Greek inscription in honour of Proculus, son of Tatiatus praet. prefect, at the mouth of the River Lycus (Phoenicia)
source date: 382/383 AD
edition published: 2021-05-14
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/)

1-2[^1] Πρόκλε πέπον, Τατιανοῦ ἀρίστοιο Λυ|κίοιο γενέθλης ἰθαγένοιο | 3[^2] ἀρχικὰ πατρώιων ἐξωριάζων φαύλῳ | 4-5[^3] πρωθήβης φοῖνιξ Ἠλιουπόλεως θεό|φιν ἄρχων, 5-6[^4] αἶψα μάλ' ἐκτελέων ἱερά, | ὅσσα νόῳ φρονέει Φοινίκη αὐτή· | 7-8[^5] ὅσον καὶ τόδε ἐργάζετο τεόν νόημα· | ὦ μέγα θαῦμα, 8-9[^6] τὰ αἰπύτατα τῶν | σκοπέλων ἶσον ἔθηκε μέσον, | 10-11[^7] ὄφρα διηνεκέως ὁμαλὴν ὁδὸν ἐξ|ανύοντες 11-12[^8] φεύγωμεν χαλεπῆς | ὕψος ὁδοιπλανίης.

[^1: Verse 1]

[^2: Verse 2]

[^3: Verse 3]

[^4: Verse 4]

[^5: Verse 5]

[^6: Verse 6]

[^7: Verse 7]

[^8: Verse 8]

Edition based on Merkelbach, Stauber 2002 (SGO 04), 20/10/01.

“O caro Proculo, rampollo di Taziano, il migliore della pura stirpe dei Lici, tu che lasci la sovranità delle terre patrie a un individuo modesto, tu che sei nel fiore degli anni governatore di Fenicia, per volere degli dèi di Eliopoli, e che senza indugi porti completamente a termine i sacri riti, tanti quanti la Fenicia stessa desiderava: quanto è grande quel che il tuo ingegno ha realizzato: o grande meraviglia ! Le cime più alte dei monti egli le ha rese pianeggianti nel mezzo, affinché, potendo percorrere una strada interamente in piano, possiamo evitare le difficoltà di un percorso che sale.”

“O dear Proculus, offspring of Tatianus, the best of the pure lineage of the Lycians, you who leave the sovereignty of the homelands to a modest figure, you who are in the full flower of youth governor of Phoenicia, by the will of the gods of Heliopolis, you who without delay completely carry out the sacred rites, as many as Phoenicia itself wished, how great is that which your genius has achieved: O great wonder ! He has made the highest peaks of the mountains level in the middle, so that, being able to travel along a road that is entirely levelled, we can avoid difficulties of a route that climbs.”

“O cher Proculus, issu de Tatianus, le meilleur de la pure lignée des Lyciens, toi qui laisses la souveraineté sur ta patrie à un modeste individu, toi qui es dans la fleur de la jeunesse gouverneur de Phénicie, par la volonté des dieux d’Héliopolis, et qui accomplis immédiatement les rites sacrés, autant que les Phéniciens eux-mêmes le souhaitaient, combien est grand ce que ton ingéniosité a réalisé: Ô grande merveille ! Il a fait en sorte que les plus hauts sommets des montagnes soient plats au milieu, de sorte que, en pouvant circuler sur une route entièrement plate, nous pouvons éviter les difficultés d’un itinéraire qui monte”

(Different English translation by Jones Hall 2004, p. 143, and Brewer 1874, p. lxxxi; different French translation by Hajjar 1990, p. 2056, and by Yon 2009, p. 308; German translation by Merkelbach, Stauber 2002 (SGO 04), 20/10/01)

The inscription is located at the mouth of the ancient River Lycus, now Nahr el-Kalb (Dog River, a place which is today currently called Great Zab). It was chiselled on a rock face flanking the roman street on the southern promontory, called Ras el-Kalb, above the left or southern bank of the river. In Antiquity this area was about 7 miles North of roman Berytus (Barrington Atlas 69 C 2), today it is 12 Km North of Beirut centre (Lebanon) (cf. Da Riva 2017 with fig. 1). The inscription for Proculus is only one of the nineteen commemorative stelae of Nahr el-Kalb, and rock reliefs, chiselled into the limestone rocks. This exceptional group of commemorative stelae includes some Egyptian hieroglyphic stelae, cuneiform inscriptions, Roman and Greek dedications, inscriptions of the Ottoman period, a memorial to Napoleon III’s intervention in Lebanon in 1860 and also a dedication to the independence of the country from France in 1943: the first stele celebrates the Pharaoh Ramses II (on 1276 BC), the last celebrates the Liberation of South Lebanon on May 24th 2000. The variety of languages, writing systems, artistic expressions shows a richness that is rare in other places. For these reasons the site is now protected by the UNESCO (https://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/6433/ ) and included in the program of conservation and study “Project at Nahr El Kalb” (https://www.factumfoundation.org/pag/232/lebanon-project-at-nahr-el-kalb). On this site and its inscriptions, a monument to the power of the Empires, cf. Maïla-Afeiche 2009; Da Riva 2017.

In 1873 the American botanist and archaeologist J(ohn) A(lsop) Paine (1840-1912), correspondant of the American Palestine Exploration Society, reported the first provisional autoptic transcription of the entire Greek inscription (Paine 1873, pp. 111-112; for precedent partial readings from 1767, see Yon 2009, p. 306). Since it is chiselled on the rock, it was barely eroded in the epigraphic field (Yon 2009, p. 306: «La pierre est actuellement pratiquement illisible»). All the following editions derive from Paine’s reading (Yon 2009 ibid.). The inscription is listed as nr. 11 among the stelae of Nahr El Kalb by Mouterde 1932. An autoptic transcription by R. Mouterde is preserved in Beirut in his unpublished papers for the preparation of the “Inscriptions grecques et latines de la Syrie”, but it is reproduced in diplomatic form and taken into account in the Yon 2009 edition (see his ‘Notes critiques’ under his edition). A very loose interpretation of the Greek text can be found in Brewer (1874, p. lxxxi).

The Greek verse-inscription was made in honour of (Eutolmius) Proculus, when he was the governor of Phoenicia in 382/383 AD (PLRE I, pp. 746-747). Born from a prominent Lycian family, he was the son of the praetorian prefect of the East Flavius Eutolmius Tatianus (PLRE I, pp. 876-878; on his career see PPRET 87). Tatianus was praetorian prefect from 388 to 392 AD and numerous inscriptions erected by him as prefect in honour of the emperors of that period have survived (PPRET 82, 83, 84, 85, 86). In addition, an inscription from Sidyma containing his cursus honorum has also come down to us (PPRET 87), while other inscriptions have been found that testify to his activity as praetorian prefect (PPRET 88, 90). In 392 AD, Tatianus was removed from the prefecture, tried, condemned and his name was erased from most inscriptions (below). Nevertheless, one inscription has been found, relating to his rehabilitation, that was put up by his nephew many years later (PPRET 91). Thanks to his father’s influence, the son Proculus led a brilliant career, only to be tried and sentenced to death in 392/393 AD. Although the son's name was erased in Constantinople (below), it was retained in Phoenicia and so it seems appropriate to examine the inscription from the River Lycus, an inscription that was engraved when Tatianus was not yet praetorian prefect. On our stele Proculus is celebrated as the “offspring of Tatianus, the best of the pure lineage of the Lycians” (ll. 1-2). This statement at the beginning of the text underlines the close relationship between the power of his father, who, by then, was seeking entry into the praetorian prefecture: Tatianus had been praeses Thebaidos (364-366 AD), praefectus Aegypti (367-370 AD), consularis Syriae (370/373 AD), comes Orientis (370/373 AD), comes sacrarum largitionum (374-380 AD) (see PPRET 87).

About the inscription from the mouth of the River Lycus (Phoenicia), it is worth noting that the metric has a dactylic rhythm, but produces neither hexameters nor regular elegiac distichs. The name of the honoured person, Proculus, opens the inscription (l. 1): in the Greek sources it is always written Πρόκλος (contracted form, not Πρόκουλος), while it is Proculus in the Latin sources (listed by PLRE I, pp. 746-747; Olszaniec 2013, pp. 324-328).

The inscription is divided into three parts. The first part (ll. 1-3) extols Tatianus, the father of the honoured governor, and their belonging to the nobility of Lycia. The verb ἐξωριάζων (l. 3) is a hapax (cf. Aesch., Prom. 17) to indicate probably that the government of the province of Lycia, their homeland, was then entrusted to an anonymous governor who was less noble (φαύλος) than the autochthonous Tatianii. The second part (ll. 4-6) contains the eulogy of the deep attention of the governor Proculus to the political interests and religious traditions of Phoenicia. The whole province thanks Proculus for presiding over the traditional rites (ll. 5-6) and praises him as a “ruler of Phoenicia by the will of the gods from Heliopolis” (ll. 4-5) like a traditional young nobleman of the province (l. 4), although he was a Lycian nobleman. The explicit reference to the gods of Heliopolis invites us to interpret the ἱερά as religious rites. The city of Baalbek-Heliopolis was the Colonia Iulia Augusta Felix Heliopolis from the Severan age (cf. Wienholz 2016), but it was above all a great Phoenician religious centre in the heart of the Bekkaa Valley (concerning the religious identity of the city, cf. Butcher 2019; on the cults of the city, cf. Hajjar 1990. On the cults in the province of Phoenicia with particular attention given to Helipolis, cf. Aliquot 2012, pp. 195-229, in part. pp. 200-216). Christian emperors, since Constantine, seem to have had a less than tolerant relationship with the sanctuaries, traditional cults and rituals of Phoenicia (cf. Belayche 2018). Care for urban life seems to have been always a characteristic of Proculus’ administration. This attitude prompted Hajjar (1990, p. 2506) to enhance Paine’s reading of line 5 of the inscription (1873, p. 112: αἶψα Μαλεκ τελέων ἱερά) as a revival of the Phoenician ancient cults of Malach, promoted by the pagan Proculus. This interpretation, followed by Jones Hall (2004, pp. 142-143), was authoritatively rejected by Rey-Coquais (2006, p. 95) and by Yon (2007, p. 400 nt. 51). But there is no doubt that Proculus was greatly estimeed as the defender of the religious tradition of the region by the civil authorities of the province (on Proculus’ paganism, see von Haehling 1978, pp. 122-123, nr. 17). Rey-Coquais (2006, p. 95) interprets the αἶψα μάλ' ἐκτελέων ἱερά (l. 5) as sacra iussa of the emperors, and not as traditional religious ceremonies; the will of the emperors ought to refer to the road works on the Lebanese plateau mentioned in the following verses. The noun ἱερά, is not an adjective and seems to translate better as sacra, “sacred ceremonies” and not “orders of unnamed emperors”.

The third part of the inscription (ll. 7-12) celebrates the great intelligence of Proculus as a governor (ll. 7-8), who had built or maybe improved the itinerary of the road between the Mediterranean coast and the passes of Mount Lebanon to the East (ll. 8-12). Proculus’ engineers reduced the differences in height along the mountain road from the mouth of Lycus River North of Berytus beyond Mount Lebanon in the direction of the Bekkaa Valley and Heliopolis (on the road network of the province, cf. Sader 2000; Stern 2000. On the transformation of the landscape between the coast and the Bekkaa Valley, cf. Paturel 2019, pp. 194-277).

The name of the dedicator of our inscription was never chiseled in the epigraphic field, but the honours given to the governor of the province of Phoenicia and the solidarity of the entire province (l. 6 Φοινίκη αὐτη; l. 11 the plural φεύγωμεν for the inhabitants of the province) for his religious and infrastructural work, during a short lapse of time, lead one to believe that the honorary inscription for Proculus was made at the behest of the council (koinòn) of the province of Phoenicia. The inscription placed at the beginning of the road, near the junction with the busy coastal road, aimed to celebrate forever a governor who had been attentive to the needs of the provincials of Phoenicia. Since the name of the governor was not erased from the inscription at the mouth of the Lycus, it is necessary to reflect on Proculus’ career and on the death sentence that struck him in 393 AD.

We do not have any sources listing the cursus honorum of Proculus (the principal sources are the orations and the letters by Libanius, listed and summarized by PLRE I, pp. 746-747; Petit 1994, pp. 213-217; Olszaniec 2013, p. 326 nt 1616; italian translation by Pellizzari 2017 ad loc. On Proculus’ career, cf. Seeck 1906, 248-250; Ensslin 1957; PLRE I, pp. 746-747; Delmaire 1989, pp. 104-108; Olszaniec 2013, pp. 324-328). As we know form Libanius (Lib., Or. 42, 41-42; cf. Petit 1994, pp. 213-217), Proculus had started his career as governor of Palestine (Palaestina prima according to Delmaire 1989, p. 105). We lack a specific date, but we know that the position must have been held before 382 AD, when Proculus became consularis Phoeniciae (at that time, on November 22th 383 AD the governor of Palestine was Eucharius, as proconsul in CTh 11, 36, 28, see PLRE I, p. 288). Recently, Mratscheck (2012, pp. 261-266) proposed to date Proculus’ government in Palestine to the years 375/376 or 376/378 AD. Thanks to the orations of Libanius we know that Proculus was consularis Phoeniciae in 382/383 AD (Lib., Or. 42, 41-42; Lib., Or. 36, 23; Lib., Or. 10, 03); probably at the end of this office, he received our honorary inscription from the mouth of the Lycus River. Soon after the governorship in Phoenicia, he was promoted to the position of comes Orientis in 383 AD (cf. Delmaire 1989, p. 106; Olszaniec 2013, pp. 324-325; the period is confirmed by four constitutions of the Theodosian Code, the first one CTh 12, 01, 090 dated to March 8th 383 AD, the last CTh 12, 01, 103 dated July 27th 383 AD). The assignment was characterised by intense building activity in the cities, promoted by an authority that was not always welcome. Discharged in 384 AD, he was later appointed comes sacrarum largitionum, attested by CTh 06, 30, 11, which was issued on May 7th 386 AD, probably at the end of Proculus’ service (see Delmaire 1989, pp. 106-107). While this part of Proculus’ career took place in the years when his father was not in office, the following appointment to praefectus urbi of Constantinople immediately followed the nomination of Tatianus to the high position of praetorian prefect of the East in 388 AD (Zos. 04, 45, 01; see Dagron 1974, pp. 255-257). Proculus had an exceptionally long urban prefecture – four years, from 388 to 392 AD – considering that the average for other urban prefects was just one or two. The sources also speak of the high handed manner in which he governed (for the ten constitutions of the Theodosian Code and for the references in Libanius, see PLRE I, pp. 746-747; Olszaniec 2013, pp. 325-326 nt. 1615). This entire period in the East was effectively marked by the governance of these two men, father and son, Tatianus, praetorian prefect of the East and ordinary consul in 391 AD, and his son Proculus, urban prefect of Constantinople. Since the emperor Theodosius I was in the West, fighting Maximus until his return to Constantinople in July 391 AD, the two had a certain amount of autonomy of government. Before the Spring 392 AD, while prefect of Constantinople, Proculus had the Obelisk of Theodosius erected in the Hippodrome (below).

About one year after Theodosius I returned to Constantinople (July 391 AD), the magister officiorum Rufinus (PLRE I, 778-781) used his legitimate function of controlling the documents of the administration of the two prefects, father and son, to discredit them. The emperor subsequently deprived them of their offices and had them tried, it seems, for corruption or crimen maiestatis. Based on the analysis of Zos. 04, 52 (Paschoud 1979, pp. 321-322, 449-452; Engl. transl. by Ridley 1982, p. 95), which is the most detailed source, Rebenich (1989) has reconstructed the chronology of events. Between June 30th 392 AD (CTh 12, 01, 127 the last correctly dated constitution to the praetorian prefect Tatianus) and August 26th 392 AD (CTh 08, 06, 02 the first constitution to his successor as praetorian prefect of the East, Rufinus), Tatianus was suddenly deposed as praetorian prefect of the East and replaced by Rufinus. Before Tatianus’ trial began, Proculus fled. Probably in the Autumn 392 AD (or in September ?) the proceedings against Tatianus slowly got under way: hoodwinked perhaps by Rufinus, Tatianus wrote letters persuading his son to return. We are uncertain whether the proceedings against Tatianus were suspended. Promised safety, Proculus was persuaded to return to Constantinople. Maybe in the Winter of 392/393 AD, Proculus was arrested and the trial against Tatianus resumed. His trail ended in early 393 AD with a death sentence that was commuted to exile in Lycia and confiscation of property (in addition to Zosimus, see Eun. fr. 59 Müller = 57 Blockley). At the same time, Proculus was imprisoned and tried; in the Autumn of 393 AD, he was sentenced to death. He was executed on December 3rd 393 AD at Sykai near Constantinople and his father was obliged to attend (Chron. Pasch. A. 393, p. 565 Dindorf = MGH AA 09, Chron. Min. 01, p. 245; Christian authors dwell on the sorrow of the fall of the pagan Tatianus, cf. Asterius, Hom. 04, 09, 01, p. 43 Datema [= PG 40, 224C-225A]; Phot., Cod. 258, p. 484 Bekker. On these events, cf. Rebenich 1989, pp. 159-163; Olszaniec 2013, pp. 400-402; Mecella 2015, p. 55).

Many measures issued by Tatianus and Proculus during their terms of office were annulled by the Emperor Theodosius I (CTh 09, 42, 12; CTh 09, 42, 13; CTh 11, 01, 23; CTh 12, 01, 131; CTh 14, 17, 12, June/November 393 AD). The sudden fall of Tatianus and Proculus and the long trials against them led to their names being erased from many inscriptions (for those of Tatianus, see PPRET 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 88, but not on Tatianus’ inscription from Sidyma, see PPRET 87, and Canopus, see PPRET 90). In 396 AD, having killed the praetorian prefect Rufinus, the emperor decreed that no infamy should befall the clients of Tatianus, recruited mainly in the province of Lycia (CTh 09, 38, 09, on August 31st 396 AD, cited above, with Mecella 2015, in part. p. 58 nt. 26). Only fifty years later Tatianus appears to be rehabilitated in an honorary inscription from Aphrodisias (Caria) made by his omonymous grandson in his memory (PPRET 91). Also the name of Tatianus’ son, Proculus, was restored on the base of the obelisk of Theodosius I in Constantinople after having suffered a damnatio memoriae.

The name of Proculus was written twice on the pedestal of the obelisk of Theodosius in the Hippodrome of Constantinople: it appears in the Greek dedication chiselled inside a tabula ansata on the North-West face of the plinth (photo in Safran 1993, Pl. 5 and in Crkvenjakov 2016, fig. 6), and in the Latin dedication chiselled inside a tabula ansata on the South-East face (photo in Safran 1993, Pl. 4 and in Crkvenjakov 2016, fig. 4). The Latin text forms five hexameters, the Greek text forms two elegiac distichs: in both it is the obelisk itself that speaks (CIL 03, 00737 = CLE 0286 = ILS 0821 = EDH 065179; Cugusi 2010, pp. 452-454, nr. 2 = AE 2010, 1523; cf. also Rebenich 1989, p. 154 nt. 7 and 8 = SEG 39 (1989), 651). The monument was erected probably in 390 AD according to Marcelllius comes (MGH AA 11, Chron. Min. 02, p. 62), under the supervision of the urban prefecture of Proculus. The monolith had originally been put up in Karnak by the Egyptian Pharaoh Thutmose III (1479-1425 BC). Subsequently, in the 4th Century AD, Theodosius I had it transported to Constantinople and placed in the center of the hippodrome. The monument was intended to celebrate the victories of the emperor, his dynasty and to compete with similar monuments in Rome and Constantinople (on the problems of transporting and construction of the monument, cf. Effenberger 1996 and 2007; Wirsching 2006 and 2013, pp. 119-129; on the Hippodrome, cf. Bauer 1996, pp. 247-254. Regarding the rich figurative cycle of the pedestal and its political context, much discussed, see Balty 1982; Rebenich 1991; Safran 1993; Speck 1997; Geyssen 1998; Kiilerich 1998; Ritzerfeld 2001; Bassett 2004, pp. 79-96, and 2011).

The Latin text (South-East face):

Difficilis quondam dominis parere serenis / iussus et extinctis palmam portare tyrannis, / omnia Theodosio cedunt subolique perenni, / ter denis sic victus ego domitusque diebus / iudice sub «Proclo», superas elatus ad auras.

“Formerly difficult, I was ordered to obey the peaceful masters and to raise the palm after the tyrants were dead. Everything gives way to Theodosius and his eternal offspring. In this way conquered and mastered in three times ten days, under Proclus the Prefect, I was raised to the high air” (Engl. transl. by Safran 1993, pp. 409-410 = SEG 43 (1993), 478; the “tyrants” in the Latin inscription can be identified as Magnus Maximus and his son Victor, and Theodosius’ “eternal offspring” must be his sons Arcadius and Honorius).

The Greek text (North-West face):

κίονα τετράπλευρον ἀεὶ χθονὶ κείμενον ἄχθος / μοῦνος ἀναστῆσαι Θευδόσιος βασιλεύς / τολμήσας «Πρόκλος» ἐπεκέκλετο καὶ τόσος ἔστη / κίων ἠελίοις ἐν τριάκοντα δύω.

“Only Emperor Theodosius dared to erect the four sided column which had lain heavy on the earth for a long time. Proclus was summoned, and so this enormous column was put up in thirty-two suns” (Engl. transl by Safran 1993, p. 410; the text extols the feat of erecting the base and the obelisk in just thirty-two days).

As said, after Proculus and his father Tatianus suffered the damnatio memoriae and were condemned (392-393 AD), their names were removed from all the inscriptions: the name of Proculus was also erased from the two inscriptions on the base of the obelisk. However, after Flavius Rufinus was executed on November 395 AD, they were rehabilitated (for the context, see CTh 09, 38, 09, issued by Arcadius on August 31st 396 AD). Proculus’ name on the base of the obelisk in the hippodrome was therefore first erased after 392 AD and then very probably restored during or soon after 396 AD (Proculus’ son or grandson, Tatianus junior, was appointed urban prefect in Constantinople in 452 AD, see PPRET 91). The visibility on a public monument in the centre of the hippodrome in the political heart of Constantinople forced the removal of the name Proculus and then its restoration. In contrast, the inscription at the mouth of the River Lycus was never erased, probably because it was isolated and because the governors and the inhabitants of the province of Phoenicia (in Berytus as elsewhere), who frequented the road remained devoted to the memory of Proculus, who had improved the infrastructure of the region.

Paine 1873, pp. 111-112 Brewer 1874, p. lxxxi (only ll. 5-12) Weissbach 1922, pp. 39-41 Mouterde 1932, p. 14, nr. XI = SEG 07 (1934), 0195 (revision by J.J.E. Hondius) Hajjar 1990, p. 2506 (= Jones Hall 2004, p. 143) = SEG 54 (2004), 1596 = SEG 57 (2007), 1774 = SEG 57 (2007), 1786 SGO 04, 20/10/01 = SEG 57 (2007), 1786 Yon 2009, pp. 307-309, nr. 11 (with photo)

Aliquot J., La Vie religieuse au Liban sous l’Empire Romain, Beyrouth 2012 Balty J., Hiérachie de l’empire et image du monde. La face nord-ouest de l’obélisque Théodosien à Constantinople, Byzantion, 52, 1982, 60-71. Bassett S., The urban image of late antique Constantinople, Cambridge 2004 Bassett S., Sculpture and the rhetorical imagination in late antique Constantinople, in Archaeology and the Cities of Asia Minor in Late Antiquity, eds O. Dally, C. Ratté, Ann Arbor (Mich.) 2011, 27-41 Bauer F.A., Stadt, Platz und Denkmal in der Spätantike. Untersuchungen zur Ausstattung des öffentlichen Raums in den spätantiken Städten Rom, Konstantinopel und Ephesos, Mainz am Rhein 1996 Belayche N. Les discours chrétiens sur la «fin des cultes» publics au Levant: l’argument des sanctuaires, RHR, 235, 2018, 209-232 Brewer F.P., On a Greek Inscription from near Beirut (Proceedings at Boston, May 20th, 1874), in JAOS, 10, 1872/1880, lxxix-xci (see lxxxi) Butcher K., Heliopolis: coins, temples, and sight lines, BICS 62, 2019, 106-115 Crkvenjakov V., The Obelisk of Theodosius in Constantinople, AXIOS, 1, 2016, 196-208. Cugusi P., Carmina Latina epigraphica Constantinopolitana, RFIC, 138, 2010, 445-461 Dagron G., Naissance d'une capitale. Constantinople et ses institutions de 330 à 451, Paris 1974. Da Riva R., Towards a long-term place biography of Nahr el-Kalb (Lebanon), Antiguo Oriente 15, 2017, 13-32. Delmaire R., Les responsables des finances impériales au Bas- Empire romain (IVe-VIe s.). Études prosopographique, Bruxelles 1989 Effenberger A., Überlegungen zur Aufstellung des Theodosios-Obelisken im Hippodrom von Konstantinopel (mit einem Beitrag von Karl-Heinz Priese), in Innovation in der Spätantike (Kolloquium Basel 6. und 7. Mai 1994), hrsg. B. Brenk, Wiesbaden 1996, 207-283 Effenberger A., Nochmals zur Aufstellung des Theodosius-Obelisken im Hippodrom von Konstantinopel, Gymnasium, 114, 2007, 587-598. Ensslin W., Proculus 17, in RE XXIII/1, Stuttgart 1957, coll. 77-79. Geyssen J.W., Presentation of Victory on the Theodosian obelisk base, Byzantion, 68, 1998, 47-55. Hajjar Y., Baalbek, grand centre religieux sous l’Empire, in ANRW, II/18.4, Berlin-Boston 1990, 2458-2508 Jones Hall L., Roman Berytus. Beirut in late antiquity, London-New York 2004 Kiilerich B., The Obelisk Base in Constantinople: Court Art and Imperial Ideology, Roma 1998 Maïla-Afeiche A.-M., Le Site de Nahr el-Kalb, Beyrouth 2009 Merkelbach R., Stauber J., Steinepigramme aus dem griechischen Osten (SGO), IV. Die Südküste Kleinasiens, Syrien und Palaestina, München 2002 Mouterde R., Le Nahr El-Kelb (Fleuve du Chien), Guide archéologique, Beyrouth 1932 (Engl. Translation 1934) Olszaniec S., Prosopographical Studies on the Court Elite in the Roman Empire (4th Century AD), Toruń, 2013 Paine J.A., The Greek Inscription at Dog River (Discoveries at Nahr-el-Kelb presented by R.D.Hitchcock), Palestine Exploration Fund, Quarterly statement, 5/3, (July) 1873, 111-112 Paschoud F., Zosime, Histoire nouvelle, II/2 (Livre IV), Paris 1979 Paturel S.E., Baalbek-Heliopolis, the Bekaa, and Berytus from 100 BCE to 400 CE: a landscape transformed, Leiden-Boston (Mass.) 2019 Pellizzari A., Maestro di retorica, maestro di vita. Le lettere teodosiane di Libanio di Antiochia, Roma 2017 Rebenich S., Beobachtungen zum Sturz des Tatianus und des Proculus, ZPE, 76, 1989, 153-165 Rebenich S., Zum Theodosiusobelisken in Konstantinopel, MDAI(I), 41, 1991, 447-476 Rey-Coquais J.P., Roman Berytus. Regard sur le livre de Linda Jones Hall, “Roman Berytus. Beirut in Late Antiquity. Archaeology and History”, Lebanon 23, 2006, 84-98 Ridley R.T., Zosimus, New History. A translation with commentary, Canberra 1982 Ritzerfeld U., “Omnia Theodosio cedunt subolique perenni”. Überlegungen zu Bildprogramm und Bedeutung des Theodosiusobelisken und seiner Basen in Konstantinopel, JAC, 44, 2001, 168-184 Sader H., La ‘route de la mer’ en Phénicie”, in Les routes du Proche-Orient: des séjours d’Abraham aux caravanes de l’encens, éd. A. Lemaire, Paris 2000, 67-85 Safran L., Points of View: the Theodosian Obelisk Base in Context, GRBS, 34, 1993, 409-435 Seeck O., Die Briefe des Libanius zeitlich geördnet, Leipzig 1906 Speck P., Beobachtungen zur Unterbasis des Theodosios-Obelisken im Hippodrom von Konstantinopel, Boreas 20, 1997, 17-22 Stern E., La Via Maris, in Les routes du Proche-Orient: des séjours d’Abraham aux caravanes de l’encens, éd. A. Lemaire, Paris 2000, 59-65 Von Haehling R., Die Religionszugehörigkeit der hohen Amtsträger des römischen Retches seit Constantins I. Alleinherrschaft bis zum Ende der Theodosianischen Dynastie, Bonn 1978 Wienholz H., Eine severische Neokorie im Bacchustempel von Baalbek, in Kaiserkult in den Provinzen des Römischen Reiches. Organisation, Kommunikation und Repräsentation, hrsg. A. Kolb, M. Vitale, Berlin-Boston (Mass.) 2016, 229-251 Weissbach F. H., Die Denkmäler und Inschriften an der Mündung des Nahr El-Kelb (Wissensch. Veröff. d. deutsch-türkischen Denkmalschutz-Kommandos, 4), Berlin-Leipzig 1922, 39-41 Wirsching A., Wie die Obelisken um die Zeitenwende und im 4. Jahrhundert aufgerichtet wurden, Gymnasium, 113, 2006, 329-358 Wirsching A., Obelisken transportieren und aufrichten in Ägypten und in Rom mit einem Exkurs zu den Memnonkolossen, Norderstedt 2013 (3rd ed.) Yon J.-B., De l’araméen en grec, in Mélanges en l’honneur de Jean-Paul Rey-Coquais, éd. P. L. Gatier, J. B. Yon, Beyrouth 2007, 381-429 Yon J.-B., Les Inscriptions grecques et latines de Nahr el-Kalb, in Le Site de Nahr el-Kalb, éd. par A.-M. Maïla-Afeiche, Beyrouth 2009, 303-314

the awarder is Proculus, son of Flavius Eutolmius Tatianus praetorian prefect.