Brickstamp, Rome Alison E. Cooley AEC/ASHL AN1872.1489.xml Oxford Ashmolean Museum AN1872.1489 AshLI 186 Coll. Ref: 6* Roman catalogue: 370 AN1876.58

A circular, orbicular stamp (0.085+), damaged on all sides, with a large orbiculus (0.03+) extending into the central section of the stamp. The orbiculus is only partly preserved.

Brick: 0.084+ 0.086+ 0.039

There are two lines of letters around the edge of the stamp, running in concentric circles, with the additional word COS stamped across the central circular section, which is otherwise blank. In line 1, the bottoms of some letters are damaged. The letters AE are ligatured in CAES, and only the top stem of S is preserved. In line 2 the letters AE are ligatured in PAETINO.

 0.01-0.011 (outer line); 0.009-0.01 (inner line); 0.009-0.01(central line). Rome AD 123 (consular date). This brickstamp was part of a collection of brickstamps from Rome, Ostia, and Portus given to the Ashmolean by J.H. Parker, Keeper of Antiquities in the Ashmolean Museum (1870-84), after a visit to Rome in the winter months of 1871/2. The number 370 has been used twice in labelling the brickstamps in this collection: see also AN1872.1488(6) (no.370). It is currently in store. Photograph
Doliare ex figlinis Anterotis Caesaris nostri servi Paetino et Aproniano consulibus

Brick-product from the brickyards of Anteros, slave of our Caesar. In the consulship of Paetinus and Apronianus.

It is surprising to find an imperial slave apparently named as the owner of brickyards, when other similar owners tend to be high-ranking senators or members of the imperial family, and given that slaves could not legally own property in this way. In other stamps, Anteros appears as officinator (production overseer) working on land owned by the emperor (cf. CIL XV 812-13), and Weaver argues that it is also in that capacity in which he is named in this brickstamp (Weaver 1998: p.239-41). The year AD 123 marked an exceptional and sudden upsurge in the marking of bricks with stamps bearing a consular date, with some 700 different brickstamps known for this one year alone. Quite why this was the case is still the matter for debate, but it is probable that Hadrian’s government imposed a requirement upon brick producers in this year to include a date upon their bricks (Bloch 1959: p.237)

Ashmolean Museum Department of Antiquities MS. Accession Register 1872.1489(6*); 1876.58 ; CIL XV.1 no.810, c.19 (from an impression sent by Waldstein) (Dressel 1891).

Online: EDCS-34500746 [accessed 10/12/14]

Bloch H. 1959 The Serapeum of Ostia and the Brick-Stamps of 123 A.D. A New Landmark in the History of Roman Architecture American Journal of Archaeology 63.3 225-240 Weaver P. 1998 Imperial slaves and freedmen in the brick industry Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 122 238-46