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