Despre două recente tentative de localizare a Vicinei
On two Recent Attempts to Locate Vicina

Summary/Abstract: The paper comments the recent opinions expressed by Virgil Ciocîltan and Denis Căprăroiu about the location of Vicina, the first one at Măcin, and the second one at Axiopolis. The etymology and interpretation of the cartographic sources would plead for Măcin, while the proposed location at Axiopolis is based on the distance mentioned in the portolan Il compasso da navigare. I consider that any attempt to locate Vicina must be in agreement with the results of the Genoese sources: the amplitude of the trade fulfilled there, which indicates terrestrial relations with markets and supply places for goods exported by Vicina to Hungary and to the Golden Horde.Taking into account the necessary condition of terrestrial connection, Axiopolis is excluded, because a road through Bărăgan to Cernavodă is not conceivable. The pair of harbors Măcin‐Brăila could match this condition because Brăila took over Vicina’s function after its disappearance. No coins dated between the 13th‐14th centuries were recovered by archaeological researches or by stray finds after the destruction of the buildings in Măcin. Such coins should have to exist in such a commercial center. The second objection excluding Măcin is the position of Vicina on the frontier between the Byzantine‐Genoese state formation and the Golden Horde.Therefore, I consider that Vicina was either a place developed near Isaccea, or evenIsaccea. There is a large concentration of coins dated to the period when Vicina flourished. Another worthy proposal, according to Marcu Botzan, is an island near the Danube bend,which was later destroyed by the water.

• Details
• Contents