Inscription (1) from Ancyra in honour of Constantine Aug. by his praet. prefect Fl. Constantius
source date: 324/327 AD
edition published: 2020-06-18
availability: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/)

Clementissimo adque perpetuo imperatori domino nostro Constantino, Maximo, Victori, semper Augusto, Flavius Constantius, vir clarissimus, praefectus pretorii, pietati eius semper dicatissimus.

This edition follows CIL 03, 06751.

“ To the most merciful and enduring emperor, our master Constantinus, the greatest always victorious Augustus, Flavius Constantius, of clarissimus rank, praetorian prefect, always everlastingly devoted to his piety.”

“À notre seigneur Constantin, éternel et très clément empereur, le plus grand victorieux, toujours Auguste, Flavius Costantius, clarissime préfet du prétoire, toujours très dévoué à sa piété.”

“Al nostro signore Costantino, eterno e clementissimo imperatore, Massimo Vincitore, sempre Augusto, Flavius Costantius, chiarissimo prefetto del pretorio, sempre devotissimo alla pietà sua.”

We know that the inscription was originally engraved on a rectangular marble block, but unfortunately we are without any photographic reproduction of it, although in 1875 the German orientalist Andreas David Mortdmann sent one to Mommsen (see Ephemeris Epigraphica 02, nr. 1036; also von Domaszewski based his edition on a photograph of the monument, see Ephemeris Epigraphica 05, nr. 0055). One rough facsimile is all we possess. The writing module is irregular and is characterized by a shallow carving of the letters. Even if it is impossible to establish the dimensions of the support, through the height of the letters (the only recorded data), Mitchell and French (GLIA 02, 329) estimate the inscription’s dimensions to be very similar to those of a second dedication from Ankara, more recently discovered (PPRET 13: h. 126 cm, w. 92 cm). This new inscription was also erected by the prefect Flavius Constantius in honour of the Emperor Constantine.

According to Mitchell and French (GLIA 02, 329), the second inscribed base found at Ankara was chiselled on a re-used epigraphic field. In fact, if our inscription really is so similar to the second one from Ankara both in dimensions and chronology, then it is highly likely that the inscribed field of our marble base was re-used just like the other one.

The inscription in question was discovered «when the “Banque Agricole” (Ziraat Bankasi) was built in Ulus» (GLIA 02, 329; cf. Jerphanion 1928, p. 234), in the second half of the 19th Century, between 1863 (creation of the Ziraat Bankasi) and 1875 (Ephemeris Epigraphica 02, nr. 1036, Mommsen was notified by Mordtmann). The marble base was then reused: it may have been used in a cemetery or inserted into the lower town’s walls as spolia, preserving it at least until Jerphanion’s autopsy (Jerphanion 1928, p. 234). The stone was subsequently lost and its current location is unknown.

Ulus is the historical centre of Ankara and the original core of the Roman city of Ancyra, the capital of the province of Galatia (Haensch 1997, 277-281). Such a monumental inscription like this (if the assumption of Mitchell and French about the dimensions is true), must have occupied a very visible and important place within the city, such as the forum.

The inscription put up by the praetorian prefect Constantius praises the Emperor Constantine. The epithet victor is worthy of comment, since it replaced the word invictus, linked to the worship of Sol Invictus, which was at this point in contrast to imperial religious sensibility. The title victor was used continuously after Licinius’ defeat on September 19th 324 AD, when Constantine, at the end of the civil war, presented himself as the final and only winner over his enemies. The portrait of the triumphator is, however, tempered by the attention to clemency and piety that characterized Constantine’s policy of reconciliation in the East. Indeed, the emperor was aware that Licinius’ eminent supporters would not only have to be pardoned, but also elevated, if necessary, to influential positions. The prefect’s devotion to pietas rather than numen represents another example of Constantine’s inclination towards reconciliation in areas that had only recently passed under his control and that required caution (cf. Chastagnol 1966, pp. 543-550; Grünewald 1990, pp. 134, 149; Porena 2003, pp. 390-391; GLIA 02, 329). The second Constantinian inscription from Ancyra (PPRET 13) glorifies Constantine’s pietas.

The monument is dedicated only by Flavius Constantius but is very similar in its form and content to the collegial ones (PPRET 01; 02; 03; 08; 09; 16; 17; 18). Constantius may therefore have been the only praetorian prefect of Constantine when these dedications were made. He is cited as praetorian prefect in eight imperial constitutions (the list in Porena 2003, pp. 383-386, with discussion of chronology and contents): the first (CTh 15, 14, 01) and the last (CTh 02, 24, 02) attest to him being praetorian prefect between December 16th 324 AD and June 11th 327 AD. He also held the consulate in 327 AD together with Valerius Maximus (CLRE, pp. 188-189). Flavius Constantius was one of the major figures involved in the Constantinian reorganization of the East after the overthrow of Licinius’ regime. Two dedications from Ancyra (here and PPRET 13) and another two, related to buildings (Aqaba military building, PPRET 14; epigram for the Great Antioch’s Church, PPRET 15) testify to his important role in the building policy of the East. He was probably promoted to the praetorian prefecture at the time of the second and decisive war against Licinius (321-324 AD, perhaps replacing Iunius Bassus, cf. PPRET 10 and PPRET 11).

Constantine entrusted Constantius with such an important but thorny task that many scholars supposed kinship with the emperor’s family. The PLRE (I, Constantius 1, p. 224 and Constantius 5, p. 225) has suggested to identify Constantius with the homonymous envoy sent by Constantine between 315 and 316 AD to persuade Licinius to promote Bassianus (married to Constantine’s half-sister Anastasia) to the rank of Caesar before their first conflict (Anon. Vales. 02, 14): the great deal of trust required for such a mission, supports the kinship theory. Chausson (2002, pp. 138, 145) suggested that Flavius Constantius could be Constantine’s legitimate brother (another son of Constantius I and Elena). Barnes (2011, p. 212, nt. 14) suggested that he was on a par with Iulius Constantius, son of Constantius I and Theodora, thus making him Constantine’s half-brother, although there is no evidence that he took the nomen Flavius. Porena (2003, pp. 387-389) agreed with Constantius’ identification in the PLRE and observed that he already must have been a trusted and experienced figure at that moment (perhaps in Constantine’s service before 324 AD), suitable to become Constantine’s praetorian prefect, when the second conflict with Licinius degenerated into open warfare. However, Porena also noted that Constantine and Constantius had to belong to the same generation and so his praetorian prefect could, in theory at least, be merely a cousin of the emperor.

In the Ankara dedications Flavius Constantius is styled vir clarissimus. Since almost nothing is known of Constantius’ career before the prefecture, we cannot establish when he became clarissimus. According to Porena (2003, pp. 391-393) there are three possibilities: a) when he held the consulate (assuming he belonged to the equestrian order and that our inscription post-dates 327 AD); b) he was of clarissimus rank before his consulate (if he was a relative of Constantine, as suggested above); c) during Constantius’ tenure as praetorian prefect, since Constantine established that upon appointment praetorian prefects would automatically become clarissimi

Porena (2003, pp. 392-393) gives two possible explanations for the creation of Ankara’s monument: a) if the inscription was made to celebrate Constantine’s Vicennalia in 325 AD (when Flavius Constantius would appear to be the only member of the prefectural college), the monument could represent a surviving example of a series of monuments decreed by the prefect for this anniversary; b) the dedication may have been made shortly before the prefect’s departure in 327 AD, when Constantius was a member of a larger prefectural college, but he would have commissioned the monuments on his own in the regions for which he was responsible. The discovery of the second dedication from Ancyra (PPRET 13) strongly supports the first assumption. Similarly, Mitchell and French date our dedications to the first weeks and months after the defeat of Licinius, since the inscriptions were intended to immediately publicize the political tenor of the new regime (see GLIA 02, 329).

Ephemeris Epigraphica 02, 1036 Ephemeris Epigraphica 05, 0055 CIL 03, 06751 Jerphanion 1928, p. 234, nr. 7 Bosch 1967, p. 367, nr. 305 Grünewald 1990, p. 244, nr. 417 Porena 2003, p. 390 = AE 2003, 1832 GLIA 02, 329

EDCS 28400808 EDAK LSA 1138 TM 385204

Barnes T.D., Constantine: Dynasty, Religion and Power in the Later Roman Empire, Chichester-Malden 2011 Bosch E., Quellen zur Geschichte der Stadt Ankara im Altertum, Ankara 1967 Chastagnol A., Un gouverneur Constantinien de Tripolitaine: Laenatius Romulus, Praeses en 324-326, Latomus, 25, 1966, 539-552 (= Id., L'Italie et l'Afrique au Bas-Empire: Études administratives et prosopographiques. Scripta varia, Lille 1987, 279-295) Chausson F., Une soeur de Constantin. Anastasia, in Carrié J.-M., Lizzi Testa R. (éd.), Humana sapit. Etudes d’antiquité tardive offertes à Lellia Cracco Ruggini, Turnhout 2002, 131-155 Ephemeris Epigraphica: Corporis Inscriptionum Latinarum Supplementum, 2, Berlin 1875 Ephemeris Epigraphica: Corporis Inscriptionum Latinarum Supplementum, 5, Berlin 1884 Grünewald Th., Constantinus Maximus Augustus: Herrschaftspropaganda in der Zeitgenössischen Überlieferung, Stuttgart 1990 Haensch R., Capita provinciarum. Statthaltersitze und Provinzialverwaltung in der römischen Kaiserzeit, Mainz 1997 Jerphanion G.D., Mélanges d’archéologie anatolienne. Monuments préhelléniques, gréco-romains, byzantins et musulmans de Pont, de Cappadoce et de Galatie, Beyrouth 1928 Mitchell S., French D., The Greek and Latin Inscriptions of Ankara (Ancyra), II, München 2019 Porena P., Le origini della prefettura del pretorio tardoantica, Roma 2003

v(ir) c(larissimus)

praefectus praetorii