EDITED BY n CHRISTER BRUUN JONATHAN EDMONDSON The Oxford Handbook of ROMAN EPIGRAPHY OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Sep 01 2014, NEWGEN T H E OX F O R D H A N D B O O K O F ROM A N E PIGR A PH Y frontmatter.indd 1 9/2/2014 9:16:21 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Sep 01 2014, NEWGEN frontmatter.indd 2 9/2/2014 9:16:21 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Sep 01 2014, NEWGEN THE OXFORD HANDBOOK OF ROMAN EPIGRAPHY Edited by CHRISTER BRUUN and JONATHAN EDMONDSON 1 frontmatter.indd 3 9/2/2014 9:16:21 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Sep 01 2014, NEWGEN 3 Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford New York Auckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong Karachi Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto With oices in Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore South Korea Switzerland hailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam Oxford is a registered trademark of Oxford University Press in the UK and certain other countries. Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press 198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016 © Oxford University Press 2014 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by license, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reproduction rights organization. Inquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above. You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data [CIP to come] ISBN 978–0–19–533646–7 1 3 5 7 9 8 6 4 2 Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper frontmatter.indd 4 9/2/2014 9:16:21 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Sep 01 2014, NEWGEN Contents Preface List of Figures, Maps, and Tables List of Contributors List of Abbreviations ix xiii xxv xxvii PA RT I ROM A N E PIGR A PH Y: E PIGR A PH IC M E T HOD S A N D H I S T ORY OF T H E DI S C I PL I N E 1. he Epigrapher at Work Christer Bruun and Jonathan Edmondson 2. Epigraphic Research from Its Inception: he Contribution of Manuscripts Marco Buonocore 3 21 3. Forgeries and Fakes Silvia Orlandi, Maria Letizia Caldelli, and Gian Luca Gregori 42 4. he Major Corpora and Epigraphic Publications Christer Bruun 66 5. Epigraphy and Digital Resources Tom Elliott 78 PA RT I I I N S C R I P T ION S I N T H E ROM A N WOR L D frontmatter.indd 5 6. Latin Epigraphy: he Main Types of Inscriptions Francisco Beltrán Lloris 89 7. Inscribing Roman Texts: Oicinae, Layout, and Carving Techniques Jonathan Edmondson 111 9/2/2014 9:16:21 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Sep 01 2014, NEWGEN vi CONTENTS 8. he “Epigraphic Habit” in the Roman World Francisco Beltrán Lloris 131 PA RT I I I T H E VA LU E OF I N S C R I P T ION S F OR R E C ON S T RUC T I NG T H E ROM A N WOR L D Inscriptions and Roman Public Life 9. he Roman Republic Olli Salomies 153 10. he Roman Emperor and the Imperial Family Frédéric Hurlet 178 11. Senators and Equites: Prosopography Christer Bruun 202 12. Local Elites in Italy and the Western Provinces Henrik Mouritsen 227 13. Local Elites in the Greek East Christof Schuler 250 14. Roman Government and Administration Christer Bruun 274 15. he Roman State: Laws, Lawmaking, and Legal Documents Gregory Rowe 299 16. he Roman Army Michael Alexander Speidel 319 17. Inscriptions and the Narrative of Roman History David S. Potter 345 18. Late Antiquity Benet Salway 364 Inscriptions and Religion in the Roman Empire 19. Religion in Rome and Italy Mika Kajava frontmatter.indd 6 397 9/2/2014 9:16:21 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Sep 01 2014, NEWGEN CONTENTS vii 20. Religion in the Roman Provinces James B. Rives 420 21. he Rise of Christianity Danilo Mazzoleni 445 Inscriptions and Roman Social and Economic Life 22. he City of Rome Christer Bruun 471 23. Social Life in Town and Country Garrett G. Fagan 495 24. Urban Infrastructure and Euergetism outside the City of Rome Marietta Horster 515 25. Spectacle in Rome, Italy, and the Provinces Michael J. Carter and Jonathan Edmondson 537 26. Roman Family History Jonathan Edmondson 559 27. Women in the Roman World Maria Letizia Caldelli 582 28. Slaves and Freed Slaves Christer Bruun 605 29. Death and Burial Laura Chioffi 627 30. Communications and Mobility in the Roman Empire Anne Kolb 649 31. Economic Life in the Roman Empire Jonathan Edmondson 671 Inscriptions and Roman Cultural Life 32. Local Languages in Italy and the West James Clackson frontmatter.indd 7 699 9/2/2014 9:16:21 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Sep 01 2014, NEWGEN viii CONTENTS 33. Linguistic Variation, Language Change, and Latin Inscriptions Peter Kruschwitz 721 34. Inscriptions and Literacy John Bodel 745 35. Carmina Latina Epigraphica Manfred G. Schmidt 764 APPENDICES frontmatter.indd 8 Appendix I Epigraphic Conventions: he “Leiden System” 785 Appendix II Epigraphic Abbreviations 787 Appendix III Roman Onomastics 799 Appendix IV Roman Kinship Terms 807 Appendix V Roman Voting Tribes 811 Appendix VI Roman Numbers 813 Appendix VII List of Digital Resources 815 Illustration Credits Index of Sources General Index 817 821 00 9/2/2014 9:16:22 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN CH APTER 18 L AT E A N T IQU I T Y BEnET SA LWAY Late Antiquity may be understood to comprise that post­classical but pre­medieval period which started with Diocletian and closed with Phocas, honorand of the last pub­ lic monument in the Roman Forum (CIL VI 1200 = ILS 837, 1 August 608), when cultural identity remained predominantly Roman but also became increasingly Christian.1 he epigraphy of this period difers in several respects from that of the High Empire, relecting the changed political, economic, and cultural circumstances. Attention will focus here on the epigraphic habit of that luctuating portion of the late­antique world that remained Roman. Despite the emergence of additional languages in the inscribed repertoire in certain regions (Syriac and Coptic),2 Latin and Greek retained their hegemony as the two languages of the Roman cultural mainstream, though the bal­ ance between them luctuated. heir basic epigraphic footprint continued to respect the long established linguistic frontier dividing the Empire’s Greek East from its Latin West in north Africa and the Balkans. nevertheless, the establishment of an imperial court, with attendant bureaucratic and military retinue, in major centres of the Greek East from the last decades of the third century coincided with a new lowering of Latin inscriptions in the region. From Diocletian to the Valentinianic dynasty oicial pro­ nouncements were inscribed in Latin prose, oten in multiple copies.3 Ater the deini­ tive separation of the imperial government in 395, a new vogue set in amongst members of the increasingly Hellenophone governmental elite of the Empire’s eastern portion for showing of their facility in the language of law and authority by the composition and display of Latin epigrams.4 Although the vast majority of inscriptions cannot be dated precisely, the abso­ lute number of Greek and Latin texts inscribed in durable media declined drastically 1 2 3 4 Chronology covered by A.H.M. Jones 1964. Syriac: Briquel Chatonnet, Debié, and Desreumaux 2004. Coptic: Krause 1991. Feissel 1999; Corcoran 2000, 2007. Feissel 2006. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 364 9/2/2014 9:08:00 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN LATE AnTIQuITY 365 in the third century, especially from the 240s to the 270s, the most acute period of the “third­century crisis.”5 A partial recovery followed in the late third and early fourth cen­ tury, before numbers tail of again in the ith and sixth centuries, when the epigraphic culture of the Latin West sufers in the wake of imperial contraction, while that of the Greek East displays somewhat more vitality and resilience. not all categories of text were afected equally. Most are diminished in number, some entirely eliminated, while others continue but in a radically altered fashion, and other new categories emerge for the irst time. Epitaphs (always the largest category) remain the most resilient throughout, while public dedications, especially at the municipal level, sufer the most acute decline and do not see a recovery equivalent to that for epitaphs in the fourth century. Accordingly, funerary inscriptions account for an even greater proportion of Roman epigraphy than had been the case before, while their content and style were profoundly altered by the progressive Christianization of society between the third and ith centuries, though considerable cultural continuities may still be observed. Moreover, this phenomenon does not account for all the developments in other categories. nor is the chronology and pace of developments synchronized across the range of inscriptional types. he ability to examine late antique Latin inscriptions as an integrated whole is hin­ dered by patterns of publication. he tradition inherited from Renaissance humanists to treat “Christian” texts separately from “pagan” or secular epigraphy has inluenced the structure of epigraphic corpora, both Greek and Latin. Following in the footsteps of Smetius and Gruterus in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the extensive selec­ tion of Latin inscriptions by Giuseppe Gaspare Orelli, published between 1828 and 1856, excluded Christian texts. his same attitude was adopted by the original editors of the Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, which aims to provide a comprehensive record of Latin inscriptions to about 600 CE. hus, even where the data had been assembled together, as for instance by Emil Hübner for the Iberian peninsula and Britain, they appeared separately: CIL II in 1869 and VII in 1873 separate from his respective cor­ pora of Christian inscriptions, Inscriptiones Hispaniae Christianae and Inscriptiones Britanniae Christianae, published in 1871 and 1876. (However, for the new edition of CIL II, the editors decided to include Christian inscriptions up to the Arab conquest in 711.) For Rome (CIL VI), Wilhelm Henzen respected the limits of Christian epigraphy as deined by Giovanni Battista de Rossi for the Inscriptiones Christianae Urbis Romae (ICUR). he exclusion of Christian texts from most volumes of CIL means that the collec­ tion is asymmetric in its late antique sections, undermining its utility. Moreover, the dis­ tortion gives an exaggerated impression of the real decline in the Latin epigraphic habit. he awkward divide between CIL and ICUR is mirrored by the selections of Hermann Dessau (ILS) and Ernst Diehl (ILCV), and successive introductions and handbooks to Latin or Roman epigraphy have tended to perpetuate the lopsided treatment of Late Antiquity. Most explicitly or efectively end with the third century or the reign of Constantine.6 hose that continue their coverage on to heodosius, or even Phocas, 5 6 Roueché 1997: 353–354; cf. Ch. 8. hird century: Sandys 1927; Schmidt 2004. Constantine: Bloch 1969; Meyer 1973; Susini 1982. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 365 9/2/2014 9:08:01 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN 366 BEnET SALWAY generally restrict themselves to narrowly secular examples.7 Selections and manuals of Greek inscriptions that cover the Roman period exhibit the same tendencies, terminating with Diocletian or Constantine,8 or focusing only on secular texts thereater.9 A few hon­ orable exceptions treat late antique secular and Christian texts together and more than cursorily.10 Students of the late antique Latin inscriptions of the city of Rome now beneit from the fact that the inscriptions of emperors, senators, and equestrian oicials from the third century onwards have been re­edited with copious commentary and illustration by Géza Alföldy in CIL VI.8.2 (1996) and CIL VI.8.3 (2000). Outside Rome, speciically late antique corpora exist for some regions, notably in the Greek East.11 Furthermore, an initiative to link the late antique texts of the Latin West that are dispersed across the elec­ tronic corpora may alleviate the obstacles posed by the printed collections.12 Considering the texts of the traditionally distinct sub­ields of late Roman and early Christian epigraphy as an integrated whole highlights the distinctiveness of the epi­ graphic landscape of Late Antiquity. Within the repertoire of Latin inscriptions in particular the changes are such that the epigraphic record no longer contributes to our historical understanding of this period in the same way as it does for the High Empire. A comparison of the basis for the entries in the Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire (PLRE), covering the period 260 to 641, reveals the progressive decline of traditional categories of honoriic inscriptions as a principal source for public oice holders.13 Still, while the most famous inscribed text from Roman antiquity must be Augustus’ Res Gestae (Ch. 10; Figs. 10.2–3), the longest is certainly Diocletian’s Edict on Maximum Prices of 301, a historical source arguably of equal signiicance, though in quite a diferent way.14 he changing proile of the epigraphic record itself provides an indispensable barometer of socio­political developments and the evidence of inscrip­ tions remains vital for the study of those periods, regions, echelons of society, and aspects of life that are poorly documented by the literary record. General Features Although the majority of late antique public inscriptions are on stone, bronze was still used throughout the Latin West for the display of documents of the Roman state and local municipalities. A signiicant number of inscribed bronze plaques survive from 7 Cagnat 1914; Calabi Limentani 1991. IGRR; Guarducci 1987; McLean 2002. 9 OGIS; SIG3; cf. Guarducci 1967­1977: 4.299–556, appending Christian texts to 600 CE to secular material that ends with Diocletian. 10 Diehl 1912; Gordon and Gordon 1965; Lassère 2007; Cooley 2012. 11 Beševliev 1964; Sironen 1997; IG II/III2 .5 (2008); ala2004 (Aphrodisias). 12 Witschel 2010. 13 In general, Barnes 1999. 14 Laufer 1971; Giacchero 1974; Corcoran 2000: 205–233; Crawford 2002; Salway 2010. 8 oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 366 9/2/2014 9:08:01 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN LATE AnTIQuITY 367 Italy, Gaul, and Africa from the fourth century (CIL VI 1684, 1689; ILS 6111–17; AE 1990, 211; 1992, 301; cf. CIL VIII 17896 = FIRA I 64, a contemporary copy of a bronze origi­ nal), while in early sixth­century Rome the Ostrogothic king heoderic is said to have ordered the publication of a pronouncement on bronze (Anon. Val., pars posterior, 69, p. 552). If the king’s order was ever carried out, it is doubtful whether the text would have been engraved on a freshly cast sheet of bronze. From the start of the fourth cen­ tury it is increasingly common to ind texts of all sorts inscribed on bronzes and stones previously inscribed with texts now deemed redundant or expendable. his no doubt indicates a reduction of the resources that commissioners of inscriptions were will­ ing or able to invest in this form of display. his re­use might take various forms. he cheapest option was to refashion the text by erasing and recarving a small portion. hus the dedicatory inscription to a statue base at Aphrodisias (Fig. 18.1), which had honoured the emperor Julian, was crudely reworked to honour heodosius I or II, as is clear in lines 2–5 of the text (ala2004 20, lines 2–5): Φλ(άουιον) Κλ(αύδιον) <<Θεοδόσιον>> (vac) τὸν αἰώνιον καὶ εὐσεβέστατον (vac) Αὔγουστον To Flavius Claudius <<heodosius>> the everlasting and most pious Augustus. Most drastic was the complete erasure of an original text, smoothing of the surface, and carving over it of a fresh text. he original dedication date on its right­hand side reveals that this is what the praefectus vigilum Rupilius Pisonianus did when he set up a statue of the emperor Constans (337–350) in Rome on a base that had originally supported a statue of the goddess Venus Genetrix unveiled on 26 September 269 (CIL VI 1157 = 40840). Most commonly, however, texts reused in Late Antiquity are opis­ thographic, i.e., reused by being inscribed on what was originally their reverse side. At Larinum in Samnium the bronze plaque that bore a copy of a senatus consultum of 19 CE governing attendance at spectacles (AE 1978, 145; cf. Chs. 15, 25) was turned over, cut down, and inscribed with a tabula patronatus dated 1 April 344 (AE 1992, 301). he proliferation of antique monuments in the public spaces of Constantinople is well documented.15 Similarly in Rome and Italy in the later fourth and ith centuries cer­ tain ancient statues were rescued from dilapidated surroundings and re­erected in new contexts.16 Restoration and renewal is also a strong theme running through late antique building inscriptions, though the genuine extent of the work claimed may sometimes be doubted in the light of the archaeology (cf. Ch. 24).17 Greek and Latin epigraphy of Late Antiquity exhibits the same basic conventions in the presentation of the written word as had prevailed since the Hellenistic period. As in contemporary literary manuscripts and papyrus documents, absence of word­spacing 15 16 17 Bauer 1996: 413–421. Curran 1994: 47–49; Bauer 1996: 401–412. Alföldy 2001; Behrwald 2009: 49–56. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 367 9/2/2014 9:08:01 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN 368 BEnET SALWAY FIG. 18.1 Base of a statue of the emperor Julian, re­carved to honour heodosius I or II. Aphrodisias, Caria. Aphrodisias Museum, Geyre, Turkey. remains the norm, with occasional interpuncts being the only regular aid to legibility. However, there is much variation in style of script, competence of layout, and qual­ ity of execution. Greater varieties of letter­forms were employed simultaneously than in earlier times. Rather than the development of completely new scripts, there was an increase in the range and type of letter­forms considered appropriate.18 Stylistically, neither the uniformity within nor consistency between inscriptions—characteristics of early imperial epigraphy—seem to have been a priority. While changes in aesthetics 18 Greek: Roueché 1997; ala2004 (narrative: letter­forms); Sironen 1997: 380–383. Latin: Cardin 2008: 47–60; cf. Diehl 1912: pls 32–37; Gordon and Gordon 1965: nos. 301–365. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 368 9/2/2014 9:08:01 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN LATE AnTIQuITY 369 FIG. 18.2 Detail of the rescript of Constantine and sons to the umbrians, Hispellum. Palazzo Comunale, Spello. may be a factor, the greater variability in quality suggests that inscriptions were no lon­ ger carved predominantly by professional letter­carvers, but now commonly by ordi­ nary masons. Observe, for example, the contrast between the careful scoring of the still visible guidelines and the rather haphazard carving of the lettering on the rescript of Constantine and his sons to the umbrians from Hispellum (CIL XI 5265 = ILS 705; Fig. 18.2). nevertheless, although the widespread transmission of professional letter­carving skills may have fallen victim to the general decrease in epigraphic pro­ duction during the third­century crisis, high quality work is still apparent in some prestige projects. In Latin, traditional squared monumental capitals continued to be employed for inset bronze letters, as on the Arch of Constantine in Rome (CIL VI 1139 = ILS 694, 315 CE), as well as for lettering on stone, as in the inscription commemorating the lavish loor and wall mosaics provided by the urban prefect Longinianus and his wife Anastasia for St. Peter’s in 401/2 (CIL VI 41331a = ICUR II 4097). Also continuing a style current since the irst and second centuries is the more elongated capital script used, for instance, on the statue base of the anonymous patronus of Saena (Siena) at Rome, dated to 1 August 394 (CIL VI 1793). Speciic to the city of Rome is the lam­ boyantly serifed script of the mid­fourth­century calligrapher Furius Dionysius Philocalus, employed by bishop Damasus for his cycle of epigrams celebrating the oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 369 9/2/2014 9:08:02 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN 370 BEnET SALWAY martyrs,19 and still being imitated in prominent epitaphs and public inscriptions of the early ith century (CIL VI 40798, statue base of Arcadius, 399/400; CIL VI 41377, verse epitaph of Eventius, 407). First attested by two inscriptions from third­century north Africa (CIL VIII 11824 = CLE 1238 = ILS 7457, the famous “Mactar harvester” inscription;20 cf. CIL VIII 17910, hamugadi) is the use on stone of the rounded capitals, properly a manuscript bookhand, known to palaeographers as uncial. In these examples, which both have a literary lavour, the choice of script may be a conscious afectation, but this is unlikely in the case of the version of the preamble to Diocletian’s Prices Edict from Athens, 21 and even less so with the two copies of a letter of the emperor Julian from Lesbos (CIL III 14198) and Amorgos (CIL III 459 = AE 2000, 1370; Fig. 18.3). he challenge to compre­ hensibility is obvious even from the opening clause of the latter, which reads ouopipi solent nonnul[le] contpouepsie que for the correct oboriri solent nonnullae controversiae quae (“Some disputes are accustomed to arise that . . . ”). he extraordinary appearance of these inscriptions may be attributed to the local hellenophone carvers, who, unfa­ miliar with the conventions of inscribed Latin, struggled to copy the half­uncial text as it appeared on the papyrus or parchment before them.22 Similarly in the Greek East during the sixth­century the so­called “heavenly let­ ters” (litterae caelestes) of the special Latin cursive script used by the imperial chancery are found faithfully reproduced on stone (cf. AE 2004, 1410 = SEG 54, 1178, 1–2 April 533, Didyma).23 he intention was presumably to emphasize the idelity of the publicly inscribed document to the authentic original retained in the archive of the munici­ pality or provincial governor. In a constitution of the emperor Maurice from Ephesus, dated 11 February 585, the cursive Latin of the dating clause forms a striking contrast with the clear capital script of the body of the text in Greek (I.Ephesos 40; Fig. 18.4): dat(um) III Idus Februar(ias) Constantinupo(li) imp(er)a(toris) d(omini) n(ostr)i [[Maurici Ti]]beri pe(r)pe(tui) Aug(usti) ann(o) III et post cons(ulatum) eius(dem) ann(o) I (crux) 5 Given on the third day before the Ides of February in Constantinople in the third year of the emperor our lord Mauricius Tiberius, perpetual Augustus, and in the irst year ater his consulate. As for Greek letter­forms, from the third century onwards an increased inluence of cursive forms upon some letters of the standard epigraphic capital script is observable. Lunate forms of epsilon (Є) are commonly found alongside the traditional squared 19 20 21 22 23 Ferrua 1942; cf. Ch. 21. Shaw 2013 (with photos). Photo: Gordon 1983: pl. 53. Marichal 1952; Feissel 2000. cf. Feissel 2004. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 370 9/2/2014 9:08:02 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN LATE AnTIQuITY 371 FIG. 18.3 Letter of the emperor Julian to the praetorian prefect Secundus from the island of Amorgos in the Cyclades. Epigraphic Museum, Athens (EM 10401). form (E), while from the mid­fourth century onwards, as seen in the Aphrodisian dedi­ cation to Julian/heodosius (Fig. 18.1), trilateral squared or lunate (C) forms of sigma and double­horseshoe (ω) forms of omega almost completely displace their respective forms standard in the Hellenistic and early imperial periods (Σ, Ω). here is also an increased tendency towards vertical elongation, perhaps relecting the inluence of Latin, and an increased abbreviation of predictable elements, which certainly repre­ sents Roman custom. Trends in orthography can be revealing about developments in pronunciation. he one variation from classical norms that can reasonably be considered a speciically late feature is the progressive distinction of consonantal ­v­ from vocalic ­u­ in Latin. In Latin inscriptions this gives rise to an increased confusion or interchangeability of B oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 371 9/2/2014 9:08:02 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN 372 BEnET SALWAY FIG. 18.4 Constitution of the emperor Maurice, 585 CE, from Ephesus, with the last six lines containing a Latin dating­formula. In situ. and V, while in Greek it is exempliied by a switch in the standard transliteration of the Latin sound from ου to β, the voicing of which was itself in the process of sotening from ­b­ to ­v­. Other speciically late features that are common to texts in both lan­ guages are the use of: • a symbol resembling a “scroll” or undulating tilde (~) as an abbreviation mark, oten in a vertical position at the point of suspension so looking like a shallow S • supralinear letters in abbreviations • the deployment of the cross as an ornamental punctuation mark, especially to open and close texts, where previously it was normal to ind a leaf (hedera). oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 372 9/2/2014 9:08:03 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN LATE AnTIQuITY 373 he subscript of the emperor Maurice (Fig. 18.4) illustrates these phenomena. A late antique novelty increasingly common in the ith and sixth centuries is the use of the years of the iteen-year iscal cycle, the indiction, in dating formulae, espe­ cially in epitaphs. unlike the annual consulship, as a chronological system the indic­ tion had the advantage of having a naturally progressive sequence. However, it was the practice to indicate the number of the year within the cycle but not the number of the cycle in the series, which took its notional starting point under Constantine on 1 September 312. he system, therefore, is of limited utility in identifying a par­ ticular year in the longer term.24 Without any additional chronological indicator, between Constantine and the death of Heraclius in 641, for example, an indictional dating may signify any one of twenty­two diferent twelve­month periods, no doubt more of a disadvantage to us than it was to contemporaries. Similarly, the lack of synchronization with the consular year (beginning on 1 January) is more awkward for us than it would have been for Roman taxpayers, for whom its annual rhythm was more relevant than the traditional civic year. Also newly emerging in the same period are a new expression in Latin for indicating the day—sub die—and the symbol Ϛ to represent the Roman numeral VI. he epitaph of a young girl from Ammaedara, in the province of Byzacena, illustrates these various features in combination (AE 1975, 901): Pontica idel(i)s in Χρ(ist)o requiebit (!) in pace s(ub) d(ie) Ϛ id(us) Maias ind(ictione) XIII vixit annis V 5 Pontica, believer in Christ, went to rest in pace on the day 6 before the Ides of March in the 13th indiction. She lived for 5 years. he danger of imprecision arising from dating by indiction alone was perceived by the emperor Justinian’s advisers. A law of 31 August 537, the day before the beginning of the next irst indiction, laid down a new system whereby henceforth, for a document to have any legal force, it had to be dated by consulship, indiction, and the emperor’s reg­ nal year (Just. Nov. 47.1). his was the irst open acknowledgement in the imperial chan­ cery, in the over ive hundred years since the “Augustan settlement,” that the regime was indeed a monarchy. he new style, well documented in papyri, is also relected in the subsequent epigraphic record.25 24 25 cf. Lassère 2007: 911 (tabulation of cycle from 312 to 641). Feissel 1993. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 373 9/2/2014 9:08:03 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN 374 BEnET SALWAY Late Antique Society Epitaphs, because they represent a wider social spectrum than does the literary record, are central to the analysis of the chronological, demographic, and geographical dis­ tribution of a range of social and cultural phenomena: for example, family life and the progress of the Christianization of the general population.26 Speciically Christian aspects of Latin funerary epigraphy are dealt with by Danilo Mazzoleni in Ch. 21; for Greek, Erkki Sironen provides a useful introduction.27 Among the epitaphs of the Jewish diaspora a renaissance in the use of Hebrew is notable (cf. JIWE I 42–116, Venusia, S. Italy). Verse remained popular for epitaphs and perhaps even increased pro­ portionally (cf. Ch. 35).28 Despite the occasional self­consciously Christian touch, the sentiments eulogizing domestic virtues generally continue earlier traditions (cf. Chs. 26, 27), as in this hexameter example from the catacombs of Hadrumetum (Sousse) in Byzacena (ILTun 193):29 5 haec fuit Eusebia, fratres, rara castissima coniunx, quae meruit mecum vitam coniugii, ut tempora monstrant, annis decem sexs (!) mensibus octo et viginti diebus, huius, ut coniteor, vitam Deus ipse probavit, innocua vere coniunx exempli rarissimi sexus. oro Successus ego tabularius huiusque maritus eius semper meminisse, fratres, vestris precibusque. his, brothers, was Eusebia, a rare and most chaste partner, who has deserved to live with me in marriage, as the dates demonstrate, for sixteen years, eight months, and twenty days, whose life, as I bear witness, God himself approved; a truly irreproachable partner, most rare example of her sex. I, Successus, tabularius and her husband, beg you, brothers, to remember her always in your prayers too. A number of funerary epigrams are known for high­proile members of the senato­ rial aristocracy, though some only survive through the copies of medieval pilgrims and Renaissance scholars, such as those from the mausoleum of Petronius Probus (PLRE 1, Probus 5) at St. Peter’s (CIL VI 1756 = ILCV 63).30 By contrast, it is only modern excava­ tion that has reunited the strikingly traditional verse epitaph for the urban prefect of 359, Junius Bassus (PLRE 1, Bassus 15), with his famous sarcophagus, which enjoyed a prime position behind the high altar of the original Constantinian basilica on the 26 27 28 29 30 Shaw 1984; Liebeschuetz 1977. Sironen 1997: 384–400. Bernt 1968. Pikhaus 1994: no. B10. Trout 2001; Matthews 2009: 135–137. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 374 9/2/2014 9:08:03 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN LATE AnTIQuITY 375 Vatican (CIL VI 41341a; cf. VI 32004 = ILS 1286 = ILCV 90 = ICUR II 4164).31 Similarly, discovery of a fragment of the inscribed funerary epigram for the Gallic aristocrat and bishop of Clermont-Ferrand in the late ith century, Sidonius Apollinaris (PLRE 2, Apollinaris 6), has restored faith in its authenticity (CLE 1516 = ILCV 1067 = RICG VIII 21).32 Pagan cultural references remained acceptable in verse, even within an ecclesi­ astical milieu. Sidonius’ epitaph describes his literary works as “gits of the Graces” (dona Gratiarum) and a ith/sixth-century inscription from the Lateran quotes Vergil, Aeneid 1.274–278, with its description of Romulus’ building of the city’s Mavortia moenia (AE 1989, 75). Vergil was accorded the status of an honorary Christian, but here it may be more signiicant that these lines preface Jupiter’s famous prediction for Rome of imperium sine ine, a message not unwelcome to the city’s bishops. In the Greek East a fashion for adorning statue bases with honoriic verses for living subjects arose in the second century and continued to lourish in Late Antiquity, but never caught on in a big way in the Latin West (cf. CIL VI 1693 = ILS 1241, c. 352 CE; CIL VI 1710 = ILS 2949 = IGUR I 63, c. 402 CE, two verses in Greek).33 hese Greek epigram­ matists, whether employing Christian or traditional mythological imagery, generally favoured the so­called “modern style,” typiied by nonnus and his school.34 his form was popular because its simple rhythmic structure (with stress accents signalling the main caesura and line­ends) allowed the poet to combine a high literary register with a direct style, readily comprehensible to less educated audiences. Changes in personal naming practices are observable in late antique epigraphy and are a key indicator of social and cultural developments (Appendix III). For many Romans the nomen gentile shited from indicating a family relationship to mark­ ing social status as a long­term consequence of the constitutio Antoniniana of 212. Transformations in the standard canon of personal names (cognomina) are partially attributable to the progressive Christianization of society in the fourth century.35 By the ith century Roman names were efectively reduced to single personal names for most, but epigraphic evidence still occasionally reveals the polyonymy of members of the Roman or Constantinopolitan elite, otherwise known only by single personal names.36 hus it is only from recent epigraphic inds that the consuls of 463 (Vivianus), 511 (Felix), and 521 (Valerius) are shown to glory in the names Flavius Antoninus Messala Vivianus (AE 2008, 1764), Arcadius Placidus Magnus Felix (EAOR VI 17.67a–f), and Iobius Philippus Ymelco Valerius (EAOR VI 17.72a–g) respectively, and Justinian’s notorious praetorian prefect, John the Cappadocian (PLRE 3, Ioannes 11), to have styled himself in full as Fl(avius) Marianus Michaelius Gabrielius Archangelus Ioannes (AE 2004, 1410 = SEG 54, 1178, lines 42–44).37 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 Matthews 2009: 133–134; cf. Malbon 1990: 115 (translation). Montzamir 2003. Robert 1948. Agosti 2008. Salway 1994: 136–143; Kajanto 1997; Solin 2005; Salomies 2012. Rome: Cameron 1985. Constantinople: Laniado 2012. Feissel 2004: 333–335. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 375 9/2/2014 9:08:03 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN 376 BEnET SALWAY A striking development in Latin epigraphic practice is the prefacing of honoriic texts with a form of nickname known as the signum.38 Attested from the start of the third century, they are most noticeable epigraphically as a common afectation in dedica­ tions to members of the Roman senatorial aristocracy of the fourth and ith centuries.39 Morphologically these names are formed with the adjectival suix -ius, their mean­ ings oten expressing some personal quality, and are frequently Greek by etymology; one early example is even inscribed in the Greek alphabet on an early third­century statue base from utica in Africa Proconsularis (AE 1964, 179; cf. 1973, 575): Εὐκόμι // C(aiae) Sulpiciae [?Di]/dymianae c(larissimae) [f(eminae)] / coniugi Q(uinti) Vin[ii] / Victorini c(larissimi) v(iri) il(iae / C(ai) Sulpici(i) Iusti c(larissimi) v(iri) / Calpurnius Gabini[us] / patronae (“Well­haired one! Calpurnius Gabinius (set this up) to his patron Gaia Sulpicia Didymiana, clarissima femina, wife of Q. Vinius Victorinus, vir clarissimus, daughter of C. Sulpicius Iustus, vir clarissimus”).40 Originally these signa were employed in the vocative to form an imprecation, suggesting an address to the statue with which each was associated. hey were normally carved detached from the main body of the text, oten on the cornice of the statue base, as for Sulpicia Didymiana (PIR 2 S 1029) and on that for L. Aradius Valerius Proculus signo Populonius, dating to c. 340 (CIL VI 1690 = ILS 1240), or even on the plinth of the statue itself, as in the case of the statue labelled Dogmatii, found near the base for Caelius Saturninus of 324/337 (CIL VI 1704 = ILS 1214).41 By the later fourth century, gentilicia, which mostly shared the -ius termination with the genuine signa, can be found standing in as a detached signum in order to conform to the fashion, as on the cornice of the posthumous base dedi­ cated to Vettius Agorius Praetextatus: Agorii (CIL VI 1778, 1 February 387).42 he con­ sistent use of terminations in -i in these fourth­century examples looks supericially similar to the earlier signa in the vocative, but grammatically they are in the genitive, suggesting that the understanding of the function of these headings has shited. hey now function as labels of the images to which they relate, i.e., “(statue) of X.” By the ith century, not just a single name but the honorand’s full names might be repeated in detached form at the head of the dedication, as in that from Trajan’s Forum to the panegyrist and poet Claudian from c. 402 CE: [Cl(audi)] Claudiani v(iri) c(larissimi) / [Cla]udio Claudiano v(iro) clarissimo tri/[bu]no et notario . . . (CIL VI 1710 = IGUR I 63 = ILS 2949; cf. VI 1725 = ILS 1284 = Fig. 18.5). Another shorthand method of identiication that emerges in the epigraphic record in late antiquity is the monogram. his usually takes the form of a design comprising the letters of a name within a circle or connected by a square.43 From the fourth cen­ tury they are common on seal rings and in the ith and sixth can be found as graiti, 38 39 40 41 42 43 Kajanto 1966: 42–90. Chastagnol 1988a: 38–41. Photo: Lassère 2007: 86, ig. 37. Photo: Lassère 2007: 719, ig. 118. Photo: Gordon and Gordon 1965: no. 339. Roueché 2007a: 231–234. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 376 9/2/2014 9:08:03 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN LATE AnTIQuITY 377 coin designs, and monumental decoration, as on the pillars from the church of St. Polyeuktos, built in Constantinople in the early sixth century by the wealthy aristocrat Anicia Iuliana. Since they were designed to be recognizable rather than decipherable, these monograms cannot always be fully understood. In this case a plausible resolution might be ἁγίου Πολυεύκτου (“of St. Polyeuktos”).44 Vertical links between patron and client continue to be a common reason for epi­ graphic commemoration. As well as individuals, cities, and even provinces, in the fourth century the collegia of the city of Rome are notable for erecting dedications to the urban prefects: for example, the corpus coriariorum (CIL VI 1682 = ILS 1220) or the mensores et codicarii (VI 1759 = ILS 1272). he corpus suariorum et confecturariorum (“guild of pork butchers and sausage makers”) was responsible for two dedications— in prose and verse—to the prefect, Valerius Proculus (CIL VI 1690, 1693 = ILS 1240, 1241). hat relations between the prefects and tradesmen were not always so cosy is demonstrated by three fragmentary copies of the same edict of Tarracius Bassus (PLRE 1, Bassus 21), the prefect of 375–376, naming and shaming a list of shopkeepers (tabernarii) who, in contravention of expected behaviour (disciplina Romana), had become accustomed to claim handouts, seats at games, and bread “in dereliction of prefec­ toral edicts” (derel[ictis edictis praef(ectorum)]) or “having quit Rome” (derel[icta urbe Roma]) (CIL VI 41328–30).45 he allocation of seating, in the Flavian Amphitheatre in Rome at least, was a seri­ ous enough business to warrant the carving of permanent place markers for senatorial spectators, as the series of inscribed seats stretching from the fourth to sixth century demonstrates (Ch. 25).46 Extending through the social orders, the “circus factions” (the hippodrome teams and their supporters) leave a considerable trail of inscriptions in the Greek East, from formal honours to simple graiti.47As well as in the hippodrome, their presence was felt in the theatre, and they seem to have been used as a basis for the organization of public ceremonial. One of the activities in which they become engaged is the shouting of acclamations. hese are chants that express approval or support, a genre which enters the epigraphic record in the later third century and continues into the early seventh.48 Acclamations also appear in the portico of the south agora at late antique Aphrodisias, such as a text hailing a local magnate and benefactor, Albinus (ala2004 83.xv):49 αὔξι Ἀλβῖνος ὁ κτίστης καὶ τούτου τοῦ ἔργου. up with Albinus! he builder of this work too! 44 45 46 47 48 49 Harrison 1986: 130, 5.a.iii. For 415 designs, mostly of names and oices, PLRE 3.1556–73. Purcell 1999: 144–145. EAOR VI (ed. S. Orlandi), superseding Chastagnol 1966. Cameron 1973; Roueché 1993, 2007a. Roueché 1984, 2007b: 183–186; Wiemer 2004. cf. Roueché 1984: 190–194. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 377 9/2/2014 9:08:03 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN 378 BEnET SALWAY In the economic sphere, Diocletian’s Maximum Prices Edict, with its listing of a ceiling price for nearly fourteen hundred separate goods or services, under seventy chapter headings, is an invaluable resource for the modern scholar, although the recovery of its full text is only now nearing completion (cf. n. 14). As in earlier peri­ ods, inscribed artefacts (instrumentum domesticum) are most informative about com­ merce and manufacture. In contrast to the environs of Rome, where brick­stamps show that the workshops (iglinae) come under the control of the urban prefects from Diocletian onwards, brick production seems to have remained in private hands in ith- and sixth-century Constantinople.50 A unique insight into the agrarian society and economy of late antique north Africa is provided by a cache of forty­ive writing tablets relating to a certain fundus Tuletianus in the mid­490s (the so­called “tablettes Albertini”). hese show that over ity years into the Vandal period tenant-landlord relations were still being governed by the lex Manciana of the irst century CE and the use of Roman forms for transactions, including a slave­sale, with school­teachers and a priest, rather than professional notaries, acting as scribes.51 The Imperial State Despite the decline in the epigraphic habit, inscriptions still provide some essential information for political and military events, especially for periods in the third and fourth century for which no extensive historical narrative survives.52 Inscriptions, especially epitaphs in the Latin west, are essential for establishing the consular fasti, sometimes the only clue to shiting political alliances.53 For example, it is only epigraphy that has preserved the identity of Arcadius son of heodosius II (PLRE 2, Arcadius 1), a short­lived member of the heodosian dynasty, too junior to feature in the numismatic record (CIL XI 276 = ILS 818 = ILCV 20, a mosaic from the church of St. John the Evangelist, Ravenna),54 and recorded the posthumous rehabilitation of Virius nicomachus Flavianus (PLRE 1, Flavianus 15), a pagan senator and supporter of the usurper Eugenius (CIL VI 1783 = ILS 2948, Trajan’s Forum, Rome).55 he decline in many categories of public text at the provincial and municipal level gives a new promi­ nence to inscribed copies of acts of central government.56 As already noted, there is an elorescence in the fourth century in the inscribing of imperial pronouncements in their original elaborate Latin form in multiple copies over the provinces of the Greek 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 Rome: Steinby 1986; Constantinople: Bardill 2004; cf. Ch. 31. Courtois et al. 1952; for a slave sale: ibid. no. 2; cf. Wessel 2003. Barnes 1982, 2011. Bagnall et al. 1987: 58–66; Salway 2008: 300–309. Barnes 2007. Hedrick 2000. Feissel 1995, 2009. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 378 9/2/2014 9:08:03 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN LATE AnTIQuITY 379 East.57 he most extreme example is Diocletian’s Edict on Maximum Prices, attested in as many as forty­ive separate copies.58 In the Early Empire much information can be derived from the formal imperial titulature found in the headings of oicial acts (Ch. 10). A development that allows a crude diferentiation of texts of Christian emperors from those of pagan ones, but only in the Greek East, is Constantine’s replacement of Σεβαστός, the traditional equiva­ lent of the Latin Augustus, by the simple transliteration Αὔγουστος.59 he inclusion of multiple titles commemorating military victory reaches the height of its complexity in the Tetrarchy and thereater, as in the heading of Diocletian’s Prices Edict (ILS 642).60 Such prolixity may have encouraged some inscribers to omit the heading entirely in favour of the bald descriptor e(xemplum) s(acrarum) l(itterarum), as was done in the copy of the Prices Edict from Stratonicea in Caria (AE 2008, 1396). As well as the titles themselves, the order of seniority and composition of the imperial college are valu­ able indicators of the niceties of imperial politics. For instance, the two­man college of Galerius and Maximian that issued the letter conirming city status to the town of Heraclea Sintica in Macedonia in 307/8 (AE 2002, 1293 = 2004, 1331) reveals a low­point in diplomatic relations between Diocletian’s successors.61 It may appear that there was a decline in the use of full imperial titulature, but this may simply result from the fact that oicial documents were less oten inscribed on durable materials. he opening of a letter of 337 from Constantine and his Caesars to the Senate at Rome, acknowledging the virtues of Valerius Proculus (PLRE 1, Proculus 11) and probably granting the Senate’s request for the erection of a public statue in his honour, shows not only the full panoply of imperial epithets, powers, and victory titles in use but also the traditional formal epistolary greeting (“if you and your children are faring well, it is good; we and our army are faring well”) addressed to the Senate and magistrates: consulibus, praetoribus, tribunis plebis, senatui suo salutem dicunt: si vos liberique vestri valetis, bene est; nos exercitusque nostri valemus (CIL VI 40776). he sporadic survival of inscriptions makes arguments e silentio fragile. For example, the argument that heodosius deliberately dropped the title pontifex maximus, based only on epigraphic material, may be mistaken. he title is last attested by an inscription dedicating the pons Gratianus in Rome by Valentinian, Valens, and Gratian in 369 (CIL VI 1175 = ILS 771; CIL VI 31250); but, when manuscript evidence is taken into conside­ ration, it seems to have lived on at least into the sixth century, with slight restyling as pontifex inclitus (cf. Collectio Avellana 113, letter of Anastasius of 516).62 On the other hand, the disappearance under heodosius I of the formula devotus/dicatus numini maiestatique eius/eorum (“devoted to his/their divine aura and majesty”), irst attested 57 58 59 60 61 62 Corcoran 2007: 224–226. Feissel 1995: 43–45; Crawford 2002: 147 n. 6, 156 n. 27. Rösch 1978; Salway 2007. Laufer 1971: praef., sections 1–5; Roueché 1989: no. 231, panel i, lines 1–7. Mitrev 2003. Cameron 2007. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 379 9/2/2014 9:08:03 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN 380 BEnET SALWAY for the Severans, may relect new religious sensibilities (cf. CIL VIII 22671 = IRT 476, Lepcis Magna; VIII 10489 = ILS 779, Gigthis, 378 CE). A speciically late imperial category of inscribed material is that of silver plate dis­ tributed as largesse, presumably to high­ranking civil and military oicials. About twenty examples survive, from the decennalia of Licinius (317/318) to the consulship of Fl(avius) Ardabur Aspar (434), and all but this last celebrating imperial anniversa­ ries.63 he (oten optimistic) slogans on these objects generally follow simple formulae paralleled in other media: for example, the sic X / sic XX // Licini Augusti semper vincas (“hus 10, so 20. Licinius Augustus, may you be victorious forever!”) inscribed on the bowls celebrating Licinius’ decennalia from naissus (niš);64 but an example from Kaiseraugst sports two lines of hexameter verse: Augustus Constans dat laeta decennia victor / spondens omn[i]bus ter tricennalia faustus (ILS 1299: “Constans victorious Augustus gives (this) for a joyous ten years, (and), having been blessed, promising (it) to all three times over for the thirty­year anniversary”).65 In return it is the probable beneiciaries of this largesse who were overwhelmingly responsible for dedications of statues or other monuments to the emperors with their ever more elaborately lattering introductory formulae, as when Licinius is described as devictor omnium gentium barbarorum et super omnes retro principes providentissimus (“defeater of all tribes of bar­ barians and most provident above all past emperors”) at Tarraco (CIL II 4105 = II2/14, 939).66 Although the emperors continued to sponsor public building in Rome, their general absence from the city gave more prominence to their local representatives, the praefecti urbis, as their agents.67 Inscriptions of the urban prefects attest signiicant rebuilding activity ater the Gothic sack of 410, and again ater that by the Vandals in 455 (CIL VI 40803 = 31419 [410/423]; 31890 = 37106 = 41403, 1788 = 31891 = 41404, 41405 [456]).68 Oicial regulation of the interface between the people and subordinate oicials of pre­ fects and provincial governors is attested by inscribed edicts of the fourth and ith cen­ turies, which ix the fees and gits that administrators might lawfully accept (CIL VIII 17896 = FIRA I 64, hamugadi, 362/363; AE 2003, 1808, Caesarea Maritima, 465/473; cf. Bull. ép. 2004, 394).69 he activity of central and provincial oicials can be traced through the seal­impressions on lead bullae, which proliferate in the sixth and seventh centuries.70 A cache of Latin ostraka from Carthage document the state’s requisitioning of olive oil in the late fourth century.71 Beyond the major urban centres, various central government activities have let their trace. For example, tetrarchic land-surveyors let 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 Leader­newby 2004: 11–59. Chastagnol 1988b; Leader­newby 2004: 18. Leader­newby 2004: 25. Chastagnol 1988a: 19–26; for such titles, cf. Ch. 10. Chastagnol 1960; Curran 2000: 1–115; Behrwald 2009: 46–59; Chenault 2012. Behrwald 2009: 132–146. cf. Chastagnol 1978: 75–88; Stauner 2007. For example, the commerciarii: PLRE 3. 1485; Zacos and Veglery 1971; Oikonomides 1995. Peña 1998. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 380 9/2/2014 9:08:04 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN LATE AnTIQuITY 381 cippi across the Syrian provinces, Palaestina, and Arabia; Volcei in Lucania beneited from an alimenta scheme under Constantine and Licinius (CIL X 407 = Inscr.It. III.1, 17, 323 CE); and detailed tax­registers were engraved across the province of Asia in the Valentinianic period.72 he largest arm of the imperial state remained the military and, outside papyri from Egypt, inscriptions remain the main source for knowledge of all grades below the most eminent generals.73 With the suppression of the praetorian cohorts in 312, the last indi­ vidual bronze diplomas disappear but the conferral of tax privileges by Licinius on his troops collectively in 311 is now attested by two bronze plaques (AE 1937, 232 = FIRA I 93, Brigetio, Pannonia; AE 2007, 1224, ?Durostorum, Moesia). he renewed (and sometimes extreme) geographical mobility of soldiers of all ranks, provoked by the development of the comitatus, is documented by epitaphs (cf. AE 1981, 777; CIL III 14406 = ILS 8454).74 Inscribed regulations of Anastasius on soldiers’ allowances from Pamphylia, Arabia, and Libya detail the internal hierarchy of the legions c. 500.75 With Christianization, the dedication by military units of altars on behalf of the emperors’ well­being gives way to acclamations to the Christian God and for the emperors’ long reign, such as that found on Constantinople’s Porta Aurea (CIL III 7405 = ILS 9216). Following the separation of military and civilian career paths, the generals (magistri militum) lagged behind in the receipt of honours, but in the early 400s Stilicho was honoured by two statues in the Forum Romanum (CIL VI 1730–31 = ILS 1277–78) and the loyalty and courage (ides virtusque) of his soldiers were the subject of a third monument (CIL VI 31987 = ILS 799). By the mid-ith century generals are attested as donors to churches (ILS 1293, Lateran, Rome; 1294, St. Agatha, Rome; CIL V 3100 = ILS 1297, St. Justina, Padua) and in the seventh century as church builders (AE 1973, 245, Torcello, 638/639; CIL VIII 2389 = ILS 839, hamugadi, 641/646). It is a feature typical of Late Antiquity that sixth­century generals celebrated the restoration of vital infrastruc­ ture with inscribed verses: for example, the pons Salarius in Rome (CIL VI 1199 = ILS 832, 565 CE; cf. CIL II 3420 = ILS 835 = ILCV 792, lines 8–9, Carthago nova, 589). The Imperial Elite Even if in much reduced numbers, the continued tradition of honouring members of the equestrian and senatorial elite with statue bases permits career­patterns to be traced through the dark days of the third into the later fourth century.76 At Rome, despite their physical absence, the emperors maintained control over the erection of honours in public 72 Millar 1993: 535–544; Harper 2008. Oicers from duces and comites down are listed in PLRE 1. 1116–27; 2. 1295–1306; 3.1511–37. Lower ranks: Elton 1996: 274–277. 74 Wilkinson 2012; cf. Ch. 30. 75 Feissel 2009: 124, 126–127. 76 Christol 1986; Kuhof 1983. 73 oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 381 9/2/2014 9:08:04 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN 382 BEnET SALWAY Table 18.1 Senatorial and equestrian grades from the late second century onwards late 2nd—mid-4th centurymid-4th–mid-5th century mid-5th century onwards senatorial grades v(ir) c(larissimus) equestrian v(ir) em(inentissimus) grades v(ir) p(erfectissimus) v(ir) e(gregius) v(ir) inl/ill(uster/tris) v(ir) sp(ectabilis) v(ir) c(larissimus) v(ir) p(erfectissimus) v(ir) exc(ellentissimus) v(ir) gl(orisosus/issimus) v(ir) magn(ificus/centissimus) v(ir) inl/ill(uster/tris) v(ir) sp(ectabilis) v(ir) c(larissimus) v(ir) d(evotus/issimus) v(ir) l(audabilis) v(ir) st(renuus) v(ir) h(onestus/issimus) spaces, so many of the statue bases put up by clients to their patrons originate from the private space of aristocratic mansions, sometimes explicitly so (CIL VI 31940 = 41331 [374/380 CE], 1793 [392], 41382 [416/421]).77 Although the aristocracy of Rome were slow to adopt the practice, the increasing ubiquity of the senatorial epithet vir clarissimus, thanks to the widespread award of honorary senatorial status and the upgrading of formerly equestrian posts, led to the development of a range of epithets that distinguished those who had held genuinely high oice from the mass of viri clarissimi. he promotion to senatorial status of the oices of the traditional equestrian service in turn provoked the emergence of new grades of sub­senatorial status (see Table 18.1). At Rome honoriic statues continued to be dedicated to senators until the practice largely halted with the Vandal sack.78 However, from the later fourth century onwards the dedicatory texts change in format and content. Minor senatorial magistracies are no lon­ ger enumerated and a much more allusive and verbose style, reminiscent of the municipal honoriic decrees of an earlier age, comes into vogue.79 he statue base for Fl(avius) Olbius Auxentius Draucus (PLRE 2, Draucus) from the 440s illustrates this (CIL VI 1725 = ILS 1284; Fig. 18.5). His early career, comprising the urban magistracies (quaestor, praetor, consul sufectus), now of purely local signiicance, is paraphrased by senatus munia (line 3), ater which come a series of ranks and oices in imperial service, either at court (then in Ravenna) or at Rome, culminating in the urban prefecture, which earned him the title vir inlustris. he complexity of the text’s grammar has proved a challenge to translators:80 Fl(avi) Olbi Auxenti Drauc[i v(iri) c(larissimi)] Fl(avio) Olbio Auxentio Drauco v(iro) c(larissimo) et inl(ustri) patriciae familiae viro, senatus mun<i>is prompta devotione perfuncto, 77 78 79 80 niquet 2000. Machado 2010: 255–257. Roda 1977: 93–108; Delmaire 2004. cf. Gordon 1983: 182–183, no. 97; Lassère 2007: 740–742. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 382 9/2/2014 9:08:04 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN LATE AnTIQuITY 5 10 15 383 comiti ordinis primi et vicario urbis Romae, comiti sacri consistorii, praefecto urbis Romae, ob egregia eius administrationum merita, quae integritate censura et moderatione ita viguerunt ut sublimissimae potestatis reverentiam honoriica eius auctritas custodiret et humanitatem amabilis censura servaret, petitu senatus amplissimi, qui est iustus arbiter dignitatum, excellentibus et magniicis viris legatione mandata ut inpetratorum dignitas cresceret, quae paribus studiis amore iustitiae et providentiae desiderabantur, dd(omini) nn(ostri) Fll(avii) heodosius et Placidus Valentinianus invicti ac triumfatores principes semper Augusti FIG. 18.5 Base of a statue honouring the Roman senator Flavius Olbius Auxentius Draucus, from Rome. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 383 9/2/2014 9:08:04 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN 384 BEnET SALWAY 20 ad remunerationem titulosque virtutum, quib(us) circa rem publicam eximia semper probitas invitatur, statuam auro fulgentem erigi conlocarique iusserunt. Of Flavius Olbius Auxentius Draucus vir clarissimus. To Flavius Olbius Auxentius Draucus vir clarissimus and illuster, a man of patrician family, having fulilled all the senate’s obligations with unhesitating devotion, comes of the irst rank, vicarius of the city of Rome, comes of the imperial consistory, prefect of the city of Rome, on account of the outstanding merits of his periods of oice, which were so strong in integrity, judgement, and moderation that his honoriic authority maintained respect for the most sublime power and (his) amiable judgement preserved human kindness, by request of the most ample senate, which is the proper arbiter of honours, the delegation having been mandated to excellent and magniicent men so that the dignity of the rewards be increased— (rewards) that were desired with equal zeal by a love of justice and foresight—our lords the Flavii heodosius and Placidus Valentinianus, unconquered and triumphant leaders forever Augusti, have ordered, for the remuneration and record of the virtues by which outstanding probity with regard to the republic is always encouraged, that a statue shining with gold be erected and put in place. he emergence of this more lorid style more or less coincides with another new phe­ nomenon: the production of luxury two­leaf writing tablets (diptychs) in ivory. A sig­ niicant number are souvenirs commemorating public games given by members of the ith- and sixth-century civilian and military elite of both Rome and Constantinople during their tenure of the praetorship (at Rome) or the consulship (ILS 1298, 1300–1312).81 Provinces and Municipalities At the municipal level in many regions Late Antiquity is an epigraphic desert, excluding epitaphs. In the Latin West, the north African cities manifest the most resilient epi­ graphic culture.82 At Mustis a fourth­century cycle of epigrams attests to local pride in the urban landscape.83 Here as elsewhere, however, the efect of increasing burdens on the curial class and the diversion of municipal revenues to imperial cofers severely curtailed private and civic benefaction. nevertheless, imperial rescripts inscribed by successful petitioners demonstrate the continued desire of communities from the third into the sixth century for a civic charter, especially when autonomy might be a way to be free of other burdens (CIL III 6866 = ILS 6090, Tymandus, Pisidia, ?tetrarchic; AE 2004, 1331, Heraclea Sintica, Macedonia, 308; MAMA VII 305, Orcistus, Phrygia, 324/326; cf. Ch. 17; AE 2004, 1410 = SEG 54, 1178, Didyma/Iustinianopolis, Caria, 533). he continued existence in the ith century of patron-client relationships between the aristocracy and cities in the Latin 81 82 83 Delbrück 1929; Cameron 2013. Lepelley 1981a. Schmidt 2008. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 384 9/2/2014 9:08:04 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN LATE AnTIQuITY 385 West is well attested, oten by the bronze commemorative plaques that adorned the man­ sions of the patroni (for example, ILS 6111–17).84 Although there is evidence into the later fourth century of euergetism by local worthies, funding entertainments (IRT 567, Lepcis Magna; CIL X 6565 = ILS 5632, Velitrae, 364/367) and public buildings (AE 1903, 97; cf. CIL VIII 4878 = ILS 2943, hubursicu numidarum, 326/333 CE; AE 1972, 202, Asola, n. Italy, 336), inscriptions reveal that the imperial treasury, through the agency of provincial gov­ ernors, had become the primary funder of public building.85 Communities fortunate enough to become the chief cities of newly created provinces, such as Antioch in Pisidia, saw considerable investment by the authorities in new public buildings and monuments (AE 1999, 1611–1620).86 Even Ephesus, long established as the premier city of Asia, under­ went signiicant remodelling to accommodate statues and other inscribed monuments commemorating the activities of emperors and proconsuls.87 Generally provincial gov­ ernors became the most frequent recipients of municipal honours,88 though these were habitually ofered not by the council and people but by senior oicers of the civic admini­ stration. he epigraphic record documents the subordination of the wider curia and annual magistrates to narrower groups of liturgists, known as decemprimi (δεκάπρωτοι), and senior oicials, known as principales (πρωτεύωντες), respectively, and the regular institution of a curator rei publicae (λογιστής) appointed from amongst the latter as a de facto mayor.89 From the mid-ith century, another occasional oicial, the pater civitatis, is attested in inscriptions in the eastern part of the Empire, as, for example, Fl(avius) Athenaeus on a statue base from Aphrodisias (ala2004 62). In the Latin West, the munici­ pal pontiices or lamines perpetui of the imperial cult continued to perform a role long ater the neutralization of their religious functions (cf. CIL VIII 10516 + 11528 = ILCV 388, Ammaedara, 526); and tenure of the oice of high priest (coronatus or sacerdos) at the annual regional or provincial council remained an important occasion for the staging of spectacles (cf. CIL XI 5265 = ILS 705 = EAOR II 20, the Hispellum rescript; Fig. 18.2).90 he new hierarchy of honours is documented by the rare survival of an inscribed register of the council of hamugadi in numidia, c. 362/3 (CIL VIII 2403 [= ILS 6122], 17903 + AE 1948, 118).91 he example of Aurelius Antoninus (c. 337) ofers a good illustration of a late antique municipal career (CIL XI 5283 = ILS 6623, Hispellum): C(aio) Matrinio Aurelio C(ai) f(ilio) Lem(onia tribu) Antonino v(iro) p(erfectissimo) coronato Tusc(iae) et Umb(riae) pont(iici) gentis Flaviae 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 Chausson 2004. Cecconi 1994: 117–121. Christol and Drew­Bear 1999. Bauer 1996: 422–426. Horster 1998; Slootjes 2006: 129–153. Lepelley 1981a, 1981b; Laniado 2002: 201–211. Chastagnol and Duval 1974; Lepelley 1997: 339. Barnes 2011: 20–23 for the dating of the rescript. Chastagnol 1978; Horstkotte 1988. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 385 9/2/2014 9:08:04 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN 386 BEnET SALWAY 5 abundantissimi muneris sed et praecipuae laetitiae theatralis edi[t]o[r]i aedili quaestori duumviro iterum q(uin)q(uennali) i(ure) d(icundo) huius splendidissimae coloniae curatori r(ei) p(ublicae) eiusdem colon(iae) et primo principali ob meritum benevolentiae eius erga se [ple]bs omnis urbana Flaviae Constantis patrono dignissimo 10 To C. Matrinius Aurelius Antoninus, son of Gaius, of the Lemonia tribe, vir perfectissimus, high priest of Tuscia and umbria, pontifex of the Flavian gens, producer of a most abundant arena­show as well as of an outstandingly enjoyable theatrical performance, aedile, quaestor, twice quinquennial duumvir with judicial power of this most splendid colonia, curator rei publicae of the same colonia and irst principalis, on account of the merit of his benevolence towards them, as a most worthy patronus, the whole urban populace of Flavia Constans (set this up). On the domestic front, Late Antiquity sees an upsurge in the commissioning by the elite of mosaics incorporating labels and commemorative texts to decorate their homes across the Empire from Britain to Syria.92 Labelling of the luxury tableware in their dining rooms seems to have been equally popular, ofering another opportunity for an inscribed epi­ gram: for example, the names on the Hoxne hoard from Britain and the elegiac couplet on a silver plate from the Sevso treasure.93 he Chi­Rho symbol regularly accompanies owner­ ship inscriptions on gold and silver plate from the fourth century onwards, whereas, except for the use of crosses as punctuation, public inscriptions remain relatively free of Christian vocabulary and symbolism until the reign of Justinian. Divine favour is explicitly invoked in the formulae of the inscriptions recording the refortiication of African cities by the cen­ tral Byzantine government ater the reconquest from the Vandals (AE 1911, 118, hamugadi, 539/544 CE).94 Similarly, sometime in the later sixth century the dedication of the nE gate of Aphrodisias was over­carved with a prominent Christian emblem and the naming of the city was adjusted to obscure the memory of Aphrodite (ala2004 22).95 Epilogue he unusual spectacle of a marble plaque bearing a copy of a papal letter­forms an appropriate end to this chapter (ICUR II 423; Fig. 18.6). he letter, dated 22 January 92 93 94 95 Leader­newby 2007. Tomlin 2010; Mango 1994: 77–83. Durliat 1981: no. 19. Roueché 2007b: 186–189. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 386 9/2/2014 9:08:04 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN LATE AnTIQuITY 387 FIG. 18.6 Inscribed copy of a letter of Gregory the Great to the subdeacon Felix. Church of S. Paolo fuori le mura, Rome. 604, is an ordinance addressed to the subdeacon managing the church’s estates along the Via Appia, allotting the revenues of certain properties to provide lighting for the basilica of St. Paul Outside­the­Walls (S. Paolo fuori le mura). he care of its layout and carving confounds prejudices about the appearance of late antique inscriptions. Its opening and closing preserve elements of the diplomatics of the document that are either abbreviated or omitted in the version transmitted in the manuscript collection of Gregory the Great’s letters (Ep. 14.14). It shows the pope’s self­styling as episc(opus) servus servorum D(e)i (“bishop and servant of the servants of God”), reproduces what would have been his personal subscription, bene vale (“farewell”), and shows the papal chancery utilising the fullest form of dating as required for legal validity by Justinian’s legislation (whereas the letter collection simply iles it by indiction): dat(a) VIII kal(endas) Februarias imp(eratoris) d(omini) n(ostri) Phoca p(er)p(etui) Aug(usti) anno secundo et consulatus eius anno primo ind(ictione) septima Given on the eighth day before the kalends of February in the second year of the emperor our lord Phocas perpetual Augustus and the irst year of his consulship, in the seventh indiction. Here we ind the rector patrimonii Appiae (the controller of the property along the Via Appia) adopting the long­standing practice of enhancing the utility and authority of the letter as a document of reference by ensuring its record in permanent inscribed form for public display. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 387 9/2/2014 9:08:05 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN 388 BEnET SALWAY Bibliography Agosti, G. 2008. “Literariness and Levels of Style in Epigraphical Poetry of Late Antiquity.” Ramus 37: 199–213. Alföldy, G. 2001. “Diicillima tempora: urban Life, Inscriptions and Mentality in Late Antique Rome.” In Urban Centers and Rural Contexts in Late Antiquity, eds. T.S. Burns and J.W. Eadie, 3–24. East Lansing, MI. Bagnall, R.S., et al. 1987. Consuls of the Later Roman Empire. Atlanta. Bardill, J. 2004. Brickstamps of Constantinople. 2 vols. Oxford. Barnes, T.D. 1982. he New Empire of Diocletian and Constantine. Cambridge, MA. Barnes, T.D. 1999. “Latin Epigraphy and the History of the Western Roman Empire ater Constantine.” In Atti XI Congresso Internazionale di Epigraia Greca e Latina, Roma 1997, 2.565–576. Rome. Barnes, T.D. 2007. “Arcadius the Son of the Emperor heodosius II.” In Acta XII Congressus Internationalis Epigraphiae Graecae et Latinae, Barcelona 2002, eds. M. Mayer et al., 109– 112. Barcelona. Barnes, T.D. 2011. Constantine: Dynasty, Religion and Power in the Later Roman Empire. Malden, MA. Bauer, F.A. 1996. Stadt, Platz und Denkmal in der Spätantike. Untersuchungen zur Ausstattung des öfentlichen Raums in den spätantiken Städten Rom, Konstantinopel und Ephesos. Mainz. Behrwald, R. 2009. Die Stadt als Museum? Die Wahrnehmung der Monumente Roms in der Spätantike. Klio Beihet n. F. 12. Berlin. Bernt, G. 1968. Das lateinische Epigramm im Übergang von der Spätantike zum frühen Mittelalter. Munich. Beševliev, V.I. 1964. Spätgriechische und spätlateinische Inschriten aus Bulgarien. Berlin. Bloch, R. 1969. L’épigraphie latine. 4th ed. Paris. Briquel Chatonnet, F., M. Debié, and A. Desreumaux, eds. 2004. Les inscriptions syriaques. Études syriaques 1. Paris. Cagnat, R. 1914. Cours d’épigraphie latine. 4th ed. Paris. Calabi Limentani, I. 1991. Epigraia latina. 4th ed. Milan. Cameron, A.D.E. 1973. Porphyrius the Charioteer. Oxford. Cameron, A.D.E. 1985. “Polyonymy in the Late Roman Aristocracy: he Case of Petronius Probus.” JRS 75: 164–182. Cameron, A.D.E. 2007. “he Imperial Pontifex.” HSCPh 103: 341–384. Cameron, A.D.E. 2013. “he Origin, Context and Function of Consular Diptychs.” JRS 103: 174–207. Cardin, L. 2008. Epigraia a Roma nel primo Medioevo (secoli IV–X): modelli graici e tipologie d’uso. Rome. Cecconi, G.A. 1994. Governo imperiale e élites dirigenti nell’Italia tardoantica. Problemi di storia politico-amministrativa (270–476 d.C.). Como. Chastagnol, A. 1960. La préfecture urbaine à Rome sous le Bas-Empire. Paris. Chastagnol, A. 1966. Le sénat romain sous le règne d’Odoacre: recherches sur l’épigraphie du Colisée au Ve siècle. Bonn. Chastagnol, A. 1978. L’album municipal de Timgad. Bonn. Chastagnol, A. 1988a. “Le formulaire de l’épigraphie latine oicielle dans l’antiquité tardive.” In La terza età dell’epigraia, ed. A. Donati, 11–65. Faenza (repr. in Chastagnol 2008: 133–187). oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 388 9/2/2014 9:08:05 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN LATE AnTIQuITY 389 Chastagnol, A. 1988b. “Les inscriptions des monuments inaugurés lors des fêtes impériales.” MEFRA 100: 13–26 (repr. in Chastagnol 2008: 303–316). Chastagnol, A. 2008. Le pouvoir impérial à Rome: igures et commémorations. Geneva. Chastagnol, A., and n. Duval. 1974. “Les survivances du culte impérial dans l’Afrique du nord à l’époque vandale.” In Mélanges d’histoire ancienne oferts à William Seston, 87–117. Paris (repr. in Chastagnol 2008: 401–432). Chausson, F. 2004. “Les patronats familiaux en Afrique et en Italie aux IVe–Ve siècles: un dos­ sier épigraphique.” RAL ser. 9, 15: 71–120. Chenault, R. 2012. “Statues of Senators in the Forum of Trajan and the Roman Forum in Late Antiquity.” JRS 102: 103–112. Christol, M. 1986. Essai sur l’évolution des carrières sénatoriales dans la seconde moitié du IIIe siècle ap. J.-C. Paris. Christol, M., and T. Drew­Bear. 1999. “Figures du pouvoir: gouverneurs et évêques. Antioche de Piside capitale provinciale et l’œuvre de M. Valerius Diogenes.” AntTard 7: 39–71. Christol, M., and O. Masson, eds. 1997. Actes du Xe Congrès international d’épigraphie grecque et latine, Nîmes 1992. Paris. Cooley, A.E. 2012. he Cambridge Manual of Latin Epigraphy. Cambridge. Corcoran, S.J.J. 2000. he Empire of the Tetrarchs: Imperial Pronouncements and Government, AD 284–324. 2nd ed. Oxford (1st ed., 1996). Corcoran, S.J.J. 2007. “Galerius’ Jigsaw Puzzle: the Caesariani Dossier.” AntTard 15: 221–250. Courtois, C., et al., eds. 1952. Tablettes Albertini. Actes privés de l’époque vandale (in du Ve siècle). Paris. Crawford, M.H. 2002. “Discovery, Autopsy and Progress: Diocletian’s Jigsaw Puzzles.” In Classics in Progress: Essays on Ancient Greece and Rome, ed. T.P. Wiseman, 145–163. Oxford. Curran, J.R. 1994. “Moving Statues in Late Antique Rome: Problems of Perspective.” Art History 17: 46–58. Curran, J.R. 2000. Pagan City and Christian Capital: Rome in the Fourth Century. Oxford. Delbrück, R. 1929. Die Consulardiptychen und verwandte Denkmäler. Berlin. (Ital. transl., Bari 2009). Delmaire, R. 2004. “un genre en voie de disparition: les cursus épigraphiques au Bas­Empire.” In Le monde romain à travers l’épigraphie: méthodes et pratiques., eds. J. Desmulliez and C. Hoët­Van Cauwenberghe, 247–270. Lille. Diehl, E. 1912. Inscriptiones Latinae. Bonn. Drinkwater, J.F., and R.W.B. Salway, eds. 2007. Wolf Liebeschuetz Relected: Essays Presented by Colleagues, Friends, and Pupils. BICS Suppl. 91. London. Durliat, J. 1981. Les dédicaces d’ouvrages de défense dans l’Afrique byzantine. CEFR 49. Rome. Elton, H. 1996. Warfare in Roman Europe AD 350–425. Oxford. Feissel, D. 1993. “La réforme chronologiques de 537 et son application dans l’épigraphie grecque: années de règne et dates consulaires de Justinien à Héraclius.” Ktèma 18: 171–185 (repr. in Feissel 2010: 503–524). Feissel, D. 1995. “Les constitutions des Tétrarques connues par l’épigraphie: inventaire et notes critiques.” AntTard 3: 33–53 (repr. in Feissel 2010: 117–184). Feissel, D. 1999. “Les inscriptions des premiers siècles byzantins (330–641): documents d’histoire sociale et religieuse.” In Atti XI Congresso Internazionale di Epigraia Greca e Latina, Roma 1997. 2.577–589. Rome. Feissel, D. 2000. “une constitution de l’empereur Julien entre texte épigraphique et codiica­ tion (CIL III, 459 et Ch I, 16, 8).” In La codiication des lois dans l’Antiquité, ed. E. Lévy, 315–337. Paris (repr. in Feissel 2010: 205–222). oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 389 9/2/2014 9:08:05 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN 390 BEnET SALWAY Feissel, D. 2004. “un rescrit de Justinien découvert à Didymes (1er avril 533).” Chiron 34: 285– 365 (repr. in Feissel 2010: 251–324). Feissel, D. 2006. “Les inscriptions latines dans l’Orient protobyzantin.” In Acta Congressus Internationalis XIV Archaeologiae Christianae / Akten des XIV. Internationalen Kongresses für christliche Archäologie, eds. R. Harreither et al., 99–129. Rome and Vienna. Feissel, D. 2009. “Les actes de l’État impérial dans l’épigraphie tardive (324–610): prolé­ gomènes à un inventaire.” In Selbstdarstellung und Kommunikation. Die Veröfentlichung staatlicher Urkunden auf Stein und Bronze in der römischen Welt, ed. R. Haensch, 97–128. Vestigia 61. Munich (repr. in Feissel 2010: 43–70). Feissel, D. 2010. Documents, droit, diplomatique de l’Empire romain tardif. Paris. Ferrua, A. 1942. Epigrammata Damasiana. Rome. Giacchero, M. 1974. Edictum Diocletiani et collegarum de pretiis rerum venalium in integrum fere restitutum e Latinis Graecisque fragmentis. 2 vols. Genua. Gordon, A.E., and J.S. Gordon. 1965. Album of Dated Latin Inscriptions. 3. Rome and the Neighbourhood, A.D. 200–525. 2 vols. Berkeley. Gordon, A.E. 1983. Illustrated Introduction to Latin Epigraphy. Berkeley. Guarducci, M. 1967–77. Epigraia greca. 4 vols. Rome. Guarducci, M. 1987. L’epigraia greca dalle origini al tardo impero. Rome. Harper, K. 2008. “he Greek Census Inscriptions of Late Antiquity.” JRS 98: 83–119. Harrison, R.M. 1986. “Marble carving.” In Excavations at Saraçhane in Istanbul 1. he Excavations, Structures, Architectural Decoration, Small Finds, Coins, Bones and Molluscs, eds. R.M. Harrison et al., 117–167. Princeton. Hedrick, C. 2000. History and Silence: Purge and Rehabilitation of Memory in Late Antiquity. Austin, TX. Horster, M. 1998. “Ehrungen spätantiker Statthalter.” AntTard 6: 37–59. Horstkotte, H. 1988. “Das Album von Timgad und die Bindung von Staatsbeamten an die Kurie.” ZPE 75: 237–246. Jones, A.H.M. 1964. he Later Roman Empire 284–602: A Social, Economic, and Administrative Survey. 3 vols. Oxford. Kajanto, I. 1966. Supernomina. A Study in Latin Epigraphy. CommHumLitt 40. Helsinki. Kajanto, I. 1997. “Roman nomenclature during the Late Empire.” In Le iscrizioni dei cristiani in Vaticano: materiali e contributi per una mostra epigraica, ed. I. Di Stefano Manzella, 103–111. ISS 2. Vatican City. Krause, M. 1991. “Inscriptions.” In he Coptic Encyclopedia, ed. A. Z. Atiya, 4.1290–99. new York. Kuhof, W. 1983. Studien zur zivilen senatorischen Laubahn im 4. Jahrhundert n. Chr. Ämter und Amtsinhaber in Clarissimat und Spektabilität. Frankfurt am Main. Laniado, A. 2002. Recherches sur les notables municipaux dans l’empire protobyzantin. Paris. Laniado, A. 2012. “Parenté, relations et dévotions: le phénomène de polyonymie chez les digni­ taires de l’Empire proto­byzantin (Ve–VIe s.).” In Les stratégies familiales dans l’Antiquité tardive, eds. C. Badel and C. Settipani, 27–56. Paris. Lassère, J.­M. 2007. Manuel d’épigraphie romaine. 2nd ed. 2 vols. Paris (1st ed., 2005). Laufer, S. 1971. Diokletians Preisedikt. Berlin. Leader­newby, R.E. 2004. Silver and Society in Late Antiquity: Functions and Meanings of Silver Plate in the Fourth to Seventh Centuries. Aldershot. Leader­newby, R.E. 2007. “Inscribed Mosaics in the Late Roman Empire: Perspectives from East and West.” In Art and Inscriptions in the Ancient World, eds. Z. newby and R.E. Leader­newby, 179–199. Cambridge. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 390 9/2/2014 9:08:05 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN LATE AnTIQuITY 391 Lepelley, C. 1981a. Les cités de l’Afrique romaine au Bas-Empire 2. Notices d’histoire municipale. Paris. Lepelley, C. 1981b. “La carrière municipale dans l’Afrique romaine sous l’empire tardif.” Ktèma 6: 333–347. Lepelley, C. 1997. “Évergétisme et épigraphie dans l’antiquité tardive.” In Christol and Masson 1997: 335–352. Liebeschuetz, J.H.W.G. 1977. “Epigraphic Evidence and the Christianisation of Syria.” In Limes. Akten des XI. internationalen Limeskongresses, Székesfehérvár 1976, ed. J. Fitz, 485– 508. Budapest. Machado, C. 2010. “Public Monuments and Civic Life: he End of the Statue Habit in Italy.” In Le trasformazioni del V secolo. L’Italia, i barbari e l’Occidente romano, eds. P. Delogu and S. Gasperini, 237–257. Turnhout. Malbon, E.S. 1990. he Iconography of the Sarcophagus of Junius Bassus. Princeton. Mango, M.M. 1994. “he Inscriptions, Weights and Dimensions.” In M.M. Mango and A. Bennett, he Sevso Treasure: Art Historical Description and Inscriptions, and Methods of Manufacture and Scientiic Analyses, 37–54. JRA Suppl. 12. Ann Arbor. Marichal, R. 1952. “L’écriture de la chancellerie impériale.” Aegyptus 32: 326–350. Matthews, J.F. 2009. “Four Funerals and a Wedding: his World and the next in Fourth­century Rome.” In Transformations of Late Antiquity: Essays for Peter Brown, eds. P. Rousseau and M. Papoutsakis, 129–146. Farnham­Burlington, VT. (repr. in his Roman Perspectives: Studies in the Social, Political and Cultural History of the First to Fith Centuries, 255–274. Swansea 2010). McLean, B.H. 2002. An Introduction to Greek Epigraphy of the Hellenistic and Roman Periods from Alexander the Great down to the Reign of Constantine (323 B.C.–A.D. 337). Ann Arbor. Meyer, E. 1973. Einführung in die lateinische Epigraphik. Darmstadt. Millar, F.G.B. 1993. he Roman Near East 31 BC–AD 337. Cambridge, MA. Mitrev, G. 2003. “Civitas Heracleotarum: Heracleia Sintica or the Ancient City at the Village of Rupite (Bulgaria).” ZPE 145: 263–272. Montzamir, P. 2003. “nouvel essai de reconstitution matérielle de l’épitaphe de Sidoine Apollinaire.” AntTard 11: 321–327. niquet, H. 2000. Monumenta virtutum titulique. Senatoren im spätantiken Rom im Spiegel epigraphischer Denkmäler. Stuttgart. Oikonomides, n. 1995. “L’épigraphie des bulles de plomb byzantines.” In Epigraia medievale greca e latina, ideologia e funzione, eds. G. Cavallo and C. Mango, 153–168. Spoleto. Peña, J.T. 1998. “he Mobilization of State Olive Oil in Roman Africa: he Evidence of Late Fourth­Century Ostraca from Carthage.” In Carthage Papers: he Early Colony’s Economy, Water Supply, a Public Bath, and the Mobilization of State Olive Oil, 116–238. JRA Suppl. 28. Portsmouth, RI. Pikhaus, D. 1994. Répertoire des inscriptions latines versiiées de l’Afrique romaine (Ier–VIe siècles). Brussels. Purcell, n. 1999. “he Populace of Rome in Late Antiquity: Problems of Classiication and Historical Description.” In he Transformations of urbs Roma in Late Antiquity, ed. W.V. Harris, 135–161. JRA Suppl. 33. Portsmouth, RI. Robert, L. 1948. Hellenica. Recueil d’épigraphie, de numismatique et d’antiquités grecques 4. Épigrammes du Bas-Empire. Paris. Roda, S. 1977. “Magistrature senatorie minori nel tardo impero romano.” SDHI 43: 23–112. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 391 9/2/2014 9:08:05 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN 392 BEnET SALWAY Rösch, G. 1978. ΟΝΟΜΑ ΒΑΣΙΛΕΙΑΣ. Studien zum oiziellen Gebrauch der Kaisertitel in spätantiker und frühbyzantinischer Zeit. Vienna. Roueché, C.M. 1984. “Acclamations in the Later Roman Empire: new Evidence from Aphrodisias.” JRS 74: 181–199. Roueché, C.M., ed. 1989. Aphrodisias in Late Antiquity: he Late Roman and Byzantine Inscriptions Including Texts from the Excavations at Aphrodisias Conducted by Kenan T. Erim. JRS Monograph 5. London. Roueché, C.M. 1993. Performers and Partisans at Aphrodisias in the Roman and Late Roman Periods. JRS Monograph 6. London. Roueché, C.M. 1997. “Benefactors in the Late Roman Period: the Eastern Empire.” In Christol and Masson 1997: 353–368. Roueché, C.M., ed. 2004. Aphrodisias in Late Antiquity: he Late Roman and Byzantine Inscriptions. Electronic 2nd ed., updating Roueché 1989. London [http://insaph.kcl.ac.uk/ ala2004]. Roueché, C.M. 2007a. “Interpreting the Signs: Anonymity and Concealment in Late Antique Inscriptions.” In From Rome to Constantinople: Studies in Honour of Averil Cameron, eds. H. Amirav and B. ter Haar Romeny, 221–234. Leuven. Roueché, C.M. 2007b. “From Aphrodisias to Stauropolis.” In Drinkwater and Salway 2007: 183–192. Salomies, O. 2012. “Rélexions sur le développement de l’onomastique de l’aristocratie romaine du Bas­Empire.” In Les stratégies familiales dans l'Antiquité tardive, eds. C. Badel and C. Settipani, 1–26. Paris. Salway, R.W.B. 1994. “What’s in a name? A Survey of Roman Onomastic Practice from c. 700 BC to AD 700.” JRS 84: 124–145. Salway, R.W.B. 2007. “Constantine Augoustos (not Sebastos).” In Drinkwater and Salway 2007: 37–50. Salway, R.W.B. 2008. “Roman Consuls, Imperial Politics, and Egyptian Papyri: he Consulates of 325 and 344 CE.” JLA 1: 278–310. Salway, R.W.B. 2010. “Mancipium rusticum sive urbanum: he Slave Chapter of Diocletian’s Edict on Maximum Prices.” In By the Sweat of Your Brow: Roman Slavery in its Socio-Economic Setting, ed. u. Roth, 1–20. BICS Suppl. 109. London. Sandys, J.E. 1927. Latin Epigraphy: An Introduction to the Study of Latin Inscriptions. 2nd ed. Cambridge. Schmidt, M.G. 2004. Einführung in die lateinische Epigraphik. Darmstadt. Schmidt, M.G. 2008. “Walking in Mustis. Monumentale Versinschriten einer afrikanischen Stadt im urbanen Kontext.” In Literatura epigráica: Estudios dedicados a Gabriel Sanders, eds. X. Gómez Font, C. Fernández Martínez, and J. Gómez Pallarès, 309–321. Zaragoza. Shaw, B.D. 1984. “Latin Funerary Epigraphy and Family Life in the Later Roman Empire.” Historia 33: 457–497. Shaw, B.D. 2013. Bringing in the Sheaves: Economy and Metaphor in the Roman World. Toronto, Bufalo, and London. Sironen, E., ed. 1997. he Late Roman and Early Byzantine Inscriptions of Athens and Attica: An Edition with Appendices on Scripts, Sepulchral Formulae and Occupations. Helsinki. Slootjes, D. 2006. he Governor and His Subjects in the Later Roman Empire. Leiden. Solin, H. 2005. “Problèmes de l’onomastique du Bas­Empire.” In Le monde romain à travers l’épigraphie: méthodes et pratiques, eds. J. Desmulliez and C. Hoët­Van Cauwenberghe, 271–293. Lille. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 392 9/2/2014 9:08:05 PM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, Mon Aug 11 2014, NEWGEN LATE AnTIQuITY 393 Stauner, K. 2007. “Wandel und Kontinuität römischer Administrationspraxis im Spiegel des ordo salutationis commodorumque des Statthalters von numidien.” Tyche 22: 151–188. Steinby, E.M. 1986. “L’industria laterizia di Roma nel tardo impero.” In Società romana e impero tardoantico. 2. Roma: politica, economia, paesaggio urbano, ed. A. Giardina, 99– 164. Bari. Susini, G.C. 1982. Epigraia romana. Rome. Tomlin, R.S.O. 2010. “he Inscriptions.” In he Hoxne Late Roman Treasure: Gold Jewellery and Silver Plate, ed. C. Johns, 165–173. London. Trout, D.E. 2001. “he Verse Epitaph(s) of Petronius Probus: Competitive Commemoration in Late­Fourth­Century Rome.” New England Classical Journal 28.3: 157–176. Wessel, H. 2003. Das Recht der Tablettes Albertini. Freiburger Rechtsgeschichtliche Abhandlungen, n. F. 40. Berlin. Wiemer, H.­u. 2004. “Akklamationen im spätrömischen Reich.” Archiv für Kulturgeschichte 86: 27–73. Wilkinson, K.W. 2012. “Aurelius Gaius (AE 1981.777) and Imperial Journeys, 293–299.” ZPE 183: 53–58. Witschel, C. 2010. “he Epigraphic Habit in Late Antiquity: An Electronic Archive of Late Roman Inscriptions Ready for Open Access.” In Latin on Stone: Epigraphic Research and Electronic Archives, ed. F. Feraudi­Gruénais, 77–97. Lanham, MD. Zacos, G., and A. Veglery. 1972. Byzantine Lead Seals, 3 vols. Basel. oxfordhb­9780195336467­09­part­3.indd 393 9/2/2014 9:08:05 PM