The Inscriptions of the Construction and Recovery Works of the Public Buildings and Utilities in Aquincum

Inscriptions related to buildings and structures provide an important contribution when studying the architecture of Aquincum. They may also reveal the date of construction or improvement works and the identity of the builder. Occasionally, the indication can also provide the reason and purpose of the construction activity. The builder may be an individual or a definite group. As an individual, the name refers to a person's origin. If their role and position in the life of the city are also mentioned, the composition and identity of the urban elite can also be inferred. The identification of the different groups can contribute to an understanding of which religious, social, and other organisations operated in Aquincum. Both private construction and state-owned existed alongside each other. The date and location of the inscribed stones on the buildings refer to the prestige of Aquincum as the seat of governors. This article presents the information based on a detailed analysis of the captions found so far. A map showing the original texts and their location is attached to the article. In addition, a summary table covering the most significant information of the thirty inscriptions examined (dedication of the inscription, type of building/structure, nature of construction, reason for construction activity, nature of financial coverage, time of construction of the builder, construction board) are published.


Introduction -inscriptions of sacred buildings related to the cult of Nemesis
The inscriptions on the public buildings of Aquincum are examined by grouping them according to the function of the particular building. For example, the inscriptions on the sacred buildings; most of which are related to the cult of Nemesis.
Such is the case with the fanum (fanum, -i n. sanctuary, sacred area) that was later added to the western gate of the amphitheatre at the military city (Póczy, 2004:p.111). Two inscribed altar stones (Cat. 1, Cat. 2) related to its construction were found at the same place, next to the southern wall of the sanctuary (Kuzsinszky, 1891:p.119). On both, the inscriptions are fragmentary. However, it is not a renovation, but a so-called -a solo -construction of a new facility. Unfortunately, these inscriptions give no information about when this happened or the date of this construction. The earliest date related to the Temple of Nemesis is on a votive altar (Cat. 3). This altar stone, 1.2 m high and 0.43 m wide, is decorated with a volute and a rose and was found in the back wall of the cell of the Nemesis sanctuary by Károly Torma (Kuzsinszky, 1891:p.117;Torma, 1881). From the date of the consuls -Rustico II et Aquilin(o) [co(n)s(ulibus)] -and according to the data -XII k(alendas) sept(embres) -in the text, the erection of the altar can be dated to Aug. 21, 162 AD. The founder of the altar stone was designed by Marcus Ulpius Zosimus, who, according to Károly Torma, was also the builder of the fanum. The evidence is visible in a small compass on the sanctuary. According to his argument, the sanctuary was made solely to hold the votive altar stone (Torma, 1881:p.63).
The inscription on the renovation of the Nemesis Temple, dating back to 1876 on Snail Hill (Csiga-domb), in Aquincum, next to the amphitheatre of the civil town, is also accurate (Cat. 4).
The almost complete and well-written inscription reveals all the important details of the renovation. Consequently, it is known that the temple was destroyed because of its poor condition: vetustate [con] lapsum. According to the date of the consul, [Messalla] et Sabi(no) co(n)s(ulibus) -and the date indicated in the text -VIII K(alendas) Iul(ias)the date of the inscription is Jun. 24, 214 AD. The restorers were Florus and Mercator duumvir quinquennials, and the offerer dedicans -or the curans, the supervisor of the works -was Aurelius Surus. According to his name, it is presumed that he was of Syrian origin.
The term "salariarius" in the inscription might be controversial because of its various interpretations. It could be that Aurelius Surus was honoured for his work or simply came from the city of Sala (Zalalövő). According to Bálint Kuzsinszky, Salariarius is a soldier who receives salary instead of a regular military mercenary, probably because he resigned his military service after his dismissal (Kuzsinszky, 1891:p.156). The discovery of a sarcophagus from Aquincum (CIL III 10501), on which the term salarius also appears, clearly indicates that the soldier in question, Titus Aelius Iustus, was a solitary soldier. In addition, if Aurelius Surus was of Sala origin, his name would likely include domo Sala, as in the case Mursa's Flavia Paula sarcophagus (Németh, 1999:p.59).
Another inscription about a later renovation was found under the ruins of the chapel (Cat. 5). The square limestone slab, 59 cm high and 58.5 cm wide, with a simple frame, was originally intended to be walled in the sanctuary wall. Similarly, to the previous examples, the date on which the table was set was Jun. 27, 259 AD. There is an interesting phenomenon in the dedication of the inscription, Deae Dianae Nemesi Aug (ustae), which proves that the figure of Nemesis and Diana became almost the same.
With the previous Nemesis inscriptions, the idea presents itself that they probably do not refer to the same building, as the first and second mentions fanum, while the fourth mentions temple. According to Károly Torma, the building to the right of the western gate of the amphitheatre was a Nemesis fanum or sanctuary, and the Nemesis temple was 29.4 meters west of the gate (Torma, 1881) (Fig. 1, Table 1).

Inscriptions of sacred buildings related to the cult of other gods
There is only one inscription left on sacred structures for the other gods. Such is the inscription on the construction of the temple erected to the goddess Dea Syria and Baltis (Cat. 6).
Baltis and Dea Syria -on the inscription referred to as Diasuria -were Syrian goddesses whose reverence had conquered Pannonia at the same time. Therefore, it was possible to build a common temple (Kuzsinszky, 1937:pp.141-142).
In the short inscription dated to the 3 rd century, neither the time of construction nor the reason is given, only the name of the builder -T(itus) Fl(avius) -is known.
In contrast, the constructional inscription on the Temple of Hercules answers almost all questions (Cat. 7 (a), Cat. 7 (b)). Before the analysis of the inscription, it is worth mentioning that the appearance and then strong presence of the cult of Hercules in Pannonia is related to the Severus Dynasty. Hence why, besides the birthplace of Septimius Severus in Africa, Hercules has one of the most widespread cults in Pannonia. The fragmentary building board found in 1974 is an especially important proof of this (Bánosi, 1984:p.44).
It turns out that the temples offered for the salvation of Marcus Aurelius, Antoninus Caracalla and his mother, Iulia Domna, were the target of major construction activities: fundamentis adie[cto portico] (Cat. 7 (a)) and fundamentis adie[cta (?) Porticu (?) ex voto fecit] (Cat. 7 (b)). Although the construction started from the groundwork, the description is not about constructing a new building, but about renovating, expanding and building a porticus. According to György Bánosi's supplement, the term [vetust(ate) conlapsum restituit] refers to this, since it even determines the reason for the restoration (Bánosi, 1984). Expansion may be evidenced by the terms adiecta or adiecto. The last line of the consul's name reveals that the construction was in 216 AD. What the text on the board does not answer is who or what body did the work as a votive act. György Bánosi analysed the possible constructors. He saw an opportunity that it might have been a member of the Legion's officers, perhaps the governor of the 216 th year, Octavius Appius Suetrius Sabinus, who is also known to have set up an altar to Hercules of Amphissa, in Aquincum. He also did not reject the possibility that one of the members of the body of troops in Aquincum might have been the builder (Bánosi, 1984:p.50). This inscription is also significant because it is the only one found to date in Pannonia that relates to the construction of the Temple of Hercules, and is one of the proofs of the reconstruction period following the Marcomannic Wars (AD 166-180).
We must note here, that in Aquincum and in its surroundings, the worship of the indigenous gods -in many cases identifying them to Roman gods -was very current. This is evidenced by altar stones inscriptions (Gabler, 1967:p.195).
The renovation of the Iuppiter Dolichenus Temple, which was also inscribed (Cat. 8), happened in this major rebuilding period, indicating that Septimius Severus and his son, who visited Aquincum in 202 AD, had rebuilt the Iuppiter Dolichenus Temple, which was a vetustate conlapsum, like the Hercules Temple. The names of the emperors in nominative case on the inscriptions of public buildings do not imply that the construction was ordered by the emperor personally. However, in this case, the reason might be that the renovation of the temples was not the duty of the state. By doing so, the ruler and his son were probably trying to encourage construction by the noblemen of the city, because at that time public money was primarily used to strengthen the borders (Szilágyi, 1956:p.14).
Similarly, to the temples of Hercules and Iuppiter Dolichenus, the Sanctuary of the Legio II Adutrix Pia Fidelis Severiana Valetudinarium is one of the renovations of sacred buildings in the military town. The plaque (Cat. 9), which records the construction of the building, cannot be dated precisely, it can only be stated that it was made during Severus Alexander's reign, between 222 AD and 235 AD. It is interesting to note that this is not a simple temple, but a multi-purpose building with a bedroom or perhaps an infirmary and a portico.
There is also an inscription on the renovation of a temple for an unknown deity (Cat. 10). Although the inscription found in the second half of the 19 th century and first recorded by Macko (Fröhlich, 1891:p.162), is only four lines, it contains several interesting facts. The text was probably deliberately divided so that each line contained important information about the renovation of the temple, possibly similar to the large boards currently displayed on construction sites. The first line, which contains the name of the contributor, is engraved with much larger letters than the other three. He, C(aius) Cornel(ius) Corinthus, was of Greek descent by name. The reason for the offering can be read in the second line, which is nothing more than being elected as Augustalis (members of a religious, social group). Unfortunately, the inscription tells us nothing about the construction of the temple, but it turns out that the temple was splendidissimo, that is, it was nicely restored by C(aius) Cornel(ius) Corinthus. The release of the fourth line -PEP II -is debated. Róbert Fröhlich reads iterum [r]e[ f(ecit)?] (Fröhlich, 1891). This is interesting because he puts the PEP in the published original text (Fig. 2) in the [r]e[ f(ecit)?] as if there was an unreadable letter before and after E, and did not comment as to why he chose this solution. It is conceivable that the Greek origin of the offeror suggested by his name may have been spelt here -P instead of R for R and PH -or it may be a mistake of the illiterate engraver. János Szilágyi resolved the same as rep(aravit) (Szilágyi, 1956:p.106), which does not change the meaning of the text. Thus, Caius Cornelius Corinthus would have rebuilt the temple for the second time. It would be interesting to know why the temple had to be renovated twice within one generation.
The inscription documenting the construction of the Nymphaeum (Cat. 11) is partially a transition between sacred and profane buildings. This building, which adorns one of the squares of the city, was built and financed by city councillor, Caius Titius Antonius. It is important to record his name because he also funded other buildings of Aquincum. Any architectural remains associated with the inscription have not yet been discovered (Szilágyi, 1956:p.33). The nymphaeum structure may not have been significantly expensive, but that it is aquam induxit, or water was led to it, probably meant that an offset to the nymphaeum was built from the parent branch of the aqueduct.

The case of the baths
The first case of the profane buildings is the group of baths. Fifteen of this building group have been excavated in the area of Aquincum (Fröhlich, 1891:p.162). One of them was the balneum of the military town, the slab of which was found under the plaster of house No. 5 at Kolosy Square (Cat. 12). The stone slab in the notched frame, the letters painted red (Kuzsinszky, 1904:p.164), was probably inserted into the wall of the balneum. The name of Flavius Marcianus, who was a consul during his bath work at Severus Alexander, is not on the list of consuls. This suggests that he was a consul suffectus (Kuzsinszky, 1904:p.165). The third line of the inscription is missing, but it can be readily supplemented because it was a continuation of the name Severus Alexander, struck with the damnatio memoriae ("condemnation of memory"), which had begun in the previous line. The expression "solo" in the fourth row clearly shows that this is new construction; nevertheless, Margit Németh interprets it as a reconstruction (Németh, 1999:p.64). This military town bath was located in the north-eastern region of the canabae (the town, which surrounds the Roman camp). Although the constructional plaque had been placed in the stone vault of the Aquincum Museum in 1901, the bath itself -probably linked to this inscription -was only found during the excavations of the 1970s. During the excavation, various shaped pools, traces of the heating system, as well as water pipes and sewers were exposed (Póczy, 1983:p.269). It turned out that when the spa was installed, they adapted to the existing utility system and connected the spa's sewers to the northern main drainage channel from the northeast corner of the camp to the Danube.
The same installation principle can be observed in the larger bath of the legionary fortress, the exploration of which was begun in 1778 by István Schönvisner. At that time, walls and a hypocaust room were discovered, which he thought was a public bath. This hypothesis was confirmed by the inscription stone found in 1849, documenting the restoration of the bath (Cat. 13;Kaba, 1984:p.181). The inscription dated Jun. 30, 268 AD, is engraved on an altar stone, the traces of which are original and have been erased due to the new text in the first line of the new inscription. András Alföldi reconstructed the text, which was hardly readable on the very badly preserved stone in many places, using and modifying the supplement of Mommsen and Domaszewski (Alföldi, 1943:p.39). The text reveals that it was a major renovation, remodelling and perhaps extension because the bath had long been abandoned and unused (magno tempore in/[te]rmissas et destitutas), which was probably the result of the Marcomanni wars. During the reconstruction work begun in the Septimius Severus era, only 268 baths took place. It is also noteworthy that although there was a Gothic invasion of the Balkans in the summer of 268 AD, Aquincum was at peace and renovation works on the spa were able to continue (Alföldi, 1943:p.41).
We have more information about the persons on the caption. The name Clementius Silvinus / Silvius, first mentioned in the title, can be found on two other Aquincum titles (CIL III 3424, CIL III 10424). Clementius Silvinus was a vir egregius, or knightly man, who, by order of Gallienus, dated 260 AD, came to the praeses, or civilian court. Aurelius Frontinus, who later became a dux or provincial military commander, had a similar career.
Although the first excavation of the bath dates back more than two centuries, its aqueduct and canal, which is perpendicular to the north-south main line, in a south-west direction, and its palaestra (parade-ground for different sports) were discovered only in the second half of the 20 th century.
A palaestra was discovered in the civil town as far back as 1884. In the palaestra, Károly Torma found several fragments ( Fig. 3 (a) of a Greek dipinti (painted) inscription (Cat. 14). Although they are not closely related to the subject, because of their peculiarity and they have decorated a public building, they are worthy of mention. Due to the deeper location of the room compared to the surrounding rooms and some of the painted signs, Torma mistakenly concluded that there might have been a lupanarium (brothel) (B. Thomas, 1955:p.94). The misunderstanding was clarified by Mihály Kuzsinszky, who, in 1889, compiled the fragments in the correct order and interpreted some of them. He was able to spell out several words, including the term πάλαιστρα (palaestra) for the room's purpose. From the compilation of four lines of text ( Fig. 3 (b)), he concluded that the inscription recorded the award of some men in the palaestra (Kuzsinszky, 1889:pp.120-124).

The case of amphitheatres
In the case of profane buildings in Aquincum, the largest number of inscriptions regarding construction activities are related to amphitheatres. The military city amphitheatre was previously mentioned in the paragraphs of the Nemesis sanctuaries, to which its wall was directly linked. A construction inscription was found in front of the northern entrance of the amphitheatre (Cat. 15). The 94 cm high, 172 cm long and 27 cm thick stone slabs have the text in a tabula ansata (tablet with handles). The tablet is held on two sides by a winged Victoria figure, and below it is a Pegasus, which was the coat of arms of the Legio II Adiutrix. The inscription dated 145 AD, is likely to be the construction inscription of the amphitheatre (Kuzsinszky, 1934:pp.180-181). However, this is not entirely certain. There are several reasons for the uncertainty. One is that the amphitheatre is not mentioned on the board, and the other being that Antoninus Pius' name, which is incorrectly written on the caption, is in the dative. On this basis, attempts were made to link it to the construction of a triumphal arch (Fehér and Kovács, 2003:pp.192-193), but the arguments are not convincing. Based on the location of the inscription and international parallels (above the three entrances to Lambaesis's amphitheatre, there was a similar construction inscription, none of which mentions the amphitheatre), it is likely that the construction inscription of the amphitheatre has been found. This view is also expressed by Margit Németh (Németh, 1999:p.18-19).
Unfortunately, the constructional inscription of Aquincum's civil amphitheatre has not been found, but two of the stone monuments documenting its renovation have survived (Cat. 16, Cat. 17). One commemorates the successful completion of the amphitheatre gate renovation. Fragments of its table are 40 cm high and 6-32 cm wide and have traces of whitewash in its indentations. Column No. 22 was found nearby (Torma, 1881:p.78). There are seven names -two of them probably belong to the same family -on the board of directors adored for Iuppiter Optimus Maximus and probably Iuno. These are probably the names of the citizens of Aquincum who were financially supporting the renovation. There was no reference to the inscription on the venue board to assist in the inscription. Károly Torma, from a mere 7 cm fragment, also found next to column No. 22, suggests that it is likely to be related to the restoration of the gates (Torma, 1881:pp.79-80). Studies of a travertine slab with only two letters -AS -indicate that it may be a piece of the upper part of a memorial plaque and possibly the fragment of the [. . . . port] as [reficiendas] inscription.
The other inscription on the renovation, which documents the restoration of the auditorium sections of the bourgeois amphitheatre, is similarly fragmentary (Cat. 17). The fragment, which is the lower-left corner of a stone slab, was probably found in "Papföld" before 1890 (Kuzsinszky, 1904:p.174). Bálint Kuzsinszky published a drawing of the inscription of the stone fragment in 1904 ( Fig. 4) but considered that it is incomprehensible due to its truncated lines. The inscription was interpreted only  in 1971, although Szilágyi also noted that, since the text was very damaged, the resolution he proposed was uncertain. If the supplement was correct, a remarkable fact was recorded on the board, namely, that there was a sufficient budget for the restoration. Also, that amount, which was no less than fifty-five thousand sestertius, was spent on the renovation of the cortinae (vault) (Kuzsinszky, 1904;Szilágyi, 1971:p.309). There were also several ideas in the name of the collection supervisor during the addition. Attempts have been made to refer to the three solid letters, INC or ING, for persons whose names appear on other Aquincum stones, but the name of the latter is preceded by at least one letter, and INC is right next to the frame (Szilágyi, 1971:p.309). Therefore, the name of the supervisor could be Marcus Ingenus Maro.
The in situ inscribed stone monuments of the civil town amphitheatre are the remaining inscriptions on the seats (Cat. 18). The excavated, inscribed sediles were also very different in length, height and width. Károly Torma justified this due to the height differences that were compensated for by different levels of filling. For each of them, as Torma says, the name or initials of the citizen's names were engraved on the stone -in some cases, followed by a space after the letter S, the abbreviation of the sedilewhere it was. For a single stone fragment, only the one where the N O pair appears is uncertain. He speculates that this might be a piece of a podium ledge on which the cuneus (the arrow-headed area of the grandstand) number has been engraved, only pairs of letters have been used instead of numbers. According to that finding, N O would have designated the seventh cunei (Torma, 1881:p.49). However, this interpretation suggests that similarly to some other sediles, the initials of a praenomen and a cognomen can be on it. The cuneus designation also seems to be refuted by the fact that the cuneus designation stones found in Puteoli contain the word cuneus and the number beside it.
There is one among the several inscribed sedile that not everyone agrees with. Károly Torma copied from the stone the letters BOI VIL, which he identified as the seat of Boi(i) or Boi(oduri) vil(ici), that is to say, perhaps a public servant, servus vilicus (Torma, 1881:p.51). However, the letters on the still existing stone fragment can be read and interpreted differently. Next to the letters VI, only a partial letter follows the space, which may be E rather than L. In the case of the BOI VI E, which can be reconstructed in this way, according to the Lugdunum example, where members of different tribes were given a certain number of seats in the amphitheatre. It could also be said that the boii (members of the Celtic tribe Boius, i. m.) received six seats. Then there might have been another tribal nameperhaps the eraviscus -and a place.
One of the inscribed seats is worth mentioning: it is the one that marked the bisellium. The 1.58 m long, 0.67 m high and 0.68 m deep sedile was used to calculate the number of the cavea seatings in the way, that a half of the bisellium, which was the place of Valerius Iulianus and Aelius Quintus, was a person's seat requirement (Torma, 1881:p.48).
The four stone fragments found near the Krempel Mill in 1875 cannot be classified as sedile (Fig. 5). Two of the four fragments, the one with Roman numerals and the one with worm-like armrests, belong together. From this, it became clear that these were two pieces of a sella -or rather a cathedra. The reconstructed fragments suggest that it could originally have served as a seat for eight people. Although a similar stone fragment was found in Pompeii, Soproni interpreted it as a local calendar, ignoring Károly Torma's interpretation. More sediles have been found over time, bringing the number of inscriptions to 27, and published in 1891 by Bálint Kuzsinszky (Kuzsinszky, 1891:pp.109-112). Interestingly, only two of them can be found today and, recently, a piece of the sella, with numbers of location, in the warehouse of the Hungarian National Museum.

The case of basilica, collegium and triumphal arch
We still have three inscriptions on the public buildings of the city, but we have no archaeological evidence of where they might have stood.
The first is the inscription on the construction of a basilica (Cat. 19). Unfortunately, the inscription is so fragmentary that the only record relates to the fact that the basilica was built -or possibly renovated. It is not possible to supplement it according to our present knowledge. The inscription on the construction of a college headquarters is also somewhat fragmented (Cat. 20). The stone inscription found by Bálint Kuzsinszky in a tabernacle to the southwest of the macellum (marketplace for meat) in 1931 lacks the part that contained the name of the collegium. This subtitle fragment is also problematic because Kuzsinszky only produced a datasheet about it and did not propose to resolve it. Later, the following note was added to the datasheet by Lajos Nagy: "collegiumi schola. . . suis refecit" (Szilágyi, 1973:p.152). Based on this, János Szilágyi proposed a supplement to the catalogue. Consequently, the inscription only says that the collegium was established from private money.
There are also two other building inscriptions associated with the collegium (Cat. 21, Cat. 22), which relate to the south-western region of the canabae.
One of them is a broken stone slab (Cat. 21), discovered during the founding of an apartment building in Pest in 1900, which is commemorated by the construction of a banquet house (Szilágyi, 1949:p.19) or kitchen (Kuzsinszky, 1904:p.167), and is currently bricked in the stone vault of the Aquincum Museum. The almost intact inscription is especially significant in social history because the three magistrates mentioned in the inscription are members of the superintendent of the collegium Victorianorum that erected the building. It must have been Aquincum's most populous collegium because it had at least six groups. One of them, Caius Iulius Pacatus was the head of construction and the priest of the fanum of the collegium. After the three magistrates, decuriones are represented in the text, except for Vibius Lucius, supervisors of the building. We also know the patron of the collegium, Cnaeus Marcus Masvetus. The date of the Consul reveals that the construction took place in 223 AD. Consequently, this building was constructed by Emperor Severus Alexander. Besides the real purpose of the building, where the name of the collegium is not clear. Bálint Kuzsinszky raised the possibility that he might be called Victorianorum (Kuzsinszky, 1904:p.167) because the emperor was always a victor, and János Szilágyi defined him as the believer of the goddess Victoria, the "organisation of the imperial invincibility" (Szilágyi, 1949:p.20).
The construction of a fountain made by a member of the collegium fabrum, a particularly significant public organisation, is traced to a stone plaque found in the ruins of the Trinitarians in 1778 (Cat. 22). The collegium fabrum worked in an association with the postmen until 150 AD, called collegium fabrum et centonariorum. (After their severance, the collegium fabrum in canabae and the collegium centonariorum in the civil town were the fire departments.) Like the previous one, it also provided social benefits. The fountain was claimed by Caius Iulius Severus because he became one of the magisters of the collegium fabrum. Such offerings and constructions of gratitude or votive acts were typical, customary, almost expected. The Aquincum organ was likely one such gift given to the association by the commander of the collegium fabrum for the post he received (Szilágyi, 1956:p.38;Zsidi, 1998:p.92).
There have been different opinions about where this fountain might have been. János Szilágyi puts the silanum in the civic town and suggests that it may be related to one of the two archaeological findings found in the civil town. One is a piece of a cylinder of a marble ornamental well, and the other is an imprint of the wall of a public well or a round water basin found next to a public bath built in the centre (Szilágyi, 1956:p.33). Klára Póczy has a completely different opinion. She ties this caption to the south-western region of the canabae and suggests that it was on a forum there (Póczy, 1983:pp.261-262).
The same localization problem occurred with another caption. An inscription found next to Vörösvári út in 1882 (Cat. 23) documents that Caius Titius Antonius donated some kind of decoration to the forum of the municipium. The name of Caius Titius Antonius had already been found on an earlier inscribed stone monument (Cat. 11). According to his testimony, he had a nymphaeum built in the civil town with his own money. As before, János Szilágyi places the ornament donation inscription on the forum of the civil town, while Klára Póczy places it on the main square of the southwestern region of the canabae.
Similarly, to the inscription on the building of the collegium headquarters (Cat. 20), Bálint Kuzsinszky found a marble plaque in several pieces, which was later displayed on the north-east wall of the U-shaped lapidary of the new building of the Aquincum Museum; this proves the rebuilding of the four commercial premises (Cat. 24). Kuzsinszky did not suggest a supplement to the text (Szilágyi, 1971:p.307), and later additions became difficult because of the inaccurate joining of pieces of the board and the deterioration of the stone. In 1971, when the inscription was first published, János Szilágyi prepared suggestions for them. From these, it emerges that a senior citizen of the municipium, Titus Flavius Fortio / Corvio -his third name is uncertain -was the one who rebuilt the four commercial places the second time [in solo [ref(ecit) I(terum)] (Szilágyi, 1971:p.308). Unfortunately, there is no data to assist with dating, so we do not know if the barbaric invasions necessitated reconstruction or was it simply a modernisation. The former seems more probable, and therefore the inscription, appearing in the 2 nd Century AD, can finally be dated.
The construction of the brick triumphal arch from the personal asset of Caius Iulius Sextimus is also related to the civil town (Cat. 25) (Szilágyi, 1956:pp.27, 29). The triumphal arch stood on the main street -which departed from the harbour -of the civil town, namely, it was founded in a public place -locus public-donated by the city council for this purpose. Caius Iulius Sextinus was a Syrian publican. (It should also be noted here that collegium surorum, or Syrian collegium, was a state licensed organisation.) That is why the plaque commemorating his deed is decorated with the reliefs of Dea Syria and Iuppiter (Póczy, 2004:p.254). The right side of the board is completely broken, but the rest of the board can be reconstructed. A fragment of the upper-right text box reveals that the missing relief could have depicted Dea Baltis (Kuzsinszky, 1937:p.136).

Inscriptions on milestones
The milestones represent a completely different group, which, in addition to their distance from the settlement, also reported on various construction and renovations. Two such multifunctional milestones were found in Aquincum (Cat. 26, Cat. 27). The first (Cat. 26) was erected eight miles from the border of Aquincum. (A Roman mile is 1480 metres long. Roman miles = 1000 double steps or 5000 feet. 1 step = 74 cm.) On the cylindrical mile, the inscriptional field is shaped like a panel (Fig. 6). The framed field captures the fact that Severus Alexander has renovated the road.
The major Pannonian carriageways, including this one, were made with great technical care. A multi-layer foundation was laid with a rammed earth layer and then covered with basalt slabs (Póczy, 2004:p.50). The subtitle box clearly shows that the second and fourth lines have been deleted. This is because the name of the emperor, who was later sentenced to be a damnatio memoriae, stood here. The distance from Aquincum -AB Q M P / VIII -is engraved on the limestone roller below the table. The letters were painted red, the traces of which are still visible today (Nagy, 2007:pp.144, 149).
The second, two milestones from Aquincum (Cat. 27), reports that Macrinus had reconstructed the roads and bridges between 217 and 218 AD. The renovation was, of course, not supervised by the emperor, but by its legate, Aelius Triccianus, and it was he who was responsible for the maintenance of the city's road network (Kuzsinszky, 1900:p.8).
Apart from these two milestones, several further examples are known. It is of unique interest, that among these, there are three others, which were also two miles from the city (Cat. 28, Cat. 29, Cat. 30). More interestingly, two of them (Cat. 28, Cat. 29) were claimed by the same emperor, Caius Iulius Verus Maximinus. The only difference is that in the second case, besides Maximinus, the name of his son, Caius Iulius Verus Maximus, is also mentioned. On three other Pannonian milestones -the examples of Fadd (CIL III 10645), Podgajce (CIL III 6465) and Pilisszántó (CIL III 11340) -only the name of Maximinus is engraved (Kuzsinszky, 1900:p.10). The third milestone was made during the reign of Philippus Arabs. The following is an effective approach for analysing the "template" of milestone inscriptions according to which almost every milestone is written. First was the name of the emperor, with his full title, and possibly even his child, who may have  (Cat. 26;Nagy, 2007:p.154.) been co-ruler, or his wife. (Since Iulia Domna, the Augusta had the right for the title of mater castrorum.) Then followed the builder -if it was not the emperor -and finally the city and its distance from Rome in double steps. If the landmark was ordered by the emperor, or was rebuilt by the emperor, the bridge where the stone stands was replaced by the construction supervisor instead of the builder.

Conclusion
There are several facts that can be deduced from the inscribed stone monuments documenting the construction and renovation of Aquincum's public buildings and structures. Looking at the location of the stone slabs and fragments (Fig. 7), it is clear that most of them were found in the area of the military city and its surroundings. The map also shows that the excavation work on road constructions of the 20 th century contributed to the appearance of most of the monuments, since the sites are in most cases along or in the immediate surroundings of the roads.
Looking at the text of the inscriptions (Table 1), it appears that the constructions were mainly in the Severus era, when Pannonia and especially Aquincum were in their golden age. The large number of inscriptions on the renovation suggests that the Marcomanni Wars and other barbaric invasions in the area of Aquincum were devastating, and that reconstruction works had been going on for decades.
An analysis of the names and positions of the builders and donors gives an insight into the life of the city. There is, for example, the composition of a collegium (Cat. 21), or the custom that, when a person has received an important position, he usually enriched his city with some building (Cat. 10). It also becomes evident that the construction of the city centre was almost always constructed from the personal budget of wealthy citizens. The imperial investments created the road network and the larger buildings of the canabae.