{"schema_version":"1.1","assessment_date":"2026-10-17","title":"Milestone context hierarchy and parallel fixed roadworks records","status":"editorial criteria; individual object admission requires publication review","unit_of_assessment":"object, historical location event, local road association, and stated inference","not_probability_scale":true,"priority_note":"T1 and T2 prioritize different strong contextual classes. The numerical order does not establish that every T1 is evidentially stronger than every T2. T2a and T2b must remain visibly distinct.","tier_order":["T1","T2","T3","T4","T5","T6","U","X","R1"],"mandatory_high_tier_fields":["object_identity","milestone_function_status","roman_attribution_status","support_form","support_original_position_status","historical_location_role","road_context_status","publication_url_or_local_path","publication_locator","assessment_reason","assessment_date"],"global_rules":["Never assign T1 from rupestral, rock, stone, material, an isolated in_situ value, or database milestone type alone.","Rock-cut lettering on a movable boulder is not confirmed original bedrock.","Unresolved authenticity or non-milestone function blocks milestone-anchor admission; retain a visible disputed or other-road-inscription category.","Do not require a narrowly dated inscription for spatial admission; instead disclose unknown chronology and block dated phase validation.","Secondary deposition, transport, or incorporation as displaced spolia before the assessed discovery blocks T2b. Later or on-site fence-post reuse without demonstrated transport does not by itself erase a publication-documented same-site Roman-road association. Such admission remains T2b with original installation unproved and reuse flagged.","A modern transfer after a documented ancient-position discovery does not erase the earlier context, but current repository coordinates cannot substitute for original-position geometry.","Coordinate precision is a separate axis. Missing or inherited coordinates do not acquire precision through strong contextual evidence.","A high contextual tier is not independent confirmation of an Itiner-e segment until that segment's source genealogy has been reviewed.","The original installation of a milestone and the date of the current road fabric must not be equated without evidence.","Object-level inference stops at the stated point, local relation, corridor, or segment; never automatically validate a whole route.","Unreviewed catalogue records default to U, not to T5 or T6 merely because a locality or point is available.","When source statements conflict, preserve the conflict and withhold the stronger interpretation until adjudicated. Narrative relocation evidence overrides a generic in_situ metadata label.","R1 is a parallel record-kind class for rock-cut roadworks inscriptions; it does not increase the T1 milestone count or establish distance mileage."],"tiers":[{"id":"T1","label":"Fixed rupestral milestone with a documented road relation","short_label":"Fixed rock marker","required_evidence":["Accepted Roman milestone function, supported by an inspected publication.","Inscription cut into original bedrock; support continuity or documented original bedrock position is established.","Inspected publication establishes a direct relation to a local Roman road; physical or explicit functional relation must be recorded.","The historical support position used for the claim has no unresolved displacement contradiction."],"prohibits":["movable boulder assumed fixed","other road inscription relabelled milestone","present location substituted for relocated original","proximity-only road attribution"],"permitted_scope":["original inscription position","documented local road relation"],"does_not_establish":["exact pavement centreline","road construction date","specific works phase","whole network segment","independent Itiner-e verification"],"unknown_date_policy":"Permit spatial admission with Roman attribution established; show undated or broad date and block precise temporal validation.","geometry_policy":"Map an original location only with its cited source; if unusable or missing, retain a dossier-only T1 and do not manufacture a pinpoint."},{"id":"T2","label":"Milestone with documented Roman road context","short_label":"Documented road context","required_evidence":["Accepted Roman milestone identification.","Inspected publication directly ties object discovery or installation to physically identified Roman road remains.","No unresolved positive evidence of displaced secondary deposition, transport before the assessed discovery, or incorporation as transported spolia. Later or on-site reuse must be separately qualified."],"subtypes":[{"id":"T2a","label":"Documented primary road setting","required_evidence":["Original installation, original socket, standing base, or equivalently documented primary context beside the Roman road."],"scope_note":"Primary marker station and local road association; precision and date remain separate."},{"id":"T2b","label":"Found with road remains; original installation unproved","required_evidence":["Publication documents a local discovery with Roman road remains.","Original socket or installation is not established.","No demonstrated transport before assessed discovery, secondary fill, or incorporation as displaced road spolia. Later or on-site fence-post reuse is recorded separately and cannot establish unchanged primary installation."],"mandatory_ui_qualification":"Original installation unproved","scope_note":"Strong local co-occurrence; not proof of the exact mile station, original emplacement, or contemporary road surface.","borderline_example":"CIL II 4644 at Casa de Campo: publication-reported local Roman-road association may support T2b alongside separately flagged fence-post reuse. The original station and socket remain unproved, and fuller excavation or discovery records are needed."}],"does_not_establish":["roadwork date","whole route alignment","exact location from a catalogue centroid","independent Itiner-e verification"],"permitted_scope":["local road association","primary station only for T2a"]},{"id":"T3","label":"Published road association; physical context unresolved","short_label":"Published road association","required_evidence":["Inspected publication specifically links the object to a named road or offers an original-position argument.","Physical co-occurrence with Roman road remains or primary installation has not been adequately established.","Attribution and limits are explicitly recorded."],"permitted_scope":["conditional road or corridor attribution"],"does_not_establish":["excavated primary setting","exact road alignment","original mile station"]},{"id":"T4","label":"Specific discovery context; original road setting unproved","short_label":"Specific discovery context","required_evidence":["Inspected publication supplies a specific discovery or recovery context.","Original roadside station or sufficiently supported road relation is not established."],"reuse_policy":"Secondary reuse and recovery can qualify as a specific context, but must carry reuse_role and original_position_unknown. Such a location is not a road alignment anchor.","permitted_scope":["discovery geography","reuse geography","recovery geography"],"does_not_establish":["original roadside setting","mile station","Roman road alignment"]},{"id":"T5","label":"Broad locality or corridor only","short_label":"Broad locality","required_evidence":["Inspected publication supplies a broad discovery locality or corridor.","No adequately located specific original-position discovery is established."],"permitted_scope":["regional distribution","corridor search"],"does_not_establish":["site pinpoint","nearest-road match","original roadside station"]},{"id":"T6","label":"Collection, custody, or proxy location only","short_label":"Custody or proxy only","required_evidence":["Review establishes that the available geometry or location identifies collection, custody, reporting locality, or catalogue proxy rather than ancient discovery context."],"permitted_scope":["custody history","access or display","catalogue navigation"],"does_not_establish":["ancient findspot","original station","road association"]},{"id":"U","label":"Unreviewed or insufficient evidence","short_label":"Unreviewed","required_evidence":[],"default_for_bulk_catalogue":true,"permitted_scope":["catalogue discovery","review queue"],"does_not_establish":["low quality ancient context","primary setting","road association"]},{"id":"X","label":"Excluded from milestone alignment inference","short_label":"Excluded or disputed","required_evidence":["Inspected publication identifies a serious unresolved authenticity or function problem, or accepted non-milestone function."],"permitted_scope":["disputed-object dossier","other-road-inscription comparison when appropriate"],"preserve_in_catalogue":true,"does_not_establish":["milestone alignment anchor"]},{"id":"R1","label":"Rupestral roadworks record · separate from milestones","short_label":"Fixed roadworks record","description":"A published original rock-cut inscription physically tied to a Roman road and recording roadwork. Historical relocation or loss is explicit. This parallel class supplies no mileage or milestone identity.","required_evidence":["Original rock support documented in an inspected publication.","Physical road relation documented.","Roadwork wording supported by a published edition.","Original setting distinguished from later movement, loss or display."],"prohibits":["Relabelling a roadwork text as a milestone","Using the moved panel coordinate as the ancient road point","Assuming source independence from an Itiner-e segment"],"permitted_scope":["Documented local roadwork and original road relation; geometry and road-fabric phase remain separate."]}],"independent_axes":{"support_form":["original_bedrock","detached_rock_face","movable_boulder","freestanding_column","fragment","unknown"],"milestone_function_status":["accepted","probable","disputed","other_road_inscription","honorific_or_boundary","unknown"],"authenticity_status":["accepted_in_consulted_edition","disputed","rejected","unreviewed"],"historical_location_role":["original_station","findspot","secondary_reuse","recovery","historical_custody","repository","catalogue_proxy","unknown"],"coordinate_fitness":["source_surveyed_original_position","source_georeferenced_findspot","approximate_locality","corridor_only","custody_or_proxy","missing","quarantined","unknown"],"road_context_status":["original_installation","documented_local_physical_association","published_conditional_attribution","no_road_context","secondary_road_reuse","unknown"],"source_independence_from_segment":["independent_evidence_demonstrated","shared_source","possible_dependency","not_reviewed","not_applicable"],"temporal_compatibility_with_segment":["supported_for_specific_phase","broadly_compatible","incompatible","unknown","not_applicable"],"inference_scope":["point","local_road_association","corridor","segment","route","none"]},"event_requirements":{"separate_event_types":["inscription_phase","road_installation","works_claim","erasure","reinscription","reuse","discovery","modern_relocation","repository_observation"],"required_per_event_when_claimed":["event_type","date_or_unknown","location_role_or_not_applicable","source","locator","evidence_status"],"actor_rule":"Keep named emperor, grammatical subject of works verb, commissioner, funder, governor, executing unit, community, stonecutter, and modern editor distinct. Do not infer workforce from titulature.","precision_rule":"Store reported date and positional uncertainty; do not substitute numeric exactness for missing evidence."},"source_register":[{"id":"alarcao2005","citation":"Jorge de Alarcão, O território dos Paesvri e as suas principais povoações, Conimbriga 44 (2005), 147–171","locator":"p.160, paragraph on CIL II 6211","url":"https://ap1.sib.uc.pt/bitstream/10316.2/37810/1/o_territorio_dos_paesvri_e_as_suas_principais_povoacoes.pdf","supports":"Rupestral support does not settle milestone function","inspection_status":"online primary scholarly article text inspected; CIL entry not newly inspected"},{"id":"elisha2011","citation":"Yossi Elisha, Rantis (Northwest), Hadashot Arkheologiyot 123 (2011)","locator":"Road description; Table 1; figs.5–7","url":"https://hadashot.iaa.org.il/Report_Detail_Eng.aspx?id=1826","supports":"Milestones can be physically associated with roads through secondary incorporation","inspection_status":"excavator's final report inspected"},{"id":"rib2283","citation":"Roman Inscriptions of Britain, RIB 2283","locator":"Support: Other events, Modern location, Institution; Commentary","url":"https://romaninscriptionsofbritain.org/inscriptions/2283","supports":"Narrative relocation history overrides isolated in situ metadata","inspection_status":"online corpus edition inspected"},{"id":"itinere2025methods","citation":"Itiner-e: A high-resolution dataset of roads of the Roman Empire, Scientific Data (2025)","locator":"Methods: road digitisation, steps one to three","url":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-025-06140-z","supports":"Milestones enter network reconstruction; source independence cannot be assumed","inspection_status":"author methods text inspected"},{"id":"kolb2019","citation":"Anne Kolb, Via ducta – Roman Road Building, in Roman Roads: New Evidence – New Perspectives (2019)","locator":"pp.11–13 ","url":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110638332","supports":"Archaeological control of exact itinerary routes; separate types of works and milestone erection","inspection_status":"local full chapter pages text inspected","locator_status":"Published page locator supplied in the recorded citation; verification and reuse limits remain separate."},{"id":"rathmann2019","citation":"Michael Rathmann, Miliaria in der Provinz Lusitania, in Roman Roads: New Evidence – New Perspectives (2019)","locator":"pp.303–306 ","url":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110638332-016","supports":"Corpus editions need integration with archaeological and infrastructure evidence","inspection_status":"local chapter pages text inspected; historical corpus counts not treated as current","locator_status":"Published page locator supplied in the recorded citation; verification and reuse limits remain separate."},{"id":"gutierrez2022","citation":"Gutiérrez-Rodríguez et al., Microstratigraphic analysis of the main Roman road in Hispania: the Via Augusta where it passes through the Ianus Augustus (Mengíbar, Spain), Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences 14, 142 (2022)","locator":"Discussion: reconstruction of the Via Augusta, repairs and road-sequence chronology","url":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12520-022-01602-6","supports":"Epigraphic work claims and excavated fabric do not automatically yield an exact local phase date","inspection_status":"primary article discussion inspected"}]}