Dr.

Rudolf Habelt GmbH

Nobilissimvs Caesar imperii et sacerdotis

Author(s): Slobodan Dušanić
Source: Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik, Bd. 37 (1980), pp. 117-120
Published by: Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20185833
Accessed: 20-10-2015 15:58 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 is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Zeitschrift für Papyrologie
und Epigraphik.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 131.91.169.193 on Tue, 20 Oct 2015 15:58:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 117

NOBILISSIMVS CAESAR IMPERII ET SACERDOTIS

The singular title of the nobilissimusCaesar imperiiet sacerdotis, which formsthe

subject of this note, was borne by SeverusAlexander as Elagabalus' colleague inA.D. 221
222. Until recently, it was read incomplete - andwrongly restored - in two inscriptions )
and in a fragment of a praetorian diploma issued by these two rulers. 2) Thanks to the find

of another copy of the same constitutio of January7, 222, the exact wording of the
title is established beyond any doubt; the outer face of the first tablet of the bronze gives
it as

nobilissimusCaes. imperisacerdotis
to (Pi. IVb),
the inner face as

nobilissim. Caes. im[pJeriet sacerdot.4)

Indiscussing the words quoted some fifteen years ago, I translated them "(themost

1) CIL VI 2001 (Fasti sodaliumAntoninianorum [?]; July 10, 221), 1.11: nobilissimum
Caes. imperii [ --- 1. CIL VIl 585 (Chesters; October 30, 221), 1.4f.: Enobiliss.] Caesar
imper[i --- J. In both the places, the erased space after imperii was generally restored,
with Th.Mommsen (St.-R. 113 1148f. n.3), imperii consors (cf. Hdn. V 7,5) or particeps;
the earlier editors preferred a simple imperii heres (Borghesi, Hubner). The most recent
edition of the Britannic inscription (RIB1 1465), from1965, retainsMommsen's consors
and makes no mention of the Planinica diploma, published in 1962 and 1964 (infra, note 3).

2) CILXVI 140 (cf. G.Forni, Archiv. stor. Lodigiano 1959, 12ff.), tab. Iext. 1.8f.:
nobilissimus Caes. E---sace]rdotis; int. 1.2f.: no[bilissim. Caes. impeJri sacerd[ot.J.
Restored by Ch. HUlsen (Rom.Mitt. 22,1907,437f.) and others consors imperisacerdotis
(Hulsenalso proposed an emendation [sace]rdoti<q(ue)>,which has not been adopted by
the majority of scholars [cf. below, note 6)), Alexander's title in this fragment, as in the
still smaller fragment of the same date (?), CIL XVI 141 (the extant portion of the prescript
ends with Alexander's cognomen), must have been identical to that in the Planinica
privilegium: the omission of et in the scriptura interior of no.140, if the conjunction was
omitted at all (cf. Historia 13,1964,491 n.39: RI is better read ET ?), should be treated
as a simple slip (cf. CIL XVI p.213, VIl G, fourth para.).

3) S. Dulanit-P. Petrovit, Ziva Antika 12, 1962,380ff. (figs. 8-1 1) = Ann.ep. 1964,269
+ 1966, 339 =Margaret M.Roxan, RomanMilitary Diplomas 1954-1977, London1978,
no.75. Discovered at the village of Planinica near Pirot (Serbia, Yugoslavia); preserved in
the M4useum of Nil.

4) Complying with the orthography adopted in the diplomata after Trajan (cf. CIL XVI
p.212 VIA; Germania 52, 1974,410, of stipendis and the like), the engraver wrote imperi,
not imperii as done in CIL VI 2001.

This content downloaded from 131.91.169.193 on Tue, 20 Oct 2015 15:58:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 118 S.DulaniE

noble) Caesar of the State (Empire)and of Elagabalus". ) This interpretation, forwhich

no alternative has been proposed so far as Iknow, ) of the genitive imperii seemed to
me necessary for two reasons. First, the language. The two possessive genitives with the
conjunction between them, apparently differentiated through the choice of an abstract
and a common7)noun, can easily be understood as referring to complementarybut non
identical sources of Alexander's Caesarship. Second, the Caesar's legal position of the
co-giver of the constitutio. The new diploma has shown that during his joint reign with

ElagabalusAlexander lacked both the (secondaryproconsular) imperium ) and the (secondary)

tribunician power, which leaves open the question of the formal base of his participation

in the emperor's law-making; ) an extraordinary position of the "Caesar of the State" may

have been intended, as I then considered, to provide a formal justification of the Caesar's

legislative right.
However, neither of the arguments cited in favour of the translation "Caesar of the State'

5) Historia 13,1964,495ff.
6) See e.g. H.Bengtson, Grundriss der romischenGeschichte, 1,Munchen 1967, 375
n. 1;G.Walser, inANRW 112, Berlin-New York 1975,630; E.Kettenhofen, Die syrische
Augustae in der historischen Uberlieferung, Bonn 1979, 199f. n.218. The desperate
assumption (C.R.Whittaker in a note to his edition of Herodian [the Loeb series, Cambridge
Mass. 1970], vol. 11p.63f.; J.Mann apud Roxan, op.cit., p.97, notes 1 and 3) ot the
same haplographyNOBILISSIMVSCAESAR IMPERII
ETSACERDOTIS
<CONSORS> COS
in at least three places (wherever the end of the Caesar's full titulature is extant, cos.
follows the sacerdotis immediately:CIL XVI 140, tab. Iext. 1.9; Roxan, op.cit., no.75,
tab. Iext. 1.9 and int. 1.6), which produces grammatically (the zeugma) and historically
(Alexander was not expected to participate importantly in the cult of the Sol Elagabalus,
Hdn. V 7, 1) an improbable text, reflects the difficulties of interpretation presented by
Alexander's title in the diploma fromPlaninica.
7) Of course, the sacerdos represents an abbreviation of the full styling sacerdos
amplissimus dei invicti Solis Elagabali, read after Elagabalus' names in the prescript of
the same document.
8) The abbreviations Imper. Caes. opening the second paragraph in the prescript of the
diplomata of January7,222, with its list of Alexander's parentes, should be expanded
Imper(atoris) Caes(aris) and included in Elagabalus', not Alexander's, titulature (Dusanic,
Ioc.cit., 490; cf. Roxan, op.cit., no.75). The possibility of such a completion was
envisaged (though not accepted) as far back as Mommsen, ad CIL III D. L(p.892). J.Mann
and C.R.Whittaker (above, note 6) have recently insisted upon the reading Imper(ator)
Caes(ar) ... M.Aurellius Alexander, despite the fact that no authoritative document gives
Alexander the nomen Imperatoris(its absence from the obverse legends of Alexander's
Caesarean coinage in Rome seems especially instructive, Dulanic, loc.cit.).
9)Dulanie, loc.cit., 490ff.

This content downloaded from 131.91.169.193 on Tue, 20 Oct 2015 15:58:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Nobi I issimus Caesar imperii et sacerdotis 119

can stand a closer inspection. The meaning of imperium"the (Roman)State" seems virtually
impossible in a highly official text such as that of a military diploma: the term tended to

representa "Raumbegriff"only, 10) and the cases wherein it connotes the organism, not
merely the territory, of the empire, - when found in officiose contexts - duly specify
imperiumRomanum, imperiumpopuli Romani or the like. 11)On the other hand, the rank
of a "Caesar of the State" would appear legally odd to a degree unacceptable even to

Elagabalus' age; besides, it, or an equivalent of it, was not held necessary for the junior

co-rulers later thanAlexander (notablyMaximus and Philip 11),12) though their position
vis-d-vis the senior colleagues, and their formal inability to legislate, were practically
speaking the same asAlexander's.
I should propose now to see a hendiadyoin of a certain sort in the latter part of the

title discussed, and translate it whole "the most noble Caesar of the Emperor and the Priest

(the Emperor-Priest)".As to the language, the imperiimeans nothing else than an Imperatoris
modified according to thewell-known figure abstractumpro concreto. Such modifications
are abundantly attested in literary texts, and occur in documentaryones too. 13) Iquote
fromNdgelsbach's Stilistik (pp. 81f. 84f. of the ninth ed.) some examples similar to ours
in so far as two nouns, one abstract (pro concreto), other common, are linked by an et:

10) See e.g. U.von LUbtow, Das romische Volk, sein Staat und sein Recht, Frankfurt
am Main 1955, 635. Despite the usage referred to in the next note, that tendency must
have deeply influenced Roman constitutional t h e o ry, a circumstance which I somewhat
underestimated in 1964 (loc.cit., 496).
1 1) E.g. RIC Ip.216 no. 159 (A. D. 71/2): Victoria imperii Romani. Cf. O. Prinz,
ThLL VII 1, col. 579f. (s.v. imperium Ill A 1 b a).

12) CILXVI 146, 149-151 (cf. Dulanit, loc.cit., 488.494.498 with n.83). The
status of Gordian Ill before the murder of Balbinus and Pupienus will have been formally
close to that of the Caesars Alexander, Maximus and Philip 11 (Du-anie, in: Frappe et
ateliers mon6taires dans I'Antiquit6 et Moyan Age [Actes du symposium r6uni du 30
janvier au 1er f6vrier 1975 dans le Mus6e National de Belgrade], Belgrade 1976, 58 n.39),
while theCaesarship of Decius 11(cf. Chiron 6,1976, 429; note that the Caesarean dupondii
of Decius 11 from the Viminacian local mint, unlike those of Philip 11and Quintus, have
the prince's bust radiate [B. Pick, Die antiken MUnzen von Dacien und Moesien, Berlin
1898, p.49 no.143 J), and, especially, of Valerian 11, probably was of a heightened type.

13) Prinz, loc.cit., 581f. (Ill B). To the only epigraphic instance cited there (CIL Ill
14195, 26) we want to addAnn.6p. 1971,381: pro salute imp(erii) (parallels likeAnn.
6p. 1967, 563 and 573, confirm the correctness of the expansion) perpetui M.Antoni
Gordiani Aug. (the inscription's imperium perpetuum c. perpetuus Imperator/Princeps/
Augustus of later times). For coins, to remain within the Severan period, note the dynastic
legend Aeternitas lmperii, RIC IV 1, p. 11 1 no. 155 (A. D. 200-201), etc.

This content downloaded from 131.91.169.193 on Tue, 20 Oct 2015 15:58:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 120 S. Dulan it

erat plena lictorumet imperiorumprovincia (Caes. BC III32, 4), and - a hendiadyoin

analogous to that fromAlexander's Caesarean titulature - non solum spectator sed actor
et acroama (Cic. Sest. 54,1 16). 15)Constitutionally, the title "Caesarof the Emperorand
the Priest", though an innovation, implies no extravagance comparable to that of the
alleged title "Caesar of the State and of Elagabalus". With regard to Elagabalus' personal

relationshipwith the Sol of Emesa, 6) the genitives imperii (= Imperatoris)et sacerdotis

match the formuladominuset deus, widely used forDomitian, 17)met with sporadically
later 8) and renderedofficial underAurelian. ) Expressed through the possessive con
struction analyzed here, the idea that a Caesar owes his position to his Emperor and belongs

in a way to him, if abusive in the strict sense during the principate, corresponded neverthe

less to the realities of Roman dynastic relations.20) What is more, the qualification "Caesar

of the (Priest)Emperor"must have been especially appropriate to the situation at the court
in 221-222. Its implicit tendency, already pointed out, was "tomanifest the impulseof
Elagabalus given to the senate forAlexander's appointment", an impulseuponwhich
"Elagabalus insisted very strongly, as is shown by the surprising legend IndulgentiaAug.
on the reverse of Alexander's Caesarean coin".21)

Belgrade Slobodan Dulanie

14)Cf. e.g. Cic. Phil. I121,52: consulibus reliquisque imperiiset potestatibus.

15) Cf. e.g. Liv. 156,9: Brutus, ludibrium verius quam comes.

16)M. Hammond,The Antonine Monarchy, Rome 1959, 212.239f. nn.96-100 (that

scholar rightly reminds us of Elagabalus' attempt "to introduce adoratio of himself into
court ceremonial" [HA, Hel. 23,5]).
17) Epit. de Caes. 11,6: ... ac more C.Caligulae dominum sese deumque dici coegit
(Domitianus).
18) IOSPE IV71, 1.7f. (AntoninusPius !).
19) Hammond, op.cit., 235 n.75.
20) Cf. e.g. HA, Clod.Alb. 10,3: Severus ipse Caesarem su u m eundem (Albinum)
appellari voluerit. The fact that Elagabalus possessed the patria potestas over his associate
may have contributed to such a state of affairs in this case (Dulanie, Historia 13, 497
with n.80).
21) Dulanie, Historia 13, 497, with references to Herodian, V 7, 1, and BMC, R. Emp.
V p.264f. no.452. The problemwhether Maesa stood behindAlexander's promotion (cf.
Kettenhofen, op.cit., 37) is immaterial for our purpose.

This content downloaded from 131.91.169.193 on Tue, 20 Oct 2015 15:58:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 TAFEL IV

a)- ,
i

a)

-~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~jt

a) Inschrift aus Medma; zu M. Cygielman S. 99 ff.

b) Militardiplom aus Planinica, Aussenseite; zu Dusanic S. 117 ff.

This content downloaded from 131.91.169.193 on Tue, 20 Oct 2015 15:58:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions