Old And New Data About The Late Roman Fortification From The Island Ostrovul Mare

Gogoșu Commune, Mehedinți County, Romania

 

Dorel Bondoc

 

The first part (Part I) of this paper will be published in the volume in the honour of Dr. Mihai Bărbulescu from Cluj-Napoca. Subsequently, Dr. Adrian Gheorghe from Filiaşi gave me another set of pieces (Part II), which will be presented here.

 

Part I

 

On the island of Ostrovul Mare, there have been signaled vestiges belonging to different periods. First of all, I have to mention here a neolithic settlement of Sălcuţa Culture¹. Important archaeological traces were dated in the Bronze Age, especially those belonging to Gârla Mare Culture². The archaeological excavations made between 1976-1977 pointed out a settlement and a necropolis from the 7^th century³. Three medieval settlements from the 13^th –14^th centuries⁴ were also identified.

The Roman period is well represented too. Traces of walls, pottery fragments⁵, and an inscription (…Ferox…[v]ix(it) a[n(nis)]…)⁶ can be dated in the period of Roman Dacia, somewhere between the 2^nd-3^rd centuries. A Roman brick with an incised nine men’s morris play, was reused for the 7^th century settlement⁷. From Ostrovul Mare, Al. Bărcăcilă published a monetary treasure beginning with the emperor Constantius Chlorus and ending with Mauricius Tiberius⁸. In 1978, there was excavated a tumulus and inside, there were discovered a cremating stake and a fireplace; the inventory contained a curved knife of Dacian tradition, Roman pottery decorated with "ribs", a fragment of a bracelet of glass, three coins from Probus, Diocletian and Constans⁹. The late dating of the brick with stamp [CO]H(ORS) VIII discovered near, in the locality Balta Verde¹⁰, is uncertain¹¹.

The retaking of the discussion about the fortification from Ostrovul Mare has been caused by new discoveries, but also by some old ones. A fragment of a Roman grinder (mola manuaria) of stone (Fig. 1), has been discovered by Dr. Adrian Gheorghe from Filiaşi, on the Romanian bank of the Danube, right on the beach of the river, opposite the island Ostrovul Mare. The piece is the superior part (catillus) of the grinder, with a frame of 4cm wide. Sizes: the probable diameter- 36cm ; the height- 7cm. It is difficult to date the piece, therefore I can just suggest the Roman period of Dacia. A similar piece was reused in the 7^th century, to make a kiln inside a hovel¹².

Fig. 1. A fragment of a Roman grinder (mola manuaria)

In the same place (on the Romanian bank of the Danube, on the beach of the river, opposite the island Ostrovul Mare), I have discovered a fragmentary lancet (Fig. 2). The spatula has been well preserved, with a green patina on its surface. It was made completely of bronze, with its section in a rectangular shape; at the end, inside of a transverse section, there has been preserved part of an iron blade.
Sizes: the preserved length - 9cm; the breadth - 1.3cm. There have been discovered similar pieces in Porolissum¹³, Sarmizegetusa¹⁴ and other places of the Roman Empire¹⁵.

Fig. 2. A fragmentary lancet.

The works for building of hydro-electric station Iron Gates II also favoured more discoveries. A stone of 39 x 42 x 28cm with a fragmentary inscription: …A… VI…¹⁶ was reused with other 8 pieces of stone like anchors (Fig. 3). This identification is based on the shallow furrows on the surface of the pieces, for the attachment of ropes.

Fig. 3. Anchors.

The remains of a harbour installation are remarkable, whose landing place made of wooden beams has been very well preserved in the sand of the beach of the island (Fig. 4, Fig. 5). This installation was made of a row of vertical stakes put in the ground. Over them were placed horizontal beams of wood¹⁷.

Fig. 4. Ostrovul Mare. A harbour installation, acc. to M. Davidescu 1989.

Fig. 5. Pieces of wood from the harbour installation, acc. to I. Stângă, 1998.

Click on the images to see a larger version.

Weights for fishing nets, pottery, fragments of tiles and bricks and an iron anchor (Fig. 6) have completed the discoveries of this kind from Ostrovul Mare¹⁸. The possibility to date the harbour in the 2^nd century, an eventual destruction at the middle of the 3^rd century, the subsequent rebuilding and its working till the 6^th century, etc.¹⁹, are simply speculation for the moment. Their checking is impossible because the place of discovery is superposed by the waters of the Danube and the buildings of the hydro-electric station Iron Gates II.

Fig. 6. Iron Anchor acc. to M. Davidescu 1989.

Click on the image to see a larger version.

Proofs that certify fishing in antiquity are all over the place. A fish hook (Fig. 7) made of bronze has been discovered by Dr. Adrian Gheorghe on the beach of the island. It was fully cast and presents a green patina on its surface. At the superior part, the hook is bent to be tied with a cord. Its rod is rectangular in section. The inferior part is bent like a hook and it presents a spine in order to prevent the escape of the fish after it has bitten the bait. Sizes : 8.5 x 3cm. The weight - 20g. The most appropriate analogies come from the 4^th century, from the Late Roman fortification of Hinova²⁰.

Fig. 7. Fish Hook.

A very interesting piece is a weight/anchor (Fig. 8), made of sandy limestone. The piece has been discovered on the Romanian bank of the Danube, right on the beach of the river, opposite the island Ostrovul Mare. It is in the shape of a pear and it is perforated in the superior part in order to be hung with a cord. The diameter of the perforation is 5cm. Sizes: Height - 23cm; Maximum breadth - 15.3cm. Weight - 4kg.

Fig. 8. Stone Anchor.

I have discovered a small round disc in the same place. It was made from a fragment of a pot, and it is aproximately round with a small hole in the middle. It was probably used as a weight for a fishing net (Fig. 9). Diameter - 5.4cm.

Fig. 9. Disc.

*

The traces of a fortification surrounded by a ditch and a vallum (palisade) of defence were known by Al. Bărcăcilă as far back as in 1936²¹. Al. Bărcăcilă had information about the investigations of a silviculturist who excavated in 1910, because he wanted to find the gate of the fortification. The spoilation of the stone and of the bricks seems to be usual in Ostrovul Mare. Somebody remembered that at one moment, even the Serbian neighbours from the southern bank of the Danube, used to come to the island by boat to find bricks (information from Dr. Adrian Gheorghe).

The researches made in 1981 by M. Davidescu led to the identification of the Late Roman fortification. The archaeological excavations begun in 1983²² pointed out just a part of a wall from the eastern side, 23.50m long (Fig. 10). It was built of stone, limestone and bricks. The wall is 2.80m thick. At its northern end there is a circular tower with the interior diameter of 3.50m, and at its southern end there is a pentagonal tower with its interior in a rectangular shape (4.05 x 3.45m). Both towers are protruded out of the enclosure, this feature being specific to the Late Roman fortifications. A gate with an opening of 3.27m was identified at 8.50m from the northern tower; at some time it was blocked with an exterior tower of rectangular shape.

Fig. 10. Plan of a late Roman fortification.

A coin from the reign of emperor Aurelian, which was discovered during the excavations²³ cannot be a chronological argument for the dating of the fortification, because it could have remained in use for a long time. But another coin coming from the emperor Valens, has been discovered right on the precinct wall²⁴. There is no information about the military unit of this fortification. M. Davidescu mentioned that in the inventory there are three round pieces of limestone²⁵, used as weights for fishing nets. One of them, the biggest, even if it was perforated in its middle, could be a projectile, but for this hypothesis there are no archeological proofs (no photos or drawings)²⁶. Because the other sides (the northern, the southern and the western sides) of the fortification have not been discovered, M. Davidescu was led to believe that it was not finished²⁷, also he identified signs of an organised destruction of the precinct, by spoilation of the stone on the entire length of the wall. He dated the building to the reign of Emperor Iustinian and believed that on the island there is another fortification from the 4^th century, but it has not yet been discovered.

There are some observations to be made about these. First of all, the discovered wall represents just a part from the eastern side of the fortification, which could have been continued towards the south, as the plan of the building suggests, because behind the pentagonal tower could easily be seen the prolongation of the wall. In this case the pentagonal tower is not a corner one, but an intermediary one, and from the published plan seems to be attached subsequently, during another period. The northern tower could be considered a corner tower only if the brick laying that started towards the west represents sooner a part of the northern side of the fortification. Also, the blocking of the gate with a rectangular tower could suggest another phase of construction. The few preserved signs seem to show that we deal with a fortification of the quadriburgium type. For the dating of the fortification during the 4^th century we have some epigraphical and archeological evidence.

1. A stamped brick has been given to me for study by Dr. Adrian Gheorghe from Filiaşi, who told me that he discovered it on the wall of the fortification. It is fragmentary and is made of semifine clay with small stones in the composition. On the surface, there are abundant traces of mortar and a stamp inside, in a rectangular register. The letters are in relief, 2.8cm high; the two letters A are upside-down; the letter N is tied to the A. The preserved sizes: 17 x 11.5cm. The legend on the stamp is DIANA (Fig. 11). The toponym refers to the ancient locality Diana (today Karats in Serbia), situated on the southern bank of the Danube. The brick is dated in the 4^th century and it represents an import of building material.

Fig. 11. A stamped brick with the legend "DIANA".

Click on the image to see a larger version.

A similar piece coming also from Ostrovul Mare is shown in Fig. 12. It was signaled by I. Stângă²⁸. For the fortification Diana see the article by V. Kondic^28bis. Stamped bricks with the toponym Diana have also been discovered to the north of the Danube, in Dierna-Orşova²⁹, Drobeta³⁰ and Hinova³¹. This fact proves the intense activity of the officina from Diana-Karatas and also, the relation of military dependence, of the Roman fortification from the islands of the Danube and from the north ripa of the river, upon the Roman political and military authorities from the southern bank of the Danube. From this point of view, the northern-Danubian Late Roman fortifications could be considered the "bridge-heads" of the ones from the southern bank of the river³².

Fig. 12. A stamped brick with the legend "Diana" acc. to I. Stângă.

Click on the image to see a larger version.

2. Another brick has been given to me by Dr. Adrian Gheorghe, who mentioned that he found it near the wall of the fortification, and that probably it had fallen from the wall. It is fragmentary, made of semifine clay, with little stones and fragments of mica in the composition. On its surface, there are traces of mortar and there is also a fragmentary stamp inside a rectangular register. The letters are in relief, disposed from the right to left, 2.5cm high. The preserved sizes are 25 x 16cm. The legend on the stamp is AQUI[s] (Fig. 13).. It is dated to the 4^th century. The toponym refers to the ancient locality Aquae (today Prahovo-Negotin, in Serbia) situated on the southern bank of the Danube, opposite Ostrovul Mare. Taking into consideration the position of the island Ostrovul Mare, opposite Aquae, I think that this stamped brick represents more than an import of construction material. Most probably, the garrison from Ostrovul Mare was made by soldiers coming from Aquae, and they brought with them bricks from the southern bank of the Danube. Bricks with the stamp Aquis have been discovered to the north of the Danube, in Drobeta³³; in this case, surely it is an import of building material. The fortification Aquae was mentioned in Tabula Peutingeriana (VII). Systematic archaeological excavations have not yet been made³⁴.

Fig. 13. A stamped brick with the legend "Aquis" in mirror image acc. to I. Stângă.

Click on the image to see a larger version.

3. A fragmentary brick (Fig. 14), made of semifine clay, with sand and little stones in the composition. The piece was discovered on the wall of the circular tower. On its surface, there are traces of mortar and also two stamps inside of rectangular registers. Just one of the stamps has been well preserved ; the letters are in relief, 2.2cm high; the last letter is upside-down. The preserved sizes of the brick: 22 x 17 x 7cm; the sizes of the rectangular register: 6.3 x 3cm. The impression of the stamp is DA(cia) RIP(ensis). It could be dated in the 4^th century. The place of manufacturing could not have been identified, such pieces have been discovered on a large area, to the north and the south of the Danube³⁵. Anyway, the stamp certifies the contribution of the army of the province Dacia Ripensis to the Late Roman domination over the islands from the Danube. The 2^nd stamp was badly preserved. There are visible just the traces of three letters.

Fig. 14. A fragmentary brick made of semifine clay, with sand and little stones in the composition.

Click on the image to see a larger version.

4. A fragment of brick (Fig. 15), made of rough red clay, with little stones in the composition. It was discovered on the wall of the circular tower. On the surface of the piece, there is a fragmentary stamp. Unfortunately, no letters have been preserved. The preserved sizes: 10 x 6cm.

Fig. 15. A fragment of a brick of rough red clay.


Click on the image to see a larger version.

5. During the archaeological excavations, right on the precinct wall, there was discovered a coin from the time of the emperor Valens³⁶.

The northern circular tower has many analogie in the 4th century, on the limes of the Lower Danube: Hajducka Vodenica³⁷, Rtkovo³⁸, Cezava³⁹, etc.

*

Sometime, during the period of the emperors Anastasius-Iustinian, the fortification seems to have been rebuilt; then the gate could have been blocked and there was raised the pentagonal tower situated to the southern end of the wall. The most appropriate analogy for this tower are at Hajducka Vodenica, where such a tower was dated during the reign of the emperor Iustinian⁴⁰. Similar towers in shape and dated in the same period are in Sucidava⁴¹.

Among the discoveries from the 6^th century made by M. Davidescu in Ostrovul Mare, an arrow-head of iron with three sides⁴² is significant. On the Romanian bank of the Danube, right on the beach of the river, opposite the island Ostrovul Mare, I have discovered a digitated brooche with five knobs (Fig. 16), made of bronze. The head is in a semi-disc shape, divided by a vertical line in two quarters of a circle. The plate is decorated with geometrical motifs and on the lateral sides, it presents six prominences, three on each side. The superior and the inferior prominences are perforated and they seem to have been filled with precious stones in antiquity. The leg was schematically decorated like a stylised head of an animal; unfortunately the preserved details do not permit its identification. The pin was made of iron and it has been fragmentarily preserved. Sizes: 4.6 x 2.6cm.

Fig. 16. Bronze Brooch.


Click on the image to see a larger version.

The most appropriate analogy comes from Desa⁴³. It is a piece which, excepting a few differences, is very similar to the piece from Ostrovul Mare. On the line of the Danube, near Ostrovul Mare, another digitated brooches were discovered in the locality Izvoarele⁴⁴, Drobeta- 2 pieces⁴⁵, Aquis- 4 pieces⁴⁶. On the map of the area, these discoveries show a concentration in the Iron Gates area⁴⁷.

*

Concerning the Late Roman fortification from the island Ostrovul Mare, taking into consideration the new discoveries, it could be said that there is only one fortification, built in the 4^th century, rebuilt subsequently in the 6^th century. The precinct and the circular tower belong to the 4^th century, this dating being based on the stamped bricks discovered in the brick laying of the tower, but also on the coin from the time of the emperor Valens, which was discovered right on the wall⁴⁸. The mentioning on the stamps only of the toponyms and of the name of the province, could suggest a later period, perhaps the 2^nd half of the 4^th century- the beginning of the 5^th century. The fact that they were discovered in the brick laying of the tower shows that we deal with military officinae. In the 6^th century, after the domination of the Empire on the line of the Danube was restored, the fortification was probably rebuilt and then there was raised the pentagonal tower.

 

NOTE

 

1.        I. Stângă, Raport preliminar de cercetare arheologică. Ostrovul Mare, km. fluvial 876, Porţile de

Fier II- campania 1980-, Drobeta, V, 1982, p. 183-189; G. Crăciunescu, Noi date despre locuirea de la km. 865 din Ostrovul Mare, Drobeta, VI, 1985, p. 43 and the followings.

2.        G. Crăciunescu, op.cit., p. 47; Idem, Noi descoperiri arheologice din epoca bronzului la Ostrovul

Mare, Drobeta 1980, p. 43-58 ; M. Davidescu, Cetatea romană de la Hinova, Bucureşti, 1989, p. 107.

3.        V. Boroneanţ, I. Stângă, Cercetările privind secolul al VII-lea de la Ostrovul Mare, comuna

Gogoşu, din zona hidrocentralei „Porţile de Fier II”, Drobeta, 1978, p. 87-107.

4.        V. Boroneanţ, G. Crăciunescu, Aşezarea şi necropola din secolele XIII-XIV de la Ostrovul Mare,

km. 875, Drobeta, VI, 1985, p. 119 and the followings.

5.        D. Tudor, Oltenia romană, 4^th edition, Bucureşti, 1978, p. 220.

6.        CIL, III, 12600=IDR, II, 138.

7.        V. Boroneanţ, I. Stângă, op.cit., p. 89.

8.        Al. Bărcăcilă, Câteva monede şi două iconiţe de la Ostrovu Mare şi Gogoşu (reg. Craiova), SCN,

1, 1957, p. 419-421; D. Tudor, op.cit., p. 220-221; M. Davidescu, op.cit., p. 107.

9.        M. Davidescu, op.cit., p. 108.

10.     IDR, II, 140.

11.     C. C. Petolescu, Cronica epigrafică a României (I, 1975-1980), SCIVA, 4, 32, 1981, p. 602, nr.

29.

12.     V. Boroneanţ, I. Stângă, op.cit., p. 96.

13.     N. Gudea, I. Bajusz, Instrumente medicale şi ustensile folosite de medicii şi farmaciştii romani

din Dacia Porolissensis. Contribuţii la studiul medicinei romane, Acta Musei Porolissensis, 16 1992, pl. I/1-2.

14.     D. Alicu, S. Cociş, C. Ilieş, A. Soroceanu, Small finds from Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa, Cluj-

Napoca, 1994, plate 41/739.

15.     E. Künzl, Medizinische Instrumente aus Sepulkralfunden der römischen Kaiserzeit, Bonner

Jahrbucher, Band 182,1982, p. 1-131; Idem, Operationsräume in römischen Thermen. Zu einem chirurgischen Instrumentarium aus der Colonia Ulpia Traiana, Bonner Jahrbucher, Band 186 (1986), p. 493, abb. 2/1-2; E. Riha, Romische toilettgerat und medizinische Instrumente aus Augst und Kaiseraugst, Augst 1986, p. 81-82.

16.     M. Davidescu op.cit., p. 109 without photos or drawings; I Stângă, Viaţa economică la Drobeta în

secolele II-VI p.Ch., Bucureşti 1998, p. 283, pl. XIII, for drawings.

17.     M. Davidescu, op.cit., p. 110; I. Stângă, op.cit., p. 281, pl. XI/2; p. 282, pl. XII.

18.     M. Davidescu, op.cit., p. 112, fig. 35.

19.     Idem,, p. 112-113.

20.     Idem, p. 64, fig. 17.

21.     Idem, p. 113-114.

22.     Idem, p. 113-117.

23.     Idem, p. 116.

24.     Ibidem; the author considered that the piece has no any connection with the precinct.

25.     Ibidem.

26.     D. Bondoc, Artillery troops detached north of the lower Danube in the late Roman period, Limes

XVIII, Proceedings of the XVIIIth International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies held in Amann, Jordan (September 2000), II, BAR International Series, 1084 (II), 2002, p.643, nr.6.

27.     M. Davidescu, op.cit., p. 116.

28.     I. Stângă, Sur les estampilles tegulaires decouvertes dans la fortifications romaine tardive de

Hinova (dep. De Mehedinţi), Die archaologie und geschichte der region des Eisernen Tores zwischen 275-602 N. Chr. Kolloquium in Drobeta-Turnu Severin (2.-5. November 2001), Bucureşti 2003, p. 85, fig. 2/7.

28bis. V. Kondic, Statio cataractarum Diana, Derdapske sveske, 4, 1987, p. 43-47.

29.     AnnEp, 1972, 493; IGLR, 416; IDR, III/1, 46.

30.     CIL, III, 14216, 32; IGLR, 404 şi 408, cu bibliografia.

31.     M. Davidescu, op.cit., p. 35 şi 36; ILD, p. 72, nr. 85 şi p. 71, nr. 83/e.

32.     D. Bondoc, „Bridge heads“ on the northern border of the Dacia Ripensis province between the

4^th-5^th centuries, The Roman and Late Roman City. The International Conference (Veliko Turnovo, 26-30 July 2000), Sofia 2002, p. 167-172.

33.     IGLR, 405, with the bibliography.

34.     Short presentation N. Gudea, Die Nordgrenze der Römischen Provinz Obermoesien. Materialien

zu ihrer geschichte (86-275 N.Chr.), Sonderdruck aus Jahrbuch des Römische-Germanischen Zentralmuzeums Mainz, 48. Jahrgang 2001, p. 89, nr. 25, cu bibliografia.

35. D. Benea, Officina militară de la Dierna (sec. III-IV e.n.), Acta MN, 13, 1976, p. 205-214, p. 205-214.

36.     M. Davidescu, op.cit., p. 116.

37.     M. Vasic, V. Kondic, Le limes romain des Portes de Fer, Studien zu den militärgrenzen Roms,

III. Vorträge des 13. Internationalen Limeskongresses, Aalen, 1983, p. 550, fig. 15.

38.     Idem, p. 551, fig. 16.

39.     Idem, p. 552, fig. 21.

40. Al. Jovanovic, Hajducka Vodenica, fortification antique tardive et paleobyzantine, Starinar, 33-34, 1982-1983, p. 329-331.

41.     The towers I and J, acc. to D. Tudor, op.cit., p. 424, fig. 127.

42.     M. Davidescu, op.cit., p. 116, no drawings or photos.

43.     D. Popescu, Fibeln aus dem Nationalmuseum fur Altertumer in Bucureşti, Dacia, IX-X, 1941-

1944 (1945), p. 505, fig. 11/121; Al. Madgearu, Continuitate şi discontinuitate culturală la Dunărea de jos în secolele VII-VIII, Bucureşti, 1998, p. 54, no. 13.

44.     M. Davidescu, op.cit., p. 217, fig. b.

45.     Idem, p. 217, fig. a and c.

46.     Non vidi, acc. to Al. Madgearu, op.cit., p. 58, no. 43-46.

47.     Al. Madgearu, op.cit., p. 64, fig. 37.

48.     M. Davidescu, op.cit., p. 116.

49.      

ABBREVIATIONS

 

Acta MN- Acta Musei Napocensis, Cluj-Napoca, 1, 1964 şi urm.

AnnEp- Anne Epigraphique, Paris 1903 şi urm.

CIL- Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, Berlin, I, 1863 şi urm.

IDR- Inscriptiones Daciae Romanae= Inscripţiile Daciei romane, Bucureşti, I (1975), II (1977), III/1 (1977) şi urm.

IGLR- E. Popescu, Inscripţiile greceşti şi latine din secolele IV-XIII descoperite în România, Bucureşti, 1976.

ILD- C.C. Petolescu, Inscripţii latine din Dacia, Bucureşti 2005.

 

Part II

 

SOME PIECES DISCOVERED BY DR. ADRIAN GHEORGHE ON THE ROMANIAN BANK OF THE DANUBE, FACE TO FACE WITH OSTROVUL MARE ISLAND

 

A lot of pieces were discovered by chance by Dr. Adrian Gheorghe, on the Romanian bank of the Danube, opposite Ostrovul Mare island, and were given to me for publishing, and then were given to the Museum of Oltenia, Craiova. This is the reason I present these pieces here.

 

                  1. A fragment of terra sigillata vessel. Only a part from the inferior half of the piece was preserved. The decor consisted of ovals and below these were rendered grapes and vine leaves.

Sizes: 10 x 7.2cm. Fig. II.1.

 

                  2. A fragment of terra sigillata vessel, with the surface decorated with irregular impressions.

Sizes: 3.5 x 3.2cm. Fig. II.2.

 

3. A fragment of a vessel decorated in barbotine technic. It was made of fine brick-coloured paste, with fragments of mica in its composition. The rim is bent towards the exterior. The piece is decorated with vegetal motifs, and on the exterior surface there are red painted.

                  Sizes: 6.7 x 4.5cm. Fig. II.3.

 

                  4 Adornment of a belt (?). It is in a rectangular shape, with the end cut in the shape of pelta.

Sizes: 5.3 x 2cm. Fig. II.4.

 

5. Two fragments of brooches. The pieces belong to the strong profiled type. The beginning of the 2^nd century. Fig. II.5.

 

6. A fragment of a handle of a vessel made of bronze, in a shape of an acanthus leaf.

Sizes: 9.3 x 4.5cm. Fig. II.6.

 

7. Little plate made of lead. On its face there are the letter A, made in relief, 0.7cm high. I have no idea about the significance of the piece. It could be a sigillum (?).

Sizes: 1.9 x 1.3 x 0.4cm. Fig. II.7.

 

8. A digitated brooche with five knobs, made of bronze. The head is in a semi-disc shape, decorated with semicircular lines. The plate is decorated with geometrical motifs and on the lateral sides, it presents six prominences, three on each side. On the lateral sides there is the head of a eagle. The leg was schematically decorated like a stylized head of an animal. The pin was not preserved. 6^th century, perhaps later.

Sizes: 6.3 x 3.5cm. Fig. II.8.