Bilingual epitaph in Latin (a) and Greek (b) hexameters of the praet. prefect Maiorinus from Buşr al-Hariri (Syria) by his nephew
source date: 346/365 AD
edition published: 2020-03-27
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/)

Sede sub hac recubas clarus praetorique praefectus
Maiorinus virtute caelebratus magna per orbem.
Haec illi nunc requies fati, haec sedis aeterna,
Filippi extructa studiis gratique nepotis.

Τύμβος ὑπουδαίων μακάρων ὅδε· τῷ ἔνι κεῖται
συνκλήτου φίλον ὄμμα, σαόφρων Μαιουρῖνος
οὗ δύσις ἀντολίη τε μεσημβρίη τε καὶ ἄρκτοι
πιστοτάτου βασιλεῦσιν ἀμωμήτοιο τε κέρτου
εὐρύ τε καὶ μάλα καλὸν ἀεὶ κλέος ἀείδουσιν·
τεῦξε δέ μιν ὥριστος ἐν ἡμερίοισι Φίλιππος,
αὐτοκασιγνήτης πινυτόφρονος ἔκγονος ἥρως,
καὐτὸς ἐὼν βασιλῆος ἀμύμονος ἐσλὸς ὀπάων,
καὶ κτίσε πύργον ὕπερθεν ἐϋπτερύγεσσι πελείαις,
λαοτύπων παλάμῃσιν ἐς οὔρανον εὐρὺν ἀείρας.

The Latin text’s edition is based on Feissel 2006b, pp. 125-126, and IGLS XV／1, 242.

The Greek text’s edition is based on IGLS XV／1, 241.

a: “Inside this seat you sleep Maiorinus, shining praetorian prefect celebrated for your great virtue throughout the world. Now there is for him the fatal rest, there is the eternal seat, built by the care of Philippus, grateful nephew.”

b: “Here lies the tomb of the blessed (lying) underground; in this one lies the wise Maiorinus, a figure dear to the Senate, the most faithful to the emperors and irreprehensible friend, whose favorable and always honorable fame the sunset, sunrise, noon, and the constellations of bears sing. Philippus built it, distinguished among mortals, noble progeny of his wise sister, and himself a noble companion of the blameless sovereign, he also built a tower for the fast winged pigeons, raising it up into the vast sky through the capable hands of the sculptors.”

a: (re-elaborated from Feissel 2006b, pp. 125-126)

“Sous ce siège tu es couché, Majorinus, brillant préfet du prétoire, célébré pour ta haute vertu à travers le monde. Voici maintenant pour lui le repos fatal, voici le siège éternel, édifié par les soins de Philippe, neveu reconnaissant.”

b: (by IGLS 15,1, 241)

“Voici le tombeau des bienheureux (qui séjournent) sous terre! Ici repose le sage Majourinos, chère figure du Sénat dont Couchant, Levant, Midi et les Ourses chantent l’éternelle renommée au loin répandue et absolument splendide, lui le plus fidèle aux empereurs, l’ami sûr irréprochable. L’a fait édifier Philippos, excellent parmi les mortels, le noble fils de sa propre sœur à l’esprit avisé, et lui-même sage compagnon d’un empereur irréprochable, et il a fait bâtir la tour qui est au-dessus pour les pigeons aux ailes rapides, l’ayant fait élever par les mains des tailleurs de pierres jusque vers le vaste ciel.”

a: “In questa sede tu giaci Maiorinus, luminoso prefetto del pretorio, celebrato per la tua grande virtù in tutto il mondo. Ecco ora per lui il fatale riposo, ecco l’eterna sede, costruita dalle cure di Filippo, nipote riconoscente.”

b: “Ecco la tomba dei beati (che giacciono) sottoterra; in questa giace il saggio Maiorinus, figura cara al Senato, il più fedele agli imperatori e irreprensibile amico, la cui favorevole e sempre onorevole fama cantano il tramonto, l’aurora, il mezzogiorno e le costellazioni delle Orse. La fece costruire Filippo, insigne tra i mortali, nobile progenie della saggia sorella, e lui stesso nobile compagno dell’irreprensibile sovrano, e costruì in alto una torre per i piccioni dalle ali veloci, sollevandola fino al vasto cielo attraverso le abili mani degli scultori.”

Our Greek and Latin epitaphs most likely originate from the same building, the Ma’aref at Buşr al-Hariri, on the plateau of Trachôn (Syria), one of the many villages in this rural area. This elongated and polished building, now partially destroyed (only two corner and some other pieces survive; for more details see Sartre-Fauriat 2001, pp. 53-56) is made of basalt blocks. The Latin epitaph is now lost but probably was on a cartouche above a vaulted apse (perhaps on the building’s gate); the Greek one is visible still today on two blocks on the top of each other in the middle of the external wall.

Some travellers and scholars saw these inscriptions during their journeys in the 19th Century. William John Bankes (1786-1855), Egyptologist and collector of fine arts, visited Buşr al-Hariri in 1816 (Sartre-Fauriat 2004, pp. 152-155) and only copied the Latin inscription, because he was interested in its particular paleographic shape (see IGLS 15,1, 242 for Bankes’ fac-simile). The British antiquarian noted that it was chiselled in a cartouche above a vaulted apse with a simple moulded frame. Waddington in 1861 saw both inscriptions in the same building, a building he described as a “little church” (see Waddington 1870, p. 566). Then Von Oppenheim copied only a part of the Greek inscription together with another one (W 2472; IGLS 15,1, 251) as if they were a whole. In his opinion these texts were on an external wall of a majestic building, “a castle” with pillars and arches (Von Oppenheim 1899, pp. 183-185). Thanks to Sartre-Fauriat we know that these two texts were on the same wall of our building, but mounted separately and at a distance (the second one is to the right of our Greek one, at the base of a pillar; see IGLS 15,1, 251).

The nature of the building is unknown, but its architectonic style dates it to the 2nd-3rd Century AD, before the epitaphs were written. Sartre-Fauriat suggested that the building had been destroyed and rebuilt several times during the 19th Century and that the blocks were robbed from another building, which would help to explain the travellers' contradictory versions about the building and the inscriptions within it (see Sartre-Fauriat 2001, p. 56; IGLS 15,1, 241). However, the hypothesis of repair with reused blocks is unlikely due to: a) the dating of the building (2nd-3rd Century AD) before the inscriptions were put up (4th Century AD); b) the position of the Greek inscription in the middle of the wall; c) the neat distribution of the text on several blocks: it is hard to believe that those basalt blocks were moved in order to be reused, preserving the integrity of the text. The building housing the inscriptions was almost certainly the same building where the epitaphs were originally engraved.

Indeed, in this area of the Hauran another twenty or so epigrams (all similar to ours) were discovered, all of them relating to monumental burials of wealthy local families. Maiorinus’ nephew Philippus composed these epitaphs. He also constructed a majestic grave in a rural praedium in honour of his distinguished relative, a member of an aristocratic family tied to the Trachôn plateau, no doubt through its origins and properties. This rural praedium, far from the city, could be an example of an isolated, abandoned necropolis: the perimeter walls of the building remained in place and the inscriptions on them survived until the modern age.

These two epitaphs are addressed to the same man, the praetorian prefect Maiorinus (PLRE I, Maiorinus 1, pp. 537-538; Petit 1994, pp. 152-153), and put up by the same dedicant, his nephew Philippus. Maiorinus probably had aristocratic origins and would appear to originate from the eastern part of the empire (in Syria according to the epitaph and the correspondence of Libanius). Nothing is known about his career. No source allows to establish the chronology of his praetorian prefecture nor its administrative area. He is mentioned in Libanius’ letters, but his prefecture would appear to be already finished when these letters were written, at the latest in 357 AD. By that time Maiorinus had held a series of unspecified offices (Lib., Ep. 0560 [357 AD], Lib., Ep. 1510 [365 AD]). Ammianus’ narrative, which begins in 353 AD, does not mention him. Maiorinus’ son was a protégée of Libanius and in one of his letters, the author referred to his father’s high offices as μεγίστη ἀρχή, an expression always associated with the praetorian prefecture (Lib., Ep. 0474; Lib., Ep. 0560; see also Feissel 2006b, p. 125, nt. 148 and IGLS 15,1, 241). The series of praetorian prefects for the years 337-357 AD, that is to say in the period before Libanius’ letters, has a gap for the holder of the Eastern prefecture between July 6th 344 AD, when the prefect Domitius Leontius (see PPRET 22, PPRET 24) is attested for the last time (CTh 13, 04, 03), and July 28th 346 AD, when the prefect Flavius Philippus is firmly attested for the first time (CTh 11, 22, 01, on the constitution see Cuneo 1997, p. 146; but on the possibility that Philippus started his service as early as 344 AD, see PPRET 27; cf. PPRET 28; PPRET 29; PPRET 31). There may be another gap in 351 AD between the end of Philippus' service and the beginning of Thalassius' prefecture (see the discussion in PPRET 27). Maiorinus may have held the office in one of these two periods (344-346 AD or 351 AD), if he was praetorian prefect in the East, as seems likely (Barnes 1992, p. 255, inclines for the later chronology; cf. also Laniado 2018, pp. 416-417).

Our two epigrams tell us that Maiorinus was buried on the plateau of Trachôn. The epigrams show that Maiorinus belonged to a small group of followers who were loyal to more than one emperor (ll. 5-6: πιστοτάτου βασιλ̣εῦσιν ἀμωμήτοιό τε κέρτου), and that his nephew Philippus continued this allegiance (ll. 10-11: καὐτὸς ἐὼν βασιλῆος ἀμύμονος ἐσλὸς ὀπάων). If its prefecture began in 344 AD, the emperors could be Constantine and Constantius II.

It is possible that two other Greek inscriptions reveal our prefect’s ties with this area:

(W 2476) + Χρ(ιστέ), βο(ήθει) Μαιουρίνῳ. (see IGLS 15,1, 243)

(W 2472) + Φλ(αούιος) Χρυσάφιος ἔκτισεν τὸν ναὸν τοῦ ἁγίου Σεργίου / ἐξ ὑποβωλῆς τοῦ τῆς μακαρίας μνήμης Ἠλία ἀδελφοῦ λογωθέτου / Εὐανγέλου δὲ πρεσβ(υτέρου) προσφέροντος τὸ πρὶν ἔνθα ἀπόθητον / μετὰ ἁψίδων καὶ πλακώσεως· διὸ ἐνθάδε κῖται· ἐξ ἐπιμελίας δὲ / Ἠλία ἀρχιδ(ιακόνου), γένους Μαιουρίνου· ἔτους υιβ’ τῆς ἐπαρχ(είας), χρόνον ια’ ἰνδικ(τιῶνος). (see IGLS 15,1, 235)

The last two inscriptions both came from the same building in Buşr al-Hariri, the great church of Saint Sergius. The first is roughly chiselled on a stone within, while the second sits upon the architrave of the church gate and could date to 517 AD. If Μαιουρῖνος is our Maiorinus or a relative of him, through the first inscription, we can deduce that he was probably Christian (in fact many of the epigrams are addressed to Christians in the Busr Al-Hariri area). The second shows that he belonged to a powerful senatorial family that was already well established in this area and that was still relevant in 517 AD, when the archdeacon Elia boasted of having γένος Mαιουρίνου (another fact that could demonstrate Maiorinus was Christian, see IGLS 15,1, 241).

Our praetorian prefect probably died before 365 (Lib., Ep. 1510; see PLRE I, Maiorinus 1, pp. 537-538 and IGLS 15,1, 241), so our epitaphs and also his death could date to between 346 and 365 AD. According to Sartre-Fauriat, these epitaphs were made by his nephew and not by his son because Maiorinus’ son became so familiar with a rhetorician rival to Libanius (Lib., Ep. 1118; Lib., Ep. 1285) that he was no longer considered part of the family (see IGLS 15,1, 241). Cugusi identified the nephew as the praetorian prefect Flavius Philippus (Cugusi, Sblendorio Cugusi 2011, p. 208; but on Philippus' origins see PPRET 27), since he too was of oriental origins, was prefect not long after Maiorinus and was much trusted by the emperor (ll. 10-11: καὐτὸς ἐὼν βασιλῆος ἀμύμονος ἐσλὸς ὀπάων). If this identification is correct, then it would be plausible to assume that his nephew (and not his son) erected these monuments in order to celebrate their common prestigious careers. A much simpler hypothesis put forward by Feissel suggests that if the son of Maiorinus had happened to die before his father, then he would not have been able to make the tomb (see Feissel 2006b, p. 125 nt. 149).

That said, the only way someone like Philippus was ever going to obtain such an important position, so close to the emperor, was by belonging to the generation following Maiorinus. He therefore had to be Maiorinus’ nephew and not his sister’s grandson (cf. Feissel 2006b, p. 125; IGLS 15,1, 241). According to the reading of Waddington (1870), Robert and also more recently Merkelbach and Stauber, the word “grati” (l. 6) in the Latin text, is interpreted as the name of a second nephew “Gratus”, but Feissel rightly demonstrates through a comparison with the Greek text (ll. 7-10) that there was only one dedicant nephew, Philippus (see Feissel 2006a, p. 267, nr. 848; Feissel 2006b, pp. 125-126): the Greek epigram does not mention any Gratus.

Both inscriptions are in dactylic hexameters (four in Latin and ten in Greek) but contain imprecisions (see Cugusi, Sblendorio Cugusi 2011, p. 207). They are evidently inspired by classical Greek and Latin literature and used stereotyped formulas, revealing a good knowledge of the classical authors. Given the quality of the other epigrams found in and around Hauran, it is clear that this area had deep ties with classical culture. There are, nevertheless, some formal differences between the two epigrams: the Latin text is sober and shorter than the Greek hexameters, that are numerous and more complex. The praise of the deceased in the Greek text takes its inspiration from Homeric heroes, and the personification of the cardinal points is another Homeric reference (see Sartre Fauriat 2014, p. 307). This articulate metaphor describing the extension of his fame (Greek ll. 3-7) became the synthetic per orbem (Latin l. 3) in the Latin text. Cugusi (2011, p. 208) also noticed that the Latin formula iacendi (l. 1) is inspired by a pseudo-Virgilian epigram. However, the epigram in Latin shows more serious metric, grammatical and orthographical problems than the Greek epigram. The dactylic metrics of Latin verses 1-3 is seriously incorrect. Feissel (2006b, nt. 152) and Sartre-Fauriat, Sartre (IGLS 15,1, 241) have tried to correct the meter of the second verse by attributing magna(m) to orbem, but such a solution is not entirely satisfactory. As noted by Feissel (ibidem) «la deuxième personne est cependant embarrassante, en raison du passage à la troisième personne au vers 3 (où l’on attendrait tibi plutôt que illi)»; stylistically the Greek epigram is much better than the Latin one. The author and the stone-cutter in Syria were not Latin-speaking: the orthographical variations in Latin are too many in only four verses, but they do not correct the metrics (praetori for praetorio, caelebratus for celebratus, nuc for nunc – a mistake –, sedis for sedes; the first enclitic -que is metrically useless without the desinence -io; the second one is useful for metrics but not for grammar).

Since our Latin epitaph is the only one found among all the Greek epigrams from the Hauran area, the choice of using Latin must be related to the high political role of the prefect. Indeed, a Latin epitaph in verse, in a Greek-speaking area was the exclusive prerogative of an elite, a privilege reserved for the highest offices of the Eastern empire (Feissel 2006b, p. 126; Cugusi, Sblendorio Cugusi 2011, p. 208). In addition to the Latin epitaph, Philippus decided to be even more gushing in his praise of Maiorinus in Greek: the prefect’s epitaph had to be read and understood also by local people who passed in front of the tomb.

Furthermore, the uncial writing of the Latin text is also interesting. The stone-cutter copied the inscription using the same script as the draft. He was evidently accustomed to the uncial script, which was used for normative texts between the 3rd and 4th Centuries, even in the Greek-speaking area. To see a documentary style of writing in an epigraphic context is significant (see PPRET 53).

For other epitaphs of praetorian prefects see PPRET 64 and PPRET 71; maybe PPRET 87; for posthumous rehabilitations see PPRET 91 and PPRET 93; epitaphs of prefects’ relatives see PPRET 20 and PPRET 55.

Waddington 1870, p. 566, nr. 2475 [W 2475] (a) CIL 03, 00124 (cf. p. 970) (a) CLE 0622 (a) Cholodniak 1904, p. 275, nr. 670 (a) Robert 1960, p. 303 (a) PLRE I, Maiorinus 1, p. 537 (a) Puech 2002, p. 342 (a) SGO 04, 22/15/01 (a) Feissel 2006b, pp. 125-126 = AE 2006, 1610 (a) Cugusi, Sblendorio Cugusi 2011, pp. 178-179, nr. 31 (a) IGLS 15,1, 242 (a) Waddington 1870, p. 566, nr. 2474 [W 2474] (b) Froehner 1873, p. 31, nr. 2474 (b) Kaibel 1878, pp. 175-176, nr. 441 (b) Von Oppenheim 1899, p. 185 (b) Peek 1955, nr. 655 (b) Robert 1960, pp. 302-303 (b) SEG 20 (1964), 0393 (b) PLRE I, Maiorinus 1, p. 537 (b) Sartre-Fauriat 2001, p. 53 (b) Puech 2002, p. 342 (b) SGO 04, 22/15/02 = BE 2003, 601 (b) SEG 48 (1998), 1914 (b) Cugusi, Sblendorio Cugusi 2011, pp. 178-179, nr. 31 (b) IGLS 15,1, 241 = AE 2014, 1402 (b)

IGLS 15,1, 242 (fac-simile by W.J. Bankes p. 304) (a) IGLS 15,1, 241 (p. 306) (b)

EDCS 21200193 EDH 067825 MQDQ 622 TM 386657

Barnes T.D., Praetorian Prefects, 337-361, ZPE, 94, 1992, 249-260 Cholodniak I.I., Carmina sepulcralia latina epigraphica, Petropoli 1904 Cugusi P., Sblendorio Cugusi M.T., Carmina latina epigraphica delle province greco-orientali (CLEOr), Epigraphica, 73, 2011, 161-245 Cuneo P.O., La legislazione di Costantino II, Costanzo II e Costante (337-361), Milano 1997 Feissel D., Chroniques d’épigraphie byzantine 1987-2004, Paris 2006(a) Feissel D., Les inscriptions dans l’Orient protobyzantin, in Akten des XIV. Internationalen Kongresses für christliche Archäologie (Wien 19-26.9.1999). Frühes Christentum zwischen Rom und Konstantinopel, t. I, Wien-Città del Vaticano 2006(b), 99-129, pl. 96-100 Froehner W., Mélanges d’epigraphie et d’archéologie, Paris 1873 Kaibel G., Epigrammata graeca ex lapidibus conlecta, Berlin 1878 Laniado A., L’aristocratie sénatoriale de Constantinople et la préfecture du prétoire d’Orient, in Morrisson C., Sodini J.-P. (éd.), Constantinople réelle et imaginaire. Autour de l’œuvre de Gilbert Dagron, Paris 2018, 409-454 Peek W., Griechische Vers-Inschriften. Band I, Grab-Epigramme, Berlin 1955 Petit P., Les fonctionnaires dans l’œuvre de Libanius. Analyse prosopographique, Paris 1994 Puech B., Orateurs et sophistes grecs dans les inscriptions d’époque impériale, Paris 2002 Rinaldi G., Antiochia nel secolo quarto: interazioni tra pagani e cristiani e note prosopografiche, SMSR, 81, 2015, 21-69 Robert L., Hellenica. Recueil d’épigraphie de numismatique et d’antiquités grecques, XI-XII, Paris 1960 Sartre-Fauriat A., Culture et société dans le Hauran (Syrie du Sud) d’après les épigrammes funéraires (IIIe-Ve siècles ap. J.-C), Syria, 75, 1998, 213-224 Sartre-Fauriat A., Des tombeaux et des morts: monuments funéraires, société et culture en Syrie du Sud du Ier s. av. J.-C. au VIIe s. apr. J.-C., vol. I, Beyrouth 2001 Sartre-Fauriat A., Les voyages dans le Ḥawrān (Syrie du Sud) de William John Banks (1816 et 1818), Bordeaux-Beyrouth 2004 Sartre-Fauriat A., Sartre M., Le Plateau du Trachôn et ses bordures, Vol. 1 (= IGLS 15,1), Beyrouth 2014 Von Oppenheim M.F., Vom Mittelmeer zum Persischen Golf durch den Haurän, die Syrische Wüste und Mesopotamien, Berlin 1899 Waddington W.H., Inscriptions grecques et latines de la Syrie: recueillies et expliquées, Paris 1870

(Lat.) virtute caelebratus magna per orbem; (Gr.) συνκλήτου φίλον ὄμμα, σαόφρων Μαιουρῖνος οὗ δύσις ἀντολίη τε μεσεμβρίη τε καὶ ἄρκτοι πιστοτάτου βασιλ̣εῦσιν ἀμωμήτοιό τε κέρτου εὐρύ τε καὶ μάλα καλὸν ἀεὶ κλέος ἀείδουσιν.

clarus praetorique praefectus

clarus praetorique praefectus, συνκλήτου φίλον ὄμμα