Qasr Bshir

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Georeferencing Map with all coordinates: OSM | WikiMap
Qasr Bshir
Alternative name Castra Praetorii Mobeni , Praetorium Mobeni
limes Limes Arabiae et Palestinae
section Limes Arabicus
(front Limes line)
Dating (occupancy) 293/305 AD
to early 5th AD
Type Quadriburgium
unit unknown
size 56.30 m (
SE ) × 57.05 m (SW) ×
56.75 m (NW) ×
55.45 m (NE) (= 0.31 ha)
Construction stone
State of preservation Very well preserved corner towers, some of which have been preserved up to the first floor. Due to its dilapidation, the facility is considered to be at great risk.
place Qasr Baschir
Geographical location 31 ° 20 '14.1 "  N , 35 ° 58' 51.5"  E
height 800  m
Previous Qasr eth-Thuraiya
(front Limes line) (north)
Subsequently Umm Ubtulah
(front Limes line) (south)
Backwards Qasr Abu el-Kharaq
(rear Limes line) (northwest) ;

Khirbet el-Fityan
(rear Limes line) (southwest)

The Praetorium Mobeni from the southwest (2011)
View from the east of the fort (2018)

The Qasr Bshir , Latin Castra Praetorii Mobeni or Praetorium Mobeni , Arabic قصر بشير, DMG Qaṣr Bašīr , also known as Qasr Beshir and Qasr Bashir, is a late Roman military camp whose crew was responsible for security and surveillance tasks on the front Limes Arabiae et Palestinae in the late ancient province of Arabia . The remains of the fortification, some of which have been preserved up to the second floor, form the best preserved fort in present-day Jordan , even if numerous earthquakes have caused severe damage. The monument, which is highly endangered by dilapidation and vandalism, is located about eighty kilometers south of the Jordanian capital Amman at 800 meters above sea level and 15 kilometers northwest of today's small town Al Qatrana . Since 2001 it has been on the tentative list for inclusion in the UNESCO World Heritage ( World Heritage in Jordan ).

location

The Praetorium Mobeni is only about 15 kilometers, i.e. about a day's march, northeast of the legionary camp Betthorus (el-Lejjun) in the wide, slightly hilly plain of the Jordanian steppe, which is around 8,000 square kilometers in size. The table landscape around the fort is criss-crossed by numerous flat small wadis, all of which drain westward into Wadi Mudschib when there is rare rainfall . In the north, about three kilometers away, there is a range of hills that overlooks Wadi Su'eida, a tributary to Wadi Mujib. About two kilometers to the east is a low ridge. The climate corresponds to the subtropical- arid zono biom , which is typical for desert landscapes.

The garrison lies in the middle of a flat depression on the west side of a slight topographical elevation and is oriented to the south-west. A small deposit of loess covers this elevation. From the towers of the fortification the soldiers had an excellent view of the treeless land. The view was only restricted to the south. The adjacent Limes watchtowers Qasr Abu el-Kharaq and Qasr el-Al were also within sight. In the west, the fertile, inhabited region of the Moabitian plateau could be seen over the Wadi Mujib .

With the Praetorium Mobeni , the Romans had established a central position in the border protection system of this desert border. The quadriburgium secured Rome in this area, together with Qasr eth-Thuraiya , located just five kilometers to the north, of the southeastern border of the Roman Empire, which had to be defended against looting by Arab nomads and later against the Sassanids . As in most of the border zones of the Roman Empire, the Limes Arabicus did not consist of a continuous, closed barrage , but of a system of legionary camps, forts, control stations and watchtowers arranged in a chain.

Research history

The fort became known for the first time through two research trips carried out in 1897 and 1898 by the Austrian ancient historian Alfred von Domaszewski (1856–1927) and the German-American philologist Rudolf Ernst Brünnow (1858–1917), which covered the Roman Limes and many others visited ancient sites in the former province of Arabia. They were also the first to report on the building inscription.

The biblical archaeologist Nelson Glueck (1900–1971), who visited many buildings of the Roman Limes in Jordan in the second half of the 1930s, showed no closer interest in the Qasr Bshir and referred to von Domaszewski's and Brünnows descriptions.

Despite these early investigations, the Limes in what is now Jordan was one of the least investigated border regions of the Roman Empire in the period that followed until the early 1980s. The decisive contribution to the modern research of the late antique Limes Arabicus was made by the investigations of the American provincial Roman archaeologist Samuel Thomas Parker , who undertook archaeological expeditions from 1980 to 1989 with a team of scientists from different disciplines. As head of the Limes Arabicus Project , he focused on the Roman border in central Jordan. The project was funded primarily through grants from the National Endowment for the Humanities during the research campaigns of 1980 and 1982 , with additional support from the Jordanian Antiquities Service, North Carolina State University , Dumbarton Oaks Center for Byzantine Studies, and the American Philosophical Society . Additional funding came from the National Geographic Society , the Samuel H. Kress Foundation, and private donors.

For Parker, the Praetorium Mobeni assumed a three-fold key role at the Arab Limes in Jordan, as the complex is not only the best-preserved Roman fortification in the country and its architectural structure deserves special attention, but also because the date of construction from this site was determined by the The building inscription found in situ has been preserved. As a third point, the archaeologist cited the investigations he carried out during the second and third field campaigns of the project in the June and July months of 1982 and 1985, through which stratifiable coins and ceramics could be recovered. The ceramic fragments recovered in 1982 were able to confirm the date of the broken fragments found during a field inspection in 1976.

Another important step in researching the eastern Roman desert border and its structures was provided by the evaluation of historical aerial photographs from the first half of the twentieth century. However, since after the Second World War local political and military restrictions mostly prevented civilian aerial photography in this region, systematic aerial archaeological investigations were no longer possible until the end of the twentieth century. Since 1995, however, the archaeologists have been able to rely on older, now released photo archives that were made by the early US reconnaissance satellites between 1960 and 1972 when researching the broader context in this Limes zone. Photos around the Qasr Bshir area could also be analyzed.

Building history

Stratigraphies on the Limes Arabicus

During his research expeditions into the late antique Limes Arabicus, Parker set up a stratigraphic scheme which served to simplify the assignment of the secured Roman and Byzantine finds and findings.

Stratum Time position approximate dating
VI late Roman 284-324
VB early Byzantine I 324-363
VA early Byzantine II 363-400
IV early Byzantine III − IV 400-502
III late Byzantine I − II 502-551

The fortification of the Limes Arabicus in this area began with the annexation of the Nabatean Empire during the reign of Emperor Trajan (98–117) in AD 106. To secure the newly won territories, the emperor left between AD 107 and 114 with the Establish a military road along the Limes via Traiana Nova running from south to north, stretching from the port city of Aila ( Akaba ) on the Red Sea to the legionary camp of Bostra in present-day Syria. The Legio III Cyrenaica stationed there was responsible for building the road. Over the centuries, the Roman army was repeatedly forced to expand the border fortifications. With the reforms of Emperor Diocletian and the growing threat from the Sassanids, these efforts reached a climax. The Praetorium Mobeni was on a road section upstream of the Via Traiana Nova . Archaeologically verifiable, this connected to the Via Traiana Nova in the north near Amman . In the south, the course is speculative. But here, too, a connection to Via Traiana Nova is clearly to be expected.

Building inscription

The building inscription carved into the lintel above the main entrance to the complex. The picture clearly shows the costly damage caused by the illegal sprayer scene (2018)

With the building inscription reproduced on a tabula ansata , which is still located above the south-western main entrance, the establishment of the complex can be dated to the years between 293 and 305 AD, i.e. the time of the first tetrarchy . With the phrase “a fundamentis”, the inscription also makes it clear that a new building was erected on this site that was not preceded by a predecessor, as predicted by older research.

Optimistic maximisque principibus nostris Caio Aurelio
Valerio Diocletiano Pio Felici et Invicto Augusto
Marco Aurelio Valerio Maximiano Pio Felici et Invicto Augusto
Flavio Valerio et Constantio Galerio Valerio Maximiano
nobilissimis Caesaribus castra praetorii Mobeni a fundamentis
Aurelius Asclepiades praeses provinciae Arabiae
perfici curavit

Translation: “In honor of our best and greatest rulers, Gaius Aurelius Valerius Diocletianus , our pious, happy and undefeated ruler, and Marcus Aurelius Valerius Maximianus , our pious, happy and undefeated ruler, and for Flavius ​​Valerius Constantius and Galerius Valerius Maximianus, our noblest Casesaren , ordered Aurelius Asclepiades , governor of the province of Arabia, to build Castra Praetorii Mobeni from scratch. "

Water management

As the building inscription reports, the fort was built at the behest of the provincial governor (praeses) Aurelius Asclepiades. It supposedly had the task of serving as a safeguard against the increasing threat from the Sassanids at that time. Even more important, however, is the connection, often established in the desert regions, between the control of the vital wells and cisterns and their monitoring by the Roman army. The Wadi Mujib, through which the rare rainfall in the region was collected, was used by the soldiers to create a water pipe on the ground that was connected to a large, rectangular basin that they built less than a kilometer from their fort. It is believed that the reservoir built in the middle of a wadi was created at the same time as the Praetorium Mobeni was built. The water collector, built from well-hewn stones, was restored and can be used again today in its original function for Bedouins . Five cisterns were also set up inside the fort, which enabled the crew to be well supplied.

Enclosure

The north tower - some of the towers are almost completely preserved (2011)
In the stairwell of the north tower (2011)

The facility has an almost square floor plan with side lengths of 56.30 meters (SE) × 57.05 meters (SW) × 56.75 meters (NW) × 55.45 meters (NE) (= 0.31 hectares). The partly rough, partly stronger and smoother masonry of the enclosure is double-shelled. On the outside, in the lower layers, it consists of mostly thick, mostly cuboid stone of different lengths and heights. The sometimes uneven layering of these blocks was compensated for by inserting narrow stone slabs. These monumental-looking blocks are missing from the inner wall shell. The wall core between the two shells is filled with broken stones mixed with mortar. On the outside, the size of the stone material used gradually decreases towards the top. While the Roman builders left it in the area of ​​the lower, massive stone layers with a non-jointed layering, the smaller, upper workpieces are set in mortar and grouted. The defensive wall was measured at its foot with a thickness of 1.50 meters. It tapers a little in its upper areas. It was found that the height of the wall, including the stone parapet with the now lost battlements, must have been around 6.5 meters. The soldiers reached the parapet via the corner towers. Appropriate entrances were located there. Plastering could only be found on the inner surfaces of the system.

Corner towers

The four three-storey corner towers, designed as rectangular flanking towers, which are the outstanding feature of the late antique building type of the Quadriburgii , protrude 3.05 meters from the surrounding wall and have a square base area of ​​11 to 12 meters. They each cover an area of ​​10 to 20 square meters. With a height of just over 10 meters, the best-preserved corner tower is the southwestern one. Each floor area of ​​these towers was divided into three rooms. The largest of these rooms took up the outer corner and was measured with a clear dimension of around 5.50 × 4.60 meters. The other two rooms were around 3 × 3.30 meters and 2.90 × 4.70 meters. On the ceilings vaulted with stone arches, long stone beams rested, the ends of which were embedded in the outer walls. The floor of the upper floors was laid over the stone girders and probably consisted of stone slabs. At the corner facing the central courtyard there was a rectangular staircase in each of the four towers. This opened up the building to the flat roof that was accessible. The roughly 1.10 meter wide rectangular staircase rose in the shape of a spindle with the aid of intermediate landings. Among other things, one of their intermediate landings had been created in front of each floor entrance. The steps of the stairs, which are set as stone slabs, are set into two inner flanks of the tower wall on the one hand, and into the central rectangular staircase pillar on the other, which is located in the middle of the staircase. The top floor of the flanking towers was probably designed as a flat roof with parapet , which was used for monitoring and signaling and could also be used as a combat platform in the event of a defense. The fortifications only have small slotted windows on the third floors facing the enemy. Below that, on the level of the second floor, there were only very narrow loopholes in both the towers and the defensive wall.

Accesses

The west tower with the main entrance on the left side and the slip gate below the tower (1986)

The single-lane, 2.65-meter-wide main portal is located in the middle of the south-western perimeter wall and is flanked by two towers, which also protrude from the wall at three meters and are six meters wide. Above the portal is the lintel made from a block of stone with the building inscription, above which a relief arch rises. Access to these two towers was through a rectangular room each on the ground floor and first floor. With their flanks, these rooms form the Torgasse within the fort and face the inner courtyard. The gate towers could be entered both from the ground floor and from the floor above. Adjacent to the western corner tower there is a 0.95 meter wide hatch in the north-western perimeter wall. A 1.30 meter wide passage, which was covered by a barrel vault, led through this gate from the central courtyard of the fort to the outside. Small entrances of this kind are not atypical for a number of late antique military buildings. Remnants of the battlement have been preserved on the surrounding wall.

Interior development

Remnants of the plastering remained on the south tower (1986)

The interior of the fort consists of a large central four-sided courtyard. The massive curtains laid out between the four mighty corner towers were built on all around with rectangular, two-storey suites of rooms, the walls of which met the fence at right angles. There they were partially interlocked with the inner formwork of the curtains. It can therefore be assumed that this spatial arrangement was created at the same time as the construction of the weir system. These four room lines surrounding the interior of the fortification had seven lanes on each floor along the north-east and south-east side and six along the north-west and south-west side, making a total of 26 rooms per floor. On the second floor, the rooms were vaulted by two double arches. The dimensions of the individual rooms vary slightly, but correspond to around five square meters, which is roughly the same as the staff barracks in the Betthorus legion camp and the Khirbet el-Fityan fort . On the northeast side, opposite the main entrance, was the largest, probably representative rectangular room. This was in front of the actual room suite along the curtain wall there and thus had a back room. The height of the interior of the fort, which had largely collapsed due to earthquakes, corresponded to the height of the surrounding wall, so that its flat roofs could also serve as combat platforms in the event of a defense.

It is possible that feeding troughs have been set into the walls of several rooms on the ground floor, which could speak for stables. This assumption includes a total of 69 niches in 23 rooms, three of which were in one room. According to Domaszewski and Brünnow, these niches were embedded on the inside of the curtains, they were 1.40 meters above the burial horizon and the width they stated was 0.80 meters. According to other information, the niches were 0.70 meters above the ground, measured around one meter in width, 0.60 meters in depth and 1.20 meters in height. The niche floor is flat and does not show any hollows for receiving feed. However, the assumption is that there may have been a wooden structure that served as a nativity scene. According to this scenario, the rooms above would have been crew quarters. Parker indicated that all of these considerations are hypothesized. Unfortunately, the stationed unit is not mentioned in the building inscription, nor is the fort mentioned in the late Roman state manual Notitia dignitatum .

Panoramic photo of the interior, taken from the north tower (2011)

Possible vicus structures

Extramural remains near the fort with a view to the northeast (1986)

To the west of the fort, the remains of two interconnected buildings can be seen that might have belonged to the vicus , the camp village. The dating of the pottery picked up there on the surface suggest that these ruins cannot be older than perhaps a few years before the fort itself. They would then have emerged in the late 3rd century at the earliest. However, it is also possible to date these outdoor facilities at the same time as the construction of the fort or to add them later. These questions can only be answered by excavation.

Ceramics

During the 1976 field inspection, a total of 218 ceramic shards were collected. Of the 74 fragments that can be precisely dated, 34 sherds belong to the late Roman epoch, which can be assigned to Stratum IV, and 40 early Byzantine sherds, which belong to the period I − II. The pottery suggests a single continuous period of occupation, which lasted from the late 3rd or early 4th century to the late 4th or early 5th century. The ceramic typologist who was then busy with the evaluation dated these shards without prior knowledge of the building inscription.

Two explorations were carried out in 1982 to obtain a full stratigraphic history of the fort. One probe was made in the southwest corner of the central courtyard, the second in the corner of a room along the southern wall. Unexpectedly, a small amount of Umayyad pottery emerged from the rubble in the southwest corner under the topsoil . This gave a first indication of a certain Arab subsequent use of the fort. The context of the find material, the lack of similar ceramics in the second probe and the absence of further Umayyad ceramic fragments during the field inspections indicated that Arab use must have been limited. Under the Umayyad stratum, a series of superimposed layers of earth and ash emerged, all of which, according to Parker's system, dated to the early Byzantine periods I-II. The layers contained ceramics and a coin from the reign of Emperor Constantius II (337-361) which was to be assigned to the years 347/348. The four lowest of these layers could be clearly assigned to the garrison period and were rich in broken glass and animal bones. The lowest layer, which was reached in 1982, rested on a plaster floor that was no longer broken through.

The second probe from 1982 in one of the rooms brought to light fallen masonry in several layers, alternating with ash lenses. All strata contained ceramics from the 4th century and a coin dating from 340 to 365. The layers were above a leveling layer that was leveling the terrain and was above the existing soil. A large amount of animal bones, which also included small remains of horse and camels, as well as the already mentioned cribs, which were built into several rooms on the ground floor, suggest that a cavalry unit was barracked in the fort.

Taxa

Riding and work animals

The animal bones obtained from the early Byzantine strata VB to IV of the Qasr Bshir reflect the same result in their percentage of quantity and taxa for donkeys, horses and dromedaries , as is known from the corresponding strata at the Betthorus legionary camp . In addition, the samples from both garrisons show a similar camel-to-donkey ratio for the late Roman stratum VI (approx. 2: 1) and for the strata VB to IV (approx. 1: 1). As in Betthorus , horses at Qasr Bshir are only represented by an extremely small number of bones. Only three fragments have been found in the late Roman and early Byzantine context.

Slaughter cattle

In a comparison between the food deliverers from the legionary camp Betthorus and the Praetorium Mobeni , comparable results were found with three exceptions. No pig bones were recovered from the late Byzantine deposits of the quadiburgium (stratum III) and the frequency of pig bones in the late Roman and early Byzantine strata VI to IV is lower than in the legionary camp. The same was true of the chicken bones, which in Strata VI to IV at Qasr Bshir are even considerably lower. The third exception is the cattle, which in the early Byzantine period (Strata VB to IV) of the Qasr are represented with only a single fragment. However, the research made it clear that the variations in these three taxa cannot be explained by different procurement strategies, culinary practices, or dietary preferences. Rather, the state of preservation of the archaeofaunal remains on the Qasr is extraordinarily poor, as 80 percent of all recorded mammal and bird fragments are less than a quarter of their original length. The highly fragmented taxonomic skeletal material from this site can most likely be explained by taphonomic processes and is only of limited use for a comparative analysis.

Wildlife

The American anthropologist Michael Richard Toplyn of Harvard University , who was involved in Parker's research on Limes Arabicus , found in his breakdown of the collected tax material in 2006 that the animal bones collected at the Betthorus legionary camp and at Qasr Bshir were the clear focus of the Limes project on domesticated farm animals . For this reason he could not make a percentage determination of the real occurrence of these animals during antiquity from the wild taxa made available to him, even due to a lack of extensive research on this topic. However, small species such as hares, foxes and unidentifiable birds could be depicted. Toplyn was also able to make it clear that the wild fauna and avifauna did not significantly contribute to the economy or nutrition of the Roman soldiers at the legionary site and at Qasr Bshir.

Late and late

The Praetorium Mobeni was used by the Roman military throughout the 4th century. As early as the early fifth century, however, the traces of use subsided and, according to the prehistorian Johanna Ritter-Burkert (2018), the garrison was probably abandoned in this secular area. Parker decided in 1990 that the fort would be abandoned no later than 500 AD.

During his reign, Emperor Justinian I (527-565) transferred the defense to the Ghassanids for a short time in the early 6th century , but the Limes Arabicus ceased to exist soon afterwards. To what extent the Praetorium Mobeni still played a role at all at this time is unknown. A late Byzantine occupation of this period cannot be proven. Under the Umayyads , the abandoned Qasr Bshir seems to have been used as a caravanserai . Damaged by an earthquake in the 8th century, the former fort was finally abandoned.

criticism

The 1993 vehemently guided submissions of Israel the ancient historian Benjamin Isaac of Roman politics and society, but also the Roman army and the Roman Limites were of several scientists, including 1,993 already by specializing in Roman military history German-Americans Michael P. Speidel and 2000 by the Provincial Roman archaeologist Michaela Konrad in her habilitation thesis, rejected or viewed critically in parts. The Italian historian Antonio Santosuosso (1936-2014), who specializes in early medieval history, however, considered Isaac's work to be “brilliant” in 2007 and the German ancient historian Peter Kehne saw in 2004 in the book with reference to the Hebrew sources used, which the Roman army as a police force and executive Describe the organ of the imperial tax authority, a standard work. Isaac rejected the research work done by Samuel Thomas Parker on the Qasr Bshir and described, among other things, with the help of texts from the Talmud, a Roman Empire already internally rejected and disintegrated by its own population, which acted as a surveillance state. The army was haphazard and there were no overall strategies developed by military commanders. In the Roman military, decisions were made by groups formed ad hoc. And without the comprehensive strategies that would have been necessary to develop border fortifications, there could be no clearly defined borders in the east. Therefore, Isaac speaks specifically the Praetorium Mobeni a strategic military role within the late Roman Limes, and interprets the term Castra as Statio and thus as the quarters for the Cursus publicus , as Mutationes (exchange stations for draft animals and wagons) and an inn ( mansio ) , which could also be used by passing soldiers. Issac wrote, among other things: “An important building (Qasr Beshir) is clearly identifiable as an administrative center and not as a border guard entity; ... ” He went on to explain that the term praetorium, which is inscribed on Qasr Beshir , is said to have lost its military meaning during the early Principate and was then only used for the residence of a governor in a city or along a Roman road. Isaac cites the New Testament as evidence . In the Praetorii , and therefore also in the as Castrum called desert fort Praetorium Mobeni was then spoken aloud Issac by the governor and the right contact with the population maintained.

literature

  • Hans-Peter Kuhnen (ed.): Desert border of the Roman Empire. The Roman Limes in Israel and Jordan . Nünnerich-Asmus, Mainz 2018, ISBN 978-3-96176-010-7 .
  • Michael R. Toplyn: Livestock and limitanei. The zoo archaeological evidence . In: Samuel Thomas Parker (Ed.): The Roman Frontier in Central Jordan. Final Report on the Limes Arabicus Project, 1980-1989 (= Dumbarton Oaks Studies 40), Washington, DC, 2006, ISBN 0-88402-298-6 , pp. 463-507.
  • Geoffrey Greatrex , Samuel Lieu (eds.): The Roman Eastern frontier and the Persian wars. Volume 2: AD 363-630. A narrative sourcebook. Routledge, London et al. 2002, ISBN 0-415-14687-9 .
  • David Leslie Kennedy: The Roman Army in the Levant. The british council for research in the Levant, London 2000, ISBN 978-0-9539102-1-2
  • David Leslie Kennedy, Derrick Newton Riley: Rome's Desert Frontier from the Air BT Batsford Limited, London 2004, ISBN 0-203-78927-X , pp. 176-178.
  • Samuel Thomas Parker: The Limes Arabicus Project. The 1985 Campaign . In: Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 30, 1986, pp. 233-252; here: p. 247.
  • Samuel Thomas Parker: Romans and Saracens. A History of the Arabian Frontier . (= Dissertation Series / American Schools of Oriental Research 6), Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake 1986, ISBN 0-89757-106-1 , pp. 53-55.
  • Samuel Thomas Parker, John Wilson Betlyon , Michael R. Toplyn : Preliminary Report on the 1987 Season of the Limes Arabicus Project (= Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. Supplementary Studies 26). Preliminary Reports of ASOR-Sponsored Excavations 1983-1987, The American Schools of Oriental Research, 1990, pp. 89-136.
  • Nelson Glueck : Explorations in Eastern Palestine, III . In: The Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research 18/19, 1937-1939, pp. 105-107.

Web links

Commons : Qasr Bshir  - collection of images, videos and audio files

Remarks

  1. ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Johanna Ritter-Burkert: Qasr Bshir - Praetorium Mobeni (JO) . In: Hans-Peter Kuhnen (Ed.): Desert border of the Roman Empire. The Roman Limes in Israel and Jordan . Nünnerich-Asmus, Mainz 2018, ISBN 978-3-96176-010-7 , pp. 136-139; here: p. 137.
  2. ↑ a b Johanna Ritter-Burkert: Qasr Bshir - Praetorium Mobeni (JO) . In: Hans-Peter Kuhnen (Ed.): Desert border of the Roman Empire. The Roman Limes in Israel and Jordan . Nünnerich-Asmus, Mainz 2018, ISBN 978-3-96176-010-7 , pp. 136-139; here: p. 138.
  3. ↑ a b Hans-Peter Kuhnen : Desert Frontier of the Roman Empire - The Fateful Frontier of Rome in the Orient from Augustus to Heraclius . In: Hans-Peter Kuhnen (Ed.): Desert border of the Roman Empire. The Roman Limes in Israel and Jordan . Nünnerich-Asmus, Mainz 2018, ISBN 978-3-96176-010-7 , pp. 1–116; here: p. 138.
  4. ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k l m Samuel Thomas Parker: Romans and Saracens. A History of the Arabian Frontier . (= Dissertation Series / American Schools of Oriental Research 6), Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake 1986, ISBN 0-89757-106-1 , p. 53.
  5. ↑ Betthorus Legionary Camp
  6. ↑ Nasim Barham: Geographical Problems of Rain Agriculture in Jordan (= Dissertation ), University of Hanover, 1979, p. 35.
  7. ↑ Heinz Ullrich Baierle: Vegetation and flora in south-western Jordan (= Dissertationes Botanicae 200), Cramer / Borntraeger, Berlin, Stuttgart 1993, ISBN 3-443-64112-1 , p. 11.
  8. ↑ a b c http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/1553
  9. ↑ Qasr Abu el-Kharaq
  10. ^ Qasr el-Al
  11. ^ Samuel Thomas Parker : History of the Roman Frontier East of the Dead Sea . In: Samuel Thomas Parker (Ed.): The Roman Frontier in Central Jordan. Final Report on the Limes Arabicus Project, 1980-1989 (= Dumbarton Oaks Studies 40), Washington, DC, 2006, ISBN 0-88402-298-6 ; P. 517 ff .; here: p. 549.
  12. ↑ Qasr eth-Thuraiya
  13. ^ Alfred von Domaszewski, Rudolf Ernst Brünnow: The Provincia Arabia on the basis of two trips undertaken in the years 1897 and 1898 and the reports of earlier travelers described. Volume 2: The outer Limes and the Roman roads from el-Maan to Bo.sra . Trübner, Strasbourg 1905. p. 57 ff .; here: p. 48.
  14. ↑ Nelson Glueck : Explorations in Eastern Palestine, III . In: The Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research 18/19, 1937-1939, pp. 105-107.
  15. ^ Samuel Thomas Parker: Romans and Saracens: A History of the Arabian Frontier . (= Dissertation Series / American Schools of Oriental Research 6), Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake 1986, ISBN 0-89757-106-1 , p. XIII.
  16. ^ Suzanne Richard, Samuel Thomas Parker: The Roman castellum of Khirbet el-Fityan . In: Samuel Thomas Parker (ed.): The Roman Frontier in Central Jordan (= BAR International Series 340), Oxford 1987, p. 8.
  17. ^ David L. Kennedy: Aerial Archeology in the Middle East. The Role of the Military - Past, Present ... and Future? . In: Robert H. Bewley, Wlodzimierz Raczkowski (Ed.): Aerial Archeology. Developing Future Practice, (= NATO Science Series 1: Life and Behavioral Sciences 337). IOS Press, Amsterdam 2002. pp. 33-48.
  18. ^ Robert A. McDonald: Opening the Cold War sky to the public. Declassifying satellite reconnaissance imagery . In: Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 61 (1995), pp. 385-390.
  19. ↑ Samuel Thomas Parker, John Wilson Betlyon, Michael R. Toplyn: Preliminary Report on the 1987 Season of the Limes Arabicus Project (= Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. Supplementary Studies 26). Preliminary Reports of ASOR-Sponsored Excavations 1983-1987, The American Schools of Oriental Research, 1990, pp. 89-136; here: p. 90.
  20. ↑ Hans-Peter Kuhnen : Desert Frontier of the Roman Empire - The Fateful Frontier of Rome in the Orient from Augustus to Heraclius . In: Hans-Peter Kuhnen (Ed.): Desert border of the Roman Empire. The Roman Limes in Israel and Jordan . Nünnerich-Asmus, Mainz 2018, ISBN 978-3-96176-010-7 , pp. 1–116; here: p. 76.
  21. ↑ Hans-Peter Kuhnen : Desert Frontier of the Roman Empire - The Fateful Frontier of Rome in the Orient from Augustus to Heraclius . In: Hans-Peter Kuhnen (Ed.): Desert border of the Roman Empire. The Roman Limes in Israel and Jordan . Nünnerich-Asmus, Mainz 2018, ISBN 978-3-96176-010-7 , pp. 1–116; here: p. 36.
  22. ^ Samuel Thomas Parker: The Limes Arabicus Project. The 1985 Campaign . In: Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 30, 1986, pp. 233-252; here: p. 247.
  23. ↑ CIL 3, 14149 .
  24. ^ Johanna Ritter-Burkert: Qasr Bshir - Praetorium Mobeni (JO) . In: Hans-Peter Kuhnen : Desert border of the Roman Empire - Rome's limit of fate in the Orient from Augustus to Heraclius . In: Hans-Peter Kuhnen (Ed.): Desert border of the Roman Empire. The Roman Limes in Israel and Jordan . Nünnerich-Asmus, Mainz 2018, ISBN 978-3-96176-010-7 , pp. 1–116; here: p. 139.
  25. ↑ Reservoir at the Praetorium Mobeni
  26. ↑ Khirbet el-Fityan fort
  27. ^ Alfred von Domaszewski, Rudolf Ernst Brünnow: The Provincia Arabia on the basis of two trips undertaken in the years 1897 and 1898 and the reports of earlier travelers described. Volume 2: The outer Limes and the Roman roads from el-Maan to Bo.sra . Trübner, Strasbourg 1905. p. 57 ff .; here: p. 57.
  28. ^ A b c Samuel Thomas Parker: Romans and Saracens: A History of the Arabian Frontier . (= Dissertation Series / American Schools of Oriental Research 6), Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake 1986, ISBN 0-89757-106-1 , p. 55.
  29. ↑ a b Michael R. Toplyn: Livestock and limitanei. The zoo archaeological evidence . In: Samuel Thomas Parker (Ed.): The Roman Frontier in Central Jordan. Final Report on the Limes Arabicus Project, 1980-1989 (= Dumbarton Oaks Studies 40), Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington DC 2006, ISBN 0-88402-298-6 , pp. 463-507; here: p. 468.
  30. ↑ Michael R. Toplyn: Livestock and limitanei. The zoo archaeological evidence . In: Samuel Thomas Parker (Ed.): The Roman Frontier in Central Jordan. Final Report on the Limes Arabicus Project, 1980-1989 (= Dumbarton Oaks Studies 40), Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington DC 2006, ISBN 0-88402-298-6 , pp. 463-507; here: p. 469.
  31. ↑ Samuel Thomas Parker, John Wilson Betlyon, Michael R. Toplyn: Preliminary Report on the 1987 Season of the Limes Arabicus Project (= Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. Supplementary Studies 26). Preliminary Reports of ASOR-Sponsored Excavations 1983-1987, The American Schools of Oriental Research, 1990, pp. 89-136; here: p. 108.
  32. ↑ a b c Michaela Konrad : The late Roman Limes in Syria. Archaeological investigations at the border forts of Sura, Tetrapyrgium, Cholle and in Resafa. (= Resafa 5), Zabern, Mainz 2000, ISBN 3-8053-2600-9 (habilitation thesis), p. 103.
  33. ↑ Antonio Santosuosso: Greek and Roman Warfare Battles, Tactics, and trickery by John Drogo Montagu . In: The Journal of Military History 71, No. 1, 2007, pp. 208-209; here: p. 209.
  34. ↑ Peter Kehne: On the logistics of the Roman army from the middle republic to the end of the high imperial period (241 BC-235 AD: research and tendencies. In: Military History Journal 63, 1, 2004, p. 115 ff .; here: p. 143.
  35. ↑ a b Michael P. Speidel: Review of: 'Benjamin Isaac, The Limits of Empire. The Roman Army in the East . In: Bonner Jahrbücher 192, 1992 (1993), p. 649.
  36. ↑ Eckhard J. Schnabel : Original Christian Mission . Brockhaus, Wuppertal 2002, ISBN 3-417-29475-4 , p. 489.
  37. ↑ Benjamin Isaac: The Limits of Empire. The Roman Army in the East. Clarendon Press, Oxford 1990, ISBN 0-19-814952-2 . P. 173.
  38. ↑ Benjamin Isaac: The Limits of Empire. The Roman Army in the East. Clarendon Press, Oxford 1990, ISBN 0-19-814952-2 . P. 174.
  39. ↑ Benjamin Isaac: The Limits of Empire. The Roman Army in the East. Clarendon Press, Oxford 1990, ISBN 0-19-814952-2 . P. 175.
  40. ↑ Benjamin Isaac: The Limits of Empire. The Roman Army in the East. Clarendon Press, Oxford 1990, ISBN 0-19-814952-2 . P. 172.