Drususstein

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Drususstein in the Mainz Citadel (status 2011)

The Drususstein (also known as the Eigel or Eichelstein ) is a 20 m high, originally massive block of cast masonry of Roman origin on the site of the Mainz Citadel . In the meantime, researchers have largely agreed that this is the structural remnant of the cenotaph for the Roman general Drusus , mentioned by ancient authors such as Eutropius or Suetonius . The Roman troops under his command erected the cenotaph after his death in 9 BC. In the Roman Mogontiacum , today's Mainz .

The Drususstein was from the former Principate starting point for elaborate memorial services in honor of Drusus and center of the imperial cult in Mogontiacum. After it was stripped of its exterior cladding in the early Middle Ages, it served as a watchtower as part of the fortifications of the city citadel from the 16th century. For this purpose, the previously massive structure was hollowed out so that a spiral staircase could be installed. This led from a broken doorway to an opening at the top. In addition to the structural remains of the pillars of the aqueduct and the stage theater , the Drususstein is one of the few remains of the Roman Mogontiacum visible above ground. In addition to the Igel column , it is also the only Roman tomb north of the Alps that has been preserved above ground at its original location since ancient times .

Historical background

The Roman general and stepson of Augustus , Drusus, founded no later than 13/12 BC. BC the legionary camp Mogontiacum opposite the mouth of the Main as one of the strategic starting points for the conquest of Germania magna . During the Drusus campaigns (12 to 8 BC, ended by Tiberius ) Drusus died in the autumn of 9 BC. BC and was brought back to Mogontiacum by his brother Tiberius and the Roman army. Before the corpse was transferred to Rome , the soldiers there honored the popular general with a memorial service. At this time the soldiers apparently had a spontaneous desire to honor Drusus permanently in Mogontiacum with a memorial or cenotaph. Corresponding construction work was probably already in progress in the immediate vicinity of the legionary camp when Augustus subsequently approved the project. As a special honor for Drusus, according to Suetonius, he is said to have personally written a funerary inscription (Elogium) that was attached to the cenotaph. The remnants of the building that are visible today as the Drusus stone are associated with this building.

location

Today the Drususstein lies on the Jakobsberg, a hill above the old town of Mainz in the south . There the structure stands about 115 m above sea level and thus in a dominant position above Mainz, which is located on the Rhine. In the second half of the 17th century, the Drususstein was surrounded by the late baroque Mainz citadel and has since stood in the southern pointed bastion called Bastion Drusus .

When the monument was built, the legionary camp that had been built a few years earlier was about 800 m away in a north-westerly direction. An open space in between, about 600 x 800 m in size, was presumably a training and parade field for the soldiers stationed there. The military rituals and equestrian games mentioned in ancient literature may also take place here in memory of Drusus. In about 340 m to the north-east and within sight of the Drusus stone, the Roman stage theater was later, which is interpreted in science as part of the cult ensemble within the framework of the Drusus veneration.

  • Location of the Drusus stone in Mogontiacum

  • Overview plan of the citadel as it was built in 1802 with the Drususstein location

Building research

For the first time, scientific observations on the Drususstein are mentioned as part of construction work in the 18th century. As part of underpinning measures to stabilize the Drusus stone, which was used by the military, its base and foundation were exposed, and the basic structure of the monument could thus be observed in situ . This happened at a time when in Mainz, due to increased building activity, especially on the fortifications, many Roman building remains were discovered and thus the interest in the Roman Mogontiacum increased significantly. A comprehensive study was carried out by members of the Mainz antiquity association in 1880 . In addition to surveying work, the lower completion of the Drusus stone was also examined. Renovation work on the property led to a significant deterioration in the building fabric in the 1960s, and the original constriction in the middle of the Drusus stone was filled with masonry, so that its characteristic shape was lost. Excavations and subsequent renovation measures on the building fabric by the Mainz Department of Archaeological Monument Preservation on the Drususstein since the 1990s and the removal of wild vegetation ensured the preservation of the Drusus stone. At the beginning of the 21st century, the Drusus stone and the large cuboids incorporated into it were precisely measured and evaluated as part of a scientific research project.

Structural description

In its current state, the Drususstein has the shape of a massive cylinder, flattened at the top and slightly tapering. On its northeast side, the Drususstein is around 21 m high. The structural remains can be divided into two sections: a square base as an only partially visible substructure and a cylindrical main part with a relatively even, flat end. A third section, the upper end of the cenotaph, which can be safely assumed, has not been preserved and can only be explored through comparative research in the area of ​​Roman monument and grave architecture. Any external disguise or decoration of the cenotaph has been absent since the early Middle Ages.

An only partially visible square substructure serves as the basis of the visible cylindrical structure. In its current state of preservation (2011), this has an edge length of around 12.20 m and an average height of around 10.31 m. Its corners are heavily weathered, so that the lower part of the cylindrical main body connects directly to the upper edge without any major indentation.

The visible remains of the cylindrical main section are on average around 11.94 m high and consist of a core masonry mass of mortar and rubble stones as well as individual large cuboids, which are scattered throughout. As the outer part of the cylinder, a masonry belt encloses the lower part of the cylindrical superstructure, encompasses the entire structure and has an almost circular cross-section. Due to various indicators such as construction joints and different materials, a production in several construction phases can be determined. Whitish limestone, red and light beige to whitish sandstone were used for this. Above this 3 to 4 m high section, the rest of the superstructure follows up to the end of the structure. The exposed cast masonry is relatively homogeneous and consists of rubble stones of roughly the same size that are broadly grouted with cement. Large blocks made of sandstone and limestone have been inserted into this area again, which, like some large blocks in other parts of the building, have arched traces of processing of a Roman pointed iron.

  • Drususstein north-east view with door and exposed plinth (status 2011)

  • Detailed view of the cylindrical superstructure with various building materials (status 2011)

  • Built-in large cuboid with traces of processing by Roman pointed iron (status 2011)

Changes to the cenotaph

Since its presumed completion not long after the death of Drusus in 9 BC. Chr. There were several strong interventions in the building fabric. The cenotaph probably suffered the first major damage as a result of the Batavian uprising , in which only the legionary camp stood up and remained undamaged. Corresponding findings are also known from the civil settlement, where, for example, the large stone thermal baths on Tritonplatz were destroyed during this period. A speedy repair and restoration of the cenotaph after the restoration of order can be assumed. It has long been suspected that spoils from the stone buildings destroyed by the rebels were used. The large cuboids described above were accordingly interpreted as spoils of destroyed stone buildings. The more recent structural investigations by Panter, however, did not reveal any verifiable connection or any indication of the use of spolia (see also the following chapter on the subject of "dating").

At an indefinite time in the early Middle Ages, the cenotaph must have been stripped of its exterior cladding, roof structure and possible decorations. It is possible that the more or less intact outer cladding of the cenotaph was still in place until the 10th or 11th century and was then used to build the medieval city wall or the neighboring monasteries and churches such as St. Jakob, St. Alban or St. Used Nikomed. In the middle of the 12th century, the chronicler Otto von Freising compares the appearance of the Drusus stone with that of a “pyre”: Monstrature adhuc monumentum eius Maguntiae in modum pirae. - His monument is still shown in Mainz in the form of a pyre . This first description of the external appearance of the Drusus stone possibly suggests the loss of the external cladding and a reduction of the cenotaph to the conical core. The pictorial representation, which began in the late Middle Ages, shows a cylindrical to conical stump with a clear constriction in the middle of the structure. In 1528, excavation work on the neighboring St. Jakob Monastery and the first documented construction interventions on the Drususstein are recorded. In 1552 an unsuccessful attempt was made to break off the Drususstein in order not to offer a strategic base for the advancing troops of the enemy margrave Albrecht von Brandenburg-Kulmbach . The conical, arched end of the cenotaph in Huttich's illustration from 1520 was, however, successfully leveled as part of the two interventions on the Drususstein, so that by the middle of the 16th century at the latest, the Drususstein appears with a flat upper end of the building.

At the end of the 17th century, the Drususstein was used as a watchtower and thus as part of the fortifications on the Jakobsberg. The structure of the Drusus stone was massively influenced by this. On the upper end of the cenotaph a viewing platform, which is no longer preserved, was attached. For this purpose, part of the outer masonry was removed. A doorway that is still visible today was inserted on the northeast side at a height of around 3.15 m. The branch passage behind it leads to a spiral staircase made of sandstone with 69 steps leading to the viewing platform, for the construction of which the inner cast core was hollowed out.

Restoration measures from the end of the 19th century changed the appearance, in some cases massively, in particular the construction work for the 2000 year celebration of the city of Mainz in 1962. In these, the previously characteristic constriction was filled and has not been visible since then. Further preservation measures of the building in the 1980s caused, from today's monument conservation point of view, a deterioration in the building fabric and the loss of details that are important for building research.

Dating and comparative classification in Roman grave architecture

The type and time of construction of the tomb of Caecilia Metella is comparable to the cenotaph of Drusus.

An exact dating of the Drusus stone, for example based on epigraphic , dendrochronological or archaeological findings, is not possible. If one follows the opinion widespread in science that the Drusus stone is identical to the cenotaph erected by Roman legionaries in honor of Drusus, the date should have been to the year 9 BC. Or just a little later. It can only be said with relative certainty that the Drusus stone must be the structural remnant of a building from Roman times. This results primarily from the established use of the Roman foot measurement (0.305 m) during construction. Further significant indications are traces of processing and processing on the building material used, such as the use of Roman pointed iron for surface treatment or the assumed use of inserted metal clips and pins to connect individual cuboids due to the corresponding sockets on the cuboids.

The allegedly built-in spoils on the Drususstein played an important role in earlier dating approaches. The large cuboids used in the construction have so far been addressed as spoils of large Roman buildings that were used in the Drususstein. This resulted in a conclusion on the dating of the Drusus stone (which was particularly widespread in the first half of the 20th century until the 1980s): Large Roman buildings, made in stone as the origin of the Spolia, were only suspected in Mogontiacum from the Vespasian period so that the use of possible spoils from these stone buildings resulted in a later dating and thus a possible different interpretation of the building. As a further development, historians later established a possible connection between the Spolia and the destruction in Mogontiacum by the Batavian Rebellion, during which large Roman stone buildings in Mogontiacum were destroyed, which is archaeologically verifiable. A structural refurbishment of the previously erected Drusus stone outside the camp after its probable damage using spoil from these buildings has now been accepted. This moved the dating of the building back towards a possible start of construction in the late first decade BC. An interpretation of the building as a cenotaph of Drusus was now also more likely. A detailed examination of the accessible building material by Panter at the beginning of the 21st century has now shown that addressing these large cuboids as spolia cannot be proven. Rather, it seems to be the case that these were deliberately built in as a planned structural reinforcement of the core structure when the building was built. From this point of view, there is nothing to speak of the earlier dating approach in the second third of the first century.

In the course of the structural analysis of the Drusus stone at the beginning of the 21st century, an attempt was made to classify the assumed reconstruction of the cenotaph in the Roman grave architecture. It was compared with Italian grave structures of the 1st century and especially with those from the capital Rome itself. A comparison with provincial Roman grave structures on the Rhine was not possible, as there were no structures comparable in size and purpose during this period. Within these parameters, a type comparable to the cenotaph of the Drusus was found, namely that of the tumulus with a podium or that of the tumulus with a cylindrical upper and square substructure. A comparable building is therefore, for example, that probably from the 2nd decade BC. BC tomb of Caecilia Metella on the Via Appia in Rome.

Attempts at reconstruction

Various attempts to reconstruct the cenotaph were made in the 19th and 20th centuries. The first reconstruction proposal came from Friedrich Lehne . A text written by Lehne as early as 1811 and an outline drawing from Lehne's plan of the fortress city of Mainz were summarized and published posthumously in 1838. Lehne already assumed a total height of 30 m and took up the design of the cenotaph in a square substructure and a cylindrical superstructure in a ratio of 1: 2. The semicircular roof end with a crowning eagle figure and other decorative details, however, arose from Lehne's imagination. Another detailed proposal came a year later, in 1839, from Nikolaus Müller . In his proposal, Müller tried to incorporate the centrally seated constriction on the Drusus stone, which the backrest did not take into account in his reconstruction approach. His proposal for proportioning differed from Lehne's; Müller proportioned the substructure and superstructure in a ratio of 1: 1. He also added numerous figures, friezes and a memorial inscription to Drusus Germanicus, in which he wrote the XIIII. and XVIII. Legion named as builder. The only reconstruction approach formulated in writing, however, is W. Usinger's reconstruction from 1880 directly on the results of the excavations of the Mainz antiquity association on the Drususstein. It is noticeable here that the structural data on the dimensions and dimensions of the Drusus stone already show a high level of agreement with the current results.

Another attempt at reconstruction by Johannes Ledroit dates back to 1931 and essentially takes up the features of the Lehnean reconstruction. For the first time, a conical roof finish is assumed, again crowned by an eagle figure. In his reconstruction drawing from 1962, Heinz Leitermann also retained this type including the roof. In the area of ​​the constriction of the Drusus stone built in 1962 by restoration measures in the area of ​​the cylindrical upper construction section, however, Leitermann suspected a circumferential column arrangement with Corinthian capitals, only indicated in the drawing, which stand slightly in front of the recessed masonry. Eagle figures and an inscription also adorn the cenotaph at Leitermann.

The latest reconstruction proposal from 1985 comes from Hans G. Frenz . He too proportions the entire structure in a ratio of 1: 1 and, like Usinger, refers to investigations on the structure itself.

  • Reconstruction by Friedrich Lehne, 1811

  • Reconstruction by Nikolaus Müller, 1839

  • Reconstruction attempt by Hans G. Frenz, 1985

In his work on the structural investigation of the Drusus stone, Panter undertook a possible ideal construction of the cenotaph taking into account Vitruvius's Ten Books on Architecture . If the results of the measurements at the beginning of the 21st century are brought into line with the proportions recommended by Vitruvius, the following original dimensions can be assumed: Substructure 48 Roman feet (= approx. 14.640 m) edge length and 36 Roman feet (= approx. 10.980 m) Height and thus a ratio of 4: 3. The cylindrical superstructure should have had the same dimensions. According to Vitruvius, the third and final component must have been a conical roof with an obligatory crowning figure. This would have to have a diameter of 48 Roman feet (= approx. 14.640 m) and a total height of 24 Roman feet (= approx. 7.320 m) and thus a proportion in the ratio 2: 1. From this, a total height of the cenotaph of 96 Roman feet (= approx. 29.280 m) can be determined.

Drususstein and imperial cult in Mogontiacum

With its establishment, the Drusus cenotaph immediately became the center of cultic and military celebrations in honor of Drusus. Due to the popularity of the deceased general among the Roman soldiers and their large number in Mogontiacum (up to the year 92, two legions and auxiliary troops, i.e. around 20,000 soldiers, were permanently stationed in Mogontiacum), the celebrations soon gained national and civil significance also had meaning for the civil settlement of Mogontiacum as a “political place of pilgrimage”. The cenotaph was the focus of annual cult and memorial celebrations (supplicatio) in honor of Drusus, to which members of the parliament of the three Gaulish provinces (concilium Galliarum) traveled. The Roman legions from Mogontiacum honored their former military leader with parades (decursio militum) and perhaps with sporting competitions. Especially for the legions of the Upper German Army stationed in Mogontiacum, the celebrations were a high point of garrison life, in which, in addition to the general Drusus, the achievements and armed deeds of his troops were appropriately recognized. For the members of the Tres Galliae , the celebrations were an occasion for public expressions of loyalty to the imperial family and the Roman authorities. The concilium Galliarum was also connected to Drusus in a special way, as he was in 12 BC. Was the founder of the concilium and imperial governor of the province.

The nearby theater, which is axially oriented directly to the Drususstein, with its more than 10,000 seats, should have been integrated into these celebrations. A later stone theater building (2nd century) was probably preceded by a wooden predecessor building in the earlier imperial era, which was included in the celebrations that took place at least once a year, probably in September.

The festivities, originally limited to Drusus, were later extended to his son Germanicus and the entire Julio-Claudian imperial family . From the early 2nd century at the latest, the original cult events merged into general celebrations as part of the imperial cult , which was of great importance in Mogontiacum as an important garrison town on the Rhine. The cult celebrations that began with the spontaneous honoring of Drusus lasted well into the 3rd century.

Starting point of the Via sepulcrum

Due to the importance and esteem of the cenotaph among the Roman provincial population and higher ranks of the military, a grave route based on the Italian model was created - with the cenotaph as the starting point (in Mainz modernly referred to as via sepulcrum ). This led from the cenotaph to the south in the direction of Mainz-Weisenau , where a second military camp and a civil and craft settlement was located in the 1st century. In the immediate vicinity of the cenotaph, the tomb of the Cassier, two brothers active in military service with the Legio XIIII Gemina , was built in the early 1st century , which was noticeable due to its size and high artistic quality. Further burials in the 1st and 2nd centuries followed on both sides of the road link.

The Drususstein in historiography

The cenotaph of Drusus was mentioned several times in Roman times. The first mention is in the Tabula Siarensis from the year 19 or shortly thereafter. There, the honors decided by the Senate for Germanicus , who had recently died , including an arch of honor for Germanicus in Mogontiacum, were described by the Senate . In this context, a tumulus for his father Drusus is mentioned ([ad tumu] lum Drusi) , which was quickly erected in accordance with a possible addition to the fragmentary text by Roman soldiers and was completed on the basis of a later permission from Augustus.

Suetonius also mentions the cenotaph in his De vita Caesarum , published around the year 120, in connection with a description of Drusus:

" Ceterum exercitus honorarium ei tumulum excitavit, circa quem deinceps stato die quotannis miles decurreret Galliarumque civitates publice supplicarent. ("The army also built him a grave of honor around which the soldiers parade every year on a certain day and on which the Gallic tribes made sacrifices by state." - translation after André Lambert) "

- Suetonius : Claudius 1,3

There is talk of a tumulus honorarius and both activities of the soldiers (running games, possibly in the sense of festive military exercises) and sacrificial acts of the Gallic citizens in this are mentioned. Suetonius also mentions an inscription written personally by Augustus, which was attached to the memorial of Drusus. Even Cassius Dio and Eutropius mention the building in the early third respectively in the late 4th century. In his work Breviarium ab urbe condita (written before 378) Eutropius described the cenotaph of Drusus as monumentum and for the first time specified its exact location (... apud Mogontiacum monumentum habet ...) . In contrast to the previously used term tumulus , the term monumentum is used here explicitly for a building made of stone. A somewhat later text passage in the Chronicle of Hieronymus (a Latin translation and continuation of the Chronicle of Eusebius ) refers almost literally to the Eutropius text and is the last mention of the cenotaph in antiquity.

The Drusus stone as a remnant of Roman Mainz that can be seen from afar was described and depicted again and again in the Middle Ages . First mentions of the Drusus stone in the 10th and further mentions in the 11th and 12th centuries, for example in the world chronicle of Marianus Scotus, were more or less textual repetitions of ancient authors, especially Eutropius. In an inscription from the St. Gallen monastery, the medieval term “Trûsilêh” is used for the Drusus stone for the first time. In his chronicle, written in the 12th century, Otto von Freising compares the shape of the Drusus monument with that of a “funeral pyre” and thus gives an indication of the appearance of the cenotaph at that time for the first time. When the Drusus stone was mentioned in the late Middle Ages (from around 1230), the relationship between the structural remnants and the person of Drusus was often lost, or the Drusus stone was misinterpreted as the tomb of Drusus. Since it was first mentioned in a document dated to 1268, the term “Eichelstein” or “Eigelstein” has become established, which is likely to be related to the shape of the Drusus stone from the later Middle Ages. It was not until the end of the 15th century, when humanists such as Konrad Celtes , Helius Eobanus Hessus and Johannes Huttich began to appreciate the historical building and its history , that ancient knowledge of the Drusus cenotaph became more present again.

Pictorial representations

Pictorial views of the Drusus stone are available from the early 16th century, for example in Celtes' book Quatuor libri amorum from 1502. One of the best-known illustrations from this period can be found in Johann Huttich's Collectanea antiquitatum in urbe atque agro Moguntino repertarum from 1520. In this publication Huttich said in a lengthy accompanying text about the ruinous condition of the monument and gives the reader the most important interpretations of the Drusus stone that were circulating at the time: a memorial for the emperor Severus Alexander, who was killed in 235 at Mogontiacum, or a tomb for the Roman general Drusus. In Franz Behem's city ​​view of Mainz from 1565, the Drususstein is shown schematically in a strongly exaggerated acorn shape and with a characteristic constriction. The first city map of Mainz by Gottfried Mascop from 1575 shows a realistically reproduced Drususstein in the middle of vineyards and in the immediate vicinity of the Benedictine monastery of St. Jakob.

Matthäus Merian published a copper engraving of the Drusus stone that is often shown in his Topographia Archiepiscopatus Moguntini in 1646 . It shows the Drususstein as part of its use as a watchtower for the ramparts of the Schweickhardtsburg, which was replaced by the citadel from 1661.

Numerous images and ideal constructions of the monument were part of this tradition, especially in the 18th and 19th centuries. The Drususstein and its surroundings were a popular motif of the Mainz painters such as Johann Kaspar Schneiders . Early personalities in Mainz's history such as Friedrich Lehne and Nikolaus Müller also tried to make reconstructions and sketched the current state of the monument. The first photographs of the Drusus stone date from 1892 and 1895/96.

The Drususstein was also the motif of a postage stamp issued by the Deutsche Bundespost in 1962 on the occasion of the 2000 year celebration of the city of Mainz.

literature

  • Heinz Bellen : The Drusus monument apud Mogontiacum and the Galliarum civitas. In: Ders .: Politics - Law - Society. Studies on ancient history (= Historia individual writings. No. 115). Steiner, Stuttgart 1997, ISBN 3-515-07150-4 , pp. 85-101 (reprint of the article from the yearbook of the Roman-Germanic Central Museum Mainz 31, 1984, 385-396 with addendum).
  • Karl-Viktor Decker , Wolfgang Selzer : Mainz from the time of Augustus to the end of Roman rule. In: Hildegard Temporini , Wolfgang Haase (Hrsg.): Rise and decline of the Roman world . History and culture of Rome as reflected in recent research. Volume II 5, 1, de Gruyter, Berlin 1976, ISBN 3-11-006690-4 , pp. 457-559.
  • Hans G. Frenz : Drusus maior and his monument to Mainz. In: Yearbook of the Roman-Germanic Central Museum Mainz 32, 1985, pp. 394–421.
  • Hans Ulrich Instinsky : Historical questions of the Mainz Drusus monument. In: Yearbook of the Roman-Germanic Central Museum in Mainz. 7, 1960, pp. 180-196
  • Andreas Panter: The Drususstein in Mainz and its classification in the Roman grave architecture of the time it was built (= Mainzer Archäologische Schriften. Volume 6). Archaeological Monument Preservation Office Mainz 2007, ISBN 978-3-935970-03-7 .
  • Franz Stephan Pelgen: Mainz. From the “miserable stone lump” to the monument. From the history of the Mainz Roman ruins. Zabern, Mainz 2003, ISBN 3-8053-3283-1 .
  • Wolfgang Selzer, Karl-Victor Decker, Anibal Do Paco : Roman stone monuments. Mainz in Roman times. Philipp von Zabern, Mainz 1988, ISBN 3-8053-0993-7 .
  • Wolfgang Spickermann : Mogontiacum (Mainz) as the political and religious center of the Germania superior. In: Hubert Cancik , Alfred Schäfer , Wolfgang Spickermann (eds.): Centrality and Religion (= studies and texts on antiquity and Christianity. Volume 39). Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2006, ISBN 3-16-149155-6 , pp. 167-194.

See also

Web links

Commons : Drususstein (Mainz)  - Collection of images, videos and audio files
Wikisource: Der Eichelstein (Sage)  - Sources and full texts

Remarks

  1. ↑ Eutropius Breviarium ab urbe condita , 7, 12-13; Suetonius: Claudius , 1.3 ; 11.2
  2. ^ Jürgen Oldenstein :  Mogontiacum. In: Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde (RGA). 2nd Edition. Volume 20, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin / New York 2001, ISBN 3-11-017164-3 , p. 147 .; Heinz Cüppers : The Romans in Rhineland-Palatinate. P. 463; Andreas Panter: The Drususstein in Mainz and its classification in the Roman grave architecture of the time it was built. P. 102.
  3. ^ Heinz Cüppers: The Romans in Rhineland-Palatinate. , P. 463
  4. ^ Marion Witteyer : Mogontiacum - military base and administrative center. The archaeological evidence. In: Franz Dumont , Ferdinand Scherf , Friedrich Schütz (Hrsg.): Mainz - The history of the city. P. 1026.
  5. ^ Hans G. Frenz: Drusus maior and his monument in Mainz. P. 394. Frenz leads this characterization to the ancient image of Drusus in Velleius Paterculus 2, 97, 2-4 and Tacitus : Annalen 2, 41 ; 6, 51 back.
  6. ↑ In detail: Heinz Bellen: Das Drususdenkmal apud Mogontiacum and the Galliarum civitas. Correction addendum. P. 96 ff. And in particular p. 98.
  7. ^ Suetonius: Claudius , 1, 5 .
  8. ^ Suetonius Claudius , 1, 3 .
  9. ↑ Decker and Selzer: Mainz from the time of Augustus to the end of Roman rule. P. 475.
  10. ^ Wolfgang Spickermann : Mogontiacum (Mainz) as the political and religious central place of the Germania superior. P. 169.
  11. ↑ In detail on this and also on the excavations of the Mainzer Altertumsverein by the architect W. Usinger in 1880: Hans G. Frenz: Drusus Maior und seine Monument zu Mainz.
  12. ^ Wilhelm Velke : The Eigelstein near Mainz. In: Journal of the association for research into the Rhenish history and antiquities. Volume 3, Mainz 1868-1887, pp. 364-382.
  13. ↑ Andreas Panter: The Drususstein in Mainz and its classification in the Roman grave architecture of the time it was built.
  14. ↑ The structural description is based on the most recent detailed investigations by Andreas Panter at the beginning of the 21st century. He received his doctorate in 2005 as a monument conservationist from the structural-architectural field, with his, also practical, investigation into the Drususstein. In cooperation with Gerd Rupprecht from the General Directorate for Cultural Heritage Rhineland-Palatinate - Directorate State Archeology Mainz, the book publication listed under literature was created as part of the Mainz Archaeological Writings .
  15. ↑ Tacitus, historiae , 4, 15
  16. ↑ For example, from the historian Hans Ulrich Instinsky : Historical questions of the Drusus monument in Mainz. In: Yearbook of the Roman-Germanic Central Museum in Mainz. 7, 1960, pp. 180-196; and by Karl-Viktor Decker, Wolfgang Selzer: Mainz from the time of Augustus to the end of Roman rule. S. 474. Also Heinz Bellen: The Drususdenkmal apud Mogontiacum and the Galliarum civitas. takes up the topic.
  17. ↑ Hans G. Frenz: Drusus Maior and his monument to Mainz. P. 417
  18. ↑ Chronicle III, 3.
  19. ↑ Quoted from Walter Lammers (ed.): Otto Frisingensis: Chronik or the history of the two states. Darmstadt 1990, pp. XXXI-XXXII.
  20. ↑ Interpretations of this text passage by Hans Ulrich Instinsky, among others: Historical questions of the Drusus monument in Mainz. In: Yearbook of the Roman-Germanic Central Museum in Mainz. 7, 1960, pp. 180-196.
  21. ↑ As a result of his structural investigations, Andreas Panter names the following damage due to the restoration measures in the second half of the 20th century: Removal of 12 large cuboids, grinding of large cuboids and thus destruction of Roman processing marks, poor cementing, covering and changes to the original building fabric. See also Andreas Panter: The Drususstein in Mainz and its classification in the Roman grave architecture of the time it was built. Pp. 65, 103.
  22. ↑ Andreas Panter: The Drususstein in Mainz and its classification in the Roman grave architecture of the time it was built. P. 102.
  23. ↑ Hans Ulrich Instinsky: Historical questions of the Mainz Drusus monument. In: Yearbook of the Roman-Germanic Central Museum in Mainz. 7, 1960, pp. 180-196; Karl-Viktor Decker, Wolfgang Selzer: Mainz from the time of Augustus to the end of Roman rule. P. 474; or Heinz Bellen: The Drusus monument apud Mogontiacum and the Galliarum civitas. P. 93.
  24. ↑ Andreas Panter: The Drususstein in Mainz and its classification in the Roman grave architecture of the time it was built. P. 80.
  25. ↑ Andreas Panter: The Drususstein in Mainz and its classification in the Roman grave architecture of the time it was built. P. 92 ff.
  26. ↑ Andreas Panter: The Drususstein in Mainz and its classification in the Roman grave architecture of the time it was built. P. 103.
  27. ↑ The latest annotated overview is provided by Andreas Panter: The Drususstein in Mainz and its classification in the Roman grave architecture of the time it was built. P. 49 ff.
  28. ^ Friedrich Lehne: The Eichelstein to Mainz. In: Philipp Hedwig Külb (ed.): Fr. Lehne's, professors and city librarians in Mainz, collected writings. Volume 3, Mainz 1838, pp. 133-146 ( online ).
  29. ↑ Nikolaus Müller: The Eichelstein, the honorary monument of Drusus in Mainz. In: Annals of the Society for Nassau antiquity and historical research. Volume 3, Issue 1, Wiesbaden 1839, pp. 3-38 ( online ).
  30. ↑ Johannes Ledroit: How did the Drususstein at Mainz once look like? In: The home. Middle Rhine and Hessenland. 7th year, issue 7, 1931, p. 103 ff.
  31. ^ Heinz Leitermann: Two thousand years of Mainz. Verlag Hans Krach, Mainz, 1962, p.?.
  32. ^ Hans G. Frenz: Drusus maior and his monument to Mainz. P. 412 ff.
  33. ↑ Andreas Panter: The Drususstein in Mainz and its classification in the Roman grave architecture of the time it was built. P. 92 ff.
  34. ↑ Peter Herz : The ceremony for Drusus maior and Germanicus in Mogontiacum . In: Wolfgang Spickermann (Hrsg.): Religion in the Germanic provinces of Rome .
  35. ^ Wolfgang Spickermann: Mogontiacum (Mainz) as the political and religious central place of the Germania superior. P. 168.
  36. ↑ In detail: Heinz Bellen : Das Drususdenkmal apud Mogontiacum and the Galliarum civitas . In: ders .: Politics - Law - Society. Studies on ancient history (= Historia individual writings. No. 115). Pp. 85 ff. (First 1984).
  37. ↑ Heinz Bellen: The Drususdenkmal apud Mogontiacum and the Galliarum civitas . P. 93 ff.
  38. ^ Duncan Fishwick: The imperial cult in the Latin West. Studies in the ruler cult of the Western provinces of the Roman Empire . Brill, Leiden, 2004, ISBN 9004128069 , p. 369.
  39. ↑ Heinz Bellen: The Drususdenkmal apud Mogontiacum and the Galliarum civitas . P. 87 ff.
  40. ↑ Heinz Bellen: The Drususdenkmal apud Mogontiacum and the Galliarum civitas. P. 95.
  41. ↑ CIL 6, 40348 . Cf. Andreas Panter: The Drususstein in Mainz and its classification in the Roman grave architecture of the time it was built. P. 18.
  42. ↑ According to the supplemented text and reading according to Bellen and Lebek, see Panter, p. 18 ff. The additions refer to the passage from Suetonius cited below.
  43. ↑ Cassius Dio 55, 2, 1 ( English translation )
  44. ↑ Andreas Panter: The Drususstein in Mainz and its classification in the Roman grave architecture of the time it was built. P. 28 ff., P. 36.
  45. ↑ Passed on in: Georg Christian Joannis : Rerum Moguntiacarum volumen II. Frankfurt 1722, p. 568. The corresponding text passage of the document reads: ... vinea prope saxum glandiforme ... , ... a vineyard near the acorn-shaped stone .. . [translation quoted by Franz Falk : Roman buildings in and around Mainz to medieval documents. In: Mainz magazine. 2, 1907, p. 38].
  46. ↑ Online .
  47. ↑ Online .
This article was added to the list of excellent articles on November 21, 2011 in this version .

Coordinates: 49 ° 59 ′ 31.7 "  N , 8 ° 16 ′ 27.2"  E