Tuesday, November 30, 2021

English Translation of Zeljko Miletic's "Lucius Artorius Castus and Liburnia"


I have gone to the trouble of using Google Translate to make available in rough form the following Croatian article by Professor Doctor Željko Miletić of the University of Zadar (https://arheologija.unizd.hr/djelatnici/zeljko-miletic). This is a very sensible piece written on Lucius Artorius Castus, his service in the Armenian War and his appointment as procurator of Liburnia in the late 160s.  Because it has not before been available in English, it has been easier to either ignore or negate by the Sarmatian Contingent of Arthurian researchers.  I wanted to make sure the material was made available to an English speaking/reading audience, as it echoes my own work on LAC.  

Miletić's approach is quite simple and straight-forward, and free of any impulse to convert Castus into something that he clearly was not.  As such, it is of tremendous value to the field of Arthurian Studies.

I recently communicated with Prof. Dr. Miletić, and he has not changed his opinion on LAC's career since writing his article. 

Željko Miletić
Lucius Artorius Castus i Liburnia

Inscriptions from Podstrana indicate that the position of the first centurion (primus pilus) of the legion enabled Lucius Artorius Caste to break through from
of the third bourgeoisie into knights. He continued his knightly career
is in the army, as praepositus classis Misenatium, praefectus
(castrorum) legionis i dux legionariorum et auxiliorum Britannicorum adversus Armenios, and finally as procurator
centenarius provinciae Liburniae, which is a function with the authority of ius
gladii of distinctly military significance. We date Artori's monuments
in the 2nd century, and the short-lived separation of Liburnia from the province
We associate Dalmatia with the Quad-Marcoman war in the time of M.
Aurelia (thesis related to Medini's). Detachments of new legions from
anti-German armies II Piae and III Concordiae, as well as the newly formed cohorts I and II miliaria Delmatarum, then built ramparts
around the suburbs of Salona in Dalmatia. The army is building fortifications in Noricum
and Pannonia, and possibly Artorius' command post, the principle
praetenturae Italiae in Liburnian Tarsatica. Throughout the region in
the age of M. Aurelius and Commodus changes the status of the provinces (Raetia, Noricum, Dacia, Liburnia), at a time when the knightly
the class breaks through some barriers to Senate competencies.
The career of Lucius Artorius Caste and the creation of the procuratorial province of Liburnia fit into modern social processes.

Professor Cambi asked me for a congress on the relationship of Lucius Artori
Caste and the provinces of Liburnia. I thank him for the opportunity. There is a lot in the work
a space dedicated to Artori’s career from the time before he became procurator
of the province, which was necessary to illuminate the period of his life about which
we know only from a few words on one of Arthori’s three inscriptions.
The first problem that needed to be solved was to determine the time of the creation of the monuments from which we reconstruct Artori's life path, especially the one with an exhaustive
an inscription from Podstrana, broken into two pieces (CIL 3, 1919 = 8513 = 12813).
Artori's cursus honorum shows the promotional path, titles and names of the units as they are
are common in the 2nd century, with which are mixed some elements that are extremely already
then they appear (titula dux), but are frequently awarded only from the last decade of the 3rd century,
ie in the time of Septimius Severus and later (Saxer, 1967: 44, nos. 77 and 78; 48, nos. 86-88,

57, no. 107; Ibeji, 1991: 226-234). Such late dating of the inscription certainly falls away,
due to the absence of characteristic late epithets in the names of units, due to the palaeography of letters and epigraphic features of the inscriptions, which indicate that the monuments
erected at the end of the second or beginning of the 3rd century In support of the claim that Artorije lived
in the 2nd century there is an indirect mention of vexillations on the inscription, which are precisely in that
period, from Marcus Aurelius to Septimius Severus, widely used in the war
arenas (Saxer: 33-49, nos. 63-88; Ibeji, 1991: 156-157; Cowan & McBride,
2003: 17-19). Command over vexillations, ie the title dux, as well as the statement
about the existence of some hitherto unknown procuratorial province from whose name they are
only the first three letters of the LIB remain, and in which the government with powers ius gladii, are referred to
that Artorije was a participant in major war events. Namely, from epigraphic records
and literary sources it is perfectly evident that vexillations were formed during the war
periods, while creating new provinces or changing the status of existing ones
in that period also related to wars and the accumulation of large contingents of troops
in certain areas.

In the process of connecting the data from Artori's extremely warrior life with
real wars, it is a fortunate circumstance that the duties on the inscriptions are shown in
a simple sequence from the lowest and earliest, to the higher and later. On the big one
the inscription from Podstrana precisely states each individual centurion position,
so the number of performed all duties and our knowledge of the rhythm in which they are otherwise
achieved, as well as knowledge about the duration of the career of military officers, allow to compare
pattern of Artori's progress with the schedule of military events during the 2nd century.
Paradoxically, as a key period in that temporal and spatial fixation
proved to be a long peaceful period of the reign of Antoninus Pius (Birley, 2000:
149-155). The peaceful character of his reign, interrupted only by minor riots in
Mauritania, Judea and Britain, is not in line with the major war conditions during
whose Artori's career took an upward trajectory and reached its peak. Only in
times of crisis, when established social frameworks collapse and bend boundaries
of various layers, frequent penetration into higher positions and radical change
personal legal status. For Artori, it was the time after Antonin's death,
in the time of Emperor Marcus Aurelius, when, already during the first year of his reign,
riots broke out in the East and war with the Parthians began. While that crisis is not over yet, it has begun
is a war with the Germans in the Danube area.
Thanks to these chronological benchmarks, I tried the remaining, earlier and
a less tumultuous part of Artori's career chronologically determined. There is an objection that this is
speculative method and that one misplaced link in the chain breaks the whole string.
However, in this way the career of Lucius Artorius Caste was completely reconstructed
corresponds to the picture of the progress of man from the third bourgeoisie to the knightly ordo.
The itinerary of the reconstructed Arthurian journey through the provinces agrees with the historical one
itinerary of the legions and units in which Artorije served. A circle of people to whom
was Artorije was surrounded in his reconstructed life fits perfectly
interest groups, social ties, hierarchy and manner
progress.

On an inscription from Podstrana, Artori's first recorded position is the place of a centurion in III. the Gallic Legion (legio III Gallica) while this one was stationed in Judea at the time
Hadrian. However, he had to start his career earlier, probably as an ordinary soldier. If L. Artorije became a centurion by promotion from the Legion, it probably is
this was after 13 to 20 years of service, which is the usual range during which plain
soldier - miles - progresses through pay grades, through some of the total of a hundred
military and non-commissioned officer positions (Breeze, 1974: 442). Advancing to the centurion
during his service in the Praetorian Guard is within the same range (usually about 16
year). The third common way was to place the centurion directly in the legions of
by the governors of the provinces, if they have previously fulfilled their basic civil
duties in municipalities (Dobson, 1974: 403-404). Anyway new
the centurions of Emperor Hadrian were experienced soldiers in the 1930s.1
 Although
Artorius was not pointed out on the inscriptions, it is quite possible that he was miles in the Third
the Gallic legion, in which he would then rise to the rank of centurion. Legio III Gallica
stationed in Syria, or Judea since the civil wars of 69, and there she found herself
and Emperor Hadrian on his journey to the East (Ritterling, 1925: 1521-1524).

The deterioration of Roman-Judaic relations grew after the emperor's arrival in Jerusalem and
it was potentiated by the order to start construction work in the new Jerusalem
which Hadrian named Aelia Capitolina. Possibility to build capitol
the temple at the Jewish Temple was one of the reasons for the Judean rebellion of Bar-Kohba
(Sicker, 2001: 180-184; Goodman, 2008: 483-488). After the Egyptian legion
XXII Deiatorana was destroyed, Hadrian sends his best generals to Judea,
among which the first is Cn. Minicius Faustinus Sex. Julius Severus (Salomies, 1992:
126 et seq.), 2
 former governor of Britain, and from 134 Judea (Cass. Part, LXIX.13,
2; Birley, 2005: 129-132). Regardless of whether Judea remained of praetorian rank or not
became a consular province shortly before 127, the relocation shows the importance of the war
in which Julius Severus did not decide on a frontal conflict, but with seven full ones
legion and with cohorts and auxiliaries of the strength of another 5 legions, destroyed fort after fort,
as described by Cassius Dion (Cass. Dio, LXIX 13, 3 – 14, 2). After the end of the war
In 135, Julius Severus received ornamenta triumphalia and was appointed governor
Syria Palestine, a newly formed province of great military importance at the time (CIL III,
2830+CIL III, 9891).3
 It is important to say that Julius Severus was born in the colony of Aequum
in the province of Dalmatia, a countryman of young Artorius (Bulić, 1903: 125 = AE 1904, 9;
Abramić, 1950: 237-239 = AE 1950, 45; Gabricevic: 1953, 257-258; CIL 3, 2830).


At the age of just over thirty, during the Judean War or just after
upon its completion, Artorije became a centurion. Time, space, and circumstances ideally matched the promotion from NCO to first in a series of centurion ranks.
His superior knightly military tribune (tribunus militum angusticlavius) was then
was Statius Priscus whose chivalrous, and later even senatorial career, began which
a year earlier just under the command of Sextus Julius Severus in Britain. Stations
Prisco was decorated for services in the Judean War (CIL 3, 1523). We mention it because
his life path will still be intertwined with Artori's. The next position of the centurion
He achieved Artorije, in the same area, in Legion VI. Ferrata, who is of the Flavians
in the province of Syria, and after the end of the war he stationed in Jerusalem the neighboring city of Bostra in the client Nabatea (Ritterling, 1925: 1587-1596), as part of the Syrian military
contingent, the largest in the Empire. Legion VI. Ferrata remained in Judea until
215. We conclude that the first two centurion positions, at intervals of 3-5 years,
Undoubtedly, he kept Artorius in two legions in the Judeo-Nabataean area,
he was a participant in the war against Bar-Kohba and his commanders were the tribune of the Statue
Prisco and Consul Julia North. Artori's next position of centurion in II. legion
Assistants (legio II Adiutrix), demanded his transfer to something else entirely
area, on the Danube limes, that is, in Aquincum in Pannonia, where II.
the legion has been stationed since Trajan 's Dacian wars, until the end of antiquity (CIL III
14347; 2
 Z. Visy, 1988: 81; Ritterling, 1925: 1446-1449).

Artorije in the forties of the 2nd century achieved the position of centurion in the 5th Macedonian
legion stationed at Tresmis in Lower Moesia (Moesia Inferior) at the mouth of the Danube
to the Black Sea, in a province later called Scythia Minor. Legion V. is also on
the Danube Limes since the Dacian Wars (Ritterling, 1925: 1576-1577). Although
the progression of centurions through units we observe through individual, isolated cases, they are the result of larger actions, for example the addition of units due to
losses in wars or dismissals from military service etc. It is therefore not surprising that from Tresmis
we have an inscription (CIL 3, 6186) with a mention of Artori's contemporary, the centurion
Tiberius Claudius Ulpian, a native of Syria, who was transferred to V. in the same way.
legion from II. legions at Aquinas (CIL 3, 6186). They are probably even earlier at the same time
were in Syria, where Tiberius Claudius Ulpian served in the leg. X Fretensis which
was stationed in Jerusalem and suffered great damage during Bar-Kohbin
uprising. Tiberius Claudius, who should be some ten years older, however,
this was the last duty, for he died at the age of 66 after as much as the seventh centurion
in sequence. He is one of the vast majority of centurions who, despite a long career, more
they could not progress.
He had begun his centurion career in the legions of L. Artoria Cast at the time
Hadrian in the Syrian area, completing it in the time of Antoninus Pius in the Pannonian
-Danish Danube area at the very beginning of the fifties of the 2nd century, when
becomes primus pilus - the first centurion of the 5th Macedonian Legion in Troesmis.
They were captivated by people in their fifties, of vast military experience.
The youngest known primus pilus is Blossius Pudens, which as primus pilus desi-

gnatus died at the age of 49, while he had not yet taken up the appointed office i.e. not yet
managed to “consume” that position, as stated on the inscription CIL 6, 3580. Brian
Dobson believes that the service received was one year, although this is not yet possible
formally demonstrate (Dobson, 1974: 411-412) .After the honorable dismissal, he received
a significant amount of money that qualified him to enter the knighthood (Suetonius,
Caligula, 44; Dobson, 1974: 376) .4
 Lucius Artorius Caste's position as first centurion
(primus pilus) legions also allowed entry from the third bourgeoisie into
knights, which is confirmed on the inscription from Podstrana by the knightly duties that follow. For such remarkable success it was necessary to show military virtues, but certainly also
to have the support of the commander of the legion and possibly the governor of the province.
From the inscription we read that Artori's next position was in the elite Praetorian fleet
in the Gulf of Misena on the Tyrrhenian coast of Italy: praepositus classis Misenatium,
i.e. praepositus classis praetoriae Misenensium. Without additional data difficult
is to say precisely what a command post it is. It seems to have preceded
The "real" procurators, that is, the rank, corresponded to the militias (militiae),
preliminary duties of young people from the knightly class. How is Mizenska
the praetorian fleet, Artori's presbytery, corresponds in rank to the tribune of a particular praetorian cohort in the city of Rome. It may be the command of some navy
departments in the city of Rome itself. Cohortes classicae were singled out from the majority
praetorian fleets at Misena, and had a similar role as praetorian cohorts (Saddington, 2007: 209-210). The title praepositus is often carried by vexillation commanders,
so the function could be tied to the command of several ships grouped into a fleet division. Of the two known prepositional vexillations from the 2nd century, one from the era
Hadrian commanded the legionary divisions and was the primus pilus, the second of the era
Marcus Aurelius auxiliary compartments and was praefectus alae (Saxer, 1967:

26, no. 47; 34, no. 64), which corresponds to Artori's rank. Also the word can be
and about some specific task, like the one the man mentioned in the inscription had
ILS 2764 from half a century later of the northern period, in charge of imperial transport
luggage and ship supplies: praepositus reliquationi classis praetoriae Misennatium
piae vindicis et thesauris dominicis et bastagis copiarum devehendarum. That would
certainly any place that needs a particularly devoted and reliable man. However,
we cannot fathom what exact indebtedness Artoria has as a praepositus.
 He continued the knightly career of Artoria in the legion, as praefectus legionis, which is
an abbreviated form of the full title praefectus (castrorum) legionis, common on the inscription
2nd century material This position is regularly held by people who came to the knightly class over
primipilates (primipilares). There are many analogous examples of this. Thus Artorius' somewhat younger contemporary Petronius Sabinus was decorated during the Germanic
wars (169-175) by M. Aurelius, after whose death he received another primipilate

and continued his procuratorial career (Maxfield, 1981: 198). Artorije performs the service
in Britain, in leg. VI Victrix, which Hadrian transferred to York in 119. It's a legion
built Hadrian's, and later Antonin's wall. Between 155 and 157, the Brigadiers
rebelled in northern Britain, the legions suffered losses and the vexillation arrived
reinforcements from Germany, headed by Gnaeus Julius Vera, the new governor of
around 154/5 to 158 (RIB 1322; Speidel, 1987: 233-237; Birley, 2005: 145-149),
which originates from Ekva in Dalmatia (CIL III, 2732 = CIL III, 8714) .5
 He was
son (or nephew) of Gnaeus Julius Severus, a victor in the Judean War in which he is like
the young centurion also participated in Lucija Artorija (Zaninović, 2011: 507). Gnej Julije
Ver regained full control of Hadrian's Wall.
Somewhere from the time of Emperor Claudius until the middle of the third century there are two
the basic lines of advancement of the former primipila. The privileged way is when the primipilares go to the successive positions of the Roman tribunes, then to the position of the primus pilus
iterum and further into the system of equestrian procurators. The second is when the former primipili
get the position of praefectus castrorum, which is a kind of camp logistics chief,
after which they retire (Dobson, 1974: 402). Artorije, however, continued
career. There is no doubt that Lucius Artoria Cast proved himself in Britain as
praefectus castrorum legionis VI Victricis still under Julius Faith. To understand
of this unexpected course of his career one should know that the governor 161. — 162.

in Britain Marcus Statius Priscus Licinius Italicus, whose origin is uncertain,
but there is serious speculation that he could be a native of Dalmatia
(Birley, 2005: 151-155). Articles Prisco is briefly the governor of Britain for a time
the coming to power of Emperor Marcus Aurelius, when the long-lasting peace in the Empire was interrupted.
Prisco was thirty years earlier, 132nd, in that same Britain its unbelievable
he began a successful career as a knightly prefect. We have already mentioned that after that
was tribune III. of the Gallic Legion in Hadrian’s Judean War as Artori’s commander. Later, he rose from the knighthood to the Senate and passed the entire Senate
cursus honorum, he became consul in 159 (CIL 6, 1523). Station Prisco goes to
East to replace Mark Sedati Severian, the then governor of Cappadocia
who was killed by Vologez IV., destroying one Roman legion. He arrives there in 162 and the next
conquers the Armenian Artaxerxes (SHA, Marcus, 9.1; SHA, Verus, 7.1; Birley,
2000: 160-164). I consider that under his command was Lucius Artorius
The caste to which the title dux has been assigned.
The character of the troupe led by Lucius Artoria Cast
There is a lengthy debate as to which units are commanded by dux Artorius, for
are in place of this statement on the inscription as many as two fractures on the stone, and it is possible that they were
stolen and stonemasonry errors. The problem is further complicated by the doubtful relationship

whether the word British refers to the area from which military units were brought or is part of it
unit names. There are also two against whom Artorije is at war, against the Amorites
(adversus Armoricanos) or, as I firmly believe, against the Armenians (adversus
Armenians). I base this on Carrara's reading of the letter E in the word ARME [nio] S on
an inscription from Podstrana (Carrara, 1852: 23, no. IX; Gwinn: 2010), as well as on historical circumstances. Therefore, one of the possible solutions of the syntagm on the inscription
could be dux leggionum (trium or duarum) Brittaniciniarum adversus Armenios.
However, instead of the word trium or duarum, of which only the final letter remains
M, the missing part could be supplemented with alaru] m or cohortiu] m or auxilioru] m
or peditu] m. Lack of space for longer words in the empty space between the two
parts of the inscription from Podstrana can theoretically be solved by shortening words and ligatures (joined letters). If we separate the clumsy form of Brittanicimiarum into
two words, we could offer some more elegant solution such as cohortiu] m
Britanici (arum) mi (lli) ar (i) um. Note that the abbreviated word LEGG with the double letter G does not have to refer to plural legiones but can also refer to legionarii. For
such a solution there is an analogy on the inscription of Mark Claudius Front which refers
precisely on the Armenian-Parthian war in which Fronto, as the legate of the emperors Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Vera, fought under the command of Stacius Priscus. We read:… leg (ato)
Augg (ustorum) pr (o) pr (aetore) exercitus legionarii / et auxilior (um) per Orientem
in Armeniam / et Osrhoenam et Anthemusiam ducto / rum… (CIL 6, 1377). Therefore
we can also accept the resolution of the word LEGG s on the inscription of Lucius Artorius Caste
genitive legionariorum. A more studious analysis of this problem will be offered by mine
colleagues dealing with epigraphic topics in these papers from the Congress.

British troops in the war against the Armenians
The general meaning of the quotation on the inscription is clear. Dux Lucija Artorije Kast leads to
East, against the Armenians, vexillation composed of soldiers from legions and auxiliaries
troops. These auxiliaries bear the provincial name of the British or the ethnic name of the Britons.
I think the epithet Britaniciae or Britanicianae of Artori's auxilias should be understood
as a result of the desire to reconcile the ethnic and provincial names of the units of which it is
compound vexillation.
The question immediately arises as to where these British auxiliary units were moved to the East. It is said that before leaving for Armenia, Artorije performed his duty
camp prefect VI. legions called Victrix, stationed in Britain, so we would
might have thought that the vexillations launched to the east were composed of units in
that province. In Britain at that time they were stationed on August II in Isch (Ritterling,
1925: 1460), VI Victrix in Eburak (Ritterling, 1925: 1606) and XX (Valeria) Victrix in
Devi (Ritterling, 1925: 1773). However, neither in the work Historia Augusta, nor in any
other literary sources or on the inscriptions of that legion are not mentioned as participants
in the Parthian War Lucius Vera. In addition, due to significant unrest in Britain in which
was therefore sent by Sextus Calpurnia Agricola, it would be difficult to expect to be a province

weakens (HA 8.8; Birley, 2001: 123). On the other hand, we know they are in response to
the destruction of the legion in the East and the defeat of Atidius Cornelian sent legion I Minervia from
Bone - her legate is Fronto - II Adiutrix from Aquinas and V Macedonica from Tresmis
(CIL 6, 1377; CIL 8, 18893; CIL 3, 7505; SHA, Marcus 8.6; Birley: 2001, 123).
Vexillations were also sent from Pannonia led by P. Julius Geminius Marcianus, sent as legatus Auggustorum super vexillationes in Cappadocia, where he set out
from the position of commander of the leg. X Geminae stationed in Vindobona (CIL 8, 7050),
and I have no doubt that he took with him part of the legionary cohorts and auxiliary units from
Pannonia, united in vexillations. Evidently, the majority of the forces are in Syria and Armenia
started from the Danube Limes. Where before the war with the Parthians were ale,
cohorts and irregular troops called Brittanica or Brittonum? More than half
them from all over the Empire is in the province of Dacia, the rest are on the Danube Limes in
Rhetia, Pannonia and Moesia, and only one is outside that area, in Mauritania. Here
there is no place to discuss the reconstruction of the schedule of auxiliary units, which
is particularly complex in terms of auxiliaries with the epithets Britannica and Britonum, because of
similarity of unit names, change of epithets, multiplication of the same ordinal number and
sometimes scarce records. Therefore, we mention only those for which there is a relative
secure stationing space, primarily thanks to diploma data.

Most of the troops in Dacia remained there after the Dacian wars. She's graduating
attested cohors I Britannica milliaria equitata c. R. (Spaul, 2000: 193-194);
then Cohors II Brittonum (Britannorum) milliaria c. R. p. F. (Matei-Popescu &
Tentea: 135; Spaul: 2000: 198). In Dacia, after the annexation of the province, the so-called ala
I Brittonum c. R. (Matei-Popescu & Tentea: 133). Cohors I Brittonum milliaria
Ulpia Torquata pia fidelis is mentioned in 119th and 123rd in Porolisen Dacia, according to
by some opinions perhaps the same unit that later appears as Cohors I Brittonum milliaria (Spaul, 2000: 195-197). For Cohors II Brittonum Augusta Nervia
pacensis milliaria we know that in Pannonia Inferior was 114th, and in Dacia it was transferred
139. - 140. (Spaul, 2000: 201). Irregular pedites singulares Britanniciani were brought from Britain during the Dacian Wars and remained in the province (Matei-Popescu &
Tentea: 140). Let us also mention the neighboring provinces. In Pannonia Inferior is Ala I Flavia
Augusta Britannica milliaria c. R. (Spaul, 1994: 68-69) and Ala I Brittonum Veterana
c. R. (Spaul, 1994: 72). Cohors III Britannorum is witnessed in Recia on the series
diploma (Spaul, 2000: 202). Cohors II Brittonum Flavia equitata positioned
is in Moesia Inferior (Spaul, 2000: 199). Cohors III Brittonum veteran, after
Of the Dacian Wars, stationed at Moesia Superior (Campbell, 2009: 15; Matei-Popescu
& Tentea: 131; Spaul, 2000: 203). There are indications that several more units of the same
type of name is stationed on the Danube Limes.
Let us repeat that II. legion of Adiutrix of Aquinas in Pannonia,
without any doubt, with auxiliary units, of which the said inscription speaks
P. Julius Gemini Marciano. We also know that there is a leg. V. Macedonica from Tresmis u
Moesia Inferior, for which we can also with high probability assume
to lead its satellite auxiliaries, which is common. Recall that

in the fifties of the 2nd century the third centurion of Artorius was in II Adiutrix, and the fourth in V.
Macedonian legion, in which he then became the primus pilus, and he knew him very well
troops from the Danube Limes. If we accept the assumption that he led Artorije
vexillations composed of auxiliaries from the Danube region (perhaps from Dacia) that bear the name
Britannica or Brittonum, as well as from legionary divisions from the same provinces, we see that
this fits perfectly with the data from the Historia Augusta that the northern borders were intentional
were weakened by the transfer of troops to the East due to the crisis with the Parthians (SHA, Marcus
12.13; Birley, 2001: 123). This model corresponds to the common practice of forming individual vexillations from legionary and auxiliary soldiers from one province.
that is, from some unique space.
We can conclude that the Danube troops, including Artori's (Dacian)
vexillations, were part of the successful army of Mark Stati Prisk.
Using vexillation
Vexillations were common in the time of Marcus Aurelius and were the main way of organizing troops in the Parthian and German wars, and a little later in the time of Septimius.
North. Although each post of vexillation commander (legatus Aug. vex., Dux vex.,
praefectus vex., praepositus vex., tribunus vex.), it seems, can cover a wide range of sizes and strengths of the merged divisions, ie each of these positions can
preceded by a differently ranked command post, the title dux vexillationum, at least
as far as we know from a couple of inscriptions from the time of Septimius Severus, it is highly ranked
the title of commander of the joint divisions. It is held by senators, legates of provinces and legions, as well as one equestrian whose rank we do not know because the title vir egregius was then still general.
honorary title for knights (Saxer, 1967: 44, nos. 77 and 78; 48, nos. 86-88, 57, nos. 107;

perhaps 62, no. 22). However, through the 2nd century and in the time of Marcus Aurelius this was not common
the name of the commander of such joint units, the titles legatus Aug.
vex., praepositus vex. and tribunus vex. They often come from the ranks of the senatorial class
(ordo senatorius), as we see from the following few examples. One from the beginning of the 2nd century.
is Quintus Julius (Q. Iulius Quadratus Bassus), commander of the leg. XI Claudiae, then
101. - 102. praepositus vexillationum, and after that the commander of the leg. X Fretensis,
consul suffectus 105. and stratelates (dux exercitus) during the Second Dacian War
(Dąbrowa, 1993: 34-35; Gregori, 2007: 657). In the time of Artorius some 60 years
later this is still a senatorial position, as we see from Senator Julius ’career
Pompilius Pison who during the German War was commander of the I Italian Legion, IIII
Flavian legions and all their auxiliary troops, with praetorian or consular
snagom promagistrata: praepositus legionibus I Italicae et IIII Flaviae cum omnibus copiis auxiliorum dato iure gladii (ILS 1111; Campbell, 2009: 31). Although
the phrase praepositus vexillationum is not explicitly used here, for sure
it is the command of vexillations (joint units separated
from the regular composition), which we see from the stated composition of the hull. A young officer from the knighthood, M. Valerius Maximianus, became famous for his heroic deeds.

captures at the beginning of the German War, he enjoyed the great confidence of M. Aurelius, he was
presidial procurator, after which he was elevated by the mechanism of adlection (adlectio)
in the Senate inter praetorios, after which he continued a brilliant career as commander of a number of legions, and finally as consul suffectus around 186 (Campbell, 2006: 31).
inscription we know that he was already included among the senators of 179, when he was in office
commander of vexillations during the winter in Leugaricia (praepositus vexillationum
Leugaricione hiemantium) 150 km deep in the enemy territory of Sueb, in
Trencin in Slovakia (AE 1956, 124; CIL 3, 13439). His career is an example
of exceptional social progress made possible by a dynamic military-political one
the situation. However, we can follow it exclusively through numerous inscriptions, and not through literary ones
sources, in the same way as in Artorius. The equalization of the importance of knights and senators began precisely in the time of Antoninus Pius, which can be seen from one formal thing,
namely, only the Senate honorary title vir clarissimus is then given the most
ranked knights, praetorian prefects, accompanied by consular honors
(Crook, 1955: 166; Bekavac & Glavaš, 2011: 129). Lucius Artoria Cast lived
in the same social and time frame, but his above-average career nonetheless
is slightly less bright. At the time of Sever's second Parisian campaign praepositus
vexillationum IIII Germanicarum expeditione secunda Parthica je Klaudije Gal
(Maxfield, 1981: 199).
Knights can also be given the position of vexillation commander. Contemporary Lucy
Artoria Caste is a knight of Sextus Baius Pudens, governor of the province, i.e. presidial
procurator in Noricum. Several inscriptions show its function praepositus vexillationum per Germaniam et Raetiam et Noricum et Pannoniam et Moesiam, which, given the sequence of functions on the inscriptions and the space it encompasses
duty of preposition, relations to the German war (CIL VI 31870, 31871, 41284; CIL
14, 00289). The title dux carried by Lucius Artorius Castus should therefore be understood in
meaning praepositus or praefectus vexillationum - commander of vexillation. Name
the dux carrying Artoria may have been to show the great numerical strength of the troops
led by an Equestrian commander, and we would expect for such a formation a man from the senatorial order.

Transfer of troops from the East from the Parthian War
on the Danube in the German Wars
Victory in the Parthian War was secured in 166, and troops brought an epidemic
some severe infectious disease to the West, from which he died during the German Wars
and Emperor Lucius Verus, in the winter of 168/169. (Birley, 2001: 149-158). Without a doubt,
numerous legions and auxiliaries from the East were transferred to the Danube. Many names of commanders from the East are also mentioned in the German wars, but we also find a whole new layer
young commanders, for it is evident that the disease has decimated the troops. Swabian
Quadi and Markomani broke through the 167 Limes, penetrated all the way to Aquileia, besieged it, and
then plundered the adjoining Opitergium, and in 168 M. Aurelius's headquarters set the code

Aquileia, and later moved to Carnuntum, the oldest military stronghold on the Pannonian Limes on the Danube (Mócsy, 1974: 186-187).
The condition of the legions at that time is best known from the inscription ILS 2288, on which
at the end of the list of 33 legions by provinces, the names of the new three legions S. were added.
North. Two new legions of M. Aurelius, II Pia and III Concors later, are also listed
known as II and III Italica, recruited in 165, precisely because of the aggravation of the crisis on
Danube due to the Quad and Marcomanne danger (ILS 2287; ILS 2288; Dąbrowa,
1993: 29-30). At this time there were only four legions on the Rhine, and as many as nine on the Danube
one in Dacia. Vandals (Astingi and Lacringi) and Sarmatian Jazigi broke into Dacia,
so the V. Macedonian Legion was transferred from Tresmis to Moesia Inferior in Potais in
Porolisenska Dacia (SHA, Marcus 22, 1; Cassius Dio, Historia Romana, Epitome 72, 11-12). By 180, there were 12 legions on the Danube borders, including II. and
III. Italica (Birley, 2001: 166-167). More than half of the total Roman population in
the army participates in the German wars.
The Marcomanni were defeated in 172, the Quadi in 173, the Sarmatian Jazigi in 174 (Birley, 2001:
171-177). Due to new hostilities, 177. M. Aurelius and Commodus go to another war
expedition (expeditio secunda Germanica) (AE 1956, 124). In this expedition
participate and II. and III. an Italian legion that may have been planned to be stationed in two
provinces that had yet to be established on the newly conquered land across the Danube,
in the area of ​​Sveba and Sarmata.

The Parthian War, and then the German "expeditions", marked the life of Artorius. After being a dux, in the order of honor on the inscription from Podstrana, Artorije is the procurator of a province from whose name the first letters of LIB have been preserved. None
there is no doubt that he took up this new duty without any pause, directly
after the end of the Armenian-Parthian War 166. In Artori's high age
and with the career of a knight we must not expect any break. That in the East he stayed on
a position necessary to deal with a post-war situation (eg a military
-administrative position), we would expect this to be indicated on the inscription as well.
 In the 2nd century, the possibility arose that a person who was praefectus castrorum would progress to centenary procurators (Dobson, 1974: 402). The last in a series of listed
Of Artori's functions, procurator of the province of LIB [urniae], given
on the ius gladii he possesses, it is of distinctly military importance. The emergence of a new province
and a knight who rules with the powers of ius gladii can be brought at this time exclusively in
connection with the war zone of the Alpine-Pannonian area of ​​the provinces along the Danube during
German wars. J. Medini elaborated the thesis that the province of Liburnia was organized in response to these turbulent war events, in order to defend Italy outside
its territory, sometime around 184/5. years (Medina, 1980: 372, 380-381). IN
I basically agree with his thesis which he thoroughly developed in the work »Provincia
Liburnia ”(Medini, 1980: 364-392), with the proviso that I determine the origin of the province
during the German Wars. I dedicate this article to the memory of Julian
Medinija, Professor of Provincial Archeology at the Department of Archeology, Faculty of Philosophy in Zadar.

Direct confirmation of the existence of protruding defensive lines for the defense of Italy
gives us the cursus honorum of Quintus Antistus Adventus who, like Artorius, took part in the Parthian War of 162, as commander of II. legion Adiutrix (translato ine am
expeditione Parthica qua donatus est donis militaribus…), so he remained in the East
as governor of Arabia Petrae from 165, then elected deputy consul,
after which he was curator operum locorumque publicorum in Rome (CIL 3, 92 -
Bostra; SEG 7, 822 - Gerasa). Perhaps the experiences of public affairs, with fresh war,
was decisive that in 168 during the German War he became imperial commander
pretenture Italije i Alpa: legatus Augusti at praetenturam Italiae et Alpium expeditione Germanica (AE 1893, 88 = ILS 8977 - Thiblis). Without a doubt, the expression
praetentura in the inscription means a military area, and judging by the scope of modern construction work between the Adriatic, the Alps and Pannonia, this area was the pre-wall of Italy
with a system of defensive fortifications - praetentura Italiae et Alpium (Petru, P.
- Šašel, J., 1971). L. Margetić, on the trail of Šašel's argument and denying
Degrassi's conclusions, convincingly proved that at the time of the formation of the pretenture
there was no movement of the borders of Italy to the territory of Liburnia (Margetić, 1990: 27-
28). He believes that the term pretense has only a general meaning of "defense" or "protection", and
it does not imply the organization of some military-territorial area, for which it is anyway
there was a short-term need because the situation in that area stabilized after
170, as can be seen from the fact that parts of the Italian legions built ramparts at Salona
(Margetić, 1990: 27-28). These arguments, however, are not good, because, after all
of short-lived appeasement, the seventies of the 2nd century are again a time of fierce
conflict, so M. Aurelius and Commodus undertook another expedition. Also,
Department II. and III. the Italian legions are constantly strengthening the defensive force of the pretense,
building and renovating camps and erecting city walls.

The organization of the pretense was fueled by a fear of Italy's vulnerability, provoked
burglaries in Dacia, Pannonia and especially in northern Italy (Birley, 2001: 157).
The goal of Marcus Aurelius was to protect Italy and Illyricum: omnia, quae ad munimen Italiae
atquuae Illyrici pertinebant (SHA, Marcus, 14, 6; Zaccaria, 2002: 77). Intensively
the fortification of cities, the erection of camps, fortifications and ramparts encompassed a wide Retskonoric-Pannonian-Dalmatian area. Detachments of new legions and auxiliaries from the anti-German army (newly formed legio II and leg. III Italica, as well as cohors I and coh. II
miliaria Delmatarum) then built ramparts around the suburbia of Salona in Dalmatia (CIL
3, 1979 = CIL 11, 642a5; CIL 3, 6374 = 8655; CIL 3, 1980 = 8570).
In Norik, replacement began during the first decades of the second century
earthen-wooden with stone camps. Augustiana Fortress (Dan. Traismauer u
Austria) was thus completed around 140-144 (Alföldy, 1974: 145; CIL 3, 5654).
During the first burglaries of Quad, Markoman and Narist 166 - 167 were looted
the auxiliary fortresses of Lauriacum, Tullnerfeld, Faviana, Zwentendorf and Augustiana,
and possibly some others (Fisher, 2012: 35-36). Rainbows probably date from that time
defensive walls near Rattendorf (Alföldy, 1974: 154; P. Petru - J. Šašel: 1971,

90). Judging by the diploma from Mauterno in the time of Hadrian, until the middle of the 2nd century.
in Norik reside three alae, at least five cohorts, and more divisions of one cohort, which
agrees with the number of approximately nine auxiliary camps that existed in Hadrian's time
(CIL 16, 174; Alföldy, 1974: 144). The total number of soldiers would be of the order of one
legions. At least part of the auxiliaries were withdrawn from the limes to the southern part of the province as early as 168, when
a pretense was formed (Alföldy, 1974: 152-153). Fortifications that already exist on
pretentious area, eg the one in Vrhnika in Slovenia (Roman Nauportus on the border
Italy), are integrated into the renewed and supplemented defense system of praetenture,
whose command headquarters was Tarsatica (today Rijeka in Croatia).
The area of ​​Atrans, the Trojan pass in
Slovenia, which is a key point on the main road leading from Aquileia to the Pannonian
limes in Carnuntum, or Windobon. Maybe it's about the fortifications in Atrans
word on a building inscription from the second pol. 168 (CIL 3, 11675 = ILJug-01,
382. = Shashel, 1992: 231-233). The strongest blow to Norik was in 170 or 171 when they were
barbarians penetrated into northern Italy as well. Solva was completely destroyed between 160.
and 170. (Alföldy, 1974: 152 et seq .; Hudeczek, 1977: 464-465). After that breakthrough,
the new legion of Marcus Aurelius, II Italica, probably around 171, and no later than 175,
she built a legionary camp in Ločica near Celeja in Norik, where she stayed for a short time
and in which numerous bricks with the seal of that unit were found (CIL 3, 5757,1g, CIL 3,
5757.4, CIL 3, 14369.2a-k, CIL 3, 14369.21; Alföldy, 1974: 154-155; Winkler,
1977: 224-225). This camp controls the same road, the so-called "Amber Road," like
and Atrans. II Italica from Ločica was moved to the border to build a legionary fortress
in Albing, on an island in the Danube, perhaps after the Germanic-Sarmatian triumph of M.
Aurelia 176. She stayed there for a short time, because she went to a permanent camp 7 km away
Lauriak, at the confluence of the Enns and the Danube, which, after many years of work, was completed in
Komodo's time, judging by the inscription dated September 18, 191. (CIL 3,
15208: Ritterling, 1925: 1469-1470; Alföldy, 1974: 165-167).

Ovilavae in Noricum became, shortly before the end of the German War, a colony
Aurelia Antoniniana and then the ramparts were erected. From 179 to 180 there is a building inscription
of the legionary camp of Castro Regina in Regensburg, in which it is written that he was for the emperor
Antonina Pia and Komoda, leg. III Italica sagradila vallum cum portis et turribus
(CIL 3, 11965). Regensburg is command post III. legions until late antiquity.
Also, over thirty marching temporary camps north of
Danube (Fisher, 2012: 39). After the death of Marcus Aurelius, Commodus undertook the Third
a German expedition, perhaps retaliation for disrespecting client relations with
barbarians established during the previous expedition (SHA, Commodus, 12, 8;
CIL 5, 2155 - Altinum). At the end of the war, Komod erected a series of burgs and presidiums
along the Danube, to fight the wandering jazz hajduks (latrunculi), about which
say inscriptions with the same text from the Intercise dated 183-185 (Mocsy,
1974: 196-197, Fig. 196; CIL 3, 10312; CIL 3 10313; RIU-05, 1128; RIU-05, 1129;
RIU-05, 1130…). It seems that the preserved inscriptions were never placed on the burgs,
because the legate of the province of L. Cornelia Felix fell into disfavor, he experienced damnatio me-

moriae, so all the plates were left in the workshop at Intercisa (Mocsy, 1974: 197). These
events coincide with the overthrow of Praetorian Prefect Tigidi Perenis, who
tried with the legions of Pannonia to raise a rebellion against Commodus. Medina agrees
with the opinions of Pflaum, Wilkes, and Šašel that somewhere at that time the emergence of the province of Liburnia was provoked (Medini, 1980: 373-374). I think that's what happened
at least a decade earlier, as part of a general reorganization of the status of the provinces in the north
borders of the empire, when various military areas (praetenturae) coexist.
So the province of Liburnia would be formed immediately after the end of the Parthian War,
at the time of the acute crisis with the barbarian peoples, about 168.
We see that vexillations, especially those from II. Drinks and III. Concordia, build fortifications
in Noricum and Pannonia, and possibly the principle in Tarsatica, today in Rijeka. It's recent
published a collection of papers on the principle in Tarsatica, in which the results of new ones were published
archaeological excavations (Radić Štivić & Bekić, 2009). The authors of the articles based on the so-called
of small archaeological material date the erection of the building in the middle of the 3rd century (Višnjić,
2009: 62). The largest amount of found material originates from that period, and from 66
pieces of money from the principality, 36 of them from the other sex. 4th century, and 21 from the second half. 3rd st.
(Bekić, 2009: 186-187). However, we note that in almost every category of findings
there are objects that we can undoubtedly date earlier, in the 2nd century, and some even
ago. Let us mention some: terra sigilatta bowl Hayes 10 (Percan, 2009: 75); African amphorae 2a, Dressel 2-4, Dressel 30, Pompeii VII (Visnjic, 2009a: 125-132);
Aucissa fibulae, profiled 1st and 2nd century fibulae, plate enameled fibulae from the transition
1st in the 2nd century, pendant of horse equipment of the Bishop 3C type (Višnjić, 2009b: 156-162);
several forms of glass cups, glass semicircular bowl, glass plates, spherical
glass jug (Janeš, 2009: 231-235). The number and variety of these items, which are
much older than the assumed time of construction of the principles, is difficult to explain
longevity of use. Therefore, I think it is time to build principles in Tarsatica
should be lowered lower, in the 2nd century, during the German Wars and intensive construction
activities in the Alpine-Danube-Adriatic area, and served as Artori's
command post in the province of Liburnia.

Changing the status of the provinces

Another important phenomenon that covered the entire region in the time of M. Aurelius and Commodus is the change in the status of the provinces (Dacia, Raetia, Noricum, Liburnia). Cause of
barbarian burglaries 167. in the area of ​​Dacian auraria, formed Tres Daciae, which are
169 or 170 placed under the general governorship of Claudius Front (AE 1963, 52;
Birley, 2001: 160). Raetia and Noricum, hitherto procuratorial provinces under administration
governors of the knightly class, during the German Wars, no later than 175, for
the presence of a large number of troops, changing status to imperial provinces, each
under the administration of legates from the senate class - legatus Augusti propraetore (Alföldy,
1974: 242-250, Appendices V-VI; Winkler, 1977: 204-205). Under his authority is also Commander II. legion of Italica which has since been stationed in Noricum. Change

status was reflected in the titles of staff of the provincial senatorial office in Virunum.
Now the titles beneficiarius consularis (legionis II Italicae libra) librarius appear
consularius, frumnetarius, strator consularis legionis… Yes such a change is not
exceptional, proves the relocation of part of the boundary line between Pannonia Inferior and
Superior around 214, in similar war circumstances, as a result of Carp pressure
and the Vandals on the northeastern edge of Pannonia 212/213. (Mócsy, 1974: 198). Two
The Pannonians were equal in military strength, since then with two legions each.
Artorije procurator Liburniae
The last known presiding procurator Norika Ti. Claudius Priscinianus
he took office (which lasted in Norik as a rule for three years) in 168.
(Alföldy, 1974: 246-247). The procurators of Norik were from a very high knighthood
rank ducenaria. After the arrival of the propretor legates to the post of governor,
the procurators in Noricum appear in parallel, but no longer as governors, but as
financial procurators of lower status of sex agencies, ie centenaries (Alföldy,
1974: 164).

Procurator Lucius Artorius Caste, governor of the province of Liburnia, is of centenary rank. The province of Liburnia, however, is not a place of financial action
procurator, rather than a separate administrative and administrative unit separated from Dalmatia, managed by the presiding procurator. L. Artorije Kast has ius gladii, authority
held by the highest senate magistrates, e.g., proconsuls and propretors in the provinces.
The imperial presence in the province implies that he is the ultimate authority. If
confer on a senator on that occasion a power that includes the right to command
army, trials and punishments, then it is especially emphasized on the inscriptions, as in
the case of the already mentioned Julius Pompilius Pison who during the German War
commander of the two legions and the associated auxiliaries and to whom ius gladii was given:
praepositus legionibus I Italicae et IIII Flaviae cum omnibus copiis auxiliorum
dato iure gladii (ILS 1111; Campbell, 2009: 31). What are the exact reasons for getting it
such high powers we can only speculate. It's probably about command
large military forces whose total number of soldiers in this case is forces at least
three legions, while in the usual circumstances senators from the ranks of former praetors or
consuls command with only one legion, that is, as former consuls can
to be governors in only a few imperial provinces with two or more legions.
Lucius Artoria Cast is not even a senator, so there is no doubt that he was given exceptional authority
ius gladii as presiding procurator, i.e. as governor and commander of the army in
province of Liburnia (Medina, 1980: 382). Artori's chivalrous career is not over
by some regular procurator of the highest rank, but the last two of his duties are high and, given the authority ius gladii he has been granted, have been assigned to him for
his military virtues.
Due to the lack of records, ex silentio we can only speculate that the province was not long-lived. We do not know if Lucius Artoria Cast, who after

fifty years of service at the age of about 70 podines retired to the peace of his estate,
outlived the province.
dies natalis c. 104
miles 121-135
centurio legionis III Gallicae 135-138
centurio legionis VI Ferratae 139-142
centurio legionis II Adiutricis 143-146
centurio legionis V Macedonicae 147-150
primus pilus legionis V Macedonicae 151
praepositus classis Misenatium 152-154
praefectus castrorum legionis VI Victricis 155-162
dux legionariorum et auxiliorum Britannicorum adversus
Armenians
162-166
procurator centenarius provinciae Liburniae 167-174


Saturday, November 27, 2021

THE SIMPLE LOGIC BEHIND 'ARMENIOS' AS THE PROPER READING FOR THE LUCIUS ARTORIUS CASTUS INSCRIPTION

"DUX OF THREE BRITISH [VEXILLATIONS] AGAINST ARMENIA"

Sometimes, when direct evidence is lacking, and even an abundance of indirect evidence is considered insufficient, an Arthurian researcher who is seeking an objective result must rely upon logical argument. In recent days, it has become obvious to me that as far as the LAC stone is concerned, I must fall back on the latter method.  Not because I remain unconvinced, and not because all scholars and most laymen remain unconvinced.  Rather, I must do so because there is a very vocal minority, holding to its own fanatical opinion (one that runs counter to common sense), who insists on both disparaging better theories and personally attacking the character and methodology of anyone who dares support such.

I tried for a long time to reason with the party in question, and to work with them on reaching a consensus.  This attempt was a mistake.  Only now do I realize I was doomed to fail from the outset.  Although I asked the "opposition" more than once that if they continued to behave abominably towards me and my ideas I would have to discontinue all interaction with them, they ignored my entreaty.  They continued the barrage of misinformation as well as sundry unpleasantries.  Because of this, I have decided I can no longer sustain any kind of relationship with them that even approximates something rational.  Communication with them has been terminated and will not resume in the future.  Being present in their so-called debates was eroding my own credibility.  In truth, I was warned I was beginning to "sound rabid" in my defiance of their nonsense, and even "desperate."  While it is important for me to defend good scholarship, whether mine or someone else's, it is also not my job to try to prove I'm right and everyone else is wrong.  I leave that to the those who have opted to subscribe to preconceived belief and rampant bias and who have no problem twisting and bending the academic process to suit their own needs. 

Members of the Arthurian community in good standing need to purge disruptive and unhealthy elements from our midst.  Bad scholarship, pseudo-scholarship, troll-like behavior - it can no longer be tolerated. All of that is ruining the field of study.  Already many are leaving it, and most actual scholars won't touch it with a ten-foot pole (unless they are participating in some esoteric literary study that manages to avoid any hint of a treatment of the historical Arthur). The only good way to rid ourselves of such harmful factions is to ignore them.  Don't shine light on them, don't engage with them.  Shut them out. Once they find themselves totally neglected and alone in the dark, we can hope that they will eventually dissolve and disappear.  

With that out of the way, I wish to here briefly recount my reasoning for supporting the proposed ARMENIOS reading for the fragmentary ARM[...]S.  It should be enough to remind my readers that every single established, respected, professional Roman military historian and Latin epigrapher I have contacted or whose material I have read now hold to the view that the most probable reading for ARM[...]S is ARMENIOS.  Among these scholars are men of such caliber as Roger Tomlin and Anthony Birley (maligned through ignorance and arrogance by the party I have alluded to above).  The opposition cite only themselves (three in number), plus a man whose specialization is Sarmatian studies.  At least one other man, a well-known writer of a decidedly New Age/Neopagan/Neoshamanistic disposition, has proven to be another devotee of the Sarmatian Cause.  They claim they have support for their reading of ARMATOS, but when pressed to reveal that support they can only say that there are scholars in the East (China, Russia, etc.) who agree with them.  All these "scholars", of course, are also of the Sarmatian faction.  I have yet to receive the names of any of them, or citations for their studies.  If they exist - and they well might - their work is automatically suspect because they are operating from the standpoint of ethnic propaganda.  Some of these folks, for example, claim descent from the Caucasus Ossetians, themselves descendents of the Sarmatian Alans.

The Sarmation contingent (dare I say 'cult?) also consistently applies flawed and dishonest techniques to historical work.  They are not beyond conjuring scenarios for which no evidence exists at all in the literary, epigraphic or archaeological materials.  

I, on the other hand, have no axe to grind, whether religious, political, ethnic or otherwise.  Believe it or not, I am actually trying to find out the truth about these things.  And, to be perfectly frank, I don't care what the truth ends up being or how it effects others.  The truth is the truth, and should be valued for what it is.  In addition, I try very hard to adhere to proper scientific procedures.  I  may not always be successful, but when I make a mistake, I admit it - publicly.  I am also not afraid to change my mind - or even my theory - whenever I feel new evidence and/or a better argument demands I do so.  My opponents never admit their errors, and never, ever apologize for anything.  They remain intractable and obdurate, fixed forever in their blind faith. 

Let us now treat of the three proposed readings for the ARM[...]S of the LAC stone. 

1) ARMATOS

This is universally rejected because it is a neutral term, and is both excessively obvious and vague, nonspecific and ambiguous.  The best summation of the academic opinion on ARMATOS for ARM[...]S was stated (via private communication) by Professor Roger Tomlin, recognized as one of (if not THE) foremost British Latin epigrapher:

"Did any Roman officer ever boast instead of marching against INERMES [unarmed men]?" 

Tomlin then went on to list any number of terms that could have been used that would have passed along information deemed necessary on the inscription.

LAC simply would not have said that he took three British legions (or vexillations of three British legions) against 'armed men.' The suggestion, really, is ludicrous. 

Tomlin's final assessment of ARMATOS is worth quoting again in full:

"I think ARMATOS would have been used adjectivally, and a Roman writer would have specified who had taken up arms. There are many such terms, which could have been used on their own – REBELLES, LATRONES, HOSTES, DEFECTORES, DESERTORES ...

If it were a matter of internal security, I would have expected a term such as this. That they were 'armed' would not need to be stated."

If we opt for LAC's legionary forces having fought inside Britain, as the Sarmatian contingent insists they did, Tomlin had the following to offer:

"REBELLES would be a possibility, if it was assumed that the invading tribes were in a treaty relationship and had broken it. It has been argued that Roman outward pressure caused some tribes to coalesce, e.g. CALEDONIOS. And later, the 'Picts' are an example – as in the dice box tower (AE 1989, 562) which reads: PICTOS | VICTOS | HOSTIS | DELETA (etc.).

HOSTES PVBLICOS, possibly. 

He might have said something like HOSTES P.R., but I still go for the name of a tribe. 'Armed men' is much too vague for his audience in Croatia, and the rest of his epitaph is severely factual."

2) ARMORICOS

I was the first person to demonstrate that ARMORICOS could, actually, be fit on the stone.  The reading was abandoned by the Sarmatian contingent after they had defended it for decades.  Why?  Because they thought it wouldn't fit on the stone.  They found themselves needing something other than ARMENIOS, the only other good option.  If they were forced to accept ARMENIOS, then they had to say goodbye to their precious Sarmatian connection.  But I showed incontrovertibly that ARMORICOS could fit with a couple of quite allowable ligatures - ones that could be shown from precedent-setting inscriptions found in Dalmatia at the same time of LAC.  

We do know that there were problems in Gaul under Commodus.  Specifically, we may point to the so-called Deserters' War under a certain Maternus.  

My reasons for shying away from ARMORICOS are few, but significant.  First, we have no record of any force being sent to Armorica in the time period we are referring to.  Second, we would expect LAC to have written not ADVERSUS ARMORICOS, but instead 'against Maternus' or 'against deserters', etc.  There is no evidence that the Armoricans themselves, or rather the tribes living in Armorica, were the enemy.  Third, we have not a single additional stone mentioning Armorica.  Not one.  Fourth, an observation by Roger Tomlin:

"ARMENIOS I think more likely than ARMORICOS, both because it fits more easily (but, I repeat, the other will also fit) and because my guess is that 9 out of 10 Liburnians would have heard of 'Armenia', but only 1 out of 10 'Armorica'. That is bare assertion, of course, but I can't help feeling that LAC was expecting his readers to know what he was referring to."

3) ARMENIOS

The argument in favor of Armenia is circumstantial, but still compelling.  

We may begin with the sending of the Roman governor of Britain, Statius Priscus, to Armenia to command the war there.  This Priscus may well have been born in Dalmatia, as is true of Iulius Severus, (who hand-picked him),  as well as Lucius Artorius Castus.  Tomlin was the first to propose (and others, including the late Anthony Birley, subsequently agreed with him) that it was reasonable to assume some legionary detachments were brought with Priscus to Armenia.  While Britain is very far away from Armenia (pretty much on the other side of the Empire!), we know that a legion stationed at Bonn, Germany, on the Rhine was sent to Armenia, as were Danubian detachments.  Both Tomlin and Birley say the most likely route to be taken by Priscus involved going quickly up the Rhine and then down along the Danube.  In any event, the objection to troops going from Britain to Armenia because of distance is moot: obviously, Priscus himself had no trouble going there.  

Second, the most likely foundation date for the province of Liburnia (and, hence, the appointment of LAC to the procuratorship of the new province) is c. 168.  This military reorganization of Dalmatia was performed by the joint emperors, Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus at the outset of the Marcomannic Wars.  No other reorganization of Dalmatia is known, and all the scholars I have consulted have agreed that it makes no sense to look for the creation of Liburnia at the end of the Marcomannic Wars, or to have LAC appointed to a special office that may have only been held by him. 

Third, if we permit the 'proc cent' of the LAC inscription to be a formula only adopted in the time of Commodus (something I found at first occurring independently on another stone c. 190), we can have that carved on LAC's stone when he was retired and anywhere between his early 70s and early 80s.  This career time-line was devised and approved by Roger Tomlin, who says there is no reason LAC could not have been commissioned directly into the centuriate.  Of course, Tomlin warns us not to make too much of the proc cent, as just because we don't have other extant stones with this formula before 190 doesn't mean such didn't, at one time, exist.  In addition, we know of these ranks and payment levels from stones and other sources during the reign of Marcus Aurelius and much earlier.  But if we are to be generous and allow the formula to be a determining factor in the dating of the stone, the resulting date does not preclude LAC from having gone to Armenia under Priscus.

It is for these reasons that I must side with ARMENIOS as the most probable reading of the ARM[...]S of the LAC stone.  Should future evidence materialize that runs counter to this position, I will immediately taken it into consideration should I need to revise my thinking on the subject.  

A NOTE ON THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM: IMPLIED VEXILLATIONS OR COMPLETE LEGIONS?

All along, the academic community has insisted that 'vexillations', missing from the LAC memorial stone inscription, is implied.  I have, for the most part, agreed with this assessment.  When one uses this as a baseline for exploration of the ARM[...]S of the inscription, two candidates emerge for the fragmentary word : Armenia and Armorica.  For the former we have a well-known recorded event, while for the latter we possess no independent record of conflict (other than the possibility that the so-called Deserters' War seems to have involved Gaul). 

However, an extensive search on my part has failed to produce another single example of a stone where vexillations is implied.  While it is true that Castus, from the standpoint of vanity, may simply have been exaggerating his status as duke by choosing to leave out any mention of vexillations, this is not a very satisfactory solution to the problem.  Anyone who knew him or who knew of him would immediately recognize that he was lying in the context of a perpetual monument.  Such an intentional omission seems, for that reason, to be highly unlikely.  At least in the opinion of this writer.

Professor Roger Tomlin told me several months ago that all three legions would never have been removed entire and simultaneously from their bases and brought against anyone, whether in country or without.  However, as LAC was prefect of the Sixth, he could well have led his own legion (assuming the legate and senior tribune were adsent or dead) plus generous vexillations drawn from the other two British legions during an action in-country.  In this sense, he might have felt justified in proclaiming on his stone that he was dux (temporary military commander) of three British legions.

Tomlin wished to emphasize this point, because it meant that whether LAC was leading troops inside or outside of Britain, a minimum of two vexillations from the other two British legions would be implied.  

I think the solution to this problem is not anywhere near as difficult as the Sarmatian contingent would have us believe it is.  Anyone reading that LAC had led three British legions to Armenia or Armorica would recognize immediately that vexillations were intended, for the entire legionary complement of the large British province would never have been sent to either place.  Sure, such a statement might have been seen as somewhat of a lazy one or might even have been taken by some "not in the know" as a rather glaring carving error. But it did serve to get the message across in less space and with less effort on the part of the carver. 

Professor Roger Tomlin himself holds this same view, telling me that

"He [the carver] may have been saving space – we know he was pressed for it – and no one would think an entire legionary garrison would be taken out of a province for service elsewhere. He was quite capable of error: BRITANICIMIARVM certainly, and [PR]AEFF."

I would add that the shift from nominative to dative case in the inscription is probably also simply due to an error on the carver's part.  [An alternative explanation for the case problem is proposed here:  https://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/709592.Some_Problems_Concerning_the_Reading_of_the_CIL_3_12813.pdf.]
 
The Sarmatian contingent has a different take on this, of course.  For them, LAC is de facto governor of Britain, and as such he is commander of the entire legionary complement of the province.  They will not retract this falsehood, despite the overwhelming body of evidence that supports the accepted scholarly view that dux did not have the meaning they are trying to assign it during LAC's floruit.  Nor have they been able to provide any real evidence in support of their contention.  

During the 2nd century, a dux was a junior officer who was given a special, temporary command assignment.  As Tomlin makes clear, LAC would have reverted to prefect status when his mission was completed.  In the case of the expedition against Armenia, he was appointed commander of the legionary detachments that accompanied Priscus to the East.  

I would advise my readers to discount their claim that LAC was de factor governor of Britain.  Even if, for the sake of argument, we accept that he was just that, we are forced to answer a difficult question: how did he become de facto governor?  For that to have happened, not only would the governor of Britain have to be dead or left unappointed, but any vice-governor would also have to be dead or somehow indisposed, and every single senior officer of all three legions would have to be dead or absent (meaning all legates and senior tribunes).  Although much is made of Commodus' replacement of senatorial legates with equestrians, the point is exaggerated in the Classical texts for the usual political reasons.  The fact of the matter is, as Tomlin has demonstrated with examples, equestrians had been given posts traditionally reserved for senators prior to the reign of Commodus. Equestrians were even officially raised to the senatorship.  It happened, for instance, under Marcus Aurelius.  Bear in mind that we also have nothing on LAC's stone about him holding the rank of legate.

To suggest, as the Sarmatian contingent does, that a prefect of the Sixth Legion became effective governor of Britain is, therefore, preposterous.  






 







Saturday, November 20, 2021

MY REBUTTAL OF ANTONIO TRINCHESE'S SUPPORT OF 'ARMATOS' FOR 'ARM[...]S'

This following response to Antonio Trinchese's support of ARMATOS was posted in the Facebook KING ARTHUR: MAN AND MYTH group page.  My passages of rebuttal are all in Italics. 

The word "armatus" as a noun has been used many times by Latin authors. Julius Caesar, for example, uses it in this passage:

“Ei repentino malo perterriti diffugiunt ad sua praesidia; quae nostri ut viderunt, acrius contra armatos incitati neminem ex eo numero vivum capi patiuntur. Profugit inde cum paucis Lucterius nec se recipit in eastra.

"They were panic-struck by the sudden blow, and fled helter-skelter to their own detachments. When our men saw it they dashed the more fiercely against the armed men, and suffered not one of the number to be taken alive. Lucterius fled away from the spot with a few followers, and did not return to the camp”

In this context, we are informed exactly who the armed men are. Here is a bit fuller version of the account:

35 Having collected great store of corn, Drappes and Lucterius established themselves not more than •ten miles from the town, intending from this point to convey the corn into the town by degrees. The commanders divided the duties between them: Drappes stood fast with part of the force to guard the camp, Lucterius escorted the train of animals to the town. Having posted several detachments thereabout, he began about the tenth hour of the night to carry the corn into the town by narrow paths through the woods. The camp sentries noticed the noise thereof, and scouts, being sent out, reported what was afoot; so Caninius moved speedily with  p565 cohorts (which had stood to arms) from the nearest forts and attacked the corn-carriers just before dawn. They were panic-struck by the sudden blow, and fled helter-skelter to their own detachments. When our men saw it they dashed the more fiercely against the armed men, and suffered not one of the number to be taken alive. Lucterius fled away from the spot with a few followers, and did not return to the camp.

36 After his success Caninius discovered from the prisoners that a part of the force was with Drappes in camp not much more than •twelve miles away.

In Tacitus we find examples of both the use of "adversus armatos" as “against well armed men, soldiers” and of the word "armati" as a synonym for "mutiny soldiers":

Tacitus, Annales, 1, 59, “non enim se proditione neque adversus feminas gravidas, sed palam adversus armatosbellum tractare.

For he practised war, not by the help of treason nor against pregnant women, but in open day and against men who carried arms”.

Once again, the context tells us exactly who the armed men are. And the fuller passage:

59 1 The report of Segestes' surrender and his gracious reception, once it became generally known, was heard with hope or sorrow by the advocates or opponents of war. Arminius, violent enough by nature, was driven frantic by the seizure of his wife and the subjugation to slavery of her unborn child. He flew through the Cherusci, demanding war against Segestes, war against the Caesar. There was no sparing of invectives:— "A peerless father! a great commander! a courageous army! whose united powers had carried off one wretched woman. Before his own sword three legions, three generals, had fallen. For he practised war, not by the help of  p345 treason nor against pregnant women, but in open day and against men who carried arms. In the groves of Germany were still to be seen the Roman standards which he had hung aloft to the gods of their fathers. Let Segestes inhabit the conquered bank, and make his son once more a priest — to mortal deities:11 one fact the Germans could never sufficiently condone, that their eyes had seen the Rods, the Axes, and the Toga between the Elbe and the Rhine. Other nations, unacquainted with the dominion of Rome, had neither felt her punishments nor known her exactions: seeing that they had rid themselves of both, and that the great Augustus, hallowed as deity, and his chosen Tiberius had departed foiled, let them never quail before a callow youth,12 before a disaffected army! If they loved their country, their parents, their ancient ways, better than despots and new colonies, then let them follow Arminius to glory and freedom rather than Segestes to shame and slavery!"

The armed men are, obviously, his Roman enemy.

Tacitus, Annales, 1, 32:

“Cassius Chaerea, mox caede Gai Caesaris memoriam apud posteros adeptus, tum adulescens et animi ferox, inter obstantis et armatosferro viam patefecit.

Cassius Chaerea, soon to win a name in history as the slayer of Caligula, then a reckless stripling, opened a way with his sword through an armed and challenging multitude”.

This episode took place during a mutiny of the Roman troops in Germania.

Which once again proves the point: the context tells us who the armed men are.

The word "armatus", in its various cases, is widely used also in Latin epigraphy. There are 73 examples in the Clauss-Slaby database: in many cases they are personal names; in two cases, precisely in Dalmatia, they indicate a local divinity (Daniel Hunt was the first to point out this evidence to me); in other cases, finally, they indicate "armed men" or "troops".

And in not one of these instances in ARMATOS used the way you are proposing it is used in the LAC inscription.

An example of the use of the word "armati" in epigraphy is given by the epigraph CIL 02-05, 01022, containing the so-called "Lex Ursonensis", granted by Marcus Antonius in 44 BC.

“...103. Quicumque in colonia Genetiva IIvir praefectusve iure dicundo praerit, eum colonos incolasque contributos quocumque tempore coloniae finium defendendorum causa armatoseducere decuriones censuerint, quot maior pars qui tum aderunt decreverint, id ei sine fraude sua facere liceto. Eique IIviro aut quem IIvir armatispraefecerit idem ius eademque animadversio esto, uti tribuno militum populi Romani in exercitu populi Romani est, itque ei sine fraude sua facere liceto ius potestasque esto, dum it, quot maior pars decurionum decreverit, qui tum aderunt, fiat.

Whenever a majority of the decurions present at any meeting determine to draft armed menfor the purpose of defending the territories of the colony, it shall be lawful, without prejudice to themselves, for every duumvir or prefect charged with jurisdiction in the colony Genetiva Julia to draft under arms colonists, resident aliens, and "attributed" persons. And the said duumvir or any person placed in command of such armed forceby the duumvir shall have the same right and the same power of punishment that belongs to a military tribune of the Roman people in an army of the Roman people; and he shall exercise lawfully and properly such right and power without prejudice to himself, provided that all acts performed are in accordance with the decree of a majority of the decurions present at the said meeting”.

Particularly interesting is the example of the inscription, which contains instructions from the praetorian prefect to the governor of the province Macedonia, not far from Dalmatia, referring to previous provisions specifically concerning "armed men".

And yet again, we are specifically told who these armed men are. The LAC inscription does not.

In addition to the geographical proximity, the dating of the epigraph in the year 192 is interesting, given that the dating proposed by us for the epigraph of Lucius Artorius Castus is the year 197:

SEG-53, 00617 = AE 2014, 01178: “Exemplum epistu(lae) [scrip]tae Messalae Rutiliano a praef(ecto) prae[torio. Ci]rca armatoset circa ceteros comme[antes sat]is provinsum est principalibus consti[tutionib] us, qua certum est te non ignora[re, ut si s]ecumdum ea partibus tuis functus [sis, nequ]e diplomatibus commeantes neque [coloni] vel stabularii iniuriam patientur = Copy of the letters to Messala Rutilianus written by the pretorian prefect. Concerning those bearing arms and other travellers, the imperial constitutions, which you surely know, take ample care of; if you perform your duties accordingly, neither those travelling with a diploma nor the peasants nor the station personnel will suffer any wrong”.

This is an intentionally vague reference, as it is written about laws pertaining to whoever happens to be armed and may be encountered by travelling. Using this example for comparison with a supposed ARMATOS on the LAC inscription is arguing apples and oranges.  No one could possibly know who all the armed men are wondering about, and so there is no effort to tell us who they are.  This is mere common sense.  You can't be specific if you are speaking in general terms ON PURPOSE.    But we do know who is being spoken about here.  So in that sense, we are not kept in the dark.

In those years many "armed men" toured the Empire, legally or not. "Armati" is, notoriously, also a synonym for "soldiers", and during the last years of Commodus' reign and during the subsequent civil wars for the conquest of the throne, there were soldiers mutinied to their commanders, but faithful to the emperor, or vice versa, or real deserters constituting almost a regular army, even with claims to the imperial throne, in the well-known case of Maternus:

Herodian [1.10.1] “But before long another plot was organized against Commodus. It involved a former soldier named Maternus, who had committed many frightful crimes.He deserted from the army, persuading others to flee with him, and soon collected a huge mob of desperadoes. At first they attacked and plundered villages and farms, but when Maternus had amassed a sizable sum of money, he gathered an even larger band of cutthroats by offering the prospect of generous booty and a fair share of the loot. As a result, his men no longer appeared to be brigands but rather enemy troops”.

Have you bothered to look up 'enemy troops' in Herodian? You need the Greek text here. But, in any case, we are once again looking at an enemy CLEARLY IDENTIFIED IN THE LITERARY ACCOUNT. We have no doubt who these armed men are: they are the armed men who follow Maternus.

No one would put on his stone that he had fought armed men. As Tomlin has pointed out, who else would he have fought? Inermes (unarmed men)? Unless you specify on the inscription whose armed men they are, the term is so obvious as to not require stating. 

You are consistently confusing true literary sources with inscription texts.  For example, you claim that such a use of ARMATOS on the LAC stone would not be at all unlike the use of "rebelles hostes publicos" in Tiberius Claudius Candidus's inscription.  But 'rebelles hostes publicos'   (against supporters of Albinus, opponent of Severus in 196–7; see  https://dokumen.pub/image-and-reality-of-roman-imperial-power-in-the-third-century-ad-the-impact-of-war-0815353731-9780815353737.html) is a very specific description.  We would presume, of course, that they were armed!  

For those who wish to inspect the Candidus inscription themselves, I would send them to 


There it is revealed just how specific the use of the terms discussed above really are:

duci terra marique adversus rebelles hh(ostes) pp(ublicos) item Asiae item Noricae

"governor of the province of Hispania Citerior for the two emperors, as well as military commander on land and on sea against rebels and enemies of the State in the same province, also (against rebels and enemies) in Asia and Noricum"

CONCLUSION

ARMATOS in the LAC inscription tells us nothing at all other than that the enemy happened to be armed.  IN EVERY EXAMPLE Antonio Trinchese PROVIDED AND WHICH I TREATED OF IN DETAIL, THE CONTEXT OF THE PASSAGE TELLS US EXACTLY WHO THE ARMED MEN WERE AND WHAT ROLE THEY WERE PERFORMING AS ENEMIES.  THE LOCATION OF THE ENEMY IS ALSO NOT LEFT IN DOUBT. ARMATOS IS A NEUTRAL TERM, AND TELLS US NOTHING, AND THEREFORE WOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN USED IN ISOLATION ON THE STONE.

AS ROGER TOMLING WRYLY OBSERVED ABOUT THE PROPOSED USE OF THIS VAGUE. NONSPECIFIC TERM: "a Roman general wouldn't have congratulated himself on fighting against 'armed men', any more than he would have recorded a campaign against inermes."  INERMES ARE 'UNARMED MEN.' TOMLIN HAS WRITTEN EXTENSIVELY ABOUT HIS REJECTION OF ARMATOS FOR THE CASTUS STONE, BUT HIS SUMMARY STATEMENT IS MORE THAN ADEQUATE: 

"Castus is so explicit elsewhere in his great inscription that I can't think he would have been so vague at the highpoint of his career. There are so many specific terms he might have used: DEFECTORES, REBELLES, LATRONES, HOSTES PVBLICOS, PRAEDONES, even DESERTORES. I think of Tib. Claudius Candidus, legate of Hispania Citerior, et in ea duci terra marique adversus rebelles hostes publicos.

Armatus, unlike all the nouns I have quoted above, is an adjective – it is used of a person doing something illegal (but specified), and worse than this, doing it 'under arms'. Can you find armatus being used by itself in the sense of 'illicitly armed'? I had a quick look at the dictionary, but I couldn't find it in this sense – only neutrally, 'having arms' and then explicitly, being a 'soldier'.

In other words, I wonder if armatus is used in the sense of doing something which is not only illegal but done 'with weapons'. But what this is, must be specified. For example, armed robbery. You fight 'armed men', but if only if they are enemies of the State in some way and are defined as such."

My own personal conclusion regarding ARMATOS is this: for a career soldier and prefect of a legion to make a big deal of saying that he had fought some armed men is, well, more than a bit ridiculous, really.  Frankly, it is so obvious an assertion as to be patently absurd.