Benefiel - Praetorian Laterculus

A New Praetorian Laterculus from Rome
Author(s): Rebecca R. J. Benefiel

Source: Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik, Bd. 134 (2001), pp. 221-232
Published by: Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn (Germany)
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20190814
Accessed: 16-08-2015 17:34 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn (Germany) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Zeitschrift
für Papyrologie und Epigraphik.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 194.214.29.29 on Sun, 16 Aug 2015 17:34:36 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
221
A New Praetorian Laterculus from Rome*
The majority of the epigraphical discoveries of praetorian laterculi took place in the 1870s in
excavations near and around Camp. The large quantity of information
the Praetorian retrieved from
these operations informed what remain the standard works on the Praetorian Guard, M. Durry's Les
cohortes pr?toriennes (1938) and A. Passerini's Le coortipretorie (1939). Over the past century, chance
discoveries have brought to light only a few additional fragments1.1 have the good fortune to contribute
to this corpus, presenting in this article the most recently discovered praetorian laterculus, a substantial
sixteen-line fragment.
The attempt to place this inscription within its typological context also encouraged close
examination of this class of documents. The most significant change to the praetorian guard came with
the army reforms of Septimius Severus, which altered the composition of the guard, creating a
permanent break with its tradition. The result is reflected clearly in the documentation and it is simple to
classify laterculi as dedicated before or after 193 AD. However, I have found that if one studies these
documents more closely, it becomes evident that in fact three phases among the laterculi of the
praetorian guard are discernible.

I therefore begin with a discussion of the class o? laterculi and cite the criteria for the delineation of
the three phases, providing a table that lists and classifies all known praetorian laterculi. Next comes the
introduction of the new laterculus fragment, with comments on specific characteristics that classify it as
belonging to the third phase. Lastly, with the aid of supplemental information from other inscriptions,
the dating of this laterculus is restricted to the end of the first quarter of the third century.
I. Classification of praetorian laterculi
The class of inscriptions to which this new

fragment belongs is called laterculi militum, i.e. lists of
soldiers. Soldiers would often make a collective dedication to the emperor upon the occasion of their
honorable discharge (missio honesta) from military service. Large inscriptions would record this
practice, bearing a dedication followed by the list of dedicating soldiers2. The soldiers were grouped
according to their units (cohorts, listed in numerical order, are then divided into centuries).
Unfortunately, because these were particularly long epigraphs, they are almost always preserved only in
fragments and so we have general dedications preserved without the lists of dedicating soldiers as well
as lists of soldiers without dedications.
Laterculi recording discharges from the legions have been found in the provinces3. The laterculi
discovered in Rome, however, record discharges from the praetorian guard and urban cohorts. If
headings to identify the cohort are lacking, differentiation between lists of praetorian and urban cohorts
My sincere thanks go to Professor Silvio Panciera for accepting me into his seminar and for his comments on an early
draft of this work. I also received valuable help and insightful comments from Professors Werner Eck, Christopher Jones,
and my colleagues at Harvard. For the initial encouragement to study I thank Professors J. Linderski, G. Houston,
epigraphy,
andW. West. Final thanks toMark Pobjoy and to the owners of the laterculus for allowing me to document it.
1AE
1930, 57; AE 1940, 82; AE 1964, 20.
2
E.g. CIL III 6580, which begins: Imp(erator?) Caesari /L{ucio) Septimio Severo Pertinaci /Augusto) Pont?fice)
Max(imo) Trib(unicid) Pot(estate) II /Imp{eratori) III Co{n)s(uli) II Proco(n)s{uli) P(atri) P(atriae) / Veterani leg(ionis) II
Tr(aianae)fort(is) missi / honesta missione qui militare / coeperunt Aproniano et Paulo / [co(n)s(ulibus). . .].
3
E.g. CIL III 6178-9, 6580, 14507; VIII18065, 18068, 18084; AE 1955, 238.
222 R. Bene?el
can be difficult. The of troops, as the military

two bodies force within the city, were numbered
shared the same camp until AD 270, and even made dedications together5.
sequentially4,
To my mind, three general phases can be discerned within this type of documentation of the
praetorian guard. The first covers the period up to AD 193. During this phase, every two years there
occurred a general discharge of praetorian soldiers who had completed their term of service. The
soldiers were listed by century, but within each century they were further subdivided according to the
year in which they had enlisted. The year was denoted by consular dating. The praetorians themselves in
this period came almost exclusively from the Italian peninsula. These were Roman citizens selected for
elite military service. As citizens, they held standard Roman tribal affiliations and they had richly
diverse Roman names.
The composition of the praetorian guard shifts following Septimius Severus' reform of 193; its
documentation reflects such changes accordingly. In response to the guard's murder of his predecessor,
Severus disbands the praetorians and replaces them with legionary soldiers. From this point on, the
legions become the standard place of recruitment for the praetorians. The morphology of the guard is
permanently altered. These former legionary soldiers are almost exclusively provincial in origin. They
no longer consistently belong to the standard Roman tribes, but more often cite a pseudo-tribe that has
been adapted from an emperor's gentilicium6. Finally, the nomenclature of these praetorians is different.
There is less variety overall because many adopt an "imperial" gentilicium. The standard
individuals
imperial gentilicia include

Iulius, Flavius, and Aelius; the gentilicium Septimius appears as well, but
only during the years of Septimius Severus' reign and those immediately following.
In the years following the reform, the documentation of the praetorian guard reflects the changes
that have taken place. Since the praetorians have been recruited from the legions, there is no longer a
central record of their dates of enlistment; therefore, each centuria is no longer subdivided by the date of
enlistment. The change in the origins and tribal affiliation creates larger problems for this system of
documentation. When the praetorians hailed mostly from the Italian peninsula, their origines consisted
of a relatively restricted number of towns that could be identified, even when abbreviated to a few
letters. However, when the membership shifts to provincials, the towns of origin are virtually
unrestricted and are likely to be less familiar to those keeping the records. This combines with the fact
that the new praetorians did not belong to the standard Roman tribes. The laterculi of the years directly
after the Severan reform illustrate that this system of documentation was undergoing an administrative
transition. To completely avoid the issue, the laterculi of this phase sometimes omit the columns for
tribal affiliation step comes when, neglecting
and for filiation. The next a strict alignment, the pseudo
tribes begin to appear inconsistently, placed directly before the origo. Finally, when the transition has
been completed, all columns of information are once again included, but it would seem that the tribal
affiliation is now intended to identify the origo.
The third phase does not reflect a change in composition of the guard but does reflect the strong
impact of Caracalla's wide-reaching grant of Roman citizenship, the constitutio Antoniniana. The
soldiers are the same, still recruited mostly from the legions, still provincial in origin, but the striking
4 was and were

The praetorian cohorts numbered I-IX (a tenth cohort added by Domitian), followed by the urban
cohorts X-XII, XIIII. Urban cohort XIII had been withdrawn from Rome, but maintained its denomination, stationed at
Lugdunum.
5 CIL VI 32519
preserves several centuries of the ninth praetorian cohort which are then followed by a heading for (and
subsequent list of) the tenth urban cohort (COH X UR[b]). CIL VI 32523b (= 37184) also preserves the end of the list of the
praetorian cohorts, after which the space at the end of the column is intentionally left blank. The column that follows then
contains the first cohort of urban troops and takes a different form, retaining the consular dating of enrollment. CIL VI 32536
preserves fragments of a dedication performed by all fourteen cohorts.

6 G. Forni coined the term for these new tribal the most of which are the Aelia,
"pseudo-tribe" affiliations, popular
Claudia, Flavia, and Ulpia. See his introduction in Le pseudo-tribu (1985) 1-2, or a fuller treatment in Pseudo-tribu romane
der?vate da sopranomi imperiali, in Studia Ghisleriana, ser. 1, vol. 11 (1955) 87-124.
A New Praetorian Laterculus from Rome 223
feature is that now well over half of them have assumed the name Marcus
assumptionAurelius. While
of imperial gentilicia had occurred
previously, is no previous or
there subsequent parallel for it
happening on so grand a scale. In the military sphere, the name Aurelius obtains and maintains huge
popularity. In this phase the administrative transition for the documentation has also been completed. It
is to this third phase that our fragment seems to belong. The phenomenon of assuming the name Marcus
Aurelius will be discussed further in section II.
The
following table lists all the known
fragments of praetorian laterculi, classified into phases
according to the characteristics discussed above. The few pieces that are too fragmentary to supply more
than one criterion have not been included7. The origins, tribe, and gentilicia pertain to the soldiers listed
in the inscription. The dates of dedication for the inscriptions of phase I are obtained from the
enrollment supplied for each century of soldiers, estimating
dates a standard sixteen- (or seventeen-)
year term of service. If the laterculus is broken and specific information cannot be ascertained, n/a is
entered; if the information was never originally listed on the stone, it is noted as "not given".
CIL/AE# origins tribe gentilicia date
VI32515 Italy not given diverse 136

VI32517 n/a original diverse 144 or
148
AE 1930, 57 Italy original diverse 152
VI32518 Italy original diverse 154
AE 1940, 82 Italy n/a diverse 164
VI32536 provinces not given mix, inc. 13 Septimii

VI32533 provinces pseudo mix (many "imperial'' 209
(given infrequently) inc. 3 Septimii)
VI32623 provinces pseudo / orig. (50/50) mix
VI32642 n/a pseudo "imperial", inc. 2
Septimii_
VI32627 provinces not given mix (30%Aurelii)
VI32626 provinces pseudo / orig. n/a
VI32523a provinces pseudo (69%) Aurelii (59%)

VI37184 provinces pseudo Aurelii (71%)
=32523b8
7 CIL VI
32529, 32561, 32563.
8 The statistics
supplied pertain only to the praetorians listed, although this fragment contains the last column of the
praetorian cohorts and continues with the beginning of the urban lists. The documentation of the urban cohorts had continued
to cite the dates of enrollment (here, 183/184), although in this case estimating a 20-year term of service for the urbaniciani
does not seem concordant with the praetorian statistics. I have found no discussion this however, in
concerning inscription;
light of CIL VI 32903 and in order to account for the characteristics of both praetorian and urban cohorts, this laterculus
deserves more consideration.
224 R. Beneflel
VI32624 provinces pseudo (70%) Aurelii (64%) III

VI32625 provinces not given Aurelii (85%) III
VI32628 provinces pseudo (1 of 14orig.) Aurelii (81%) III
VI32639a n/a pseudo Aurelii (74%) III
VI32639b n/a pseudo Aurelii (77%) III
VI32640 provinces pseudo Aurelii (67%) III
new fragment provinces pseudo (79%) Aurelii (71%) III
II. The newly discovered fragment
As seen in the last entry in the table above, this new fragment, listing praetorians from the provinces and
including a preponderance of pseudo-tribes and Marci Aurelii, contains the criteria to place it in what I
have termed the third phase. The following section introduces the fragment and includes a short
discussion of its primary features.
\.* je?t '-V*'* V- "'. r r* ?J>

r -j
mm?
A. Discovery of the Inscribed Stone

The fragment was found less than a decade ago, during the restructuring work of a villa in the zone of
Monte Sacro. The owners of the villa discovered it during renovations to the original chicken coop
ipollaio) of the property. The stone, a hefty marble slab and solid building material, had been turned
over and reused so that the inscription was not visible. This the legibility of the text to a great
preserved
extent. Once the slab had been unearthed and the
inscription was discovered, the area was investigated
further, but no other inscriptions or fragments belonging to this inscription were found.
The zone of Monte Sacro is toward the outskirts of modern Rome, to the northeast. The villa for
which this marble slab was reemployed belonged complexto a residential that was constructed as one of
Mussolini's building projects during a the early 1930s,
housing project for officers and workers of the
Italian railway system. The complex originally lay outside the city of Rome and was surrounded by
countryside. The whereabouts of the stone prior to the 1930s are unknown, and there is no record of it in
earlier publications.
B. Description and Text

The inscription is incised deeply on amarble slab (54 cm long x 8 cm deep), the top of which is broken
unevenly (37 cm high at the left edge, 40 cm at the right). Both right and left sides remain intact,
preserving the full width of the inscription. The bottom edge is rough, but may have been the original
end of the stone, in consideration of the letter forms. Discoloration of the left edge of the stone renders
photography ratherdifficult, but the letters are still legible to the naked eye. A hole in themiddle of the
stone, between 10 and 11, occupies
lines the space of 2-3 letters.
Fifteen complete rows of the inscription are preserved, with the second half of the first row
preserved at the top. Traces of guidelines, set up both horizontally and vertically for alignment purposes,
are still visible9. The space between guidelines varies slightly, from 2.05 to 2.15 cm. The lettering is
well preserved and of standard form (letter heights averaging 1.75 cm), until the bottom of the stone.
There a new section begins, set off by extra space above the heading (the centurion's name) which also
has larger letters (2.3-2.4 cm high). Two rows follow, the second of which is incised more deeply and
which has larger letter forms itself (2.2 cm on average; the E of Vindex is 2.6 cm high). This is likely to
have been the end of the stone with the last entry meant to occupy the remaining space.
The inscription itself bears a list of names, all giving the following information: praenomen, nomen,
filiation, tribal affiliation, cognomen, and city of origin. Each element, except the cognomen, is abbre
viated. The abbreviated
forms keep these entries of approximately equal length so the data is justified,
i.e. aligned at left and right. Since the cognomina vary in length, however, in order to justify the entry,
the final "s" of the name is placed at the right of the column. In the case of shorter names, then (e.g.
Felixs), space is left between the final letter and the rest of the name. Additional information is supplied
in rows four and eight, where an abbreviation for a military office appears before the column for the
praenomen10. The stylized type of "7" that appears at the beginning of line 14 and begins a new section
denotes a new century of soldiers and precedes the name of the centurion, Pomponi Verini, given in the
genitive.
[... Ulp(ia) Ca]ndidus Anch(ialo)

M(arcus) Aurel(ius)M(arci)f(ilius) Ulp{ia) Solanus Nicop{pli)
M(arcus) Aurel(ius)M(arci)?flius) Ulp(ia) Potitus Nicop(oli)
C M(arcus) AureKJus)M{arc?)?jlius) Ulp(ia) Veranus Nicop(oli)
M{arcus) Aurel(ius)M(arci)flflius) Ulp{ia) Appianus Tars(o)5
C{aius) Aurel(ius) C(aii) f(ilius) Caes{area) Gaius Germ(anicia)
M(arcus) AureKfus)M{arc?)?jlius) Vitalis Duros(toro)
BF C(aius) Iulius M(arci)fiflius) Ulp(ia) Valentin(us) Zarmz{egethusa)n
C{aius) Valerius) C(aii) f(ilius) Ulp(ia) Ianuarius Zarmz(egethusa)
9 These are most seen

clearly under the lettering of the sixth row, in particular at CAES GAIVS.
10Line 4:
c(prniculariusl) M. Aurel(ius) Veranus; line 8: b(ene)f(iciarius) C. lulius Valentinus.
11The name is
variously spelled both in Latin and inGreek. See col. 599-600 of RE S XIV (1974), s.v. Sarmizegethusa,
599-655 (C. Daicoviciu). In praetorian laterculi, the city is elsewhere abbreviated as SERMIZ, ZERMZ, or ZERMIZ. This is
the first citation with an 'a' in the initial syllable.
226 R. Benefiel
M(arcus) Aurelius) M(arc?) fiilius) Qui(rina) Venetus Scupii)12 10

Liucius) Arrius L(uci) fiflius) Arn{ens?) F[el\ix s13 Carth{agine)
Miar eus) Aureliius) M(arci) fiilius) Ulp{i?) Patavinus Serd(ica)
M{arcus) Aureliius)Miarci) fiilius) Ulp{ia) Paternus Nicop{oli)
1 (centuria) Pomponi Verini
M(arcus) Aureliius) Miarci) fiilius) Ulpiid) Martius Poetoiyion?) 15

C(aius) Iulius C(aii) fiilius) Quir(ina) Vindex Scupii)
C. Characteristics of the inscription

Much of the information supplied in the text of this inscription is characteristic of the third-century
praetorian laterculi. First, the praetorians cite origins from the provinces along the Danube. Twelve of
the fifteen soldiers in this inscription come from the border provinces of Pannonia, Dacia, Moesia, and
Thracia14; only the three soldiers from Tarsus, Caesarea Germanicia, and Carthage represent the rest of
the Empire. These demographics concur with the statistics Passerini compiled for the praetorian guard
of the third century; the majority of soldiers were supplied by the provinces of Pannonia, Moesia, and
Thrace15. Also characteristic of praetorian documentation in the third century is the striking preponder
ance of both the name M. Aurelius and the pseudo-tribe "Ulpia".
1.Assumption of the name Marcus Aurelius

Nine of the fourteen soldiers for whom we have praenomen and gentilicium are named Marcus
Aurelius; one other is Gaius Aurelius. Additionally, the gentilicium is abbreviated to Aureliius). The
gentilicium was generally not abbreviated, unless especially common or in the cases of gentilicia
assumed from imperial nomenclature. Such is the case here where many soldiers have assumed the
name of Marcus Aurelius as a result of the constitutio Antoniniana. These constitute a clear majority of
the soldiers (more than two-thirds
listed in this of those
fragment).
The assumption of the gentilicium Aurelius continues the trend of assuming imperial nomenclature
that had begun under earlier emperors. This habit was especially popular with soldiers who owed their
allegiance to the emperor and, in the case of auxiliary troops, who received Roman citizenship as a
result of their service. The altars dedicated in Rome to a multitude of gods by the honorably discharged
?quit?s singulares Augusti illustrate this phenomenon well16. Dedications dating from AD 132 until 137
of soldiers who had enrolled under Trajan and were discharged by Hadrian include a very high
percentage o?Marci Ulpii11. This then shifts dramatically with the inscriptions dating from AD 139 to
12 town is listed most as Scupi, there are also rare occurrences

Within praetorian laterculi, this often but of Scupis {CIL
VI 32533, 32624) and Scupo (VI 32536).
13A
space is left empty on the stone so that the final "s" is in alignment with the final letter of the other cognomina in
the column. Owing either to pronunciation or to the pattern of alignment of these lists, "Felixs" is not uncommon within the
epigraphic corpus. This spelling occurs in slave or libertine contexts (C/L VI 4605, 8522, 19320, 28928, 24951, and as an
adjective inCIL VI 23137) and inmilitary listswhere it is interchangedwith the standard spelling, "Felix" (cf. CIL VI 32536
and VI 1058, with 64 appearances of "Felixs" to 16 of "Felix"). In addition, the soldier so named comes from Carthage and
Felix "seems to be the most popular cognomen among the soldiers from Africa": L. R. Dean, The Cognomina of Soldiers in
theRoman Legions (diss. Princeton 1916) 25.
14Anchialus
(Thrace), Nicopolis (Moesia Inferior), Durostorum (Moesia Inferior), Zarmizegethusa (Dacia), Scupi
(Moesia Superior), Serdica (Thrace), and Poetovio (Pannonia).
15A.
Passerini, Le coortipretorie (Rome 1939) 175-77.
16CIL VI 31138-31154. These were the
cavalry arm of the praetorian guard, soldiers who had been recruited from the
auxiliary alae.
17 In CIL VI
31140, 38 of the 48 soldiers (79%) are named Marcus Ulpius; 31141, 30 of 41 (73%); 31142, 21 of 25
(84%); 31143, 13 of 18 (72%); 31144, 12 of 18 (67%); 31145, 25 of 40 (62.5%).
145, in which soldiers who had enrolled under Hadrian and were then discharged by Antoninus Pius,
almost all give their names as Piublius) Aeliusx%.
Although Caracalla's edict affected the greater population of the Roman world, it is again within the
military that concrete effects are seen most clearly and immediately. In this context, there is a more
thorough and consistent assumption of the name Marcus Aurelius from the nomenclature of the
emperor, owing both to a factor of

loyalty and to the consistent record-keeping of the military. The
military rosters of the cohors XX Palmyrenorum, from the papyri of Dura Europos, may be the clearest
illustration of the results of Caracalla's edict19. These rosters are lists of all the soldiers in the cohort,
ordered according to their dates of enlistment. Of those who enlisted before Caracalla's edict was
passed, an occasional Aurelius is listed. The year 214 shows a decided break, however, with a clear
majority of soldiers
enlisting in that year named Aurelius. The subsequent years see the percentage of
Aurelii recruits climb even further. PDura 98, with recruits who enlisted between 193 and 217, and
PDura 101, with personnel who enlisted between 195 and 222, illustrate clearly the shift that occurs
beginning in 214, when an overwhelming number of soldiers assume the name Marcus Aurelius20.
Dedications set up by specific groups of soldiers show that this phenomenon continued in strength and
longevity. Soldiers originally of Pannonia or Moesia making group dedications show not only a
majority but a virtual exclusivity of soldiers named (Marcus) Aurelius21. The praetorian laterculi are
one more medium that documents the results of this edict. Once the full effects of the edict are felt,
consistently more than two-thirds of the soldiers bear the name Aurelius.
2. Shift inTribal Affiliation

The tribes represented on this fragment are also in keeping with other praetorian laterculi of the
-
third century many imperial pseudo-tribes22 and few, if any, original Roman tribes. The only original
Roman tribes represented are the Quirina, cited by both soldiers from Scupi (a town that had been
assigned a colony of veterans under the Flavians and enrolled into that tribe23), and the Arnensis, the
tribe to which Carthage and several communities of Africa The and Mauretania had been ascribed24.
blank left in the position of tribal affiliation for the soldier from Durostorum is extremely rare. Only one
other known laterculus preserves such blank spaces in the column for tribes (two in CIL VI 32523a, one
in 32523b)25; all three soldiers have assumed the name Marcus Aurelius. Thus, it seems likely that these
18 InCIL VI
31147, 28 of the 39 soldiers (72%) are named Publius Aelius; 31149, 25 of 35 (71%); 31150, 31 of 40
(77.5%); 31151, 23 of 30 (75.9%); 31152, 15 of 20 (75%).
It is notable to see that among the soldiers who do not assume the name of the majority, most do assume other imperial
gentilicia (e.g. Iulius, Flavius, Claudius).
19 For a full see
discussion of these rosters, J. F. Gilliam, Dura Rosters and the Constitutio Antoniniana, Historia 14
(1965) 74-92. The complete texts of the papyri are given in R. O. Fink, Roman Military Records on Papyrus (Cleveland
1971) 52-81 {PDura 101), and 90-95 {PDura 98).
20
Compare soldiers who enlisted before 214 (8 Aurelii to 101 others) and those who enlisted after (55 Aurelii to 20
others) inPDura 98. For the pedites listed inPDura 101, the number of Aurelii remains in the single digits for each year
from AD 193 until 212, then jumps significantly to 55 (inAD 214), 25 (215), and 83 (216).
21 See CIL VI 32542
(dedication made inAD 223 toAlexander Severus), 32543 (AD 227), and 32544 where all the
soldiers listed, from Pannonia and northern Thrace, are named Aur{elius) or Aurel{ius). So are the majority of the dedicants
fromMoesia Inferior inCIL VI 32549.
22 The new tribes, assumed from the gentilicia of certain emperors, which came into being during the Empire. See
above, n. 6.
23 See CIL
III, p. 1460.Deductio is attested by CIL III 8199, 8200. See also E. Birley, The Flavian Colonia at Scupi,
ZPE 64 (1986) 209-16.
24 RE
II, s.v. Arnensis, 1204 (Kubitschek); widely attested epigraphically (e.g. CIL VIII 1035, 2565 blO, 2618 b35,
3358, 3925, 14362, 14364, 18461, 18595, 24640, 24641, and 24818).
25 CIL VI 32523a does not
preserve the column of cities. CIL VI 32523b gives "HAB" for the corresponding origo,
which should be understood as Ha[d](rianopolis). So, G. Forni, Le tribu romane III, 1: Lepseudo-trib? (Rome 1985) 137,
afterMateescu, Ephemeris Dacoromana, I (1927) 97.
228 7?.Benefiel
four soldiers, lacking tribal designations but all with the assumption of Caracalla's nomenclature, would
have received their citizenship under Caracalla's edict. The Caesarea is neither an original Roman tribe,
nor does it become an imperial pseudo-tribe. It is listed in the position of tribal affiliation only five other
times, each time in a military laterculus iCIL VI 37184, 32624, and 32642) and each time in conjunc
tion with a variation of Germanicia as the city of origin; the city of origin in these cases has thus been
taken to be the city of Caesarea Germanicia, located in Syria Commagene26.
The Ulpia, perhaps the best attested imperial pseudo-tribe, is the tribe cited most frequently in this
inscription. Soldiers from five different cities, who account for nine of the thirteen tribal citations, claim
affiliation with the Ulpia tribe27. The primary reason for this is the geographical area in consideration
here. Trajan had left his mark especially in the area of the Danubian provinces28. Tarsus is the one city
where it is most to accept Ulpia as an epithet. Perhaps
difficult the praetorian on this laterculus was
influenced by the popularity of Ulpia among the soldiers around him; possibilities reconciling Tarsus
and Ulpia remain conjectures29.
Last to be considered is the correlation between the non-Aurelian praetorians and their cities of
origin. The four soldiers in question all hail from cities which had the status of colonia and a high
percentage of Romans in their population: Carthage, given Roman colony status under Augustus; Scupi,
colonized with Roman settlers under the Flavians; and Sarmizegethusa, settled and supplied with a large
contingent of Roman colonists by Trajan. In addition, the soldiers from Carthage and Scupi cite the only
original Roman tribes. In view of background and origin then, one may assume these four soldiers
already had Roman citizenship and did not benefit from the constitutio Antoniniana.
3. The Soldiers
Several of the soldiers have names that carry a "soldierly" connotation, as was popular among
Roman troops. In this inscription,Vitalis (line 7), Valentinus (8), Felix (11)30,Martius (15), andVindex
(16) are all attested.
Less frequent is the citation of Gaius, arguably the most common Roman
praenomen, as a cognomen. In fact, it is so uncommon that the editors of the CIL vocabula have placed
question marks before entries where Gaius appears as cognomen31. Our soldier, C. Aurel(ius) Gaius (6),
is even more remarkable for citing this name as both praenomen and cognomen32.
26 See Passerini
(1939) 179, and E. de Ruggiero, Dizionario Epigr?fico di Antichit? Romane, vol. III, s. v. Germanicia,
522.
27 In for tribal
addition, it is probable that the soldier from Anchialus (line 1) also would have cited the Ulp(ia)
affiliation. In other laterculi, whenever a tribe is extant, it is the Ulpia tribe associated with Anchialus. Ulpia
praetorian
Anchialus is elsewhere attested epigraphically (IGR 1.771) and numismatically; cf. B.V. Head, Historia Numorum (Oxford
1911)277.
2%A inMoesia was honored of the colonized settlements
patron of the Ulpian colony of Oescus, Inferior, by several of
the area, ". . . ab Poetovionensis ex Pannonia Ratiar{iae) ex
including: ordinib{us) coloniar{um) Ulpiae Superiore, Ulp{iae)
Moesia Traianae ex Dada Superiore ..." {CIL III 753).
Superiore, Sarmizegethusensium
29 Tarsus it is broken and does not
appears only on one other laterculus {CIL VI 32623, line 33). Unfortunately,
preserve the column for tribal affiliation.
30 In this "Felixs". For see n. 13.
inscription, spelling,
31 The seven times in Rome. Gaius as a cognomen more but
cognomen Martius appears appears frequently (18 times),
seems concentrated in a certain time period and for the most part in a military context. The earliest appearance of Gaius in
the position of cognomen is datable to AD 133, a M. Gaius, an auxiliary who served in Rome among the ?quit?s
Ulp(ius)
singulares {CILVI 31141). Ofthose remaining, there is one which is impossible to date {CILVI 10768), but all the others
to the third attested lack oi praenomen instances), presence of Aurelius as gentilicium (ten), and
belong century, by (six
dating given by the inscription (four). At least thirteen of the individuals are soldiers. Due to the time period and military
itmay be that the cognomen was to whom the name sounded "Roman", even if the
context, supposed adopted by provincials
use was not correct.
32 This
phenomenon is attested only one other time by a C. Iul(ius) Caius, in amilitary laterculus of approximately the
same time {CILVI 32624, c28).
Besides the centurion, Pomponius Verinus, there are two individuals within the ranks of the
praetorians in this fragment who have specifically designated billets. These abbreviations, as is standard,
are placed in the margin of the inscription, before the column for praenomen. The "BF" (8) is a standard
abbreviation for the position of beneficiarius, a soldier who would serve as an assistant to an upper-level
officer. The rank of a beneficiarius depended on the rank of the officer he was serving33. This
information is sometimes given in the abbreviation (e.g. BF TR, beneficiarius tribuni), but here the post
is not further specified.
The abbreviation "C" (4) is somewhat less clear. In no other military laterculus is a post abbreviated
to this single letter. In other laterculi, there do exist the abbreviations of corinicularius), fisici)
curiator), and c(ustos) airmorum). Of these, the first is certainly the most preferred but is not certain.
The cornicularius also belonged to the group of sub-officers, a position elevated above the standard
praetorians. This rank was found in both the civil service and the military34.
III. Establishing a Date
Paleography is useful for supplying a broad chronological context for a text, but will hardly ever yield
an exact answer35. The paleography of this inscription has some distinctive traits that place itwithin the
third century. The most notable of these are: the especially long upper horizontal bar of the letter 'F'
that slants up at the right (particularly marked in the column for filiation); the conversely short
horizontal bar of the 'T'makes confusion with the letterT easy (see line 5, TARS); and the circle of
the 'P' that does not connect with the vertical stroke but remains open at the bottom. Serifs are found on
all the letters.
Attempting to place this fragment within its proper class of inscriptions may narrow the
chronological context somewhat. There is a definite group of inscriptions to which this belongs (CIL VI
32523a, 32624, 32628, 32639, 32640). These are all characterized by the same strictly aligned columnar
format, giving the same
information; by strictly provincial origins, most often from the Danubian
provinces; by an overwhelming majority of soldiers named M. Aurel(ius); and by the citation of
imperial "pseudo-tribes" for tribal affiliation. A terminus post quern is supplied by the appearance of the
effects of the constitutio Antoniniana. A general terminus ante quern may be proposed as well since this
-
fragment and the group of similar laterculi all still preserve both abbreviations of the praenomina
mention of which disappears -
completely during the third century and standardized citations of tribal
affiliation, which become extremely rare in the mid-third century and disappear under
completely
Aurelian36. Among other datable praetorian dedications, praenomina are still cited in inscriptions of AD
223 and 227 (CILVI 32542 and 32543, respectively) but soon disappear37. In addition to the absence of
praenomina and the omission of tribe, the habit of prefacing mention of the origo with "D^rno)"38 is
another attribute of later inscriptions which our inscription lacks. Considering these criteria, itmay be
supposed that our fragment belongs to a group of laterculi which were produced between AD 212 and
the middle of the third century.
33 For a complete treatment see

of this post, J. Ott, Die Beneficiarier. zu ihrer Stellung innerhalb der
Untersuchungen
Rangordnung des R?mischen Heeres und zu ihrerFunktion (Stuttgart 1995). I thank Prof. W. Eck for alerting me to this
reference.
34 For on the
further information position, see De Diz. vol. II, s.v. cornicularius, 1216-24.
Ruggiero, Ep.,
35 J. and A. E.
Gordon, Contributions to thePaleography of Latin Inscriptions (University of California Publications in
Classical Archaeology 3) (Berkeley 1957) 217. See also theirAlbum ofDated Latin Inscriptions (Berkeley 1958-65), in four
volumes with plates.
36G.
Forni, II ruolo della menzione della tribunell'onom?stica Romana, in:L'onomastique latine (Paris 1977) 99.
37 One list from the
reign of Alexander Severus {CILVI 32544) already omits praenomina. Other examples include:
CIL VI 32549, 32564, and 32625.
38 CIL VI 32625 is a
good example of such a later inscription. See also CIL VI 32561 and 32563.
230 R. Benefiel
The best way to restrict the date further is to examine other inscriptions in the hope of identifying an
individual of this fragment who is mentioned within a better known context. The advantage this
fragment offers is the large number of individuals cited; the balancing disadvantage is that so many
soldiers have the most common gentilicium of this period, Aurelius. The name one would hope most to
find elsewhere is that of the centurion, Pomponius Verinus. As an officer, he would have the possibility
of appearing in additional contexts and, with a less common name, he should be more easily
identifiable.Although no other epigraphic attestation thus far mentions this gentilicium and cognomen
together, there is rare mention of a praetorian centurion named Verinus elsewhere. Therefore, in the
absence of a single inscription with the authority to confirm the chronological context of our fragment, I
offer the following composite examination of other epigraphic texts that have the possibility of
mentioning individuals listed on this laterculus and that together agree as to a general time period to
which this inscription should belong.
The first of these inscriptions is an epitaph from a funerary monument in the archaeological museum
of Fiesole39. The deceased is a praetorian soldier who fought under a centurion named Verinus. The
inscription reads:
Diis) Mianibus)
[?]teius Vitalis, milies) cohiortis) VII
priaetoriae), 7icenturia) Veriniprioris40, vixiit) aninis) XL
III, mUiitavit) aninis) XIII, nat(ione) Suebus Ne
cresis, lectus a legioneprima Minerve (!)Menosonia
Cara coiux et Vincentius fiili
us h(e)r(e)d(es) b(ene)m(erenti)f(aciundum) c{u)riaveruni).
Only this monument and one other inscription attest to a centurion named Verinus. It would be
agreeable, therefore, to identify this individual with the centurion Pomponius Verinus of our fragment.
Since the inscription itself does not furnish information that can be securely dated, an attempt to date the
monument has been made on the basis
of the style of the sculptural relief of the deceased soldier which
stands above the epitaph. The features of the portrait of the deceased, especially the furrowed brow,
strongly recall the portraiture of Caracalla, suggesting that the monument was produced during or soon
after that emperor's reign (198-217)41.
Additional supporting evidence may be offered by two separate dedications by the entire fifth cohort
of the vigiles, inAD 205 and 210, respectively iCIL VI 1057, 1058)42.Among those listed are a C.
Iul{ius) Valentin{us), and aM. Aurelius Vitalis43. As there existed the possibility for transfer to the
39 AE
1990, 752, discussed by: M. P. Speidel and B. Scardigli, Neckarschwaben (Suebi Nicrenses), Arch?ologisches
Korrespondenzblatt 20 (1990) 201-07; P. Le Roux, L'Arm?e Romaine sous les S?v?res, ZPE 94 (1992) 261-63; G.
Ciampoltrini, Ancora sul 'pretoriano' del Museo Archeologico di Firenze, Prospettiva 71 (1993) 38-41.
40 It is that this title of prior refers to the centurion's in the ranks, those called
proposed position prior commanding the
right wing of the maniple, and those called posterior commanding the left wing (cf. De Ruggiero, Diz. Ep., s.v. centurio, esp.
193-94). Other citations of officers denoted prior andposterior are found in papyri documentation (cf. R. O. Fink, Roman
Military Records on Papyrus, 1971, 549).
41
Speidel and Scardigli, 202. Le Roux sees Severan influences and agrees with a date under Caracalla (page 261).
Ciampoltrini aims for the second half of the third century and points out the fact that this legion's activity in the early 250s
could have provided an opportunity for a display of valor which would have earned promotion to the praetorian guard. Le
Roux makes the point, however, that the role of the legio IMinerva during the civil war between Severus and Albinus could
have offered a similar to shine.
opportunity
42 These were not the usual dedications made from service because the unparalleled number of
upon discharge
dedicants (ca. 140 soldiers in each of the seven centuries) shows that the entire cohort made the dedication, perhaps to
display their loyalty to the emperor.

43 C.
Iul{ius) Valentinas) {CILVI 1057L4, 65) and C. Iulius Valentinus {CILVI 1058V7, 14);M. Aurelius Vitalis {CIL
VI 1057R3, 58).
praetorian guard from the legions, so too could a soldier to the guard from one of the other
transfer
military branches stationed in Rome44. M. Aurelius Vitalis is present in the first dedication, but absent
from the second; thus, if he had been transferred, it would have happened between 205 and 210. C.
Iul(ius) Valentin(us) is present in both and, if he is to be identified as the individual of our inscription,
he would have a promotion
received from the vigiles after AD 210. Valentinus had in fact already
received a promotion between 205 and 210 for, in the first dedication, he appears as an ordinary soldier
of standard grade, but in AD 210, he has already attained the status of immunis and is grouped with the
lower-grade officers at the head of the list of the century, holding the billet of buciinator)45. If he had
continued to distinguish himself, a further promotion would certainly have been possible. Presumably
after such a promotion these soldiers still would have had to serve a few years or more before
completing their required service and becoming eligible for an honorable discharge. The date supplied
by these dedications puts the soldiers' termination of service between 210 and 225 (estimating an
average twenty-year term of service, with enrollment before 205). This then would date our fragment to
the same time period, within the second or third decade of the third century.
Another inscription which seems to fit with this dating scenario is the epitaph of a praetorian whose
tomb was erected by his heir, a praetorian centurion named Aurelius Veranus (CIL VI 2695):
Diis) Mianibus) Siacrum) /M(arco) Aurelio) Ianuario / equiti cohiortis) VIIIIpriaetoriae)

/ 7 icenturia) Faventini / qui vixiiif) anniis) XX / militiavit) ann(is) III miensibus) XL /
Aur(elius) Veranus 7 (centurio) / coh(ortis) II pr(aetorianae) secun/dus her es
b(ene)mierent?) / posuit.
Veranus is a relatively rare cognomen46 and itmay be noted that the Veranus of our inscription already
holds an elevated position within the ranks (cornicularius, line 4). He may have been recalled to service
or may have re-enrolled if he had the chance to serve as an officer. If he was already holding a special
billet at the completion of his term of service, he would have had a better chance to gain access to a
higher grade. The epitaph can be dated through the figure of Faventinus, the other centurion mentioned
in the inscription. He appears on only one other inscription, in the position of centurion of the vigiles
(CIL VI 3001); that inscription has a secure date of AD 225. Faventinus would then require a promotion
to the praetorian guard, thus supplying CIL VI 2695 with the terminus post quern of 225. Veranus may
have been a centurion already before Faventinus received his promotion; however we may best assume
thathe held the rank of centurion in the 230s47.
Certainly the strongest
possible connection, however, is supplied by another fragment of a
praetorian laterculus whichincludes a centurion listed as 7 Verini (CIL VI 32627). Although centurions
on that laterculus are listed by one name only, this is the most likely identification for our centurion
Pomponius Verinus. Besides the fact that this laterculus lacks the columns for the entries of filiation and
tribal affiliation, it is quite similar to our fragment. Aurelius is the most common gentilicium among the
soldiers, but the fact that fewer than one-third of the soldiers listed have assumed it (9 of 30) may point
44 a vigilis a praetorian a legionary

Cf. CIL VI 2780, who became and eventually centurion.
45 This was a trumpeter who played the bucina. In the cohorts of the vigiles, only bucinatores existed, whereas in the
legions there were cornicines and tubicines as well.

46 It
appears only a handful of times in inscriptions, most often in the Danubian provinces (four attestations inRome,
three elsewhere in Italy, and twelve in the provinces).
470ne other inscription, another praetorian epitaph, makes the only other mention of a praetorian centurion named
Veranus (CILX 1754). Characteristics which mark this inscription as later include lack oi praenomina and the fact that all
six individuals mentioned have the gentilicium abbreviated to "AUR". These characteristics, however, are due not only to the
chronological context but also to the social status of the dedicants. It reads: D(is) M(anibus) /Aurelius Abitus mil{es)
coh{ortis) Xpr(aetoriae) / 7 (centuria) Verani vix(it) an(nis) XL mil(itavit) / an(nis) XIIII nat(ione) Bessus na/tus reg(ione)
Serdica vi/co Magari. Aur(elius) Ma/ximus et Aur(elius) Zobin/us et Aur(elia) Zantiala / et Aur(elius) Gaianus / hered(es)
b(ene)m(erenti) f(aciundum) c(u)r(averunt).
232 R. Benefiel
to the fact that the full effects of the constitutio Antoniniana have not yet been reached. Our fragment
would have been produced later, with a higher percentage of M. Aurelii and with the gentilicium
abbreviated to Aurel(ius), instead of written out in full.
The great service of this laterculus (VI 32627) is that in addition to providing a somewhat firmer
chronological context for the centurion Verinus, two other centurions are also listed who can both add
further support for the dating of our fragment. The first centurion, 7Marciani (VI 32627, 5), appears in
only one other epigraphic context. This is a dedication to Hercules for the health and welfare of the
imperial house, erected by several praetorians, one of whom identifies himself as cohiortis) X
priaetoriae) 7icenturia)Marciani iCILVI 323). This dedication is datable toAD 221 or 222. Likewise,
the second 7 Agricolae in one other inscription -
centurion, (VI 32627, 17), is attested another
praetorian laterculus iCIL VI32536, col. 2, line 30). CIL VI32536 has only a few praetorians who have
taken the name Aurelius, but there are many imperial gentilicia among the ranks. The most telling detail
is the listing of up to ten praetorians named L. Septimius. This onomastic did not achieve a sustained
popularity and must have been adopted during or immediately after the years of Septimius Severus's
-
reign. Such time context is consistent with the format of these laterculi iCIL VI 32536 and 32627)
both lack the standard columns for filiation and tribal affiliation, a result of the administrative transition
that affected this type of praetorian documentation in the years following the Severan reform.
Given the format of these laterculi, CIL VI 32536 would be the earliest, sometime after the reform
of AD 193, followed chronologically by CIL VI 32627 (which belongs perhaps to the early 210s). Our
inscription was dedicated later, given its higher percentage of Aurelians and its format, i. e. by this time
the administrative transition for the documentation had been completed and the columns for filiation and
tribal affiliation were once again included. Consideration of the information supplied by other
inscriptions as well as the overall context of the class of praetorian laterculi suggests that our fragment
was likely to have been dedicated within the period AD 215-225.
IV. Conclusion
The new inscription introduced here, in addition to augmenting the corpus of epigraphic evidence for
the praetorian guard, has also provided the opportunity to examine more closely the class of praetorian
laterculi. This inscription clearly illustrates both the changing role of the tribal affiliation and the effects
of the constitutio Antoniniana as displayed by the identification of the soldiers of the guard. In addition,
the attempt to place this inscription within its chronological context automatically necessitated a broader
view of surrounding circumstances, which revealed a series of transitions within this system of
documentation. Essentially standard and without variation until the time of Septimius Severus, the
format of these laterculi is thrown into a state of confusion after the reform in the composition of the
guard. Changes are evident in the categories of soldiers' names, origins, and tribal affiliations. A second
transition soon follows, when a majority of
adopt soldiers the name M. Aurelius as a result of
Caracalla's edict. Besides the comprehensive papyri lists of entire cohorts, there may be no other source
that shows these effects so clearly. This inscription is representative of these broad changes taking place
in the early third century, and provides an insight into the documentation of this elite branch of the
Roman army.
Harvard University Rebecca R. J. Benefiel

Benefiel - Praetorian Laterculus

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Benefiel - Praetorian Laterculus

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A New Praetorian Laterculus from Rome

Author(s): Rebecca R. J. Benefiel

A New Praetorian Laterculus from Rome*

praetorian guard are discernible.

I. Classification of praetorian laterculi

The class of inscriptions to which this new

can be difficult. The of troops, as the military

imperial gentilicia include

4 was and were

preserves fragments of a dedication performed by all fourteen cohorts.

CIL/AE# origins tribe gentilicia date

VI32515 Italy not given diverse 136

VI32536 provinces not given mix, inc. 13 Septimii

VI32523a provinces pseudo (69%) Aurelii (59%)

VI32624 provinces pseudo (70%) Aurelii (64%) III

II. The newly discovered fragment

\.* je?t '-V*'* V- "'. r r* ?J>

A. Discovery of the Inscribed Stone

B. Description and Text

[... Ulp(ia) Ca]ndidus Anch(ialo)

9 These are most seen

M(arcus) Aurelius) M(arc?) fiilius) Qui(rina) Venetus Scupii)12 10

1 (centuria) Pomponi Verini

M(arcus) Aureliius) Miarci) fiilius) Ulpiid) Martius Poetoiyion?) 15

C. Characteristics of the inscription

1.Assumption of the name Marcus Aurelius

12 town is listed most as Scupi, there are also rare occurrences

emperor, owing both to a factor of

2. Shift inTribal Affiliation

III. Establishing a Date

33 For a complete treatment see

display their loyalty to the emperor.

Diis) Mianibus) Siacrum) /M(arco) Aurelio) Ianuario / equiti cohiortis) VIIIIpriaetoriae)

44 a vigilis a praetorian a legionary

legions there were cornicines and tubicines as well.

Harvard University Rebecca R. J. Benefiel

You might also like

\.* je?t '-V' V- "'. r r* ?J>