Provenance and location

Ancient city: Roma
Modern city: Rome (Italy)
Province: Urbs
Diocese: Italiciana
Regional prefecture: Italia Illyricum Africa
Provenance: Rome, seen for the first time in the gardens of the Villa dei Mattei on the Caelian Hill
Current location: Rome, Museo Nazionale Romano, Palazzo Altemps, ground floor, portico of the courtyard next to the theatre entrance, inv. 80733
Ancient location: private space

Type and material of the support and text layout

Text category

Honorary inscription for the praetorian prefect Praetextatus

Latin text

Critical edition

Edition based on CIL 06, 01778, EDR126995. Text was seen and verified by Porena 2018.

col.I.2: Solis, Vermaseren 1956
col.I.3: quindecimviro, Vermaseren 1956
col.I.8: hierofante, Vermaseren 1956
col.II.1-2: quaestori candidato, Vermaseren 1956
col.II.4: conrectori, Duthoy 1969
col.II.8-9: proconsuli Achaiae, Duthoy 1969
col.II.10: PRAEEECTO, Gordon 1965, Gordon 1983
col.II.11: PRAEE, Gordon 1965, Gordon 1983, LSA; praefecto, Duthoy 1969; prae⌜f⌝(ecto), EDR, Dubosson-Sbriglione 2018
col.II.12: EI, Gordon 1965, Gordon 1983; YLLYRICI, Gordon 1965, Gordon 1983
col.II.13-14: consuli designato, Vermaseren 1956
lat.dex.1: EEBR, Gordon 1965
lat.dex.2-3: a single line in Bricault 2005
lat.dex.3: cons(ulibus), Vermaseren 1956, De Angelis D’Ossat 2011

Translations

English

“Agorius’s (statue).

To Vettius Agorius Praetextatus, of clarissimus rank, pontifex of Vesta, pontifex of the Sun, quindecemvir, augur, tauroboliate, curialis, neocorus, hierophant, father of the sacred rites; candidate quaestor, urban praetor, corrector of Tuscia and Umbria, consularis of Lusitania, proconsul of Achaia, prefect of the City, praetorian prefect twice* of Italy and Illyricum, designated consul.

Dedicated on the Kalends of February, during the consulship of our master Flavius Valentinianus Augustus for the third time and of Eutropius”.

(other English transl.: Croke, Harries 1982, p. 105, nr. 64; Gordon 1983, p. 178; Beard, North, Price 1998, p. 213, nr. 8.9)

French

“(Statue) d’Agorius.

Au clarissime Vettius Agorius Praetextatus, pontife de Vesta, pontife du Soleil, quindécemvir, augure, taurobolié, curiale, néocore, hiérophante, père des cérémonies sacrées; questeur candidat, préteur urbain, correcteur de Tuscie et d’Ombrie, consulaire de Lusitanie, proconsul d’Achaïe, préfet de la Ville, préfet du prétoire deux fois* d’Italie et d’Illyricum, consul désigné.

(Statue) dédiée le jour des calendes de février, sous le consulat de notre seigneur Flavius Valentinien Auguste, pour la troisième fois, et d’Eutropius”.

(other French transl.: Chastagnol 1991 (2nd ed.), pp. 157-158, nr. 41C; Bricault 2005, pp. 552-553, nr. 501/0181; Dubosson-Sbriglione 2018, pp. 504-505, nr. 107)

Italian

“(Statua) di Agorius.

Al chiarissimo Vettius Agorius Praetextatus, pontefice di Vesta, pontefice del Sole, quindecemviro, augure, tauroboliato, curiale, neocoro, ierofante, padre dei sacri riti; questore candidato, pretore urbano, correttore di Tuscia ed Umbria, consolare della Lusitania, proconsole d’Acaia, prefetto urbano, prefetto del pretorio ‘doppio’* dell’Italia e dell’Illirico, console designato.

Dedicata alle Calende di febbraio durante il consolato del nostro signore Flavius Valentinianus Augustus per la terza volta e di Eutropius”.

 

* “praetorian prefect at the same time over two seats”, concerning the iteration see Commentary.

(German transl.: Helbig 1969, pp. 53-54, nr. 2152)

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

The inscribed base was found in an unknown place in Rome. The artefact was first seen by J. Sirmond (1559-1651) in the gardens of the Villa dei Mattei on the Caelian Hill sometime between 1590 and 1608. The base was part of the Mattei family’s collection of Roman antiquities, which was begun in the 1550’s and which was partially located on the Caelian Hill, where, in 1580, Ciriaco Mattei (1545-1614), banker and collector, had built the Villa Celimontana with its vast park (Benocci 1991). Our base remained in these gardens for over three centuries. After the Mattei family eventually died out, the villa and its collection passed to the Bavarian Baron Richard von Hoffmann in 1869. However, in 1919, following the Italian victory in the First World War, the property was expropriated by the Kingdom of Italy, whereupon the antiquities including the inscribed base, were acquired by the Italian State (see De Angelis D’Ossat 2011b). Since 1925/26 the villa became the property of the Municipality of Rome – the park is public and the villa is the seat of the (Royal) Italian Geographical Society. In February 1923 the base in honour of Praetextatus was transferred to the Museo Nazionale Romano alle Terme di Diocleziano and exhibited in room VII (inv. 80733). In December 1997 it was transferred to Palazzo Altemps, where it is currently exhibited in the North portico, at the end of the large courtyard on the ground floor of the palace, at the left of theatre entrance.

The base in honour of Praetextatus is originally a large funerary base or funerary altar, the decoration of which has been removed: only faint traces now remain of the urceus on its right side and the patera on the left. The epigraphic field was lowered and the previous funerary inscription all but cancelled in order to put in the present inscription (cf. Gordon 1965, pp 144-145; Helbig 1969, 53-57, nr. 2152).

The base is engraved on two sides. The epigraphic field on the front, below the imposing statue and the senator’s onomastics, carries an exceptionally well chiselled text in two columns: in the left-hand column, in the first position for the reader, Praetextatus’s religious offices are listed; in the right-hand column, in the secondary position for the reader, the civil offices of his cursus honorum are listed. This kind of division of the senator’s religious and civil duties in two parallel writing columns is almost unique. It is noteworthy that the writing in the left-hand column is aligned towards the left edge, while the writing in the right-hand column is aligned towards the right edge of the epigraphic field. Also the left-hand column, listing Praetextatus’ religious offices is wider and the letters are more spaced apart; the right-hand column listing the senator’s civil offices is narrower and the letters are chiselled very close to each other and are compressed towards the right edge. In addition, in the right-hand column the stone cutter had to join two letters with a nexus (three times: l. 3, U and R; l. 5, U and M; l. 10, U and R), and had to insert several dwarf letters (l. 3, letters A and O; l. 5, letters R and A; l. 12, letter C), because he was forced to chisel the cursus in a limited space (on the palaeography of our inscription, see Gordon 1965, pp. 145-146). At the end of the right-hand column (ll. 13-14) the office of consul designates was written in larger letters, because it was the highest and most prestigious office of the senatorial career in the late empire.

The base from Palazzo Altemps has many elements in common with the funerary altar of Praetextatus and Paulina (PPRET 77). Both in the inscription on the front of the altar (side a, ll. 3-18) and in the inscription exhibited at Palazzo Altemps the priestly offices precede the civil offices (on the altar, the transition from the list of Praetextatus’ priesthoods to the offices of his cursus is explained in l. 8: in re publica vero). This is precisely the order of importance that Praetextatus and Paulina gave to the two careers. Praetextatus, a traditionalist but also a non-conformist, considered the dignities of a senatorial career to be ‘vanity’ (caduca): Symmachus states this in his report to Valentinian II on the death of his friend (Symm., Rel. 12, 02: non quod ille praemia terrena desideret, qui gaudia corporis, etiam cum hominem ageret, ut caduca calcavit) and also Paulina’s poem on our altar states the same (side d, ll. 18-21, in particular l. 20: Quae tu caduca ac parva semper autumans). The inscriptions on the funerary altar (late 384/385 AD) and the inscription on the base in Palazzo Altemps, which extol Praetextatus’s priesthoods in the first position and Praetextatus’s cursus honorum only in the second position, were made after his death and show Paulina’s point of view.

On the right side of the base in Palazzo Altemps, the date of the dedication of the monument was inserted: February 1st 387 AD. Praetextatus’ died between December 8th and 10th 384 AD (see Vera 1983, pp. 140-142), or between October and the first half of November 384 AD (Cecconi 2002, pp. 266-281; see also Kahlos 2002, pp. 151-171). Not only was he still praetorian prefect on September 9th 384 AD (CI 01, 54, 05), but he was also the ordinary consul designated for 385 AD. Nevertheless, on January 1st of that year Fl. Bauto was made the western consul since Praetextatus had died (see CLRE, pp. 304-305). Our inscription was prepared and chiselled just over two years after the senator’s death. The date of the dedication does not seem to be connected with any known events related to the biography of Paulina, wife and later widow of Praetextatus (on Paulina see PLRE I, p. 675, and PPRET 20). The name of the dedicator(s) seems never to have been chiselled at the end of the inscription, while the pagan cults of the devout senator are emphasised. The absence of the dedicator is common to most of the inscriptions of Praetextatus and his wife Paulina in Rome: the name of the dedicator of the couple’s funeral altar is of course missing (see PPRET 77); nor is it to be found in the inscription in honour of Paulina in the basilica of the Santi XII Apostoli (see PPRET 20); it was deliberately omitted from the inscription in honour of Praetextatus in Palazzo Massimo alle Colonne (see PPRET 80), while it was accidentally dropped in the inscription in honour of the senator from the Roman Forum, the only one that was certainly public (see PPRET 78). Given the absence of a dedicator and the listing of Praetextatus’ priesthoods, Niquet (2000, pp. 242-246 and 251), who considers the numbering of the praetorian prefecture to be an error (for a contrary view see below), thinks that the funerary altar was the model for the Palazzo Altemps inscription, and that the latter was made together with the inscription in honour of Paulina by the Santi XII Apostoli. In her opinion, Paulina died on February 1st 387 AD and was immortalised beside her husband on the funeral altar. But she was also honoured with a memorial statue (bearing the inscription in the basilica of Santi XII Apostoli, PPRET 20), that was erected close to her husband’s statue that carries our inscription in Palazzo Altemps, while both were located in their domus in the area of the Villa Celimontana (later Paulina’s inscribed base was moved from here to the Quirinal Hill; cf. also F. Mitthof and H. Niquet in CIL 06, p. 4759). In our opinion this connection is far from certain. Praetextatus’ inscription in Palazzo Altemps seems to have been simply copied in the Mattei family gardens on the Caelian Hill, while the inscription for Paulina was copied in the basilica of the Santi XII Apostoli on the Quirinal Hill, the two places being very far apart. The private setting of Paulina’s monument is confirmed by other surviving inscriptions in honour of Praetextatus and Paulina: their funerary altar was located in the family tomb outside Rome (PPRET 77); the inscription exhibited in Palazzo Massimo alle Colonne declares that the monument was located in a domus and it was actually found in a residential area on the Aventine Hill (PPRET 80, l. 10); the tabula ansata (CIL 06, 01781, cf. p. 4760 = EDR 111561) and two fistulae (CIL 15, 07563 = EDR 149417) both mentioning Praetextatus and Paulina were found in 19th Century on the Esquiline Hill and almost certainly come from their urban domus (concerning the domus of Praetextatus and Paulina, see Guidobaldi 1995; Kahlos 2002, p. 25; a domus was probably inherited by Paulina on the Esquiline Hill, see Ensoli 2000, pp. 279-280; Carucci 2008). The theory that Praetextatus and Paulina’s domus was situated somewhere on either the Caelian and Quirinal hills is hard to substantiate. Although it is highly likely that Praetextatus and Paulina’s monuments (without a dedicator) were destined for a private setting within their domus, it cannot be said that they were joint monuments of the couple. The date of February 1st 387 AD engraved on the base for the husband hardly indicates the date of his wife’s death. The interpretation of the date of the inscription on the right side of the base from the Palazzo Altemps as a memorial of Paulina’s death is purely speculative.

In 4th Century AD Rome the aristocratic wives of praetorian prefects were celebrated by inscribed monuments both in their domus and in those of their relatives (see the inscription in honour of Tyrrania Anicia Iuliana, PPRET 70). The adult children of Sex. Petronius Probus and Anicia Faltonia Proba celebrated their father and mother with individual inscribed monuments in their domus: they had (at least) five elegant monuments built for their illustrious parents, all of which would have been put up sometime after the beginning of 395 AD (see PPRET 65 and 66). But in the inscriptions of Praetextatus and Paulina there is no trace of their children (concerning the dedicator of the inscription in Palazzo Massimo alle Colonne, see PPRET 80). Otherwise, in the funerary sphere, aristocratic widows commissioned epitaphs. In similar periods (resp. 384/385 AD and 388/395 AD) the two noble women took care of the funerals, deposition and epitaphs of their husbands; both were then buried in the same sarcophagus (Paulina in a cinerary urn ?) with their respective husbands. Paulina composed or commissioned and had chiselled the long epitaph in verse on the funerary altar that commemorates her and her beloved husband Praetextatus (see PPRET 77); Proba certainly played a role in the composition of the double epitaph of her husband Probus (see PPRET 64). In the second half of the 4th Century AD women of senatorial rank had inscriptions carved and received them in the great houses and sumptuous tombs of their families in Rome.

The lack of the dedicator’s name pleads strongly in favour of the Palazzo Altemps monument being situated inside of one of the couple’s private properties in Rome. Another important factor to take into consideration is that the two inscriptions that mention the magistracies of Rome, quaestura and praetura – the altar PPRET 77, side a, ll. 9-10, and the Palazzo Altemps inscription, col. II, ll. 1-3 – were likely placed in private settings (that is to say the sepulchre and a domus) and were commissioned by the family. The two inscriptions that do not mention the magistracies of Rome – the fragmentary inscription from the Roman Forum (PPRET 78) and the base from Palazzo Massimo alle Colonne (PPRET 80) – had public settings. The first inscription was erected in a prestigious monumental public place and has accidentally lost the dedicator’s name; the second inscription appears to be a late copy of a text chiselled soon after Praetextatus’ death, probably in a public place, this too having failed to preserve the dedicator’s name (the name was deliberately omitted when the inscription was chiselled). A third element is also worthy of examination. Praetextatus’ onomastic contains the signum Agorius between the gentilicium Vettius and the cognomen Praetextatus, and this is a feature of his name. Only the inscription in Palazzo Altemps (see the corona) and the verse inscription on the back of the funerary altar (PPRET 77, side d, l. 4) extoll the signum Agorius. This rather Hellenic sounding ‘nickname’ crops up in the Greek inscriptions of Thespiae where our senator is cited (Plassart 1926, pp. 444-446, nr. 85 = AE 1928, 00048 = SEG 15 (1958), nr. 322 = LSA 839 = Roesch 2007, nr. 418, l. 6) and Crete (ICret 04, 316 = Bigi Tantillo 2020, pp. 192-193, nr. 3, l. 1), while the cognomen Praetextatus is widespread in historical works, official documents, and the Saturnalia of Macrobius. The signum alone appears in texts pertaining to the family sphere or in which there is a deep familiarity with the senator.

A list of Praetextatus’ priesthoods and initiations into the mysteries opens the Palazzo Altemps inscription (left-hand column). At the beginning the public priests of the city of Rome are listed (ll. 1-4), followed by the foreign cults and mysteries practised in Rome (ll. 5-9). Only one other epigraphic source celebrates the senator’s rich religious life: the inscription engraved on the funerary altar (PPRET 77), in the prose inscription on the front (side a, ll. 3-8) and in the eulogy in iambic verse on the back (side d, ll. 13-29) (concerning Praetextatus’ religious activity cf. Rüpke 2005, pp. 1363-1364, nr. 3468; Massa 2020). In the inscription in Palazzo Altemps the public priests of the city of Rome might well be listed in a hierarchical order (ll. 1-4) according to when each priesthood was established, from the most recent to the oldest: pontifex Vestae (4th Century AD?, cf. Van Haeperen 2002; Lizzi Testa 2007), pontifex Solis (reorganised by the emperor Aurelianus in 274 AD, cf. Hijmans 2010; Salzman 2017), quindecemvir sacris faciundis (reorganised by Sulla in 81 BC, cf. Granino Cecere 2019), augur (royal age, cf. Lizzi Testa 2009). On the front of the funerary altar the traditional priesthoods of the city of Rome are listed perhaps in alphabetical order: augur, pontifex Vestae, pontifex Solis, and quindecimvir sacris faciundis (for an overview of these colleges cf. Kahlos 2002, pp. 65-68; Van Haeperen 2019a).

Immediately after the public priesthoods, several exclusive religious initiations and various sacra peregrina, regularly celebrated by the senator in Rome, are listed (ll. 5-9). It seems likely that this order is determined by the increasing importance of the initiation or priesthood achieved in the same way that the traditional Roman cults were perhaps arranged in order of venerability: the tauroboliatus, the bull sacrifice linked to the cult of the Magna Mater (Cybele/Dindymene with Attis) was widely practiced by the 4th Century pagan aristocracy of Rome (cf. Dubosson-Sbriglione 2018; Van Haeperen 2019b; see also PPRET 36 and 40); the barely known curialis, which on the altar is named curialis Herculis (side a, l. 5; on the cult of Hercules in Late Antiquity cf. Eppinger 2015); the neocorus “temple overseer” (the same as on the altar, side a, l. 7) is the title of the priest of the cult of Sarapis (cf. Bricault 2018); the hierofanta “he who reveals things sacred” (the same as on the altar, side a, l. 6) who would appear to be the priest of the cult of Hecate; the pater sacrorum, which on the altar is referred to as pater patrum (side a, l. 8), is the sixth and highest degree of initiation of a high priest in the cult of Mithras (cf. Bjornebye 2012; Walsh 2018).

The Palazzo Altemps inscription lacks any mention of Praetextatus’ initiation into the Eleusinian Mysteries, which instead appears on the list of the senator’s religious initiations on the front of the altar (side a, ll. 5-6: sacratus Libero et Eleusiniis). The inscription in Palazzo Altemps does not include the initiations received by the senator and his wife in Greece, but only the priesthoods and ritual practices performed in Rome (in the lower part of the left-hand column there was room to add more of the senator’s priests/initiations: their exclusion was deliberate). This choice diffentiates the content of this inscription from the content of the base inscribed in Paulina’s honour in the basilica of Santi XII Apostoli (PPRET 20, ll. 4-7) and from the couple’s funerary altar (PPRET 77, side a, ll. 20-22; side d, ll. 22-29), where Paulina’s initiations are extolled as a key element of matrimonial concord, and where Praetextatus is praised as his wife’s guide and teacher in religious matters. This also makes it less likely that the Palazzo Altemps base (for Praetextatus) and the Santi XII Apostoli base (for Paulina) were conceived together in 387 AD to be erected in the same setting (concerning the initiations and cults shared by Praetextatus with his wife Paulina, see PPRET 20 and 77).

The inscription in the right-hand column of the frontal epigraphic field of the base in Palazzo Altemps lists Praetextatus’ entire cursus honorum in chronological order, beginning with his two traditional magistratures held in Roma (quaestura and praetura) and ending with his glorious elevation to the ordinary consulate, which, in the end was never held, but highlighted by the larger letters (ll. 13-14). Concerning the similarities and differences between the four surviving epigraphic cursus of Praetextatus (besides ours, see PPRET 77, 78, 80) and for a broader analysis, see discussion in PPRET 77.

We shall review Praetextatus’ career in chronological order. After having held the traditional magistracies of Rome in his youth, quaestor candidatus and praetor urbanus (ll. 1-3), he was corrector Tusciae et Umbriae, then consularis Lusitaniae in the decade 350/360 AD, before 362 AD. Between 362 and 364 AD he led a long proconsulate of Achaia at the behest of the emperor Julian (Groag 1946, pp. 45-48). He became prefect of Rome between the Summer 367 and the Summer 368 AD (Chastagnol 1962, pp. 171-178; Kalhos 1995). He he was active in improving monumental and sacred buildings in Rome (see CIL 06, 00102 = ILS 4003 = LSA 1503 = EDR 135295; CIL 06, 41378 = EDR 073920). He governed the city impartially (Amm. 27, 09, 08-09) above all during the clash between the Christian supporters of Damasus and Ursinus (Kahlos 1997 and 2002, pp. 115-123; Lizzi Testa 2004, pp. 159-169; Reutter 2009, pp. 31-56). In 382/383 AD, fifteen years after the end of his prefecture of Rome, Praetextatus was honoured in Gortyna by a monument in the cycle of statues celebrating great Roman senators in the local Praetorium made by the provincials of Crete under the aegis of the consularis Cretae Oecumenius Dositheus Asclepiodotus (ICret 04, 316 = Bigi Tantillo 2020, pp. 192-193, nr. 3): the inscription in Greek records him as an urban prefect, but it is likely that the beginning of his praetorian prefecture of Italia et Illyricum was imminent (see Tantillo 2020, pp. 69, 74-75; Porena 2020a, pp. 103-105; 113-117; 119-120; Porena 2020b, p. 156, and below). After the end of his urban prefecture in September 368 AD, he spent the following fifteen years indulging himself in cultural and religious otium. During this period he carried out numerous ambassadorships to the courts of the emperors Valentinianus I and Gratianus on behalf of the Senate of Rome. It is difficult to say whether such senatorial ambassadorships were commemorated in the Roman Forum inscription. The ambassadorships are recorded in the inscriptions from Palazzo Massimo alle Colonne (PPRET 80, ll. 6-8) and in the funerary altar (PPRET 77, side a, l. 15), but not in the inscription in Palazzo Altemps; Niquet (2000, p. 243) suggests that the legations for the Senate are omitted in the right-hand column of our inscription due to lack of space. The senator and his wife became a shining example of traditional western aristocratic values. In 383 or 384 AD, shortly before or after the assassination of the emperor Gratianus, Praetextatus was, according to scholars, appointed praetorian prefect of Italia Illyricum Africa. In 384 AD Praetextatus held a single praetorian prefecture, shortly after the conclusion of which (September/October 384 AD), he died, his passing occuring in the first half of December at the latest (above). In the cursus honorum chiselled on the fragmentary inscription from the Roman Forum we are unfortunately only able to read after the lacuna (PPRET 78, l. 4): [praef(ecto) praet(orio) Il]ḷỵṛ[i]c̣ị ẹṭ Ịṭạḷịạ[e]. In the inscription on the front of the altar (PPRET 77, side a, ll. 16-17) and in the inscription in Palazzo Altemps (frons, col. II, ll. 11-12) – two inscriptions written at a later time but very close chronologically to the Praetextatus praetorian prefecture – the prefecture has a numeral ‘two’, II, between praefectus praetorio and the regional determination Italiae et Illyrici. Considering the insertion of the numeral ‘two’, II, to be an error by the stone cutters, scholars postulate that only the text of the inscription from Palazzo Massimo alle Colonne is correct (PPRET 80, ll. 4-5): praef(ecto) praetorii / Illyrici Italiae et Africae. In 1934 Palanque speculated that the numeral II of the praetorian prefecture (l. 16) on the inscription on the front of the funerary altar (side a) was in fact a stone cutter’s mistake, when the latter accidentally descended from the VII of the upper line (l. 15), to produce a V; from the inscription of the funerary altar the wrong iteration would have been copied into the later honorary inscription of Palazzo Altemps. Although unlikely, this interpretation has been universally accepted (see Niquet 2000, pp. 242-243, and transposed in CIL 06, pp. 4757-4759). However, Palanque’s theory has inconsistencies. How could a seemingly perfect funerary altar contain such an elementary mistake for example? And how can one legitimately compare the large Palazzo Altemps honorary base, with the small base from the Palazzo Massimo alle Colonne, which is indeed very modest and has an unfinished text that is certainly lacking and difficult to understand? The two splendid monuments produced in Rome for Praetextatus – the great posthumous honorary base that in all likelihood orginated from a rich domus (now in Palazzo Altemps) and the famous magnificent funerary altar from a noble mausoleum (now in the Capitoline Museums) – are independent of each other in terms of workmanship, chronology, location and usage. The two inscriptions record Praetextatus as praefectus praetorio II Italiae et Illyrici, and this formula is accurate and chronologically very close to the senator’s prefectorial office (end 384/beginning 387 AD). The confident chiselling in two different places of two magnificent epigraphic fields with their studied, clear and tasteful layout flies in the face of the hypothesis of a stone cutter’s mistake. This possibility becomes even more remote in the case of the magnificent funerary altar, which comprises fifty-nine iambic senaries engraved on three sides without a single error. A repeated chiselling error on several inscriptions of such a high quality is inadmissible, particularly when they were destined to adorn structures belonging to a powerful and successful aristocrat at the very peak of his career.

In the crisis period after the catastrophe of Adrianople (August 9th 378 AD), Emperor Gratianus separated the prefecture of Illyricum from the prefecture of Italy and Africa. It seems likely that some senators simultaneously held both prefectures, by combining the two. We think that Praetextatus held a "double" prefecture and that the ‘strange’ numeral ‘two’, II, clearly chiselled in the beautiful inscriptions from both the sepulchre of Praetextatus and Paulina and from their domus, reflects this particular administrative situation, which appears to run from late 381 to late 384 AD (see Porena 2020a, pp. 113-117 and Porena 2020b, p. 156, and see PPRET 77). In our opinion, in the inscriptions in honour of Praetextatus made soon after his death, the numeral ‘two’, II was chiselled between the title of praetorian prefect and the regional determination (two related but distinct regions thanks to the conjunction et: Italiae et Illyrici or Illyrici et Italiae) to show a single prefectorial mandate over two regional prefectures. As said, the inscription from the Palazzo Massimo alle Colonne has no iteration, but displays: praef(ecto) praetorii / Illyrici Italiae et Africae (PPRET 80, ll. 4-5); in our opinion this formula is probably a late (5th Century AD) update of the original titling engraved at the time of Praetextatus’ death. When the inscription from Palazzo Massimo alle Colonne was inscribed, the original titulature (the numeral ‘two’ followed by two regions only) had become incomprehensible and was therefore updated in an inferior monument, engraved long after the senator’s death.

In the autumn of 384 AD Praetextatus left the praetorian prefecture and was appointed consul for the following year (CLRE, pp. 304-305), but he died suddenly, as said, in December 384 AD at the latest (above). The senator is remembered as the appointed consul in all inscriptions made in his honour after his death, because it was the most prestigious office of his career. The monuments in his honour in Rome all seem to have been created after Praetextatus’ sudden death, which shocked the city. On Praetextatus and his career, see in brief Seeck 1883, pp. LXXXIII-XC; Nistler 1910; Ensslin 1954; PLRE I, pp. 722-724; Kuhoff 1997; extensively Kalhos 2002.

Bibliography

Beard M., North J., Price S., Religions of Rome, II. A Sourcebook, Cambridge-New York 1998.

Benocci C., La Villa Matteidal XVI al XX secolo: il palazzetto, il parco, le collezioni, in Ead. (a cura di), Villa Celimontana, Torino 1991, 17-93.

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.

Bjornebye J., Secrecy and Initiation in the Mithraic Communities of Fourth Century Rome, in Mystery and secrecy in the Nag Hammadi collection and other ancient literature: ideas and practices studies for Einar Thomassen at Sixty, Leiden 2012, 349-374.

Bricault L., Receuil des inscriptions concernant les cultes Isiaques (RICIS), II, Corpus, Paris 2005.

Bricault L., Les prêtres isiaques du monde romain, in V. Gasparini, R. Veymiers (eds), Individuals and materials in the Greco-Roman cults of Isis: agents, images, and practices, Leiden-Boston (Mass.) 2018, 155-197.

Carucci M., The Sette Sale Domus - A Proposal of Reading, in P.F. Biehl, J.J. Rassamakin (eds), Import and Imitation in Archeology, Langenweißbach 2008, 213-221.

Cecconi G.A., Commento storico al libro II dell’epistolario di Q. Aurelio Simmaco, Pisa 2002.

Chastagnol A., Les fastes de la préfecture de Rome au Bas-empire, Paris 1962.

Chastagnol A., Le Bas-Empire. Textes choisis et présentés, Paris 1991 (2nd ed.).

Croke B., Harries J., Religious Conflict in Fourth-Century Rome. A Documentary Study, Sidney 1982.

De Angelis D’Ossat M., Base onoraria di Vettius Agorius Praetextatus, in AAVV., Palazzo Altemps. Le collezioni, Milano 2011, p. 70 (= Ead., Scultura antica in Palazzo Altemps, Milano 2002, p. 109).

De Angelis D’Ossat M., La collezione Mattei in Villa Celimontana, in AAVV., Palazzo Altemps. Le collezioni, Milano 2011, pp. 34-36.

Dubosson-Sbriglione L., Le culte de la Mère des dieux dans l’Empire romain, Stuttgart 2018.

Duthoy R., The Taurobolium: its evolution and terminology, Leiden 1969.

Ensoli S., I santuari di Iside e Serapide a Roma e la resistenza pagana in età tardoantica, in S. Ensoli, E. La Rocca (a cura di), Aurea Roma. Dalla città pagana alla città cristiana, Roma 2000, 267-287.

Ensslin W., Praetextatus 1, in RE XXII/2, Stuttgart 1954, coll. 1575-1579.

Eppinger A., Hercules in der Spätantike. Die Rolle des Heros im Spannungsfeld von Heidentum und Christentum. Wiesbaden 2015.

Gordon A.E., Album of Dated Latin Inscriptions, vol. III (Rome and the Neighborhood, A.D. 200-525), Berkeley 1965.

Gordon A.E., Illustrated Introduction to Latin Epigraphy, Berkeley-Los Angeles-London 1983.

Granino Cecere M.G., Quindecemviri e sacra peregrina, in «Sacrum Facere». Atti del V Seminario di Archeologia del Sacro. Sacra peregrina. La gestione della pluralità religiosa nel mondo antico, Trieste 2019, 147-163.

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

Guidobaldi F., Domus: Vettius Agorius Praetextatus, in E.M. Steinby (a cura di), Lexicon Topographicum Urbis Romae, II, Roma 1995, 164.

Helbig W., Ehreninschrift für Vettius Agorius Praetextatus auf einer Statuenbasis, 387 nach Chr., in .

Führer durch die öffentlichen Sammlungen klassischer Altertümer in Rom, III. Die staatlichen Sammlungen: Museo nazionale romano (Thermenmuseum), Museo nazionale di Villa Giulia, bearb. von B. Andreae [et al.], 4 ed., Tübingen 1969.

Hijmans S.E., Temples and priests of Sol in the city of Rome, Mouseion, 10, 2010, 381-427.

Kahlos M., The restoration policy of Vettius Agorius Praetextatus, Arctos, 29, 1995, 39-47.

Kahlos M., Vettius Agorius Praetextatus and the rivalry between the bishops in Rome in 366-367, Arctos, 31, 1997, 41-54.

Kahlos M., Vettius Agorius Praetextatus. A senatorial life in between, Roma 2002.

Kuhoff W., s.v. Vettius Agorius Praetextatus, in Biographisch-Bibliographisches Kirchenlexikon, XII, Herzberg 1997, 1297-1309.

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

Lizzi Testa R., Christian emperor, vestal virgins and priestly colleges: reconsidering the end of Roman paganism, Ant Tard, 15, 2007, 251-262.

Lizzi Testa R., «Augures et pontifices»: public sacral law in late antique Rome (fourth-fifth centuries A.D.), in A.J. Cain, N.E. Lenski (eds), The power of Religion in Late Antiquity, Farnham-Burlington 2009, 251-278.

Massa F., Vettio Agorio Pretestato: aristocrazia romana, “culti orientali” e cristianesimo, in C. Bonnet, E. Sanzi (a cura di), Roma città degli dèi. La capitale dell’impero come laboratorio religioso, Roma 2018, 63-76.

Niquet H., Monumenta virtutum titulique. Senatorische Selbstdarstellung im spätantiken Rom im Spiegel der epigraphischen Denkmäler, Stuttgart 2000.

Nistler J., Vettius Agorius Praetextatus, Klio, 10, 1910, 462-475.

Palanque J.-R., Une prétendue préfecture de Vettius Agorius Praetextatus, Byzantion, 9, 1934, 355-359.

Plassart A., Inscriptions de Thespies, BCH, 50, 1926, 383-462.

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.

Reutter U., Damasus, Bischof von Rom (366-384): Leben und Werk, Tübingen 2009.

Rüpke J., Fasti Sacerdotum. Die Mitglieder der Priesterschaften und das sakrale Funktionspersonal römischer, griechischer, orientalischer und jüdisch-christlicher Kulte in der Stadt Rom von 300 v. Chr. bis 499 n. Chr., 3 voll., Stuttgart 2005.

Salzman M.R., Aurelian and the cult of the Unconquered Sun: the institutionalization of Christmas, solar worship, and imperial cult, in O. Tal, Z. Weiss (eds), Expressions of cult in the southern Levant in the Greco-Roman period: manifestations in text and material culture, Turnhout 2017, 37-49.

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

Van Haeperen Fr., Le collège pontifical (3ème s.a. C.-4ème s.p. C.). Contribution à l’étude de la religion publique romaine, Brussels 2002.

Van Haeperen F., Cultes publics, agents cultuels et pouvoir à Rome, Pallas, 111, 2019a, 137-151.

Van Haeperen F., Étrangère et ancestrale. La mère des dieux dans le monde romain, Paris 2019b.

Vera D., Lotta politica e antagonismi religiosi nella Roma tardoantica: la vittoria sarmatica di Valentiniano II, Koinonia, 7, 1983, 133-155.

Vermaseren M.J., Corpus Inscriptionum et Monumentorum Religionis Mithriacae (CIMRM), I, The Hague 1956.

Vermaseren M.J., Corpus cultus Cybelae Attidisque (CCCA), III, Italia-Latium, Leiden 1977.

Walsh D., The cult of Mithras in Late Antiquity development, decline and demise ca. A.D. 270-430, Leiden-Boston 2018.

Praetorian prefects and epigraphic habit