Provenance and location

Ancient city: Roma
Modern city: Rome (Italy)
Province: Urbs
Diocese: Italiciana
Regional prefecture: Italia Illyricum Africa
Provenance: Rome
Current location: lost
Ancient location: private space

Type and material of the support and text layout

Text category

ownership

Latin text

Critical edition

Edition based on CIL 06.

2: pref pret, CIL 15
5: pret, CIL 15

Translations

English

“(Belonging) to Postumianus, of clarissimus rank, former praetorian prefect, and to Festus, of clarissimus rank, tribunus and notarius, from the praetorium Soterianum (?) property of ours.”

French

“(Appartenant à la propriété) du clarissime Postumianus, ancien préfet du prétoire, et du clarissime Festus, tribun et notaire, du praetorium Soterianum (?) de notre propriété.”

Italian

“(Di proprietà) del chiarissimo Postumianus, ex prefetto del pretorio, e del chiarissimo Festus, tribuno e notario, dal pretorio Soterianum (?) di nostra proprietà.”

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

The inscription was included in a collection of ancient epigraphic texts composed around 1600 by the grammarian and historian of the Italian language Celso Cittadini (1553-1627) (“Iscrittioni copiate dal libro turchino del sig. Celso Cittadini, ritratte da lui da diversi luoghi antichi insieme colle sue annotationi,” in Cod. Marcianus Lat. XIV, 16 = 4053, p. 71; see CIL 06,1, p. LVI; Formichetti 1982). It was engraved on a bronze foil that was shaped like a hatchet-head (securiclata), and probably found in Rome and now lost. The inscription records the joint ownership of two senators, Postumianus former praetorian prefect and Festus tribune and notary, of a commodity to which the lamina was meant to be attached.

Different readings were proposed for the interpretation of the last part of the text and the identification of this property. H. Dressel (CIL 15, 07163; cf. CIL 06, 32035) linked the words de praet(orio) to the office of Festus and considered Soteri the name of a slave co-owned by Postumianus and Festus (nostrorum). However, the office of tribunus et notarius praetorianus, attested from the second half of the 4th Century, never appears in the way proposed by Dressel (tribunus et notarius de praetorio: cf. CTh 06, 13, 03; CIL 06, 01761 (p. 4754) = ILS 1285 = LSA 1465 = EDR 122366; ACO II, 1,3, p. 19 and II, 3,3, p. 23; ACO II, 1,1, pp. 72-3 and 3,1, p. 47; on this rank, see Jones 1964, p. 573; Teitler 1985, pp. 59-62). Th. Mommsen (reported in CIL 15, 07163) suggested that the praetorium Soteri(?; -anum?) at l. 5 refers to the provenance of the object on which the table was placed from a property of the two officials. This reading must be preferred, also considering a contemporary lamina securiclata which records, after the identity of the owners, its provenance in an analogous way (CIL 06, 32033 and p. 4805 = CIL 15, 07132 = ILCV 0776 = EDR 029529: Probi et Pro/bes nostris / de massa ce/lla binar(i)a).

In the 4th and 5th Century AD the term praetorium had a technical meaning: having now lost every reference to its military origin (the general’s tent within a Roman castrum), it came to refer, inter alia, to the owner’s residence in a large estate, which served as the administrative centre and as a gathering place for crops and rents from the tenants of the estate itself (see Vera 1995, pp. 341-352; Vera 1999a, pp. 283-297; cf. Sfameni 2006, pp. 234-235; Carrié 2012, p. 38). Therefore, Postumianus and Festus jointly owned an estate of this kind, which would have taken its name from its administrative centre the praetorium Soteri(anum?); the location of this property is unknown (see Evangelisti 2008; cf. below). Probably the bronze foil was intended to be attached to containers or vehicles carrying goods from the property.

The label “board of exemption” (i.e., from taxes) comes from Dressel. The German archaeologist edited this document in CIL 15 under a section entitled «tabellae immunitatis» (CIL 15, 07125-07170; cf. De Rossi 1877, pp. 81-83): after listing a few inscriptions that explicitly grant immunity, Dressel collected many other documents that share with the previous ones, rather than their contents, their particular shape (they are all hatchet-head shaped bronze foils or discs with inscriptions recording names, usually in the genitive form, and occasionaly indicating the provenance). Following Dressel’s classification, some scholars suggested these laminae were used to indicate exemption from customs to the goods in transit (see Palmer 1980, pp. 223, 229-230; Carandini 1985, p. 68; Orlandi 2006, pp. 220-221; but cf. Vera 1999b, p. 1018). But in a recent survey of the material, G.A. Cecconi has rightly questioned the homogeneity of the corpus collected by Dressel, urging caution in the use of the label “tabella immunitatis” that should be restricted to the inscriptions explicitly attesting immunity, while a different use cannot be ruled out a priori for the other laminae (Cecconi 2014, pp. 183-193, with reference also to new findings). The present document belongs to this second group and it may have simply had the purpose of indicating ownership and provenance.

A. Chastagnol dated this lamina to the 5th Century on the grounds of Festus’ appointment as tribunus et notarius, a feature that does not appear in the epigraphic cursus of Roman senators before that period. So the French scholar proposed to identify one of the officials as Rufius Praetextatus Postumianus, who was twice urban prefect in the mid-5th Century and ordinary consul in 448 AD (cf. PLRE II, Postumianus 4, pp. 901-902; CLRE, pp. 430-431; Chastagnol 1982, p. 190, nt. 88; cf. Evangelisti 2008; CIL 06, p. 4805). Such an attribution cannot be excluded, although our sources do not record any praetorian prefecture held by this Postumianus. That said, the status of tribuni et notarii was already growing in the last quarter of the 4th Century, as testified by constitutions issued by the emperors Gratian and Theodosius I (CTh 06, 10, 02-03). In addition, this bronze lamina is a peculiar object that cannot be compared to the honorary inscriptions celebrating the careers of senators. The decisive indication for the chronology may well, however, be found in the reference to the pretorian prefecture of Postumianus. In the Fasti only one holder of this office is attested with this name and he was in service in 383 AD. The main evidence for his prefecture comes from the Theodosian Code, which preserves ten laws addressed to «Postumianus praetorian prefect» between April and December 383 AD (references in PLRE I, Postumianus 2, p. 718). These constitutions were issued in the eastern part of the empire by the emperor Theodosius I and their chronology suggests that Postumianus was praetorian prefect of the East after Florus (PLRE I, Florus 1, pp. 367-368) and before Maternus Cynegius (PLRE I, Cynegius 3, pp. 235-236; PPRET 75). This solution receives confirmation from a letter that Gregory of Nazianzus addressed to Postumianus, asking him to use his influence to secure unity among the bishops assembled in Constantinople in 383 AD (Greg. Naz., Ep. 173; cf. CTh 16, 05, 11-12); the office of Postumianus is not stated, but Gregorius writes that he had attained the summit of authority (173,2: ἦλθες ἐπὶ τὸ ἀκρότατον τῆς ἐξουσίας). From this same letter we know that Postumianus was a westerner, from Italy, but with a good command of Greek; he was also a Christian.

The career of Postumianus before the praetorian prefecture is not known (PLRE I, Postumianus 2, p. 718). Possibly his career under Theodosius was supported by the patronage of Quintus Aurelius Symmachus, who addressed a letter to Eutropius, praetorian prefect of Illyricum in 379-381 AD, in formal recommendation of one young Roman senator named Postumianus (Symm., Ep. 03, 48: see Matthews 1975, pp. 97, 113; Vera 1979, pp. 391-393; Pellizzari 1998, pp. 174-175). The letter may also refer to another Postumianus, an advocate mentioned in the Saturnalia by Macrobius (cf. PLRE I, Postumianus 3, p. 719), that however in 379/383 AD was already a mature man (so Cameron 2011, p. 246). In the text mentioned above, Gregory of Nazianzus makes reference to other posts Postumianus held before the praetorian prefecture (Ep. 173,2: ἀρχάι οὐκ ὀλίγαι), presumably in the East. Looking at the career of the prefects of Theodosius I, he may well have held a palatine office (his predecessor, Florus, had been master of the offices of Theodosius; Maternus Cynegius was count of the sacred largesses and quaestor before the praetorian prefecture, see PPRET 75).

In the heading of an imperial constitution addressed to him while prefect of the East (CTh 12, 01, 102), Postumianus is called praetorian prefect «II» (iterum), that is «for the second time». This indication is very rare in the Theodosian Code. In fact, it only occurs in other thirteen laws, all 5th Century in date and addressed to officials who, actually, were holding the same office for the second time (the praetorian prefects Theodorus, PLRE II, Theodorus 12, pp. 1086-1087, in CTh 16, 02, 39, CTh 16, 05, 45 and CTh 16, 05, 46, and Aurelianus, PLRE I, Aurelianus 3, pp. 128-129, in CTh 03, 12, 04, CTh 07, 09, 04, CTh 09, 28, 02, CTh 16, 05, 57, CTh 16, 05, 58, CTh 16, 08, 22, CTh 16, 10, 21; the proconsul of Africa Iulianus, PLRE II, Iulianus 28, pp. 641-642, in CTh 12, 01, 176, CTh 02, 16, 03, CTh 04, 22, 06). Cautiously, PLRE and D. Vera suggest that, before the praetorian prefecture of the East, Postumianus may have been praetorian prefect of Illyricum, under Theodosius and after Eutropius, last attested in office on September 381 AD (PLRE I, p. 718; Vera 1983, pp. 410-412). But this solution is problematic, because after the prefecture of Eutropius the control over the region might have reverted back to the emperor Gratian and the Fasti for that position do not provide any room for Postumianus as a prefect in Illyricum (cf. Porena 2020, pp. 143-166; see PPRET 59, 60, 73).

Unlike the other praetorian prefects of the East under Theodosius I, who are all attested in service for long periods of time (cf. PLRE I, pp. 1051-1052; see PPRET 75, 87), Postumianus’ tenure lasted a few months, from April to December 383 AD. Sometime after this date, the bronze lamina must have been engraved.

It is likely that, given the co-ownership on the praetorium, Postumianus and Festus were somehow related: perhaps Festus was the brother or son of Postumianus (Matthews 1967, p. 495). But there is no way to verify this hypothesis, nor to link Postumianus or Festus with confidence to any family of the late Roman aristocracy (the proposal of Matthews 1967 finds no place in Matthews 1975; cf. Chastagnol 1961, pp. 744-758; Arnheim 1972, pp. 133-134). Since the praetorium Soterianum is only attested on this one lamina it is not even possible to locate. At best one might conjecture that the prefect Postumianus, or his son, may have been the Christian senator owner of an estate in the province of Lucania and Bruttii referred to in a letter of Paulinus of Nola (Paul. Nol., Ep. 49; PLRE I, Postumianus 2, p. 718; cf. Rougé 1986, pp. 119-136; Perrin 1992, pp. 1059-1060, 1061-1062; Mußfeldt 2007, pp. 206-215). Possibly, the same Postumianus took part in a senatorial embassy to the emperor Honorius in 395 AD, during a severe crisis of the food supply in Rome (Symm., Ep. 06, 22; Vera 1979, p. 392; Pellizzari 1998, pp. 174-175; but cf. PLRE I, Postumianus 3, p. 718; Marcone 1983, pp. 96-97).

Bibliography

Arnheim M.T.W., The Senatorial Aristocracy in the Later Roman Empire, Oxford 1972.

Cameron Alan, The Last Pagans of Rome, Oxford-New York 2011.

Carandini A., Hortensia. Orti e frutteti intorno a Roma, in Misurare la terra: centuriazione e coloni nel mondo romano. Città, agricoltura e commercio: materiali da Roma e dal suburbio (Catalogo della mostra, Roma, Museo Nazionale Romano, aprile-giugno 1985), Modena 1985, 66-74.

Carrié J.-M., Nommer les structures rurales entre fin de l’Antiquité et haut Moyen Âge: le répertoire lexical gréco-latin et ses avatars modernes (1re partie), AntTard, 20, 2012, 25-46.

Cecconi G.A., Privilegi reali o presunti per senatori tardoromani: le tabellae immunitatis e i tituli in laminis securiclatis vel in discis inscripti varii argumenti, in Caldelli M.L., Gregori G.L. (a cura di), Epigrafia e ordine senatorio 30 anni dopo, Roma 2014, 183-191.

Chastagnol A., La famille de Caecinia Lolliana grande dame païenne du IVe siècle après J.-C., Latomus, 20, 1961, 744-758.

Chastagnol A., La carrière sénatoriale du bas-empire (depuis Dioclétien), in Epigrafia e ordine senatorio (Atti del Colloquio Internazionale AIEGL, Roma 14-20 maggio 1981, Tituli 4), Roma 1982, 167-194.

De Rossi G.B., Comunicazione, Bullettino dell’Instituto di Corrispondenza Archeologica, 1877, 81-83.

Evangelisti S., Soteri(ani) Praetorium (631), in La Regina A. (ed.), Lexicon Topographicum Urbis Romae. Suburbium, vol. V, Roma 2008, 99.

Formichetti G., s.v. Cittadini Celso, in Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani, 26, Roma 1982, 71-75.

Jones A.H.M., The Later Roman Empire 284–602: A Social, Economic and Administrative Survey, 3 vols., Oxford 1964.

Marcone A., Commento storico al libro VI dell’Epistolario di Q. Aurelio Simmaco: introduzione, commento storico, testo, traduzione, indici, Pisa 1983.

Matthews J., Continuity in a Roman Family; The Rufii Festi of Volsinii, Historia, 16, 1967, 484-509.

Matthews J., Western Aristocracies and Imperial Court, A.D. 364-425, Oxford 1975.

Mußfeldt S., Bleibende Fragen: Zu Adressat und Datierung von Epistel 49 des Paulinus von Nola, Hermes, 135, 2007, 206-215.

Orlandi S., Pontis Veri Massa (629), in La Regina A. (ed.), Lexicon Topographicum Urbis Romae. Suburbium, vol. IV, Roma 2006, 220-221.

Palmer R.E.A., Customs on Market Goods Imported into the City of Rome, in D’Arms J.H., Kopff E.C. (eds.), The Seaborne Commerce of Ancient Rome: Studies in Archaeology and History, Roma 1980, 217-233.

Pellizzari A., Commento storico al libro III dell’Epistolario di Q. Aurelio Simmaco: introduzione, commento storico, testo, traduzione, indici, Pisa 1998.

Perrin M.-Y., Ad implendum caritatis ministerium. La place des courriers dans la correspondance de Paulin de Nole, MEFRA, 104, 1992, 1025-1068.

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

Rougé J., Periculum maris et transports d’état: la lettre 49 de Paulin de Nole, in Hestiasis. Studi di tarda antichità offerti a Salvatore Calderone, 2, Messina 1986, 119-136.

Sfameni C., Ville residenziali nell’Italia tardoantica, Bari 2006.

Teitler H.C., Notarii and exceptores: An Inquiry into Role and Significance of Shorthand Writers in the Imperial and Ecclesiastical Bureaucracy of the Roman Empire (from the Early Principate to c. 450 AD), Amsterdam 1985.

Vera D., Le statue del Senato di Roma in onore di Flavio Teodosio e l’equilibrio dei poteri imperiali in età teodosiana, Athenaeum, 57, 1979, 381-403.

Vera D., La carriera di Virius Nicomachus Flavianus e la prefettura dell’Illirico Orientale nel IV sec. d.C., Athenaeum, 61, 1983, 24-64, 390-426.

Vera D., Dalla ‘villa perfecta’ alla villa di Palladio: sulle trasformazioni del sistema agrario in Italia fra Principato e Dominato, Athenaeum, 83, 1995, 189-211, 331-356 (= Id., I doni di Cerere. Storie della terra nella tarda antichità. Strutture, società, economie, Turnhout 2020, 227-251).

Vera D., I silenzi di Palladio e l’Italia: osservazioni sull’ultimo agronomo romano, AntTard, 7, 1999a, 283-297 (= Id., I doni di Cerere. Storie della terra nella tarda antichità. Strutture, società, economie, Turnhout 2020, 287-299).

Vera D., Massa fundorum. Forme della grande proprietà e poteri della città in Italia fra Costantino e Gregorio Magno, MEFRA, 111, 1999b, pp. 991-1025 (= Id., I doni di Cerere. Storie della terra nella tarda antichità. Strutture, società, economie, Turnhout 2020, 301-316).

Praetorian prefects and epigraphic habit