Provenance and location

Ancient city: Athenae
Modern city: Athens (Greece)
Province: Achaia
Diocese: Macedonia
Regional prefecture: Italia Illyricum Africa
Provenance: the inscription was found in 1869 on a private property (Gaspari) in the Plaka, North of the Tower of the Winds (Aerides, or «Horologium Kiristi» - Roman Agora, Athens)
Current location: unknown (lost)
Ancient location: public space (East-side of the Roman Agora)

Type and material of the support and text layout

Text category

Honorary inscription

Greek text

Critical edition

Edition based on IG II-III/2, pars V, nr. 13275.

3: ΑΝΤΟΛΙΟΣΣΕΝ on the stone; σ(τῆσ)εν Robert 1948; σ<τῆσ>εν IG II-III/2, pars III/1, nr. 4226, Sironen 1994 and 1997

Translations

English

(Sironen 1997, p. 70)

“The Proconsul of Hellas Anatolius set you up, Prefect Probus, at Athens in a statue made of bronze”.

French

“Par une statue en bronze, toi, ô Probus, préfet, à Athènes Anatolius, le proconsul de l’Hellas, t’a élevé”.

Italian

“Con una statua in bronzo, te, o Probus, prefetto, ad Atene Anatolius, proconsole dell’Ellade, Ti ha elevato”.

(German translation by K. Hallof in IG II/III^² 13275)

The inscription and its prefects: critical commentary, updating, overviews

The inscription was found in 1869 in the Plaka district in the center of Athens on the private property of the Gaspari family. According to the editor, the german epigraphist U. Köhler (1838-1903), the find spot was located North of the Tower of the Winds (Aerides, or Horologion of Andronikos of Kyrrhos, or «Horologium Kiristi»; see Saladino 2012) on the eastern side of the Roman Agora. The inscription was chiselled on the convex surface of a columnar statue-base. Köhler was probably the only person to see the inscription, which has since disappeared. He states that he could read traces of an earlier inscription on the upper right-hand part of the epigraphic field (where the remains of the word νόμοι were readable). It is possible that the epigraphic support, a reused column drum, had already been used to engrave an earlier inscription (on these types of supports, which were widespread in the Greek-speaking area of the late Empire, see Bigi 2020).

The inscription is composed of a single elegiac distich, engraved on three lines. On line 3 the pentameter is irregular. The name of the dedicator, Ἀντόλιος, is a hapax, instead of Ἀνατόλιος, and the second α is suppressed to avoid the tribrach rhythm. The following verb <στῆ>σεν, is a sigmatic aorist without augmentation of the verb ἴστημι, used in the homeric epos in place of ἔστησε; curiously in our inscription the verbal theme does not appear. The first editor (Köhler 1870, p. 133) believes that the three letters στῆ were omitted by the stone cutter by mistake. Nachmanson (1910, p. 118) believes that the verb was reduced voluntarily as a contraction. Whatever the case, the syllable στῆ of the verb στῆσεν is necessary not only for the understanding of the text, but also for the establishment of the correct metric of the pentameter.

The dedicator of our elegiac distich in Athens is Anatolius, proconsul Achaiae (l. 3: Ἑλλάδος ἀνθύπατος, on this titulature, cf. Corsten 1997, in particular p. 119). He directly addresses the recipient Probus (σε Πρόβον | τὸν ὕπαρχον, ll. 1-2) who is present in the form of a bronze statue (εἰκόνι χαλκείῃ, l. 1; on honorary statues in the Roman Agora of Athens, cf. Deligiannakis 2013, pp. 114-125; Dillon 2018; Dillon in print). Private individuals, dignitaries and public institutions all needed the emperor’s permission in order to put up a bronze statue in a public space. In our inscription from Athens the permission is not mentioned (see Feissel 1984, pp. 545-558; for bronze statues in honour of praetorian prefects with imperial permission, see PPRET 24, 54, 58. For references to gilded bronze statues in honour of praetorian prefects, erected in prestigious public spaces in this period [sub auro, inaurata, auro condecorata], see PPRET 27, 28, 31, 46, 48, 51). If, as it seems, the monument comes from the Roman Agora, the proconsul may have had a personal monument placed there (as a personal client of Probus ?) with the permission of the Athenian city authorities.

Although the dedicator’s name, Anatolius (see PLRE I, p. 61), was a common one in the Late Empire, it can be associated with the proconsul Achaiae, who received three elegiac distichs from the city of Sparta, for his commitment to helping the community after the earthquake, dated by historians to 375 AD (cf. Zos. 04, 18, 02; Avramea 1997, pp. 41-51; Cartledge, Spawforth 2002², p. 113). The epigram was chiselled on a reused columnar base that was found close to the theatre (Woodward 1925-26, pp. 245-247, nr. 35 = AE 1929, 0023 = SEG 11 (1954), 0773 = Groag 1946, pp. 57-58 = Robert 1948, p. 63 = Feissel 1985, p. 288, nr. 26 = LSA 0357):

Ἀντολ̣[ί]η̣ πολύολβε, / σέθεν καλὸν οὔνομα / ἔδεκτο /

ἀνθύπατον Ῥώμης /5 ἄνθος ἐϋκτιμένης. /

Ὡς ἀγαθὸς γὰρ ἐὼν πάν/των ἀπὸ κῆρας ἐρύκει /

Σπάρτην τ’ εὔανδρον τεῦ/ξεν ἐρειπομένην, /

10 ἣ δῶκεν ἄγαλμ(α) κατὰ / πτόλιν ἄγχι Λυκούργου, /

ὄφρα πέλοιτο βροτοῖς / αἰὲν ἀοιδότατος.

(Transl. Gehn LSA 0357): “Wealthy Anatolia, from thee the proconsular flower of well-built Rome received his fair name. Being so good he saved Sparta, abounding in good men and true, from every grief, when it happened that she lay in ruins. She (Sparta) gave him a statue in the city, close to (that of) Lykourgos, so that he be always most famous to the people”.

The proconsulate of Achaia held by Anatolius in 375 AD could well coincide with one of the four praetorian prefectures of the honoured personage, Probus (Πρόβον, l. 1). Since the edition of Symmachus’ letters, published in 1883 by O. Seeck (p. XCIX), the ὕπαρχος Probus, honoured in the monument of the Athenian Agora, is identified with Sex. Petronius Probus, who was the most important senator of the second half of the 4th Century AD. Born around 328/332 AD, after being nominated to the quaestura and the praetura in Rome, he was made proconsul of Africa in 358 AD, ordinary consul in 371 AD and praetorian prefect of Italia-Illyricum-Africa, Illyricum, Gaul, attaining this position four times between 364 AD and 387 AD (this is the most extensive chronology proposed by the modern historians); he died sometime between 388 and 392 AD (see in brief, Jones 1964, p. 85-87, scheme pp. 88-89; similarly PLRE I, pp. 736-740, and scheme pp. 1050-1051; Pergami 1995, pp. 417-423; Lizzi Testa 2004, pp. 316-319; for an analysis of his career, see PPRET 59). Petronius Probus is attested as praetorian prefect during and at the end of his career in 11 inscriptions (besides this one, see PPRET 56, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66), as well as being cited in numerous literary texts and as many as 46 constitutions from the Theodosian and Justinian Codes (source list in PLRE I, pp. 736-740; Porena 2020c). Unfortunately, the data provided from such a large number of sources does not always concord. While it is certain that Petronius Probus was proconsul of Africa in 358 AD (CTh 11, 36, 13, on 23 June; CIL 08, 01783) and ordinary consul with Gratianus Augustus (iterum) in 371 AD (CLRE, pp. 276-277), the chronology, sequence and administrative geography of his four praetorian prefectures is difficult to reconstruct and opinions are divided.

To sum up, we can say that two chronologies and two extensions of the prefectures of Probus are possible: 1) a “backward-looking chronology” in an Empire divided into three major praetorian prefectures (Galliae, Italia-Illyricum-Africa, Oriens); 2) a “forward-looking chronology” in an Empire divided into four praetorian prefectures (Galliae, Italia-Illyricum-Africa, autonomous Illyricum, Oriens).

The prevailing reconstruction today is the “backward-looking chronology” based on an Empire divided into three praetorian prefectures, that was proposed by Jones 1964 and PLRE. According to this interpretation, in the second half of the 4th Century there was only one major praetorian prefecture of Italia-Illyricum-Africa, particularly in the years 381-392 AD, next to the praetorian prefecture of Gaul and the East. Thus Probus would have held a first short praetorian prefecture of Illyricum in 364 AD (CTh 01, 29, 01), a second short praetorian prefecture of Gaul in 366 AD (CTh 11, 01, 15), and a long third praetorian prefecture of Italia-Illyricum-Africa in the years 368-375/376 AD. The latter prefecture is attested by the Pincio inscription, which was dedicated on August 8th 378 AD (PPRET 59, but strangely the office is listed without iteration), and would have been followed with a fourth short praetorian prefecture of Italia-Illyricum-Africa in 383 AD. This series of offices is chronologically compatibile with the order of the four prefectures listed in the Verona inscription (PPRET 63), but obliges us to correct the dates of the constitutions of the Law Codes for the period 380-384 AD, in which Probus is reported to be in office as praetorian prefect overlapping with the six/seven other prefects of Italia-Illyricum-Africa. It contradicts the account of Ammianus, who describes Probus holding the prefecture continuously from 368 AD owards (intervallando potestates adsiduas, Amm. 27, 11 and Amm. 30, 05). This chronology incorporates Probus’ first three praetorian prefectures during the reign of Valentinianus I, and assumes only one short praetorian prefecture of two months in 383 AD in the last thirteen years of the senator’s career (376/388 AD).

Chronology:

1st praetorian prefecture over Illyricum in 364 AD, appointed by Valentinianus I

2nd praetorian prefecture over Galliae in 366 AD, appointed by Valentinianus I

3rd praetorian prefecture over Italia-Illyricum-Africa in 368-375/376 AD, appointed by Valentinianus I

[Gothic crisis 376/379 AD: Probus was never appointed praetorian prefect under Gratianus (378-383)]

[383-388 AD usurpation of Magnus Maximus]

4th praetorian prefecture limited to the period of August-October 383 AD over Italia-Illyricum-Africa, appointed by Valentinianus II

The “forward-looking chronology” based on an Empire divided into four praetorian prefectures has been proposed recently by Porena (2020a-b). According to this interpretation, in the years 361-376 AD, there was only one large praetorian prefecture of Italia-Illyricum-Africa, next to the praetorian prefecture of Gaul and the East. However, from 376/377 AD, the praetorian prefecture of Italia-(Illyricum)-Africa was separated from the autonomous prefecture of Illyricum. At the behest of Valentinianus I, Probus held a first long praetorian prefecture of Italia-Illyricum-Africa in the years 368-375/376 AD, which is attested by the Pincio inscription dedicated on August 8th 378 AD (PPRET 59, appropriately the office is listed without iteration). After this mandate, during the Gothic crisis and around the defeat of Hadrianopolis, Gratianus would have divided the prefecture of Italia-Africa (perhaps with a part of Illyricum) and made an autonomous praetorian prefecture out of Illyricum. In the years (379?) 380-382 AD, Emperor Gratianus would have given Probus a second praetorian prefecture in Italia-Africa. In the Autumn of 381 AD, Gratianus also gave Probus a third praetorian prefecture of Illyricum alone, which was extended into 382 AD. Probus was appointed to a second and third prefecture with separate codicils (the two mandates on two locations would have overlapped for a few months). In 384-385 AD, after the usurpation of Maximus in Gaul and the assassination of Gratianus, Valentinianus II would have given Probus a fourth praetorian prefecture in Italia-Africa with a formal appointment in the same codicils to the praetorian prefecture of Gaul. Since the latter was controlled by the usurper Maximus, Probus never took possession of this prefecture, even though Valentinianus II claimed it as his own. This reconstruction preserves the dates of the constitutions of the Law Codes for the period 380-384, while agreeing with the account of Ammianus (Amm. 27, 11 and Amm. 30, 05). It also concords with the data of the inscription for Probus from the Pincio (PPRET 59) and Capua (PPRET 60) and distributes the praetorian prefectures of Probus between the reigns of Valentinianus I, Gratianus and Valentinianus II.

Chronology:

1st praetorian prefecture in 368-375/376 AD over Italia-Illyricum-Africa, appointed by Valentinianus I

[376/379 AD Gothic crisis and creation of an autonomous praetorian praefecture of Illyricum]

2nd praetorian prefecture in (379?) 380-382 AD over Italia-(Illyricum)-Africa, appointed by Gratianus

3rd praetorian prefecture in 381-382 AD over autonomous Illyricum, appointed by Gratianus

[383-388 AD usurpation of Magnus Maximus]

4th praetorian prefecture in 384-385 AD over Italia-(Illiricum)-Africa (and nominally Galliae), appointed by Valentinianus II

Let us return to the Athenian inscription. The identification of the dedicator of Probus’ Athenian epigram with the proconsul of Achaia Anatolius, who restored Sparta probably after the earthquake of 375 AD, allows us to date the inscription towards the end of the long praetorian prefecture of Italia-Illyricum-Africa, held by Probus in 368-375/376 AD (the third one or the first one of his four prefectures, see above). Ordinarily the honorary verse epigrams do not indicate prefecture iterations and the inscription from Athens does not mention the consulate of 371 AD, but such short poems (one distich) often lack these indications.

The office of the praetorian prefect in our inscription is indicated by the noun ὕπαρχος. This noun is usually not accompanied by an indication of the geographical district of the prefecture. In Greek inscriptions in which the office is indicated by the word ὕπαρχος, it is safe to assume that the monument was made in a city within the district administered by the dignitary being honoured. In our case, the prefecture of Probus certainly included the diocese of Macedonia, the province of Achaia and the city of Athens: it was therefore the prefecture of Illyricum. According to the “backward-looking chronology,” if the inscription from Athens was chiselled after the earthquake of 375 AD, then it is possible that it refers to the third praetorian prefecture at the time of its conclusion, when Probus was discharged in 376 AD. However, if the proconsul had been honoured in Sparta a few years after the earthquake for his efforts in rebuilding the city (see Groag 1946, p. 57), then it is equally possible that the inscription refers to the fourth prefecture, held in 383 AD. If the absence of the consulship is interpreted to indicate the inscription dating to before 371 AD, then the prefecture could also be that of Illyricum in 364 AD.

Otherwise, according to the “forward-looking chronology”, the praetorian prefecture mentioned in the inscription from Athens would be the first one held by Probus, dating to 368-375/376 AD, probably towards its end, or equally the third one in an autonomous Illyricum, in 381-382 AD. This prefecture cannot be the fourth (384-385 AD) since Illyricum (with Greece) was not included in it. While Gehn, in LSA 1, generically dates the Athenian inscription to the period 368/388 AD, Sironen (1994, p. 30; 1997, p. 69) dates it to the years 375/376 or 382-384 AD. For us, a date during the period 376/382 AD is most plausible.

It seems very likely that the proconsul of Achaia Anatolius was a client of the powerful praetorian prefect Probus and wanted to honour him with a personal monument in Athens. The Athenian inscription is the only one made by a proconsul for a praetorian prefect.

In the verse inscription from Athens the noun ὕπαρχος seems to indicate the office of the praetorian prefect. If so, this would be the first epigraphic attestation of the use of this Greek word for the office of the praetorian prefect (for the use of this noun in the epigraphy of the diocese of Asia, see the detailed study by Feissel 1998; updates in Filippini in print). In the epigraphy of the 4th Century AD, only one other instance of the use of the noun ὕπαρχος might possibly be interpreted to indicate a praetorian prefect: in the Aphthonius inscription (see PPRET 76). Since its establishment by Augustus, the office of praetorian prefect is indicated in Greek by the term ἔπαρχος: this term is very common in the prose epigraphy of the 4th Century AD (see PPRET 18; 29; 30; 35; 43; 44; 47; 52; 68; 73; 82; 83; 84; 85; 86; 87; 88; 90). We note that in two Greek prose inscriptions from Gortyna, the praetorian prefect Petronius Probus himself is also referred to as ἔπαρχος (see PPRET 58 and 61). The meaning of the two terms ὕπαρχος and ἔπαρχος has different nuances: ἔπαρχος indicates a perspective from below, «the one who commands above other dignitaries»; ὕπαρχος indicates the perspective from above, «the one who commands below a higher authority». In Greek epigraphy the office of praetorian prefect seems to be denoted by ἔπαρχος in prose texts, but by ὕπαρχος in verse texts; the two nouns are metrically equivalent. In prose, ἔπαρχος is followed by the specification τοῦ ἱεροῦ πραιτωρίου / τῶν ἱερῶν πραιτωρίων, while ὕπαρχος (between the 4th and 5th Centuries AD) does not seem carry any further specification. Only in 6th Century AD prose, is the noun ὕπαρχος sometimes followed by τοῦ ἱεροῦ πραιτωρίου / τῶν ἱερῶν πραιτωρίων. If the noun ἔπαρχος is never ambiguous and always indicates the praetorian prefect, the same cannot be said for ὕπαρχος. In effect, the latter is rarely followed by the indication of the appointment, the praetorian prefecture, nor by any geographical indication and can be ambiguous. It may indicate a diocesan vicarious or a praetorian prefect. In the few cases where ὕπαρχος is followed by the geographical indication, it is either the Asiana diocese (Ἀσίης, Ἀσίδος) or a seat of Asiana linked to the presence of the vicarius or proconsul Asiae (e.g. in their late inscriptions, Isidorus, Stephanus, Nonnus ὑπάρχοι are the vicars of Asia, cf. Feissel 1998). It seems likely that the readers of late Greek inscriptions distinguished the dignitary honoured in a monument with the title of ὕπαρχος according to the location of the monument (e.g. in a city that was the seat of a vicar and not a prefect, or within a gallery of statues of vicars or prefects) or according to the style of the statue (the statue of a vicar may have been dressed differently from that of a praetorian prefect, but no secure statue of a late antique praetorian prefect currently allows a study of his clothing and insignia). In summary, however, it seems that only from the beginning of the 5th Century AD does the term ὕπαρχος become widespread in Greek epigraphy, mostly in epigrams, to denote the praetorian prefect, with the exception of Probus’ Athenian inscription. In the 4th Century AD ὕπαρχος basically indicates the office of the diocesan vicars (Feissel 1998).

A final element is common to the monuments of Probus in Athens and Aphthonius in Gortyna: they are the only honorary monuments to praetorian prefects in the 4th Century – and perhaps in the entire late antique epigraphy – whose base is composed of a column drum and not a parallelepiped base. The titling (ὕπαρχος) and the columnar shape of the base lead us to yet another possibility - that the ὕπαρχος Probus of the Athenian monument made by Anatolius, might actually be a vicarius Macedoniae, distinguishable from the aristocratic praetorian prefect Petronius Probus, and that the ὕπαρχος Aphthonius in Gortyna (PPRET 76), may also be a vicarius Macedoniae.

Bibliography

Avramea A., Le Péloponnèse du IVe au VIIIe siècle. Changements et persistances, Paris 1997.

Bigi F., I monumenti del ciclo di Asclepiodotus: statue, supporti, contesto archeologico, in Senatori romani nel Pretorio di Gortina. Le statue di Asclepiodotus e la politica di Graziano dopo Adrianopoli, a cura di F. Bigi, I. Tantillo, Pisa 2020, 28-40.

Cartledge P.A., Spawforth A., Hellenistic and Roman Sparta. A tale of two cities, London-New York 2002 (2nd ed.).

Corsten Th., Proconsul Graeciae, ZPE, 117, 1997, 117-122.

Cougny E., Epigrammatum Anthologia Palatina, III, Paris 1890.

Deligiannakis G., Late Antique Honorific Statuary from the province of Achaia, A.D. 300- 600. A contribution to the topography and public culture of late antique Greece, in E. Sioumbara, K. Psaroudakis (eds.), ΘΕΜΕΛΙΟΝ 24. Μελέτες για τον Δάσκαλο Πέτρο Θέμελη από τους μαθητές και τους συνεργάτες του, Athinai 2013, 107-138 (= SEG, 63, 2013, 34).

Dillon S., Portrait statuary in Roman Athens: reconsidering the material from the Athenian Agora, in V. di Napoli, F. Camia, V. Evangelidis (eds.), What’s new in Roman Greece ? Recent work on the Greek mainland and the islands in the Roman period (Athens, 8-10 October 2015), Athinai 2018, 379-390.

Dillon S., Portrait Statues in the Athenian Agora in the Roman period: the archaeological evidence, in C.P. Dickenson (ed.), Public Statues Across Time and Cultures, in print (Routledge).

Dittenberger W., Corpus Inscriptionum Atticarum, III/1. Inscriptiones Atticae aetatis romanae, Berlin 1878 Feissel D., Notes d’épigraphie chrétienne (VII), BCH, 108, 1984, 545-579.

Feissel D., 1ère Partie, Inscriptions du IVe au VIe siècle, in D. Feissel, Anne Philippidis-Braat, Inventaires en vue d’un recueil des inscriptions historiques de Byzance. III. Inscriptions du Péloponnèse (à l’exception de Mistra), TM 9, 1985, 269-298 (267-395).

Feissel D., Vicaires et proconsuls d’Asie du IVe au VIe siècle. Notes sur l’administration du diocèse asianique au Bas-Empire, Ant Tard, 6, 1998, 91-104.

Filippini A., Tra poesia e storia amministrativa. Gli epigrammi onorari per i vicari d’Asia nella valle del Lykos, in G. Agosti, I. Tantillo (eds), Iscrizioni metriche nel tardo impero romano. Settant’anni dopo Louis Robert, Hellenica IV (1948), in print.

Groag E., Die Reichsbeamten von Achaia in spätrömischer Zeit, Budapest 1946.

Robert L., Hellenica. Recueil d’épigraphie, de numismatique et d’antiquités grecques, IV, Epigrammes du Bas-Empire, Paris 1948.

Jones A.H.M., Collegiate Prefectures, JRS, 54, 1964, 78-89 (= Id., The Roman Economy, Oxford 1974, 375-95).

Kaibel G., Epigrammata Graeca ex lapidibus conlecta, Berlin 1878.

Köhler U., Zwei Inschriften aus Athen, Hermes, 4, 1870, 132-133.

Lizzi Testa R., Senatori, popolo, papi. Il governo di Roma al tempo dei Valentiniani, Bari 2004.

Nachmanson E., Die schriftliche Kontraktion auf den griechischen Inschriften, Eranos, 10, 1910, 101-141.

Pergami F., Sulla istituzione del defensor civitatis, SDHI, 61, 1995, 413-431.

Porena P., Le iscrizioni del Pretorio di Gortyna e la carriera prefettizia di Sex. Petronius Probus, in F. Bigi, I. Tantillo (a cura di), Senatori romani nel Pretorio di Gortina. Le statue di Asclepiodotus e la politica di Graziano dopo Adrianopoli, Pisa 2020a, 87-141.

Porena P., Ipotesi sull’istituzione di una prefettura del pretorio autonoma d’Illirico nel decennio 378-387, in F. Bigi, I. Tantillo (a cura di), Senatori romani nel Pretorio di Gortina. Le statue di Asclepiodotus e la politica di Graziano dopo Adrianopoli, Pisa 2020b, 143-166.

Porena P., Appendice. Selezione di fonti sulla carriera prefettizia di Sex. Petronius Probus, in F. Bigi, I. Tantillo (a cura di), Senatori romani nel Pretorio di Gortina. Le statue di Asclepiodotus e la politica di Graziano dopo Adrianopoli, Pisa 2020c, 211-216.

Robert, L., Epigrammes du Bas-Empire (Hellenica IV), Paris 1948.

Saladino V., La Torre dei Venti. Motivi e scopi della sua costruzione, ASAA, ser. III, 90, 2012, 167-195.

Seeck O. (ed.), Q. Aurelii Symmachi quae supersunt, (MGH AA, VI/1), Berlin 1883.

Sironen E., Life and administration of late roman Attica in the light of public inscriptions, in P. Castrén (ed.), Post-Herulian Athens. Aspects of life and culture in Athens, A.D. 267-529, Helsinki 1994, 15-62.

Sironen, E., The late Roman and early Byzantine inscriptions of Athens and Attica, Dissertation - University of Helsinki 1997., 69-70 no. 13.

Woodward A.M., Excavations at Sparta, 1926, Annual of the British School at Athens, 27, 1925/1926, 173-254.

Praetorian prefects and epigraphic habit