Final Word on the Dux Title of L. Artorius Castus

So, just this morning, as we continue to be bedeviled by the proposal by Dr. Linda A. Malcor and colleagues that the dux title for the 2nd century legionary prefect L. Artorius Castus equates functionally to a governorship (despire overwhelimg evidence and broad scholarly consensus to the contrary), I felt I should seek to put the matter to rest by communicating my thoughts one last time to Professor Roger Tomlin.

My email to him (unedited) is pasted below along with his (unedited) response:

"There is still a group of Arthurian scholars who are insisting Castus, as dux, was dux of Britain, and thus a sort of governor.

I pointed out to them that he does not call himself Dux Britanniarum (as with that title after Diocletian). If he did just say he was dux of 3 legions and that's all, then we might pause and wonder what he meant.

But he says he was dux of 3 legions (legionary detachments) that he took against someone somewhere. That very statement precludes the possibility he was claiming to be dux of Britain.

Is my reasoning not sound here?

If he had been dux of Britain, would he not have said so by calling himself Dux Britanniarum?

Thanks, Roger."

"Yes, I think you are right.

dux Britanniarum is a much later title – late third-century if not fourth-century – meaning commander of the armed forces in Britain. Not (civil) governor. Castus does not claim any of this: he is acting-commander of legionary detachments drawn from the army in Britain which were temporarily combined to be a mobile expeditionary force."

I've decided that this "problem" is no longer such, and I will not be treating of it again in the future.