughly speaking correctly amalgamated with ^. Cf. Fig.s i & 12 — 18.
b. Ptolemaic Localisaton.
The correct localisation of Prot. Ac was a natural consequence of its
distinct natural outlines. The region between the Carpathian mountains,
the lower Danube, and the Pruth, is formed by nature in such a manner
that it lends itself quite readily as a subject of separate description^).
For similar reasons, it was easy to incorporate the physical map Ac
correctly with the Pre-Ptolemaic collective map of Europe. The Danube,
as the southern and western frontier of the region mentioned, was com-
pletely known beforehand, because it formed the frontier of the Roman
Empire since the beginning of our era. And the large angle formed by
this river within the region of modern Hungary offered a firm basis for
Prot. Ad and Ae are placed within Dacian territory. They are so
far localised correctly, and in our first article on the subject^) we con-
sequently assumed that Ptolemy's physical design of Dacia belonged to
one of them. Through further investigations, however, we observed that
neither Ad nor Ae agrees sufficiently with the physical map so as to be
assigned to its original contents. This was the reason that obliged us to
assume the existence of a separate physical map Ac^ different from Ad
and Ae. — Prot. Ad is limited to a narrow fringe, attached to the Ptole-
maic rivers Danubios, Tibiskos, and Hierasos. Its interior elements have
^) The same law of geographical limitation is traceable in the extension of the Roman
s dominion over Dacia, and much later re-appears in the establishment of the Daco-Roman
2) "The Scott. Geogr. Mag." XXX, p. 66.
yS Ptolemy's maps of northern Europe
suffered displacement both towards the east and towards the west. Ae
fills out the interior part of the Ptolemaic Dacia, evacuated by the details
of Ad. An inexperienced editor seems to have misunderstood the southern
outlines oi Ae, i. e. the rivers Danube and Aluta (and Theiss?), identifying
them with the Transylvanian Alps of the physical map Ac. Thus he
transplanted Saldensioi and Zusidava Ae [— Sallis & Sukidava Ad) from
the southern side of the Danube to the northern, and the baths of Her-
cules (Hydata) Ae from the Iron Gate to the interior Dacia, and so on.
— The incorrect combination of Prot. Ad and Ae re-appears on the
Tabula Peutingeriana which is again reflected by the descriptive text of
the Anonymus Ravennas that often supplies a better or more complete
reading. Cf Fig.s 15 and 16. In our research, we understand the Ta-
bula as including the evidence of the Anonymus Ravennas, if no diver-
gence is expressly stated.
Even if the Ptolemaic amalgamation of Ad and Ae with the physical
framework of Ac is incorrect, the errors generally do not assume . larger
dimensions There are no displacements of entire provinces, and the
parallelism of the duplicate series is in most cases undisturbed. Only a
few names have been transplanted far away from their proper places.
Paloda or Polonda Ad has emigrated from west of the Aluta to the
border of the Prut (Fig. i). Sangidava Ae appears in Ad with the tri-
plicate forms Singidava and Zargidava, the one in western Dacia, the
other near the Dacian coast of the Black Sea. Three Danubian towns
east of Potulatensioi Ae seem to have been moved too far east and
placed in reverse order, viz. i Sornon, 2 Tiason, 3 Netindava, corre-
sponding to the present 3 Soareni, 2 Teascul, i Nedeia. Cf. Fig.s 17
& 18. We suppose that they belong to Prot. Ad^ but it cannot be made
out exactly because they are ignored by the Tabula Peutingeriana.
c. Definition of Limits.
Ac may claim the entire physical details appearing on the Ptolemaic
map of Dacia — mountains and rivers. The southern continuations of
the Carpathian chain, lacking on the Ptol. map, seem to be traceable in
the presumable outlines of Prot. Ae, cf. Fig. 13.
Ad and Ae seem to have supplied almost the entire tribes and towns
of Dacia. The two prototypes at least claim so many of these details
that very little is left which might bo suggested as possibly belonging
The mutual relations of Ad and Ae appear from the duplicate series
compared with the Tabula Peutingeriana. The system of routes deduced
therefrom is summarised below, cf. the detailed synopsis under i.
§ 22. LOCAL PROTOTYPES Ac, Ad & At 79
Aizizis — Tibiskon (= Tabula)
Sallis — Zurobara = Saldensioi — Ziridava; (with conti-
nuation Ziridava — Karrodunon =
Dierna — Zarmizegethusa (= Tabula)
.... Pinon — Sukidava = Drubetis — Pimm — Zusidava (= Ta-
a) .... Predav(a) — Singidava 1
b) Sukidava — Zargidava — Petroda- > = Zusidava — Buridav(a)—Sangidava—
va — Karsidava J Patridava (Karrodunon) (= Tabula).
Dififerences from the Tabula may occur, but are of little import. They
will be dealt with under the heading ^'general topographic scheme".
Cf. also under "examination of details".
Apart from the displacements mentioned, we observe no confusion be-
tween Ad and Ae worth speaking of. On the Ptolemaic map, the two
prototypes lie neatly beside eachother. Only in the south-western corner,
they wedge themselves a little into eachother's areas, Frateria and Ar-
V\ww2i Ad invading ^^^), and Saldensioi and Drubetis ^^ projecting corre-
spondingly into the territory of Ad.
The greater part of Ae seems to have been bounded by river-courses,
viz. I. the Danube from Gran to Semlin (or eventually the Theiss), 2. the
Danube from Semlin to Nicopoli, 3. the Aluta. Only Saldensioi and
Zusidava, = Sallis & Sukidava Ad, and perhaps Albokensioi, cf. under f,
belong to the southern side of the Danube. We have not been able to
discover sure traces of Ae west or south of the above line of demar-
kation; the further list of Cisdanubian duplicate names, collected in "The
Scott. Geogr. Mag." XXX, p. 66, seems to be drawn from other sources,
cf. under "duplicates". If Prot. Ae was thus limited by a line Danube
— Aluta or Theiss — Danube — Aluta, we may assume that the duplicate
map Ad had the same line of demarkation.
So much for the mutual relations of Prot. Ad and Ae. As soon as
we leave Ptolemy's map of Roman Dacia, we miss almost completely
their distinctive marks, i. e. the duplicate series, and also the Tabula
Peutingeriana deserts us. We therefore see here provisionally no means
of distinguishing the exact origin of the Ptolemaic elements. We may
only point out collectively the extreme northern outposts of Ptolemy's
Dacian prototypes which we shall here designate as Acde for want of
interior distinction. Cf. Fig.s 14—15.
Outposts of Acde in these regions are the tribes Karpianoi, Tagroi,
Biessoi, Sabokoi, Burgiones, Anartofraktoi, Koistobokoi *transmontanoi.
^) Frateria and Arkinna = the present Fratesti and Arcan, see Fig.s 17 — 18.
8o Ptolemy's maps of northern Europe
The Karpianoi contrast with their alter- ego Harpioi and with the town
Harpis. The "ethno-topic" combination of Harpioi and Harpis seems to
indicate that these names belong to Prot. F.
The Burgiones contrast with their alter-ego Buroi in Germania, be-
longing to Prot. Bi, whereas the triplicate Kuriones B2 is pushed far
away into interior Germania.
The frontier between Acde and Bi coincides with that of the Ptole-
maic sections Sarmatia and Germania.
A whole series of displaced tribes from Prot. E collide with the
north-western outposts of Acde^ viz. Ombrones, *Ouarinoi, *Burgundiones,
*Gutones, Finnoi, cf. § 26. We may also attribute to E some invaders
in Roman Dacia. The Ratakensioi, as C. Miiller suggests, p. 144, seem
to be the Rakatriai Bi = Rakatai B2. Kotensioi (or Kontekoi Athos
Atlas) = *Kotnoi, *Koteinoi of Bi & B2 (= Kytnoi in Pannonia?). The
Teuriskoi seem to be the well-known Celtic tribe of Tauriskoi in the
"Hohe Tauern" ; Strabo also calls them Teuristai, VIII, p. 293.
d. General Topographic Scheme.
The physical map Ac seems to have been of superior quality, like
that of Germany. Cf. Fig. 13. It appears from the visible design of
the rivers Tibiskos, Alutas, and Hierasos, but still more perhaps from
the indirectly observed traces of the mountain system. We presume to
have discovered them by pointing out the extension of our assumable
Prot. Ae, for its outlines correspond too strikingly with the Transylvanian
Alps; accidental coincidence seems to be scarcely conceivable. The like-
ness is especially conspicuous in the south western corner where the
Saldensioi Ae coincide with the isolated mountain chain projecting to the
Iron Gate. The only natural explanation of this coincidence is the
assumption that Prot. Ac contained a design of the Transylvanian Alps
and that the outlines of Prot. Ae were identified herewith, owing to a
misunderstanding on the part of that cartographer who amalgamated the
It may be regarded as questionable whether the almost complete
separation of the ea.stern and western Ad (cf. Fig. 14 and p. 78) is
original or whether it is due to the cartographer who amalgamated them.
If we are right in identifying Singidava Ad with Zargidava Ad (= Sangidava
Ae), there would be some reason for regarding the separation of the
sections concerned as original: Singidava and Zargidava would mark the
same route, drawn from dififerent sources, and the author of Ad would
have ignored the identity of both names, because he reached the station
from two opposite points of departure.
The system of routes, as we may reconstruct it by comparing Prot.
§ 22. LOCAL PROTOTYPES Ac, Ad & Ae 8 1
Ad and Ae, sometimes differs from that of the Tabula Peutingeriana.
Here the question arises which representation is to be preferred.
According to the Ptolemaic map, the stations Tiriskon and Argidava
could without any difficulty be combined with the route leading from
Hydata to Porolisson, belonging to Prot. Ae, and corresponding to the
route Ad Aquas — Porolisso on the Tabula. But the Tabula combines
Tivisco (= Tiriskon) with the route Tierna — Sarmategte, and Acidava
(= Argidava) with the route Drubetis — Rusidava. The route Tierna —
Sarmategte corresponds to a line Dierna — Zarmizegethusa in Prot. Ad,
and this prototype would consequently claim the Ptolemaic station Tiriskon,
if the evidence of the Tabula is to be regarded as decisive. In return,
the Ptolemaic duplicate Tibiskon with its surroundings must then be
assigned to Prot. Ae.
To begin with, we actually adopted this view, owing to the fact that
the Tabula preserves the road lines which are eliminated on the Ptole-
maic map. But later we realized that such an arrangement is* impossible
from the Ptolemaic point of view. We notice the following parallel of
Ptolemaic road stations:
Ad: Sallis — Tibiskon — Zarmizegethusa— Zurobara — Singidava.
Ae : Saldensioi — Tiriskon — Zermizirga — Ziridava— Sangidava.
The correspondence leaves no doubt that we are here faced with an
original route which has been eliminated by the author of the Tabula.
He erroneously transplanted Tiriskon Ae to a fragmentary route of Ad,
leading from the Iron Gate to Zarmizegethusa, and he transplanted Ar-
gidava Ae to another route of the same prototype Ad, viz. Drubetis —
Ptolemy places Karrodunon north of Porolisson, whereas the Tabula
has a station called Cersie south of the latter town, and south of the
Carpathian mountains. We identify Cersie — Karrodunon with the present
Krosno north of the mountains (cf. p. 85). Consequently, the Ptole-
maic representation seems to be more correct.
Dacia east of the line Pretorio — Apula — Porolisso is left blank by the
Tabula, cf. Fig. 16. It seems, however, that the regions have not been
completely eliminated, . but appear with wrong localisation, transplanted
to the south-eastern side of the Danube. Next to Sucidava in Moesia,
the Tabula places a town Sagadava, = Sancidapa Anon. Rav., which is
ignored by Ptolemy, by the Itinerarium Antonini, and by all other
authorities. It seems to be the Ptol. Zargidava Ad from the northern
side of the lower Danube = Sangidava Ae. In order to explain how it
could be transplanted south of the river, we may suggest that the author
of the Tabula identified the neighbouring Ptolemaic town Karsidava with
Capidava in Moesia which is known from the Itin. Antonin. and also
82 Ptolemy's maps of northern Europe
from an inscription (Capidavensis). If the reader compares our figures 15
and 16, it will strike him that the Ptolemaic towns Porolisson — Napuka —
Zargidava — Karsidava and the correspondences Porolisso — Napoca— Saga-
dava — Calidava on the Tabula occupy fairly corresponding positions. In
both documents, a square figure is formed. A river separates Porolisson
and Napuka from Zargidava, and equally Porolisso & Napoca from Saga-
dava. — Apart from Zargidava and Karsidava, no other towns from
Ptolemy's eastern Dacia are traceable on the Tabula. The Anonymus
Ravennas possesses an additional route running, as it seems, from the
mouth of the river Tyras to Porolisson: Phira (Thira in Guido's Geo-
graphy), Tirepsum, Iscina, Capora, Alincum, Ermerium, Urgum, Sturum,
Congri, PoroUisum, Gertie. But apart from Thira, PoroUisum, and Gertie,
the names have no likeness with Ptolemaic ones.
It must be added that the author of the Tabula has transplanted
about a dozen towns from the northern side of the upper Danube to the
southern. 'Moreover, he is guilty of a really Procrustean treatment of
an entire region about the lower Danube. The surroundings of the river