The Later Roman Empire, 284-602: A Social, Economic and Administrative Survey. Vol. III

452 Pages·25.506 MB·English

by  Jones, Arnold Hugh Martin.

THE LATER
ROMAN EMPIRE
284-602
A SOCIAL ECONOMIC AND ADMINISTRATIVE
SURVEY
By A. H. M. JONES
PROFESSOR OF ANCIENT HISTORY
IN THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE
VOLUME III
BASIL BLACKWELL
OXFORD
1964
VICE CANCELLARIIS ET MAGISTRIS ET SCHOLARIBUS UNIVERSITATUM
OXONIENSIS, BABYLONIENSIS, LONDINIENSIS, CANTABRIGIENSIS J
CUSTODI SOCIIS SCHOLARIBUS CLERICIS ET CHORISTIS COLLEGII
В. V. MARIAE WINTON. IN OXONIA, COMMUNITER NUNCUPATI
NEW COLLEGE, CUSTODI ET SOCIIS COLLEGII OMNIUM
ANIMARUM FIDELIUM DEFUNCTORUM, PRAEPOSITO ET SOCIIS
COLLEGII UNIVERSITATIS APUD LONDINIUM, MAGISTRO ET
SOCIIS COLLEGII В. V. MARIAE, SC. JOHANNIS EVANGELISTAE
ET GLORIOSAE VIRGINIS SC. RADEGUNDAE COMMUNITER
NUNCUPATI JESUS COLLEGE.
.
© basil Blackwell and Mott 'Ltd 1964
PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN BY
BILLING AND SONS LIMITED, GUILDFORD AND LONDON
AND BOUND AT THE KEMP HALL BINDERY, OXFORD
TABLE OF CONTENTS
VOLUME III
NOTES—1-343
APPENDIX I—The largitiones and the res privata, 344-6
APPENDIX II—The Notitia Dignitatum, 347-80
APPENDIX III—Dioceses and Provinces, 381-91
List of collections and periodicals cited, 392-3
List of sources and abbreviations, 394-406
Index, 407
LIST OF MAPS IN FOLDER
i. The Severan Provinces, and the Dioceses and Provinces of the
Verona List
ii. Dioceses and Provinces accorcu^g to the Notitia Dignitatum
iii. Financial Districts, Treasuries, Mints and Factories in the early
Fifth Century
iv. The Order of Battle of the Roman Army
v. The Distribution of Cities in the middle of the Fifth Century
vi. The Empire of the last years of Justinian
vii. Ecclesiastical Organization under Justinian
v
NOTES
I. THE PRINCIPATE (pp. 1-19)
As this introductory chapter is merely a resume of well-known material
I have given authorities only for a few isolated facts and figures which the
reader might like to verify, and for some controversial views.
1. A. Momigliano (Secondo Contributo alia Storia degli Studi Classic}, 105-44)
has to my mind conclusively demonstrated that there is no valid reason for
doubting that the Historia Augusta could have been written at the date its
authors profess to have written it. On the positive side I would add that, as
Mommsen (Ges. Schr. vn. 302 ff.) long ago observed, the administrative
terminology of the authors precisely fits this period. For example there are
duces and very rarely a magister militum, but usually the praetorian prefect is
commander in chief; there is no quaestor or magister officiorum, but the magister
memoriae is still the chief secretary (see ch. XII, n. 3).
2. My statistics do not agree with those of P. Lambrechts (La composition du
senat romain (117-92), Antwerp, 1936, (193-284), Budapest, 1937), but this
work is now obsolete. My figures are derived from an unpublished thesis of
my former pupil J. Morris of University College, London, which comprises
an exhaustive prosopography of senators and their provenance when known.
3. The titles first appear in inscriptions at the end of the second century (e.g.
ILS 1455) but were generally current much earlier (e.g. Suet. Claudius, 24).
4. Pius’ accumulated balance: Cassius Dio, LXXIV. 8. MARCUS’ auctions:
SHA, Marcus, 17.
5. Hadrian’s arrears: ILS 309. marcus’ arrears: Cassius Dio, lxxi. 32.
6. Galen, deprobispravisque alimentorum succis (Ed. Kuhn, vi. 749). I am indebted
for this reference to Dr. David Woollam of Emmanuel College.
7. tributum soli: Dig. l. xv. 4 (the forma censualis), Appian, Syriac a, 50
(1% of the assessment), tributum capitis: Dig. l. xv. 3 (age limits in
Syria); it was certainly a polltax in Egypt (Wilcken, Grund^iige, 189), and a
polltax is recorded in Macedonia and Greece (IG xii. v. 724, 946, ’Aq%.
АеЛт., 1916, p. 148). Dig. l. xv. 8 §7 suggests that tributum soli and capitis were
the two standard direct taxes. Where movable property (such as ships, Tac.
Ann. xiii. 51) was assessed is not known.
8. See my Greek City, 140-3.
9. SC DE GLADIATORIBUS: F/R I2. 49. TERGESTE: ILS 6680.
10. pertinax’s reserve: Cassius Dio, lxxiii. 5. severus and the army:
Herodian, 111. viii. 4.
11. caracalla’s increase of pay and its cost: Herodian, iv. iv. 7, Cassius
Dio, lxxviii. 36. caracalla and the vicesima hereditatum: Cassius
Dio, lxxvii. 9.
12. For my views on the Constitutio Antoniniana see my Studies in Roman
Government and Law, ch. viii.
13. macrinus reduces the vicesima hereditatum: Cassius Dio, lxxviii. 12.
HIS RESTRICTION OF PAY INCREASES: ib. LXXVIII. 28, 36.
14. the senatorial council of state: Herodian, VI. i. 2.
15. See n. 2.
16. Aur. Victor, Caes. xxxiii. 34, xxxvii. 5, 6; see C. W. Keyes, The rise of
the equites in the third century of the Roman Empire (Princeton, 1915).
В I
2 I. THE PRINCIPATE (pp. 22-31)
17. MARCUS AND THE MARCOMANNI: Cassius Dio, LXXI. 15. PERTINAX AND
the land: Herodian, 11. iv. 6. probus and the barbarians: SHA, Probus, 18.
AURELIAN AND THE LAND: CJ XI. Их. I.
18. aurelian’s currency reform: Exon. Hist. Rev. 1953, 297-8; my inter­
pretation is confirmed by С. H. V. Sutherland in JRS li (1961), 94-5. the
follis: JRS xlix (1959), 34 ff.; my conjecture that the follis was worth
12,500 denarii under Diocletian has since been proved correct by P. Beatty
Panop. 2, line 302, when 4 folles are equated with 3 3 talents ( = 49,500 denarii) +
500 denarii.
19. Econ. Hist. Rev. 1953, 295-6, 299.
20. black market in aurei : CIL xiii. 3162; for the old ratio of denarius to
aureus see Cassius Dio, lv. 12 § 4, and Т. V. Buttrey’s analysis of this passage
in JRS li (1961), 40-5. aurum coronarium: Cassius Dio, lxxvii. 9.
21. rise in prices and wages: P. Oxy. 1414.
22. For the Egyptian evidence see S. L. Wallace, Taxation in Egypt (Princeton,
1938). It is one of the unsolved mysteries of history that so useful a tax as the
vicesima hereditatum had ceased to exist by the fourth century.
23. Diocletian’s edict: ILS 642. The most recent study of the annona
problem is D. van Berchem, ‘L’annone militaire dans l’empire Romain au
IIIе siecle’, Mem. Soc. Nat. Ant. de France, 8me serie, Tome x (1937), 117-202.
24. indictiones: Pliny, Paneg. 29, Cassius Dio, lxxvii. 9, Dig. xix. i. 13 §6,
xxvi. vii. 32 §6, xxxiii. ii. 28. Cf. CJ x. xvi. 2, 260, 3, 249. payments for
annona: Sb 7181 (220 a.d.), P. Kalen, 9 (240 a.d.); for clothing: P. Oxy. 1414.
The problem is discussed by van Berchem (see n. 23), but a thorough study
based on the papyri is a desideratum.
25. For pay and deductions see P. Gen. Lat. 1 (reprinted in M. McCrum and
A. G. Woodhead, Documents of the Flavian Emperors (Cambridge, 1961), no. 405),
26. the magister memoriae’s salary: Pan. Lat. ix. 11; for the Augustal
prefect and the dux of Libya see p. 397.
II. DIOCLETIAN
In chapters II to IX I have not thought it necessary to give full documenta­
tion for the political and military narrative, as I am covering the same ground
(more rapidly) as a number of more learned historians; O. Seeck, Geschichte
des Untergangs der antiken Welt (Berlin, 1897-1921) for the period from a.d. 284
to 476, J. B. Bury, A history of the Later Roman Empire (London, 1923)
for a.d. 395 to 565, A. Piganiol, Uempire chretien (325—95) (Paris, 1947),
E. Stein, Histoire du has-empire, vol. I (284-476) (Paris, 1959, translation and
revision by J. R. Palanque), vol. II (476-565) (Paris, 1949). The same applies
to church history, where the story is more fully told in Histoire de Veglise (A.
Fliche, B. Martin), vol. Ill, De la paix Constantinienne a la mort de Theodose (by
J. R. Palanque, G. Bardy, P. de Labriolle, Paris, 1947), vol. IV, De la mort de
Theodose aVavenement de Gregoire le Grand (by P. de Labriolle, G. Bardy, L. Brehier,
G. de Plinval, Paris, 1945)-
There is no full scale modern biography of Diocletian. W. Seston has never
completed his Diocletien et la Tetrarchie (Paris, 1940), of which only the first
II. DIOCLETIAN (pp. 37- 43) 3
volume has appeared. There are exhaustive and useful articles by G. Costa in
the Di^ionario Epigrafico and by W. Ensslin in Pauly-Wissowa (s.v. Valerius
Diocletianus). Apart from the general works mentioned above, there is a full
account of the reign in the Cambridge Ancient History, XII, chapters ix, x, xi
and xix.
1. Arcadius Charisius and Hermogenian are usually placed after 331 a.d.
because both (Arcadius in Dig. 1. xi. 1 §1 and Hermogenian in Dig. iv. iv.
17) know of the inappellable jurisdiction of the praetorian prefect, affirmed
in that year by CTh xi. xxx. 16. But both (Arcadius in Dig. l. iv. 18 §26 and
Hermogenian in Dig. l. iv. 1 §1) speak of decaproti, who appear to have been
abolished in 307-8 in favour of praepositipagorum (see my Greek City, p. 333,
n. 106), and neither in their exhaustive treatment of munera mention the latter
office. The wording of CTh xi. xxx. 16, a proconsulibus et comitibus et his
qui vice praefectorum cognoscunt, sive ex appellatione sive ex delegato sive
ex ordine iudicaverint, provocari permittimus ... a praefectis autem praetorio,
qui soli vice sacra cognoscere vere dicendi sunt, provocari non sinimus,
ne iam nostra contingi veneratio videatur, suggests that Constantine’s object
was to affirm that appeals were allowed from vice sacra iudicantes, except for the
praetorian prefects. It may be that the title vice sacra iudicans originally meant
that the holder’s judgments were like the emperor’s inappellable, and that this
tide was originally given to the praetorian prefects only. When the title was
more widely granted appeals were allowed, and Constantine in this law made
this plain, reaffirming the old inappellability of the prefects only.
2. For the date and composition of the Notitia Dignitatum see App. II.
3. The vexed question of the date of Diocletian’s dies imperii has now been
settled by P. Beatty Panop. 2, lines 162, 170, etc. Maximian’s dates remain
highly problematical, but there is no doubt that he was appointed first Caesar
and then Augustus. Eutropius, the only literary authority to record the fact
(ix. 20, 22), is wrong in making Maximian continue as Caesar until 293, but a
few inscriptions (e.g. ILS 616) record him as Caesar; since he issued no coins
as such the period in which he was Caesar must have been very brief.
4. the caesars: Aur. Victor, Caes. xxxix. 24-5, Eutrop. ix. 22. Despite
Seston’s ingenious arguments (op. cit. pp. 88 fF.) I find it hard to disbelieve the
contemporary evidence of Pan. Lat. viii. 3 that both were created simul­
taneously on 1 March.
5. Lact. Mort. Pers. xviii, xix, Aur. Victor, Caes. xxxix. 48, xl. 1, Eutrop.
ix. 27, x. 1, 2.
6. adoratio A Persian ceremonial: Aur. Victor, Caes. xxxix. 2, 4, Eutrop.
ix. 26. seclusion: SHA, Aurelianus, 43.
7. For collegiality see pp. 325-6. The division of the empire in 293 is described
by Aur. Victor, Caes. xxxix. 30 and Praxagoras (FHG iv, p. 2). That Dio­
cletian was in Illyricum and Thrace throughout 293 and 294 is proved by the
subscriptions of the Code (see pp. 495-7 of Kruger’s edition). Lactantius
(Mort. Pers. xvii) represents Diocletian as leaving for Rome after starting the
persecution in the spring of 303, and returning to Nicomedia next year ‘aestate
peracta per circuitum ripae Istricae’: he had already reached Durostorum by
8 June 303 (CJ v. lxxiii. 4) and was back in Nicomedia by 27 August 304
(CJ hi. xxviii. 26).
8. Lact. Mort. Pers. vii. 4, provinciae quoque in frusta concisae. byzacena:
AE 1908, 197. sitifensis: CIL viii. 8924, 20215. numidia c. and м.:
4 II. DIOCLETIAN (pp. 43-7)
ILS 631-3, 651, CIL viii. 5526, 7965. tripolitania: ILS 9352, IRT 577,
CIL viii. 22763. the Egyptian provinces: J. Lallemand, Bull. Ac. Roy.
Belg. (Cl. le tires et sc. mor. et pol.) 5 ser. xxxvi (1950), 387-95. с aria: ILS 635.
insulae: CIL 111. 450, AE 1947, 57, CJ hi. xxii. 5, 294. pisidia: ILS 8932,
9480. scythia: ILS 4103. noricum divided: ILS 4197. lugdunensis
divided: CTh xi. iii. 1, 313 (S). viennensis: CIL xn. 1852.
9. See my article, ‘The date and value of the Verona list’, JRS xliv (1954), 21-9,
and add CIL viii. 18905, which shows Numidia reunited in 314.
10. acta marcelli: Anal. Boll. xli (1923), 260 fF. aurelius litua: ILS 628;
Cornelius Octavianus appears to have dealt with the rebel Bavares ‘et in priori
praesidatu et post in ducatu’ (ILS 9006). fortresses built by praesides:
AE 1931, 82 (Britain), ILS 640 (Maxima Sequanorum), AE 1942-3, 81,
cf. ILS 5786 (Numidia), CIL viii. 8712 (Sitifensis), ILS 9352 (Tripolitania),
6886 (Caesariensis), CIL 111. 14149, AE 1895, 182 (Arabia), CIL 111. 6661
(Libanensis).
11. Valerius concordius: CIL xiii. 3672 (v.p.). carausius: Eutrop. ix. 21.
duces of scythia: ILS 4103 (v.p.); in Valeria: CIL 111. 10981 (v.p.); in
noricum: ILS 664 (v.p.); in illyricum: FIR i2. 93, line 24; of egypt, etc.:
AE 1934, 7-8 (v.p.); of africa, etc.: ILS 2774, cf. 9006. For later ducatus
covering several provinces see Not. Dig. Or. xxxiii, xxxviii, Occ. xxxii, xxxiv,
xxxv, xxxvii, xl.
12. See JRS xliv (1954), 24 fF. I have noted the following praesides of
Diocletianic date who are styled v.p.; IGR 1. 789-92, 1511-2, IRT 577, ILS
618, 628, 635, 640, 644, 4495, 9352, CIL 11. 4104, 5140, hi. 223, 307, 450, 480,
6661,14156, vi. 1641, viii. 2573-5, 2660, 4325, 8474, 21447-9, 23179, AE 1908,
107, 1917-8, 30, 1920, 15, 1930, 114, 1942-3, 81, 1956, 34; also prefects of
Egypt, P. Oxj. 71, 888, 1456, 1503, 2187.
13. The administrative set up of Egypt under Diocletian has been vividly
illuminated by P. Beatty Panop., which shows о inlxgonog rfjg хатсогедсо Orjfiaidog
arranging all financial affairs and mentions o emrgonog rfjg dvcorega) Qr)f$aidog
fulfilling similar functions (1, lines 79, 187, 2, line 180), while 6 fjyov/xevog
тfjg Grjfiaidog appears only as a judge (1, lines 143, 272, 347, cf. 126) or as con­
cerned with forts (1, lines 77, 385, 404) and the manufacture of arms (1, lines
213, 342). In 316 an emrgonog Tfjg 'Enravofxiag is recorded at the same time as a
rjyeftw rrjg 'Egxovkiag (P. Oxy. 2113-14): these procurators of subdistricts are
not later continued. For the financial responsibility of proconsuls under
Constantine see CTh xi. i. 2+vii. 1, 313 (S), xi. xvi. 1, 319,1. xii. 2, 319.
14. Lact. Mort. Pers. vii. 4.
15. For Diocletian’s insistence on fair assessments see the edict of Optatus
(P. Cairo Isid. 1, Sb 7622); on jurisdiction, CJ 111. iii. 2, 294.
16. Italy appears as officially one diocese not only in the Verona list but in the
Notitia Dignitatum (Occ. i. 52-60, 90-7, ii. 6, 10-27), though by that time the
vicarius urbis Romae was long established. A vicarius of the praefectus urbi is very
occasionally mentioned (Zos. 11. 9, ILS 1214, 792, Chron. Min. 1. 67, 68) and
elaborate theories have been formulated (most recently by Chastagnol, La
Prefecture Urbaine a Rome, 26-42, who cites the earlier literature) on his relation
with the vicarius of the praetorian prefect in urbe Roma. The meagre evidence
does not seem to me to justify these theories: so far as we know the vicarius of
the urban prefect was merely his temporary deputy (as certainly in Chron. Min.
1. 67, 68). The vicarius urbis is first recorded with that title in ILS 1214, vicario
II. DIOCLETIAN (pp. 47-50) 5
praefF. praetorio bis, in urbe Roma et per Mysias, but ILS 619 records ‘Septimius
Valentio v.p. a.v. praefF. praett. cc. w/ at Rome in 293-6.
17. early vicars: ILS 619, 1214 (cited in n. 16; Urbs Roma and Moesia),
Acta Marcelli, Anal. Boll, xli (1923), 260 fF. (Spain), AE 1942-3, 81, IRT
464, Aur. Victor, Caes. xl. 17, Eus. HE x. 6 (Africa), ILS 1218 (Italy), P. Oxy.
1469, CJ xi. 1.1 (325), CTh xii. i. 12, 325,11. xxxiii. 1, 326 (S), Eus. V. Const. 1.
31 (Oriens), CTh xi. vii. 2, 319 (Britain). A number of others are recorded in
the Codes without their dioceses (e.g. CJ vn. xxii. 3, 314; viii. x. 6, 321, ix.
xxxiv. 3, 320, CTh 11. vii. 1, 314,11. xv. 1, 319). For the military duties of early
vicarii see the Acta Marcelli and AE 1942-3, 81. The equestrian rank of vicars is
attested by ILS 619, IRT 464 and (of later date) ILS 1214,1218, Aug. Ep. 88 §4,
CIL 11. 2203, P. Oxj. 1469. The constitutional position of proconsuls is
described by Eunapius (V. Soph. vii. 5) and also emerges from Not. Dig. Or. ii,
xxiv, where Asia is omitted from the lists of provinces under the disposition
of the praetorian prefect of the East and the vicar of Asiana, and Occ. ii, xx,
where Africa is similarly omitted. The later established proconsul of Achaea
was subject to the praetorian prefect of Illyricum (Not. Dig. Or. iii. 8).
18. Lact. Mort. Pers. vii. 4. I know of the following diocesan rationales under
Diocletian and Constantine: Africa, CIL viii. 7043, ILS 1218, Eus. HE
x. 6 §1, CTh x. i. 2, 319, xix. 1, 320; Numidia and Mauretania, CIL viii.
7008-9, 7067; Gaul, ILS 1214, rationalis vicarius per Gallias; Spain, CTh
x. xi. 1, rationali[bus] Hispaniarum, 317; Tres Provinciae, CTh 11. xxv. 1,
325 (S), xii. vi. 2, 325 and vii. 1, 325; Urbs Roma, ILS 1218, CTh xi. xxx. 14,
327; Asiana, ILS 6091; Egypt, P. Oxy. 1410, rov diaarjfi(oTaTov) xaQoX(ixov)
ETiaQxeiaq Aiyvmov xal Афщд, CIL in. 17, P. Oxy. 1204, 1260, 2187, P.
Merton, 90, PSI 302, P. Harris, 160, P. Vind. 14, Sb 4295, P. Beatty Panop. 1,
lines 64, 90; 2, lines 12, 23, P. Flor. 54. There are a large number of rationales
recorded at Rome (CIL vi. 1120a, 1121, 1132, 1145, 1701 a, b); they may have
been rationales urbis Romae, but some may have been rationales of the (Western)
empire. Practically all the above are styled v.p.
19. Diocesan magistri reiprivatae are rarely recorded. I can cite P. Beatty Panop.
1, lines 160, 205, 227 (298), CTh x. i. 4, ad Dometium Dracontium magi-
strum privatae rei Africae, 320, CIL 111. 18, Val. Epiphanius v.p. mag. privat.
Aeg. et Lib. (Constantine). Magistri (rei privatae) are often coupled with
rationales (rei summae), e.g. in Lact. Mort. Pers. vii. 4, Firm. Mat. Math. iv. xxi. 9,
CJ iii. xxii. 5, 294, CTh x. i. 2, 319, xii. i. 14 (326-54).
20. A proconsul of Crete is still recorded under Diocletian (AE 1933,
101, 1934, 259), and a v.c. legatus Augusti in Phoenice (AE 1939, 58). А Лцуатод
of Moesia II appears in the Acta Dasii (Anal. Boll, xvi (1897), 11-5). decimus :
ILS 607, 2291, 3091. maximianus: ILS 2292, 5786-7. constantius: Anon.
Val. 1. concordius: CJ ix. ix. 27, 295, CIL xm. 3672. Cf also Octavianus,
ILS 9006 (cited in n. 10).
21. duces and iudices : Pan. Lat. x. 3, qui iustitiam vestram iudices aemulentur,
qui virtutis vestrae gloriam duces servent. flavianus: CIL viii. 4325. men of
liberal education: Pan. Lat. ix. 5, 15, vi. 23.
22. ASCLEPIODOTUS AND HANNIBALIANUS: ILS 8929, SHA, ProbuS, 22, Aur.
Victor, Caes. xxxix. 42, Eutrop. ix. 22. volusianus: Aur. Victor, Caes. xl. 18.
pompeianus: Pan. Lat. xii. 8, cf. iv. 25. For the functions of the praetorian
prefects see pp. 371-2, 448 fF., 479 fF. For the two financial departments and
the secretariats see pp. 412 fF., 367-8.
6 II. DIOCLETIAN (pp. 51-5;
23. sicorius probus: Petr. Patr. 14. The magister studiorum is last recorded in
ILS 1214, which is also the only evidence for a consiliis sacris.
24. For Asclepiodotus see n. 22. eumenius: Pan. Lat. ix. 6, 11. Gallus had a
praetorian prefect and a quaestor (Amm. xiv. i. 10, vii. 9, 12), appointed by
Constantius. So also had Julian (Amm. xvii. iii. 4, xx. viii. 14, ix. 5), but
Ursulus, Constantius’ comes sacrarum largitionumy controlled the largitiones in
Julian’s dominions (Amm. xxii. iii. 7).
25. salary of magister memoriae: Pan. Lat. vi. 11, trecena ilia sestertiaquae
sacrae memoriae magister acceperam. For the allowances of duces etc. see p. 397.
26. Lact. Mort. Pers. vii. 4. For the numbers of officia see pp. 592-4.
27. Zos. 11. 34. The latest substantial contribution to the problem of the army
is D. van Berchem, L’Armee de Diocletien et la Reforme Constantinienne, Paris,
1952.
28. lanciarii: ILS 2781, Val. Thiumpo qui militavit in leg. XI Cl., lectus in
sacro comit. lanciarius, deinde protexit annis V, missus, pref. leg. II Hercul.,
2782, Martino . . . qui vixit ann. XXXVIII, in prima Minerbes mil. ann. V, in
und. ann. IIII, in lanciaria ann. V, in pr. ann. V, 2045, Val. Tertius militi corti
X pretorie qui vixit annis XXXVI mes. Ill dies XV, militabit legione Mesiaca
annis V, inter lanciarios annis XI, in pretoria ann[is ...]. comites : P. Oxj. 43 R,
col. ii, 17, 24, 27. The Lanciarii Seniores are the senior palatine legion in the
East (Not. Dig. Or. v. 42), the Comites Seniores the senior palatine vexillation
in both East and West (Not. Dig. Or. vi. 28, Occ. vi. 43). acta maximiliani:
G. Kruger, Ausgewahlte Martjrerakten, 86-7.
29. Opt. App. I, ad init.
30. The usurper Magnentius was commander of Ioviani and Herculiani (Zos.
11. 42); cf. also Soz. vi. 6, Zos. 111. 30, Vegetius, 1. 17, where their origin is
given. Their Seniores rank highest among the palatine legions of the West
(Not. Dig. Occ. v. 145-6) and their Iuniores next after the Lanciarii in the East
(Not. Dig. Or. v. 43-4). The Equites Promoti Seniores are the highest
ranking palatine vexillation in the East (Not. Dig. Or. v. 28), and the second
highest, after the Comites Seniores, in the West (Not. Dig. Occ. vi. 44).
31. On the origins of the protectores see Stein, Bas-Empirey 1. 57-8. diocletian:
Aur. Victor, Caes. xxxix. 1, domesticos regens, SHA, Carusy 13, domesticos
tunc regentem. Valerius vincentius: ILS 2779. protectores in egypt:
P. Oxj. 43 R, col. ii, 7, col. iv, 18-20.
32. For Thiumpus see n. 28.
33. acta sergii et bacchi: Anal. Bol. xiv (1895), 375 fF. scutarii: Lact. Mort.
Pers. xix. 6, statim scutarius, continuo protector, mox tribunus, postridie
Caesar, CTh xiv. xvii. 9, 389, annonas civicas in urbe Constantinopolitana
scholae scutariorum et scutariorum clibanariorum divi Constantini adseruntur
liberalitate meruisse. For the later history of the scholae see pp. 613-4.
34. For the Constantinian additions to the comitatus see pp. 97-8. the Egyptian
EXPEDITIONARY FORCE: P. Oxj. 43R, Col. ii, 2I-3, Col. iv, II, Col. V, I2-I3,
23-4, cf. Not. Dig. Or. xxviii. 14, 15, for V Macedonica and XIII Gemina;
xxxi. 43, for ala 11 Hispanorum.
35. CJ vii. lxiv. 9 (293-305), veteranis qui in legione vel vexillatione militantes
post vicesima stipendia honestam vel causariam missionem consecuti sunt,
honorum et munerum personalium vacationem concessimus, x. Iv. 3 (286-93),
veteranis ita demum honorum et munerum personalium vacatio iure conceditur