DOI: 10.26658/jmr.1143763 (Research Article / Araştırma Makalesi) JMR 15, 2022  315-334
The Late 4th - Early 5th c. Mosaic Pavements in Philippopolis and 
Augusta Traiana in Thrace
Trakya’daki Philippopolis ve Augusta Traiana’dan Geç 4. - Erken 
5. Yüzyıla Tarihlenen Mozaik Döşemeler 
 Ivo TOPALILOV* 
(Received 15 January 2022, accepted after revision 28 September 2022)
amico et collegae optimo
Abstract
The present paper deals with the mosaic pavements that embellished the public buildings, semi-public and 
private houses between the 80s of 4th c. and the first two decades of 5th c. in the two most important cities 
in late antique province of Thrace - Philippopolis and Augusta Traiana that are unearthed so far. This was 
a period of great significance for the mosaic development in both cities which though developed in different 
way until that time, were now united with the use of the full geometrization. Although already entered in 
the private mosaic pavements in Thrace in the time of the Tetrarchy, the full geometric composition did not 
receive wide acceptance in the aulae of the private houses and the figural compositions with real emblema or 
pseudo-emblem are persistent. The inclusion of the Christianity into the new imperial ideology in the time of 
Theodosius I and Arcadius and the establishment of the symphonia between the State and Church reflected 
on the importance of the Christian bishop, but also impacted on the stylistic development of the mosaic art in 
both cities with the abrupt abandonment of any other compositions and motifs than the geometric in order to 
avoid any link with the paganism and its art. The examples studied reveal that the full, ‘orthodox’ geometric 
composition and motifs, with humble colouring, were distributed in the private houses of the Christian clergy, 
while these geometric mosaics with the inclusion of few specific symbols – in the Christian basilicas, related 
to the liturgical need. It is without any doubt that the mosaic pavements in the Christian basilicas inspired 
the mosaic pavement decoration of the aulae of the elites in both cities since the middle of 5th c. onward and 
therefore the Christianity dominating the official and private culture. At last, but not at least are the figural 
compositions that with the inclusion of specific Christian symbols gained Christian connotation. The present 
study reveals the still underestimated importance of the mosaic pavements for the study of the development of 
the political process in Thrace in the Late antiquity and link them with specific historical events as it is attested 
also elsewhere.
Keywords: Christianity, geometrization, mosaic pavement, aula, palatium.
Öz
Bu makale, Trakya’nın şimdiye kadar ortaya çıkarılmış Geç Antik Çağ’daki en önemli iki kenti Philippopolis ve 
Augusta Traiana’da 80’li yıllarda bulunan ve 4. yüzyıl ile 5. yüzyılın ilk yirmi yılına tarihlenen kamu binaları 
ile yarı resmi ve özel konutları süsleyen mozaik döşemeleri ele almaktadır. Bu, o zamana kadar farklı şekillerde 
gelişmiş, ancak bahsi geçen dönemde tam geometrik motif kullanımı ile karakterize olan her iki şehirde de 
mozaik gelişimi için çok önemli bir dönemdir. Trakya’daki özel mozaik döşemelere Tetrarşi döneminden 
itibaren rastlanılmasına rağmen, tam geometrik kompozisyon özel evlerin aulalarında geniş kabul görmemiştir 
ve gerçek amblemli veya sahte amblemli figürlü kompozisyonlarla karşılaşılmaktadır. I. Theodosius ve 
Arcadius döneminde Hristiyanlığın yeni imparatorluk ideolojisine dahil edilmesi ve Devlet ile Kilise arasında 
*   Ivo Topalilov, Institute of Balkan Studies with Center of Thracology “Prof. Alexander Fol” - Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 13 Moskovska Str., 
1000 Sofia, Bulgaria  https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0565-2054. E-mail: ivo.topalilov@balkanstudies.bg; itopalilov@yahoo.com   
316    Ivo Topalilov
uyumun sağlanması, Hristiyan piskoposunun önemini yansıttığı gibi, aynı zamanda paganizm ve sanatı ile herhangi bir 
bağlantıdan kaçınmak için geometrik ögeler dışındaki diğer kompozisyon ve motiflerin aniden terk edilmesiyle her iki 
şehirde de mozaik sanatının üslup gelişimi etkilenmiştir. İncelenen örnekler, mütevazı renklere sahip, tam, ‘ortodoks’ 
geometrik kompozisyon ve motiflerin Hristiyan din adamlarının özel evlerine dağıtıldığını, birkaç özel sembolün dahil 
edildiği bu geometrik mozaiklerin - litürjik bir gereksinim olarak Hristiyan bazilikalarında, Hristiyanlık ile ilgili 
olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Hiç şüphe yok ki, Hristiyan bazilikalarındaki mozaik döşemeler, 5. yüzyılın ortalarından 
itibaren her iki şehirdeki seçkinlerin aulaelerinin mozaik döşeme süslemelerine ilham kaynağı olmuştur. Dolayısıyla 
resmi ve özel kültüre Hristiyanlık hakimdir. Sonuncusu ama en önemlisi de, belirli Hristiyan sembollerinin dahil 
edilmesiyle birlikte Hristiyan çağrışımı kazanan figürlü kompozisyonlardır. Bu çalışma, Geç Antik Çağ’da Trakya’daki 
siyasi sürecin gelişiminin incelenmesi için mozaik döşemelerin hala hafife alınan önemini ortaya koymakta ve başka 
yerlerde de kanıtlandığı gibi bunları belirli tarihsel olaylarla ilişkilendirmektedir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Hristiyanlık, geometrizasyon, mozaik döşeme, aula, palatium.
With the completion of the administrative reform undertaken by Diocletian at 
the end of 3rd c., the old province of Thracia was split into six new provinces, 
the centre of which was the new late antique province of Thrace (Fig. 1). It 
consists of at least five major urban centers, two of which with clear Roman 
Figure 1 
Map of the Late antique provinces in Thrace 
(Dintchev 2021: 37 fig. 2).
past – Philippopolis and Augusta Traiana (Beroe), both of which retained 
their importance with Philippopolis established as a provincial capital. 
Unsurprisingly, Philippopolis is mentioned in the written sources with Serdica 
as ‘civitates amplas et nobiles’ (Amm. Marcellinus 21.10.3). This seems also to 
have reflected on the status of the Christian leaders because the Philippopolitan 
bishop became metropolitan, while the Beroean bishop became the head of an 
autonomous archiepiscopate. Both cities also retained their status as cultural and 
trade centers with elites that preserved at least until the time of Theodosius I the 
pagan traditions expressed in one way or another, e.g., the mosaic pavements.1 
This should not be surprising as it is clear that the one of the most effective 
material manifestation of the wealthy class of the cities were the vast and richly 
decorated with mosaic pavements rooms of the public and private buildings. 
In fact, it may be assumed that the mosaic pavements become one of the most 
distinguished features of the late antique society in Philippopolis and Augusta 
Traiana when compared with the other urban centers and elites in Thrace as we 
1 On this attitude attested by Ammianus Marcellinus about the revival of the myth of the mythical 
founder – see Topalilov 2018a. On the mosaic pavements as mediator for these believes in Augusta 
Traiana – see the study of V. Popova and M. Kamisheva in Pillinger et al. 2016: 157-158.
The Late 4th - Early 5th c. Mosaic Pavements in Philippopolis and Augusta ... / Trakya’daki Philippopolis ve Augusta Traiana’dan Geç 4. - Erken 5.....    317
can conclude from the numerous mosaic pavements discovered so far (they are all 
published and discussed most recently in Pillinger et al. 2016: 122-270). Based 
on the local traditions, the development of the mosaic art in these cities had its 
own path. Despite this, however, a certain common layer in the heterogeneous 
mosaic production in both cities may be observed whose beginning may be dated 
to the later years of Theodosius I’s rule and its completed form to the early years 
of Theodosius II at the latest, viz. the second decade of 5th c. after which, with 
very rare exceptions, the development of the mosaic art in both cities followed 
an almost identical way. It is therefore the goal of this paper to study the nature 
of this layer and the possible grounds for this.
The mosaic art in Philippopolis and Augusta Traiana in the period under 
consideration had a great base to develop upon from the time of Principate and 
the Tetrarchy onward. The examples, although not numerous, show the use of 
both geometric and figural compositions with clearly attested Italic and North 
African influence, respectively. Both types of mosaic composition gained 
acceptance in the private as well as the public buildings in black–and–white 
as well as in polychrome style. A preference of the geometric mosaics in the 
decoration of the public buildings and the figural – in the private houses may be 
observed. In fact, the figural mosaic composition that embellished a room in the 
public building such as the so-called Western Thermae in Philippopolis is the 
only one dated to the middle of 2nd c.; the mosaic pavements of the so-called 
Eastern Thermae dated to the beginning of 3rd c., seem to be entirely geometric. 
As for the private houses, with one exception up to now in Philippopolis - the 
domus that was found on ‘Knyaz Tseretelev Str 10/10a’ and it is assumed to 
be that of a curial (Pillinger et al. 2016: 252-254), they were decorated with 
figural mosaics. Not much changed initially in 4th c., but at the second quarter of 
the century at earliest, certain Christian symbols were embedded in the bordure 
of the mosaic compositions as revealed by the mosaic from Augusta Traiana 
that embellished the aula of possibly a wealthy merchant from Asia Minor who 
settled in the city.2 Such cases are, however, still very rare, and this is the only 
one known from both cities. The figural mosaic pavements are made in opus 
tessallatum and opus vermiculatum and are characterized with abundance of 
colours and motifs – figural, ornamental, geometric and floral with the use of the 
real emblema or in most of the cases – of the pseudo-emblem, filled with either 
Christian or non-Christian scenes made in the traditional mosaic repertoire. Such 
is for example the Dionysian thiasos (Θίασος) scene found in Augusta Traiana 
or the Mediterranean water landscape with corresponding fauna and flora and 
the boat with two cupids on the real emblema mosaic in Philippopolis. These 
monuments are among the most distinguished in Thrace, the first one dated to 
the time of emperor Flavius Claudius Julianus (known as Julian the Apostate in 
Christian tradition (361-363), and related to the revival of pagan mythological 
and other Greek-Hellenistic content in the Syrian region (Pillinger et al. 2016: 
152-159). If the date is correct, it may suggest that in this case we may be dealing 
with one of the rare cases when a certain historical event may have found its 
place in the art. Although under discussion, the date of the marine mosaic is 
most likely close to that and therefore will not be included in the present study.3
2 On the building found on ‘Gen. Stoletov Str’ in Stara Zagora – see most recently Kalchev 1992, 53; 
Ivanov 2012: 485; On the mosaic – see Kalchev 2009: 70-74; Pillinger et al. 2016: 125-131; Popova 
2016: 170; Popova 2018: 149.
3 The marine mosaic in Philippopolis is dated between the middle of 3rd – middle of 4th c. (Koranda 
1990: 67–70; Koranda 1991/1992: 97-98), at the second half of 4th c. (Pillinger et al. 2016: 227), at 
the end of 4th- beginning of 5th c. (Tankova 1980: 34) or early 5th c. (Valeva 1995: 262). 
318   Ivo Topalilov
The geometric compositions continued its use in the public buildings such 
as the thermae, some of which were partly repaired during that period, and 
which might had provided some inspiration for the mosaic geometric carpet 
in the private houses as a case in Philippopolis may reveal (Topalilov 2016). 
At that time, however, the geometrization entered the mosaic pavements of the 
Christian basilicas as the case with the thermae-gymnasion partly transformed 
into a Christian basilica in the middle – second half of 4th c. in Augusta Traiana 
shows (Popova 2017: 81).4 They are characterized by a modest colour scale and 
the mosaic pavement has not become yet an essential decoration of the Christian 
basilicas.
These cases clearly reveal that until the time of Theodosius I and possibly the 
first years of his rule the geometric composition had gained less acceptance in the 
mosaic pavements of the private houses in Philippopolis and Augusta Traiana, 
and the figural compositions are still favored despite the fact that the entire 
geometric composition had already entered other kinds of public houses such as 
for example the aula of the so-called Constantinian imperial villa near Serdica 
(Dinchev 2003). It seems that the aulae of the similar complexes in Thrace 
such as the praetorium/palatium of the provincial governor in Philippopolis 
and the city’s governor in Augusta Traiana remained without mosaic pavement 
decoration.5
The complexity of the processes with the weaving together of various styles, 
including the official imperial, personal preferences, religiosity, as well as 
the skillfulness of the mosaicists, combined with the wealth of the owner of 
the domus, have produced an amalgam of different in style and iconography 
mosaic pavements with a vast number of diversity among them. The Episcopal 
(Metropolitan) basilica in Philippopolis may provide an example for this with 
the insertion of a kind of emblema in the nave (see on bordure of the emblema 
– Kantareva-Decheva et al. 2021) if this mosaic pavement belonged to the 
Christian basilica at all, and not to the previous pagan building. It is without any 
doubt that some of the owners of these domus were distinguished members of 
the local provincial elite, and some of them might had also belonged to the newly 
established senate in Constantinople which also gives an artistic inspiration for 
the development of the mosaic art in Philippopolis and Augusta Traiana.6
The archaeological excavations in Plovdiv and Augusta Traiana unearthed 
numerous mosaic pavements that are dated to a period of four decades between 
the 80s of 4th c. and 20s of 5th c. revealing a certain period of flourishing of the 
mosaic industry and the next examples will make this clear.
Among the most important cases of that time which is still unparalleled in the 
4 On the mosaic pavements of the thermae-gymnasion – see most recently in Pillinger et al. 2016: 122-
125; Kamisheva - Karamanova-Zlatkova 2017: 169-180.
5 A complex that is a peristyle-organized and enclosed a whole insula (67/32 m) located between the 
agora and the Episcopal complex along cardo maximus westward and along southward the decumanus 
that enclosed from south the Metropolitan basilica was significantly transformed in the beginning 
of 4th c. with the establishment of a new imposing official part with a huge reception hall (13/9 m) 
(aula) and triclinium with stibadium heated by hypocaust. The decumanus that flanks the aula from 
south was shut up in the cross with the cardo maximus by a monumental entrance (Kesyakova 2008: 
238-240). It is assumed that by this the street was turned into a distinct antechamber (vestibule) of 
the aula as may be also deduced by masonry benches on the north side. The complex is interpreted 
as praetorium or palatium (Dinchev 2002: 216, 224 n. 36). Possibly, at the middle-third quarter of 
5th c. the aula and one of the room attached received mosaic pavements – on the description of the 
pavements – see Kesyakova 2009: 137-162; Pillinger et al. 2016; on the new date – see Topalilov 
2022.
6 The development of the mosaic art in Philippopolis and Augusta Traiana between the Tetrarchy and 
Theodoisan time has been studied most recently in Topalilov 2022.
The Late 4th - Early 5th c. Mosaic Pavements in Philippopolis and Augusta ... / Trakya’daki Philippopolis ve Augusta Traiana’dan Geç 4. - Erken 5.....    319
mosaic production of the Late Antique Philippopolis, excluding the mosaics of 
the Metropolitan basilica from the middle-third quarter of 5th c., is the mosaic 
pavement that embellished the aula of the peristyle organized house known 
as ‘domus Eirene’ (Fig. 2). It has enclosed a whole insula located some 30 m 
Figure 2
Domus Eirene: the first period of the mosaic 
pavements (after https://mosaictourplovdiv.
balkanheritage.org/en/ancient-residential-
building-%d0%b5irene-en/, last consulted 
on 14 January 2022).
northward to the entrance of the Metropolitan basilica of which the official 
part was unearthed. As the mosaic pavements in opus tessellatum and opus 
vermiculatum have already been a matter of several studies since its publication, 
I am not going into detail here with their description and problems.7 It is assumed 
that at the beginning of 80s of 4th c. the main room of the uncovered part of the 
domus, room 3, received its mosaic pavement with two panels – east and west, 
surrounded from north, west and south by a wide bordure. The composition is 
geometric with dominating ornamental and geometric motifs, but a figural image 
is also included. Thus, the eastern panel consists of the image of the head of the 
personification Eirene inserted into an octagon. At the corners two kantharoi 
and geometric ornaments are cited. The other panel consists of a kantharos full 
of water, with a floral motif coming out in the center; all the rest are geometric 
elements. The head of the personification is presented with slightly asymmetric 
nimbus. Although the existence of two panels, it is clear that the focus of the 
mosaic lays on the image of Eirene that was turned to the entrance from the 
peristyle courtyard, which may be secondary. Both images enable to identify the 
room as multifunctional triclinium, incorporating the function of reception hall 
(aula) in the Eirene area. At the end of 4th – beginning of 5th c. a transformation 
was done with the construction of a new triclinium with stibadium eastward and 
the room 3 become solely the reception hall. Within a few decades, ca. 40s of 5th c. 
it is assumed that the aula was embellished with an octagonal piscine (Pillinger et 
al. 2016: 184). The image of Eirene was subjugated into interpretatio christiana 
(Bospachieva 2003: 86; Pillinger at al. 2016: 182-184), although the cross-like 
element is in fact an essential element of the personification’s diadem, and the 
nimbus was known and used earlier for non-Christian personages (Topalilov 
2018b: 280-282). I believe that with the construction of a direct link between the 
entrance of the complex and that of the Metropolitan basilica by a special cardo 
regardless the existing urban infrastructure (on the cardo – Kesyakova 1989: 
120), the domus Eirene in fact was transformed at that time at the latest into 
domus episcopalis.8 The new domus has no parallel in term of its lavish mosaic 
7 On the mosaic pavements – see Bospachieva 2003: 83–105; Valeva 2011: 36–41; Bospachieva – 
Kolarova 2014: 210–226; Pillinger et al. 2016: 174–198; Topalilov 2018b: 273–285; Ivanov 2019: 
79–89; Popova 2021: 299–324. 
8 The interpretation of domus Eirene as domus episcopalis has been questioned recently due to the 
significant distance between the domus and the Metropolitan basilica – see Dinchev 2020: 215 n. 
4. Indeed, the distance is not like the other similar examples, but in the Philippopolitan case one 
320    Ivo Topalilov
decoration when compared with the other domus found so far in Philippopolis, 
although not interpreted as praetorium or palatium.
In sharp contrast in composition, style and colour abundance are the other mosaic 
pavements from Philippopolis that are dated to the time under question. One 
of them embellished a building that is located on the Three hills, specifically 
on Dzhambaz tepe, just over the theater and dominated the city’s landscape. 
Although the area excavated and therefore the mosaic uncovered is very small 
(3/2 m), it is clear that the composition is geometric composed by a grid of 
bands with circles inscribed, creating the pattern of bobbins (Décor I: pl. 144e)
(Fig. 3). The border is a two-strand braided ribbon, while the inner fields are 
filled with a pointed square pattern, a large rosette and a bulbous vase with 
vine tendrils probably growing out. The individual elements are imprecise and 
careless, but the colour scale is specific, made up of pastel shades, that can only 
be found on the present mosaic: white, lilac, red, ocher-colored, brown-green 
and black. It is assumed that the mosaic belongs to an Early Christian basilica 
which finds also arguments in the architecture decoration discovered on the site 
(Ботушaрова 1960: 166, fig. 3). The date proposed varies between second half/
late 4th c. – first half of 5th c. (Koranda 1991/1992: 86; Pillinger et al. 2016: 249). 
The archaeological evidence concerning the end of the Acropolis that is linked 
with the construction of this basilica supports the later date (Topalilov 2021: 
130-135).
Figure 3
The mosaic pavement of the basilica on 
Dzambaz tepe (Pilliner et al. 2016: taf. 180 
Abb. 464).
At least one mosaic pavement in Philippopolis is analogous to this by style and 
colour density. It covered the floor of the reception hall (aula) with stibadium in 
a courtyard – organized domus south of the Metropolitan basilica which replaced 
an earlier building made of bricks. The latest coins found in the latter of 364-378 
provide a certain terminus post quem for the construction of the new domus and 
the mosaic pavement.9
The mosaic which is still unpublished, is made in opus tessellatum and consists 
of entirely geometric composition of one wide bordure and an additional sector 
in the stibadium (Fig. 4). The bordure is filled with round-tongued guilloche 
(Décor I: pl. 75) and panel with the grid of bands with circles inscribed creating 
should have in mind the construction of the cardo that provided the direct link between the domus 
and the Metropolitan basilica located some 110 m southward as well as the density of urbanization 
in the center of the provincial capital that limited the perspective of the construction of the ‘typical’ 
Episcopal residence immediately next to the basilica.
9 On the results of the archaeological excavations at the site ‘Leonardo da Vinci Str. 13’ – see Bozhinova 
- Stanev 2020: 787-791; Bozhinova - Topalilov 2021.
The Late 4th - Early 5th c. Mosaic Pavements in Philippopolis and Augusta ... / Trakya’daki Philippopolis ve Augusta Traiana’dan Geç 4. - Erken 5.....    321
Figure 4
The mosaic pavement of the domus located 
in the southern quarters of Philippopolis 
at modern ‘Leonardo da Vinci Str. 13’ 
(Bozhinova - Stanev 2020: 788 fig. 3).
the pattern of bobbins (Décor I: pl. 144e-variant). In the inner squares a highly 
stylized four-leaf colored rosette with an X-shaped center is inserted. The mosaic 
in the apse consists entirely of a diagonal lattice. The colour scale is limited, 
using white, navy and dark blue, green, black, yellow and red tesserae. The 
execution is inaccurate, the schemes are poorly proportioned and composed, as 
if the usual tools for the case were not used. Given the close similarities with the 
mosaic pavement at Dzambaz tepe, the date proposed for this is the beginning 
of 5th c.
Besides, the aforementioned basilica, the Metropolitan basilica in Philippopolis 
also was embellished with a mosaic floor at that time (Fig. 5). Although some 
details are published and the vast mosaic pavements still await its full publication, 
it is clear that the composition was geometric, filled with non-figurative motifs 
with an exception – that of the tabula ansata in the south aisle that is flanked 
by vases, those beneath the tabula with stylized vines coming out. The photos 
published reveal that the mosaic pavement has a large scale of colour abundance 
(Fig. 6).10
Figure 5
The first mosaic pavement of the Metropolitan 
basilica in Philippopolis (after Kantareva – 
Decheva et al. 2021: 27 fig. 4).
Several are the mosaic pavements known from Augusta Traiana dated to the 
period under consideration. As one of the most impressive building in the city 
not only in that period, is the huge domus located extra muros and identified as 
villa suburbana (Fig. 7). Although not entirely unearthed, it is clear that it was a 
10 On the earlier mosaic pavements of the Metropolitan basilica – see most recently in Kesyakova et al. 
2011: 176, 191-192, 198; Pillinger et al. 2016: 201-203; Kantareva-Decheva et al. 2021.  
322   Ivo Topalilov
Figure 6
The tabula ansata in the southern aisle of the 
Metropolitan basilica in Philippopolis (after 
https://mosaictourplovdiv.balkanheritage.
org/en/the-episcopal-basilica-en/
 last consulted on 8 January 2022).
Figure 7
The palatium in Augusta Traiana, extra 
muros (after Pillinger et al. 2016: taf. 108 
Abb. 296).
The Late 4th - Early 5th c. Mosaic Pavements in Philippopolis and Augusta ... / Trakya’daki Philippopolis ve Augusta Traiana’dan Geç 4. - Erken 5.....   323
huge peristyle complex of ca. 3000 m sq whose main room (aula) was lavishly 
decorated with mosaic pavement and wall paintings at the end of 4th c.11 The 
mosaic is strictly geometric by which this iconography is clearly distinguishable 
from that used in the rest of the mosaic pavements in the city at that time, which 
enclose also non-geometric elements, and rarely figural. It should be stressed 
that such a geometric iconography is not to be found elsewhere so far in Augusta 
Traiana. The mosaic pavement in the 20 m-long aula (15 x 10.80 m and the apse 
with 5 x 4 m) is executed in opus tessellatum with an outlined orthogonal pattern 
of irregular octagons intersecting and adjacent to shorter sides, making swastika-
meander in the center (Décor I: pl. 171d) surrounded by a bordure in various 
width and a composition of geometric schemes. The mosaic in the stibadium 
(apse) consists of a large circle with a central eight-pointed star made up of 
eight diamonds, surrounded by two bordures filled with triangular and wave 
patterns respectively.12 The colours used are white, ocher, dark red, blue-gray 
and black, and yellow of which the yellow is predominant (Fig. 8). The complex 
is interpreted as praetorium or palatium (Dinchev 2002: 216). The archaeology 
reveals that soon after the embellishment of the aula, the hall was turned into a 
Christian church at the beginning of 5th c. with the construction of synthronon 
in the stibadium that was turned into an basilica’s apse, the fulfillment of the 
piscine in the center of the room and the establishment of the cancelli and certain 
repairment of the mosaic pavement (Kalchev 2009: 87).
Figure 8 Unlike this mosaic are the others known from Augusta Traiana that have 
The aula of the palatium in Augusta Traiana, less geometrization in their composition. An example for this are the mosaic 
extra muros (after Pillinger et al. 2016: taf. pavements that embellished several rooms in another domus of this rank, also 
109 Abb. 297). interpreted as praetorium or palatium – that located in the SW corner of the city, 
intra muros, partly preserved now under the modern Post office (Dinchev 2002: 
216). As the previous domus, this was also a peristyle complex with possibly ca. 
3200 m sq of which one-third has been excavated, precisely the inner courtyard 
surrounded by a monumental portico and the official part of the complex with the 
reception hall, reduced two-conch triclinium as well as antechamber (vestibulum) 
of the aula (Fig. 9). It is assumed that the complex was built at the beginning of 
4th c. and was in usage at least until the middle/end of 5th c. with the aula and the 
triclinium received mosaic floors at the end of 4th c. and the reception hall also 
with marble cladding.13 The mosaics have been made in opus tessellatum, opus 
vermiculatum and opus sectile and already described and commented in details 
in the recent Corpus on the Late antique and Early Christian mosaics in Bulgaria 
as well as some additional articles and therefore no extensional description is 
required (Kalchev 2009: 74-80; Pillinger et al. 2016: 138-147;).
Undoubtedly, the core of the complex was the apsidal hall (aula) (12.40 × 10 m) 
that was embellished with mosaic pavements covering ca. 131,5 m2 (Fig. 10). 
The central composition consists of a circle enclosed in a square with U-shaped 
arcades on four sides and four adjacent angles in the corners. The circle was 
filled with a scale pattern, horseshoe-shaped elements with vine with grapes, 
vegetal elements, tree of life framed by two birds, and fruit basket with apples 
and a plant with two grain stalks and two ducks, and the strip of the square – 
with swastika-meander knots with inscribed circular motifs in the corners of 
11 On the building – see Kalchev 1992: 53; 68; Dinchev 2002: 211-212, 223 n. 17; Kalchev 2009: 86-87.
12 On the detailed description of the mosaic pavement – see Kalchev 2009: 86-89; Pillinger et al. 2016: 
160-163.
13 On the building – see Kalchev 1992: 53; Dinchev 2002, 212; Kalchev 2009: 74-75; On the interpre-
tation of the rooms – see Dinchev 2002: 212. The mosaic pavements covering the vestibule and the 
northern portico should be dated to a much later period, ca. the middle-third quarter of 5th c.
324    Ivo Topalilov
the field. The four pentagonal spandrels formed between the central medallion 
and the U-shaped elements in the axes have kantharoi with two symmetrical 
vines sprouting out and a bird sits on each of its oppositely arranged handles. 
The panel is framed by a bordure with laurel ribbons, and a second frame with 
a row of arcades on the west. As for the mosaic in the apse, here one encounters 
a geometric mosaic composition with vegetable and triangular or trapezoidal 
elements.
The mosaic in opus sectile embellishing the triclinium (3.10 × 3.15 m) has a Figure 9
geometric composition with a central medallion and two narrow bands: the outer The praetorium/palatium in Augusta 
border consists of two rows of cruciforms, while the inside – of squares placed Traiana, intra muros, now under the modern Post office (after Pillinger et al. 2016: taf. 88 
on top of each other with two alternating, geometric filling motifs. The motif of Abb. 245).
the outer band decorates also the conches. The mosaic is made of white marble, 
red terracotta plates, and green breccia. Figure 10
The aula of the praetorium/palatium in 
In a later period, the mosaic pavements extended to the south portico as well, Augusta Traiana, intra muros (after Pillinger 
consisting of interlooped tangentially small and big circles, forming irregular et al. 2016: taf. 89 Abb. 246).
concave octagons filled with geometric motifs, and various birds turned towards 
a fruit-bearing plant respectively. A white songbird is inscribed on a medallion 
(Fig. 11).
The mosaics are dated to 80s of 4th c. (Kalchev 2009: 80) or at the end of 4th 
c. (Pillinger et al. 2016: 147) and the complex is identified as the praetorium 
or palatium of the ‘governor of the city’ in 4th – 5th c.14 or of the local bishop 
(Yankov 1993: 145-146).
The images inserted into the U-elements are interpreted as the four seasons, 
and the fields enclosed between these elements containing floral motifs as well 
as the stylized arcade presented into the entrance bordure (the peltae element) 
(Fig. 12) create the illusion of a rich garden or park (Valeva 2011: 45). Recently, 
however, another interpretation is proposed revealing the Christian meaning of 
the composition. Thus, the images of plants and fruits flanked by two birds that 
are enclosed into the U-shaped elements are interpreted as fons vitae and related 
14 On the interpretation as praetorium or palatium – see Dinchev 2002: 216. On the interpretation of the 
complex as the domus of the ‘governor’ of the city – see Kalchev 1992: 53.
The Late 4th - Early 5th c. Mosaic Pavements in Philippopolis and Augusta ... / Trakya’daki Philippopolis ve Augusta Traiana’dan Geç 4. - Erken 5.....    325
Figure 11 to the Christianity (Pillinger et al. 2016, 141). Three of the vases also represent 
The later dated mosaic pavement in the the fons vitae. As a Christian fountain of life are interpreted the scenes that are 
portico of the inner courtyard of the 
praetorium/palatium in Augusta Traiana, enclosed in the pentagonal panels (formed between the U-shaped elements with 
intra muros (after Pillinger et al. 2016: taf. the kantharoi and the flower stalks and vines and the two flanking birds), and 
100 Abb. 274). it is suggested that the overall composition could have a Christian connotation 
and can be interpreted as a representation of the paradise garden (Pillinger et 
Figure 12
The mosaic pavement of aula of the al. 2016: 142) with the fountain of life symbolizing the heaven with the Eden 
praetorium/palatium in Augusta Traiana, (Popova 2016: 168). It is most likely that in this iconography are implemented 
intra muros (after Pillinger et al. 2016: taf.90 the seasonal motifs combined with Early Christian elements. The mosaic finds 
Abb. 247). a kind of parallel in an earlier seasonal mosaic attested in Augusta Traiana, that 
of the domus from the beginning of 4th c. which also has a Christian connotation 
with the image of fons vitae in the form of scene with deers and flowers and 
other strictly Christian symbols such as the kantharos full of wine, and the 
several crosses scattered on the mosaic border (Fig. 13). It is very tempting to 
Figure 13
The Christian cross embodied into the 
bordure of the mosaic of an aula in a domus 
in Augusta Traiana discovered on ‘Gen 
Stoletov Str No. 117’ (after Pillinger et al. 
2016: taf. 75 Abb. 209).
326     Ivo Topalilov
see in the U-cross composition in the aula a cross-shaped element inscribed into 
a square with therefore Christian connotation, but it should be noted that this 
composition is to be found in Early Christian basilicas as well as private houses 
(Raynaud 1996). It seems, however, that its beginning should be sought in Syria 
in late 4th c. and given the proposed date the mosaic in Augusta Traiana would 
be among the earliest examples of its spreading in the Eastern Mediterranean 
and the Balkans and may reveal the origin of the owner of the domus from Syria. 
It seems, however, that its beginning should be sought in Syria in the late 4th c. 
and given the proposed date the mosaic in Augusta Traiana would be among the 
earliest examples of its spreading in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Balkans 
and may reveal the origin of the owner of the domus from Syria.
The mosaic pavement of one more villa urbana has been dated to the period 
under consideration.15 It is also a peristyle house, partly discovered, with one 
of the rooms around decorated with mosaic pavement. The complex enclosed 
partly or entirely an insula framed from the east by cardo maximus. The mosaic 
is partly preserved in the southern part of the room and consists of a geometric 
composition of adjacent octagons forming small squares (Décor I: pl. 163b). The 
octagons are filled with geometric motifs, but also with figural ones such as a 
duck, a jug with a volute-shaped handle, a kantharos and a wicker basket with 
fruit. More representations (figures) are placed in the irregular hexagons: pairs 
of fruits (apples and pears), a hammer and two braids (Kalchev 2009: 84-86; 
Pillinger et al. 2016: 150-151) (Fig. 14). Based on the parallels, the mosaic is 
dated to early 5th c. (Kalchev 2009: 86; Pillinger et al. 2016: 151), but it is very 
likely that the date is later – ca. middle or even third quarter of 5th century.
Another mosaic that belongs to this time is the one which covered the floor Figure 14
of a partly discovered villa suburbana, located extra muros near the modern The aula of villa urbana in Augusta Traiana 
‘Ayazmoto’, of which only a small fragment has been preserved (Fig. 15). It is discovered on ‘Ruski Blvd. No 51’ (after 
Pillinger et al. 2016: Taf. 103 Abb. 283).
laid in opus tessallatum with white, black, brick red (light and dark red), ocher 
and light blue tesserae, with geometric and stylized vegetable motifs visible. 
The inner border consists of a composition of overlapping octagons, with a four-
leaf, light blue and dark red contoured cross rosette. A distinguishing feature of 
the mosaic is the huge stylization of the motifs, including flowers in the form 
15 The archaeological site is known as ‘Ruski Blvd No. 51’ in Stara Zagora.
The Late 4th - Early 5th c. Mosaic Pavements in Philippopolis and Augusta ... / Trakya’daki Philippopolis ve Augusta Traiana’dan Geç 4. - Erken 5.....    327
Figure 15
A fragment of a mosaic pavement from villa 
suburbana near Augusta Traiana (modern 
‘Ayazmoto’) (after Pillinger et al. 2016: taf. 
107 Abb. 295).
of dark red, cross-shaped objects (Pillinger et al. 2016: 159). The mosaic is 
dated generally to 4-5th c., and compared with the mosaic that covered the floor 
of the aula in the villa suburbana, presented above, indicating the work of a 
certain mosaic atelier in Augusta Traiana (Pillinger et al. 2016: 160). But the 
highly stylized manner calls this proposition under question as although strictly 
geometric, the manner of execution of the mosaic in the aula as well as the style 
is more refined, and refers to a different execution and style. I would hardly 
believe that the reception hall of a certain praetorium or palatium would have 
been decorated by a city’s modest mosaic atelier while the rest of the houses in 
Augusta Traiana, including the private ones, used more qualified mosaic ateliers. 
It may be supposed that the mosaic pavement under consideration should be 
dated to the beginning of 5th c. as the mosaic is not entirely geometric, but with 
the inclusion of floral motives as well.
After this short introduction some observations may be ascertained on the 
development of the mosaic art during the period under consideration in 
Philippopolis and Augusta Traiana. First, it should be underlined that at that time 
still the ‘classical’ mosaic construction techniques such as opus tessallatum, 
opus vermiculatum and opus sectile continued to be in use, with the latter two 
rarely. The opus vermiculatum mosaics are dated to the earlier years of the time 
of Theodosius I and may belong to stylistic development of the mosaic art of 
the pre-Theodosian time that continued till a certain point during Theodosian 
reign.16
At this point, however, a significant change is attested in the decoration of the 
16 A special study on the use of opus vermiculatum in the mosaic pavements in Late Antique Thrace will 
be made by the author.
328     Ivo Topalilov
mosaic pavements in both cities with the abandonment of the figural and similar 
representational motifs and elements alike and the preference of the entirely 
geometric compositions and elements. This geometrization, however, should 
not be regarded as a part of the process with the geometrization of the mosaic 
compositions in Thrace which began at the time of the Tetrarchy, but it seems 
to be a consequence of a certain historical event that happened in the time of 
Theodosius I and Arcadius with the new role that Christianity gained at that time 
as an essential part of the new imperial ideology and the symphonia proclaimed 
between the empire and Christian Orthodox church. As already suggested, the 
absence of figurative images should be accepted as an attempt of the Christians 
to drop the pagan figural traditions in mosaics and concentrate only on the Early 
Christian separate representations, scenes and symbols (Popova-Moroz 1987a; 
Popova-Moroz 1987b; Caraher 2003), although the process seems to be more 
complex, as the Christians continued to use old schemes and motifs to give a 
Christian connotation to the composition (Popova 2018: 140) and the mosaic 
pavements in Philippopolis and Augusta Traiana are the material manifestation 
for this. A study of them reveals that at least three groups of mosaic compositions 
common for both cities may be distinguished.
The first group consists of mosaic pavements in an entirely geometric composition 
that decorate the Christian basilicas and some aulae of the private houses, 
although some of the latter may be interpreted as public as well. Two main sub-
styles can be established – the one with entire homogenous geometrization in 
composition and motifs that may be called ‘orthodox’ geometric style, and the 
other with entirely geometric composition and motifs, but with the inclusion 
of few specific figural elements inserted on specific places of the building. The 
mosaic pavements that embellished the aulae of the praetorium/palatium located 
extra muros Augusta Traiana and that of the domus in the southern quarters of 
Philippopolis are the most significant examples of the ‘orthodox’ geometrization 
style, and the only so far discovered, which reveals that this style had not 
received wide acceptance on the mosaic pavements of the reception halls in both 
cities. Indeed, this may be due to the stage of studying the mosaic iconography 
and some future discovered mosaics will deny or prove this.
The case in Augusta Traiana is of particular interest given the importance of the 
complex as a whole. It should be underlined that this mosaic composition and 
style is in sharp contrast to the figural mosaic that embellished the aula of the 
other synchronous and similarly identified as praetorium or palatium complex in 
the city, the intra muros. The transformation of the reception hall into a Christian 
church shortly after the beginning of 5th c. raises the question of the interpretation 
of this complex as the palatium of the local Christian archbishop, which may 
also shed some light on the origin of composition of the mosaic pavement itself. 
The humble and light colour scale as well as the geometric monotones in the 
mosaic pavement differentiate from the geometric carpet that had been used 
till that time full of geometric motifs and a certain colour diversity and may 
refer to the creation of a new sub-style that given the nature of the owner of the 
complex should have been deliberately sought. If so, this case is clearly attesting 
an example for the desire of the Christians to drop as much as possible and when 
possible the pagan figurative tradition in the mosaics. One should also recall in 
this case the plain burials of the Christians and their bishops at that time and may 
see also the abandonment of the figural and colourful mosaic style in terms of the 
will of the Christians to live in a more modest manner.
The interpretation of this villa suburbana as the palatium of the Christian 
The Late 4th - Early 5th c. Mosaic Pavements in Philippopolis and Augusta ... / Trakya’daki Philippopolis ve Augusta Traiana’dan Geç 4. - Erken 5.....    329
archbishop may be also deduced from the subsequent construction activity within 
the complex, obviously in ruins, in the middle of 5th c. with the construction of 
a Christian church in the courtyard and the development of a necropolis around 
(Kalchev 1992: 53; 68; Kalchev 2009: 86-87) revealing the importance of 
place for the local Christians. This type of activity is similar to those attested 
at the conch-martyrium located near the East gate of the city after the Hunnic 
invasions in 40s of 5th c. with the transformation of the martyrium into martyrial 
basilica and the spread of burials ad sanctos (on the complex – see Pilinger 
1991; Nikolov - Buyukliev 1992; Kalchev 1992: 53-54). It remains unclear, 
however, if the date is correct, why the aula was turned into a Christian basilica 
very shortly after being decorated with mosaic pavement and since when the 
complex itself was the archbishopric palatium?
The interpretation proposed raises another question – that of the establishment 
of a new Episcopeion at the last quarter of 5th c. to the contrary of the previous, 
Arianic one, a type of replacement which is also attested in Philippopolis. It may 
be, however, simply the redecoration of the Arianic episcopeion as a part of a 
program aiming at the transformation of the complex into Orthodoxly or even 
the establishment of a secondary archbishopric residence on the place probably 
donated to the Christian Church by a wealthy member of its community and 
local urban elite. The transformation of the aula at the beginning of 5th c. 
itself may indicate the establishment of an imposing bishopric chapel. This 
may be true if the complex remained as Episcopeion at that time. It is very 
tempting, however, to assume that with the transformation of the aula the whole 
complex also underwent significant changes being transformed into a Christian 
monastery of which the old aula become the catholicon, and which may have 
been mentioned in the written sources for the end of 4th c. (Yankov 1993: 139) 
The burials ad sanctos that are attested around the later basilica built in the 
courtyard in ca. middle of 5th c. reveal the basilica as martyrial. Nonetheless, this 
example indicates the spread of the full geometrization in the mosaic pavements 
of the reception halls of the domus of the high Christian clergy at the end of 4th 
c. onward and may be regarded as a distinctive mark for the importance of the 
owner at the Christian church. One more such example is known – that of an 
aula of a domus in Philippopolis whose owner was obviously with more limited 
material opportunities as we may deduce from the caliber of the aula and the 
quality of the mosaic pavement itself. In this case, we should see him as a high-
ranking Christian clergy or a highly-Christianized member of the urban elite who 
followed strictly the abandonment of the old figural and other pagan traditions 
in the art not only because of the abandonment of the pagan symbols, but also of 
the desire to live instead in a lavish life, in a more ascetic, godly manner.
The second style in the geometric mosaic compositions comprises of two groups 
of mosaics with the use of a limited number of specific figures, such as vases, 
rosettes, leaves and the scene of ‘The Fountain of life’ (fons vitae). They are 
inserted in definite and specific places (on this – see Popova 2016; Popova 
2018). During the period under consideration, the known cases of the first group 
derive from the Christian basilicas: one of the best examples is the described 
already mosaic tabula ansata from the south aisle of the Metropolitan basilica in 
Philippopolis revealing a strong Christian symbolism. As Popova has observed, 
the figures inserted in this type of mosaic mark significant for the liturgical rites 
places in the Early Christian basilicas which reasonably shows the organic tie 
between the liturgy and the new mosaic pavement decoration whose focus was 
on the rites (Popova 2018: 140). Not surprisingly, this type of iconography is to 
be found in the Christian basilicas alone and only later moved to other Christian 
330     Ivo Topalilov
buildings such as the martyria for example, but again liturgical, and still not in 
the private houses. It is without doubt that the development of the geometric 
composition in the late 4th – beginning of 5th c. should be clearly linked to the 
Christianization of the mosaic art (not only in the Christian buildings) which 
goes in line with the new role that the Christianity gained under the rule of 
Theodosius I and Arcadius as an essential part of the new imperial ideology 
and the symphonia established between the state, the emperor and the Christian 
god. For the first time it was attested in 394 with the active participation of the 
Christian clergy into the preparation for the Theodosian war against Eugenius 
and Arbogast to the West. Thus, the emperor and his army left the Kampos under 
the psalms sang by the Christian clergy. 
The second group of mosaic pavements that is also connected with the 
Christianization of the society and the municipal and provincial elite in Thrace 
consists of a kind of hybrid mosaic art – the geometric base with the inclusion 
of figures and Christian symbols or scenes that allow the indisputable Christian 
interpretation of the mosaic composition. It should be underlined that the 
Christian symbols appeared in the private as well as public buildings (see the 
examples in Asimakopoulou-Atzaka 2017). Philippopolis and Augusta Traiana 
present significant examples in this group such as possibly the domus Eirene 
(domus episcopalis) in Philippopolis and the complex identified as praetorium/
palatium in Augusta Traiana, intra muros. These pavements are in sharp contrast 
to those in the first group with its exuberant colour scale, unprecedented and 
unparalleled at that time not only in both cities, but in the province as a whole. 
Both mosaics find strong parallels in the Eastern Mediterranean, and might 
had been made by travelling mosaicists as for instance that the one who has 
made the Eirene mosaic is assumed to have come from the island of Cos. These 
mosaic pavements, however, clearly link the owners of both complexes to the 
Eastern Mediterranean, and especially Syria, where the seasonal scenes and 
personifications gained wide acceptance in the mosaic art (see in Balty 1995) 
which also influenced the mosaic art in the island of Cos (on the mosaics in Cos 
– see most recently in De Matteis 2004). If this is so, given the tied links between 
the Syrian and Thracian high clergy known we may suppose that both domus 
were owned by members of the Syrian high clergy, most probably bishops. 
This fits well with the Arianic period for which such tied links are attested in 
the written sources, but unfits with the date proposed for both mosaics in post-
Arianic period, ie. the time of Theodoisus I and early Arcadius.
Unlike the case with domus Eirene whose interpretation as domus episcopalis at 
the end of 4th c. at the latest does not raise any objections among the prevailing 
number of the scholars, the interpretation of the praetorium/palatium in Augusta 
Traiana as such is still under discussion. As noted above, the interpretation of 
the complex varies from that of the palace of the city’s governor and of the 
Christian bishop as both interpretations remain unjustified. Indeed, the Christian 
interpretation of the mosaic composition may imply the latter possibility, but up 
to now we have no other similar complex discovered to compare with in Thrace. 
The possible interpretation of the complex extra muros as the Episcopeion or as 
a secondary archbishopric residence with its specific mosaic decoration17 makes 
me more inclined to the interpretation of the praetorium/palatium initially as 
the complex of the city’s governor or of a distinguished member of the local 
municipal elite that become at that time the archbishop. The lavish decoration 
of the mosaic pavements that embellish private houses with figures, high 
17 This idea was kindly shared with me by V. Popova to whom I express my sincere gratitude.
The Late 4th - Early 5th c. Mosaic Pavements in Philippopolis and Augusta ... / Trakya’daki Philippopolis ve Augusta Traiana’dan Geç 4. - Erken 5.....    331
quality style, and colour abundance is not typical for the mosaic pavements that 
embellished the Christian clergy’ space at that time which are humbler, plain, 
and even ascetic. Thus, at the end of 4th – first half of 5th c. the secular mosaic 
compositions are with broader context and motifs than the Christian basilica’s. 
The change in the Christian mosaics in this aspect may be clearly observed in 
Augusta Traiana itself with a mosaic pavement that is dated to the second quarter 
of 4th c. and is linked to a wealthy merchant possibly coming from Syria (on the 
mosaic and interpretation – see Pillinger et al. 2016: 125-131; Popova 2016: 
166-170; Popova 2018: 149).
In the middle-third quarter of 5th c. some parts of the praetorium/palatium such 
as the vestibule of the reception hall and two portici received new mosaic floors. 
The iconography of the mosaic pavement in the vestibule is strictly geometric 
with pattern of staggered rows of superimposed groups of three adjacent 
lozenges, forming squares (Décor I: pl. 161f). The elements that fill the spaces 
are non-figural. On the entrance area to the aula an inscription reads: ΥΓΙΕΝΩ[Σ 
Ε]ΛΘΕ (Enter healthy!).
The mosaic pavement in the western portico is also a geometric composition, 
which is primarily reminiscent of the mosaic in the vestibulum, but with the 
inclusion of elements found in the mosaic in the aula among which are for 
example the peltae arcades as well as water-filled kantharos surrounded by vine 
leaves. A goblet filled with four-leaf rosettes is among the specific elements. All 
of the mosaics described so far have the same colouring in white, ochre, dark 
red, light blue and blue-gray mosaic stones.
The eastern portico also received mosaic floor whose decorative scheme consists 
of a geometric base filled with organic and floral motifs, i.e. breaking up the 
solidity of the style, is to be observed in various Christian basilicas dated to 
that time, and the most important among them – the Metropolitan basilica in 
Philippopolis. The new mosaic pavements covered the area that was exposed to 
the guests of the domus who they reached the aula through the decorated vestibule 
and portici. I believe that this reconstruction clearly reveals the increasing 
of the importance of the owner of the domus and coincides in time with the 
abandonment of the extramural residence and may therefore be in a direct link. If 
so, it is plausible to suggest that the Christian archbishop who moved inside the 
curtain walls of the city after the destruction of his extramural residence by the 
Huns might had settled in the praetorium/palatium under consideration. If so, 
this complex may be also interpreted as the new Episcopeion established in the 
middle of 5th c. The case with the prevailing number of similarities in the mosaic 
compositions of the Christian basilicas and secular houses in the middle – third 
quarter of 5th c., with certain distinction in some specific figures, is significant 
and shows that at that time it was the mosaic pavement of the basilica that served 
for inspiration in the mosaic pavements composition that embellished the aulae 
of secular buildings. Good examples for this are the new mosaic pavements in 
domus Eirene and that of the so-called ‘Residence’ in Philippopolis (Fig. 16) 
compared with the mosaic pavements of the Metropolitan basilica of second 
half of 5th c., a practice which continued in the next century (see Topalilov 2020: 
271-275).
The third group of mosaic pavements consists of ‘dissidents’ mosaic pavements 
that preserved the mosaic iconography in the entirely old pagan figural tradition. 
These mosaics are rare in that period, and it may be only one of the mosaic 
pavements discovered so far in both cities that belong to this group – the marine 
mosaic in Philippopolis if the mosaic pavement is dated to that period at all. If, 
332     Ivo Topalilov
Figure 16
The mosaic pavement of the aula of the so-
called ‘Residence’ in Philippopolis (after 
Pillinger et al. 2016: taf. 113 Abb. 303).
however, the marine mosaic should be dated to the end of 4th c. which seems 
unlikely to me I would link it to the process that undergone at that moment 
attested in Rome and the western part of the empire with the revival and 
manifestation of the old pagan traditions by some members of the senatorial 
elite in the last decades of that century. Our case may refer to such instances in 
Thrace and Philippopolis, and one should recall the Passio of St. Theodota that 
was possibly compiled at the end of 4th c. in which Philippopolis is mentioned as 
the ‘city of Apollo’ (on the Passio – see Sharankov 2015).
The processes observed in the mosaic art are not unique for Thrace, but clearly 
demonstrate the certain change that is to be observed in the mosaic art with 
the new role of the Christianity in the political life of the empire. This change 
is so abrupt and overwhelming that that even unified the mosaic art in both 
cities although so different in its development and the non-acceptance of the 
geometrization as a whole until that time in the private houses. The new mosaics 
lost its colour abundance and become in a sense even ascetic, especially those 
decorated the Christian buildings. By the end of the 4th c., however, under the 
Syrian influence the mosaics become more vividly, more picturesque, but despite 
this and the insertion of various figural and floral motifs and ornaments, the 
mosaics in Philippopolis and Augusta Traiana never fled away from the geometric 
base of their mosaic pavements till the end of the antiquity. Unlike Syria and 
even Continental Greece and Constantinople, Thrace did not accept the figural 
mosaics in such a great scale any more, and the geometric composition remained 
as central. The time of the figural mosaics such as that in Augusta Traiana of the 
merchant or second quarter of 4th c. and the marine one in Philippopolis from the 
60s of 4th c. has been passed.
Certainly, these are not all the questions that the mosaic pavements in Philippopolis 
and Augusta Traiana raise. It is my hope, however, that this short review would 
provoke the interest not only of the art historians, but also other scholars that 
study other aspects of the ancient life as the importance of these and other mosaic 
pavements as well should not be confined within the limits of the iconography, 
style, patterns, and manner of construction, as some of the articles in the recently 
published Corpus on the Late antique and Early Christian mosaics from Bulgaria 
reveals (Pillinger et al. 2016). Instead, the mosaic pavements should be studied 
The Late 4th - Early 5th c. Mosaic Pavements in Philippopolis and Augusta ... / Trakya’daki Philippopolis ve Augusta Traiana’dan Geç 4. - Erken 5.....    333
in a broader context with their place in the life of the owner of the domus, and 
therefore their importance for the society or at least a part of its elite. In fact, in 
those mosaics that embellish the private aulae, one would get the rare chance to 
came across the informal manifestation of the personal preference and attitude of 
the owner of the domus to the world and the processes, which makes those type 
of sources, although still underestimated in this aspect, as one of most important 
for study of those societies with scanty written evidence available. It is without 
any doubt that the importance of the mosaic pavements discussed above should 
not be confined only for those two cities, but also the region, and in several cases 
– even Constantinople which seems to have impacted these processes as well. 
These mosaics clearly reveal the domination of the Christianity in the public and 
private culture of the aristocratic elite in Thrace at that time.
Bibliography – Kaynaklar   
Asimakopoulou-Atzaka 2017  P. Asimakopoulou-Atzaka, Syntagma ton palaiohristianikon psefdoton dapedon tes Ellados, III. Makedonia 
Thrake. 2. Ta Psifdota Dapeda tes Makedonias kai tes Thrakes (ektos Thessalonikes), Byzantina mnhmeia 18, 
Thessaloniki.
Balty 1995  J. Balty, Mosaïques antiques du Proche-Orient, Chronologie, iconographie, Interprétation (Centre de Recherches 
d’Histoire Ancienne 140), Paris.
Bospachieva - Kolarova 2014 M. Bospachieva - V. Kolarova, V. Plovdiv – grad varhu gradovete, Filipopol-Pulpudeva-Plavdiv, Sofia.
Bospachieva 2003  M. Bospachieva, “The Late Antiquity Building EIRHNH with Mosaics from Philippopoilis (Plovdiv, Southern 
Bulgaria)”, Archaelogia Bulgarica 2, 83-105.
Bozhinova - Stanev 2020 E. Bozhinova - K. Stanev, “Arheologicheski razkopki na ul. “Leonardo da Vinchi” № 13, Plovdiv”, 
Arheologicheski otkritia i razkopki prez 2019, Book 2, Sofia, 787-791.
Bozhinova - Topalilov 2021 E. Bozhinova - I. Topalilov, “Arheologicheski razkopki na ul. “Leonardo da Vinchi” № 13, Plovdiv”, 
Arheologicheski otkritia i razkopki prez 2020, Sofia, 719-723.
Caraher 2003  W. Caraher, Church, Society and the Sacred in Early Christian Greece, Dissertation submitted to the Ohio State 
University, Ohio.
De Matteis 2004  L. M. De Matteis, Mosaici di Cos, Dagli scavi delle missioni italiane e tedesche (1900-1945), Monografie della 
scuola archeologica di Atene e delle missioni italiane in Oriente 17, Atene.
Décor I  C. Balmelle – M. Blanchard Lemée – J. Christophe – J.-P. Darmon – A.-M. Guimier Sorbets – H. Lavagne – R. 
Prudhomme – H. Stern, Le Décor géométrique de la mosaïque romaine I, Paris, 1985.
Dinchev 2002 V. Dinchev, “Kam harakteristikata na predstavitelnata kasnoantichna arhitektura v Thracia i Dacia”, Annuary 
of the Institute of Archaeology with Museum 2, 206-241.
Dinchev 2003 V. Dinchev, Kasnorimskata rezidentsiya Scretisca i rannovizantiiskoto selischte ΚΡΑΤΙΣΚΑΡΑ 
(Atheologicheskite prouchvaniya v m. Gradishteto kraz gr. Kostinbrod prez 1990-1994 g.), Razkopki i 
prouchvaniya 30, Sofia.
Dinchev 2020  V. Dinchev, “Provintsialnite stolitsi na kasnoantichnite diotsezi Thacia i Dacia”, A. Stanev - Ts. Iotov (eds.) 
Natsionalna nauchna konferentsiya 90 godini muzeyat na Sofia, Serdika-Sredets-Sofia 8, Sofia, 206-231.
Dintchev 2021 V. Dintchev, “Today’s Bulgarian Territory in Late Antiquity”, Annales Balcanici 1, 17–66.
Ivanov 2012 R. Ivanov, “Augusta Traiana/Beroe”, R. Ivanov (ed.), Corpus of ancient and medieval settlements in modern 
Bulgaria, vol. 1. Roman cities in Bulgaria, Sofia, 467-491.
Ivanov 2019 M. Ivanov, “Cat. № 7. Mosaic decoration of ‘Eirene’ building”, M. Ivanov - V. Katsarova (eds.), Taste for 
luxury, Roman mosaics from Bulgaria, Sofia, 79–89.
Kalchev 1992  Kr. Kalchev, “Arheologicheski rezervat “Avgusta Traiana – Beroe”. Prouchvaniya i problem”, Sbornik 
materiali, posveteni na 85-godishninata na Istoricheskiya muzei v Stara Zagora, Stara Zagora, 49-69.
Kalchev 2009 K. Kalchev, “Antichni mozaiki ot Avgusta Trayana-Beroe III-IV v.”, IzvMuzJužBalg 24, 69-100.
Kamisheva - Karamanova-Zlatkova 2017 
 M. Kamisheva - R. Karamanova-Zlatkova, “Mosaic pavements in the thermae of Augusta Traiana (Preliminary 
report)”, Studia academica Šumenensia 4, 169-180.
334   Ivo Topalilov
Kantareva-Decheva et al. 2021 E. Kantareva-Decheva - S. Stanev - D. Stanchev, “Novorazkriti mozaiki ot episkopskata bazilika na Filipopol 
(2019-2021)”, Godishnik na Akademiya za muzikalno, tantsovo i izobrazitelno izkustvo “Prof. Asen 
Diamandiev”, Plovdiv 2020, 23-34.
Kesyakova 1989 E. Kesyakova, “Rannohristiyanska bazilika ot Filipopol”, IzvMuzJužBalg 4, 113–127.
Kesyakova 2008 E. Kesyakova, “Aristokratichniyat dom na Filipopol”, E. Gencheva (ed.), Studia in honorem Aleksandrae 
Dimitrova-Milcheva, Yugoiztochna Evropa prez antichnostta, VІ v. pr. Hr. – nachaloto na VІІ v. sl. Hr., Sofia, 
235-255.
Kesyakova 2009 E. Kesyakova, “Mozaiki ot Rezidentsiyata na Filipopol”, Annuary of the Regional archaeological museum – 
Plovdiv 11, 137-162.
Kesyakova et al. 2011 E. Kesyakova - St. Stanev - V. Grigorov - V. Dimitrov (eds.), Studies in honour of Stefan Boyadzhiev, Sofia, 
173-209.
Koranda 1990 Ch. Koranda, Römische Mosaiken in Bulgarien. Katalog der Denkmäler, Unpublished Manuskript, Wien.
Koranda 1991/1992 Ch. Koranda, “Geometrische Gliederungsschemata frühchristlicher Mosaiken in Bulgarien”, ÖJh 61, 83–111.
Nikolov - Buyukliev 1992 D. Nikolov - Hr. Buyukliev, “Rannohristiyanski kompleks v Avgusta Trayana”, IzvMuzJužBalg 15, 29-44.
Pilinger 1991 R. Pilinger, “Grobnitsa s psalmov tekst ot Stara Zagora”, IzvMuzJužBalg 14, 59-63.
Pillinger et al. 2016 R. Pillinger – A. Lirsch – V. Popova (Hrgs.), Corpus der spätantiken und frühchristlichen Mosaiken Bulgariens, 
Wien.
Popova-Moroz 1987a V. Popova-Moroz, “Christian and Pagan Art of 4th C. in Bulgaria”, V. Gjuzelev – R. Pillinger (Hrgs.), Das 
Christentum in Bulgarien and auf der übrigen Balkanhalbinsel in der Spätantike und im frühen Mittealalter, 
Miscellanea Bulgarica 5, Wien, 261-278.
Popova-Moroz 1987b V.  Popova-Moroz, 24 Drevni mozaiki, Sofia.
Popova 2016 V. Popova, “Fons Vitae in Late Antique monuments in Bulgaria”, Studia academica Šumenensia 3, 154–198. 
Popova 2017  V. Popova, “On the date and the interpretation of the complex at the Southwestern gate of Augusta Traiana/
Beroe”, Studia academica Šumenensia 4, 57-96.
Popova 2018 V. Popova “Liturgy and Mosaics: The Case Study of the Late Antique Monuments from Bulgaria”, M. Rakocija 
(ed.), Niš and Byzantium Symposium 16, Niš, 135-160.
Popova 2021 V. Popova, “The personification of Eirene from the episcopal residence in Philippopolis/Plovdiv”, M. Rakocija 
(ed.), Niš and Byzantium Symposium 19, Niš, 299–324.
Raynaud 1996 M.-P. Raynaud, “La composition en croix de U dans la mosaïque de pavement”, RA 1, 69-102.
Sharankov 2015 N. Sharankov, “Za datata i myastoto na machenichestvoto na sveta Teodota ot “grada na Filip’, Bulgaria 
Mediaevalis 6, 17-26.
Tankova 1980 V. Tankova, “Kasnoantichna mozaika ot Filipopol”, Archeologiya 2, 27-35.
Topalilov 2016 I. Topalilov, “On the Syrian influence over the mosaics in Philippopolis, Thrace in 4th - 5th c.”, Hortus Artium 
Medievalium 22, 118-129.
Topalilov 2018a I. Topalilov, “Varhu edin fenomen ot gradskiya zhivot v Trakiya prez IV v.”, Thracia 23, Thraco-Anatolica, 
Sbornik v chest na 65-godishninata na prof. Kalin Porozhannov, d-r, d.n., Sofia, 217-230.
Topalilov 2018b I. Topalilov, “On the Eirene mosaic from Philippopolis, Thrace”, JMR 11, 273–285.
Topalilov 2020 I. Topalilov, “The Mosaic Pavements in Philippopolis, Thrace, in 6th c. CE. Some Considerations”, JMR 13, 
257-279.
Topalilov 2021 I. Topalilov, “On Some Issues Related to the Christianisation of the Topography of Late Antique Philippopolis, 
Thrace”, Annales Balcanici, vol. 1, 107-158.
Topalilov 2022 I. Topalilov, “The mosaic pavements in Philippopolis and Augusta Traiana from Constantine I till Theodosius 
I. A short review”, Cercetări Arheologice 29.1, 259-286.
Valeva 1995 J. Valeva, “Geometric Mosaics from Bulgaria”, R. Ling (ed.), Fifth International colloquium on ancient mosaics 
held at Bath, England, JRA Supplementary series 9/2, 251-263.
Valeva 2011  J. Valeva, “Elitna zhilishtna architectura i dekor v dioceza Trakija (IV-VII v)”, St. Stanev - V. Grigorov - V. 
Dimitrov (eds.), Studies in honour of Stefan Boyadzhiev, Sofia, 17-56.
Yankov 1993 D. Yankov, “Hristiyansko kultovo stroitelstvo v Stara Zagora prez kasnata antichnost i srednovekovieto”, 
IzvMuzJužBalg 16, 139-153.