Provenance and location

Ancient city: Myra
Modern city: Demre (Turkey)
Province: Lycia
Diocese: Asiana
Regional prefecture: Oriens
Provenance: The inscription was found on a masonry block located in the front-wall of the Roman horrea of Andriakè, the port of the ancient town of Myra (Lycia) («à droite de la 4e porte, en partant de l’Est», Cavalier 2007, p. 56).
Current location: Findspot
Ancient location: Public space

Type and material of the support and text layout

Text category

Instrumentum: measures (and weights) on the model established by the praetorian prefect Flavius Eutolmius Tatianus

Greek text

Critical edition

This edition follows the text edited by Cuvigny 2017, compared with the facsimile of Petersen, von Luschan 1889, and with the photo in Wörrle 1975 and Rizos 2015.

2: two lightning marks to indicate the abbreviation after λαμ and Φλ; Φλ(αβίου): Grégoire 1922; SEG 42 (1992), 1240; Morrisson 2012 [ . . . 10 . . . ] Petersen, von Luschan who, however, in the fac-simile point out some letters of the gentilizio ΕΥΤ̣Ο̣Λ̣ and Kubitschek 1918, p. 66 identified the name Εὐτολμ; ⟦Εὐτολμίου⟧ Grégoire 1922; Φλ(αβίου) Εὐτολμ̣[ίου] Wörrle 1975, p. 70; [Εὐτολμίου]: Manganaro 1992; Morrisson 2012; ⟦Εὐτολμίου⟧ Rizos 2015; Εὐτ̣ο̣λ̣(μίου) Rothenhöfer 2020 [Τατιανοῦ]: Feissel rightly, in Cuvigny 2017, p. 101, nt 16; Rothenhöfer 2020
3: [ἐπάρχου] Manganaro 1992; Morrisson 2012; ⟦ἐπάρχο⟧υ Rizos 2015; ἐ[πάρχο]υ̣ Rothenhöfer 2020
4: ξέσται Grégoire 1922; Manganaro 1992; Morrisson 2012
5: τρί[α] αὐγούστια Petersen, von Luschan 1889 (but Nachträge p. 227: «Bormann erklärt τρὶς, ter gleich tria. Studniczka vermutet τρῖς Αὐγουστια[κάς]»); Grégoire 1922; τρία Manganaro 1992; SEG 42 (1992), 1240; Morrisson 2012; τρί α Rizos 2015; [τρῖ]ς Rizos 2015
6: μ[εγί]στης Rizos 2015
7: δέδοτε instead of δέδοται; μητροπόλι instead of μητροπόλει
8: εἷς Μυρέων: Manganaro 1992; SEG 42 (1992), 1240; Rizos 2015; ἕ[τερος] Morrisson 2012; Rizos 2015
10: Ἀρναιάτες instead of Ἀρναιάταις τ[ῶ]ν Rizos 2015

Translations

English

“During the administration of my master and most admirable in all things, man of clarissimus and magnificentissimus rank, Flavius Eutolmius Tatianus, praefect of the sacred praetoria, (the following) have been made, according to the model of those that have been sent: 2 iron fragellia, 2 bronze sextarii having three Augusti, and three modii, conforming to the sample of those sent by the supreme authority (the praetorian prefecture.) Of these one fragellion was delivered to the metropolis of Myreis and another to (the metropolis) of the Arnaiatai; and similarly also one sextarius to (the metropolis) of the Myreis and the other to (the metropolis) of the Arnaiatai; and of the modii, two with two half-modium to the Myreis, one, with a half-modium, to the Arnaiatai: weights and measures are to be kept free from fraud by the prepositi in charge for use in the warehouses”

French

(based on Cuvigny 2017, p. 113)

“Sous monseigneur en tout très admirable, le clarissime et très magnificient Flavius Eutolmius Tatianus, préfet des prétoires sacrés, ont été confectionnés, sur le modèle de ceux qui avaient été envoyés, 2 fragellia en fer, 2 setiers en bronze qui ont les trois Augustes, et trois modii, copies conformes des étalons qui avaient été envoyés par sa suprême autorité. Ils ont été ainsi répartis: un fragellion a été donnée à la métropole des Myréens et l’autre à celle des Arnéates; pareillement un setier à celle des Myréens et l’autre à celle des Arnéates; quant aux modii, deux ont été donnés aux Myréens ainsi que deux demi-modii, et un aux Arnéates ainsi qu’un demi-modius. Ces mesures et ces poids seront confiés aux soins des préposés successifs, qui veilleront à leur intégrité dans l’intérêt des greniers.”

(German translation: Rothenhöfer 2020, p. 294)

Italian

“Sotto il mio signore e ammirabilissimo in tutte le cose, il chiarissimo e magnificentissimo Flavius Eutolmius Tatianus, prefetto dei sacri pretorii, sono stati realizzati, sul modello di quelli inviati, 2 fragellia in ferro, 2 sestari in bronzo, che hanno i tre Augusti, e tre modii, secondo il campione di quelli inviati dalla suprema carica (la prefettura del pretorio). Di questi sono stati consegnati un fragellion alla metropoli dei Myrei e un altro a quella degli Arnaiati, e similmente anche un sestario a quella dei Myrei e l’altro a quella degli Arnaiati; due modii, con due mezzi modii, ai Myrei, e uno, con un mezzo modius, agli Arnaiati; a cura di quanti sono via via praepositi in carica sono da custodire le misure e i pesi indenni da frodi per l’utilizzo nei magazzini”

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

Location

The inscription was engraved sometime between 388 and 392 AD on a masonry block beside the fourth door of the Roman horrea of Andriakè, the port of the ancient town of Myra (Lycia), today Demre (Turkey). The inscription contains part of a text regarding the delivery to the magistrates of the cities of Arnaia and Myra of the (weights ? and) measures to be used in Andriakè’s warehouses. Although the warehouses were officially established by the Eastern praetorian prefecture, the authority responsible for the regulation is not known. Andriakè was the merchant port of Myra and the smaller town of Arnaia: Myra is located 5 km East of Andriakè, on the coast, while Arnaia is located almost 40 km North of Andriakè (Cavalier 2007, p. 52 fig. 1).

The horrea of Andriakè were built by the Emperor Hadrian (CIL 03, 06738 = ILS 5908, after 119 AD, maybe in 129 AD) and remained in service until late Antiquity. Divided into eight large rooms, the dimensions of which are 65 m. x 32 m., the entire complex disposed of a total surface area of 1800 m.2, The building is well preserved, its elevated structures attaining a height of 9 m (cf. Rickman 1971, pp. 138-140; Wörrle 1975, 67-68; Cavalier 2007, pp. 54-59 and 2018, pp. 109-113; Marksteiner 2013; Rizos 2015, pp. 288-289). A Hadrianic inscription specifically indicates that the horrea was an imperial building, and given its strategic location within in a fortified harbour (concerning the importance of Myra as a Lycian port and its structures, cf. Zimmermann 1992; Belke 2000, 116-117; Cavalier 2007 and 2018; Carre, Laudani 2016, pp. 22-24; after the 4^th century Niewöhner 2012), it presumably remained so.

The horrea’s function is debated. What goods did it store? The port appears on the grain route from Alexandria to Rome in the early Empire (Rickman 1971, pp. 137-140; Wörrle 1975, p. 71) and later from Alexandria to Constantinople (Zimmermann 1992; Belke 2000, pp. 116-117). Tatianus’ inscription suggests that grain was stored there. However, the hinterland of Lycia is not an area of large-scale cereal production. Moreover, the horrea lacks the physical structures that one would normally associate with grain storage, that is to say the suspensurae under the floor, cavities in the walls, opus signinum for waterproofing, slit-shaped openings in the rear walls for ventilation. The windows too are rather large and would let in too much light. Since the horrea are 100 metres from the harbour and close to the agorà, some scholars think that the horrea were for regional trade: instead of handling products for the annona, these imperial warehouses were, in fact, rented to private individuals for local trade, a trade that was destined for the cities of the Anatolian and Aegean coasts, and that had little to do with grain (Cavalier 2007 and 2018; Virlouvet 2018, 56-57; concerning the trade of luxury goods such as purple and saffron in Andriakè, see the Lex portorii prov. Lyciae in 60/63 AD, SEG 57 (2007), 1666 = AE 2007, 1503; cf. Maiuro 2016). That said, for the period of Late Antiquity, Tatianus’ inscription on the delivery of official weights and measures leads Rizos (2015, pp. 289-290) to interpret the horrea of Andriakè as a public warehouse for the annona of the Eastern Empire’s army. Rizos (2015, p. 290) argues that «the horrea of Andriake must have served as a shared gathering and storage base for fiscal products exacted from the territories of Myra and Arnaiai as annona, before being shipped to the frontiers or Constantinople». Given that the horrea of Andriakè were imperial property and that supervision of the weights and measures was a specific task of the praetorian prefects for tax purposes (Rickman 1971, pp. 183-193; on civil horrea, pp. 278-290 on military horrea, see below) suggests that these warehouses were indeed state fiscal structures.

Tatianus

The inscription does not state the name and the title of the authority that issued it. It only recalls that the (weights and) measures were made by copying exactly the models disseminated by the praetorian prefect of the East Flavius Eutolmius Tatianus (l. 2). After an important career, commencing in 358 AD, he became praetorian prefect of the East from 388 to 392 AD, residing in Constantinople during the long stay of Theodosius I in Italy (the emperor only came back to Constantinople in July 391 AD; for Tatianus’ career, see PLRE I, pp. 876-878; Delmaire 1989, pp. 62-67; Olszaniec 2013, pp. 394-407; his cursus honorum is recorded in an inscription carved in his honour in Sidyma, see PPRET 87). Shortly after his return to Constantinople, the emperor Theodosius I removed Tatianus from his office and sent him into exile in Lycia, while his son Proculus was sentenced to death (for a recent study, see Mecella 2015). The fall from grace caused Tatianus’ name to be erased from almost all of his inscriptions (PPRET 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 88). Many years later a (homonymous) descendant of Tatianus ordered a Greek inscription in verse to be engraved in honour of his ancestor, the praetorian prefect, in the city of Aphrodisias (PPRET 91). In the inscription of Andriakè, the prefect’s names have been deliberately erased. More specifically, the gentilicium Eutolmius was only superficially cancelled, while the cognomen Tatianus was more deeply cut away. There is no doubt that the cognomen Tatianus was originally carved on line 2, because it is the diacritic identifying the dignitary, a diacritic which appears in all the inscriptions commemorating him (PPRET 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91) in over 100 ancient texts (laws and literary sources amongst others) about him. The diacritic could not have been omitted in this inscription, which, as we shall see, was engraved in a public space by a provincial authority (the governor of Lycia), subject to the praetorian prefect of the East (below). Moreover, the photographs (above) show that at the end of line 2 there is a space for the cognomen [Τατιανοῦ] (see Feissel, in Cuvigny 2017, p. 101, nt 16; Rothenhöfer 2020, p. 294). Nevertheless, the name of Eutolmius Tatianus allows us to date the inscription to the praetorian prefecture held by Tatianus, i.e. between 388 and 392 AD.

Edict

At the beginning of the text, the anonymous author emphasizes that the praetorian prefect Tatianus is his powerful superior. The expression in line 1, ἐπὶ τοῦ κυρίου μου, shows that the author of the text is an individual, directly subordinate to the praetorian prefect. The author is not a member of any collegial authority like the city magistrates, nor does he sit on the provincial council, and yet he seems to be the superior of the civic authorities of Myra and Arnaia. This ‘three-level’ relationship suggests that the inscription is part of an edict (or less likely a letter) of the governor of the province of Lycia (regarding the governor and hierarchy, see Slootjes 2006, pp. 39-45). The absence of any opening formulas, a heading or epistolary details, not to mention its mandatory tone and occasional syntactical inconsistencies, suggest that the text is part of a more extensive edict. Maybe it was an edict issued and circulated by the governor himself. Perhaps it was addressed to all the cities of Lycia and concerned the delivery of (weights and) measures established by the praetorian prefecture. In his official communication, the governor listed all the standard measures delivered to the individual city authorities. Probably because of disputes over the measurements in a warehouse shared by two cities, the city authorities of Myra and Arnaia wanted to permanently set in stone the essential part of the edict (for edicts of the late Roman governors between 324 and 602 AD, see Feissel 2009, pp. 110[54]-111[55], documents nr. 2, 3, 5, 14, 38-41, 50.3, 51.3, 55, 73?, 74?, 93, 93bis, 94, 105bis, 106bis; Corcoran 2014, p. 175; cf. PPRET 53). The state of the engraved inscription suggests that the original text was reduced. It suggests also that the carving was not ordered by the authority that issued it (maybe the governor) or even by the praetorian prefect. It appears more likely that the extant portion of the edict was excerpted from a larger text and then carved at the behest of the city authorities. It is difficult to say whether all the provinces of the prefecture (approximately 45) received the same instructions. It seems probable, however, that those standard measurements were the same everywhere. Goods produced in one province to be transported and consumed in another would have to be measured and taxed according to a single coherent system.

Praetorian prefect and horrea

The inscription of Andriakè shows that the praetorian prefect Tatianus had models of standard measures prepared in Constantinople that were to be used to quantify tax payments in kind. Guaranteed by the authority of the prefect (ll. 3-4 e 5-6), these objects were sent to the governors of the provinces in the Eastern praetorian prefecture. The governors who received them, then had numerous identical copies made (ll. 5-6). The governors then sent them to the city authorities responsible for calculating the tax contributions in kind in their warehouses (together with an official communication, edict or letter). In the case of Andriakè, the governor sent official standard measures to Arnaia and Myra, of which Andriake was the port and location of an important public warehouse, so that the praepositi horreorum could use them without accusations of committing fraud (on the horrea, their management and their staff, cf. Rickman 1971, pp. 183-193; Vera 2008; on the inscription concerning ὁρρεοπραιποσιτία from Megara stated by city councils of Achaea, see Rizos 2015, pp. 296-297). The horrea of Andriakè were managed by praepositi chosen in Myra and Arnaia. The task of the praepositus horreorum was a (compulsory) city service (liturgy), which was entrusted in turn to sufficiently wealthy citizens, who were chosen by the curiae (the choice of praepositi from the former officiales of the staff of the provincial governor seems to be a temporary innovation of Valentinian I, cf. CTh 12, 06, 05; CTh 12, 06, 09; see PPRET 56). Although the official (weights and) measures were probably used by mensores and susceptores in Andriakè, the horrea of that port, as already stated, were managed by praepositi chosen in Myra and Arnaia: their high social status (curials) suggests that the use of the standard measures would have been delegated to subordinate personnel. We do not know who was in charge of the staff working in the port and the horrea of Andriakè. Whatever the case maybe, the responsibility for the correct use of measuring instruments was a major task of the praepositi, who were independently drawn from two different cities (ll. 10-12). In general, products upon which tax was paid in kind (cereals, olive oil, wine) were unloaded by the dockers (saccarii, baiuli, catabolenses), measured by the mensores and stored in the local granaries, under the supervision of the praepositi (i.e. their subordinate personnel). The control of public warehouses was the responsibility of the provincial governor, while the expenses for the construction and restoration of the horrea were financed by the imperial fisc. The fiscal horrea could only receive goods enumerated in the tax registers, the contents of which were regularly reported to the governor of the province and by him to the praetorian prefect. Reports from the praepositi horreorum were regularly sent to the tabularii of the city, and by the tabularii to the bureaux of the provincial governor (see PPRET 56).

The serving praetorian prefect was obliged to supervise the weights and measures used in the provincial horrea (see also PPRET 33). The land tax of the late Empire collected large amounts of goods in kind, which were then channelled into thousands of warehouses, distributed in towns and ports throughout the country. In order to avoid fraud, the amount of goods being paid, transferred, stored and distributed had to calculated exactly. Foodstuffs in the form of cereals, oil and wine constituted the largest payments. In order to calculate payments to the treasury, every praetorian prefecture had to dispose of the same calibrated capacity measuring device.

A constitution issued by the emperor Theodosius I to the praetorian prefect of the East, Cynegius (see PPRET 75) on November 28^th 386 AD (CTh 12, 06, 21) – just before the prefecture of Tatianus – obliged every city and mansio to keep stone and metal models of weights and measures (modios aeneos seu lapideos cum sextariis atque ponderibus per mansiones singulasque civitates iussimus collocari, ut unusquisque tributarius sub oculis constitutis rerum omnium modiis sciat, quid debeat susceptoribus dare; “We command that measures of bronze and of stone, along with sextarii and weights, shall be deposited in each station and each municipality, so that each taxpayer shall have the established measures of all articles under his eyes and shall know what he must pay to the tax receivers,” transl. Pharr 1952, p. 375). Shortly before (October 3^rd, 383 AD) another constitution to the praetorian prefect of the East Postumianus (PPRET 74) transmitted the same message (CTh 12, 06, 19: In singulis stationibus et mensurae et pondera publice conlocentur, ut fraudare cupientibus fraudandi adimant potestatem; “Standards of weights and measures shall be placed publicly in each station, so that those persons desiring to commit fraud shall thus be deprived of the power to defraud,” transl. Pharr 1952, p. 375). The laws aimed to avoid tax fraud in the perception and storage. The problem was still urgent more than one hundred and fifty years later during the reign of Justinian (cf. Nov. Iust. 128, 15, adressed on June 6^th 545 AD to the praetorian prefect of the East Petrus Barsymes [PLRE IIIB, pp. 999-1002]: “We command that those exacting public taxes are to make use of just weights and measures, to obviate their committing any injustice or fraud on our taxpayers,” transl. Miller, Sarris 2018, II, p. 851; δικαίοις σταθμοῖς τε καὶ μέτροις κεχρῆσθαι κελεύομεν). A passage in the treatise “Stereometrika” by Héron of Alexandria (Hero, Stereom. 02, 54) recalls the measures officially established for cereals, barley, wine and bacon subject to taxation by the eastern praetorian prefect Domitius Modestus (see PPRET 67 and 68) in the years 370- 377 AD (see Corcoran 1995, and below).

Of course, the praetorian prefect was responsible for the integrity of official measures in the West as well. Complaints about the alteration of weights and measures can be found in a constitution of Honorius to Caecilianus praetorian prefect of Italy-Illyricum-Africa (PLRE II, pp. 244-246; CTh 11, 08, 03 on January 21^st 409 AD; standard weights in Nov. Val. 16, 02, on 445 AD). A constitution of the Emperor Maiorianus (Nov. Maior. 07, 15, on November 6^th, 458 AD), adressed to the praetorian prefect of Italy-Illyricum-Africa Fl. Caecina Decius Basilius (PLRE II, pp. 216-217), states that “tested weights shall be sent by the praetorian office, not only to each of the provinces but also to each municipality. Every tax collector, as well as everv tradesman shall use these weights, and everyone shall know that capital punishment awaits him if he should transgress this constitution” (Pharr 1952, p. 559). Between 534 and 535 AD, the praetorian prefect of Italy Cassiodorus (PLRE IIIA, pp. 265-269) intervened to verify the weights and measures in use in Liguria for taxation (Cassiod., Var. 11, 06). The verification of weights for payment in kind and in money was always necessary up to the mid 6^th Century (cf. the canonicaria epistula by the praetorian prefect of Italy in Cassiod., Var. 12, 16; Edict. Theoder. 149; Pragm. Sanctio in Nov. Iust. App. 07, 19). The urban prefect had the same task in Rome (see Chastagnol 1960, pp. 330-332). Ammianus Marcellinus (Amm. 27, 09, 10) informs us that in Rome in 367 AD, the urban prefect Vettius Agorius Praetestatus (PLRE I, pp. 722-724; see PPRET 77, 78, 79, 80, 81) had sample-weights (ponderaria) installed in structures in all the regiones, and not only on the Capitol hill, while a Novella by Valentinianus (Nov. Val. 16, 02) testifies to the emperor’s commitment to distribute sample-weights (exagia) in Rome, to limit the spread of fraud (ut fraus penitus amputetur), entrusted again in this case to the prefect’s custody (sine fraude debeant custodiri). For the dissemination of olive oil measures, guaranteed by the Prefect of Constantinople, cf. the constitution by the emperor Arcadius to Monaxius (CTh 14, 17, 15 February 15^th, 408 AD).

The measures

Thanks to the inscription of Andriakè, we can be sure that the (weights and) measures, arriving from Constantinople were then duplicated, probably by the staff of the provincial governor – in this case of Lycia – and sent to the magistrates of the cities responsible for the public horrea, in this case the cities of Myra and Arnaia with their common (fiscal ?) horrea in Andriakè (for a general study of these objects in the Eastern Empire, cf. Pitarakis 2012, 410-416). The inscription specifies in detail the types and number of models in each category to be delivered to the magistrates of the cities of Myra and Arnaia: two φραγέλλια σιδαρᾶ; two ξ(έσται) χάλκεοι (sextarii aenei) ἔχοντες τρισαυγούστια; three μόδιοι (modii, bushels), with three ἡμιμόδια. Cuvigny (2017, pp. 102 ss.) has studied the typology and use of these three types of standard measures: we follow his conclusions in part, and add some thoughts on φραγέλλια and ξ(έσται).

φραγέλλια σιδαρᾶ. It is not clear what the φραγέλλια σιδαρᾶ are: certainly not weights, which are not made of iron but of other metals. Probably the noun derives from the Latin flagellum. The Byzantine lexicons indicate a rod, a whip (cf. Cuvigny 2017, p. 111). It seems likely that the iron φραγέλλια are measuring objects similar to the regulae ferrae mentioned in the Beirut inscription on the navicularii of Arles (CIL 03, 14165, 08 = ILS 6987, see Virlouvet 2004; Corbier 2006). The Beirut inscription contains a letter from the prefect of the annona of the year 201 AD to the procurator (maybe of Narbonensis) in which the prefect orders that the iron regulae used to measure the quantity of grain transported by the navicularii of Arles to Ostia be guaranteed by the control of the procurator: the official must stamp a mark on the regulae after checking them (l. 17: inprimi charactere regulas ferreas). But scholars are divided on the nature of the iron regulae, as they are on the iron φραγέλλια. According to Heron de Villefosse (1905) the regulae are bars intended to close the hold of the ship, on which the quantity of grain transported was indicated (cf. Mommsen in CIL). According to Esperandieu (1900) and Waltzing (1900, p. 621), regulae are flat instruments, generally made of wood or iron, used to level the grain in the containers before storage: the purpose was to eliminate the grain in excess and make sure that all the containers had the same amount of grain inside them. Similarly, in her in-depth study of the Andriakè inscription Cuvigny (2017, p. 109) thinks that the φραγέλλια are «racloires en fer», scrapers for leveling cereals, but this instrument seems to be the Latin rutellum (‘paddle’) and the Greek ἀπόμακτρον, and does not look like a measuring instrument (l. 11 μέτρα). Manganaro (1992, p. 286) and Belke (2000, p. 117) consider the φραγέλλια to be a scourge to punish perpetrators of annonarian fraud, but this interpretation is at odds with the what the instrument was actually made of (scourges were made of wood or leather) and contradicts the contents of the edict, which speaks of a standard measure (l. 11). Rizos (2015, p. 291) thinks that φραγέλλιον is the ‘branch’ that a clerk can be seen holding in the middle of the mosaic of the mensores frumentari of Ostia (I, XIX, 1.3, see Pergola 1990) and that the second clerk from left holds in the fresco of the Isis Geminiana ship from the Necropolis Ostiense, now in the Vatican Museums, Gregoriano Profano, see Virlouvet 1995, pl. XIII, fig. 20 et 21). Rather than a coercive weapon, this ‘branch’ would have been a tool for calculating the number of sacks discharged into the modius. In his study on the inscription of Andriakè, Kubitschek (1918, pp. 71-72) thinks that φραγέλλια were graduated rods for linear measurement (Lat. flagella; see also Morrisson 2012, pp. 383-386, who does not specify their use). Following this suggestion, some scholars believe that φραγέλλια (and regulae) were graduated rods for vertical measurement. According to Giardina (1982, pp. 122-123 and p. 141, nt. 61) the regulae ferreae were vertical graduated bars, the dimensions of which were guaranteed by the annonarian authority, and which were used to determine the volume of cereals inside a container. Similarly Virlouvet (2004, p. 333) interprets them as measuring rods for grain carried on ships or placed in containers. According to Sirks (1991, p. 98) the regulae are vertical graduated bars placed inside the cargo hold of the ship, and calibrated to measure the amount of grain contained in the hold. According to Corbier (2006, p. 242) the regulae were calibrated bars issued by the authorities to measure the diameter and height of the modii used as units of measurement of the loaded grain.

Probably φραγέλλια σιδαρᾶ were similar to the regulae ferreae, that is to say, standard-size rulers, in the form of an iron rod or ‘whip’ that were distributed by the praetorian prefecture. It is highly likely that these rods were used to measure the height attained by the grain in a large container (a multiple of the modius), in a ship’s hold, or in the compartment of a warehouse. They were made of iron because they were more difficult to alter, even by increasing the length of the rod. Of course the volume of the container varied, but there is no doubt that the quantity of grain unloaded in sacks had to be calculated by volume. The relationship between standard measures of capacity (volume), quantity and weight of grain and other annonary products is explicitly stated in a fragment of an edict, issued by the praetorian prefect of the East Modestus, in Hero, Stereom. 02, 54 (see Corcoran 1995, pp. 379-380): in this text the relationship between cubic foot, modii, xestai (sextarii of X ounces) and pounds of corn, barley, wine, bacon, is clearly stated.

ξ(έσται) χάλκεοι ἔχοντες τρισαυγούστια. The ξ(έσται) χάλκεοι / sextarii aenei are bronze containers for measuring liquids or dry staples equal to 54 centilitres, but the close connection with the τρισαυγούστια is not clear. The stone is undoubtedly engraved: ΤΡΙΣΑΥΓΟΥΣΤΙΑ (cf. facsimile in Petersen, von Luschan 1889, p. 42, nr. 77a; photos in Wörrle 1975, Taf. 35B, and Rizos 2015, p. 289, fig. 3). The term τρισαυγούστια, as a noun, is not attested elsewhere. Morrisson (2012, p. 385) thinks that the three augustia would be an authentication mark on bronze sextarii, bearing the effigy of three emperors, minted with a punch («the xestai bore the images of the three emperors, engraved or punched as a mark of validity»). Manganaro (1992, p. 284) thinks that τρία αὐγούστια is a weight (connected to the σταθμὰ, cf. l. 11), and that the sextarii are containers for standard weights, which were made as portrait-busts of the three Augusti (Rizos 2015, p. 290 and nt 10 agrees). Following this hypothesis, Cuvigny (2017, pp. 102-105) states: «les τρισαυγούστια seraient des poids, un jeu de poids, ornés de ce motif. Τρισαυγούστιον serait une appellation familière et imagée de ces poids; elle ferait référence à cette iconographie, qui caractérisait justement certains poids officiels» (p. 104). The three Augusti are Valentinianus II, Theodosius I and Arcadius. The sextarius (measure of capacity) was associated (ἔχοντες l. 4) with the measure of weight of the grain contained in the sextarius, a weight guaranteed by the image of the three Augusti; so Cuvigny translates (ll. 4-5): “2 setiers en bronze accompagnés de poids à triple image auguste” (p. 113). But in 2020 P. Rothenhöfer published a real bronze sextarium dated 402-408 AD from a private collection. In its upper part, the sextarium has a handle sustaining the busts of three Emperors; a Latin inscription is engraved around the container, declaring the measure of capacity and the names of the emperors Theodosius II, Arcadius and Honorius: DDDominis NNNostris Arcadio / et Honorio et Theodosio <victoribus>> hac / triumfatoribus SSSem) /PPPer Augustis ((leaf)), secstarium exagialem, /⁵ unc(iae) XXIIII. This extraordinary find is a standard sextarius size of 24 ounces (2 pounds), guaranteed by the name and the portraits of the three Augusti of the years 402-408 AD. The unusual iconography of the handle and the word exagiale (here attested for the first time, but from the well known word exagium, “measure or weight verified by the authority”) confirm the public and official use of this measuring instrument. It seems very likely that the two standard measures described in the Andriakè inscription as ξ(έσται) χάλκεοι ἔχοντες τρισαυγούστια are analogous to this newly published bronze vessel, the secstarium exagiale (see Rothenhöfer 2020, pp. 295-296). In this case, if Cuvigny’s hypothesis that the τρισαυγούστια are weights with an imperial mark proves to be false, then the problem of the expression in line 11 of the Andriakè inscription will still remain open: the praepositi horreorum must retain both measures of capacity (μέτρα) and weights (σταθμὰ, as in CTh 12, 06, 21: modios aeneos seu lapideos cum sextariis atque ponderibus), but the standard measures mentioned on the inscription on the walls of the warehouse of Andriakè are only measures of capacity, not weights. Already Kubitschek (1918, 71-72) who rightly interpreted flagella as an iron bar for linear measurement noted that no object for measuring weight appeared in the Lycian inscription. Perhaps the final exhortation to the praepositi to safeguard the models in the horrea was generic and thus also included weights, although the standard models assigned by the praetorian prefecture to the governor and by the governor to the civic authorities of Myra and Arnaia were not weights.

On the dimensions of the μόδιοι and their relationship with the ξέσται (modii; 8.75 litres of corn = 16 sextarii of 0,54 litres), see Rothenhöfer 2020, pp. 292-294. On the bronze modius of Ponte Puñide (Galicia, Spain), granted by the emperors Valentinianus, Valens, Gratianus in 367/375 AD cf. Pereira Menaut 1991, pp. 217-219, nr. 87.

On the transliteration into Greek of the Latin horreum (l. 12 ὁρρίοις), see Geraci 2008, pp. 313-316; Vera 2008, p. 323, nt 1, and p. 328. Also μόδιοι, πρεποσίτων and likely φραγέλλιον are translitterated from Latin into Greek.

Bibliography

Belke K., Prokops De Aedificiis book V und Klein Asien, Ant Tard, 8, 2000, 115-125.

Carre M.-B., Laudani S., Distribution géographique des entrepôts, localisations, réseaux: études de cas, in Entrepôts et trafics annonaires en Méditerranée: antiquité-temps modernes, dir. B. Marin, C. Virlouvet, Roma 2016, 13-57.

Cavalier L., Horrea d’Andriakè et Patara: un nouveau type d’édifice fonctionnel en Lycie à l’époque impériale, REA, 109, 2007, 61-65.

Cavalier L., Nouvelles observations sur les aménagements commerciaux du port d’Andriakè, in Entrepôts et circuits de distribution en Méditerranée antique, dir. V. Chankowski, X. Lafon, C. Virlouvet, Athènes 2018, 109-122.

Chastagnol A., La Préfecture urbaine à Rome au Bas-Empire, Paris 1960.

Corbier M., Les mesures et les hommes: les naviculaires d’Arles et leurs «règles de fer», in M. Corbier, Donner à voir, donner à lire. Mémoire et communication dans la Rome ancienne, Paris 2006, 233-256.

Corcoran S., The Praetorian Prefect Modestus and Hero of Alexandria’s Stereometrica, Latomus, 54, 1995, 377-384.

Corcoran S., State correspondence in the Roman Empire: imperial communication from Augustus to Justinian, in K. Radner (ed.), State Correspondence in the Ancient World from New Kingdom Egypt to the Roman Empire, Oxford-New York 2014, 172-209.

Cuvigny H., Τρισαυγούστιον et φραγέλλιον. Contrôle de qualité et mesurage du grain fiscal au IVe s. apr. J.-C. à la lumière de P.Mich. XX 800 et de l’inscription tardive du grenier d’Andriakè, Chiron 47, 2017, 95-114.

Delmaire R., Les responsables des finances impériales au Bas-Empire romain (IVe-VIe s.): études prosopographiques, Bruxelles 1989.

Esperandieu É., Lettre d’un haut fonctionnaire, probablement d’un préfet de l’annone, aux naviculaires maritimes d’Arles, Revue épigraphique du Midi de la France, 4/98, 1900, 113-119.

Feissel D., Les actes de l’État impérial dans l’épigraphie tardive (324-610): prolégomènes à un inventaire, in Selbstdarstellung und Kommunikation. Die Veröffentlichung staatlicher Urkunden auf Stein und Bronze in der Römischen Welt, hrsg. R. Haensch, München 2009, 97-128 (then Documents, droit, diplomatique de l’Empire romain tardif, Paris 2010, 43-70).

Geraci G., Granai nell’Egitto ellenistico e romano: problemi tipologici, lessicali, funzionali e metodologici, MEFRA, 120, 2008, 307-322.

Giardina A., Lavoro e storia sociale: antagonismi e alleanze dall’Ellenismo al Tardo Antico, Opus, 1, 1982, 115-146.

Grégoire H., Recueil des inscriptions grecques-chrétiennes d’Asie Mineure, Paris 1922.

Heron de Villefosse A., Daïr-el-Gamar (Liban). Les naviculaires maritimes d’Arles, Revue épigraphique du Midi de la France, 5/116, 1905, 134-137.

Kubitschek W., Eine Inschrift des Speichers von Andriake (Lykien), NZ, 51, 1918, 63-72.

Maiuro M., Portorium Lyciae 1. Fiscus Caesaris, Lega Licia e pubblicani nella Lex di Andriake, Med Ant 19, 2016, 263-292.

Manganaro G., Due note tardoantiche, ZPE 94, 1992, 283-294.

Marksteiner Th., Andriakè, un port Lycien, in Euploia. La Lycie et la Carie antiques. Dynamiques des territoires, échanges et identités (Actes du colloque de Bordeaux, 5, 6 et 7 novembre 2009), éd. P. Brun, L. Cavalier, K. Konuk, F. Prost, Bordeaux 2013, 281-290.

Mecella M., L’amministrazione di Taziano e Proculo e il destino dei Lici tra Teodosio e Arcadio, in Governare e riformare l’impero al momento della sua divisione: Oriente, Occidente, Illirico, Roma 2015, 51-83.

Miller D.J.D., Sarris P., The Novels of Justinian. A Complete Annotated English Translation, 2 voll., Cambridge 2018.

Morrisson C., Weighing, Measuring, Paying Exchanges in the Market and the Marketplace, in Ead. (ed.), Trade and Markets in Byzantium, Washington DC 2012, 379-398.

Niewöhner P., Andriake in byzantinischer Zeit, in 40 Jahre Grabung Limyra (Akten des internationalen Symposions, Wien, 3.-5. Dezember 2009), hrsg. M. Seyer, Wien 2012, 223-240.

Olszaniec S., Prosopographical Studies on the Court Elite in the Roman Empire (4th Century AD), Toruń, 2013.

Pereira Menaut G., Corpus de Inscricións Romanas de Galicia, I. Provincia de A Coruña, Santiago 1991.

Pergola Ph., Mensores frumentarii cristiani et annone à la fin de l’Antiquité (relecture d’un cicle de peintures), RAC, 66, 1990, 167-184.

Petersen E.A.H., von Luschan F., Reisen im südwestlichen Kleinasien, II, Reisen in Lykien, Milyas und Kibyratis, Wien 1889.

Pharr C., The Theodosian Code and novels and the Sirmondian Constitutions. A Translation with commentary, glossary, and bibliography, Princeton 1952.

Pitarakis B., Daily Life at the Marketplace in Late Antiquity and Byzantium, in Trade and Market in Byzantium, Washington DC 2012, 399-426.

Rickman G., Roman Granaries and Store Buildings, Cambridge 1971.

Rizos E., Remarks on the logistics and infrastructure of the «annona militaris» in eastern Mediterranean and Aegean areas, Ant Tard 23, 2015, 287-302.

Rothenhöfer P., Unter den strengen Augen der Kaiser : ein « sextarium trisaugusteum » mit Kaiserinschrift vom Anfang des 5. Jahrhunderts, Ant Tard 28, 2020, 289-296.

Sirks B., Food for Rome. The Legal Structure of the Transportation and Processing of Supplies for the Imperial Distributions in Rome and Constantinople, Amsterdam 1991.

Slootjes D., The Governor and his subjects in the Later Roman Empire, Leiden-Boston 2006.

Vera D., Gli horrea frumentari dell’Italia tardoantica: tipi, funzioni, personale, MEFRA, 120, 2008, 323-336.

Virlouvet C., Tessera frumentaria. Les procédures de distribution du blé public à Rome à la fin de la République et au début de l’Empire, Roma 1995.

Virlouvet C., Les Naviculaires d’Arles. À propos de l’inscription provenant de Beyrouth, MEFRA, 116, 2004, 327-370.

Virlouvet C., Bâtiments de stockage et circuits économiques du monde romain, in Entrepôts et circuits de distribution en Méditerranée antique, dir. V. Chankowski, X. Lafon, C. Virlouvet, Athènes 2018, 43-59.

Waltzing J.-P., Étude historique sur les corporations professionnelles chez les romains depuis les origines jusqu'à la chute de l’Empire d’Occident, IV, Louvain 1900.

Wörrle M., Die Inschrift des Flavius Eutolmius Tatianus, in Myra. Eine lykische Metropole in antiker und byzantinischer Zeit, hrsg. J. Borchhardt, Berlin 1975, 70-71 (Tav. 35 B).

Zimmermann M., Die lykischen Häfen und die Handelswege im östlichen Mittelmeer. Bemerkungen zu PMIch I, 10, ZPE, 92, 1992, 201-217.

Praetorian prefects and epigraphic habit