No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Senatorial and Equestrian Governors in the Third Century A.D.*
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 September 2012
Extract
In the second half of the third century a.d., a large number of Roman provinces which used to be governed by legati Augusti pro praetore of senatorial rank, came to be governed by praesides of equestrian rank. In this article the evidence for this change in provincial administration has been collected as fully as possible, and thereupon the question investigated whether the change was in any way the outcome of military considerations.
The principles according to which such an investigation must be conducted, should be self-evident. The inscriptions of the latter half of the third century are considerably fewer in number than those of the earlier Empire, and the inscriptions concerning the provincial governors of this period make no exception. They should, therefore, be interpreted with the utmost care and caution. I have tried both to avoid forcing the evidence of inscriptions which have obviously been copied badly, and to avoid utilizing identifications of persons which are either improbable, or demonstrably mistaken: I believe that such evidence should not be used to support any pre-conceived views concerning supposed changes in the administrative system.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Hans Petersen 1955. Exclusive Licence to Publish: The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies
Footnotes
*
This article is a chapter from an unpublished doctoral dissertation accepted by Harvard University in 1953 and written under the direction of Professor Herbert Bloch.
References
1 The replacement of senatorial ‘legati pro praetore’ by equestrians has been treated previously by Keyes, C. W., The rise of the equites in the third century of the Roman Empire, Diss., Princeton, 1915, 8–15Google Scholar. The article of Homo, L., ‘Les privilèges administratifs du Sénat romain et leur disparition graduelle au cours du IIIe siècle,’ Rev. Hist. 137, 1921. 161–203Google Scholar; 138, 1921, 1–52, is to be disregarded, aince the author, while making little use of inscriptions, accepts the Historia Augusta as a trustworthy source and engages in over-subtle interpretations of passages drawn therefrom.
2 The epigraphical evidence for the use of these titles in the third century has been collected by Barbieri, G., L' albo senatorio da Settimio Severo a Carino, Roma, 1952, 562–585Google Scholar.
3 The epigraphical and literary evidence for the ‘procuratores a v p’ has been collected by Keyes, Rise of the equites 3–8.
4 Keyes, Rise of the equites 7–8.
5 Cod. lust, III, 3, 1 (a.d. 212); iv, 20,4 (a.d. 239); ix, 47, 2 (a.d. 212).
6 Keyes was led to his view probably by the theory of the ‘independent vicariate’, enunciated by Domaszewski, A. v., ‘Die Inschriften des Timesitheus,’ Rh. Mus. 58, 1903, 228Google Scholar. This theory, which maintains that the supposed ‘independent vicariate’ originated in the reign of Gallienus, must be likewise abandoned, since the two instances of such a vicariate alleged by v. Domaszewski should be interpreted differently: for Clementius Silvinus see below, p. 51, n. 60; for Aurelius Iulius see below, p. 54, n. 113. The view (but not the name) of v. Domaszewski is quoted by Hirschfeld, O., Die kaiserlichen Verwaltungsbeamten bis auf Diocletian2, Berlin, 1905, 389, n. 3Google Scholar.
7 LeBas-Waddington, 1949; 1950 = CIL III, 89; 90 (add. p. 969) = Princeton Arch. Exp. Syria III, A 4, pp. 225–6, no. 524; pp. 232–3, no. 533 Bostra. cf. PIR 2 1, 24–5, no. 150 (to what is there said ought to be added that the inscription of Kal'at, iz-Zerka published Rev. Bibl. 2, 1905, 93–4Google Scholar, no. 4, has been re-published in Princeton Arch. Exp. Syria III, A 1, pp. 16–17, no. 10, and that the restoration of its beginning suggested by Bleckmann, F., ‘Bericht über griechische und lateinische Epigraphik für 1910–1912,’ ZDPV 36, 1913, 224–5Google Scholar, is not acceptable.
8 OGIS 615 = IGR III, 1286 Adraa. The view that this governor was an equestrian is based merely upon the ‘correction’ of διατειμοτάτον, which is given by the inscription, to δια[ση]μοτάτον; see below the Appendix, p. 56. The name of the governor, Iunius Olympus, rather favours the view that he was a senator.
9 CIL vi, 31775.
10 Keyes, , Rise of the equites 8, 14, 15–17Google Scholar. Harrer, G. A., Studies in the history of the Roman province of Syria, Diss., Princeton, 1915, 48Google Scholar, holds that Lupus had praetorian, not consular, rank while being governor of Syria Coele.
11 OGIS 614 = IGR III, 1287 Adraa. The phrase διέποντος τὴν ἡγεμονίαν does not stand for ‘agentis vices praesidis’ (as thought by A. Stein, P-W x, 1070), but refers to the regular governor (so correctly Stein, A., Die Präfekten von Ägypten in der römischen Kaiserzeit, Bern, 1950, 150Google Scholar; 222, n. 480).
12 Princeton Arch. Exp. Syria III, A 4, pp. 231–2, no. 531 Bostra. That the governorship of Bassaeus Rufus is to be dated in these years, was made likely by Groag, E., ‘Prosopographische Beiträge,’ Jahreshefte Öst. Arch. Inst. 18, 1915, 275, 277Google Scholar. Groag does not mention this article of his in PIR 2 1, 356, nos. 66, 67.
13 ZDPV 36, 1913, 255–7, no. 15 = AE 1922, no. 130 Adraa (a.d. 274–5). Perhaps the same person is mentioned in ZDPV 37, 1914, 141–2, no. 18) = AE 1922, no. 133 Adraa; see PIR 2 III, 133, no. 197, where the latter inscription is dated correctly in the reign of Aurelian, rather than in that of Probus, to which it was assigned by the editor, G. Dalman, who has been followed by Keyes, Rise of the equites, 9, as well as by Mouterde, R. in his publication of the inscription Syria 6, 1925, 232–3Google Scholar, no. 12 (who wrongly speaks of a ‘vice-gouverneur’).
14 CIG 4649 = LeBas-Waddington III, 1909 = IGR III, 1324 = Princeton Arch. Exp. Syria III, A 4, pp. 239–240, no. 546 Bostra. It should be remarked against PIR 2 I, 321, no. 1570, and Barbieri, G., Mondo Classico 10, 1940, 138Google Scholar, n. 3, that this governor was without doubt an equestrian.
15 Gerasa ( = Kraeling, C. H. (ed.), Gerasa, New Haven, 1938), 414Google Scholar, nos. 105, 106 = AE 1939, no. 254 (Aurelius Felicianus). AE 1930, no. 105 = Gerasa 431, no. 161 (Aurelius Gorgonius).
16 CIL VI, 1673 = ILS 1211. On the date of this governorship see Harrer, Province of Syria 51–2.
17 Lupus; see above, nn. 9, 10.
18 Harrer, Province of Syria 53–8. On the date of the division of Syria see Harrer, 87–90.
19 Bull. Mus. Beyrouth 1, 1937, 79Google Scholar, no. 4 = AE 1939, no. 58 Heliopolis Syr. The phrase in 1. 6, ‘legatus eorum pro praetore,’ with ‘eorum’ instead of ‘eius’, is probably due, as thought by the editor of the inscription, H. Seyrig, to the fact that the inscription was set up in the joint reign of Diocletian and Maximian, even though the latter is not mentioned.
20 Cod. Iust. 1, 23, 3 (31 March 292); VII, 35, 4 (26 Feb 292); IX, 2, 11 (6 Apr 292); IX, 9, 25 (28 Aug 293).
21 Aelius Statutus is mentioned in three inscriptions: (1) Mél. Fac. Orient. Beyrouth I, 1906, 150Google Scholar, no. 19 = AE 1907, no. 145 = AJA 11, 1907, 316Google ScholarPubMed = Mél. Fac. Orient. Beyrouth 3, 1908, 315Google Scholar (317) prope Paneam; (2) Mél. Fac. Orient. Beyrouth 3, 317 Djermâna; (3) ZDPV 36, 1913, 249–251Google Scholar = ZDPV 37, 1914, 151Google Scholar el-Kunêtra. Sossianus Hierocles is mentioned in CIL III, 6661 Palmyra, cf. Harrer, Province of Syria 60–2.
22 Inscription of Adanda (Pamphylia) published Mon. Ant. 23, 1914, 168, no. 116Google Scholar, interpreted by Rosenberg, A., ‘Ein Dokument zur Reichsreform des Kaisers Gallienus,’ Hermes 55, 1920, 319–321Google Scholar.
23 Magie, D., Roman rule in Asia Minor, Princeton, 1950, II, 1595–6Google Scholar.
24 JRS 14, 1924, 76–7Google Scholar, no. 110 = AE 1926, no. 75 Ak Kilisse (Lycaonia, milliarium).
25 Magie, , Roman rule in Asia Minor II, 1598–9Google Scholar.
26 Magie, ibid, II, 1599–1600.
27 Terentius Marcianus is attested as διασημότατος ἡγεμών in three inscriptions: (1) BCH 7, 1883, L268, no. 12 Sagalassus (in the copy of this inscription published BCH II, 1887, 222Google Scholar, no. 17 = IGR III, 358, the cognomen is misread as Africanus); (2) BCH 23, 1899, 292 no. 6 = AE 1900, no. 128 = IGR III, 434 = OGIS 564 = TAM III, I, no. 89 Termessus Pisid.; (3) Mon. Ant. 23, 1914, 214–16Google Scholar, no. 152 = AE 1915, no. 53 Trebenna. Paribeni-Romanelli Mon. Ant. 23, 215, and Fluss P-W v, A 665, no. 57, wrongly consider Marcianus to have ‘legatus pro praetore’.
28 Bersanetti, G. M., ‘Un governatore equestre della Licia-Panfilia,’ Aevum 19, 1945, 384–390Google Scholar, has the governorship of Marcianus tentatively the years 279 and 280. Bersanetti has reached this entirely uncertain conclusion merely by first assuming the appointment of an equestrian governor was due to the fact that troops had at this time been stationed in the province, which troops, he believes, could not be commanded by a senator after the edict of Gallienus, and by then connecting this supposed new garrison of the province with the Isaurian brigandage (Zosimus I, 69–70), which he, trusting the Historia Augusta (SHA Prob. 16, 4–17, 1Google Scholar), considers to have been a serious rebellion of the whole of Isauria and Pamphylia and which supposed rebellion he assigns to the year 279 or 280, although even the date is not absolutely certain from the sources mentioned above.
29 CIG 3747, 3748 = IGR III, 39, 40 Nicaea.
30 AJP 27, 1906, 449Google Scholar, no. 3, milliarium prope Sinopen. AJA 9, 1905, 329Google Scholar, no. 78 (with corrected reading AJA 10, 1906, 433Google Scholar) milliarium prope Sinopen.
31 AJA 9, 1905, 328Google Scholar, no. 76 milliarium prope Sinopen.
32 Gaebler, H., ‘Zur Münzkunde Makedoniens IV,’ Z. Num. 24, 1904, 249–251Google Scholar; Die antiken Munzen von Makedonien nnd Paionia I, Berlin, 1906, 7–8Google Scholar. cf. Geyer P-W XIV, 765.
33 P. Iulius Iunianus Martialianus: CIL VIII, 2392Google Scholar Thamugadi; 2742 Lambaesis; 7049 Cirta. cf. de Lessert, A. Cl. Pallu, Fastis des provinces africaines I, Paris, 1896, 430–2Google Scholar; Riba P-W x, 656; Barbieri, L'albo senatorio 215, no. 1069–T. Clodius Pupienus Pulcher Maximus: CIL xiv, 3593Google Scholar = Inscr. Ital., IV, I2, no. 106 Tibur. cf. PIR 2II, 279, no. 1180.
34 CIL VI, 1638. This acephalous inscription is to be assigned to C. Iulius Priscus; see A. Stein, Präfekten von Ägypten 135.
35 BCH 62, 1938, 414–15Google Scholar, no. 5 = AE 1939, no. 191 Philippi.
36 Stein, A., Die Legaten von Moesien, Budapest, 1940, 84–101Google Scholar.
37 See below, the Appendix, p. 56.
38 CIL III, 7586 Callatis. cf. A. Stein, Legaten von Moesien 107.
39 CIL III, 14460 prope Sexaginta Prista.
40 IGR 1, 582 = Rev. Arch. 12, 1908, 36Google ScholarPubMed, no. 30 Nicopolis ad Istrum. cf. PIR 2 II, 218, no. 939; A. Stein, Legaten von Moesien 107–8.
41 CIL III, 1573 ad Mediam; VI, 1520. cf. Stein, A., Die Reichsbeamten von Dazien, Budapest, 1944, 72–3Google Scholar.
42 Klio 12, 1912, 235–6Google Scholar = AE 1912, no. 200 Bov., cf. PIR 2 IV, 3, no. 18.
43 Alföldi, A. apud Lambrechts, P., La composition du sénat romain de Septime Sévère a Dioclétien, Budapest, 1937, 98–9Google Scholar, maintains erroneously that under Gallienus th e civil and military powers in Dacia were separated, since he believes that the title ‘praeses’ implies equestrian rank (cf. above, p. 47); he also misinterprets the command of Flavius Aper attested by AE 1936, nos. 53, 54, 57 Poetovio.
44 CIL III, 13704 Thessalonice.
45 As apparently done by Keyes, , Rise of the equites IIGoogle Scholar.
46 cf. Stein, A., Reichsbeamte von Dazien 40, 86, 87Google Scholar.
47 CIL III, 10174 Biač (milliarium).
48 CIL III, 8707 Salonae.
49 CIL III, 1805 Narona.
50 CIL III, 9860 ‘milliarium inter Verbanum et Unnum’. This inscription, of which the tradition is uncertain, is perhaps a forgery; in any case, ‘v p,’ instead of Hirschfeld's ‘v c’, must be restored, since equestrian governors of the province are attested as early as 277 and 280 (above, nn. 48, 49).
51 Seston, W., Dioclétien et la tétrarchie I, Paris, 1946, 311, n. 1Google Scholar.
52 CIL III, 1938 = 8565 Salonae.
53 Bulić, Fr., ‘M. Aurelius lulus’ [sic], Bull. Arch. Stor. Dalm. 37, 1914, 118–121Google Scholar.
54 Groag, , PIR2 I, 316Google Scholar, no. 1540.
55 Bull. Arch. Stor. Dalm. 39, 1916, 120Google Scholar, no. 4594 = AE 1922, no. 47 Salonae.
56 As assumed by Groag, , PIR2 I, 331Google Scholar, sub no. 1623. In the inscription ‘v p’ is followed by two vertical strokes which can hardly be made to fit into any one of the usual formulae for provincial governors.
57 The facsimile shows as the first preserved letter in l. 2 an S, which the editor, Bulić, has disregarded in his transcription.
58 Ritterling, E., ‘Die legati pro praetore von Pannonia inferior seit Traian,’ Arch. Értesitő 41, 1927, 293–300Google Scholar. It is doubtful whether Anus (?) Avitus, attested by CIL III, 10436 Aquincum, was governor of Pannonia Inferior under the Philippi (Ritterling, , Arch. Értesitő 41, 300Google Scholar, no.xxxv; PIR 2 I, 74, no. 440).
59 Arch. Értesitő 78, 1951, 46–7Google Scholar (48), no. 6 Aquincum (milliarium). The governor is P. Cosinius Felix, whose governorship could previously not be dated (Ritterling, , Arch. Értesitő 41, 299Google Scholar, no. XXXV; PIR 2 II, 377, no. 1530).
60 CIL III, 3424; 10424 Aquincum. cf. PIR 2 II, 271, no. 1142. Domaszewski, v., Rh. Mus. 58, 228Google Scholar, has interpreted the position of Clementius Silvinus as an example of the ‘independent vicariate’ (cf. above, n. 6). This interpretation must be abandoned, for the title ‘v e’ makes it almost certain that Silvinus was a procurator (cf. Hirschfeld, Kaiserliche Verwaltungsbeamte 2 452, no. 2), and the natural inference is that he was procurator of Pannonia Inferior.
61 CIL III, 3418 Aquincum. The same man, M. Aurelius Valentinianus, was governor of Hispania Citerior in 283 (see below, p. 54, n. 109). Since the governorship of the Tarraconensis, together with that of Syria, was one of the highest-ranking consular governorships, and since the governorship of Pannonia Inferior, although since the time of M. Aurelius also consular (Ritterling, , Arch. Értesitő 41, 282, 296Google Scholar), was still, in all probability, considered inferior in rank to the former, as it had been in the second century, the likelihood is that Valentinianus, governed Pannonia Inferior before, rather than after, the year 283. The question is left undecided by Ritterling, , Arch. Értesitő 41, 301Google Scholar, and in PIR 2 1, 330–1, no. 1623.
62 CIL III, 3469 Aquincum. The interpretation is made probable by the fact that a senatorial governor of the province is definitely attested for the time about 283.
63 CIL III, 15156 Aquincum.
64 Ritterling, , Arch. Értesitő 41, 300Google Scholar, no. XXXVII; PIR 2 III, 135, no. 207.
65 AE 1936, nos. 53, 54, 57 Poetovio. That this identification cannot be correct is shown, first by the fact that a senatorial governor is still attested in the province in the time immediately preceding or following the year 283 (see above, n. 61), secondly, by the fact that under Gallienus we should expect, not a ‘vir perfectissimus praeses’, but a ‘vir egregius agens vices praesidis’, of which latter one is actually attested in the year 267 (above, n. 60), and in the third place by the fact that the ‘praeses Flavius Aper’ was ‘v p’, the ‘pp legg Flavius Aper’ on the other hand ‘v e’.
66 Ritterling, E., ‘Die Statthalter der pannonischen Provinzen,’ Arch. Epigr. Mitt. Oest. 20, 1897, 32–40Google Scholar.
67 CIL III, 4564 Vindobona (in 1. 7 read ‘v e a v p’ or ‘v p a v p’). This M. Aurelius Maximus is not in PIR 2 because A. Stein doubted not only the tradition of the inscription, but the very existence of Maximus (see Bersanetti, , Aevum 19, 1945, 387Google Scholar, n. 4). Maximus, who does not seem to be known otherwise, may have been procurator of Pannonia Superior (cf. above, n. 60).
68 CIL VIII, 261 s Lambaesis. cf. Fluss P-W XIV, 165–166.
69 RLÖ ( = Der römische Limes in Österreich) XI, 151–2, no. 42 Lauriacum. A similar dedication was made by another official who calls himself simply ‘v p’: RLÖ XI, 152, no. 43 Lauriacum; this official may also have been ‘agens vices praesidis’ (Bormann, RLÖ xi, 154Google Scholar. Stein, A. PIR2 1, 318Google Scholar, no. 1554)
70 Polaschek P-W S VII, 584–5.
71 Ritterling, E., Fasti des römischen Deutschland unter dem Prinzipat, Wien, 1932, 117–120Google Scholar.
72 CIL III, 5874 = IBR ( = Inscriptiones Baivariae Romanae ed. Vollmer, Fr., Monaci, 1915), 217Google Scholar Lauingen. cf. Ritterling, Fasti 120.
73 CIL III, 5810, p. 1853 = IBR 121 Augusta Vindelicorum.
74 CIL III, 5862 = RIBWürtt. 2 ( = Haug, F.-Sixt, G., Die römischen Inschriften und Bildiverke Württembergs2 Stuttgart, 1914), 47–8Google Scholar, no. 17 = IBR 191 Zwiefalten.
75 Haug RIBWürtt. 1 12. Ohlenschlager, Fr., Römische Überreste in Bayern, München, 1902–1910, 246Google Scholar. Haug RIBWürtt. 2 48; P- W I, A 57.
76 The inscription was thus correctly, and without comment, placed by Fr. Ohlenschlager, ‘Das römische Militärdiplom von Regensburg,’ Sb. Ak. München philos.-philol. Cl. 1874 I, 229, no. 22, and by Peaks, M. B., ‘The general civil and military administration of Noricum and Raetia,’ Chicago Stud. Class. Philol. 4, 1907, 193Google Scholar; both failed to recognize the argument that could be drawn from the place of discovery.
77 This is the solution of Haug, F., ‘Die Inschrift von Zwiefalten, CIL III, 5862,’ Rom.-Germ. Korrespondenzblatt 9, 1916, 27–8Google Scholar.
78 cf. Hertlein, Fr., Die Geschichte der Besetzung des römischen Württemberg ( = Die Römer in Württemberg I), Stuttgart, 1928, 153–5Google Scholar.
79 cf. the remarks of Stein, E., JRS 23, 1933, 41–2Google Scholar, and of Hartke, W. apud Norden, E., Alt-Germanien, Leipzig, 1934, 47, n. 1Google Scholar.
80 CIL XIII, 6562 = RIBWürtt. 655-–6, no. 456 Jagsthausen.
81 CIL XIII, 5203 = Röm. Schweiz ( = Howald, E.-Meyer, E., Die römische Schweiz, Zürich [1941]), no. 294Google Scholar Vindonissa. The restitution of the inscription is uncertain. cf. Stahelin, F., Die Schweiz in römischer Zeit3, Basel, 1948, 262, n. 1Google Scholar.
82 As wrongly thought by E. Stein apud Ritterling, Fasti 43.
83 CIL III, 5249 = Röm. Schweiz, no. 264 Vitodurum. cf. Stähelin, Schweiz in römischer Zeit 3 274, n. 3.
84 Burckhardt-Biedermann, Th., ‘Römische Kastelle am Oberrhein aus der Zeit Diocletians,’ Westd. Z. 25, 1906, 148Google Scholar.
85 Stähelin, Schweiz in römischer Zeit 2 (1931), 261, 264–6 (3271–2, 274–5). Heuberger, R., Rätien im Altertum und Frühmittelalter I (Schlern-Schriften 20), Innsbruck, 1932, 82Google Scholar. H. Nesselhauf, ‘Die spätrömische Verwaltung der gallisch-germanischen Lander,’ Abh. Ah. Berlin, philos.-hist. Kl. 1938, no. 2, contradicts himself: on p. 19 he asserts that in the later period Oberwinterthur-Vitodurum and Irgenhausen belonged to Raetia, on p. 88 he considers the ‘Praeses mentioned in the inscription of Vitodurum to have been governor of the Maxima Sequanorum.
86 The same opinion has been expressed by E. Meyer ad Röm. Schweiz no. 264.
87 For this view see above, n. 85.
88 Festus breviar. 6; Notit. Gall. 9 (p. 267 Seeck = GLM [= Geographi Latini Minores ed. Riese] 142 = MGH Auct. Ant. ix, 595–8); Polem. Silv. laterc. 2, 16Google Scholar [17] (p. 256 Seeck = MGH Auct. Ant., IX, 538); Notit. dign. occ. I, 109; 3, 23; 22, II; 22, 31).
89 Laterc. Veron. 8, 6 (p. 249 Seeck = GLM 128).
90 Mommsen, Th., ‘Verzeichnis der römischen Provinzen aufgesetzt um 297,’ Ges. Schr. v, 561–588Google Scholar.
91 Keune P-W. II, A 1644, 1658.
92 Kuhn, E., ‘Über das Verzeichis der römischen Provinzen aufgesetzt um 297,’ Jahrb. Class. Philol. 23, 1877, 697–719Google Scholar.
93 Jones, A. H. M., ‘The date and value of the Verona List,’ JRS XLIV, 1954, 21–9Google Scholar.
94 CIL VI, 1641.
95 CIL XIII, 8017 Bonna = Lehner, H., Die antiken Steindenkmäler des Provinzialmuseums in Bonn, Bonn, 1918, 50–1Google Scholar, no. 106.
96 Ritterling, Fasti 84.
97 CIL II 4076, 4118 Tarraco. PIR 2 III, 175–6, no. 387.
98 PIR 2 III 383, This identification was suggested by Goldfinger P-W VI, 2621–2; it has been accepted by Barbieri, L'albo senatorio 158, no. 744 (but p. 351, no. 2023, he considers them only of the same family).
99 The Augusti of CIL II, 4076 and 4118 being Balbinus and Pupienus, not the Philippi (as thought by de Lessert, Pallu, Fastes des provinces africaines I, 302Google Scholar, followed by Goldfinger P-W VI, 2622).
100 CIL XIII, 1807 Lugdunum. cf. Ritterling, Fasti 85.
101 CIL III, 1017 Apulum, with the restitution of Ritterling, Fasti 97–8.
102 CIL X, 1705 Puteoli; XII, 5897 Nemausus. cf. Ritterling, Fasti 99.
103 Atkinson, D., ‘The governors of Britain from Claudius to Diocletian,’ JRS 12, 1922, 71–2Google Scholar.
104 CIL VII, 107 Isca.
105 CIL VII, 95 Isca. cf. Barbieri, L'albo senatorio 277, no. 1581; p. 630. The legate is considered as legionary legate by Ritterling P-W XII, 1464.
106 JRS 19, 1929, 214Google ScholarPubMed, no. 4 = AE 1930, no. 114 Birdoswald. A better photograph of this inscription has been published, JRS 21, 1931, pl. VGoogle Scholar. On this latter photograph seems to be based the text of AE 1931, no. 82, which text misreads, in l. 5, ‘erat’ as ‘praet’; the resulting text, which speaks of a ‘pr(aef) praet(orio)’, is unacceptable, since ‘quod’ must refer to the preceding ‘praet(orium)’. It is to be admitted, however, that in this particular place the stone is more damaged than elsewhere. In this inscription the reading ‘praeses’ has been expanded from ‘pr’, which abbreviation is attested elsewhere for ‘praeses’ (see below, n. 119). In l. 1 read not ‘[impp n]n’, as given in AE, but ‘[dd n]n’, which latter restoration fits the space and is confirmed by traces visible on the photograph.
107 CIL II, 3738 Valentia.
108 AE 1923, no. 102 Asturica; no. 103 Dertosa.
109 CIL II, 4102, 4103 Tarraco.
110 CIL II, 4104 Tarraco.
111 CIL II, 1115 Tarraco.
112 CIL II, 1116 Tarraco.
113 Domaszewski, v., Rh. M. 58, 228Google Scholar, asserted that this ‘a v p’, Aurelius Iulius, was an ‘independent vicar’ (cf. above, n. 6). The only respect in which this ‘a v p’ differs from the others, is that his predicate is not ‘v e’, but ‘v p’. It is true that the equestrian Praesides of the last two decades of the third century were ‘VV pp’; however, the title ‘v p’ cannot be made to prove that this ‘a v p’ was in reality an independent equestrian governor, since at this time these titles seem to have been bestowed often as personal distinctions.
114 CIL II, 2204, 2205 Corduba (a wrong reference is given by Lothrop, L. C., ‘Roman governors of Spain under the Empire,’ Rev. Hisp. 72, 1928, 440Google Scholar, no. 66). Thouvenot, R., Essai sur la province romaine Bétique, Paris, 1940, 174Google Scholar, places the transition from senatorial to equestrian governors in the reign of Probus and connects the change with uprisings in Mauretania at this time; this view, although not conflicting with any evidence, cannot be proved and is perhaps not very probable (cf. above, p. 49, n. 28; below, p. 55).
115 Birley, E., ‘The governors of Numidia a.d. 193–268,’ JRS 40, 1950, 65–6Google Scholar, nos. 19–22.
116 CIL VIII, 2571, p. 954 = 18057 Lambaesis.
117 As done by Wilmanns ad tit.
118 As done by E. Albertini, Bull. Soc. Nat. Ant. France 1935, 165, who has been followed by Birley (above, n. 115), no. 23.
119 Yet it should be remarked here that this abbreviation does occur in the phrase ‘pr(aeses) pr(ovinciae)’ on milestones of the province of Pontus, where it is followed by the abbreviated name of the province (AJA 9, 1905, 327–8Google Scholar, no. 75; 329, no. 78 prope Sinopen); the abbreviation occurs also in an inscription of Gerasa of the time of Diocletian (Mitth. u. Nachr. d. deutschen Palaestina-Vereins 1897, 39, no. 1b = Gerasa 431, no. 160, in which latter publication Welles wrongly expands to ‘v(ir) p(erfectissimus) pr(o) pr(aetore)’), and apparently in the inscription of Birdoswald cited above, n. 106.
120 CIL vin, 2729 Lambaesis. For the dating cf. Birley, , JRS 40, 66Google Scholar; for a possible identification PIR 2 I, 8, no. 55.
121 AE 1936, no. 58 Thamugadi.
122 Stein, A., ‘Tenagino Probus,’ Klio 29, 1936, 237–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Präfekte von Ägypten 148–150.
123 AE 1934, no. 257 Cyrene.
124 As assumed by A. Stein, Präfekte 149.
125 This is shown by the cursus of M. Aurelius Diogenes (see below, n. 129). A. Stein, Präfekte 156, tries to reconcile the supposed cursus of Probus with that of Diogenes, but his explanation, that in the meantime the governorship of Egypt had been lowered in rank, seems to me a petitio principii.
126 Barbieri, L'albo senatorio 643–4, no. 1927a.
127 See above, p. 51, n. 65.
128 CIL VIII, 2529, 2530 Castra Lambaesitana; 2643 Lambaesis; 4221 Verecunda; 4578 Diana; 7002 Cirta. Bull. Arch. Com. Trav. Hist. 1915, p. CLXVIII, no. IV; 1918, 140, no. 1; 141, nos. 2, 3; 143; 1919, p. CCXIII, no. 7; 1921, p. CCXLVII, no. 6 Lambaesis. cf. PIR 2 I, 307, no. 1490.
129 CIL VIII, 2573, 2574, 2575 Castra Lambaesitana. Bull. Arch. Cam. Trav. Hist., 1903, p. CCXI, no. 2 = AE 1903, no. 243 Ain-Kerma, where in l. 11 should probably be read ‘[p]p N’. cf. PIR 2 I, 307, no. 1491.
130 AE 1908, no. 240 Cuicul.
131 CIL VIII, 2661 Lambaesis.
132 Bull. Arch. Com. Trav. Hist. 1921, pp. CLIII–CLIV.
133 Bull. Arch. Com. Trav. Hist. 1893, 161, no. 40 = Bull. Soc. Nat. Ant. France 1935, 164 = AE 1936 no. 58 Thamugadi.
134 E. Albertini, Bull. Arch. Com. Trav. Hist. 1921, pp. CLIV–CLV; Bull. Soc. Nat. Ant. France 1935. 163–6. He has been followed by A. Stein P-W, S. VII, 1212.
135 cf. above, n. 37 (printed as Appendix, pp. 56 f.).
136 The fasti of Dalmatia need to be re-done; Liebenam, W., Forschungen zur Verwaltungsgeschichte des römischen Kaiserreichs I, Leipzig, 1888, 150–165Google Scholar, is insufficient.
137 Stein, A., Der römische Ritterstand, München, 1927, 195–362Google Scholar. Barbieri, L'albo senatorio 540–3.