The Roman Empress Ulpia Severina: Ruler and Goddess (Queenship and Power) 3031286502, 9783031286506

Citation preview

The Roman Empress Ulpia Severina Ruler and Goddess

Margherita Cassia

Queenship and Power Series Editors

Charles E. Beem University of North Carolina Pembroke, NC, USA Carole Levin University of Nebraska Lincoln, NE, USA

This series focuses on works specializing in gender analysis, women’s studies, literary interpretation, and cultural, political, constitutional, and diplomatic history. It aims to broaden our understanding of the strategies that queens—both consorts and regnants, as well as female regents—pursued in order to wield political power within the structures of male-­dominant societies. The works describe queenship in Europe as well as many other parts of the world, including East Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Islamic civilization.

Margherita Cassia

The Roman Empress Ulpia Severina Ruler and Goddess

Margherita Cassia University of Catania Catania, Italy

ISSN 2730-938X     ISSN 2730-9398 (electronic) Queenship and Power ISBN 978-3-031-28650-6    ISBN 978-3-031-28651-3 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28651-3 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 Translation from the Italian language edition: “Ulpia Severina Augusta. Domina e dea” by Margherita Cassia, © Margherita Cassia 2022. Published by Edizioni Quasar, Roma. All Rights Reserved. This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Cover illustration: Artepics / Alamy Stock Photo This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG. The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

For my son Alessandro, iusto et tenaci propositi viro (Hor. carm. 3, 3, 1)

Preface: Ulpia Severina—An Unsung Augusta

Of the twelve Augustae who lived during the fifty years of the so-called military anarchy that characterized the third century (AD 235–284)— Caecilia Paulina, wife of Maximinus the Thracian, Furia Sabinia Tranquillina, wife of Gordian III, Otacilia Severa, spouse of Philip the Arab, Herennia Etruscilla, consort of Decius, Cornelia Supera, wife of Emilianus, Cornelia Gallonia second wife of Valerian, Cornelia Salonina, wife of Gallienus, Sulpicia Dryantilla, possibly wife of the usurper Regalianus, Zenobia, widow of Odenathus (Regnum Palmyrenum), Victoria, mother of the usurper Victorinus (Imperium Galliarum), Ulpia Severina, spouse of Aurelian, and Magnia Urbica, wife of Carinus—and are listed in Anne Kolb’s seminal prosopography published in 2010,1 Ulpia Severina is certainly one of the most enigmatic and least known, even if, on the basis of the substantial coinage in her name, many scholars have reasonably speculated that, after the death of her husband, she may even have ruled alone until the accession of Tacitus to the throne.

1

 Kolb 2010, pp. 30–31, nos. 30–41.

vii

viii 

PREFACE: ULPIA SEVERINA—AN UNSUNG AUGUSTA

Modern historiography on the ancient world has shown a keen interest in the above-mentioned emperors, especially Lucius Domitius Aurelianus (September 270–September/October 275),2 well known as restitutor 2  We accept here the chronology proposed by Kienast, Eck, Heil 20176, p. 275. PIR2 D 135, s.v. Imp. Caesar L. Domitius Aurelianus Aug., p. 42. Most literary sources attribute to Aurelian a reign of five years and six months: Epit. Caes. 35, 1 (Aurelianus … imperavit annis quinque, mensibus sex); Iord. Rom. 290, p. 37 Mommsen 1832 (Aurelianus Dacia Ripense oriundus regnavit an. V m. VI); Oros. 7, 23, 3 (anno ab Urbe condita MXXVII Aurelianus vicesimus nonus imperium adeptus quinque annis ac sex mensibus tenuit, vir industria militari excellentissimus); Hier. chron. a. Abr. 2290 (271 AD), p. 222 Helm 1956 (regnavit Aurelianus ann. V mens. VI); Cassiod. chron. 984, p. 148 Mommsen 1894 (Aurelianus factus est imperator, qui regnavit annis V mensibus VI); Chron. Gall. 429, p. 642 Mommsen 1892 (Aurelianus ann. V mens. VI); Bede chron. 384, p. 293 Mommsen 1896 (Aurelianus. an. V m. VI). The passage from HA Aur. 37, 4 reads: imperavit annis ‘quinque mensibus’ sex minus paucis diebus ac rebus magnis gestis inter divos relatus est, “he ruled for five years and six months minus a few days, and for his great deeds he was counted among the gods.” Five years, four months and twenty days was the length of the reign according to Chron. Urb. Rom., p. 148 Mommsen 1892: Aurelianus imp. ann. V m. IIII d. XX. Congiarium dedit D. Hic muro urbem cinxit, templum Solis et castra in campo Agrippae dedicavit, genium populi Romani aureum in rostra posuit. Porticus termarum Antoniniarum arserunt et fabricatum est. Panem, oleum et sal populo iussit dari gratuite. Agonem Solis instituit. Occisus Caenophrurio, “Aurelianus reigned for five years, 4 months and 20 days. He made a donation of 500 denarii. He surrounded the city with a wall, dedicated a temple of the Sun and a stronghold in the camp of Agrippa, placed in the rostra a golden Genius (Spirit) of the Roman people. The porticos of the Antonine baths went up in flames and were rebuilt. He ordered that the people be granted free bread, oil, and salt. He established an agone of the Sun. He was killed at Caenophrurium” (on this site see infra, Chap. 1, § 2). Greek sources speak of a six-year reign: Eus. hist. eccl. 7, 30, 21: ἔτεσι γοῦν ἓξ κρατήσαντα τὸν Αὐρηλιανὸν διαδέχεται Πρόβος, καὶ τοῦτον δέ που τοῖς ἴσοις ἐπικατασχόντα Κᾶρος ἅμα παισὶν Καρίνῳ καὶ Νουμεριανῷ, “Aurelianus reigned for six years, he was succeeded by Probus, and the latter, who ruled for about an equal number of years, was succeeded by Caro, together with his sons Carinus and Numerian,” Malal. chron. 12, 30, p.  230 Thurn 2000: μετὰ δὲ τὴν βασιλλείαν Κυντιλλιανοῦ ἐβασίλευσεν ὁ θειότατος Αὐρηλιανὸς ὁ πολεμικὸς ἔτη ϛ′, “but after the reign of Quintillian [i.e., Quintillus], there ruled for six years the most divine, the pugnacious Aurelianus”; Ioann. Ant. frg. 183, p. 338 Mariev 2008: … Αὐρηλιανὸς ἕκτῳ τῆς ἡγεμονίας ἐνιαυτῷ διαφθείρεται …, “… Aurelianus was killed in the sixth anniversary of his reign …”; Georg. Syncell. ecl. chron. p. 469, l. 25 Mosshammer 1984: Ῥώμης κη′ ἐβασίλευσεν Αὐρηλιανὸς ἔτη ϛ′, “as the twenty-eighth (emperor), Aurelius reigned over Rome for six years”; Cedren. p. 455, Bekker 1838: Αὐρηλιανὸς ἐβασίλευσεν ἔτη ϛ′, “Aurelianus ruled for six years”; Zon. 12, 27, vol. 3, p. 153 Dindorf 1870. Cubelli 1992, p. 27, on the basis of the tetradrachms dated to the seventh year of his reign, assumed that Aurelian had been killed a few days before August 29, 275; thus, after the death of Quintillus in early November 270, he would have ascended the throne before December 9, but would have set back his dies imperii to a date earlier than August 29, the day of the death of Claudius II Gothicus, of whom Aurelianus himself claimed to be the direct successor. See Estiot 1995a, p. 17: “from August 29, 272 is counted his year 4. Aurelianus thus dates his dies imperii to before August 29, 270, at the death of Claudius II, which allows him to reduce Quintillus’s reign to a mere usurpation and to present himself as the direct heir of Claudius II.” On the date of the emperor’s death and the interregnum before the rise of Tacitus see infra, Chap. 2, § 2.

  PREFACE: ULPIA SEVERINA—AN UNSUNG AUGUSTA 

ix

orbis for having reunited the three “torsos” of the Roman Empire,3 or for having built the mighty walls of Rome,4 or for the free distributions of foodstuffs to the population of Rome,5 or for having established in the imperial capital the official cult of the Sol Invictus, the supreme deity of whom he considered himself the representative on earth6 and that “symbolized both the universal dominion of Rome from East to West and the invincibility of the emperor.”7 However, the same cannot be said for his respective Augusta, recalled either synthetically in prosopographical studies8 or, generally cursorily, in articles and essays about the political and military history of a turbulent period—that of “military anarchy”—in which the princeps was fundamentally reluctant to seek collaboration with the senate, assumed the characteristics of the dominus and above all

3  On the restitutio orbis, in addition to Watson’s seminal monograph 1999, p.  174, see Allard 2006, pp. 149–172. On Aurelian pacator orbis see Sotgiu 1961, pp. 27–28; Mastino, Ibba 2012, pp. 192–195. The reference to the “three torsos” can be seen in a famous page of Mazzarino’s treatise 1956 (1986), vol. 2, p. 543. 4  See Mancini 2001; Dey 2011; Coates-Stephens 2012, pp.  83–109; Esposito, Fabbri, Giovanetti et alii 2017; Parisi Presicce, Motta, Gallitto et alii 2018. 5  See Soraci 2005–2006, pp. 345–437 (with bibliography therein). 6  See Martin 2000, pp. 297–307; Salzman 2017, pp. 37–49. 7  See Bonnet 2018, p. 243, who, on the basis of Zos. 1, 61, 2 (ἐν τούτῳ καὶ τὸ τοῦ Ἡλίου δειμάμενος ἱερὸν μεγαλοπρεπῶς τοῖς ἀπὸ Παλμύρας ἐκόσμησεν ἀναθήμασιν, Ἡλίου τε καὶ Βήλου καθιδρύσας ἀγάλματα, “at this time he also built the temple of the Sun and adorned it magnificently with offerings from Palmyra, placing there the statues of the Sun and Belos”) closely related the position of prominence achieved by the Palmyrian Malakbêl in Rome with the vigorous promotion of the cult of Sol Invictus by first Elagabalus and then Aurelian. On Aurelian’s worship of the Sol Invictus and his relationship with the Elagabal of Emesa, see Usener 1905, pp.  465–491; Halsberghe 1972, pp.  130–171. This solar theology offered Aurelian’s monarchical power a religious basis accessible to all: royal investiture derived directly from the deity Sol-Mithras, without human intermediaries, proposed by Aurelian— under whose reign the social struggles would be “resolved” in the sign of an authoritarian restoration in forms no longer “classical” but of “late antiquity”—a far more absolutist and autocratic conception than it might appear at first sight: Mazza 1986, pp. 88–93; see Mazza 1973 (1970), pp. 273–464. On Malakbêl, see Houston 1990, pp. 189–193. In general, on the political and legal reforms of the “Illyrian” emperor, see Watson 1999, pp. 123–202; Jacob 2004. On the relationship between Aurelian and the senate, see Suski 2002, pp. 279–291. 8  PIR2 V 880, s.v. Ulpia Severina Augusta, pp. 468–469; PLRE I, s.v. Ulpia Severina 2, p. 830; PIR2 D 135, s.v. Imp. Caesar L. Domitius Aurelianus Aug., pp. 41–42; PLRE I, s.v. L. Domitius Aurelianus 6, pp. 129–130; see Eck 1974b, coll. 943–944; Kolb 2010, p. 31, no. 40 (Ulpia Severina); Kienast, Eck, Heil 20176, pp. 225–227.

x 

PREFACE: ULPIA SEVERINA—AN UNSUNG AUGUSTA

showed himself particularly inclined to base his absolute power on the strength of the army. Within this context, the women of the domus Augusta could turn into veritable “needles of the scale.”9 The leading role played by the Augustae has also been emphasized by Diliana N. Angelova, who, in her book devoted to the Sacred Founders, stated that the title of Augusta undoubtedly represented the most significant honor for women of the imperial era, particularly during the third century, when seven Augustae (from Herennia Etruscilla to Magnia Urbica, including Zenobia, but excluding Sulpicia Dryantilla and Victoria) succeeded each other over thirty-five years (AD 249–284); through this title, each of these women claimed an association with the first Augusta— Livia—and with the honor implied in the same title carried originally by Augustus: “sacredness associated with founding and service to the State. To be an Augusta was to be a ‘sacred female founder.’”10 It is precisely in the light of the considerations outlined above that we intend to focus here on Ulpia Severina, the wife of Aurelian, the “Illyrian” emperor (born in Serdica, today Sofia, on September 9, AD 214 or 215). Her name is never mentioned in the ancient literary sources (Chap. 1), and she has been studied almost exclusively from the standpoint of the numerous numismatic attestations (Chap. 2), although she was in fact also the recipient of a fair number of interesting honorific epigraphs, which had been neither thoroughly examined nor adequately valued until this study (Chap. 3). To begin with, it seems necessary to make two clarifications. Firstly, I wish to reiterate that the present study, as the title itself clearly states, is 9  Cenerini 20092 (2002), pp. 94–95: “it should never be forgotten … that women never held political or military office in Roman times, although … in the imperial age, especially … women who were part of the domus Augusta and who, therefore, lived in close contact with the ‘center of power’ … would have a privileged position that would allow them be able to become stabilizing or destabilizing factors for the top echelons of power.” On matronae as Augustae see Cenerini 2016c, pp.  23–49. On the numerous roles played by matronae between the late Republic and early Empire see the summary in Zecchini 2017, pp. 247–248. On the need to study the female condition in the Roman world without the deforming lenses of a modernizing emancipationist and/or anthropological modeling reading, but rather from a perspective capable of disentangling it within a largely androcentric and misogynistic documentation and rethinking the categories of public and private in the modes of relationships between men and women within society, we refer to the insightful analysis by Giorcelli Bersani 2016, pp. 405–430. 10  Angelova 2015, p. 83.

  PREFACE: ULPIA SEVERINA—AN UNSUNG AUGUSTA 

xi

dedicated to the consort of Aurelian—the emperor also famous for having defeated Zenobia—but it is not yet another book on the “Illyrian” emperor and/or the Palmyrene Queen.11 Of course, where necessary, the appropriate references will be made to the one or the other, but always and in any case from the perspective of an investigation concerning Augusta, wife of the emperor, as a matter of absolute priority. Secondly, I would like to point out that the figure of Ulpia Severina, as has been mentioned above, has been examined almost exclusively in the light of the coinage issued during the reign of her husband and especially during the interregnum that followed the death of the latter and preceded the accession to the throne of his successor Tacitus. The aim of this study is certainly not to offer an expert essay on numismatic documentation—already the subject of refined and particularly meticulous technical analysis; rather, it constitutes a thorough historical survey of the epigraphic evidence concerning the empress which has been substantially neglected by modern scholars and analyzed instead in this book in a productive counter perspective, along with the coin issues (sometimes even overabundant), as well as the skeletal—indeed, almost ‘mute’—fragments of the literary sources, and also, where possible, with certain iconographic finds connected with portraiture (sculpture and glyptics). The first to put Severina in the spotlight was the Austrian numismatist Theodor Rohde, who even made specific mention of her in the title of his monograph, Die Münzen des Kaisers Aurelianus, seiner Frau Severina und der Fürsten von Palmyra, published in 1881. More than a century later, 11  On the relationship between Aurelian and Zenobia, see in particular Kotula 1966. Since the specific bibliography on Zenobia is vast, we refer to some particularly significant studies, which, however, are not exhaustive: see, for example, the now dated Mochi Sismondi 1930, but also the more recent PIR2 S 504, s.v. Septimia Zenobia, pp.  206–210; PLRE I, s.v. Septimia Zenobia, pp. 990–991; Hanslik 1972, coll. 1–7; Cazzaniga 1972, pp. 156–182; Pini 1974; Dodgeon, Lieu 1991, pp.  88–109; Stoneman 1992; Equini Schneider 1993; Kytzler 1994; Wieber 2006 (2000), pp. 281–310; Charles-Gaffiot, Lavagne, Hofman 2001; Equini Schneider 2002, pp. 23–27; Gabucci 2002; Zahran 2003; Bravo Castañeda 2004, pp. 81–93; Breytenbach 2005, pp. 51–66; Cussini 2005, pp. 26–43; Pastor Muñoz, Pastor Andrés 2009, pp.  323–347; Kolb 2010, p.  31, no. 38 (Iulia Aurelia Zenobia); Winsbury 2010; Sartre, Sartre 2014; Hidalgo de la Vega 2017, pp. 79–104; Andrade 2018; Yon 2019, pp. 183–203; Hidalgo de la Vega 2021, pp. 799–824. In a book dedicated to the Palmyrene Queen, Braccesi 2017, p. 134, recalls Severina in passing and somewhat fancifully: “his wife, Ulpia Severina, was far away, and he [i.e., Aurelian], in the camps, could get his satisfaction only from courtesans or with prostitutes in tow. In this respect, too, Zenobia herself could have been the just reward for the labors of a warrior perpetually on the march.”

xii 

PREFACE: ULPIA SEVERINA—AN UNSUNG AUGUSTA

between 1995 and 2014, important studies on the coinage issued in the name of Severina alone were carried out by Sylviane Estiot, Karl Strobel, and Claudia Perassi.12 Strobel and Perassi on the one hand grasped similarities with earlier Augustae, and on the other hand believed that they could see in the story of Ulpia Severina a kind of foretaste of what would happen with the figures of the Christian empresses of the following century. Strobel, in particular, not only identified some share-worthy elements of affinity between Ulpia Severina and the pagan Augustae of Syriac origin of the Severan dynasty, or with Cornelia Salonina, wife of Gallienus, but he also went so far as to point out possible analogies with the Augustae of the following century—admittedly in this case in a decidedly less persuasive way.13 Perassi also took the same perspective, placing Severina in correlation with both Iulia Domna and Galla Placidia.14 On closer inspection, however, the substantive core of the two scholars’ claims can definitely be traced to some reflections formulated a few years earlier by the numismatist Jean-Pierre Callu.15 Although Callu considered Severina’s case to be an anomaly that was difficult to understand, almost an exception within an exception compared to Iulia Domna first and Galla Placidia later, it nevertheless appears historiographically bold, if not dangerous, to project in time—as all three scholars mentioned above have done—in a retrospective and/or anticipatory analysis, the powers held by 12   Estiot 1995a, pp.  31; 51–52; 54; 56; 62–63; 78; 88; 100–101; Strobel 1998, pp. 124–133; 147–153; Perassi 2002, pp. 337–372; Perassi 2014, pp. 193–232. 13  Strobel 1998, p. 146: “sie übertrifft damit formal und politisch die Stellung der syrischen Augustae, die sich auf Familienmitglieder als Mittler ihrer Machposition stützten, oder auch der Salonina Augusta; sie stellt ein herausragendes Glied hin zu den Augustae des späten römischen und des byzantinischen Reiches dar. Durch ihre Regierung über das Reich bildete sie den Höhepunkt in der Entwicklung der Stellung der Augustae bis zum späten 4. Jh. n. Chr.” 14  Perassi 2002, pp. 341–342: “with Severina there would thus have been the official formalization of the institutional role of the emperor’s consort, in the wake of the greater political visibility already assumed by some Augustae of the Severan age, first and foremost Iulia Domna. A century and half a century later, the step forward taken during the interregnum managed by the widow of Aurelian would make it possible for a woman like Galla Placidia to rule in the name of her son who was a minor.” 15   Callu 1996, p.  141: “quand Séverine osa se présenter comme P(IA) F(ELIX) AVG(VSTA), elle n’avait qu’un vrai précédent: Julia Domna. Plus tard Galla Placidia complètera le trio. Dans les trois occurrences oeuvraient des veuves, Placidia au nom d’un enfant mineur, Valentinien III, Julia Domna en partage théorique avec Caracalla, Séverine, on ne sait pas trop bien dans quelles circonstances”. See Callu 1995, p. 23.

  PREFACE: ULPIA SEVERINA—AN UNSUNG AUGUSTA 

xiii

the Augustae, pagan or Christian, who lived before, during, or after the fifty years of “military anarchy.” Indeed, the comparison does not seem methodologically sound, at least in the writer’s opinion, since although the Syriac Augustae doubtlessly exerted influence over the imperial court, they did so always as mothers of the emperors of the Severan dynasty; Galla Placidia did indeed rule the Empire, but in the capacity of guardian of Valentinian III aged just four. Aurelian’s wife, on the other hand, would only actually reign alone once she became a widow. On the other hand, it is undeniable that the exceptional—indeed unique—situation, albeit circumscribed, represented by the presence of Severina alone on the throne of Rome, deserves more attention than it has received so far: in short, the pages in history textbooks devoted to the reconstruction of a fifty-year phase of Roman-imperial history should, in our opinion, be, if not rewritten, at least supplemented, in order to give the deserved space to this empress and thus to the so-called interregnum between the death of Aurelian and the advent of Tacitus. Catania, Italy

Margherita Cassia

Acknowledgments

First of all, I would like to thank Carole Levin, whom I had the great opportunity to meet personally and who immediately and generously supported the project of publishing my book on Ulpia Severina. She also gladly accepted this biography for the distinguished series Queenship and Power, of which she is the co-editor. This book originates from my book Ulpia Severina Augusta. Domina e dea, published in 2022  in Italian by Edizioni Quasar (Rome), but the publication for Palgrave Macmillan represented a precious and prestigious opportunity not only to revise the text and integrate and update the bibliography, but also, and above all, to work with a publishing house of international importance specializing in the history of women. I would like to thank the publisher of Edizioni Quasar, Dr. Martina Tognon, who facilitated the publication of this book, Sam Stocker, editor for History at Palgrave Macmillan Publishing House, and Charles Beem, co-editor of Queenship and Power, who both welcomed this book into the Palgrave series. I am also truly grateful to all the library staff of the Departments of Humanities, Education, and Law of the University of Catania, who, with great professionalism and equal willingness, effectively helped me to carry out my research, made even more complex by the outbreak and long persistence of the national health emergency. Affectionate thanks also go to Professor Claudia Giuffrida and Professor Alfredo Buonopane, sincere friends and helpful colleagues, who patiently read and amended my original Italian manuscript, providing me with additional and valuable insights, thanks to their specific and undisputed xv

xvi 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

expertise, although, obviously, the results achieved are entirely my responsibility. Finally, I owe much to the supportive and constant presence of my husband, Gaetano Arena, and our son, Alessandro, to whom this book is dedicated.

Notes on Translations and Abbreviations

The translations of passages from ancient sources, where not otherwise indicated, are by the Author. In the quotations from Greek authors the abbreviations used are generally those recorded in A Greek-English Lexicon by H.G. Liddell, R. Scott, H.S.  Jones, R.  McKenzie (rev. suppl. Oxford 1996  =  LSJ); in those of Latin writers the abbreviations used are those in the Index of the Thesaurus Linguae Latinae (Leipzig 1990  =  ThLL); and those of Greek Christian authors follow the abbreviations recorded in A Patristic Greek Lexicon by G.W.H. Lampe (Oxford 1961). Consideration was also given to the list by F. Montanari, Vocabolario della lingua greca. Greco-Italo (Turin 20133). The abbreviations of the journals adhere, in addition to the Année Philologique, especially to the Internationales Abkürzungsverzeichnis für Theologie und Grenzgebiete. Zeitschriften, Serien, Lexika, Quellenwerke mit ibliographischen Angaben 2., überarbeitete und erweiterte Auflage by S.M.  Schwertner (Berlin/New York 1992) and the Archäologische Bibliographie 1993 edited by W. Hermann, R. Neudecker, A. Drummer (Berlin 1994).

xvii

Contents

1 Literary Sources  1 1 Aurelian’s Anonymous Uxor  1 2 Ulpius Crinitus  5 Bibliography 18 2 Numismatic Sources 23 1 The Venèra Hoard 23 2 The interregnum between Aurelian and Tacitus 33 Bibliography 65 3 The Epigraphic Sources 77 1 The Inscriptions of Ulpia Severina, Coniux Aureliani  77 2 The Titles of Σεπτιμία Ζηνοβία Σεβαστή120 Bibliography125 Concluding Remarks133 Bibliography145 Index of Ancient Sources171 Index of Names of People181

xix

xx 

Contents

Index of Place Names185 Index of Modern Authors189

List of Figures

Fig. 2.1

Fig. 2.2

Fig. 2.3

Fig. 2.4 Fig. 2.5

Composition of the Venèra hoard. (Redrawn by M. Cassia after A. Arzone, Alcune riflessioni sul ripostiglio della Venèra (Verona) e sui grandi tesori monetali di carattere pubblico, in I. Baldini, A.L. Morelli (eds.), Beni da conservare. Forme di tesaurizzazione in età romana e medievale, Ornamenta 7, Bologna 2020, p. 39, chart 1) Distribution of coins from the Venèra hoard by mint. (© reproduced by courtesy of Prof. A. Arzone, Alcune riflessioni sul ripostiglio della Venèra (Verona) e sui grandi tesori monetali di carattere pubblico, in I. Baldini, A.L. Morelli (eds.), Beni da conservare. Forme di tesaurizzazione in età romana e medievale, Ornamenta 7, Bologna 2020, p. 40, chart 2) Map of mints and hoards connected with Aurelian coinage. (Redrawn by M. Cassia after S. Estiot, Aureliano. Volume II. 1, in J.-B. Giard (ed.), Ripostiglio della Venèra. Nuovo Catalogo Illustrato, Roma 1995, p. 20) Map of Thrace and Propontis. (© M. Cassia) Aurelianus from Rome: on the obv. bust of Severina facing right, diademed, on a crescent moon with the legend SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. Concordia standing, facing left, draped, bearing insignia in both hands with the legend CONCORDIAE MILITVM, in exergue XX I R (RIC V 1, p. 315, Rome 4). (© severina/RIC_0004 with permission of wildwinds.com, ex CNG.)

26

28

29 41

50

xxi

xxii 

List of Figures

Fig. 2.6

Denarius from Rome: on the obv. bust of Severina facing right, diademed and draped and the legend SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. Venus standing, facing left, draped, bearing Cupid and scepter and legend VENVS FELIX, in exergue ϛ (RIC V 1, p. 316, Rome 6). (© severina/RIC_0006_S with permission of wildwinds.com, ex Áureo & Calicó.) Fig. 2.7 Aureus from Rome: on the obv. bust of Severina facing right, diademed, draped, on a crescent moon with the legend SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. Concordia standing, facing left, draped, bearing insignia in both hands with the legend CONCORDIAE MILITVM (RIC V 1, p. 315, Rome 2). (© The Trustees of the British Museum.) Fig. 2.8 Aurelianus from Lugdunum: on the obv. bust of Severina facing right, diademed, on a crescent moon with the legend SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. Concordia seated, facing left, draped, bearing patera and cornucopia with the legend CONCORD MILIT, in exergue ∙ D ∙ L ∙ (RIC V 1, p. 315, Lugdunum 1). (© severina/RIC_001_D-dot-L with permission of wildwinds.com, ex Tkalec AG.) Fig. 2.9 Aurelianus from Ticinum: on the obv. bust of Severina facing right, diademed, on a crescent moon with the legend SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. Concordia standing, facing left, draped, bearing insignia in both hands with the legend CONCORDIAE MILITVM, in exergue T XX T (RIC V 1, p. 316, Ticinum 8). (© severina/RIC_0008_P with permission of wildwinds.com.) Fig. 2.10 Aureus from Siscia: on the obv. bust of Severina facing right, diademed, draped, on a crescent moon with the legend SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. Concordia standing, facing left, draped, bearing insignia in both hands and the legend CONCORDIAE MILITVM (RIC V 1, p. 316, Siscia 12). (https://smb.museum-­digital.de/object/258194?recordlang= en&record=111083, Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin / Benjamin Seifert (Lübke und Wiedemann) (Public Domain Mark 1.0.)) Fig. 2.11 Aurelianus from Serdica: on the obv. bust of Severina facing right, diademed, draped, on a crescent moon with the legend SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. a male figure and Severina clasping each other’s right hand with the legend CONCORDIA AVGG, star below, in exergue ΚΑ∙Γ (RIC V 1, p. 317, Serdica 17). (https://auctions.bertolamifinearts.com/ it/lot/58493/severina-­augusta-­270-275-­antoninianus-­ /#gallery, reproduced by courtesy of Dr. A. Pancotti— Bertolami Fine Arts.)

50

51

51

52

52

53

  List of Figures 

Fig. 2.12 Aurelianus from Antioch of Syria: on the obv. bust of Severina facing right, diademed, draped, on a crescent moon with the legend SEVERINA P F AVG; on the rev. a male figure and Severina clasping each other’s right hand with the legend CONCORDIA AVG, in exergue XX I (RIC V 1, p. 318, Antioch 19). (© https://numid.ku.de/object?lang=en&id=ID46; https://numid.ku.de/object?lang=en&id=ID46&view=rs, with permission of Dr. Ph. Köhner.) Fig. 2.13 Tetradrachm from Alexandria: on the obv. bust of Severina facing right, diademed with the legend OVΛΠ CΕVΗΡΙΝΑ CΕΒ; on the rev. standing eagle, facing right, with palm behind its shoulders, garland in its beak with the legend ΕΤΟΥC, on the right the numeral ϛ (Milne 1933, no. 4453). (© severina/ milne_4453 with permission of wildwinds.com.) Fig. 2.14 (a and b) Female bust of the Gallienic age attributed to Ulpia Severina. Palazzo dei Conservatori, Rome, inv. no. 2767. (© Reproduced by courtesy of Prof. C. Perassi, I ritratti monetali di Ulpia Severina, in RIN 103, 2002, p. 369, tavola II, figura 5.) Fig. 2.15 Monetary portraits of Ulpia Severina on coins from the mint of Rome (a) and from the mints of Rome and Siscia (b–f). (© Reproduced by courtesy of Prof. C. Perassi, Ritratti monetali delle Augustae nel III secolo d.C.: una crisi di genere?, in Un confronto drammatico con il XXI secolo: l’Impero romano del III secolo nella crisi monetaria. Atti del Convegno, Biassono 9 giugno 2012, Biassono 2014, p. 232, figura 29.) Fig. 2.16 Gold ring with reddish carved carnelian from Mtskheta, Georgia. (© Reproduced by courtesy of Prof. E. Avaliani, What’s in a Name? Who might be Basilissa Ulpia from Mtskheta?, in G.R. Tsetskhladze, A. Avram, J. Hargrave [eds.], The Greeks and Romans in the Black Sea and the Importance of the Pontic Region for the Graeco-Roman World (7th century b.c.–5th century a.d.): 20 Years On [1997–2017]. Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress on Black Sea Antiquities, Constanţa 18–22 September 2017, Oxford 2021, p. 635, fig. 4.) Fig. 2.17 Severina coin found in Dacia. (Modified by M. Cassia after N. Vlassa, Un cimitir de incineraţie de la sfîrşitul veacului III, de la Iernut, in Studii ši Cercetări de Istorie Veche 13, 1, 1962, p. 155, fig. 5.)

xxiii

54

54

56

60

63

64

xxiv 

List of Figures

Fig. 2.18 Coin from Ticinum: on the obv. bust of Severina facing right, diademed, draped, on a crescent moon with the legend SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. Concordia looking left and bearing insignia in both hands with the legend CONCORDIAE MILITVM, in exergue T XX T (RIC V 1, p. 316, Ticinum 8). (Severina/RIC_0008_T with permission of wildwinds.com.) Fig. 3.1 Apograph and interpretive transcription of the epigraph from Augustum Semta. (Reproduced from R. Cagnat, Découvertes des Brigades topographiques de Tunisie en 1893 [d’après Toussaint], in BCTH 1893, p. 222, no. 51 [= AÉ 1894, p. 19] and © M. Cassia.) Fig. 3.2 Map of Africa Proconsularis. (© M. Cassia.) Fig. 3.3 Antoninianus from Serdica: on the obv. laureate and cuirassed bust of Aurelian, facing right and the legend IMP DEO ET DOMINO AVRELIANO AVG; on the rev. a standing female figure facing right, holding a garland to Aurelian laureate, in military dress, standing, facing left, holding a spear in his left hand and the legend RESTITVT ORBIS; star in lower center; in exergue ΚΑ Γ (RIC V 1, p. 299, Serdica 305). (© aurelian/ RIC_0305 with permission of wildwinds.com.) Fig. 3.4 Photograph and interpretive transcription of the inscription from Egnatia. (© https://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?s_lang uage=it&bild=$SupIt_11_G_00005.jpg, reproduced by courtesy of Prof. M. Clauss and © M. Cassia.) Fig. 3.5 Plan of Egnatia (No. 4 corresponds to the sacellum of Eastern Deities; No. 2 to the Via Traiana). (© reproduced by permission of Dr. A. Schena [Schena Editore] from A. Donvito, Egnazia. Dalle origini alla riscoperta archeologica, Fasano [Brindisi], Schena Editore, 20033 [1988], photos Ditta Guglielmi, Castellana Grotte, p. 40, fig. 14.) Fig. 3.6 Hellenistic stoa and sacellum of the eastern deities of Egnatia. (© Reproduced by permission of Dr. A. Schena [Schena Editore] from A. Donvito, Egnazia. Dalle origini alla riscoperta archeologica, Fasano [Brindisi], Schena Editore, 20033 [1988], photos Ditta Guglielmi, Castellana Grotte, p. 41, fig. 15.) Fig. 3.7 Location of Egnatia in the road system of Apulia. (© Reproduced by permission of Dr. A. Schena [Schena Editore] from A. Donvito, Egnazia. Dalle origini alla riscoperta archeologica, Fasano [Brindisi], Schena Editore, 20033 [1988], photos Ditta Guglielmi, Castellana Grotte, p. 61, fig. 36.)

64

78 79

83

84

85

86

88

  List of Figures 

Fig. 3.8

Fig. 3.9 Fig. 3.10 Fig. 3.11

Fig. 3.12

Fig. 3.13

Fig. 3.14

Fig. 3.15 Fig. 3.16

Fig. 3.17

xxv

Section of the Via Traiana near Egnatia with obvious furrows deeply scored by chariot wheels in the limestone paving. (© Reproduced by permission of Dr. A. Schena [Schena Editore] from A. Donvito, Egnazia. Dalle origini alla riscoperta archeologica, Fasano [Brindisi], Schena Editore, 20033 [1988], photos Ditta Guglielmi, Castellana Grotte, p. 64, fig. 38.) 89 Photograph and interpretive transcription of the inscription from Allifae. (© Reproduced by courtesy of Prof. U. Soldovieri and © M. Cassia.) 90 Photograph and interpretive transcription of the inscription for Probus from Allifae (back of epigraph for Severina). (© Reproduced by courtesy of Prof. U. Soldovieri and © M. Cassia.) 91 Photograph and interpretive transcription of the inscription from Clusium. (© http://www.edr-­edr.it/edr_programmi/ view_img.php?id_nr=149857, reproduced by permission of Ministero della Cultura—Direzione Regionale Musei della Toscana—Firenze and © M. Cassia.) 93 Apograph of the inscription from Industria. (Redrawn by M. Cassia after G. Assandria, Lapide dedicata a Severina moglie di Aureliano imperatore [270–275] rinvenuta nell’antica città d’Industria, in Atti della Società Piemontese di Archeologia e Belle Arti 10, 1, 1921, p. 52.) 94 Photograph and interpretive transcription of the inscription from Industria. (https://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?s_ language=it&bild=$SupIt_12_In_00004.jpg;pp, reproduced by courtesy of Prof. M. Clauss and © M. Cassia.) 95 Photograph and interpretive transcription of the inscription from Verona, Museo Lapidario Maffeiano. (© Musei Civici and Museo Archeologico al Teatro Romano, reproduced with permission of Dr. M. Bolla.) 98 Apograph of the inscription from Verona. (Reproduced from F.S. Maffei, Museum Veronense, Veronae 1749, p. cii, no. 5.) 98 Card of the inscription from Verona by archeologist Bruna Forlati Tamaro (1897–1987). (© Musei Civici and Museo Archeologico al Teatro Romano, reproduced with permission of Dr. M. Bolla.) 99 Photograph and interpretive transcription of the inscription from Pola. (http://www.edr-­edr.it/edr_programmi/view_ img.php?id_nr=093927, reproduced with permission of Dr. K. Zenzerović, Archaeological Museum of Istria, Pula, Croatia and © M. Cassia.) 101

xxvi 

List of Figures

Fig. 3.18 Plan of the city of Pola (the forum is located at no. 7; the temple of Augustus is at no. 5). (Modified by M. Cassia after B. Forlati Tamaro, s.v. Pola, in Enciclopedia dell’Arte Antica, Classica e Orientale, vol. 6, Roma 1965, p. 262.) Fig. 3.19 (a and b) Photograph and apograph of the inscription from Tarraco. (Reproduced from J. Serra Vilaró, Excavaciones en la necrópolis romano-cristiana de Tarragona, in Memoria de la Junta superior de excavaciones y antiguedades 104, 1928, p. 97, fig. 57.) Fig. 3.20 Interpretive transcription of the inscription from Tarraco. (© M. Cassia.) Fig. 3.21 Photograph and apograph of the inscription from Banasa. (© from M. Euzennat, J. Marion, J. Gascou, Y. de Kisch, Inscriptions antiques du Maroc. 2. Inscriptions latines, Paris 1982, p. 101, no. 106, reproduced with permission of Antiquités africaines [Dr. A. Mendes da Silva] and reproduced from AÉ 1934, p. 16, no. 44) Fig. 3.22 Interpretive transcription of the inscription from Banasa. (© M. Cassia.) Fig. 3.23 (a and b) Photographs and interpretive transcription of the inscription from Volubilis. (© reproduced by courtesy of Prof. Cristiana Cesaretti https://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?s_ language=it&bild=$IAM-­S_00409.jpg;$IAM_02_02_00409 _1.jpg;$IAM_02_02_00409_2.jpg;PH0009551&nr=2; https://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?s_language=it&bild= $IAM-­S_00409.jpg;$IAM_02_02_00409_1.jpg;$IAM_ 02_02_00409_2.jpg;PH0009551&nr=3 and © M. Cassia.) Fig. 3.24 Apographs of the inscription from Andros. (Reproduced from Ph. Le Bas, Inscriptions grecques et latines, recueillies en Grèce par la Commission de Morée. V. Îles de la Mer Égée, Paris 1839, p. and CIG II, ed. A. Boeckh, Berlin 1843, p. 1069, no. 2349o.) Fig. 3.25 Interpretive transcription of the inscription from Andros. (© M. Cassia.) Fig. 3.26 Apographs and interpretive transcription of the inscription from Anineta. (Reproduced from W.R. Paton, Sites in E. Karia and S. Lydia, in JHS 20, 1900, p. 79, fig. X and © M. Cassia.) Fig. 3.27 Apograph and interpretive transcription of the inscription from Smyrna. (Reproduced from CIL III, ed. Th. Mommsen, Berlin 1873, p. 119, no. 472 and © M. Cassia.)

102

105 106

108 109

111

112 112 114 115

  List of Figures 

xxvii

Fig. 3.28 Apograph and facsimile of the inscription from Perinthus. (Reproduced from AÉ 1927, p. 22, no. 81 and from E. Kalinka, Altes und Neues aus Thrakien, in JÖAI 23, 1926, col. 133.) 117 Fig. 3.29 Interpretive transcription of the inscription from Perinthus (upper margin and lower region). (© M. Cassia.) 118 Fig. 3.30 Antoninianus from Emesa: on the obv. bust of Zenobia facing right, diademed, draped, on a crescent moon with the legend S ZENOBIA AVG; on the rev. Juno standing, facing left, holding a patera in her right hand, a scepter in her left, with a peacock at her feet and a star in the left field, with the legend IVNO REGINA (RIC V 2, p. 584, no. 2, var.). (© zenobia/ RIC_0002v with permission of wildwinds.com, ex CNG.) 123 Fig. 3.31 Sestertius or as from Rome, XI issue, January–September 275 AD: on the obv. bust of Severina facing right, diademed, draped with the legend SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. Juno standing, facing left, holding a patera in her right hand, a scepter in her left, with a peacock at her feet and the legend IVNO REGINA, in exergue numeral ϛ (RIC V 1, p. 316, Rome 7). (© severina/RIC_0007 with permission of wildwinds.com, ex Freeman & Sear.) 124 Fig. A.1 Summary table of titles attributed by epigraphic texts to Septimia Zenobia and Ulpia Severina. (© M. Cassia) 136 Fig. A.2 Table summarizing the inscriptions for Ulpia Severina. (© M. Cassia) 138 Fig. A.3 Geographical distribution of epigraphic attestations of Ulpia Severina. (Modified by M. Cassia after https://commons. wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_Ancient_Rome_271_AD.svg.)139 Fig. A.4 Pie chart showing epigraphic attestations of Ulpia Severina on a linguistic and geographical basis. (© M. Cassia.) 139

CHAPTER 1

Literary Sources

1   Aurelian’s Anonymous Uxor Ulpia Severina is directly referred to in numismatic and epigraphic sources, but her name is absent from ancient literary accounts and therefore we know almost nothing about the private life of this empress. Thus, following a pattern also applied to other Augustae of the third century, the Historia Augusta always refers to Severina without indicating her name.1 Indeed, in Aur. 45, 5 the vain request for a tunicopallium made of fine fabric by Aurelian’s “wife” is recalled: et cum ab eo uxor sua peteret, ut tunicopallio blatteo serico uteretur, ille respondit: “absit ut auro fila pensentur”. Libra enim auri tunc libra serici fuit.

1  In the Historia Augusta, none of the wives of the emperors, from Claudius II Gothicus to Carinus, were referred to by their names: Strobel 1998, p. 123.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 M. Cassia, The Roman Empress Ulpia Severina, Queenship and Power, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28651-3_1

1

2 

M. CASSIA

And to his wife, who asked him if she could have a tunicopallium of silk purple, he replied, “let us beware of buying threads by the weight of gold.” Indeed, at that time, a pound of silk was worth as much as a pound of gold.2

Another generic reference to the wife—and also the daughter—of the Augustus is found in Aur. 50, 2: uxori et filiae annuum sigillaricium quasi privatus instituit. [The emperor] as a private person annually celebrated the feast of the Sigillaria with a gift to his wife and daughter.3

2  On the topos constituted by the emperors’ desire to curb the extravagance of their consorts (HA M. Aur. 17, 4: to replenish the coffers of the aerarium without burdening the provinces, Marcus Aurelius put on sale vestem uxoriam sericam et auratam, gemmas quin etiam …; Alex. 41, 1: gemmarum quod fuit, vendidit et aurum in aerarium contulit dicens gemmas viris usui non esse, matronas autem regias contentas esse debere uno reticulo, atque inauribus et bacato monili et corona, cum qua sacrificium facerent, et tunicopallio auro sparso et cyclade, quae sex uncias auri plus non haberet, “[scil. Severus Alexander] put up for sale all the gems he had and poured the gold gained from them into the treasury, saying that men do not need gems and that imperial matrons should be satisfied with a bonnet, earrings, a pearl necklace, a crown for sacrifices, a tunicopallium embroidered with gold and a gala gown adorned with no more than six ounces of gold”) see Neri 1999, p. 238; Paschoud 1996, p. 210; Strobel 1998, p. 121. On the distinctive purple silk robe coveted by the emperor’s wife see Kolb 1976, pp. 169–171, who had linked the passage about Aurelian’s uxor with that concerning Severus Alexander and with a third, also from the Historia Augusta, concerning Aurelian himself who sent Hunila, wife of Bonosus, gifts, including tunicas palliolatas ianthinas subsericas “hooded tunics of mixed violet silk” (Quatt. Tyr. 15, 8), and had concluded that the two words can be considered as a single term (tunicopallium). On the ideological value of the references to silk in the Historia Augusta see more recently Cassia 2020, pp. 87–113. On the very high costs of importing silk textiles and the inordinate female passion for silk garments, a symbol of luxury, first Pliny (nat. 12, 41, 84) and later Galen (Galen. meth. med. 13, 22, X 942 Kühn 1825) had expressed themselves very clearly: see Arena 2021, pp.  107–114; 207–208. According to Syvänne 2020, p.  143, “Aurelian was 59/60 and Severina must have been in her teens or just past her teens,” although in the coins she is certainly not represented as a teenager (see infra, Chap. 2, § 2). 3  This information was judged to be of limited reliability by Wallinger 1990, p. 135, but it is also found in the Historia Augusta regarding Hadr. 17, 3: Saturnalicia et sigillaricia frequenter amicis inopinantibus misit et ipse ab his libenter accepit et alia invicem dedit, “[scil. Hadrian] often sent friends—who would not would have expected it—the traditional gifts of Saturnalia and sigillaria, and he himself liked to receive gifts from them, and then reciprocated with other gifts.”

1  LITERARY SOURCES 

3

Sigillaricia were small effigies or clay figurines (but also in wax, marble, gold, and silver) reproducing human or animals, which relatives and friends gave to each other during the Sigillaria, a holiday celebrated on December 20 as part of the Saturnalia (December 17–23).4 The Historia Augusta had in fact already mentioned Aurelian’s daughter (also nameless) in Aur. 42, 1–2: Aurelian filiam solam reliquit, cuius posteri etiam nunc Romae sunt. Aurelian namque pro consule Ciliciae, senator optimus, sui vere iuris vitaeque venerabilis, qui nunc in Sicilia vitam agit, eius es nepos. Aurelian left behind only one daughter, whose descendants still live today in Rome. In fact, her grandson is that Aurelian proconsul of Cilicia, an excellent senator and a truly independent man whose life is worthy of respect, and who now lives in Sicily.5

The obvious similarity in the content of the first two passages with Tac. 11, 666—where it is recorded that Tacitus did not allow his wife to adorn herself with gems (uxorem gemmis uti non est passus), abolished the use of dresses with gold tassels and advised Aurelian to avoid the use of gold in robes, on ceilings and in leather objects (auro clavatis vestibus idem interdixit. Nam et ipse auctor Aureliano fuisse perhibetur ut aurum a vestibus et cameris et pellibus summoveret)—clearly shows the moralistic purpose of the writer of the Historia Augusta, aimed at describing the “Illyrian” emperor as a man who was frugal, sober, and not given to waste,7 and  See Hild 1877, p. 1081; Klotz 1923, col. 2278.  According to PLRE I, s.v. Aurelianus 1, p. 128, this relative of the emperor was allegedly a fictitious character. On the possible allusion to Cicero in the passage in question see Rohrbacher 2016, p. 32. 6  See HA Aur. 46, 1: habuit in animo, ut aurum neque in cameras neque in tunicas neque in pelles neque in argentum mitteretur, dicens plus auri esse in rerum natura quam argenti, sed aurum per varios brattearum, filorum et liquationum usus perire, argentum autem in suo usu manere, “he had in mind to prohibit the use of gold to adorn ceilings, tunics, leather and silver objects, stating that in nature there was indeed more gold than silver, but gold was lost in the various processes of rolling, sharpening, and smelting, while silver was preserved as such in its uses.” 7  Watson 1999, pp. 1; 226 and footnote 1 (with relevant sources). On the figure of Aurelian in the Historia Augusta, see Homo 1904, pp. 33–37; Fisher 1929, pp. 125–149; Schwartz 1970, pp. 239–246; Saunders 1991, pp. 59–61; Chastagnol 1994, pp. 957–967; Zawadzki 1995, pp.  203–212; Lippold 1995, pp.  193–207; Watson 1999, pp.  209–211; Bonamente 2010, pp. 63–82; Pausch 2011, pp. 129–151. 4 5

4 

M. CASSIA

therefore inclined to disregard or not take seriously the exorbitant demands of the nameless uxor who allegedly demanded luxurious robes. On the other hand, however—and this is a seemingly dissonant fact compared to the morose character of Aurelian presented by the Historia Augusta, but actually perfectly congruent, as we shall see, with the political reality that characterized the delicate transitional phase between the reign of Aurelian and that of Tacitus (see below, Chap. 2, § 2)—as we learn from Aur. 49, 6, the emperor decided to establish or rather re-­ establish a senaculum for matrons: senatum sive senaculum matronis reddi voluerat, ita ut primae illic quae sacerdotia senatu auctore meruissent. He had intended to restore for matrons their senate or “senatine,” in which those who had been nominated by the senate to carry out priestly functions were to play a prominent role.

It was a matter of “restoring” the senate for the matrons, since, as is well known, a female senaculum had already been established by Elagabalus in the Severan dynasty (Heliog. 4, 1–3): deinde ubi primum diem senatus habuit, matrem suam in senatum rogari iussit. Quae cum venisset, vocata ad consulum subsellia scribendo adfuit, id est senatus consulti conficiendi testis, solusque omnium imperatorum fuit, sub quo mulier quasi clarissima loco viri senatum ingressa est. Fecit et in colle Quirinali senaculum, id est mulierum senatum, in quo ante fuerat conventus matronalis, solemnibus dumtaxat diebus et si umquam aliqua matrona consularis coniugii ornamentis esset donata, quod veteres imperatores adfinibus detulerunt et his maxime, quae nobilitatos maritos non habuerant, ne innobilitatae remanerent. Then, when he held his first session with the senate, [scil. Elagabalus] gave orders that his mother be invited to attend. Upon her arrival, she was invited to sit on one of the benches reserved for consuls and personally attended to the drafting of the minutes; in other words, she witnessed the drafting of the senatorial decree, and he was the only one among all the emperors under whose reign a woman, almost as if she were a clarissima, entered the senate to perform duties reserved for men. He also had a “senatine” built on the Quirinal Hill, i.e., a senate of women, just where Roman matrons used to meet in the past, but only on occasions of special solemnity, or whenever some matron received the insignia reserved for the brides of consuls, a privi-

1  LITERARY SOURCES 

5

lege that ancient emperors had sometimes granted to their relatives, especially to those who had married men without noble titles, so that they might not lose their rank.8

As Francesca Cenerini has pointed out regarding the account of Elagabalus in Historia Augusta—a complex account susceptible to many and varied interpretations—related to the establishment of an all-female senaculum, the fact that the female element was brought closer to the senate, the place par excellence of political debate in Rome, means that a new role was beginning to emerge for women “in the center of power.”9 This consideration by the scholar on the conventus matronalis could also apply perfectly well to the similar decision of Aurelian, who, more than fifty years after his predecessor, decided, certainly with good reason, to re-­ establish this place again in connection with the matronae to whom sacerdotia had been attributed by senatorial nomination.

2  Ulpius Crinitus In the wake of a flawed suggestion first made by Joseph Hilarius Eckhel as early as the late eighteenth century, and then by F. Fuchs in the late nineteenth century, that the anonymous uxor of the emperor who, as mentioned above (see supra, § 1) is indicated on other sources (i.e., coins and epigraphs) as Ulpia Severina, may have been the daughter of a certain Ulpius Crinitus, throughout the twentieth century, scholars such as Edmund Groag, Léon Homo, Joseph McCabe, Guido Barbieri, Luigi Pareti, Giovanna Sotgiu, Santo Mazzarino, Bianca Maria Felletti Maj, and Eugen Cizek did not actually seriously question this—indeed they took it as a given. Ulpius Crinitus is mentioned as many as twelve times exclusively in the Vita Aureliani of the Historia Augusta, where, however, it should be noted, this presumed father/daughter kinship is never expressly stated. Crinitus is said to have been a general in the army of Valerian,

 See Mazzarino 1956 (1986), vol. 2, p.  446: “senatine of women”; Straub 1966, pp. 221–240; Chastagnol 1979, pp. 24–26; Elefante 1982, pp. 91–107; for the customary use of senaculum see Graham 1987, p. 39, note 2. 9  Cenerini 2009, p. 137. On senaculum (Heliog. 4, 3) see also Valentini 2022, pp. 22–25. 8

6 

M. CASSIA

consul suffectus perhaps in AD 257, and even the adoptive father of the future emperor.10 In fact, in Aur. 10, 2–3 we read: [scil. Aurelianus] habuit ergo multos ducatus, plurimos tribunatus, vicarias ducum et tribunorum diversis temporibus prope quadraginta, usque adeo ut etiam Ulpii Criniti, qui se de Traiani genere referebat, et fortissimi re vera viri et Traiani simillimi, qui pictus est cum eodem Aureliano in templo Solis, quem Valerianus Caesaris loco habere instituerat, vicem sumeret, exercitum duceret, limitem restitueret, praedam militibus daret, Thrachias bubus, equis, mancipiis captis locupletaret, manubias in Palatio conlocaret, quingentos servos, duo milia vaccarum, equas mille, ovium decem milia, caprearum quindecim in privatam villam Valeriani congereret, tunc cum Ulpius Crinitus publice apud Byzantium sedenti Valeriano in thermis egit gratias dicens magnum de se iudicium habitum, quod eidem vicarium Aurelianum dedisset. Quare eum statuit adrogare. [Aurelian] thus held many offices as a general, a great many as a tribune, and nearly forty as a substitute for generals and tribunes on various occasions; he once even had to stand in for Ulpius Crinitus, who claimed to be a descendant of the family of Trajan, a truly valiant man and very much like Trajan, who was depicted together with Aurelian in the Temple of the Sun and whom Valerian had decided to take as his own Caesar: on that occasion he commanded the army, re-established the security of the borders, distributed the spoils to the soldiers, enriched the Thracians with oxen, horses, and slaves he had captured, placed the spoils of war on the Palatine Hill, and amassed in Valerian’s private villa five hundred slaves, two thousand cows, one thousand mares, ten thousand sheep, and fifteen thousand goats; it was then that Ulpius Crinitus publicly thanked Valerian, who was in the baths at Byzantium, stating that he had shown great consideration for him by giving him Aurelian as a substitute. And therefore, he decided to adopt him. 10  Eckhel 1797, p. 488; Fuchs 1895, p. 936: “daughter of Ulpius Crinitus or at least his relative.” Groag 1903, col. 1353; Homo 1904, pp.  34–35, footnote 3; 141, footnote 4; McCabe 1911, pp. 250–251, on the basis of literary sources alone and very little or even no knowledge of numismatic and epigraphic ones, had written that: “although we have already indicated the fate of Aurelian, we have not yet referred to the woman who shared his Imperial title and his great renown. Her personality is, in fact, entirely unknown; even her name is preserved for us only on the coinage. We may fairly conjecture that she disliked the plebeian ways of her husband and carried out the duties of a consort without enthusiasm. Daughter of a wealthy and prominent noble, Ulpius Crinitus”; Barbieri 1952, no. 1766; Pareti 1961, p. 71; Sotgiu 1961, p. 77; Mazzarino 1956 (1986), vol. 2, p. 578: “Aureliano had married a woman who boasted that she descended from the emperor Trajan”; Felletti Maj 1958, p. 269: “very probably the daughter of Ulpius Crinitus”; Cizek 1994, p. 226.

1  LITERARY SOURCES 

7

The Historia Augusta also “invented” the following: epistula Valeriani ad Aurelianum: “si esset alius, Aureliane iucundissime, qui Ulpii Criniti vicem posset implere, tecum de eius virtute ac sedulitate conferrem; nunc te cum ‹non meliorem› requirere potuissem, suscipe bellum a parte Nicopolis, ne nobis aegritudo Criniti obsit … Ego de te tantum deo favente spero, quantum de Traiano, si viveret, posset sperare res p.; neque enim minor est, in cuius locum vicemque te legi. Consulatum cum eodem Ulpio Crinito in annum sequentem a die undecimo kal. Iuniarum in  locum Gallieni et Valeriani sperare te convenit sumptu public.” Here is a letter from Valerian to Aurelian: “If, O my dearest Aurelian, there were another who could worthily replace Ulpius Crinitus, I would consult with you as to his worth and zeal; now, however, since I may still have to feel your absence, you take the command of the Nicopolis war, so that Crinitus’ illness may not do us harm … I, with the help of the gods, expect from you as much as the State could expect from Trajan, if he were still alive; for he whom I have chosen to replace you is no lesser man; moreover, you may reasonably hope to obtain at public expense, together with Ulpius Crinitus himself, the consulship for the coming year, beginning May 22, succeeding Gallienus and Valerian.”11

Ulpius Crinitus, defined in Aur. 13, 1 dux Illyriciani limitis et Thracici, in 14, 4–15, 1–2 was said to have delivered the following speech in the senate: agentibus igitur gratias omnibus circumstantibus Ulpius Crinitus surrexit atque hac oratione usus est: “apud maiores nostros, Valeriane Auguste, quod et familiae meae amicum ac proprium fuit, ab optimis quibusque in filiorum locum fortissimi viri semper electi sunt, ut vel senescentes familias vel fetus matrimoniis iam caducos substitutae fecunditas prolis ornaret. Hoc igitur, quod Cocceius Nerva in Traiano adoptando, quod Ulpius Traianus in Hadriano, quod Hadrianus in Antonino et ceteri deinceps proposita ­suggestione fecerunt, in adrogando Aureliano, quem mihi vicarium iudicii tui auctoritate fecisti, censui esse referendum. Iube igitur, ut lege agatur, sitque Aurelian heres sacrorum, nominis et bonorum totiusque iuris Ulpio Crinito iam consulari viro, ipse actutum te iudice consularis”. Longum est cuncta pertexere. Nam et actae sunt Crinito a Valeriano gratiae, et adoptio, ut solebat, impleta. Memini me in quodam libro Graeco legisse, quod tacen HA Aur. 11, 1; 11, 7–8.

11

8 

M. CASSIA

dum esse non credidi, mandatum esse Crinito a Valeriano, ut Aurelian adoptaretur, idcirco praecipue quod pauper esset; sed hoc in medio relinquendum puto. While all the surrounding people were expressing their thanks, up rose Ulpius Crinitus and delivered this speech: “Among our ancestors, O Valerian Augustus, according to a custom that was particularly dear to my family, the most notable personages always adopted as their sons the men of greatest worth, so that the fertility brought by a surrogate son could decorously compensate either for the aging of the lineage or the failure to bring forth offspring in marriages. This custom was followed by Cocceius Nerva in adopting Trajan, by Ulpius Trajan in adopting Hadrian, by Hadrian in adopting Antoninus, and gradually by all others; therefore, having before me the examples of the predecessors, I have seen fit to resume this custom in adopting Aurelian, whom by your authoritative decision you assigned as a substitute. Order therefore that we proceed by law and that Aurelian become heir to the sacred objects, the name and property as well as to all the legal rights of Ulpius Crinitus, formerly consul, he who now by your decision enters into the consular rank.” It would take too long to narrate the whole thing in detail. Valerian expressed his thanks to Crinitus and the adoption procedure was carried out according to custom. I remember having read in a Greek book—and I thought it appropriate to make mention of it—that it was Valerian who ordered Crinitus to adopt Aurelian, mainly because of the destitution in which he found himself. But I think it is better not to go into this matter.

The name of Ulpius Crinitus returns again in connection with the monetariorum bellum that occurred in 271, when Aurelian punished the mint workers of Rome—perhaps guilty of adulterating coins—with the temporary closure of the capital’s mint until the summer of 273 (see below). However, other scholars took a different position, among whom we should mention William H. Fisher, Ronald Syme, Timothy David Barnes, Werner Eck, Strobel, Tadeusz Zawadzki, Alaric Watson, André Chastagnol (in his excellent annotated edition of the Historia Augusta, on whose critical text we have relied for the quotations in this work), and David Rohrbacher. Over a long period of time between the 1920s and 2016, they continued to regard Ulpius Crinitus as a completely invented

1  LITERARY SOURCES 

9

character.12 Indeed, the author of the Historia Augusta—in the wake of a tendency typical of fourth-century Roman aristocrats, proud of their most distant ancestors and even inclined, if necessary, to fabricate some out of thin air—would not have hesitated to create ancestors for the emperors and/or for their most loyal supporters.13 For this reason, as seen in the Vita Aureliani, Ulpius Crinitus claims he belongs to the line of descent of Trajan (se de Traiani genere referebat). Indeed, his cognomen is one that Eutropius attributed precisely to Trajan: successit ei [i.e., Nervae] Ulpius Crinitus Traianus, natus Italicae in Hispania, familia antiqua magis quam clara. Nam pater eius primum consul fuit. He [i.e., Nerva] was succeeded by Ulpius Crinitus Trajan, born in Italica in Spain, from a family more ancient than renowned. Indeed, his father held the consulship for the first time.14

Eutropius then points out Hadrian’s shortcomings, who, jealous of the glory of his predecessor, statim … reliquit the three provinciae

12  See Fisher 1929, p.141 “this long section [i.e., HA Aur. 10, 2–15] does not contain a single detail of any historical worth. In all probability no such man as Ulpius Crinitus ever existed; and, if he did, he did not adopt Aurelian, since Aurelian’s name shows no trace of the alleged adoption… The Vita may have invented for the lady [i.e., Ulpia Severina] a father named Ulpius Crinitus and have made him into an adopted father instead of a father-in-law”; Syme 1971, pp. 4; 100–101; 220; Barnes 1972, pp. 155; 172; Eck 1974, col. 939; Martindale 1980, p. 481; PIR2 V 809, s.v. Ulpius Crinitus, p. 428; Chastagnol 1994, pp. cxiv; 965; 978, note 4, on Aurelian’s alleged replacement of the sick Crinitus (vicarius) at the command of the army fighting the Goths in Moesia; p.  1008, footnote 4, on the third consulship of Crinitus, “beaucoup pour un personnage inventé”; 1009, note 4, on the false adoption of Aurelian by Crinitus; Strobel 1998, p. 121; Zawadzki 1998, p. 24; Pausch 2010, pp. 122; 124–125; Rohrbacher 2016, pp. 135–136; 139. 13  Chastagnol 1994, pp. cxiii-cxiv: “les aristocrates romains du IVe siècle étaient fiers de leurs ascendants les plus lointains et s’en fabriquaient même au besoin. L’H.A. s’inspire d’eux en insistant sur les ancêtres des empereurs ou de leurs alliés… Dans la Vie d’Aurélien, un certain Ulpius Crinitus déclarait appartenir à la lignée de Trajan (Aur. 10, 2): son surnom (Crinitus) est l’un des noms qu’Eutrope (8, 2, 1) attribuait, peut-être à tort, à Trajan.” On the delicate, complex, and vast problem concerning the author of the Historia Augusta, see the extensive set developed by Savino 2017. 14  Eutr. 8, 2, 1. See Chastagnol 1994, p. 965: “l’imagination du rédacteur fleurit… dans les lettres et les discours, la plupart attribués à Valérien et relatifs à l’adoption d’Aurélien par cet Ulpius Crinitus dont le nom même révèle la supercherie.”

10 

M. CASSIA

incorporated into the Empire by Trajan, adding that he would have done the same with Dacia if his friends had not dissuaded him: defuncto Traiano Aelius Hadrianus creatus est princeps … Qui Traiani gloriae invidens statim provincias tres reliquit, quas Traianus addiderat, et de Assyria, Mesopotamia, Armenia revocavit exercitus ac finem imperii esse voluit Euphraten. Idem de Dacia facere conatum amici deterruerunt, ne multi cives Romani barbaris traderentur, propterea quia Traianus victa Dacia ex toto orbe Romano infinitas eo copias hominum transtulerat ad agros et urbes colendas. Dacia enim diuturno bello Decibali viris fuerat exhausta. When Trajan died, Aelius Hadrian was made Emperor … The latter, envious of Trajan’s glory, immediately abandoned the three provinces that Trajan had added and recalled armies from Assyria, Mesopotamia and Armenia and wanted the Euphrates to be the border of the Empire. He was about to do the same with Dacia but his friends convinced him not to, so as to prevent a large number of Roman citizens from being consigned to the barbarians, since Trajan, having subdued Dacia, had transferred endless quantities of men there from all over the Roman Empire to tend to the lands and cities. Indeed because of the long war with Decebalus, Dacia had been deprived of (its) resources.15

Watson’s hypothesis is striking and noteworthy: while considering Ulpius Crinitus to be one of the many fabrications of the Historia Augusta, nevertheless he thought it possible that such anecdotal evidence might allude, not even too veiledly, to the fact that Aurelian’s consort was Dacian or at any rate of Danubian origin (on this subject see infra, Chap. 2, § 2).16 Be that as it may, with the invention of Ulpius Crinitus the Historia Augusta creates a mischievous parallel between Trajan and Hadrian on the

 Eutr. 8, 6.  Watson 1999, p. 113.

15 16

1  LITERARY SOURCES 

11

one hand, and Crinitus and Aurelian—he who abandoned Trajan’s Dacia—on the other.17 Perhaps not coincidentally, Aurelian’s biographer makes further reference to Ulpius Crinitus contextually with the mention of Daciscorum, when Aurelian, in an apocryphal letter to his adoptive father Crinitus, reports on the famous revolt of the Roman mint workers in 271 and enumerates, among others, the soldiers originally from Dacia who died to suppress it: fuit sub Aureliano etiam monetariorum bellum Felicissimo rationali auctore. Quod acerrime severissimeque conpescuit, septem tamen milibus suorum militum interemptis, ut epistola docet missa ad Ulpium Crinitum ter consulem, qui eum ante adoptaverat: “Aurelian Augustus Ulpio patri. Quasi fatale quiddam mihi sit, ut omnia bella, quaecumque gessero, omnes motus ingravescant, ita etiam seditio intramurana bellum mihi gravissimum peperit. Monetarii auctore Felicissimo, ultimo servorum, cui procurationem fisci mandaveram, rebelles spiritus extulerunt. Hi conpressi sunt septem milibus Lembariorum et Riparensium et Castrianorum et Daciscorum interemptis. Unde apparet nullam mihi a dis inmortalibus datam sine difficultate victoriam.” Under Aurelian there was also a revolt sparked by the mint workers, headed by the rationalis Felicissimus. He suppressed it with great violence and harshness, at the cost, however, of the loss of seven thousand of his soldiers, as we are informed by a letter addressed to the three-time consul Ulpius Crinitus, by whom he had previously been adopted: “Aurelian Augustus to his father Ulpius. It seems to be my destiny that every war that I wage and every insurrection that I have to deal with take on ever more serious conse17  Estiot and Modonesi 1995, p. 9. See HA Aur. 39, 7: cum vastatum Illyricum ac Moesiam deperditam videret, provinciam Transdanuvinam Daciam a Traiano constitutam sublato exercitu et provincialibus reliquit, desperans eam posse retineri, abductosque ex ea populos in Moesia conlocavit appellavitque suam Daciam, quae nunc duas Moesias dividit, “seeing that by this time Illyricum was devastated and Mesia reduced to a ruinous state, [scil. Aurelian] abandoned Dacia, the Transdanubian province founded by Trajan, evacuating its army and provincial inhabitants, considering that it was now no longer possible to continue holding it; the population evacuated from it was settled by him in Mesia, in the region he called his Dacia, the one that now divides the two provinces of Mesia.” For the definition of the boundaries see Vetters 1950, pp. 3–18; Syme 1971, p. 223. “This new territorial organization, carried out in the first year of his rule, reveals a long-term defensive project, which goes beyond the responses, albeit effective, to the incursions of external populations and is part of an overall strategy that soon appears to be that of the reconstitution of the unity of the Empire, but also of its consolidation”: Silvestrini 1993, p. 189.

12 

M. CASSIA

quences, so even the city uprising has sparked an extremely tough war for me. The clerks at the mint, instigated by Felicissimus, the last of the servants, to whom I had entrusted the office of procurator fisci, rebelled. They were crushed at the price of the loss of seven thousand men, among Lembarians, Riparians, Castrians and Dacians. From this it is clear that the immortal gods have not granted me any victory without difficulty.”18

Other sources also record this event; however, they make no mention of the milites Dacisci who allegedly lost their lives to quell the riot: neque secus intra urbem monetae opifices deleti, qui, cum auctore Felicissimo rationali nummariam notam corrosissent, poenae metu, bellum fecerant usque eo grave, uti per Coelium montem congressi septem fere bellatorum milia confecerint. And not any differently within the city the mint workers were annihilated, who, at the instigation of the rationalis Felicissimus, had falsified the coinage and, in fear of punishment, had waged such a terrible war that, barricading themselves on Caelian Hill, they had killed nearly seven thousand soldiers.19 Hoc imperante etiam in Urbe monetarii rebellaverunt vitiatis pecuniis et Felicissimo rationali interfecto. Quos Aurelian victos ultima crudelitate compescuit. During his [i.e., Aurelian’s] reign, even in Rome, the mint workers rebelled, after counterfeiting coins and killing the rationalis Felicissimus. Once the rioters were overpowered, Aurelian repressed them with the utmost harshness.20 Hoc tempore in urbe Roma monetarii rebellarunt, quos Aurelian victos ultima crudelitate compescuit. At this time, in the city of Rome, the mint workers rebelled; after overpowering them, Aurelian repressed them with the utmost harshness.21 Μονιτάριοι‧ οἱ περὶ τὸ νόμισμα τεχνῖται‧ οἳ ἐπὶ Αὐρηλιανοῦ διέφθειραν τὸ νόμισμα καὶ τὸν ἴδιον ἄρχοντα Φηλικήσιμον ἀνελόντες ἐμφύλιον ἐγείρουσι  HA Aur. 38, 2–4.  Aur. Vict. Caes. 35, 6. 20  Eutr. 9, 14. 21  Epit. Caes. 35, 4. 18 19

1  LITERARY SOURCES 

13

πόλεμον‧ οὓς μόλις Αὐρηλιανὸς χειρωσάμενος ὑπερβαλλούσῃ κολάσεων ὠμότητι κατειργάσατο. Mint workers: the artisans (dealing) in coinage; those who, under Aurelian, altered the currency and, getting rid of their own overseer, Felicissimus, provoked a civil war; Aurelian, after barely overpowering them, finished them off with excessive harshness of punishment.22 Sub quo Victorinus, Vabalathus et mater eius Zenobia, vel Antiochus, Romae Felicissimus, duo Tetrici pater et filius, qui se eidem dederunt et post purpuram iudices provinciarum facti sunt, sive Faustinus Treveris tyranni fuerunt. Under him [i.e., Aurelian] there were the tyrants Victorinus, Vaballathus and his mother, Zenobia, or Antiochus, in Rome Felicissimus, the two Tetricians, father and son, who surrendered to him [i.e., to Aurelian] and after (having assumed) the purple were elected iudices of the provinces, or Faustinus in Trier.23 22  Suda Μ 1223, s.v. Μονιτάριοι; see Φ 340, s.v. Φιλικήσιμος‧ ἄρχων ἐπὶ Αὐρηλιανοῦ βασιλέως, “Felicissimus: superintendent under the emperor Aurelian.” 23  Pol. Silv. 1, 49, pp. 521–522 Mommsen 1892. See Homo 1904, pp. 158–164; Gatti 1961, pp.  93–97; Callu 1969, pp.  230–237 and 330–332, but, in particular, 231–232; Turcan 1969, pp. 948–959; Bernareggi 1974, pp. 182–191; Cubelli 1992, pp. 30, on the beginnings of the revolt in 271; 40–43, on the figure of Felicissimus; 45, on the preference given to the hypothesis that the mint workers together with Felicissimus actually “stole” gold coins or precious metal rather than “adulterated” the coinage; 49, on the involvement of the senate in the mint workers’ revolt; Estiot 1995, pp.  23–24; Perassi 2014, pp.  205–206. Cubelli 1992, pp. 7–11; 18–19, in addition to providing an overview of ancient sources, he discussed the text of Malal. chron. 12, 30, p. 231 Thurn 2000: ἐν δὲ τῷ μέλλειν αὐτὸν ἐξιέναι ἀπὸ Ἀντιοχείας τῆς μεγάλης ἐστασίασαν οἱ λεγόμενοι Μονητάριοι Ἀντιοχείας ἐπὶ αὐτοῦ, κράζοντες διὰ συνηθείας τινάς. Καὶ ἀγανακτήσας κατ’αὐτῶν ἐτιμωρήσατο αὐτούς, “when (Aurelian) was about to leave Antioch the Great, the so-called monetarii of Antioch rebelled against him, loudly making certain demands as usual. And he, angry with them, punished them.” The account is similar to that of the other sources, but the place of the revolt is Antioch. Peachin 1983, pp. 325–335, on the basis of this passage, assumed the existence of two uprisings, one occurring in Rome and the other in Antioch. John Malalas, a native of the Syriac city, would have had more reliable information; the annexation of Antioch to the kingdom of Palmyra may have prompted the rebellion, and since there is no evidence of actual coinage adulteration in Rome, the Latin sources may have preserved a distorted reconstruction of events; Cubelli 1992, pp.  22–24, did not accept Peachin’s assumptions, as Malalas, not usually considered to be a very reliable source, makes no mention of the rationalis Felicissimus; the scholar therefore proposed to amend the text, expunging the second citation of Ἀντιοχεία, and to interpret the passage as a reference to the outbreak of the revolt in Rome as the emperor was moving away from Antioch, that is, “when Aurelian was about to leave Antioch the Great.”

14 

M. CASSIA

Returning to the “good” emperor Marcus Ulpius Traianus, he is thus repeatedly linked, including through nomen, to Ulpius Crinitus, “a valiant man and truly similar to Trajan,” while Aurelian, adoptive son of Crinitus, is never shown, either on coins or in epigraphs, to be an Ulpius. However, in imagining an excellent adoptive father for Aurelian, the Historia Augusta may have chosen the nomen Ulpius certainly to strengthen the link with the adoptive emperor of the second century, that is, Trajan, but perhaps also to allude to the nomen of the “anonymous” emperor’s wife. In short, Ulpia Severina could not have been the daughter of this fictional character, but, on the contrary, as stated by Estiot and Modonesi, “it is to the empress that Ulpius Crinitus owes his existence”: Aurelian’s biographer knew of some connection between the emperor and the gens Ulpia, but, unaware that it was Severina, he made up for the lack of information by the introduction of a fictitious character, Ulpius Crinitus, “who embodies the missing link.”24 Based on a statement by Joannes Zonaras, according to whom Aurelian married one of the daughters of the Palmyrene Queen Zenobia, while the other daughters married Roman nobles (ἔνιοι … φασι … μίαν δὲ τῶν θυγατέρων αὐτῆς [i.e., τῆς βασιλίσσης Ζηνοβίας] λαβεῖν εἰς γυναῖκα τὸν Αὐρηλιανόν, τὰς δὲ λοιπὰς ἐπισήμοις τῶν Ῥωμαίων συζεῦξαι),25 Callu has on several occasions advanced the hypothesis—admittedly rejected by the vast majority of scholars—that this daughter of Zenobia, taken prisoner

 Estiot and Modonesi 1995, pp. 9–10.  Zon. 12, 27, vol. 3, pp. 152–153 Dindorf 1870.

24 25

1  LITERARY SOURCES 

15

and married in the summer of 272, could even be identified with Ulpia Severina.26 This information, reported exclusively by the Byzantine historian, is indeed fictitious, but it may show on the one hand a willingness to connect East and West with the bonds of matrimony, finally pacified and ruled by a single couple, and on the other hand, perhaps even the intent of remotely evoking the exploits of Alexander the Great, husband of the Bactrian princess Roxana. Nevertheless, this account of Zonaras certainly remains very interesting, especially if one takes into account the unequal treatment given to some third-century Roman empresses in the Historia Augusta; on the one hand, there are those, including Severina, who are not explicitly mentioned by name or even connoted negatively, and the other hand, a woman like the foreign Zenobia has an entire passage in 26  Callu 1996, p. 145, footnote 47: “osera-t-on penser que cette jeune femme est notre Séverine dont le nom serait un hommage à l’empereur, époux de Domna et patron historique de Septimia Zenobia? Condamner la rumeur en tant que fable importe assez peu, car, même extravagante, cette légende a pu contribuer à la damnatio du silence chez des historiens horrifies par cette éventuelle contamination. Le nomen Ulpia accordé par des inscriptions à la coniux de l’empereur a pu être une reaction d’hyper-latinisation”; see Callu 2000, pp. 199 e note 59–60: “au dire de Zonaras, Aurélien épousa une fille de Zénobie. Pourquoi ne serait-ce pas cette Ulpia Seuerina Mater Castrorum et Senatus et Patriae dont l’Augustat en 274 donne le signal d’un monnayage étendu à l’ensemble de l’Empire?”; 200: “probablement fille de Zenobie”; against Watson 1999, pp. 113: “incredible story”; 252, note 57: “the suggestion that Severina might herself have been the daughter of Zenobia… is far-fetched”; Perassi 2002, p.  338: “extravagant assertion”; White 2015, p.  43. Callu’s hypothesis was instead accepted by Syvänne 2020, p. 141. On the possible presence of Zenobia’s descendants in Rome see Eutr. 9, 13, 2: Zenobia autem posteros, qui adhuc manent, Romae reliquit, “Zenobia, on the other hand, left descendants in Rome present to this day”; Hier. chron. a. Abr. 2293 (274 AD), p. 223 Helm 1956: et Zenobia in urbe summo honore consenuit. A qua hodieque Romae Zenobiae familia nuncupatur, “and Zenobia grew old in the city (of Rome, held) in the highest respect. And it is from her that Zenobia’s family in Rome is named”; HA Trig. Tyr. 30, 27: huic ‹vita› ab Aureliano concessa est, ferturque vixisse cum liberis matronae iam more Romanae data sibi possessione in Tiburti, quae hodieque Zenobia dicitur, non longe ab Hadriani palatio atque ab eo loco, cui nomen est Concae, “Aurelian spared her life, and it is said that she lived together with her children, by now in the manner of a Roman matron, on an estate allotted to her near Tivoli, which to this day is called Zenobia, not far from Hadrian’s palace and the place named Conca”; Georg. Syncell. ecl. chron. p.  470, ll. 5–7 Mosshammer 1984: Ζηνοβίαν δὲ χειρωσάμενος εἰς Ῥώμην ἤγαγε, καὶ φιλλανθρωπίᾳ χρησάμενος πολλῇ συνάπτει ταύτην ἐνδόξως ἀνδρὶ τῶν ἐν γερουσίᾳ, “but, having subdued Zenobia, (Aurelian led her) to Rome and, treating her with great magnanimity, joined her gloriously (in marriage) with a man of the senate”; on this subject see Baldini 1978, pp. 145–149.

16 

M. CASSIA

Trig. Tyr. 30, 1–27 dedicated to her, and of whom an overall rather positive judgment is provided: omnis iam consumptus est pudor, si quidem fatigata re p. eo usque perventum est, ut Gallieno nequissime agente optime etiam mulieres imperarent, et quidem peregrinae. ‹Peregrina› enim, nomine Zenobia, de qua multa iam dicta sunt, quae se de Cleopatrarum Ptolemaeorumque gente iactaret, post Odenatum maritum imperiali sagulo perfuso per umeros, habitu Didonis ornata, diademate etiam accepto, nomine filiorum Herenniani et Timolai diutius, quam femineus sexus patiebatur, imperavit. Si quidem Gallieno adhuc regente rem p. regale mulier superba munus obtinuit et Claudio bellis Gothicis occupato vix denique ab Aureliano victa et triumphata concessit in iura Romana. Extat epistola Aureliani, quae captivae mulieri testimonium fert. Nam cum a quibusdam reprehend. retur, quod mulierem veluti ducem aliquem vir fortissimus triumphasset, missis ad senatum populumque Romanum litteris hac se adtestatione defendit: “audio, p. c., mihi obici, quod non virile munus impleverim Zenobiam triumphando. Ne illi, qui me reprehendunt, satis laudarent, si scirent, quae illa sit mulier, quam prudens in consiliis, quam constans in dispositionibus, quam erga milites gravis, quam larga, cum necessitas postulet, quam tristis, cum severitas poscat.” We are truly in the very depths of shame, since the crisis that troubled the State went so far that, in the face of the shameful behavior of Gallienus, even women ruled excellently, and what is more, foreign ones. There was a foreigner, in fact, named Zenobia, about whom many things have already been narrated, who boasted that she descended from the lineage of the Cleopatras and Ptolemies, and after the death of her husband Odenathus, took upon her shoulders the imperial mantle, adorned herself in the manner of Dido, and additionally placed on her head a diadem; she held power on behalf of her sons Herennianus and Timolaus longer than would have been compatible with her being a woman. That haughty woman held the royal power while Gallienus was still in charge of the State, and then while Claudius was engaged in the wars against the Goths, until finally, with difficulty overpowered by Aurelian and made to walk in the triumphal parade, she had to submit to the authority of Rome. We have in our possession a letter from Aurelian that mentions this woman when she was already a prisoner. For since he was being reproached by certain people that a man as valiant as himself had celebrated the triumph over a woman, as if she had been some

1  LITERARY SOURCES 

17

general, he sent a letter to the Roman senate and the people, in which he justified himself in these terms: “I hear it said, O senators, that it is held against me that I allegedly did not behave like a man by triumphing over Zenobia. But surely those very ones who criticize me would praise me highly if they knew what kind of woman we had to deal with, how shrewd she is in making decisions, how firm in her plans, how strict in her dealings with the soldiers, how generous where necessity requires, how harsh, should discipline dictate it.”27

Thus, in the general framework of destruction and loss of omnis pudor, a mulier and a peregrina to boot, could stand as an alternative, indeed counterbalance, to the emperor Gallienus, nequissimus, and—once she became a widow, donned the sagulum imperiale and set her diadema on her head—she managed to reign longer than femineus sexus patiebatur, precisely because, though she was a mulier, she was connoted by “manly” traits such as prudentia, constantia, gravitas, as well as largitas and tristitia depending on the circumstances. As Aurelian would have written in the epistle attributed to him, it could therefore happen that, under exceptional circumstances such as an unworthy emperor on the throne of Rome and/or the state of supervening widowhood of the ruler, a woman could hold power as well as (and perhaps even better than?) a man. If this was true for a foreign queen of an enemy State, why should it not have been equally true for a legitimate Augusta consort and widow of the reigning emperor on the throne of Rome?

27  HA Trig. Tyr. 30, 1–5. There are numerous essays and articles that specifically examine Zenobia’s role and image in the Historia Augusta: Wallinger 1990, pp.  142–143, who stresses the connections between the Suetonian description of Augustus and that of the Queen; Frézouls 1994, pp. 133–136; Gaggero 1996, pp. 211–222; Bussi 2003, pp. 261–268; Burgersdijk 2004–2005, pp.  139–151; Gaggero 2005, pp.  111–119; Lippold 2006, pp. 355–369; Krause 2007, pp. 311–334; Girotti 2011, pp. 195–209; Molinier Arbo 2014, pp.  183–203; Jones 2015–2016, pp.  221–233, who highlighted the correlation between power, gender, and ethnicity; Molinier Arbo 2016, pp. 47–80, especially pp. 65–79. With regard to the description of Aurelian’s triumph over Zenobia see Alföldi 1964, pp.  1–8; Alföldi-Rosenbaum 1994, pp. 5–10; Zecchini 1998, pp. 349–358. On the image of Zenobia as a foreign Queen warrior see Engster 2011, pp. 199–225. On Zenobia’s insolentia in the Historia Augusta, see Girotti 2022, pp. 386–387.

18 

M. CASSIA

Bibliography Alföldi 1964: A.  Alföldi, Zwei Bemerkungen zur Historia Augusta, in J.  Straub, A.  Alföldi (eds.), Historia Augusta Colloquium (Bonn 1963), Bonn 1964, pp. 1–8. Alföldi-Rosenbaum 1994: E.  Alföldi-Rosenbaum, Heliogabalus’ and Aurelian’s Stag Chariots and the Caesar Contorniates, in G.  Bonamente, F.  Paschoud (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquium Genevense, Munera 1, Bari 1994, pp. 5–10. Arena 2021: G. Arena, La cura del potere e il potere della cura. Studi su Galeno, Roma 2021. Baldini 1978: A.  Baldini, Discendenti a Roma da Zenobia? in ZPE 30, 1978, pp. 145–149. Barbieri 1952: G. Barbieri, L’albo senatorio da Settimio Severo a Carino (193–285), Roma 1952. Barnes 1972: T.D. Barnes, Some Persons in the Historia Augusta, in Phoenix 26, 2, 1972, pp. 140–182. Bernareggi 1974: E. Bernareggi, Familia monetalis, in NAC 3, 1974, pp. 177–192. Bonamente 2010: G. Bonamente, Optimi principes-diui nella Historia Augusta, in L.  Galli Milić, N.  Hecquet-Noti (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquium Genevense in honorem F.  Paschoud septuagenarii. Les traditions historiographiques de l’Antiquité tardive: idéologie, propagande, fiction, réalité, Munera 30, Bari 2010, pp. 63–82. Burgersdijk 2004–2005: D.  Burgersdijk, Zenobia’s Biography in the Historia Augusta, in Talanta 36–37, 2004–2005, pp. 139–151. Bussi 2003: S.  Bussi, Zenobia/Cleopatra: immagine e propaganda, in RIN 104, 2003, pp. 261–268. Callu 1969: J.-P. Callu, La politique monétaire des empereurs romains de 238 à 311, Paris 1969. Callu 1996: J.-P. Callu, Aurélius Victor et l’interrègne de 275: problèmes historiques et textuels, in G. Bonamente, M. Mayer (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquia IV. Colloquium Barcinonense MCMXCIII, Munera 7, Bari 1996, pp. 133–145. Callu 2000: J.-P. Callu, Pia Felix, in RN 155, 2000, pp. 189–207. Cassia 2020: M.  Cassia, La seta nella Historia Augusta: soltanto un simbolo di luxus?, in Commentaria Classica 7, 2020, pp. 87–113. Cenerini 2009: F. Cenerini, Dive e donne. Mogli, madri, figlie e sorelle degli imperatori romani da Augusto a Commodo, Imola 2009. Chastagnol 1979: A. Chastagnol, Les femmes dans l’ordre sénatorial: titulature et rang social, in Revue Historique 103, 262, 1979, pp. 3–28. Chastagnol 1994: A. Chastagnol, Histoire Auguste. Les empereurs romains des IIe et IIIe siècles, Paris 1994. Cizek 1994: E. Cizek, L’empereur Aurélien et sons temps, Paris 1994.

1  LITERARY SOURCES 

19

Cubelli 1992: V. Cubelli, Aureliano imperatore: la rivolta dei monetieri e la cosiddetta riforma monetaria, Firenze 1992. Eck 1974: W. Eck, s.v. Ulpius 33, in RE Suppl. XIV, 1974, col. 939. Eckhel 1797: J.H. Eckhel, Doctrina numorum veterum, vol. 7, Vindobonae 1797. Elefante 1982: M.  Elefante, A proposito del “senaculum mulierum” (SHA Ant. Hel. 4, 3; Aurel. 49, 6), in RAAL Napoli n.s. 57, 1982, pp. 91–107. Engster 2011: D. Engster, Das römische Frauenideal und die Vorstellung von weiblichen Kämpfern, in J.E.  Fries, U.  Rambuschek (eds.), Von wirtschaftlicher Macht und militärischer Stärke: Beiträge zur archäologischen Geschlechterforschung. Bericht der 4. Sitzung der AG Geschlechterforschung auf der 79. Jahrestagung des Nordwestdeutschen Verbandes für Altertumsforschung e.V. in Detmold 2009, Münster-New York 2011, pp. 199–225. Estiot 1995: S.  Estiot, Aureliano. Volume II. 1, in J.-B.  Giard (ed.), Ripostiglio della Venèra. Nuovo Catalogo Illustrato, Roma 1995. Estiot, Modonesi 1995: S. Estiot, D. Modonesi, La dedica veronese a Vlpia Severina Avgvsta, in Estiot 1995a, pp. 9–10. Felletti Maj 1958: B.M.  Felletti Maj, Iconografia romana imperiale da Severo Alessandro a M. Aurelio Carino (222–285 d.C.), Roma 1958. Fisher 1929: W.H.  Fisher, The Augustan Vita Aureliani, in JRS 19, 1929, pp. 125–149. Frézouls 1994: E. Frézouls, Le rôle politique des femmes dans l’Histoire Auguste, in G. Bonamente, F. Paschoud (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquium Genevense, Munera 1, Bari 1994, pp. 121–136. Fuchs 1895: F. Fuchs, s.v. Aurelianus (L. Domitius Aurelianus), in DE I, Roma 1895, pp. 930–937. Gaggero 1996: G.  Gaggero, Memorie del passato nella propaganda politica di Zenobia, in A.F. Bellezza (ed.), Un incontro con la storia nel centenario della nascita di Luca de Regibus: 1895–1995. Atti del pomeriggio di Studio a Vogogna d’Ossola, 1 luglio 1995, Genova 1996, pp. 211–222. Gaggero 2005: G. Gaggero, Nuove considerazioni su alcuni modelli femminili di Zenobia, in L. Santi Amantini (ed.), Dalle parole ai fatti: relazioni interstatali e comunicazione politica nel mondo antico, Roma 2005, pp. 111–119. Gatti 1961: C.  Gatti, La politica monetaria di Aureliano, in PP 77, 1961, pp. 93–97. Girotti 2011: B. Girotti, I ritratti di Zenobia nella Historia Augusta: tra simbologia e inventio, in I. Baldini, A.L. Morelli (eds.), Oggetti-simbolo: produzione, uso e significato nel mondo antico, Ornamenta 3, Bologna 2011, pp. 195–209. Girotti 2022: B. Girotti, Consapevolezza e inconsapevolezza dei limiti delle proprie azioni: l’insolentia nella storiografia tardoantica, in M. Cassia, G. Arena (eds.), Res et verba. Scritti in onore di Claudia Giuffrida, STUSMA 18, Milano 2022, pp. 383–395.

20 

M. CASSIA

Graham 1987: G.G. Graham, Senacula and Meeting Places of the Roman Senate, in CJ 83, 1, 1987, pp. 39–50. Groag 1903: E. Groag, s.v. Domitius 36, in RE V 1, 1903, coll. 1347–1419. Helm 1956: R. Helm, Eusebius Werke. VII. Die Chronik des Hieronymus, GCS 47, Berlin 1956. Hild 1877: J.-A. Hild, s.v. Saturnalia, in Ch. Daremberg, E. Saglio, Dictionnaire des Antiquités Grecques et Romaines, vol. IV 2, Paris 1877, pp. 1080–1083. Homo 1904: L.  Homo, Essai sur le règne de l’empereur Aurélien (270–275), Paris 1904. Jones 2015–2016: P. Jones, Rewriting Power: Zenobia, Aurelian, and the Historia Augusta, in CW 109, 2, 2015–2016, pp. 221–233. Klotz 1923: A. Klotz, s.v. Sigillaria, in RE II A 2, 1923, col. 2278. Kolb 1976: F. Kolb, Kleidungsstücke in der Historia Augusta: Textkonjekturen und -emendationen zu AS 33, 4.41, 1. A 45, 5, mit einem Exkurs über die Dalmatica, in A.  Alföldi (ed.), Bonner Historia Augusta Colloquium 1972/1974, Bonn 1976, pp. 153–171. Krause 2007: Ch. Krause, Herrschaft und Geschlechterhierarchie: zur Funktionalisierung der Zenobiagestalt und anderer Usurpatoren in den Viten der Historia Augusta, in Philologus 151, 2, 2007, pp. 311–334. Lippold 1995: A.  Lippold, Kaiser Aurelian (270–275): seine Beziehungen zur Stadt Rom und zum Senat im Spiegel der Historia Augusta, in G. Bonamente, G.  Paci (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquium Maceratense, Munera 4, Bari 1995, pp. 193–207. Lippold 2006: A. Lippold, Rolle und Bild der Frauen in der Historia Augusta, in Ch. Ulf (ed.), Frauen und Geschlechter, vol. 1, Köln-Wien 2006, pp. 355–369. Martindale 1980: J.R.  Martindale, Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire: Addenda et Corrigenda to Volume I, in Historia 29, 4, 1980, pp. 474–497. Mazzarino 1956 (1986): S.  Mazzarino, L’Impero romano, vol. 2, Roma-Bari 1956 (1986). McCabe 1911: J. McCabe, The Empresses of Rome, New York 1911. Molinier Arbo 2014: A.  Molinier Arbo, Zénobie reine de Palmyre: quand une Orientale prend le pouvoir dans l’Histoire Auguste, in A.  Gonzalès, M.T.  Schettino (eds.), L’idéalisation de l’autre: faire un modèle d’un anti-­ modèle. Actes du 2e Colloque SoPHiA tenu à Besançon les 26–28 novembre 2012, Besançon 2014, pp. 183–203. Molinier Arbo 2016: A. Molinier Arbo, Femmes de pouvoir entre Orient et Occident aux derniers siècles de l’Empire: réflexions autour du témoignage de l’Histoire Auguste, in Cenerini, Mastrorosa 2016, pp. 47–80. Mosshammer 1984: A.  Mosshammer, Georgius Syncellus. Ecloga chronographi ca, Leipzig 1984. Neri 1999: V. Neri, Considerazioni sul tema della luxuria nella Historia Augusta, in F.  Paschoud, Historiae Augustae Colloquium Genevense 1998, Bari 1999, pp. 217–240.

1  LITERARY SOURCES 

21

Pareti 1961: L.  Pareti, Storia di Roma e del mondo romano. VI.  Da Decio a Costantino (251–337 d.Cr.), Torino 1961. Paschoud 1996: F.  Paschoud, Histoire Auguste. V. 1. Vies d’Aurélien, Tacite, Paris 1996. Pausch 2010: D.  Pausch, Libellus non tam diserte quam fideliter scriptus? Unreliable Narration in the Historia Augusta, in Ancient Narrative 8, 2010, pp. 115–135. Pausch 2011: D. Pausch, Aurelian in der Historia Augusta: ein Kaiser und seine Biographie zwischen Literatur- und Geschichtswissenschaft, in U.  Egelhaaf-­ Gaiser, D.  Pausch, M.  Rühl (eds.), Kultur der Antike: transdisziplinäres Arbeiten in den Altertumswissenschaften, Berlin 2011, pp. 129–151. Peachin 1983: M.  Peachin, Johannes Malalas and the Moneyers’ Revolt, in C.  Deroux (ed.), Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History, vol. 3, Bruxelles 1983, pp. 325–335. Perassi 2002: C. Perassi, I ritratti monetali di Ulpia Severina, in RIN 103, 2002, pp. 337–372. Perassi 2014: C. Perassi, Ritratti monetali delle Augustae nel III secolo d.C.: una crisi di genere?, in Un confronto drammatico con il XXI secolo: l’Impero romano del III secolo nella crisi monetaria. Atti del Convegno, Biassono 9 giugno 2012, Biassono 2014, pp. 193–232. Rohrbacher 2016: D. Rohrbacher, The Play of Allusion in the Historia Augusta, Madison 2016. Saunders 1991: R.T. Saunders, A Biography of the Emperor Aurelian (A.D. 270–275), Diss. University of Cincinnati 1991. Savino 2017: E. Savino, Ricerche sulla Historia Augusta, Pozzuoli-Napoli 2017. Schwartz 1970: J.  Schwartz, Sur le mode de composition de la Vita Aureliani, in G. Alföldy, J. Straub (eds.), Bonner Historia Augusta Colloquium 1968/1969, Bonn 1970, pp. 239–246. Silvestrini 1993: M.  Silvestrini, Il potere imperiale da Severo Alessandro ad Aureliano, in A.  Carandini, L.  Cracco Ruggini, A.  Giardina (eds.), Storia di Roma. III.  L’età tardoantica. 1. Crisi e trasformazioni, Torino 1993, pp. 155–191. Sotgiu 1961: G. Sotgiu, Studi sull’epigrafia di Aureliano, Sassari 1961. Straub 1966: J.  Straub, Senaculum id est mulierum senatus, in J.  Straub (ed.), Historia Augusta Colloquium 1964–1965, Bonn 1966, pp. 221–240. Strobel 1998: K.  Strobel, Ulpia Severina Augusta: eine Frau in der Reihe der illyrischen Kaiser, in E.  Frézouls, H.  Jouffroy (eds.), Les empereurs illyriens. Actes du Colloque de Strasbourg 11–13 octobre 1990, Strasbourg 1998, pp. 119–153. Syme 1971: R.  Syme, Emperors and Biography. Studies in the Historia Augusta, Oxford 1971.

22 

M. CASSIA

Syvänne 2020: I. Syvänne, Aurelian and Probus: The Soldier Emperors Who Saved Rome, Philadelphia (Great Britain) 2020. Thurn 2000: I. Thurn, Ioannis Malalae Chronographia, Corpus Fontium Histo riae Byzantinae. Series Berolinensis 35, Berolini-Novi Eboraci 2000. Turcan 1969: R. Turcan, Le délit des monétaires rebellés contre Aurélien, in Latomus 28, 1969, pp. 948–959. Valentini 2022: A.  Valentini, Ornamenta delle matrone, ordo matronarum e i matronalia nella Roma repubblicana e in età augustea, in B. Girotti, G. Marsili, M.E. Pomero (eds.), Il potere dell’immagine e della parola. Elementi distintivi dell’aristocrazia femminile da Roma a Bisanzio, Spoleto 2022, pp. 23–38. Vetters 1950: H. Vetters, Dacia Ripensis, Wien 1950. Wallinger 1990: E. Wallinger, Die Frauen in der Historia Augusta, Wien 1990. Watson 1999: A.  Watson, Aurelian and the Third Century, London-New York 1999. White 2015: J.F.  White, The Roman Emperor Aurelian. Restorer of the World, Barnsley 2015. Zawadzki 1995: T. Zawadzki, Princeps necessarius magis quam bonus (HA A 37, 1): quelques remarques sur la morale politique dans l’antiquité tardive, in M.  Weinmann-Walser (ed.), Historische Interpretationen: Gerold Walser zum 75. Geburtstag dargebracht von Freunden, Kollegen und Schülern, Stuttgart 1995, pp. 203–212. Zawadzki 1998: T.  Zawadzki, L’Histoire Auguste et les empereurs illyriens (249–282), in E. Frézouls, H. Jouffroy (eds.), Les empereurs illyriens. Actes du Colloque de Strasbourg 11–13 octobre 1990, Strasbourg 1998, pp. 20–27. Zecchini 1998: G. Zecchini, I cervi, le Amazzoni e il trionfo “gotico” di Aure liano, in G.  Bonamente, G.  Heim, J.-P.  Callu (a cura di), Historiae Augustae Colloquium Argentoratense, Munera 11, Bari 1998, pp. 349–358.

CHAPTER 2

Numismatic Sources

1   The Venèra Hoard If we have to delve deep in the literary sources for details about Severina, numismatic ones, on the other hand, enable us to draw a completely different picture of the empress and one that is decidedly much more precise: indeed, the discovery in the famous Venèra hoard of a large number of numerals issued exclusively in the name of Augusta has led some scholars to advance the concrete hypothesis of a government held by Severina alone in the period between the death of Aurelian and the rise of Marcus Claudius Tacitus. The hoard was unearthed in December 1876  in a small field called “Borghetto” owned by Antonio Seghetto, in the place called Venèra, south of Verona, a few kilometers (km) from Cerea, on the road between Sanguinetto and Casaleone (on land administratively included in the latter municipality), in an area served by roads of regional importance such as the Via Mantova-Este. The coins were stored inside two wine amphorae for transport, 1 meter (m) high and 45 centimeters (cm) wide, buried at a distance of about 12 m from each other. The first amphora was accidentally discovered at a depth of 1.5 m around December 10 by seven men who were intent on digging a hole to make an icehouse; they immediately divided up the coins. On December 22, the second amphora came to light at a depth of about 40 cm. We know about the circumstances of the find and how the coins were recovered thanks to the correspondence and © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 M. Cassia, The Roman Empress Ulpia Severina, Queenship and Power, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28651-3_2

23

24 

M. CASSIA

documents of some of the people involved in the matter: Giovanni Battista Bertoli, landowner and mayor of Casaleone at the time of the discovery, who had first obtained permission from the owner of the land in question to carry out the excavations and to keep the found objects (Bertoli was later credited with the reacquisition of most of the coins found in the first receptacle which initially went missing because they had been stolen by the peasants); Stefano De Stefani (appointed royal inspector of excavations and monuments for the district of Legnago and Sanguinetto in 1876), to whom we owe the recovery of a considerable number of specimens that at first had passed into the hands of private individuals; and Luigi Pigorini (“father” of palethnology in Italy and capo sezione of the General Directorate of Museums and Excavations of Antiquity with delegated authority for pre-protohistoric finds throughout Italy), who was officially assigned to take charge of the discovery by Giuseppe Fiorelli, the director general of excavations and museums of the Kingdom of Italy. On March 20, 1877, after a long and complex series of negotiations aimed at averting the usual practices of exchanges, purchases, and sales, De Stefani, accompanied by Antonio Bertoldi, curator of the Civic Museum of Verona for the archeology and numismatics section, transported the sacks containing the coins under armed escort from Bertoli’s home to Palazzo Pompei, the old headquarters of the Museum. Further coins were subsequently recovered until they reached a total of 46,442 units; they were catalogued by the distinguished Veronese philologist, archeologist, and numismatist Luigi Adriano Milani on behalf of the Ministry of Public Education and published between 1880 and 1886.1 The contents of the hoard, now housed at the Castelvecchio Museum in Verona, include specimens dating from the reign of Gordian III up to the diarchy of Diocletian and Maximian Herculius. According to Milani, the hoard was a military coffer intended for the payment of soldiers and would have contained eight days’ pay for an entire legion (based on an average estimate of one Antoninianus per day per legionnaire); burial would have occurred in AD 288—the presumed date of the last specimen present in chronological order—in connection with Diocletian’s transit from Rome to Pannonia along the Mantua-Gazzo-Legnago-Este route.2 Daniel Gricourt brought forward the chronological terminus to 287 (late 1  For an in-depth study of the area where the hoard was found, see Arzone 2020, pp. 33–54. On the details of the events surrounding the discovery of the two amphorae, we refer to Biondani 2004, pp. 17–36, 2005, pp. 173–178, 2008, pp. 5–11. For the first publication about the hoard, see Milani 1880, 1886, coll. 254–370. 2  Milani 1880, pp. 7–8.

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

25

March–early April) and connected the concealment of the coins with the joint military maneuvers of Maximian Herculius and Diocletian against the Germanic tribes.3 Oscar Hulrich-Bansa had instead regarded the hoard as a pile of metal raked indiscriminately and destined for remelting.4 In any case, this is a most important find and one that has totally changed our knowledge of Aurelian coinage. This unique set of coins first became known to the academic community thanks to the fundamental catalog compiled almost a century and a half ago by Milani and now almost completely accessible through the commendable re-edition carried out according to modern scientific criteria by a team of French numismatists under the guidance of Jean-Baptiste Giard, curator of the Cabinet des médailles of the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris: the five partial catalogs published to date contain as many as 45,729 specimens.5 Compared with the AD 238–253 phase (30 coins) and the Valerian-­ Gallienic age (105 issues), the specimens found in the hoard show an initial sharp peak of 5160 Antoniniani in the name of Gallienus alone, 456 in the name of Augusta Cornelia Salonina, then 4136  in the name of Claudius II Gothicus and 356 coins minted by his brother Quintillus; a second peak comprises coins issued during the reign of Aurelian (10,843 coins) of which 72% consist of Antoniniani and denarii prior to the monetary reform of 274, and 28% had been reformed; an even more significant third peak is recorded in the name of Probus (Fig. 2.1). It is worth mentioning here, albeit briefly, that there were two reformed types issued during Aurelian’s reign: the first one, the central pivot of the reform itself, is the reformed Antoninianus (from his imperial titling Aurelius Antoninus), that is, the Aurelianus (or neo-Antoninianus), a “radiate” piece (from the radiate bust of the emperor on the obv.), cut at 1/80 of a pound (actual weight 4.03 g) with a fine silver content of about 4.5%; in most of the mints (with the exception of “Treveri” and Lugdunum) the new issue bears the Latin mintmark XX I in the epigraph; Serdica would replace it shortly after the reformation with the Greek equivalent ΚΑ, while Tripolis (in present-day Lebanon) would use ΚΑ exclusively. The other reformed type consists of a laureate piece, cut at 1/124 pound (about 2.60 g), whose fine metal rate is not well known, but is estimated at 2%; this small coin merits the name denarius, since its weight  Gricourt 2000, pp. 116–117.  Hulrich-Bansa 1962, p. 20. 5  Estiot 1987, 1995a; Giard 1995; Gricourt 2000; Guillemain 2009. 3 4

26 

M. CASSIA

Fig. 2.1  Composition of the Venèra hoard. (Redrawn by M.  Cassia after A. Arzone, Alcune riflessioni sul ripostiglio della Venèra (Verona) e sui grandi tesori monetali di carattere pubblico, in I. Baldini, A.L. Morelli (eds.), Beni da conservare. Forme di tesaurizzazione in età romana e medievale, Ornamenta 7, Bologna 2020, p. 39, chart 1)

corresponds to 2/3 of the new radiate piece and exactly replicates the weight ratio between the denarius and the Antoniniani at the time of its creation by Caracalla.6 6  Estiot 1995a, pp. 127–129; regarding the weight of the Antoninianus, see also 23–25; 42–47; 58; 60; 72; 77; regarding the weight of the Aurelianus (neo-Antoninianus) 27; 42; 51–52; 77; see Cubelli 1992, pp. 76; 79, who believes that the sign XX I should be interpreted “as an indication of the 5% silver percentage” and not as a “mark of value indicating a new pricing of the coinage”; 85, where he proposes the dissolution of XX I as vigesima (pars) unius (nummi), of ΚΑ as εἰκοστὸν (μέρος) ἑνὸς νομίσματος, of X I as decima (pars) unius (nummi), and of ΙΑ as δέκατον (μέρος) ἑνὸς νομίσματος; 97, on Aurelian’s monetary policy, which, like that of Tacitus and Caro, had no effect on the economy of the third century: “the issuance of radiates marked X I/ΙΑ and containing 10  percent silver ended up representing nothing more than an unrealistic attempt to realize the ideal of a pure silver coinage, since in actual fact, these pieces were immediately hoarded or at any rate, if they circulated, they probably did so with a value of double that of Aureliani (i.e., 4 denarii), thus leaving the rate of devaluation of the currency unchanged.” In general, see Cubelli 1992, pp. 53–62; Savio 2002, pp. 197–206; Belloni 2004 (1993), pp. 262–265; Carlà and Marcone 2011, pp. 78–79; Crisafulli 2012, pp. 255–261; Arslan 2017, pp. 2–17. The reform took place either around February–March (Lafaurie 1974, pp. 517–524, 1975a, p.  995, b, pp.  98–107) or in April–May (Estiot 1995a, p.  17, 1996, pp.  44–46) or in the summer (Carson 1965, pp. 233–234 on coinage with Severina alone), or even in the fall (Callu 1969, p. 323). On Aurelian’s monetary reform, which however, is beyond the scope of the present study, see in general—in addition to the already reported work by Rohde 1881—Giesecke 1933, pp. 65–70; Mazza 1973 (1970), pp. 346–356; 652, footnote 391 (brief reference to tetradrachms coined by Severina after the reform); Kienast 1974, pp. 547–566; Weiser 1983, pp. 279–295; Lo Cascio 1984, pp. 133–201; Cubelli 1992, pp. 54–55, footnote 7; Conway 2006, pp. 1–21; Haklai-Rotenberg 2011, pp. 1–139.

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

27

The contents of the Venèra hoard can be divided into three phases: up to the year 260 there are 135 pieces (0.30%); from the year 260 to Aurelian’s reform there are 18,623 coins (40.72%); and from the reform to the burial of the hoard, there are 26,956 specimens (58.95%).7 After Rome, the most prominent mints that issued the coins represented in the hoard are Ticinum and Siscia, followed by Milan; among the western mints, that of Lugdunum appears the least represented according to the number of coins, while the number of coins from the eastern mints appears somewhat small overall (Figs. 2.2 and 2.3).8 Among the partial catalogs already published, the one of particular note was published in 1995 by Estiot and deals with the 10,843 Aurelian coins found in the hoard;9 more precisely, it consists of 10,803 Antoniniani, 26 denarii, and 14 imitations, “to date the most extensive monetary documentation on Aurelian’s reign.”10 The French numismatist carried out a commendable fundamental work of classification divided into three parts: the first is devoted to Aurelian’s coinage (history of studies, monetary circulation, mints, metrology, and monetary reform); the second contains descriptions of the types of the obv. and rev. and indices of titling and legends; and the third contains the fifty-six tables with the b/w photographic reproductions of all specimens. Among the coins from the Venèra hoard, those under the sole name of Severina number as many as 524 between Aureliani and denarii (there are no aurei), and the mints of Ticinum (258 specimens), Rome (198), Siscia (49), Cyzicus (9),  Arzone 2020, pp. 38–40.  Arzone 2020, pp.  40–42. On the reduced monetization in Asia Minor in the period between Septimius Severus and Aurelian, see Katsari 2005, pp. 261–288. 9  Estiot 1995a, on which see the Reviews by Gosling 1996, p.  21 and Perassi 1997, pp. 199–203. On the coinage of Aurelian and Severina and the empress alone, RIC V 1, pp. 313–318 remains essential for ease of reference (as opposed to the complex and learned cataloguing developed by the team of French numismatists led by Giard), although this work is to be considered an outdated classification as far as chronological delimitations and the identification of the mints are concerned. To supplement the numismatic documentation offered on the Venèra hoard see also Pflaum 1960, pp.  440–441, 1963, pp.  269–270; Scarborough 1973, pp. 338–339; 342–343 on Severina. An extensive review of the findings and numismatic studies concerning Aurelian and Severina can be seen in Sotgiu 1975, pp. 1050–1054. A review of The Roman Imperial Coinage (RIC) V.1 and V.2 is available online at http://www.ric.mom.fr/en/: this is a database on the coinage of the years 268–276—produced by HISOMA (Histoire et Sources des Mondes Antiques), a laboratory of research of which Estiot herself is a member—in which one can find classified about a hundred specimens issued in the name of Severina alone. 10  Estiot 1995a, p. 13. 7 8

28 

M. CASSIA

Fig. 2.2  Distribution of coins from the Venèra hoard by mint. (© reproduced by courtesy of Prof. A. Arzone, Alcune riflessioni sul ripostiglio della Venèra (Verona) e sui grandi tesori monetali di carattere pubblico, in I. Baldini, A.L. Morelli (eds.), Beni da conservare. Forme di tesaurizzazione in età romana e medievale, Ornamenta 7, Bologna 2020, p. 40, chart 2)

Lugdunum (5), and Serdica (4) are represented, as well as one imitation coin. The nominals depict the portrait of Ulpia Severina with the legend AVG(USTA)/CΕΒ(ΑΣΤΗ) and give rise to some useful reflections regarding the time when she would have been given the title of Augusta.11 The coinage of Severina alone was struck after Aurelian’s great monetary reform, since the mint of Alexandria—which continued to include in its coinage the year of the reign of the emperor based on the Greco-Egyptian calendar—did not produce coins in the name of the empress until the sixth year of Aurelian’s reign, namely beginning on August 29, 274. In a study published as early as 1983 and devoted to the series of coins following the 11  In general, on the presence of Augustae in numismatic documentation between the third and fourth centuries, see Martin 2006, pp. 267–279; Horster 2007, pp. 291–310; Johne 2008a, pp. 611–612; Longo 2009; Morelli 2010.

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

29

Fig. 2.3  Map of mints and hoards connected with Aurelian coinage. (Redrawn by M. Cassia after S. Estiot, Aureliano. Volume II. 1, in J.-B. Giard (ed.), Ripostiglio della Venèra. Nuovo Catalogo Illustrato, Roma 1995, p. 20)

reformation, Estiot hypothesized that Severina would have received the title of Augusta no earlier than the fall of 274. Some bronze coins, evidently minted for a special occasion, depict Aurelian on the obv. and his consort on the rev.; although the date of these coins remains far from certain, it is possible that they were issued in conjunction with the triumph celebrated by Aurelian in the fall of 274, a particularly opportune juncture politically for Severina’s elevation to the rank of Augusta.12 Callu, Watson, and Perassi have also linked the bronze coinage13 to this event. Moreover, Homo, Cizek, Sotgiu, Dietmar Kienast, Eck, and Matthäus Heil consider

12  Estiot 1983, p. 16. Estiot 1995a, pp. 10 and 18, spoke of celebrations of the triumph between October/November 274 and early 275. 13  Callu 1995, p. 24, footnote 43; Watson 1999, p. 114; Perassi 2002, p. 338 and footnote 7; Perassi 2014, p. 205.

30 

M. CASSIA

that Severina received the title of Augusta in connection with Aurelian’s triumph, but they prefer the very precise date of August 29, AD 274.14 It remains unclear whether at this stage the emperor’s wife was only conferred the title of Augusta or whether she was also granted the right to mint coinage, as thought, for example, by Joseph Vogt as early as the early 1920s.15 Estiot believed that Severina was elevated to the dignity of Augusta and co-regent when Aurelian celebrated in Rome his triumph over the East, between October-November 274 and early 275, after the destruction of Palmyra and the suppression of the uprisings in Alexandria, and his triumph over the West, after the “recovery” of the Gallic Empire.16 According to the French scholar, it was in the same year, AD 275, at the earliest in the middle of September, when Aurelian was assassinated, since, as shown in the papyrological data, the news had not yet reached the region of Oxyrhynchus on October 19, 275.17 Although the literary sources describe this phase of delicate “transition” differently (see in detail infra, § 2), the empress Severina was to provide the “cover” for an interregnum of about two months until the time when Tacitus took on the insignia of power. The evidence offered by numismatic documentation is unequivocal: in Rome, Ticinum, Antioch, and Alexandria some Aureliani coins were minted in the name of Severina alone; indeed, there is an abundance of 14  Homo 1904, p. 141; Cizek 1994, p.  227; Sotgiu 1961, p. 77; Kienast et  al. 20176, p. 227. Burns 2007, p. 263, proposed the year 274 more generally. 15  Vogt 1924, p. 213: “auch an der Reichsmünze ist Severina erst sein dem Jahr 274, d.h. nach der grossen Münzreform in diesem Jahr, beteiligt. So liegt die Vermutung nahe, dass etwa die Verleihung des Augustanamens in diesem Jahr den Anlass zur Prägung ihrer Münzen gab.” 16  Estiot 1995a, pp. 10; see 18; 27. 17  P.Oxy. XII 1455, ll. 20–26, dated 21 Phaophi (= October 19, 275), seventh year of the reign of Aurelian: (ἔτους) ζ Αὐτοκράτορος Καίσαρος | Λουκίου Δομιτίου Αὐρηλιανοῦ | Γερμανικοῦ Μεγίστου Περσικο[ῦ] | Μεγίστου Γοθθικοῦ Μ[ε]γίστου | Καρπικοῦ Μεγίστου Εὐσεβοῦς | Εὐτυχοῦς Σεβαστοῦ | Φαῶφι κα; see P.Oxy. XXII 2338, 2, l. 39 (seventh year of the emperor): ζ Αὐρηλιανοῦ; the sixth year of the reign of Aurelian is attested by P.Oxy. XIV 1633 until August 23, 275 (corresponding to 30 Mesore): [(ἔτους) ϛ Αὐτοκράτορος] | Καίσαρος Λ[ο]υκίο[υ Δομ]ιττ[ίου Αὐρηλιανοῦ] | Γερμα[ν]ικ[οῦ] Μ[ε]γίσ[το]υ Περ[σικοῦ Μεγίστου] | Γ[ο]θθικοῦ Μεγίστου Καρπικο[ῦ] Μεγίσ[του] | Εὐσεβοῦς Εὐτυχοῦς Σεβαστ[ο]ῦ Μεσο[ρὴ  ̣  ̣] | Αὐρή(λιος) Σ[ε]ρῆν[ος] ὁ κ[αὶ] Σαραπ[ίων] | ἐπιδέδωκα. | Δημ(οσίᾳ) προετέθ(η) | καὶ κατεχω(ρίσθη) | (ἔτους) ϛ Μεσορὴ λ. On this intricate chronology, see Rea 1972, pp. 15–30; Hartmann 2008, pp. 309–311. See also Chastagnol 1980, pp.  75; 89; Rathbone 1986, p. 124; Kienast, Eck, Heil 20176, p. 225.

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

31

coins from Ticinum. Aurelian does not appear on the coins since they were minted after his assassination and Severina, as regent alone, wielded the power and the right to mint. The mints of Rome, Ticinum, Siscia, and Cyzicus consecrated a gold issue to her. The importance assumed by the empress, beginning in late 274, and the regency she exercised, after Aurelian’s death, “certainly owe much to the Palmyrene antecedent and the example of Zenobia” (on the similarities and differences between the Roman empress and the Palmyrene Queen gleaned from the official titling documented by epigraphs, see below, Chap. 3, § 2).18 While Estiot and Robert Göbl agree on the attribution of the issuance of aurei in the name of the widowed empress to the mints of Rome, Ticinum, Siscia and Cyzicus, they diverge as to the issuance of the radiate pieces, since Estiot takes into consideration only the mints of Rome, Ticinum and Antioch, while Göbl also adds those of Siscia and Cyzicus, with the advantage, in the latter case, of multiplying the figures to show as proof that Severina held the right to mint coinage under her own responsibility.19 On the other hand, the “legal” validity of Severina’s coinage after the death of Aurelian, already recognized by Eckhel in 1797 and then by Rohde in 1881, was subsequently accepted by Groag, Percy H. Webb, Harold Mattingly, M. Jessop Price, and then, more recently, also by Cizek, Callu, and Strobel.20

 Estiot 1995a, p. 28.  Estiot 1995a, p. 31: “the 12th issue includes only coins [10 Antoniniani and 1 denarius] in Severina’s name: Aurelian has disappeared from the coinage. This fact signals to us that the series came after his death in September 275. The terminal issues of other mints, Ticinum, Antioch and Alexandria, confirm this hypothesis”; Göbl 1993, pp.  29–30; see Callu 1996, p. 138. 20  Eckhel 1797, p. 486; Rohde 1881, pp. 228–232; Groag 1903, coll. 1403–1404; RIC V 1, pp. 253–254: “it has been suggested that these coins may have been struck in the name of the empress, and there is distinct evidence from Alexandria and elsewhere that, whatever the actual duration of the interregnum, this suggestion is well founded”; Mattingly 1939, p. 310: “the fact of any interregnum of more than a few weeks has been disputed by many modern authorities, but the coinage shows clearly that for some considerable period government was carried on in the name of the Empress Severina for the dead Aurelian”; Price 1973, p. 84: “it is therefore possible that … there was a short period of interregnum during which Severina coined alone”; Cizek 1991, pp. 109–112; Callu 1996, p. 140: “etant donné que Séverine émet en son seul nom, il paraît logique de présumer une interrègne de l’Augusta”; Strobel 1998, pp. 119–153. 18 19

32 

M. CASSIA

In particular, Callu21—in agreement with Cizek, Göbl, Strobel, but in contrast to Bruno Bleckmann22—considered an interregnum of several months in 275 plausible (even from May to December 275) and contextualized the legend P(IA) F(ELIX) (on which see infra, § 2) present on Antoniniani of Antioch (moreover already highlighted by Rohde)23 in the role played by Severina as the “nominal souveraine de la Romanitas” (on this topic, see also infra, Chap. 3, § 1),24 holder of the royal right to mint coinage in her own right.25 According to Strobel, the coinage of the last phase of Aurelian’s reign would have conferred on Ulpia Severina “eine offizielle, formale und funktionale Stellung im Reichsregiment des restitutor orbis” and thus the empress, as regent, could reasonably be viewed “in die Reihe der Herrscher des späteren 3. Jh. n. Chr.”26 There are only two dissident voices: Eck, who, in 1974, on the basis of certain peculiarities of coinage in the mints of Lugdunum, Rome, and Ticinum (where on the reverse side legends appear such as CONCORDIA MILITVM and VENVS FELIX; on this subject see at length infra, § 2), found it impossible to prove with certainty that the coins had been minted in the name of Severina alone in the period following Aurelian’s death;27 and Klaus-Peter Johne, who, in 2008, given the impossibility of circumscribing with absolute precision the end of coinage with her husband and

 Callu 1995, 1996, 2000, pp. 199–200.  Cizek 1991, pp. 109–112, 1994, pp. 205–206; Göbl 1993, pp. 29–30; Strobel 1998, pp. 119–153; see Felletti Maj 1958, p. 269: “Severina reigned with her husband … but the importance of her personality is shown by the fact that on his death, until the proclamation of Tacitus, she had the power in her hands and minted coins, whether for a few weeks or for a few months”; contra Bleckmann 1992, p. 305: “in der Tat können nämlich die Angaben des Aurelius Victor und der HA nicht verifiziert werden. Die Münzen, die allein im Namen des Senats mit der Legende INT VRB (interregnum urbis?) geprägt wurden, erlauben keine eindeutige Interpretation”; see Yonge 1979, pp. 47–60. 23  Rohde 1881, p. 229, no. 452. 24  Callu 2000, p. 200. 25  Callu 1995, pp. 13–31, 1996, pp. 138; 140. 26  Strobel 1998, pp. 145–146. 27  Eck 1974, col. 943: “ob nach dem Tod Aurelians noch für einige Zeit in ihrem Namen Münzen geprägt wurden, was sich aus gewissen Eigenheiten der Prägeweise in den Münzstätten Lugdunum, Rom und Ticinum ergeben könnte, kann nicht bewiesen warden.” 21 22

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

33

the beginning of that exclusively in the name of the Augusta, still preferred to relegate to the realm of hypothesis the possibility that Severina had actually ruled alone.28

2   The interregnum between Aurelian and Tacitus Given the divergence of opinion among contemporary scholars on the issues in the name of Severina alone, two other intrinsically related questions should be addressed at this point, viz. whether we can find hidden nuclei of “truth” or at least verisimilitude in the literary sources that speak of an interregnum between Aurelian and Tacitus, and whether from the analysis of the coins it is indeed possible to understand whether Severina did or did not hold imperial power during that period of formal vacancy. The Latin sources speak of an extraordinarily extended interregnum, which would document the existence of a time span of six or even seven months between Aurelian’s death (roughly September/October AD 275) and the accession to the throne of Tacitus. In fact, the Historia Augusta and Aurelius Victor report an interregnum that lasted six months: denique id tertio factum est, ita ut per sex menses imperatorem Romanus orbis non habuerit, omnesque iudices hi permanerent, quos aut senatus aut Aurelian elegerat, nisi quod pro consule Asiae Faltonius Probus in locum Arelli Fusci delegit‹ur›. In short, this had to be repeated three times, so that for six months the Roman world had no emperor, and the functionaries who had been elected by the senate or Aurelian remained in office, except in the case of Faltonius Probus, who was chosen to replace Arellius Fuscus as proconsul of Asia.29

According to the Historia Augusta, the army supposedly instructed the senate with the choice of a new emperor; the senate in turn deferred to the

28  Johne 2008b, p. 381: “da sich die Münzemissionen für Severina Augusta innerhalb der Jahre 274 und 275 nicht genau eingrenzen lassen, verbleiben diese Kombinationen und die These einer Regentschaft im Bereich der Spekulation.” 29  HA Aur. 40, 4.

34 

M. CASSIA

will of the soldiers and, after six months, Tacitus, a senior senator,30 was elected emperor.31 Quod post excessum Romuli novello adhuc Romanae urbis imperio factum pontifices, penes quos scribendae historiae potestas fuit, in litteras rettulerunt, ut interregnum, dum post bonum principem bonus alius quaeritur, iniretur, hoc post Aurelianum habito inter senatum exercitumque Romanum non invido non tristi sed grato religiosoque certamine sex totis mensibus factum est. What the pontiffs, who had the authority to hand down the historical news, reported as occurring after the death of Romulus, at the dawn of Roman power, that is, that an interregnum began, in the course of which, after that excellent ruler, another was sought who was just as good, also occurred after the death of Aurelian for six whole months, when between the senate and the Roman army there opened a contest, not characterized by sordid envy, but by admirable fairness.32 Ergo, quod rarum et difficile fuit, senatus populusque Romanus perpessus est, ut imperatorem per sex menses, dum bonus quaeritur, res p. non haberet. Quae illa concordia militum? Quanta populo quies? Quam gravis senatus auctoritas fuit?

30  HA Tac. 4, 5–7: at ille: ‘miror, p. c., vos in locum Aureliani, fortissimi imperatoris, senem velle principem facere. En membra, quae iaculari valea nt, quae hastile torquere, quae clipeis intonare, quae ad exemplum docendi militis frequenter equitare. Vix munia senatus implemus, vix sententias, ad quas nos locus artat, edicimus. Videte diligentius, quam aetatem de cubiculo atque umbra in pruinas aestusque mittatis. Ac probaturos senem imperatorem milites creditis?’;” 5, 1: ‘Ecquis melius quam senex imperat?’ Dixerunt decies. ‘Imperatorem te, non militem facimus,’ “but he [scil. Tacitus] replied, ‘I marvel, O senators, that you wish to elect an old man as emperor, instead of such a valiant emperor as Aurelian. Here are members that should be able to shoot arrows, throw shafts, rattle shields, ride often on horseback to set an example and instruct the soldiers! I can hardly fulfill my duties as a senator, I struggle to express my opinions verbally, as the office demands. Consider more carefully what age is the man whom from the darkness of his room you want to send out into the cold and heat. And do you then believe that the soldiers will accept an old emperor? … Who can rule better than an old man?’ They repeated ten times. ‘We appoint you emperor, not soldier.’ Tac. 6, 2–7: ‘… seniorem principem fecimus et virum, qui omnibus quasi pater consulat … Magis gratulemur, quod habemus principem senem, quam illa iteremus, quae plus quam lacrimanda tolerantibus extiterunt’, “‘… we elected an emperor in old age, a man capable of providing for the needs of all like a father … Let us rejoice in having an aged emperor, rather than still recall those situations that turned out to be extremely painful for those who had to live through them.’” 31  HA Aur. 40–41. See Watson’s conclusions 1999, p. 111 on the Historia Augusta and Aurelius Victor: “an entirely apocryphal episode came to be fashioned by the fertile imaginations of two IV century authors more interested in rhetoric than historical accuracy.” 32  HA Tac. 1, 1.

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

35

So—a rare and difficult thing—the Roman senate and people endured the State of being without an emperor for six months while they sought a worthy one. What harmony then reigned in the army! How much peace among the people! What weight the authority of the senate had!33 Verum senatus, sciens lectos a se principes militibus non placere, rem ad milites rettulit, dumque id saepius fit, sextus peractus est mensis. But the senate, knowing that the soldiers frowned upon the emperors chosen by it, put the appointment back into the hands of the army, and with the repetition of this procedure several times, six months passed.34 Interea milites amisso principe legatos statim Romam destinant, uti suopte arbitratu patres imperatorem deligerent. Quibus hoc ipsorum potissimum convenire munus respondentibus rursum legiones ad eos reiciunt. Ita utrimque pudore ac modestia certabatur, rara in hominibus virtute, rebus praesertim huiuscemodi, ac prope ignota militibus. Tantum ille vir severitate atque incorruptis artibus potuit, ut eius necis ‹nuntius› auctoribus exitio, pravis metui, † simulata dubiis, optimo cuique desiderio, nemini insolentiae aut ostentationi esset, atque etiam soli quasi Romulo interregni species obvenit, longe vero gloriosior … Igitur tandem senatus mense circiter post Aureliani interitum sexto Tacitum e consularibus, mitem sane visum imperatorem creat, cunctis fere laetioribus, quod militari ferocia legendi ius principis proceres recepissent. Meanwhile, the soldiers, having lost the emperor, immediately sent ambassadors to Rome so that the senators would elect an emperor of their choice. Since they replied that this particular task fell to the same (soldiers), the legions again referred (the decision) to them. Thus, it was discussed on both sides with decorum and moderation, a rare virtue in men, especially in such situations, and almost unknown in soldiers. That man [i.e., Aurelian] by  HA Tac. 2, 1–2.  HA Tac. 2, 6. In fact, between the date of the first session of the senate (III non. Febr., “Feb. 3”: HA Aur. 41, 3) and that of the election of Tacitus (VIII kal. Oct., “Oct. 27”: HA Tac. 3, 2), almost nine months elapsed. See Watson 1999, p. 160: “the reign of Tacitus and the ‘interregnum’ that preceded it are presented as the renaissance of senatorial authority in which the emperor derived his power from the senate, the final effort to restore the senate to its rightful position of constitutional prominence, before this was swept aside by the autocratic regime that followed.” On this topic see what has already been written by Mazzarino 1965–1966 (1990), vol. 3, p. 291: “it is no accident … that … this biography of Aurelian in the Historia Augusta … contains the … interesting discussion of the authority of the senate in the creation of princes, as opposed to the army: a discussion, indeed, in the form of letters between the senate and the army (40, 1–41, 15). The theme of the relationship between legitimacy and kratos was alive, in the lower empire, for traditionalists.” 33 34

36 

M. CASSIA

virtue of austerity and blameless deeds accomplished so much that the announcement of his death was ominous to the murderers, aroused fear in the wicked, † and in the uncertain, was cause for regret for every excellent person and to no one did it offer occasion for arrogance or ostentation; and what is more, there also occurred a kind of interregnum, similar to that (which took place afterwards) of Romulus, but much more illustrious … In the end, therefore, the senate, at about the expiration of the sixth month after the elimination of Aurelian, among the former consuls appointed Tacitus, looking altogether mild, as emperor, amid the joy of almost all, for the fact that the aristocrats had been granted by the arrogance of the soldiers the right to choose the emperor.35

In contrast, the Epitome de Caesaribus states that the interregnum lasted as long as seven months: hoc tempore septem mensibus interregni species evenit. In that period for seven months a kind of interregnum occurred.36

As noted above, a generic interregni species is in fact also spoken of by the aforementioned Aurelius Victor. On the other hand, however, the Historia Augusta itself in the Vita of Tacitus also always describes the short duration of the reign of the duo … principes (i.e., Tacitus and Florian) in terms of an “interregnum,” understood as quasi quidam interreges inter Aurelianum et Probum.37 Therefore, one can assume that already in 35  Aur. Vict. 35, 9–36, 1. See Callu 1996, pp. 133–145; Amon 2018, p. 2: “le Liber de Caesaribus d’Aurelius Victor demeure une source importante pour la compréhension de la période charnière du IIIe siècle de l’Empire … En outre, les biographies de Gallien, Claude le Gothique et Aurélien permettent à Victor, et à travers lui à l’aristocratie sénatoriale des IVe et Ve siècles, de proposer une figure archétypale de l’optimus et du pessimus princeps pour le IIIe siècle, établissant le bon et le mauvais exemple à suivre.” 36  Epit. Caes. 35, 10. 37  HA Tac. 14, 5. See Baglivi 1998–1999, pp. 259–269, who defended the handed down text, since in this passage the anonymous author tried to explain the difference between interregnum and legitimate Principate. The passage from the Historia Augusta confirms the error made by Aurelius Victor and contained already in his source, consisting in attributing to the interval between Aurelian and Tacitus the same length of reign as Tacitus himself (Tac. 13, 5: interemptus est enim insidiis militaribus, ut alii dicunt, sexto mense, ut alii, morbo interiit, “in fact in the sixth month of his reign he was killed, according to some, by an attempt hatched against him by soldiers, while according to others he died of illness.”): see Syme 1971, pp. 237–238; Chastagnol 1980, pp. 76–77, 1994, pp. 1027–1029.

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

37

Enmann’s so-called Kaisergeschichte (=EKG, on which see also infra)38— on which the Latin sources hang—the concept of interregnum had been linked to the tumultuous period immediately following Aurelian’s death. Such an extensive duration of this vacuum of an imperial figure had been repeatedly questioned since 1911 by modern scholars39 until the categorical assertion of Sir Ronald Syme who, in his celebrated Emperors and Biography. Studies in the Historia Augusta published in 1971, went so far as to claim that there was no such interval of six or seven months after Aurelian’s death that occurred around October/November 275.40 Moreover, as Zosimus and Zonaras show, any indication regarding this interregnum is completely lacking in the Greek sources: ἐπιτηρήσαντες οὖν αὐτὸν ἐξιόντα τῆς πόλεως δίχα τῆς ἀρκούσης φυλακῆς ἐπελαύνουσιν, καὶ πάντες ἐπαγαγόντες τὰ ξίφη διώλεσαν … Τακίτου δὲ τὰ τῆς Ῥώμης ἀναδησαμένου βασίλεια καὶ τὴν ἀρχὴν ἔχοντος, Σκύθαι διὰ τῆς Μαιώτιδος λίμνης περαιωθέντες ‹τὰ› ἀπὸ τοῦ Πόντου [τὰ] μέχρι Κιλικίας ἐπέδραμον· οἷς ἐπεξελθὼν Τάκιτος τοὺς μὲν αὐτὸς καταπολεμήσας ἐξεῖλεν, τοὺς δὲ Φλωριανῷ προβεβλημένῳ τῆς αὐλῆς ὑπάρχῳ παραδοὺς ἐπὶ τὴν Εὐρώπην ἐξώρμησεν· ἔνθα δὴ καὶ εἰς ἐπιβουλὴν ἐμπεσὼν ἐξ αἰτίας ἀναιρεῖται τοιᾶσδε. Then they waited for Aurelian to leave the city without sufficient escort, and they all assaulted him and slew him by the sword … While Tacitus, having assumed the imperial insignia, held power, the Scythians, having crossed the Maeotian Swamp, headed from Pontus into Cilicia. Tacitus attacked them, killed many of them in battle and handed the others over to Florianus, des-

38  Enmann 1884, pp. 335–501; on the main features of this source see at least Mazzarino 1965–1966 (1990), vol. 3, pp. 234–236. 39  Hohl 1911b, p. 284: “dass es unmöglich ist, ein interregnum in der Ausdehnung von sechs Monaten anzunehmen, ist heute allgemein zugegeben.” 40  Syme 1971, p. 237. Along these lines also Peachin 1990, p. 44, who dated the death of Aurelian to mid-September 275 and the rise of Tacitus to early December of the same year; the six-month interregnum would therefore not be credible. See also Bleckmann 1992, pp. 304–309. He preferred not to prejudge Molin 1999, p. 348, note 13, who spoke only of a possible interregnum of Severina throughout 275; on this line, Molinier Arbo 2016, p. 48, footnote 5 states: “un possible interrègne de Séverine aprés l’assassinat d’Aurélien.”

38 

M. CASSIA

ignated prefect of the Praetorian Guard, then departed for Europe, where he fell into a trap and was killed for the reason that follows.41 Δείσαντες γὰρ ἐκεῖνοι περὶ τῇ σφετέρᾳ ζωῇ ἐπιτίθενται τῷ Αὐρηλιανῷ καὶ ἀναιροῦσιν αὐτόν, ἓξ ἐνιαυτοὺς ἠνυκότα παρὰ τῇ βασιλείᾳ μηνῶν ὀλίγων ἐνδέοντας. Ὃν διεδέξατο Τάκιτος, πρεσβύτης ἀνήρ· πέντε γὰρ ἐτῶν εἶναι καὶ ἑβδομήκοντα ἀναγράφεται ὅτε ᾑρέθη εἰς μοναρχίαν. Τὸ στρατιωτικὸν δὲ αὐτὸν ἀνηγόρευσε καὶ ἀπόντα· ἐν Καμπανίᾳ γὰρ τότε δεδεγμένος τὸ ψήφισμα, εἰς Ῥώμην εἰσήλασε μετὰ σχήματος ἰδιωτικοῦ, καὶ γνώμῃ τῆς συγκλήτου τε καὶ τοῦ δήμου τὴν στολὴν περιεβάλετο τὴν βασίλειον. Indeed, those, fearing for their own lives, pounced on Aurelian and killed him, six years—minus a few months—after he had assumed imperial power. He was succeeded by Tacitus, an old man; in fact, it is written that he was seventy-five years old when he was chosen for the empire. The militia themselves acclaimed him even though he was absent; in fact, he was staying in Campania at that time. As soon as he received the decree, he went to Rome as a private citizen and, with the recognition of the senate and also of the people, he donned the imperial insignia.42

In truth, regarding Tacitus’ stay in Campania, the Historia Augusta adds a seemingly negligible, but perhaps significant particular regarding the computable duration in duobus mensibus of the stay in Baia, when the choice of Aurelian’s successor would have already been known: hoc loco tacendum non est plerosque ‹in› litteras rettulisse Tacitum absentem et in Campania positum principem nuncupatum: verum est nec dissimulare possum. Nam cum rumor emersisset illum imperatorem esse faciendum, discessit atque in Baiano duobus mensibus fuit. Sed inde deductus huic senatus consulto interfuit, quasi vere privatus et qui vere recusaret imperium.

41  Zos. 1, 62, 3-1, 63, 1. On the death of Tacitus in the Historia Augusta (Tac. 17, 5), see Requena Jiménez 2003, 2013, pp. 65–82: the episode, handed down from the Historia Augusta, of the supernatural displacement of a statue of Apollo from its pedestal to a bed would make it possible to resolve the controversial question of the death of Emperor Marcus Claudius Tacitus, since this anecdote, the result of an oral tradition that distorted its basic features, refers to the celebration of a lectisternium, information suggesting that the death of the emperor was due to malaria. 42  Zon. 12, 27–28, vol. 3, p. 153 Dindorf 1870.

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

39

At this point I cannot be silent about the fact that many writers have reported that Tacitus was appointed emperor while he was far away in Campania: in this there is some truth, I cannot deny, in the sense that, when word began to spread that he would be elected emperor, he left and stayed two months in Baia; but from there he was made to return in time to attend the session of the senate which we have described, as if he were in fact a private individual, sincerely reluctant to accept the imperial office.43

As Leandro Polverini writes in a very informative essay published in 1975  in Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt, a few years after Syme’s work, the weight of Greek sources ends up “greatly attenuating (and practically excluding)” the character of dramatic caesura between Aurelian’s military autocracy and the senatorial “restoration” of Tacitus.44 It was precisely on this basis that the same New Zealand historian had thought that he could even turn the perspective upside down, in the sense that there was nothing to impede the hypothesis that Tacitus was a well-­ known and respected figure for the generals and officers in Caenophrurium; when Tacitus came to power, the Danubian armies, who had had so many pretenders over the previous thirty years, did not have any objection, not least because Aurelian’s successor could have been a Danubian solider. “If so, a veritable link between Aurelian and Probus. The series of the military emperors was tighter than the writers knew.”45 The place of Aurelian’s murder (HA Aur. 35, 5: sed cum iter faceret, apud Caenofrurium mansionem, quae est inter Heracliam et Byzantium, malitia notarii sui et manu Mucaporis interemptus est, “but during the journey, at Caenofrurium—a stopping point located between Heraclea and Byzantium—through the treachery of one of his secretaries he was

 HA Tac. 7, 5–7.  Polverini 1975, p. 1021. 45  Syme 1971, p. 247. 43 44

40 

M. CASSIA

murdered at the hands of Mucapor”)46 was a mansio in Thrace, strategically located along an important and ancient thoroughfare47 between Perinthus (which would assume the new toponym of Heraclea only on October 13, 286 AD in honor of Maximian Herculius)48 and Byzantium, 46  Lact. mort. pers. 6, 2: nondum ad provincias ulteriores cruenta eius scripta pervenerant, et iam Caenofrurio, qui locus est Thraciae, cruentus ipse humi iacebat falsa quadam suspicione ab amicis suis interemptus, “his cruel writings had not yet reached the more distant provinces and already in Caenofrurium, which is a place in Thrace, he lay on the ground soaked in blood, killed by his friends because of unfounded suspicion”; Eutr. 9, 15, 2: occiditur servi sui fraude, qui ad quosdam militares viros, amicos ipsius, nomina pertulit adnotata, falso manum eius imitatus, tamquam Aurelianus ipsos pararet occidere; itaque ut praeveniretur, ab isdem interfectus est in itineris medio, quod inter Constantinopolim et Heracleam est stratae veteris; locus Caenophrurium appellatur, “killed due to the deceit of one of his servants who, having falsified his handwriting, indicated their names and made them known to some members of the army—friends of the emperor—as if Aurelian were preparing to kill them in particular; therefore, as a preventive measure, they assassinated him halfway along the ancient road between Constantinople and Heraclea; the place is called Caenophrurium”; Hier. chron. a. Abr. 2295 (275 AD), p.  223 Helm 1956: ac non multo post inter Constantinopolim et Heracliam in Caeno frurio viae veteris occiditur, “and not long afterwards he was killed at Caenofrurium on the ancient route between Constantinople and Heraclea”; Aur. Vict. Caes. 35, 8: qua causa ministri scelere, cui secretorum officium crediderat, circumventus apud Coenofrurium interiit, cum ille praedae conscientia delictique scripta callide composita tribunis quasi per gratiam prodidisset, quibus interfici iubebantur; illique eo metu accensi facinus patravere, “for this reason, surrounded near Coenofrurium, he died through the villainy of a subordinate to whom he had entrusted the office of secretary; that man, aware that he was guilty and deceitful, having delivered to the tribunes, almost as an act of courtesy, writings cunningly drafted in which orders were given that they should be killed. And they, prompted by this fear, committed the crime”; Chron. Urb. Rom., p. 148 Mommsen 1892: Aurelianus … occisus Caenophrurio. On the site see von Geisau 1935, col. 138; Külzer 2008, pp. 421 (for further evidence from the Byzantine period); see 399; Gnoli 2019, pp. 44–45 and note 53: “the variants of the toponym confirm the uniqueness of the original source.” 47  Itin. Anton. Aug. 138, 3; 230, 9; 323, 6; 332, 7: Cenofrurio; Tab. Peut. 8, 5: Cenopurio; Ravenn. 4, 6, p. 48, l. 36; 4, 6, p. 48, l. 40 Schnetz 1942: Cenofrurion; see Miller 1916, coll. 526; 539–540; Külzer 2008, p. 193. 48  Fragm. Vatican. 284, pp. 356–357; see Fragm. Vatican. 325, Nov. 5, 293, p. 373 Mommsen 1860; see Stiernon 1990, coll. 1306–1307; Paschoud 20022, p. 179. See the “unpublished and correct clarification that Zosimus (1, 62, 1) certainly found in his source, Eunapius” (Gnoli 2019, p. 45; on Aurelian’s reign in the Histories of Eunapius see Buck 1995, pp.  86–92): διατρίβοντι δὲ αὐτῷ [i.e., Αὐρηλιανῷ] κατὰ τὴν Πέρινθον, ἣ νῦν Ἡράκλεια μετωνόμασται, συνίσταταί τις ἐπιβουλὴ τοιάδε, “while the emperor was in Perinthus, now Heraclea, this insidious plot was hatched”; see, earlier Amm. 22, 2, 3: perque terras et maria formidatus, nullis obstantibus muris, Heracleam ingressus est Perinthum, “and, feared by land and sea, without finding any obstacle for delay, [scil. Julian] entered Heraclea, also called Perinthus”; 27, 4, 12: Europa omnium ultima praeter municipia urbibus nitet duabus, Apris et Perintho, quam Heracleam posteritas dixit, “the most remote among these regions is Europe, which, besides municipalities, shines with two cities, Apris and Perinthus, later called Heraclea.”

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

41

Fig. 2.4  Map of Thrace and Propontis. (© M. Cassia)

and can be identified with modern Kurfallı (14 km north of Selymbria), located 36 km northeast of Marmara Ereğlisi (the modern name of ancient Perinthus-Heraclea) (Fig. 2.4). Giovanni Vitucci’s opinion was different to that of Syme; in his monograph devoted to Probus (published in 1952), he claimed that no one in Caenophrurium would be found capable of “manifesting the desire to collect the grave legacy with any serious possibility of success.”49 In 1961, Luigi Pareti, without the extremism that would characterize Syme’s position a decade later, nevertheless thought that, after a “fairly long and abnormal, but historically very interesting, period of interregnum” of about two months (from mid-September to mid-November 275), the choice had fallen on Tacitus as the result of “negotiations” held between the senate and the praetorian cohorts of Rome.50 Pareti himself, in his monumental Storia di Roma, had made a brief but significant

 Vitucci 1952, p. 22.  Pareti 1961, p. 107.

49 50

42 

M. CASSIA

reference to Ulpia Severina, indeed highlighting how she possessed both the title of Augusta, documented by coins, and that of mater castrorum, highlighted by the Pola inscription (regarding this document, see infra, Chap. 3, § 1).51 In this regard, the already mentioned Polverini was more cautious: he preferred to acknowledge Syme’s conclusion as a hypothesis and see in Tacitus’ accession to the throne an “interlocutory solution, of provisional compromise,” which would be expressed in the term interregni species, symbolizing the strenuous search for a balance “between the historical reality of military dominance and the ultimate—purely formal—reaffirmation of the senatorial tradition of government.”52 Therefore, for Polverini, there was a phase of “compromise,” but not of true actual senatorial “restoration,” of which Tacitus would have been representative (Syme considered Tacitus to be a soldier, which was questionable in Polverini’s view). Even according to Chastagnol, Latin historiographical sources gave credence to the fiction of a transitory senatorial restoration through the “election” of Tacitus.53 Callu—for whom it was also an established fact that Severina reigned alone—nevertheless questioned the specific nature of this “interlude”; indeed, more precisely, he questioned whether the Augusta was the sole sovereign “durant la totalité de l’interrègne,” whether she ruled as a “simple substitute” on behalf of her deceased husband or whether she constituted the “écran momentané derrière lequel s’abrita une autre autorité, celle du Sénat de Rome.” In an attempt to answer these questions, the scholar thoroughly analyzed the three sources that mention the interregnum: Aurelius Victor, who “erases” the memory of Severina; the Historia Augusta, which, as it turns out, almost magnifies Zenobia and instead essentially forgets Severina, reduced to an anonymous uxor with an inordinate passion for silken garments; and finally, the Epitome de Caesaribus, in which Severina is forgotten. Callu concluded that the empress would be destined to be “erased” for following too closely the “example” of the Emesian Iulia Domna and the Palmyrene Zenobia and having thus represented an “offense pour Rome.”54

 Pareti 1961, p. 94 and footnotes 2–3.  Polverini 1975, pp. 1021–1022. 53  Chastagnol 1980, pp. 75–77; see Estiot 1987, pp. 13–14. 54  Callu 1996, pp. 142–145. 51 52

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

43

For Watson, who dedicated to the “Illyrian” emperor the weighty tome Aurelian and the Third Century published in 1999, the six-month interregnum is not historically acceptable, especially in the light of the papyrus documents: rather, it would have been a time span of 5–10/11 weeks at most.55 In fact, there was a military coup as with the other “Illyrian” emperors of the third century: on hearing of Aurelian’s murder, the army hailed Tacitus, who was in Campania and quickly arrived in Rome, where, having accepted the ovations from the praetorians, he promised them substantial donations and he was recognized as the new emperor by the senate; at the time of the election, Tacitus—who had been consul for the year AD 273—was seventy-five years old, a retired general, and was immediately concerned with the deification of his predecessor in order to create a line of continuity with the past and to strengthen his own power, operating in the same way that Aurelian himself had already acted by deifying Claudius II Gothicus.56 Although the impressive numismatic documentation undoubtedly attests to the existence of multiple issues in the name of Severina alone, Watson believed that he could conclude the section of his book on Aurelian, albeit significantly entitled Severina as dowager empress, by going so far as to argue that the interregnum of Severina identified by

55  Watson 1999, pp. 110; 224–225; see Ricciardi 2007, p. 297. For a detailed analysis of the period between Aurelian’s death and the inauguration of Tacitus according to modern studies, see Watson 1999, p. 250, footnote 42; Hedlund 2008, pp. 147–149. The datum is received as a possible fact by Kienast, Eck, Heil 20176, p. 227: “vielleicht führte sie nach dem Tode Aurelians bis zur Machtübernahme des Tacitus die Regierung”; Sommer 2021, p. 650: “das interregnum füllte möglicherweise Aurelians Witwe Severina, deren Porträt auf zahlreichen Münzen erscheint.” Not a mention of Ulpia Severina in Christol 1997, p. 182, who drastically downplays the “interregnum”—between Aurelian’s death and the ascension to the throne of Tacitus—that occurred “à la fin du mois de novembre ou au début de décembre. Cela réduit fortement l’intervalle que Victor considéra comme une sorte d’interrègne”; nor is Severina mentioned in Drinkwater 2005, pp. 51–53, a fact that is truly significant, all the more so if one considers that in the previous edition of The Cambridge Ancient History in 1939, special prominence is given to Severina’s regency, in an essay edited, not coincidentally, by the British numismatist Mattingly 1939, p. 310. 56  Watson 1999, p. 107. On Tacitus as consul in 273 see Johne 1991, p.  147, 2021, pp. 47–60. For a summary of the transformation processes that took place in the third century AD, understood as “personalized measures” that featured individual emperors and their relationships with elites, see Körner 2011, pp. 87–123.

44 

M. CASSIA

numismatists would remain the result of pure speculation and the coinage in the name of Augusta should be regarded with some skepticism.57 On the other hand, confronted with Watson’s categorical statements, we should not be surprised by Estiot’s understandably vexed retort to the English historian, who showed an inexplicable obstinacy in the face of the “evidence” of the facts, that is, of the numismatic datum, which is incontrovertible compared to the fallacious literary sources.58 In more recent years, with regard to the current of thought inclined to follow Syme’s interpretive proposal, Ragnar Hedlund, on the other hand, has placed himself in sharp opposition, arguing that the idea of a senatorial renaissance cannot be a priori discarded, first of all because of the absolutely unwarranted reliability attributed to the Greek sources that effectively appeared later (Zonaras especially) compared to the Latin ones, and also because actually there was nothing in the evidence available to us that could provide any “conclusive evidence against the senatorial renaissance”: thus, on the basis of the studies of Egon Flaig and Angela Pabst, Hedlund concludes that the events following Aurelian’s death should be interpreted 57  Watson 1999, p. 116: “although most numismatists currently working on this period are now prepared to see Severina’s interregnum as beyond dispute, it still remains speculative, and serious doubts remain. We must guard against over-hasty interpretations of the slight variations in mint marks that are unquestionably detectable: other explanations of these anomalous issues for Severina late in the reign may yet be forthcoming. The notion of postAurelianic coinage minted in the name of his widow certainly cannot be ruled out, but it should still be regarded with a degree of skepticism.” 58  Estiot 2005, p. 159 and footnote 7: “le témoignage monétaire est essentiel car il prouve que l’impératrice Séverine exerça la régence seule, après l’assassinat d’Aurélien en septembre 275. Le fait doit être martelé, car les historiens ne semblent pas actuellement disposés à reconnaître le poids du dossier constitué pièce à pièce pas les numismates … on peut … lire dans des ouvrages récents—par exemple sous la plume d’A. Watson—des conclusions assez décourageantes sur les capacités des numismates à faire admettre le poids de leurs documents au reste de la communauté des historiens. On ne peut pas nier la réalité d’un interrègne exercé par Séverine au prétexte que les sources littéraires n’en parlent pas … Pourtant si sur ce point précis l’on repousse l’évidence numismatique, au sens anglo-saxon du terme, on peut légitimement se demander ce qui en histoire, et en histoire de l’antiquité, peut être tenu comme une preuve objective, en particulier pour une période où l’aporie des sources textuelles constitue l’une des données de base.” However, it must be said that regarding the numismatic documentation, despite the doubts expressed by the English scholar, he nonetheless acknowledged that it had “some degree of cogency,” to the extent that it would prove how “the government of the empire was carried on in her [i.e., Severina’s] name,” but it would still force the question of whether it was “an ad hoc response to the confusion that followed Aurelian’s death rather than a period during which Severina ruled the empire in any meaningful sense”: Watson 1999, pp. 114–115; see Syvänne 2020, pp. 158; 160.

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

45

“as part of the dynamics in the negotiations of power between the city of Rome and the armies of the Empire.”59 Guido Migliorati took a different position; according to him, the epigraphic data precisely confirmed the version of the Byzantine historian of the eleventh and twelfth centuries regarding the origins and career of Tacitus, considered as a dux of equestrian rank, perhaps a native of Noricum and acclaimed emperor by the soldiers stationed on the Danubian border.60 Caillan Davenport’s thesis indicates an opposite stance: since the ancient sources, unlike in the case of Aurelian or Probus, offer no confirmation that Tacitus was actually a military officer from the Danube area, this emperor is likely to be identified with an exponent of the last generation of senatorial generals.61 In any case, it is evident that the role possibly played by Severina in the short time span between her husband’s death and Tacitus’ accession to the throne is not in any way taken into account by some scholars (Polverini, Hedlund, Flaig, Pabst) and, which is perhaps worse, it is greatly underestimated by others (Syme, Watson). In an in-depth examination of the sources of the Vita Aureliani contained in the Historia Augusta, considered to be a fifth-century work, Tommaso Gnoli62 identified two basic strands: a source from the Tetrarchic age, which has left conspicuous traces in Enmann’s aforementioned Kaisergeschichte, and a mish-mash of pieces of information that are impossible to identify;63 the later accounts of Lactantius, Eusebius, the 59  Hedlund 2008, pp. 148–149; see Flaig 1992, pp. 128–129; Pabst 1997, pp. 28–30. See also Burns 2007, pp. 235, according to whom “it may be that Severina stayed in power for a time after her husband’s death, cooperating with the Roman senate during an interregnum, or interval between rulers, until a new emperor was chosen”; see 263. 60  Migliorati 2013, pp. 195–204. Still on the epigraphic evidence from the reign of Tacitus, see Zawadzki 2005, pp. 305–322. 61  Davenport 2014, pp. 174–187. 62  Gnoli 2019, pp.  36–43. On the late dating of the Historia Augusta see Mazzarino 1965–1966 (1990), p. 218: “we tend to assign the Historia Augusta to the age of Honorius, thus to a period even later than the Theodosian one”; see 237; Mazzarino 1956 (1986), pp. 615: “the concordances between Historia Augusta and the Codex Theodosianus should be explained as reflecting legislation of the Stilichonian period”; see also 736; Mazzarino 1951, p. 299; see Gnoli 2019, pp. 37 and footnote 37 (with further bibliography), who was “rather inclined to date the HA later, in the second or preferably third decade of the V century”; 64: “the HA, which in the writer’s opinion is also later than the second edition of the Histories of Eunapius—a work likely to be from the age of Valentinian III.” 63  These are the “paltry gnomic excerpts received … on Aurelian,” of which Mazzarino 1980, p. 31, had spoken.

46 

M. CASSIA

epitomators, Julian, Ammianus, Jerome, Eunapius/Zosimus, and finally that of the Historia Augusta were superimposed on the older source, dating from the years 270–280. In particular, the scholar pointed out how, in the face of the scant importance given to Ulpia Severina by the Historia Augusta, the number of coins struck in her name alone demonstrates, without a shadow of a doubt, the leadership role held by the Augusta for at least two or three months, during the transition to the reign of Tacitus, who is also to be considered, on the track already blazed by Syme, another emperor soldier.64 The literary sources, Gnoli further pointed out, seem to have completely forgotten the period of Severina’s regency, giving the emperor Tacitus fanciful physical characteristics such as senile age (Historia Augusta, Zonaras) and attributing decisive power to the senate during the interregnum (Historia Augusta, Aurelius Victor): based on calculations of dies imperii, particularly dear to chronicles writers, Aurelius Victor would have been the first to notice a “hiatus” between the killing of Aurelian and the elevation of Tacitus and “would have invented the datum of the interregnum.”65 As it turns out, after Aurelian’s assassination in September/October of 275, according to Latin sources the succession of Tacitus would have taken place after an interregnum of 6/7 months, or immediately, or almost immediately, according to Greek sources. The Historia Augusta shows Tacitus as a senior Senatskaiser, and refers to a “climate of full convergence of interests between senate and army” and depends on a single original source “close to the facts and flawed, because it does not mention Ulpia Severina”; that is, it fails to mention the crucial role played by Aurelian’s wife, who instead minted coinage in her own name, held the leadership for at least two or three months (roughly between September and November of 275) and “played a central role in the seemingly painless transition to the choice of another vir militaris,” namely that Tacitus whom the Latin sources portray as an old senator but whom instead the numismatic documentation represents “as a mature emperor but not old, equipped with

 Gnoli 2019, pp. 48–54.  Gnoli 2020, p. 572.

64 65

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

47

shield and spear.”66 The second group of sources, that is, the Greek ones (Zosimus, Zonaras) that stick more to the actual facts, ignore the interregnum—although Zonaras considers Tacitus to be an elderly senator— but they too fail to mention the crucial presence of Severina: “Aurelian’s wife managed to ‘ferry’ the Empire to the successor Tacitus in a nontraumatic way,” as shown by the issuance of huge donativa for soldiers with the legend CONCORDIAE MILITVM.67 The numismatic findings give rise to further reflections: Tacitus began minting coins in November 275 in Lugdunum and then in Ticinum and Rome, and the first coinage of the latter two mints show a young man, while in issues III of Rome and II of Ticinum the emperor bears the features of a more mature man. “The appearance of the new emperor Tacitus was unknown to the scalptores of the mints of Rome and Ticinum before his adventus in the capital,” which probably occurred only in the final days of 275.68 A similar line of interpretation, aimed at capturing in Severina the fundamental, and very delicate, function of ‘ferrywoman’, had already been put forward by Strobel, who emphasized not only the loyalty of the troops—who in fact did not acclaim a new emperor—with regard to Severina, but also, even, spoke of “authorization” granted—at the end of 275, a few months after Aurelian’s assassination—by the widow Augusta to Tacitus, later legitimized by the senate through the official conferral of the title of Augustus, who in turn would be inclined to punish only some

66  Gnoli 2019, pp. 49–50; 53; cf. 43: “such a historiographic source—let us call it EKG, Urquelle, historiographical-source-of-Tetrarchic-age, or whatever one wishes—managed to keep on the sidelines other existing sources, which could not impose themselves in the construction of the information canvas that later became dominant.” In particular, on the profile of Tacitus traced by the Historia Augusta, see Hohl 1911a, pp. 178–229; Jones 1939, pp.  366–369; Den Hengst 1994, pp. 101–107; Paschoud 1995, pp.  269–280; on the emperors Tacitus, Carus, and Carinus see Loriot 1999, pp. 147–154; Neri 2002, pp. 373–396, regarding the possible dating of the Vita Taciti after 410 on the basis of certain affinities with the figure of the usurper Attalus. 67  Gnoli 2019, p. 51; see Estiot 2005, p. 170; also Mecella 2021, p. 81, note 85: “Aurelian’s widow could hardly have managed the delicate interregnum if there had been open dissent among the army’s leaders against her late husband.” 68  Gnoli 2019, p. 52.

48 

M. CASSIA

of the conspirators, without, however, going too far in the process of “purging.”69 The considerations made so far show in a truly incontrovertible way the extent to which the coin issues constitute an indispensable source both for supplementing and correcting the data offered by literary accounts and, above all, for restoring to the figure of Severina the proper prominence as ruler, albeit for a few months, of the Empire of Rome. In this sense, therefore, it seems necessary and methodologically unavoidable to approach the subject of the “reign of Severina” from the point of view of the coinage struck in the name of Augusta alone. The fundamental works of Callu, Strobel, and especially Estiot came to the conclusion that, in the short span of about two months, Empress Severina “exerça la régence seule.”70 Indeed, the coins show that in AD 275 Severina was sole regent during a period of interregnum managed by the army and not by the senate, as claimed by the anonymous author of

69  Strobel 2013, p.  285: “im September 275 fiel Aurelian in der Propontis bei seinem Feldzug gegen die über das Schwarze Meer in Kleinasien eindringenden Invasoren, Goten und weitere Gruppen, einer Offiziersverschwörung zum Opfer. Dieser Kaisermord weist eine Besonderheit auf, da auf ihn keine Usurpation folgte und damit offenkundig keiner im Kreise der Verschwörer die Möglichkeit sah, vom anwesenden Feldheer als neuer Augustus akzeptiert zu werden. Das Feldheer blieb dem ermordeten Kaiser treu und stellte sich loyal hinter die Augusta Ulpia Severina. Auch die anderen Teile des Reichsheeres in den Provinzen blieben loyal, so dass auch dort eine Ausrufung zum Kaiser unterblieb … Der von der Augusta nach einigen Monaten Ende 275 als Nachfolger autorisierte und vom Senat durch die Verleihung des Augustus-Titels legitimierte Tacitus eilte sofort im Jahre 276 in die Propontis und übernahm das bei Perinthos lagernde führerlose Feldheer, den sacer comitatus, was für ihn lebenswichtig sein musste. Er ließ einen Teil der Verschwörer hinrichten, sehr wahrscheinlich die in den Augen der Soldaten am meisten kompromittierten Männer, musste aber offensichtlich gegenüber einem Teil der Offiziere Rücksicht üben, um nicht deren offenen Widerstand heraufzubeschwören und damit seine eigene Sicherheit zu gefährden, wenn er die Säuberung zu sehr ausgedehnt hätte.” 70  Estiot 2005, p.  159; see earlier Estiot and Modonesi 1995, p.  10: “the episode was concealed by ancient historiographers and underestimated by modern historians, while the monetary findings confirm the regency and autonomous coinage by Severina”; Estiot 1995a, p. 31: “The brief period of vacancy of power between the death of Aurelian and the accession of Tacitus, from September to November 275, was occupied by Augusta whose name is indicated in the coinage series.”

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

49

the Historia Augusta and Aurelius Victor.71 Perassi, another excellent numismatist, also subscribes to this line of interpretation: in his view, it is conceivable that Severina exercised, albeit for a short period, a regency during which she also held the right to mint coinage.72 Indeed, after the end of 274, the year of the celebration of the triumph of Aurelian, some issues (in gold; in silver with Aureliani and denarii only in Rome; and tetradrachms in billon in Alexandria) of the eight active imperial mints (Rome, Lugdunum, Ticinum, Siscia, Serdica, Cyzicus, Antioch, and Alexandria) were struck in Severina’s name while her husband was still alive: such coins invariably bear on the obv. the legend SEVERINA AVG, except in Alexandria where the obv. presents ΟVΛΠ CΕVΗΡΙΝΑ CΕΒ.73 The issues in the name of Ulpia Severina alone, datable to between September and November 275 can be schematized as follows:74 Rome, XII issue: Aureliani, on the obv. SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. CONCORDIAE MILITVM or VENVS VICTRIX; denarii, on the obv. SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. VENVS FELIX; aurei, on the obv. SEVERINA AVG, on the rev. CONCORDIAE MILITVM (Figs. 2.5, 2.6 and 2.7).75 Lugdunum, V issue: Aureliani, on the obv. SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. CONCORDIAE MILITVM (Fig. 2.8).

71  Estiot 2005, pp. 157–180. See also Estiot 1983, pp. 9–115 (about a hoard consisting of 1745 specimens, 663 of which were minted in the name of Aurelian); Estiot 1988, pp. 439–441, 1990a, pp. 875–877, b, pp. 923–927; Estiot and Amandry 1990, pp. 727–732; Estiot 1991a, pp. 449–502 (on the chronological classification of Aurelian’s gold coins from Milan), b, pp.  49–54, 1993, pp.  327–334, 1994, pp.  818–821; Estiot and Bonté 1997, pp. 4–9; Estiot 1998, pp. 97–117, 1999, pp. 51–165, 2004. See also Göbl 1993, pp. 29–30; 45–50; 134 (on which see the discussion in Estiot 1995b, pp. 50–94). 72  Perassi 2002, p. 341. 73  Estiot 2005, p. 160, Table 1. 74  Perassi 2002, pp. 361–362, Table I. 75  See Estiot 1995a, p. 31.

50 

M. CASSIA

Fig. 2.5  Aurelianus from Rome: on the obv. bust of Severina facing right, diademed, on a crescent moon with the legend SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. Concordia standing, facing left, draped, bearing insignia in both hands with the legend CONCORDIAE MILITVM, in exergue XX I R (RIC V 1, p. 315, Rome 4). (© severina/RIC_0004 with permission of wildwinds.com, ex CNG.)

Fig. 2.6  Denarius from Rome: on the obv. bust of Severina facing right, diademed and draped and the legend SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. Venus standing, facing left, draped, bearing Cupid and scepter and legend VENVS FELIX, in exergue ϛ (RIC V 1, p. 316, Rome 6). (© severina/RIC_0006_S with permission of wildwinds.com, ex Áureo & Calicó.)

Ticinum, V issue: Aureliani, on the obv. SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. CONCORDIAE MILITVM; aurei, on the obv. SEVERINA AVG, on the rev. CONCORDIAE MILITVM (Fig. 2.9).76 Siscia, IX issue: aurei, on the obv. SEVERINAE AVG, on the rev. CONCORDIAE MILITVM (Fig. 2.10).77  See Estiot 1995a, pp. 51–52; 54; 56.  See Estiot 1995a, pp. 62–63.

76 77

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

51

Fig. 2.7  Aureus from Rome: on the obv. bust of Severina facing right, diademed, draped, on a crescent moon with the legend SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. Concordia standing, facing left, draped, bearing insignia in both hands with the legend CONCORDIAE MILITVM (RIC V 1, p. 315, Rome 2). (© The Trustees of the British Museum.)

Fig. 2.8  Aurelianus from Lugdunum: on the obv. bust of Severina facing right, diademed, on a crescent moon with the legend SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. Concordia seated, facing left, draped, bearing patera and cornucopia with the legend CONCORD MILIT, in exergue ∙ D ∙ L ∙ (RIC V 1, p. 315, Lugdunum 1). (© severina/RIC_001_D-dot-L with permission of wildwinds.com, ex Tkalec AG.)

52 

M. CASSIA

Fig. 2.9  Aurelianus from Ticinum: on the obv. bust of Severina facing right, diademed, on a crescent moon with the legend SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. Concordia standing, facing left, draped, bearing insignia in both hands with the legend CONCORDIAE MILITVM, in exergue T XX T (RIC V 1, p.  316, Ticinum 8). (© severina/RIC_0008_P with permission of wildwinds.com.)

Fig. 2.10  Aureus from Siscia: on the obv. bust of Severina facing right, diademed, draped, on a crescent moon with the legend SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. Concordia standing, facing left, draped, bearing insignia in both hands and the legend CONCORDIAE MILITVM (RIC V 1, p. 316, Siscia 12). (https://smb. museum-­d igital.de/object/258194?recordlang=en&record=111083, Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin / Benjamin Seifert (Lübke und Wiedemann) (Public Domain Mark 1.0.))

Serdica, VIII issue: Aureliani, on the obv. SEVERINAE AVGVSTA; on the rev. CONCORDIA AVGG (with a male figure and Severina clasping each other’s right hand) (Fig. 2.11).78 78  See Estiot 1995a, p. 78: in this specific case, the plural ending clearly indicates that coins in the name of Augusta were issued while Aurelian was still alive.

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

53

Fig. 2.11  Aurelianus from Serdica: on the obv. bust of Severina facing right, diademed, draped, on a crescent moon with the legend SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. a male figure and Severina clasping each other’s right hand with the legend CONCORDIA AVGG, star below, in exergue ΚΑ∙Γ (RIC V 1, p. 317, Serdica 17). (https://auctions.bertolamifinearts.com/it/lot/58493/severina-­augusta-­270-­ 275-­antoninianus-­/#gallery, reproduced by courtesy of Dr. A.  Pancotti— Bertolami Fine Arts.)

Cyzicus, X issue: aurei, on the obv. SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. CONCORDIAE MILITVM.79 Antioch, VII issue: Aureliani, on the obv. SEVERINA P F AVG; on the rev. CONCORDIA AVG (with a male figure and Severina clasping each other’s right hand) (Fig. 2.12).80 Alexandria, VII year (August 29–November 275): tetradrachms, on the obv. OVΛΠ CΕVΗΡΙΝΑ CΕΒ; on the rev. an eagle or Ἐλπίς/Spes or Athena (Fig. 2.13). Estiot has rightly emphasized some specific features of these issues— such as the unusual titling P(IA) F(ELIX)81 or the use of the unusual  See Estiot 1995a, p. 88.  See Estiot 1995a, pp. 100–101: in this case, however, the unusual AVG(VSTA) shows that Aurelian is no longer alive, but his memory is perpetuated through a male figure. 81  This legend is attested only on the coins of Iulia Domna and Cornelia Salonina and, then, between the fifth and sixth centuries AD on nominals of Galla Placidia, Licinia Eudoxia, Iusta Grata Honoria, and Euphemia: Callu 2000, pp. 189–207. In the masculine, the titling Pius Felix, initially attributed to Commodus, continues to connote the Severans and some emperors of the fifty-year period of “military anarchy,” but still persists in the titles of Christian emperors: see Van’t Dack 1991, pp. 311–335; Hekster 2002, pp. 92–98; Laconi 2003. 79 80

54 

M. CASSIA

Fig. 2.12  Aurelianus from Antioch of Syria: on the obv. bust of Severina facing right, diademed, draped, on a crescent moon with the legend SEVERINA P F AVG; on the rev. a male figure and Severina clasping each other’s right hand with the legend CONCORDIA AVG, in exergue XX I (RIC V 1, p. 318, Antioch 19). (© https://numid.ku.de/object?lang=en&id=ID46; https://numid.ku.de/objec t?lang=en&id=ID46&view=rs, with permission of Dr. Ph. Köhner.)

Fig. 2.13  Tetradrachm from Alexandria: on the obv. bust of Severina facing right, diademed with the legend OVΛΠ CΕVΗΡΙΝΑ CΕΒ; on the rev. standing eagle, facing right, with palm behind its shoulders, garland in its beak with the legend ΕΤΟΥC, on the right the numeral ϛ (Milne 1933, no. 4453). (© severina/ milne_4453 with permission of wildwinds.com.)

CONCORDIA AVG (and not AVGG) on the coins of Antioch, “à traduire par CONCORDIA AVGVSTAE”—which “confirment le rôle exceptionnel de régente joué par Séverine” and which, together with precise political choices, such as using the legend CONCORDIA MILITVM as a symbol (issues from the mints of Rome, Lugdunum, Ticinum, Siscia, and Cyzicus) or allocating substantial gold donativa (Rome, Ticinum, Siscia, and Cyzicus) to the armies after the assassination of her husband, demonstrate the empress’s special attention to the troops, in the firm knowledge

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

55

that Aurelian’s succession would not be decided within the senatorial circles of Rome, but in the higher echelons of the various armies.82 The latter assertion led the French scholar to address not only the issue of the interregnum but also that of the nomination of the successor, and here again the numismatic documentation offers valuable support. The issues of the three western mints (Lugdunum, Rome, and Ticinum) depict the widowed empress Severina at the time when Tacitus was first detained north of the Alps leading a military campaign against Germanic peoples, most likely the Alamanni and Juthungi, and only afterward did he travel to Rome, in December 275, to gain recognition from the senate; however, he made an initial stop in November 275 in Lugdunum, where he presided over the distribution of gold donativa to the armies. These facts would make Aurelian’s successor not the old senator portrayed by the Historia Augusta but rather a man “plus proche de l’entourage militaire d’Aurélien.”83 As we can see on the coins, the somatic features of this woman of power are those of an old woman with a wrinkled face. But what were the actual features of Ulpia Severina? In a fine 2002 essay, Perassi rejects all the hypotheses of attribution to the empress advanced in the past regarding both full-relief sculptures, even including the one housed in the Palazzo dei Conservatori Museum (Fig. 2.14a and b), and engravings on precious stones referring or referable to Severina, and therefore, writes the scholar, “only the portraits depicted on the coins allow us … to know the physiognomy of Aurelian’s consort.”84 Based on a close examination of the 524 coins, including Aureliani and denarii, in the imposing Venèra hoard and issued in the name of the empress alone, Perassi explains the different types of hairstyles (from the 82  Estiot 2005, pp. 162; 164; 166–167: “le patronage de l’Augusta, l’appel à la loyauté— dûment stipendiée—des soldats cachent sans doute l’âpreté des négociations qui eurent lieu pour trouver un successeur à Aurélien au sein de la caste militaire dont il était lui-même issu.” 83  Estiot 2005, p. 167. On the donativa of Tacitus, see Gricourt et al. 2014, pp. 195–219. 84  Perassi 2002, p. 340. Besides in Berlin and the Torlonia Museum, alleged depictions of Severina can also be seen at the Palazzo dei Conservatori Museum (Braccio Nuovo, Room III, no. 2 [formerly III, no. 31], inv. no. 2767), also in Rome (bust with arm and hand under drapery: Fittschen and Zanker 1983, p. 114, no. 172, tables 201–202). Bergmann 1977, pp. 182; 194, dated the Berlin head to the last two decades of the third century and the one in Rome (Palazzo dei Conservatori) to the age of Gallienus. These attributions were also later rejected by Wegner 1979, p. 145. Ricciardi 2007, pp. 306–308, deemed that the following cannot be attributable to Severina: the head on a bust that did not originally belong to it, shattered and repaired, preserved at the Torlonia Museum; and the bust kept at the Doria Pamphilj Palace, no. 2153, also in Rome.

56 

M. CASSIA

Fig. 2.14  (a and b) Female bust of the Gallienic age attributed to Ulpia Severina. Palazzo dei Conservatori, Rome,  inv. no. 2767. (© Reproduced by courtesy of Prof. C. Perassi, I ritratti monetali di Ulpia Severina, in RIN 103, 2002, p. 369, tavola II, figura 5.)

more usual hairstyle with straight hair, gathered in raised braids to form a loop on the forehead, to that of hair in waves, also gathered in raised braids to the στεφάνη (crown), to that, decidedly anomalous, with hair combed back, and not braided, and eyelet on the forehead), jewelry (στεφάνη to be precise), robes, additional attributes (such as the crescent moon), and physiognomic features, and noted the progressive “masculinization” in the representation of the empress, as well as, perhaps, her “militarization” since, in addition to the stola and palla—typical garments of the matrona—we can discern a fibula, the paludamentum worn by soldiers, that fixed her cloak on her shoulder.85 85  Perassi 2002, pp. 342–360. The “canonical” elements of a matron’s clothing consisted of three garments that fulfilled the delicate task of enveloping the body: the tunica interior (or subucula or interula, narrow and long-sleeved, made of wool and, later, of increasingly fine fabrics, worn over a fascia pectoralis or mamillare), the palla, that is, a square cloak that covered the head and shoulders and was worn outside the household walls, and especially the stola, the “official uniform” of the matronae, consisting in an overcoat that was wider and longer than the tunica, reaching down to the feet, was fastened with fibulae on the shoulders and which, not surprisingly, was reintroduced compulsorily by Octavian Augustus, concerned to curb the “transgressive” tendencies of the “declining” Republic: see Cassia 2020, p. 62 (with specific bibliography therein).

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

57

Agrippina the Youger already wore such a paludamentum, according to Pliny the Elder.86 However, this fact was “reformulated” by Tacitus and Cassius Dio, who attributed the paludamentum to Claudius while Agrippina is said to have worn a golden chlamys.87 This traditional military dress is a feature of the coins of third-century empresses (and is also documented in the portraits of Iulia Domna, Herennia Etruscilla, Cornelia Salonina, Magnia Urbica, and Galeria Valeria, respectively wives of Septimius Severus, Decius, Gallienus, Carinus, and Galerius), including those of Ulpia Severina herself, and reaches as far as the coinage of Aelia Flaccilla, first wife of Theodosius I.88 This unique condition—emphasized by Tacitus himself89—was to have a very significant follow-up, when Faustina the Younger, wife of Marcus 86  Plin. nat. 33, 19, 63: nos vidimus Agrippinam Claudi principis, edente eo navalis proelii spectaculum, adsidentem et indutam paludamento aureo textili sine alia materia, “as for us, we saw Agrippina, wife of Emperor Claudius, once he was offering the spectacle of a naval battle, sitting beside him and wearing a military cloak of gold, woven without any other material.” 87  Tac. ann. 12, 56: ipse insigni paludamento neque procul Agrippina chlamyde aurata praesedere, “the prince [i.e., Claudius], wearing a superb cloak of war, and Agrippina, clad in a chlamys woven of gold, presided over the spectacle.” Dio Cass. 60, 33, 3: ὁ δὲ δὴ Κλαύδιος ὅ τε Νέρων στρατιωτικῶς ἐστάλησαν, ἥ τε Ἀγριππῖνα χλαμύδι διαχρύσῳ ἐκοσμήθη, “Claudius and Nero wore military dress, while Agrippina was adorned in a chlamys with golden embroidery.” 88  This is the hypothesis formulated by Bastien 1993, pp. 637–640, 1994, Tables 79, 5 (Iulia Domna); 96, 4 (Herennia Etruscilla); 107, 2 (Cornelia Salonina); 116, 6 (Ulpia Severina); 130, 6 (Magnia Urbica); 154, 1–2 (Galeria Valeria); also Perassi 2002, pp. 354; 360. On the subject of iconographic features documented by numismatics and with specific reference to the Augustae we also refer to the book by Sidrys 2020, pp. 200; 204, fig. 87, who analyzed the presence of spheres on the rev. of coin issues bearing the portraits of 19 Augustae between 81 and 515 AD and concluded that the highest percentages concern the nominals of Licinia Eudoxia (47.4% out of a total of nineteen types), wife of Valentinian III, Licinia Eudocia (33.3% out of a total of twelve types), wife of Theodosius II, and Pulcheria (24.2% out of a total of thirty-three types), wife of Marcianus; the presence of the globus cruciger reflects the Christian faith of these three empresses; on the other hand, regarding the issues of Ulpia Severina (“a possible exception,” since she “ruled briefly after her husband Aurelian’s death”) 10% out of twenty total types that represent pagan deities or personifications attest a “median” value when compared with the lower ones of the remaining Augustae, from Domitia Longina, wife of Domitian, to Ariadne, consort of Zeno. 89  Tac. ann. 12, 42, 2: suum quoque fastigium Agrippina extollere altius: carpento Capitolium ingredi, qui honos sacerdotibus et sacris antiquitus concessus venerationem augebat feminae, quam imperatore genitam, sororem eius qui rerum potitus sit et coniugem et matrem fuisse, unicum ad hunc diem exemplum est, “meanwhile Agrippina concerned herself with continually increasing her personal prestige. She entered the Capitolium on a chariot: a distinction reserved since ancient times for priests and sacred statues, and which now contributed to magnifying the public deference for this woman, daughter of a general, sister, spouse and mother of sovereigns: a unique example until that day.”

58 

M. CASSIA

Aurelius, was given the official title mater castrorum in inscriptions, destined certainly to influence the “progressive construction of the role and representation of the Augustae as beneficent mothers and bringers of well-­ being and fecundity, who lovingly succored the population in distress, and also the soldiers.” Likewise, it is later documented that Iulia Domna was attributed such titles as mater Caesaris, mater Augusti et Caesaris, mater Augustorum, mater Augusti et castrorum et senatus et patriae (the title of mater castrorum et senatus et patriae was also conferred on Severina, as shown respectively by epigraphs from Pola and Tarraco: see below, Chap. 3, § 1).90 The title mater castrorum was first attributed in AD 174 to Faustina the Younger, wife of Marcus Aurelius, and was held by several Augustae, including Iulia Domna, Iulia Maesa, Iulia Mamaea, Herennia Etruscilla, and Ulpia Severina; however, like other titles in rarer use, such as mater senatus and mater patriae, it was no longer used after Diocletian.91 If Faustina the Younger is “only” mater castrorum, instead, Iulia Domna, Iulia Aquilia Severa, Iulia Avita Mamaea, Otacilia Severa, Cornelia Salonina, Ulpia Severina, and Magnia Urbica are matres castrorum et senatus et patriae.92 Here the particularity lies in the “motherhood” aspect that is not limited to the military encampments: the title of mater Augusti et castrorum et senatus et patriae conferred on Iulia Domna, further enhanced by reference to descent, closely links political propaganda with family roles in the Severan dynasty; the most intimate bond, that between mother and son, ends up finding application in the public sphere, that is, in the sphere of the relationship between the empress and the various social parties, viz. the soldiers, the senate, and the homeland, understood lato sensu as the set of all the citizens of the imperial territory: these 90  Cenerini 2016a, p.  11; see Cenerini 2016b, pp. 36–46; Hidalgo de la Vega 2000, pp. 191–224; Bleckmann 2002, pp. 333–339; Hidalgo de la Vega 2012, pp. 174–175, 2013, vol. 2, pp. 499–518; Cenerini 2015, pp. 1–13, 2022, pp. 17–21. 91  Buonopane 2020, p. 166; see Kuhoff 1993, p. 270. It is likely that Faustina held the title in 171 AD: Cenerini 2017, pp. 111–112. The title was also given to Galeria Valeria: Casella 2020, pp. 256–259. On the title from the Severans to the Tetrarchic era: Lichtenberger 2011, p. 360. 92  Kienast et al. 2017,6 pp. 137; 152; 167; 169; 174 (here Iulia Avita Mamaea is remembered only as mater castrorum and mater senatus, but see CIL II 3413 = ILS 485 = Abascal Palazón and Ramallo Asensio 1997, no. 44, from Carthago Nova in Hispania Citerior: Iuliae Avitae / Mam(a)eae Augu(stae) / matri domini / n(ostri) Sanctissimi / Imp(eratoris) Severi Ale/xandri Pii Fe/licis Aug(usti) et / castrorum et / senatus et pa/triae et univer/si generis hu/mani conven/tus Karthag(inensis)); 192; 212; 253; see generally also Angelova 2015, p. 84. On Cornelia Salonina see Ricciardi 2007, p. 247.

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

59

subjects are duty bound to respect their mother from whom they in turn expect “maternal” behavior, that is, without any hint of scandalous conduct.93 The titles accumulated by Iulia Domna “summarize and identify, in a single womb, the right of blood, military power and institutions.”94 If, as Perassi correctly points out, “Zenobia had demonstrated how even a muliercula was capable of handling power … and her example was not chronologically and geographically distant,” then the analysis of Severina’s somatic features in monetary iconography might prompt some further consideration, since the Aureliani issued from the mints of Lugdunum and Ticinum depict the empress as a woman of non-elderly age and pleasant appearance, while specimens from the Rome mint give the empress’s face a certain hardness and angularity; in still other cases, the woman appears decidedly old and in some coins she even  presents the thick beard and drooping mustache typical of the depiction of her husband (Fig. 2.15). Therefore, Severina does not appear to have a portrait of her own on the coins, one that is detached from the influence exerted by the physiognomic features of Aurelian. There are several reasons for this: (1) there was no “official” depiction of the Augustae in the mints to which the engravers could make a sure reference; (2) due to the rapid pace of coin production it was not uncommon to use models prepared for a different series in order to save time; and (3) the same mintmark could be employed regardless of the sex of the individual with partial modifications of the most conspicuous aspects, such as the hairstyle, the robes, accessories, and the presence or absence of beards and mustaches.95 Perassi wondered at this point:

 Bryant 1999, pp. 23–30.  Cenerini 20092 (2002), p. 150. 95  Perassi 2002, p. 357; see Perassi 2014, pp. 196–197, regarding the multiple causes of the variability in coin portraiture, which may well explain the variety of assessments offered by scholars regarding Severina’s physiognomy: Cizek 1994, p. 228, describes her as “una femme assez jolie, mais pourvue d’un nez trop grand,” while according to Bovini 1943, p. 247, Severina “has on the coins an appearance that shows her to be no longer young, since her wrinkles denote her advanced age”; so also Felletti Maj 1958, p. 269: “in the coin depictions Severina appears at a mature age, with a lean and dry face, forehead furrowed by wrinkles, and a rather long and pointed nose”; Floriani Squarciapino 1966, p. 228: the empress “has on the coins … an appearance no longer young, because her forehead and the corners of her mouth are marked with wrinkles.” 93 94

60 

M. CASSIA

Fig. 2.15  Monetary portraits of Ulpia Severina on coins from the mint of Rome (a) and from the mints of Rome and Siscia (b–f). (© Reproduced by courtesy of Prof. C. Perassi, Ritratti monetali delle Augustae nel III secolo d.C.: una crisi di genere?, in Un confronto drammatico con il XXI secolo: l’Impero romano del III secolo nella crisi monetaria. Atti del Convegno, Biassono 9 giugno 2012, Biassono 2014, p. 232, figura 29.) Is it perhaps only an intriguing suggestion to see then in the “masculinization” of Severina’s portrait an attempt by the Augusta—now alone at the head of the Empire and its troops—to self-represent herself as equal to a man, equally capable of exercising command?96

Whatever the answer to this question, it is nevertheless safe to speculate that the masculine features of Severina’s physiognomy on coins may have proved decisively instrumental in endorsing and/or facilitating the delicate “handover” from the emperor to the empress, a worthy alter ego, also iconographic, of the dominus in numismatic portraiture and therefore also a valid substitute even on the political (and military) scene of the Empire. In a study published in 2014—significantly titled Ritratti monetali delle Augustae nel III secolo D.C. Una crisi di genere? (Coin Portraits of the  Perassi 2002, p. 352.

96

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

61

Augustae in the III Century A.D. A Gender Crisis?)—Perassi returned to this theme of Severina’s sometimes “almost virile” profile in order to reject a hypothesis put forward in 2004 by Fernando López Sánchez, who saw in the masculinization of depictions of Severina a “manifestation du pouvoir réel de l’impératrice à Rome,” almost as if a division of roles were officially sanctioned between the imperial couple of Augusti beginning in AD 274, “à Séverine Rome et l’Italie, à lui [i.e., Aurélien] l’extérieur et les campagnes militaires.”97 According to Perassi, however, this reading of the assimilation of the “almost manly” depiction of Severina to that of her consort runs the risk of leading to a “diarchic” vision that in fact was not there, at least in the sense of a constant equality between the two partners of the imperial couple who were both living; this interpretation also suggested the separation, also geographically speaking, of the spheres of action of husband and wife, when in actual fact, some of Aurelian’s significant interventions took place in Rome, namely the construction of the famous walls and temple in honor of the Sun or public handouts to the population of Rome, but also, and primarily, the monetary reform that began in AD 274 (see supra, § 1) following the bellum monetariorum that had pitted the emperor against the mint workers of Rome in 271 (see supra, Chap. 1, § 2).98 Regarding this partial masculinization of the portraiture on Severina’s coinage, different explanations have been given from the one offered by López Sánchez, that actually seems difficult to accept. As Eric R. Varner writes in an article—with the fascinating title Transcending Gender: Assimilation, Identity, and Roman Imperial Portraits—the juxtaposition between an elaborate female hairstyle and distinctly masculine connotations renders the monetary iconography of Severina unique in the repertoire of imperial female portraits. The reason given by the scholar to explain this condition of specificity/exceptionality—whereby the portrait of the consort appears in some issues almost like a “feminized” duplication of that of her husband—is interesting to say the least, in that it attempts to capture a unique and distinctive aspect of Aurelian’s reign, hardly

 López Sánchez 2004, pp. 249–261.  Perassi 2014, pp. 205–207.

97 98

62 

M. CASSIA

discernible in the reigns of his predecessors, that is, the conflict between a Roman emperor and a foreign βασίλισσα, Zenobia.99 Indeed, Varner’s hypothesis is already reflected in a dissertation published in 2007 by Ryan Ann Ricciardi, who closely correlates the presence of Ulpia Severina in the official program of imperial propaganda with the war fought by the emperor against Zenobia, who, possessing the title of Augusta, constituted, along with her sons, a direct “rival” in Severina’s regard, a dangerously “symmetrical,” antagonist, a female “counterbalance” completely inadequate politically and yet “endowed” even with male lineage (on the possible repercussions of this parallel with Zenobia in the official titling see infra, Chap. 3, § 2).100 Although, as noted above, Perassi has on several occasions reiterated that it is absolutely impossible to trace depictions of Severina either in full-­ relief sculpture or on gems, in the writer’s opinion a specific artifact that comprises graphic elements and iconographic aspects should at least to be taken into consideration: a gold ring found in a burial chamber (no. 14) in Mtskheta, Georgia, now preserved in the archeological collection of the Georgian National Museum (inv. no. 01-6-X-1611) and bearing in the keystone a carved reddish carnelian, depicting a female bust accompanied by an epigraph. The woman appears with a pronounced jaw and a large aquiline nose, with drooping skin on her cheeks and a small chin, a slightly fleshy neck, swollen eyes and unclenched lips, hair well combed with curls over the ears and gathered and fastened at the nape of the neck; she wears an unusual headdress of a truncated cone shape with a veil that falls from the top to cover the back of her body (Fig. 2.16).

99  Varner 2008, pp. 196–197: “masculinity itself appears to be an inherent visual prerequisite for Roman ruler imagery. Ulpia Severina is unique among Roman empresses, as she may actually have wielded imperial authority in her own right during a brief interregnum in 275 AD between the death of her husband, Aurelian, and the accession of his immediate successors, Tacitus and Florian. Severina carefully constructs a visual identity on her coins by juxtaposing her elaborate female Scheitelzopf (skull braid) hairstyle with her husband’s hypermasculine facial features … Severina’s likenesses are among the most masculinized in the repertoire of female imperial portraits … Severina’s more masculine numismatic identity may also in part be a conscious response to the representations of Zenobia, whom her husband had eventually defeated and led in his triumphal procession.” 100  Ricciardi 2007, pp. 292–293 and note 709: “Aurelian’s decision to accord his wife the title may be a reaction to Zenobia’s self-proclamation as Augusta in 272. Perhaps as a means of establishing a contrast between the impropriety of Zenobia and the virtue of Ulpia Severina, Aurelian incorporated his wife into public imagery.”

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

63

Fig. 2.16  Gold ring with reddish carved carnelian from Mtskheta, Georgia. (© Reproduced by courtesy of Prof. E. Avaliani, What’s in a Name? Who might be Basilissa Ulpia from Mtskheta?, in G.R. Tsetskhladze, A. Avram, J. Hargrave [eds.], The Greeks and Romans in the Black Sea and the Importance of the Pontic Region for the Graeco-Roman World (7th century b.c.–5th century a.d.): 20 Years On [1997–2017]. Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress on Black Sea Antiquities, Constant ̧a 18–22 September 2017, Oxford 2021, p. 635, fig. 4.)

The portrait bears on the left the epigraph ΒΑCΙΛΙCCΑ and on the right ΟΥΛΠΙΑΝΑΖΙΑ and the third-to-last letter, according to Eka Avaliani, should be interpreted as an inverted Σ: the inscription should thus be read ΒΑCΙΛΙCCΑ ΟΥΛΠΙΑΝ ΑΣΙΑ and the meaning of the text, albeit engraved in a Greek that is graphically incorrect and grammatically incorrect in the use of cases, probably refers to a “Queen Ulpia of Asia,” a title for which the most suitable candidate would seem to be Severina, in connection with the establishment of a cult of the empress in the eastern area, presumably in the last year of Aurelian’s reign or immediately after his murder.101 Finally, it is worth mentioning a coin find published in 1962 but not yet adequately appreciated by the—albeit meticulous—numismatic studies devoted to the issues of Severina alone: in an urn found in an incineration cemetery located in Iernut, Dacia, a coin of the empress issued by the mint of Ticinum in the year 275 was found (Fig. 2.17; see Fig. 2.18). 101  Avaliani 2019, pp.  509; 511: “the most suitable candidacy seems to be the Roman empress Ulpia Severina … such a conception corresponds closely to the contemporary historical situation (to proclaim empress Ulpia as ‘a ruler of Ἀσία’ in the Roman province of Asia) and should be considered as an imperial political decision to establish the empress cult and authority in the Eastern provinces of Asia”; see Avaliani 2021, pp. 634–640.

64 

M. CASSIA

Fig. 2.17  Severina coin found in Dacia. (Modified by M. Cassia after N. Vlassa, Un cimitir de incineraţie de la sfîrşitul veacului III, de la Iernut, in Studii ši Cercetări de Istorie Veche 13, 1, 1962, p. 155, fig. 5.)

Fig. 2.18  Coin from Ticinum: on the obv. bust of Severina facing right, diademed, draped, on a crescent moon with the legend SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. Concordia looking left and bearing insignia in both hands with the legend CONCORDIAE MILITVM, in exergue T XX T (RIC V 1, p. 316, Ticinum 8). (Severina/RIC_0008_T with permission of wildwinds.com.)

The discovery not only testifies to the persistence of the Romanized population in Dacia after Aurelian, as Nicolae Vlassa102 writes, but also offers, in our opinion, an interesting connecting link between Ulpia Severina and a region in which the nomen Ulpius was particularly widespread and moreover corroborates and substantiates the hypothesis advanced by Watson regarding the possible region of origin of the empress, 102  Vlassa 1962, pp. 153–155 (abstract in Russian and French). See Sotgiu 1975, p. 1061, footnote 145.

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

65

but formulated by the scholar on the sole basis of the anecdotal evidence concerning Ulpius Crinitus and handed down by the Historia Augusta (see supra, Chap. 1, § 2). The empress, therefore, may have originated from a middle area of the Empire, geographically speaking, which was strongly impacted by movements of peoples in the second half of the third century, as well as being particularly crucial for the strenuous defense of the borders.

Bibliography Abascal Palazón, Ramallo Asensio 1997: J.M.  Abascal Palazón, S.F.  Ramallo Asensio (eds.), La ciudad de Carthago Nova. 3. La documentación epigráfica, Murcia 1997. Amon 2018: H. Amon, Gallien, Claude le Gothique, Aurélien et le bon empereur dans les Caesares d’Aurelius Victor, in Interférences 10, 2018, pp. 1–13. Angelova 2015: D.N. Angelova, Sacred Founders. Women, Men, and Gods in the Discourse of Imperial Founding, Rome through Early Byzantium, Oakland 2015. Arslan 2017: E. Arslan, Ancora sulla riforma di Aureliano. XX e XX I: due nominali distinti?, in BCercleNum 54, 2017, pp. 2–17. Arzone 2020: A. Arzone, Alcune riflessioni sul ripostiglio della Venèra (Verona) e sui grandi tesori monetali di carattere pubblico, in I. Baldini, A.L. Morelli (eds.), Beni da conservare. Forme di tesaurizzazione in età romana e medievale, Ornamenta 7, Bologna 2020, pp. 33–54. Avaliani 2019: E. Avaliani, Finding Meaning in the Past: Reinterpretation of the Late Roman Artifact, the Golden Ring with a Carnelian Intaglio from the Museum of Georgia, in Σκολή 13, 2, 2019, pp. 503–512. Avaliani 2021: E. Avaliani, What’s in a Name? Who might be Basilissa Ulpia from Mtskheta?, in G.R. Tsetskhladze, A. Avram, J. Hargrave (eds.), The Greeks and Romans in the Black Sea and the Importance of the Pontic Region for the Graeco-­ Roman World (7th century b.c.–5th century A.D.): 20 Years On (1997–2017). Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress on Black Sea Antiquities, Constanţa 18–22 September 2017, Oxford 2021, pp. 634–640. Baglivi 1998–1999: N.  Baglivi, Interreges … post interregnum nuncupati? (su Hist. Aug. Tac. 14, 5), in Orpheus 19–20, 2, 1998–1999, pp. 259–269. Bastien 1993: P.  Bastien, Le buste monétaire des empereurs romains, vol. 2, Wetteren 1993. Bastien 1994: P.  Bastien, Le buste monétaire des empereurs romains, vol. 3, Wetteren 1994. Belloni 2004 (1993): G.G. Belloni, La moneta romana. Società, politica, cultura, Roma 2004 (1993).

66 

M. CASSIA

Bergmann 1977: M. Bergmann, Studien zum römischen Porträt des 3. Jahrhunderts n. Chr., Bonn 1977. Biondani 2004: F. Biondani, La scoperta e il recupero del ripostiglio della Venèra: nuovi dati dalle fonti archivistiche, in Quaderni della bassa Veronese 1, 2004, pp. 17–36. Biondani 2005: F. Biondani, Ricerca e tutela archeologica nel basso Veronese alla fine dell’Ottocento: l’attività di Stefano De Stefani, in G.  Leonardi, S.  Rossi (eds.), Archeologia e idrografia del Veronese a cent’anni dalla deviazione del fiume Guà (1904–2004). Il Museo archeologico di Cologna Veneta e le prime ricerche archeologiche nella pianura veronese. Atti della Giornata di Studi “La necropoli del Fiume Nuovo,” Cologna Veneta 2004, Saltuarie dal laboratorio del Piovego 6, Cologna Veneta 2005, pp. 153–196. Biondani 2008: F. Biondani, La scoperta del ripostiglio della Venèra: nuovi documenti, in Quaderni della bassa Veronese 2, 2008, pp. 5–11. Bleckmann 1992: B.  Bleckmann, Die Reichskrise des III.  Jahrhunderts in der spätantiken und byzantinischen Geschichtsschreibung. Untersuchungen zu den nachdionischen Quellen der Chronik des Johannes Zonaras, München 1992. Bleckmann 2002: B. Bleckmann, Die severische Familie und die Soldatenkaiser, in H.  Temporini-Gräfin Vitzthum (ed.), Die Kaiserinnen Roms. Von Livia bis Theodora, München 2002, pp. 265–339. Bovini 1943: G.  Bovini, Osservazioni sulla ritrattistica romana da Treboniano Gallo a Probo, in Monumenti antichi dei Lincei, pubblicati per cura della Reale Accademia d’Italia 39, 2, 1943, pp. 240–255. Bryant 1999: C.  Bryant, Imperial Family Roles. Propaganda and Policy in the Severan Period, in E.  Dal Covolo, G.  Rinaldi (eds.), Gli imperatori Severi. Storia, Archeologia, Religione, Roma 1999, pp. 23–30. Buck 1995: D.F. Buck, The Reign of Aurelian in Eunapius’ Histories, in AHB 9, 2, 1995, pp. 86–92. Buonopane 2020: A.  Buonopane, Manuale di epigrafia latina. Nuova edizione, Roma 2020. Burns 2007: J. Burns, Great Women of Imperial Rome. Mothers and Wives of the Caesars, London-New York 2007. Callu 1969: J.-P. Callu, La politique monétaire des empereurs romains de 238 à 311, Paris 1969. Callu 1995: J.-P. Callu, L’interrègne de Séverine, in Orbis Romanus Christianusque. Travaux sur l’Antiquité tardive rassemblés autour des recherches de Noël Duval, Paris 1995, pp. 13–31. Callu 1996: J.-P. Callu, Aurélius Victor et l’interrègne de 275: problèmes historiques et textuels, in G. Bonamente, M. Mayer (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquia IV. Colloquium Barcinonense MCMXCIII, Munera 7, Bari 1996, pp. 133–145. Callu 2000: J.-P. Callu, Pia Felix, in RN 155, 2000, pp. 189–207.

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

67

Carlà, Marcone 2011: F.  Carlà, A.  Marcone, Economia e finanza a Roma, Bologna 2011. Carson 1965: R.A.G.  Carson, The Reform of Aurelian, in RN 7, 1965, pp. 225–235. Casella 2020: M. Casella, Il ruolo di Galeria Valeria nelle dinamiche della politica tetrarchica, in Klio 102, 1, 2020, pp. 236–272. Cassia 2020: M. Cassia, “La stola e il silenzio”? “Parole” di donna in un epitaffio catanese d’età imperiale, in Gerión 38, 1, 2020, pp. 55–81. Cenerini 20092 (2002): F. Cenerini, La donna romana. Modelli e realtà, Bologna 20092 (2002). Cenerini 2015: F. Cenerini, Il ruolo di Faustina Minore nel principato di Marco Aurelio, in Montesquieu.it 7, 2015, pp. 1–13. Cenerini 2016a: F. Cenerini, L’indagine sulla donna romana: fra modelli e stereotipi, in Cenerini, Mastrorosa 2016, pp. 7–12. Cenerini 2016b: F.  Cenerini, Il ruolo e la funzione della Augustae dai Giulio-­ Claudi ai Severi, in Cenerini, Mastrorosa 2016, pp. 21–46. Cenerini 2017: F.  Cenerini, Faustina Minore, Avidio Cassio, Marco Aurelio, in V. Neri, B. Girotti (eds.), La storiografia tardoantica. Bilanci e prospettive. In memoria di Antonio Baldini, Milano 2017, pp. 101–117. Cenerini 2022: F. Cenerini, Augustae o “imperatrici”?, in B. Girotti, G. Marsili, M.E. Pomero (eds.), Il potere dell’immagine e della parola. Elementi distintivi dell’aristocrazia femminile da Roma a Bisanzio, Spoleto 2022, pp. 1–22. Chastagnol 1980: A.  Chastagnol, Sur la chronologie des années 275–285, in P. Bastien, F. Dumas, H. Huvelin, C. Morisson (eds.), Mélanges de numismatique, d’archéologie et d’histoire offerts à Jean Lafaurie, Paris 1980, pp. 75–82. Chastagnol 1994: A. Chastagnol, Histoire Auguste. Les empereurs romains des IIe et IIIe siècles, Paris 1994. Christol 1997: M. Christol, L’Empire romain du IIIe siècle. Histoire politique (de 192, mort de Commode, à 325, concile de Nicée), Paris 1997. Cizek 1991: E.  Cizek, La succession d’Aurélien et l’échec de Tacite, in REA 93, 1991, pp. 109–112. Cizek 1994: E. Cizek, L’empereur Aurélien et sons temps, Paris 1994. Conway 2006: Ch.P.M.  Conway, Aurelian’s Bellum monetariorum: an Examination, in Past Imperfect 12, 2006, pp. 1–21 (https://journals.library. ualberta.ca/pi/index.php/pi/article/view/1578/1104). Crisafulli 2012: C. Crisafulli, La riforma di Aureliano e la successiva circolazione monetale in Italia, in M. Asolati, G. Gorini (eds.), I ritrovamenti monetali e i processi storico-economici nel mondo antico, Padova 2012, pp. 255–282. Cubelli 1992: V. Cubelli, Aureliano imperatore: la rivolta dei monetieri e la cosiddetta riforma monetaria, Firenze 1992. Davenport 2014: C.  Davenport, M.  Claudius Tacitus: senator or soldier?, in Latomus 73, 1, 2014, pp. 174–187.

68 

M. CASSIA

Den Hengst 1994: D. Den Hengst, Some Notes on the Vita Taciti, in G. Bonamente, F.  Paschoud (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquium Genevense, Bari 1994, pp. 101–107. Drinkwater 2005: J.  Drinkwater, Maximinus to Diocletian and the “crisis,” in A.K. Bowman, P. Garnsey, Av. Cameron (eds.), The Cambridge Ancient History. Second Edition. Volume XII. The Crisis of Empire, A.D. 193–337, Cambridge 2005, pp. 28–66. Eck 1974: W.  Eck, s.v. Ulpia Severina Augusta 57, in RE Suppl. XIV, 1974, coll. 943–944. Eckhel 1797: J.H. Eckhel, Doctrina numorum veterum, vol. 7, Vindobonae 1797. Enmann 1884: A. Enmann, Eine verlorene Geschichte der römischen Kaiser und das Buch De viris illustribus urbis Romae, in Philologus Suppl. 4, Göttingen 1884, pp. 335–501. Estiot 1983: S. Estiot, Le trésor de Maraveille, in TMon 5, 1983, pp. 9–115. Estiot 1987: S.  Estiot, Tacito e Floriano. Volume II. 2, in J.-B.  Giard (ed.), Ripostiglio della Venèra. Nuovo Catalogo Illustrato, Verona 1987. Estiot 1988: S. Estiot, Un as d’Aurélien appartenant à la collection Hans-Georg Pflaum, in BSFN 8, 1988, pp. 439–441. Estiot 1990a: S. Estiot, Une monnaie d’or d’Aurélien frappée à Ticinum, in BSFN 7, 1990, pp. 875–877. Estiot 1990b: S.  Estiot, Aurélien et Tacite: monnaies d’or et faux modernes, in BSFN 9, 1990, pp. 923–927. Estiot 1991a: S.  Estiot, Or et billon: l’atelier de Milan sous Aurélien (270–274 A.D.), in R. Martini, N. Vismara (eds.), Ermanno A. Arslan Studia dicata. Vol. 2. Monetazione romana repubblicana ed imperiale, Milano 1991, pp. 449–502. Estiot 1991b: S.  Estiot, Rome: la première émission d’or au nom d’Aurélien, in BSFN 3, 1991, pp. 49–54. Estiot 1993: S. Estiot, La première émission d’or au nom d’Aurélien à Siscia (270 A.D.), in T. Hackens, G. Moucharte (eds.), Proceedings of the XIth International Numismatic Congress, vol. 2, Bruxelles-Louvain-la-Neuve 1993, pp. 327–334. Estiot 1994: S. Estiot, Un antoninien inédit de Ulpia Severina, in BSFN 8, 1994, pp. 818–821. Estiot 1995a: S. Estiot, Aureliano. Volume II. 1, in J.-B. Giard (ed.), Ripostiglio della Venèra. Nuovo Catalogo Illustrato, Roma 1995. Estiot 1995b: S. Estiot, Aureliana, in RN 150, 6, 1995, pp. 50–94. Estiot 1996: S.  Estiot, Le troisième siècle et la monnaie: crises et mutations, in J.-L. Fiches (ed.), Le IIIe siècle en Gaule Narbonnaise. Données régionales sur la crise de l’Empire. Actes de la Table ronde du GDR 954 “Archéologie de l’espace rural méditerranéen dans l’Antiquité et le haut Moyen Âge,” Aix-en-Provence, La Baume 15–16 septembre 1995, Sophia Antipolis 1996, pp. 33–70. Estiot 1998: S.  Estiot, Aurélien: numismatiques et épigraphie, in E.  Frézouls, H.  Jouffroy (eds.), Les empereurs illyriens. Actes du Colloque de Strasbourg 11–13 octobre 1990, Strasbourg 1998, pp. 97–117.

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

69

Estiot 1999: S.  Estiot, L’or romain entre crise et restitution, 270–276 ap. J.-C., I. Aurélien, in JS 1999, pp. 51–165. Estiot 2004: S. Estiot, Monnaies de l’Empire romain. XII. 1. D’Aurélien à Florien (270–276 après J.-C.). Volume 1, Paris 2004. Estiot 2005: S. Estiot, L’interrègne de Séverine et l’accession de l’empereur Tacite: faut-il vraiment croire l’HA?, in G.  Bonamente, M.  Mayer (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquium Barcinonense, Munera 22, Bari 2005, pp. 157–180. Estiot, Amandry 1990: S.  Estiot, M.  Amandry, Aurélien: trois monnaies d’or inédites de l’atelier de Milan (270 A.D.), in BSFN 1, 1990, pp. 727–732. Estiot, Bonté 1997: S.  Estiot, F.  Bonté, Aurélien et Séverine: trois raretés et un inédit, in BSFN 1, 1997, pp. 4–9. Estiot, Modonesi 1995: S. Estiot, D. Modonesi, La dedica veronese a Vlpia Severina Avgvsta, in Estiot 1995a, pp. 9–10. Felletti Maj 1958: B.M.  Felletti Maj, Iconografia romana imperiale da Severo Alessandro a M. Aurelio Carino (222–285 d.C.), Roma 1958. Fittschen, Zanker 1983: K. Fittschen, P. Zanker, Katalog der römischen Porträts in den Capitolischen Museen und den anderen komunalen Sammlungen der Stadt Rom, vol. 3, Roma 1983. Flaig 1992: E. Flaig, Den Kaiser herausfordern: die Usurpation im römischen Reich, Frankfurt am Main 1992. Floriani Squarciapino 1966: M. Floriani Squarciapino, s.v. Severina, in Enciclopedia dell’Arte Antica, Classica e Orientale, vol. 7, Roma 1966, p. 228. Giard 1995: J.-B. Giard, Gordiano III-Quintillo. Volume I, in J.-B. Giard (ed.), Ripostiglio della Venèra. Nuovo Catalogo Illustrato, Rome 1995. Giesecke 1933: W. Giesecke, Die Münzreformen der Kaiser Caracalla, Aurelianus und Diocletianus, in Frankfurter Münzzeitung 4, 1933, pp. 65–70. Gnoli 2019: T. Gnoli, Aureliano nel IV secolo, in T. Gnoli (ed.), Aspetti di Tarda Antichità: storici, storia e documenti del IV secolo d.C., Bologna 2019, pp. 27–64. Gnoli 2020: T. Gnoli, Alcuni temi arcaici presenti in Trebellius Pollio e in Flavius Vopiscus, in Lexis n.s. 38, 2, 2020, pp. 553–578. Göbl 1993: R. Göbl, Die Münzprägung des Kaisers Aurelianus, Wien 1993. Gosling 1996: A. Gosling, Recensione a Estiot 1995a, in Scholia Reviews n.s. 5, 1996, p. 21 (https://casa-­kvsa.org.za/legacy/ScholiaUpdate/96/96-­21est.htm). Gricourt 2000: D.  Gricourt, Caro-Diocleziano. Volume IV, in J.-B.  Giard (ed.), Ripostiglio della Venèra. Nuovo Catalogo Illustrato, Verona 2000. Gricourt, Holland, Blet-Lemarquand 2014: D.  Gricourt, D.  Holland, M.  Blet-­ Lemarquand, Donativa, thésaurisation et corpus monétaire: à propos d’aurei ­lyonnais inédits (275–281) du trésor de Fontaine-la-Gaillarde, in RN 171, 2014, pp. 195–219. Groag 1903: E. Groag, s.v. Domitius 36, in RE V 1, 1903, coll. 1347–1419.

70 

M. CASSIA

Guillemain 2009: J.  Guillemain, La monetazione di Probo a Roma, 276–282 d.C. Volume III. 1, in J.-B. Giard (ed.), Ripostiglio della Venèra. Nuovo Catalogo Illustrato, Roma 2009. Haklai-Rotenberg 2011: M.  Haklai-Rotenberg, Aurelian’s monetary Reform: between Debasement and public Trust, in Chiron 41, 2011, pp. 1–139. Hartmann 2008: U. Hartmann, Claudius Gothicus und Aurelianus, in K.-P. Johne, U.  Hartmann, Th. Gerhardt (eds.), Die Zeit der Soldatenkaiser. Krise und Transformation des Römischen Reiches im 3. Jahrhrundert n. Chr. (235–284), vol. 1, Berlin 2008, pp. 297–323. Hedlund 2008: R. Hedlund, “… achieved nothing worthy of memory”. Coinage and Authority in the Roman Empire C. A.D. 260–295, Uppsala 2008. Helm 1956: R. Helm, Eusebius Werke. VII. Die Chronik des Hieronymus, GCS 47, Berlin 1956. Hekster 2002: O. Hekster, Commodus. An Emperor at the Crossroads, Leiden 2002. Hidalgo de la Vega 2000: M.  J. Hidalgo de la Vega, Plotina, Sabina y las dos Faustinas: la función de las Augustas en la política imperial, in SHHA 18, 2000, pp. 191–224. Hidalgo de la Vega 2012: M.J.  Hidalgo de la Vega, Las emperatrices romanas. Sueños de púrpura y poder oculto, Salamanca 2012. Hidalgo de la Vega 2013: M.J. Hidalgo de la Vega, Mujeres poderosas: las emperatrices sirias, sucesión dinástica, imagen pública, in R.M. Cid López, E. García Fernández (eds.), Debita uerba. Estudios en homenaje al profesor Julio Mangas Manjarrés, Oviedo 2013, vol. 2, pp. 499–518. Hohl 1911a: E. Hohl, Vopiscus und die Biographie des Kaisers Tacitus, in Klio 11, 1911, pp. 178–229. Hohl 1911b: E. Hohl, Vopiscus und die Biographie des Kaisers Tacitus. II. Prüfung der Vita Taciti des Vopiscus, in Klio 11, 1911, pp. 284–324. Homo 1904: L.  Homo, Essai sur le règne de l’empereur Aurélien (270–275), Paris 1904. Horster 2007: M.  Horster, The Emperor’s Family on Coins (Third Century): Ideology of Stability in Time of Unrest, in O.  Hekster, G.  Kleijn, D.  Slootjes (eds.), Crises of the Roman Empire. Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop of the International Impact of Empire, Nijmegen June 20–24, 2006, Leiden 2007, pp. 291–310. Hulrich-Bansa 1962: O. Hulrich-Bansa, Gli antoniniani colla marca della zecca di Mediolanum (260–268), in RIN 10, 1962, pp. 13–41. Johne 1991: K.-P. Johne, Tacitus, der Kaiser und der Konsul, in Listy filologické/ Folia philologica 114, 2–3, 1991, pp. 144–149. Johne 2008a: K.-P. Johne, Das Kaisertum und die Herrscherwechsel, in M. Haake, K.-P.  Johne, U.  Hartmann, Th. Gerhardt (eds.), Die Zeit der Soldatenkaiser. Krise und Transformation des Römischen Reiches im 3. Jahrhrundert n. Chr. (235–284), Berlin 2008, pp. 583–632.

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

71

Johne 2008b: K.-P. Johne, Der “Senatskaiser” Tacitus, in K.-P. Johne, U. Hartmann, Th. Gerhardt (eds.), Die Zeit der Soldantekaiser: Krise und Transformation der römischen Reiches im 3. Jahrhundert n. Chr. (235–284), vol. 1, Berlin 2008, pp. 379–395. Johne 2021: K.-P. Johne, Kaiser Tacitus und die Grotte von Taya. War M. Claudius Tacitus ein Aristokrat oder ein Soldat?, in Oriente/Occidente. Rivista internazionale di studi tardoantichi 2, 2021, pp. 47–60. Jones 1939: T.B. Jones, Three Notes on the Reign of Marcus Claudius Tacitus, in CPh 34, 1939, pp. 366–369. Katsari 2005: C.  Katsari, The Monetization of Roman Asia Minor in the Third Century A.D., in S. Mitchell, C. Katsari, D.C. Braund (eds.), Patterns in the Economy of Roman Asia Minor, Swansea 2005, pp. 261–288. Kienast 1974: D.  Kienast, Die Münzreform Aurelians, in Chiron 4, 1974, pp. 547–566. Kienast, Eck, Heil 20176: D.  Kienast, W.  Eck, M.  Heil, Römische Kaisertabelle. Grundzüge einer römischen Kaiserchronologie. 6., überarbeitete Auflage, Darmstadt 20176. Körner 2011: Ch. Körner, Transformationsprozesse im Römischen Reich des 3. Jahrhunderts n. Chr., in Millenium 8, 2011, pp. 87–123. Külzer 2008: A.  Külzer, Ostthrakien (Eurōpē), Tabula Imperii Byzantini 12, Wien 2008. Kuhoff 1993: W.  Kuhoff, Iulia Aug. mater Aug. n. et castrorum et senatus et patriae, in ZPE 97, 1993, pp. 259–271. Laconi 2003: S. Laconi, Pius Felix Invictus Augustus: una titolatura imperiale tra tradizione pagana e innovazione cristiana, Roma 2003. Lafaurie 1974: J. Lafaurie, La date de la réforme monétaire de Aurélien, in BSFN 29, 1974, pp. 517–524. Lafaurie 1975a: J.  Lafaurie, L’Empire gaulois. Apport de la numismatique, in ANRW II 2, Berlin-New York 1975, pp. 853–1012. Lafaurie 1975b: J.  Lafaurie, Réformes monétaires d’Aurélien et de Dioclétien, in RN 17, 1975, pp. 73–138. Lichtenberger 2011: A.  Lichtenberger, Severus Pius Augustus: Studien zur sakralen Repräsentation und Rezeption der Herrschaft des Septimius Severus und seiner Familie (193–211 n. Chr.), Leiden 2011. Lo Cascio 1984: E. Lo Cascio, Dall’Antoninianus al “laureato grande”: l’evoluzione monetaria del III secolo alla luce della nuova documentazione di età dioclezianea, in Opus 3, 1984, pp. 133–201. Longo 2009: K. Longo, Donne di potere nella Tarda Antichità. Le Augustae attraverso le immagini monetali, Reggio Calabria 2009. López Sánchez 2004: F. López Sánchez, Du masculin dans le féminin: les pouvoirs réels de Séverine (274–275 ap. J.-C.) et d’autres femmes à Rome. L’apport de la numismatique, in Y. Perrin, T. Petit (eds.), Iconographie impériale, iconographie

72 

M. CASSIA

royale, iconographie des élites dans le monde gréco-romain, Saint-Étienne 2004, pp. 249–261. Loriot 1999: X. Loriot, Problèmes d’historiographie impériale à la fin du IIIe siècle, in BSAF 1999, pp. 147–154. Martin 2006: J.-P. Martin, Les Augustae du IIIe siècle (238–275). Leur rôle d’après leur monnayage, in J. Champeaux, M. Chassignet (eds.), Aere perennius. En hommage à Hubert Zehnacker, Paris 2006, pp. 267–279. Mattingly 1939: H. Mattingly, The Imperial Recovery, in S.A. Cook, F.E. Adcock, M.P.  Charlesworth, N.H.  Baines (eds.), The Cambridge Ancient History. Volume XII. The Imperial Crisis and Recovery A.D. 193–324, Cambridge 1939, pp. 297–351. Mazza 1973 (1970): M.  Mazza, Lotte sociali e restaurazione autoritaria nel III secolo d.C., Roma-Bari 1973 (Catania 1970). Mazzarino 1951: S. Mazzarino, Aspetti sociali del IV secolo. Ricerche di storia tardoromana, Roma 1951 (Milano 2002). Mazzarino 1956 (1986): S.  Mazzarino, L’Impero romano, vol. 2, Roma-Bari 1956 (1986). Mazzarino 1965–1966 (1990): S.  Mazzarino, Il pensiero storico classico, vol. 3, Roma-Bari 1965–1966 (1990). Mazzarino 1980: S. Mazzarino, Sulla storiografia greca intorno alla grande crisi del III secolo d.C., in S. Mazzarino, Il basso Impero. Antico, tardoantico ed èra costantiniana, vol. 2, Bari 1980, pp. 26–32. Mecella 2021: L. Mecella, Milano e l’anarchia militare, in G. Albini, L. Mecella (eds.), Un ponte tra il Mediterraneo e il Nord Europa: la Lombardia nel primo millennio. Atti del Convegno Internazionale di Studi, Milano 28–29 novembre 2019, Milano-Torino 2021, pp. 57–93. Migliorati 2013: G.  Migliorati, Origine, prefettura del pretorio (?) e consolati dell’imperatore Tacito, in Epigraphica 75, 1–2, 2013, pp. 195–204. Milani 1880: L.A. Milani, Il ripostiglio della Venèra. Monete romane della seconda metà del terzo secolo, Roma 1880. Milani 1886: L.A. Milani, Di alcuni ripostigli di monete romane (studi di cronologia e storia), in Museo Italiano di Antichità Classica 2, 1886, coll. 254–370. Miller 1916: K. Miller, Itineraria Romana. Römische Reisewege an der Hand der Tabula Peutingeriana, Stuttgart 1916. Milne 1933: J.G.  Milne, A Catalog of Alexandrian Coinage in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford 1933. Molin 1999: M. Molin, Haud dissimilis Magno Alexandro seu Caesari dictatori: l’empereur Aurélien, in CCG 10, 1999, pp. 347–354. Molinier Arbo 2016: A. Molinier Arbo, Femmes de pouvoir entre Orient et Occident aux derniers siècles de l’Empire: réflexions autour du témoignage de l’Histoire Auguste, in Cenerini, Mastrorosa 2016, pp. 47–80.

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

73

Morelli 2010: A.L. Morelli, Madri di uomini e di dèi. La rappresentazione della maternità attraverso la documentazione numismatica di epoca romana, Bologna 2010. Neri 2002: V.  Neri, L’imperatore come miles: Tacito, Attalo e la datazione della Historia Augusta, in G.  Bonamente, F.  Paschoud, Historiae Augustae Colloquium Perusinum, Munera 18, Bari 2002, pp. 373–396. Pabst 1997: A.  Pabst, Comitia imperii. Ideelle Grundlagen des römischen Kaisertums, Darmstadt 1997. Pareti 1961: L.  Pareti, Storia di Roma e del mondo romano. VI.  Da Decio a Costantino (251–337 d.Cr.), Torino 1961. Paschoud 1995: F.  Paschoud, Les sources de la Vita Taciti, in G.  Bonamente, G. Paci (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquium Maceratense. Atti del Convegno sulla Historia Augusta. III, Munera 4, Bari 1995, pp. 269–280. Paschoud 20022: F. Paschoud (eds.), Zosime. Histoire nouvelle. Tome I. Livres I-II, Paris 20022. Peachin 1990: M. Peachin, Roman Imperial Titulature and Chronology, A.D. 235–284, Amsterdam 1990. Perassi 1997: C. Perassi, Recensione a Estiot 1995, Ripostiglio, in Aevum 71, 1, 1997, pp. 199–203. Perassi 2002: C. Perassi, I ritratti monetali di Ulpia Severina, in RIN 103, 2002, pp. 337–372. Perassi 2014: C. Perassi, Ritratti monetali delle Augustae nel III secolo d.C.: una crisi di genere?, in Un confronto drammatico con il XXI secolo: l’Impero romano del III secolo nella crisi monetaria. Atti del Convegno, Biassono 9 giugno 2012, Biassono 2014, pp. 193–232. Pflaum 1960: H.-G.  Pflaum, Denier inédit de Séverine, in BSFN 15, 1960, pp. 440–441. Pflaum 1963: H.-G. Pflaum, Monnaie inédite d’Aurélien de Cyzique, in BSFN 18, 1963, pp. 269–270. Polverini 1975: L. Polverini, Da Aureliano a Diocleziano, in ANRW II 2, Berlin-­ New York 1975, pp. 1013–1035. Price 1973: M.J.  Price, The Lost Year: Greek Light on a Problem of Roman Chronology, in NC 1973, pp. 75–86. Rathbone 1986: D. Rathbone, The Dates of the Recognition in Egypt of the Emperors from Caracalla to Diocletian, in ZPE 62, 1986, pp. 101–131. Rea 1972: J.R. Rea, The Oxyrhynchus Papyri. Volume xl, London 1972. Requena Jiménez 2003: M. Requena Jiménez, Lo maravilloso y el poder: los presagios de imperio de los emperadores Aureliano y Tácito en la Historia Augusta, Valencia 2003. Requena Jiménez 2013: M. Requena Jiménez, Cómo murió el emperador Marco Claudio Tácito: (SHA. Tac. 17, 5), in A&R 7, 1–2, 2013, pp. 65–82.

74 

M. CASSIA

Ricciardi 2007: R.A. Ricciardi, Where Did All the Women Go: The Archaeology of the Soldier Empresses, Diss. University of Cincinnati 2007. Rohde 1881: T. Rohde, Die Münzen des Kaisers Aurelianus, seiner Frau Severina und der Fürsten von Palmyra, Miskolcz 1881. Savio 2002: A. Savio, Monete romane, Milano 2002. Scarborough 1973: J. Scarborough, Aurelian: Questions and Problems, in CJ 68, 4, 1973, pp. 334–345. Schnetz 1942: J.  Schnetz, Itineraria Romana. Vol. II.  Ra vennatis Anonymi Cosmographia et Guido nis Geographica, Stuttgart 1942. Sidrys 2020: R.V.  Sidrys, The Mysterious Spheres on Greek and Roman Ancient Coins, Oxford 2020. Sommer 2021: M.  Sommer, Römische Geschichte von den Anfängen bis zum Untergang, Stuttgart 2021. Sotgiu 1961: G. Sotgiu, Studi sull’epigrafia di Aureliano, Sassari 1961. Sotgiu 1975: G. Sotgiu, Aureliano (1960–1972), in ANRW II 2, Berlin-New York 1975, pp. 1039–1061. Stiernon 1990: D.  Stiernon, s.v. Héraclée de Thrace, in DHGE 23, 1990, coll. 1306–1337. Strobel 1998: K.  Strobel, Ulpia Severina Augusta: eine Frau in der Reihe der illyrischen Kaiser, in E.  Frézouls, H.  Jouffroy (eds.), Les empereurs illyriens. Actes du Colloque de Strasbourg 11–13 octobre 1990, Strasbourg 1998, pp. 119–153. Strobel 2013: K. Strobel, Herrscherwechsel, politische Verfolgung, Bürgerkriege in der römischen Kaiserzeit: zwischen Rekonziliation, Amnestie und Säuberung, in K. Harter-Uibopuu, F. Mitthof (eds.), Vergeben und Vergessen? Amnestie in der Antike. Beiträge zum 1. Wiener Kolloquium zur Antiken Rechtsgeschichte, 27–28.10.2008, Wien 2013, pp. 285–298. Syme 1971: R.  Syme, Emperors and Biography. Studies in the Historia Augusta, Oxford 1971. Syvänne 2020: I. Syvänne, Aurelian and Probus: The Soldier Emperors Who Saved Rome, Philadelphia (Great Britain) 2020. Van’t Dack 1991: E. Van’t Dack, Commode et ses épithètes Pius Felix sous les Sévères, in G. Bonamente, N. Duval (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquium Parisinum, Paris 1991, pp. 311–335. Varner 2008: E.R.  Varner, Transcending Gender: Assimilation, Identity, and Roman Imperial Portraits, in MAAR, Suppl. 7, 2008, pp. 185–205. Vitucci 1952: G. Vitucci, L’imperatore Probo, Roma 1952, p. 22. Vlassa 1962: N. Vlassa, Un cimitir de incinerati̧ e de la sfîrşitul veacului III, de la Iernut [Cimetière à incinération de Iernut de la fin du IIIe siècle], in Studii ši Cercetări de Istorie Veche 13, 1, 1962, pp. 153–155. Vogt 1924: J.  Vogt, Die alexandrinischen Münzen. Grundlegung einer alexandrinischen Kaisergeschichte, Stuttgart 1924.

2  NUMISMATIC SOURCES 

75

Von Geisau 1935: H.J. von Geisau, s.v. Καινοφρούριον, in RE Suppl. VI, 1935, col. 138. Watson 1999: A.  Watson, Aurelian and the Third Century, London-New York 1999. Wegner 1979: M.  Wegner, Das römische Herrscherbild. IV.  Gordianus III. bis Carinus, Berlin 1979. Weiser 1983: W.  Weiser, Die Münzreform des Aurelianus, in ZPE 53, 1983, pp. 279–295. Yonge 1979: D.  Yonge, The So-called Interregnum Coinage, in NC 19, 1979, pp. 47–60. Zawadzki 2005: T. Zawadzki, L’empereur Tacite et l’épigraphie, in G. Bonamente, M.  Mayer (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquium Barcinonense, Munera 22, Bari 2005, pp. 305–322.

CHAPTER 3

The Epigraphic Sources

1   The Inscriptions of Ulpia Severina, Coniux Aureliani There has been very scant examination of the inscriptions in honor of Severina;1 indeed, they may even have been underestimated.2 Sotgiu devoted a short chapter of her Studi sull’epigrafia di Aureliano, published in 1961, to the analysis of some titles contained in twelve of the fourteen inscriptions dedicated to the emperor’s wife;3 however, a detailed examination of the epigraphic texts dedicated to the empress— taking into account the fact that, as well as in the numismatic documentation, we can also find the full name of Ulpia Severina in the epigraphic inscriptions, as mentioned above (see supra, Chap. 1, §

1  Brief mention in Fuchs 1895, p. 937 (only four epigraphs); Homo 1904, pp. 141, footnote 4; 359–360 (eight inscriptions); Assandria 1921, p. 53 (seven epigraphs); Sotgiu 1961, p. 78 (twelve inscriptions); Estiot and Modonesi 1995, p. 10 (twelve epigraphs); Strobel 1998, pp. 123–124 (eleven inscriptions); Watson 1999, pp. 113–114; 252, footnote 60 (seven epigraphs, with erroneous evaluation of the titling); Perassi 2002, p. 337 and footnote 1 (twelve epigraphs); Ricciardi 2007, pp. 302–303, numbers twelve and duplicates the inscription from Augustum Semta (on which see infra). Concise but terse overview in Sotgiu 1975, pp. 1049–1050. 2  Perassi 2002, p. 337 and footnote 1: “a few short inscriptions … there are altogether twelve epigraphs”; Perassi 2014, p. 193: “a few epigraphs.” 3  Sotgiu 1961, pp. 77–79.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 M. Cassia, The Roman Empress Ulpia Severina, Queenship and Power, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28651-3_3

77

78 

M. CASSIA

Fig. 3.1  Apograph and interpretive transcription of the epigraph from Augustum Semta. (Reproduced from R. Cagnat, Découvertes des Brigades topographiques de Tunisie en 1893 [d’après Toussaint], in BCTH 1893, p. 222, no. 51 [= AÉ 1894, p. 19] and © M. Cassia.)

1)—could provide additional and valuable clues for the reconstruction of this figure, who is still, at times, rather evanescent. A. Before I embark on an analysis of the epigraphs dedicated to Severina expressly referred to as Augusta, mention should be made of an inscription in Latin (Fig.  3.1) placed by the municipium of Augustum Semta (today Henchir Zemba/Dzemda, 73  km southwest of Carthage, about 12  km south of Thuburbo Maius, today Henchir Kasbat) in Africa Proconsularis and intended to honor Ulpia Severina, Pia, coniux of Aurelian. The epigraph, the size of which is not known nor is there any recent information on its current place of preservation, was found in 1893 during the reconnaissance of the Brigade topographique in Tunisia, near a “haouta” (i.e., a consecrated place consisting of a circle of stones), situated among the ruins of the site located on the banks of the Faïd-Dzemda (Fig. 3.2).4 4  Cagnat 1893, pp. 222–223, no. 51 = CIL VIII 23114 = AÉ 1894, 59 = EDCS-24300167. See Babelon et al. 1893, section Djebel-Fkirine, feuille xlii, no. 9: “deux groupes de ruines: 1e sur la rive droite du Faïd-Dzemda, édifice rectangulaire de 50 mètres sur 40; construction voütée; murs de souténement le long du ruisseau; autour, débris de toute sorte; 2e sur la rive droite, deux édifices dont l’un, quadrangulaire, mesure 40 métres sur 30 (fortin byzantin); mausolée haut de 4 métres”; Dessau 1923, col. 1148; Mesnage 1912, p. 63; Lepelley 1981, pp. 154–155; Salama et al. 2010, p. 206.

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

79

Fig. 3.2  Map of Africa Proconsularis. (© M. Cassia.) To Ulpia Severina, Pia, spouse5 of our lord emperor Caesar Lucius (C.?)6 Domitius Aurelianus, Pius, Felix, Augustus, the municipium of Augustum Semta, devoted to his Numen and (to his) maiestas, (laid).7

Jacques Gascou integrated the text as follows: Ulpiae Sae|verinae Piae, | coniugi | D(omini) n(ostri) Imp(eratoris) Caes(aris) | L(u)c(ii) C. (sic!)  On the meaning and use of this word see ThLL, s.v. coniux (coniunx/coiux), vol. 4, Leipsiae 1906–1909, coll. 341–344; Ernout and Meillet 1967, s.v. iung 11, p. 329; s.v. uxor, pp. 758–759; Fayer 1994, pp. 59–60, 2005a, p. 183, b, pp. 13–14; on the ideal claim of “equality,” at least epigraphically, in the use of the term coniux as opposed to uxor see Cenerini 2009, pp. 34; 71; 107; 112. 6  On this exception to the usual onomastic formula (L. Domitius Aurelianus) see Sotgiu 1961, p. 17. 7  Gundel 1953, pp. 140–141, noted how devotus Numini maiestatique eius—a formula linking the divine to the human—first appears under the Severans and then especially in the third and fourth centuries; see also Fishwick 2007, p. 249: “the final period goes back to the early III century, when the formula devotus Numini maiestatique eius/eorum, attested generally in the West but relatively often in Africa, became a standard formula, notably on the occasion of the dedication of imperial statues.” 5

80 

M. CASSIA

Domitii Aure|liani Pii Felicis | Aug(usti), m … [A]ug(ustum) | Sem|ta devot(um) n]um(ini) | ma[iestatiq(ue) eiu]s. The scholar pointed out that, although the inscription does indeed attest to the presence of a municipium,8 m[unicip. A]ug cannot be integrated at l. 7—according to the reading proposed by René Cagnat and also accepted in CIL VIII 23114, p. 2342—since the term municipium is usually abbreviated with mun.; he speculated that before A]ug there might be an imperial onomastic element such as [Iul(ium)], [Ael(ium)] [Aur(elium)], [Ant(oninum)]. Therefore, it would not be possible to indicate exactly when the site became municipium and especially whether this change in status occurred before or after the death of Septimius Severus.9 However, Gascou’s proposed chronology for the epigraph, namely a time frame between AD 270 and 275, could be more specific, for two reasons: (1) Saeverina (sic!) held the title of Augusta, as noted above (see supra, Chap. 2, § 1), in a chronological span from roughly August 29, AD 274/ end of 274 to early 275; (2) the interest of the little-known African community in the probable erection of a statue (as can be inferred by the formula Numini maiestatique eius) in honor of the wife of Aurelian, Augustus since September 270, may have materialized in the form of the dedication of a simulacrum at a time chronologically closer to 274 than to 270, at a date, that is, when Severina was beginning to become the increasingly well-known and important wife of the Emperor Pius and Felix, as well as the ideal “candidate” to counterpose the peregrina Zenobia, recently defeated and over whom Aurelian had celebrated—or was about to do so—a triumph full of pomp and ceremony. Through the study of some Antoniniani from Antioch with the legend SEVERINA P(IA) F(ELIX) AVG(VSTA), Callu linked such titles to the fertility of the empresses—the title PIA is indeed also present on the coins of two other empresses, Iulia Domna and Cornelia Salonina—and concluded that Severina, “la jeune veuve, probablement fille de Zénobie, sans doute enceinte, fut, l’espace d’une émission, la souveraine nominale de la Romanitas” (on the strong doubts raised by Callu’s hypothesis about the unlikely mother-daughter relationship, see supra, Chap. 2, § 1).10 Indeed, Callu’s assertions about the empress’s pregnancy at the time of her husband’s murder seem too  On the municipium of Augustum Semta, see Pflaum 1970, p. 82.  Gascou 1982, pp. 296–297, no. 24. See Galsterer-Kröll 1972, p. 102, no. 37, who suggests dating the epigraph to 270/271 AD. 10  Callu 2000, p. 200. 8 9

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

81

clear-cut and are in any case difficult to prove through the sources, but, if we also connect the monetary data with the epigraphic data, we can still reasonably assume that the three Augustae—namely Iulia Domna, Cornelia Salonina and, indeed, Severina—had a common trait consisting of a privileged relationship with certain communities: in fact, if in  the colony of Heliopolis the name Iulia Augusta Pia derives from Iulia Domna, and the epithet Saloniana at Leptis Magna is attributed to Cornelia Salonina,11 then, perhaps, Semta too may have wished that Severina, Pia, could become a “sacred founder” of the African municipium. On the other hand, in the early fourth century, Semta would once again attempt to establish a dialogue with the central power, honoring Constantius Chlorus and Constantine, as two inscribed plinths of statues testify. In the first epigraph, datable to the years AD 305–306, Constantius is referred to as “Caesar Augustus,” an unusual title for a newly elected Augustus,12 while in the second, datable to AD 314–315,Constantine is also called Pius and Felix, among other names, and there is mention of the curator rei publicae Annaeus Saturninus.13 The desire of this African community to put themselves on the radar with Aurelian (and his coniux?) is also evidenced by the finding at the vicus Annaeus, a site located in the vicinity of Henchir Ksour Dzemda, of a statue plinth dedicated to Deo | Aurelian | [-  - -] just a few kilometers from Semta.14 The toponym of the vicus (“village”), Annaeus, and the nomen of the curator rei publicae of the age of Constantine certainly allow us to assume

11  Galsterer-Kröll 1972, pp. 69–70; 82 (Iulia Domna); 85 (Cornelia Salonina); Angelova 2015, p. 93. 12  CIL VIII 23115 = AÉ 1894, 58 = EDCS-24300168 = Last Statues of Antiquity-1886: Flavio Va/lerio Con/stantio / nobilissi/mo Caes(ari) / Aug(usto) Se/mte[nse]s / p[u]b(lice) / d(ecreto) d(ecurionum) p(ecunia) p(ublica). 13  CIL VIII 23116 = ILS 8942 = EDCS-24300169 = Last Statues of Antiquity-1885: Imp(eratori) Caes(ari) Flavio Constan/tino Maximo Pio Fel(ici) / Invicto Augusto / pont(ifici) max(imo) Ger(manico) max(imo) / Sar(matico) max(imo) Brit(annico) max(imo) / Per(sico) max(imo) A(d)iab(enico) max(imo) / Med(ico) max(imo) Got(h)ico max(imo) / trib(unicia) pot(estate) X co(n)s(uli) IIII imp(eratori) VIIII / p(atri) p(atriae) procons(uli) / Annaeus Saturninus cur(ator) r(ei) p(ublicae) / devotus Numini eorum / inposuit d(ecreto) d(ecurionum) p(ecunia) p(ublica). 14  Merlin 1944, no. 777 = Sotgiu 1961, p. 84, no. 15 = EDCS-08601002. Other inscribed texts also come from the same site: Merlin 1944, no. 778 = AÉ 1923, 28 = AÉ 1950, 57 = AÉ 2008, 16 = AÉ 2012, 1875 = EDCS-08601003; Merlin 1944, no. 779 = AÉ 2012, 1875 = EDCS-08601004 (on which see Poinssot Louis and Lantier 1923, pp. 197–201); Merlin 1944, no. 782 = EDCS-08601005.

82 

M. CASSIA

a strong link between the two neighboring sites and a predominance of the Annaei in this area until Late Antiquity.15 Like his predecessors, Aurelian would have received the title divus after his death; nevertheless, “foremost among all, while still living he was honored as a deus” in some epigraphs;16 although it is not possible to establish with certainty a date when the emperor was granted the title before his death from the inscriptions (but see below, with specific reference to the inscription from Perinthus),17 for Aurelian, who was definitely alive, the coin legends testify to the use of the epithets deus et dominus (natus) (Fig. 3.3).18 Regarding the inscriptions in which Severina / Σεουηρῖνα / Σευηρεῖνα / Σεβηρεῖνα is explicitly Augusta / Αὐγούστη / Σεβαστή, it should be mentioned that they constitute a corpus of thirteen texts, nine of which are in Latin (nos. 1–9, to which, however, should be added that of Augustum Semta, making a total of ten epigraphs) and four in Greek (nos. 10–13). Based on the titling—considered to have been acquired with certainty after the death of her husband in September 275, but which Callu was inclined to anticipate, believing it to be a direct consequence of the birth of a daughter (the one recalled in HA Aur. 42, 1–2; 50, 2: see supra,

 Lepelley 1981, p. 155.  Sotgiu 1961, p. 30. 17  CIL VIII 4877 = ILAlg-01, pp. 123–124, no. 1269 = ILS 585 = EDCS-13001119 from Thubursicu Numidarum in Africa Proconsularis: Deo Aureli|ano r(es) p(ublica) c(oloniae) | T(h)u(bursicensis); ILLimisa 8 = AÉ 2004, 1680 = EDCS-33500456, da Limisa in Africa Proconsularis: [Deo(?) Au]reliano | [municip]ium Septimi|[um Aure]lium Limi|[sa] d(ecreto) d(ecurionum) p(ecunia) p(ublica); CIL II 14, 317 = CIL II 3832 = ELST 22 = IRSAT 31 = EDCS-09100348, from Sagunto in Hispania Citerior: Deo | Aureli|ano; CIL II 14, 19 = CIL II 3738 = CIL II 14, 13 = IRVT-01, 22 = IRVT-02, 17 = IRVT-02, 24 = Alföldy 2002, p. 257 = Hispania Epigraphica 2002, 536 = Hispania Epigraphica 2009, 461 = AÉ 2002, 851 = AÉ 1938, 24 = AÉ 1972, 284 = EDCS-09100020, from Valentia in Hispania Citerior: L(ucio) Dom(itio) Aureli|ano deo | Valentini | veterani | et veteres || [[Imp(eratori) Caesari [M(arco)]]] | [[A[ur(elio) A]n[tonin]o]] | [[P[io] F[el(ici)] Aug(usto) p(ontifici) m(a ximo)]] | [[t[r(ibunicia)] p[o]t(estate) I[I co(n)s(uli)] p(atri) p(atriae)]] | [[proco(n)[s(uli)] Valen]]|[[tini veteran(i)]] | [[et vete[r(es)]]] | [[[ex] d(ecreto) d(ecurionum)]]. 18  See RIC V 1, pp. 258; 299, Serdica 305–306. See Taeger 1956, pp. 182–195, 1960, p. 447: the titles deus and dominus would not signify real deification but rather “eine Art der Überhöhung in die göttliche Sphäre”; unlike Wienand 2015, pp. 63–99, who saw evidence of the growing deification of the emperor at the dawn of Late Antiquity. 15 16

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

83

Fig. 3.3  Antoninianus from Serdica: on the obv. laureate and cuirassed bust of Aurelian, facing right and the legend IMP DEO ET DOMINO AVRELIANO AVG; on the rev. a standing female figure facing right, holding a garland to Aurelian laureate, in military dress, standing, facing left, holding a spear in his left hand  and the legend RESTITVT ORBIS; star in lower center; in exergue ΚΑ Γ (RIC V 1, p. 299, Serdica 305). (© aurelian/RIC_0305 with permission of wildwinds.com.)

Chap. 1, § 1)—such epigraphs are generically dated between August 29, 274/end of 274/early 275 and September/October 275.19 Given the impossibility, therefore, of using a precise chronological criterion, the catalog follows an established geographical order: first the inscriptions found in Italy are examined according to the numerical succession of the Augustan regiones (nos. 1–6), then those of the western provinces (Spain and Africa, nos. 7–9), and finally epigraphs from eastern areas (Aegean, Asia Minor, Thrace, nos. 10–13). 1. Engraved statue base, in  local limestone (height 120  cm  ×  width 50 cm × thickness 50 cm; engraved area 72.5 cm × 32 cm; letters 5–6 cm), from Egnatia (modern-day Fasano, Brindisi) in regio II (Apulia et Calabria), erected by the decuriones (Fig. 3.4). Discovered in 1964 inside the sacellum of Eastern Deities; it is currently in situ (Figs. 3.5 and 3.6): Devoid of the plinth and with a lower right corner gap, in the main face and in the side faces damage is evident due to a pointed instrument, which does not appear to be due to damnatio memoriae, but to the reuse of the monument. In the upper façade, the pediment has the indentation for the feet of 19  Callu 2000, p. 199, footnote 60: “son Augustat peut avoir été dû à la naissance d’une fille que lui reconnaît l’HA, Aurel. 50, 2.”

84 

M. CASSIA

Fig. 3.4  Photograph and interpretive transcription of the inscription from Egnatia. (© https://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?s_language=it&bild=$SupIt_1 1_G_00005.jpg, reproduced by courtesy of Prof. M. Clauss and © M. Cassia.) the statue, followed by a molding; the inscribed area is lowered and framed by a molded cornice also present in the side surfaces.20 To Ulpia Severina Augusta, wife of our lord emperor Caesar Lucius Domitius Aurelianus Augustus, Pius, Felix, Father of the fatherland, with public money by decree of the decuriones.

As for the place where the inscription was found, the end of the Hellenistic stoa that bordered the oval esplanade would appear to have been completely renovated in the second century AD, and transformed into a small rectangular room in the center of which there was an altar or  SupplIt, 11, 1993, p. 32, no. 5 (M. Chelotti) = AÉ 1993, 504 = EDCS-10800005.

20

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

85

Fig. 3.5  Plan of Egnatia (No. 4 corresponds to the sacellum of Eastern Deities; No. 2 to the Via Traiana). (© reproduced by permission of Dr. A. Schena [Schena Editore] from A.  Donvito, Egnazia. Dalle origini alla riscoperta archeologica, Fasano [Brindisi], Schena Editore, 20033 [1988], photos Ditta Guglielmi, Castellana Grotte, p. 40, fig. 14.)

86 

M. CASSIA

Fig. 3.6  Hellenistic stoa and sacellum of the eastern deities of Egnatia. (© Reproduced by permission of Dr. A. Schena [Schena Editore] from A. Donvito, Egnazia. Dalle origini alla riscoperta archeologica, Fasano [Brindisi], Schena Editore, 20033 [1988], photos Ditta Guglielmi, Castellana Grotte, p. 41, fig. 15.)

base of a statue (Fig. 3.6), on which were depicted two flutes, a tympanum and a cymbal, while on the main surface of the slab—made of local limestone—a Latin inscription was engraved, dedicated by the priestess Flavia Cypare to Magna Mater and the goddess Syria (Flavi[a] C(ai) l(iberta) Cypa[re] / sace[rd]os Matris / Magn(ae) et Syriae deae / ex imp[er]io fecit / l(aeta) l(ibens) d(onum) d(edit) // Magn(a)e M(atri?) d(eae) Syriae).21 21  AÉ 1989, 00192 = AÉ 1993, 500 = EDCS-06100148. See SupplIt, 11, pp. 27–29, no. 1 (M. Chelotti): “the association of the cult of Magna Mater, Cybele, and the goddess Syria, fertile mother of men and gods, have the same attributes, are considered sisters … and are iconographically similar”; Petraccia Lucernoni and Traverso 2002, p. 246; Hemelrijk 2015, p. 47.

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

87

Next to the plinth a beautiful Greek marble head of the Hadrian age was found depicting Attis, as well as a large fragment of a hand belonging to the same statue, a marble relief showing a banquet and a clay fragment of a female figure, identified as the goddess Cybele. This building would have constituted the earliest known evidence of the worship of Oriental deities in the city in the imperial age.22 The Eastern world, therefore, was making its presence felt in Egnatia precisely through the sacellum dedicated to the cult of Magna Mater, that is, Cybele, originally from Phrygia, and the cult connected to it—that of Attis, a god loved by Cybele herself; Attis is represented as a beardless youth in a Phrygian cap and worshipped by the priests with orgiastic rites, singing, dancing, scourging, and self-mutilation.23 Moreover, the site of Egnatia can certainly be called strategic, given its location along the Via Traiana, a major artery of communication that crossed the entire settlement from west to east (Fig.  3.5), channeled a large part of the civil, military, and commercial movements to and from the East, and would remain efficient and functioning until the sixth century (Fig. 3.7). Indeed, right from the age of Trajan, Egnatia received a considerable impulse of growth and development as a result of the remaking and transformation of the old road, which, according to Strabo, would have been suitable to be traversed only by mule,24 but which had then become a preferred alternative to the Via Appia because of its greater convenience, speed, and safety: on the occasion of the expedition against the Dacians, the emperor transformed this ancient mule track into a route through which the legions could easily and quickly reach the place of embarkation at Brindisi.25 More specifically, with regard to the section that connected Egnatia with Barium (Bari) and Butuntum (Bitonto), the itinerary sources are particularly interesting, especially 22  Chieco Bianchi Martini 1965, pp. 227–231; see Stazio 1964, especially p. 176; Donvito 20033 (1988), pp. 42; 143, fig. 102; Silvestrini 2000, pp. 193–205. 23  Chieco Bianchi Martini 1965, pp. 227–231; Stazio 1964, p.  176; Donvito 20033 (1988), p. 146. 24  Strabo 6, 3, 7 C 282: δύο δέ εἰσι, μία μὲν ἡμιονικὴ διὰ Πευκετίων, οὓς Ποιδίκλους καλοῦσι, καὶ Δαυνίων καὶ Σαυνιτῶν μέχρι Βενεουεντοῦ, ἐφ’ᾗ ὁδῷ Ἐγνατία πόλις, εἶτα Καιλία καὶ Νήτιον καὶ Κανύσιον καὶ Ἑρδωνία, “there are two routes [the Minucia and the Appia] that start from Brentesion: the first is a mule track that passes through the territory of the Peucetians called Pedicli and then through that of the Daunians and Samnites until it reaches Beneventum. On this route is the city of Egnatia and then Celia, Netium, Canusium and Herdonia.” 25  Degrassi 1946–1947, pp. 167–183; Uggeri 1983, p. 234.

88 

M. CASSIA

Fig. 3.7  Location of Egnatia in the road system of Apulia. (© Reproduced by permission of Dr. A. Schena [Schena Editore] from A. Donvito, Egnazia. Dalle origini alla riscoperta archeologica, Fasano [Brindisi], Schena Editore, 20033 [1988], photos Ditta Guglielmi, Castellana Grotte, p. 61, fig. 36.)

the Itinerarium Burdigalense, which confirms the enduring vitality of the route and documents the presence of intermediate stations: civitas Leonatiae (perhaps a paleographic error for Aegnatiae) mil. X—mutatio Turres Aurilianas mil. XV—mutatio Turres Iuliana mil. VIIII— civitas Beroes mil. XI—mutatio Butontones mil. XI.26 The generic designations of Turres suggest centers for the collection of foodstuffs from inland latifundia and destined to be transported by land along the peninsula or embarked at the ports of Egnatia itself or of Brindisi.27

 Itin. Burdig. 609, 12–16; see Miller 1916, col. 220.  Uggeri 1983, p. 242; Donvito 20033 (1988), pp. 65–67.

26 27

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

89

Fig. 3.8  Section of the Via Traiana near Egnatia with obvious furrows deeply scored by chariot wheels in the limestone paving. (© Reproduced by permission of Dr. A.  Schena [Schena Editore] from A.  Donvito, Egnazia. Dalle origini alla riscoperta archeologica, Fasano [Brindisi], Schena Editore, 20033 [1988], photos Ditta Guglielmi, Castellana Grotte, p. 64, fig. 38.)

The deep grooves left by chariot wheels in the limestone of the road surface testify to the intense traffic and the growth of the movements of both the military and civilians, indicating the significant prominence occupied by the city due to its access to the sea (Fig. 3.8): Roads and port, which reconnected Egnatia to the East and West, were the main carriers of the traffic of the polyethnics that from the East pressed to reach the capital of the Empire, bringing with them, along with products,

90 

M. CASSIA

also political, economic, spiritual, and cultural interests that were stratified in the vast Mediterranean koiné.28

In this multi-faceted setting, the placement of a statue of Severina within the sacellum of Attis takes on a significance that cannot be overlooked: the Augusta was being honored in a cult area dedicated to Attis, Magna Mater, and the goddess Syria, who were part of a larger pantheon of oriental deities worshipped by both the Severans and Aurelian himself. 2. Engraved statue base (height 61  cm  ×  width 64  cm  ×  thickness 17  cm; letters 4–7  cm), found at Allifae (today Piedimonte Matese, Caserta)—located in regio IV (Samnium) according to Strabo and Ptolemy, in regio I (Latium et Campania) according to Silius Italicus and Pliny the Elder29—in the ruins of the women’s convent of San Salvatore (reused in 1750), later reused in a fountain in the garden of Villa Gaetani (where it was still located in 2005) (Fig. 3.9).30

Fig. 3.9  Photograph and interpretive transcription of the inscription from Allifae. (© Reproduced by courtesy of Prof. U. Soldovieri and © M. Cassia.)

 Donvito 20033 (1988), p. 141.  On the sources regarding the location of Allifae, see the discussion in Camodeca et al. 2015, pp. 7–18, in which, however, the epigraph of Severina is not mentioned. 30  CIL IX 2327 = ILS 587 = Allifae 14 = Costarella and Isabella 2006, p. 323 = AÉ 2006, 360 = EDR113024 (G. Corazza) = EDCS-12401838; see Parma and Soldovieri 2020, pp. 76–77, no. 4. 28 29

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

91

Fig. 3.10  Photograph and interpretive transcription of the inscription for Probus from Allifae (back of epigraph for Severina). (© Reproduced by courtesy of Prof. U. Soldovieri and © M. Cassia.) To Ulpia Severina Augusta, wife of our invincible lord Aurelianus Augustus.

Significantly, there is an inscription for Probus at the back of the base, later resected in the 1700s (Fig. 3.10).31 To the Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius Probus, Pius, Felix, Augustus invictus, consul, our lord.

One cannot help but notice how the community of Allifae—in the short period of time between the death of Aurelian and the reign of Probus—had on one hand bestowed honors on Augusta Ulpia Severina and Augustus Probus on the front and back of the same support, and on the other hand placed a dedication—found in the floor of vico S. Pietro, casa Colella (mid-nineteenth century)—also to another emperor, Tacitus, not by chance chronologically placed in an “interstitial” space between the

31  CIL IX 2329; see Peachin 1990, p.  433 (see Watson’s review in the book 1992, pp. 298–299); Costarella and Isabella 2006, pp. 324–325; CIL IX Suppl., pars I, pp. 905–906 (M. Buonocore); Parma and Soldovieri 2020, pp. 76; 78, no. 5. Umberto Soldovieri—who I thank for the indication—noted that the support in the early imperial age had originally been used for an honorary epigraph of a local personage, that the surface has been largely erased, and that the text, still unpublished, is barely legible below that for Probus.

92 

M. CASSIA

empress and the “Illyrian” emperor: Imp(eratori) Caesa[ri] / M(arco) Claudio Ta[cito] / Pius Felic[i] / Aug(usto).32 Unfortunately, the reuse of the base does not allow for a full understanding of the importance given to the statue based on its original location and the associated visibility of the simulacrum within the Allifae site. However, the presence of three dedicated inscriptions on dates close to each other nevertheless allows us to speculate that the prosperous community of Allifae—where senatorial properties are attested between the time of the Severans and the late third century AD,33 as well as collegia of fabrii tignarii and dendrophori, the latter connected with the cult of Cybele and Attis34—aspired in the second half of the third century AD to come to prominence before the central power and to establish a productive political dialogue with the imperial figure. 3. Molded travertine statue base with mutilated inscription in the upper parts (where Augusta’s name was indicated) and lower parts (height 30 cm × width 47 cm × thickness 24 cm; letters 4–4.5 cm) and very corroded surface. Found in 1862 at Clusium (Chiusi, Siena), in regio VII (Etruria), in the vineyard of Canon Ranghini, located in the locality of Arcisa, immediately outside Porta Lavinia between the walls of the ancient and modern city. In 1874, it was transferred to Chiusi to a storage room of the arsenale, then it was stored in 1884 at the San Francesco Museum; later, in 1981, it was located in the storage rooms of the National Archaeological Museum of Chiusi. Today it is again stored in the cloister of the Convent of San Francesco Church (Fig. 3.11).35 To Ulpia Severina Augusta, wife of our invincible lord Aurelianus Augustus, the ordo splendidissimus of the Chiusini, devoted to his Numen and (to his) maiestas (laid).

 CIL IX 2328 = Allifae 15 = EDR136015 (G. Camodeca) = EDCS-12401839.  Camodeca 1971, p. 132. 34  CIL IX 2339 = Allifae 25: Q(uinto) [T]arronio / Q(uinti) f(ilio) Fab(ia) Feli/ci Dextro / c(larissimo) v(iro) / aed(ili) curuli / designato / collegium / fabrum / tignuarior(um) / patrono; on dendrophori, college of priests who, in honor of the Magna Mater, carried pine stems symbolizing Attis in a solemn procession, see Marrocco 1951, pp. 106–107: Mater Deorum mesa / collegi de indroforum. 35  Caracciolo 2014–2015, pp. 64–66, no. 25. See Bianchi Bandinelli 1925, Tav. III, Sheet I (“in the corner formed by the traces of Roman walls [marked A] near Porta Lavinia”). CIL XI 2099 = EDR149857 (G. Caracciolo) = EDCS-22100253. 32 33

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

93

Fig. 3.11  Photograph and interpretive transcription of the inscription from Clusium. (© http://www.edr-­edr.it/edr_programmi/view_img.php?id_nr=149857, reproduced by permission of Ministero della Cultura—Direzione Regionale Musei della Toscana—Firenze and © M. Cassia.)

It is likely that the simulacrum erected in honor of the empress was flanked by a statue of the emperor, now lost, since more than a third of the epigraphic attestations of Aurelian within the Italian peninsula come “from Etruria and Umbria.”36 However, Severina’s inscription can certainly be placed within a series of honors bestowed on third-century emperors by a wealthy patronage of local origin—such as the ordo splendidissimus of Clusium—integrated with other families enriched by the transit guaranteed by the Via Cassia from the first centuries of the imperial age.37 4. Sculpted, fragmentary, white marble slab (height 55  cm  ×  width 53 cm × thickness 4 cm; letters 4.2–4.5 cm), mutilated on three sides and with rough-hewn back, from Industria (Monteu da Po, Turin), in regio IX (Liguria): In Monteu da Po, at the site of the ancient town of Industria, to the right of the street which leads from the railway station to the town, in an unexplored field, adjacent to the road, further upstream from the place where previous  Caracciolo 2018, p. 109.  Caracciolo, Gregori 2017, pp. 147–160, in particular 149.

36 37

94 

M. CASSIA

excavations were made, in the first days of March 1919, the owner of the land, a certain Garella Antonio, while digging, found at a shallow depth a white marble tombstone, missing several pieces, but which must have been roughly square in shape with sides of 55 centimeters or so.

Today, the find is kept in the storage room of the Museum of Antiquities of Turin (inv. no. 447). At the end of l. 1, it is possible to make out the lower left corner of an E; at ll. 2 and 4, the G shows the introflected curl; at the end of l. 2, the shaft of the I is barely discernible; at the beginning of l. 3, one can read the terminal rod of the N. Also noteworthy are interpunctions with wavy lines, also used for exhortative purposes (Figs. 3.12 and 3.13).38 To Ulpia Severina Augusta, wife of our lord Aurelianus Augustus, by decree of the decuriones.

In the second half of the third century, therefore, the ordo decurionum was still able to meet the costs required for the erection of a marble slab for the Augusta.39 This reconstruction is perfectly consistent with Fig. 3.12  Apograph of the inscription from Industria. (Redrawn by M. Cassia after G. Assandria, Lapide dedicata a Severina moglie di Aureliano imperatore [270–275] rinvenuta nell’antica città d’Industria, in Atti della Società Piemontese di Archeologia e Belle Arti 10, 1, 1921, p. 52.)

38  Assandria 1921, p. 52 = AÉ 1994, 636 = SupplIt. 12, 1994, pp. 49–50, no. 4 (with photograph) (G. Cresci Marrone) = EDR107084 (L. Lastrico) = EDCS-107000. 39  Vaschetti 2011, p. 166.

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

95

Fig. 3.13  Photograph and interpretive transcription of the inscription from Industria. (https://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?s_language=it&bild=$SupIt_12_ In_00004.jpg;pp, reproduced by courtesy of Prof. M. Clauss and © M. Cassia.)

the epigraphic and archeological documentation relating to Industria in the third century. In fact, two inscribed fragments, found in 1876 along the small municipal road near the “tower,” that are currently untraceable, mention respectively Gordian III and Gallienus.40 Another fragment of an inscription, engraved on white marble and perhaps of Greek origin or from Asia Minor, is incorporated in the right wall exterior of the parish church of Monteu da Po and honors Furia Sabinia Tranquillina, wife of Gordian III.41 A fourth fragment could also refer to an inscription dedicated to the same empress.42 A fifth, small, inscribed fragment was found in 1985, in the fill deposit of a ditch, and contains a dedication to an emperor, perhaps Gordian III, or his wife.43 An additional inscribed document consists of a military diploma issued in 254, thus in the age of Valerian and Gallienus, to Publius Anneius Probus of

40  Pais 1884, p. 129, nos. 960 e 962 = SupplIt, 12, 1994, p. 46 (G. Mennella). See Fabretti 1880, pp. 67–71. 41  Pais 1884, p. 129, no. 961 = SupplIt, 12, 1994, pp. 46–47 (G.  Mennella): [Furiae Sabiniae Tranquillinae] / [M(arci)] Anto[nii] / [Gordi]ani Pii / [Fel(icis)] Aug(usti) / [coniugi]. 42  CIL V 7492 = SupplIt, 12, 1994, p. 46 (G. Mennella). 43  SupplIt, 12, 1994, p. 49, no. 3 (G. Cresci Marrone).

96 

M. CASSIA

the Papiria tribe, who served in the I praetorian cohort Valeriana Galliena Pia Vindex.44 In addition to the inscriptions, it is worth mentioning two important bronze figurative ensembles depicting Roman and barbarian fighters that decorated a balteus, a type of baldric commonly used to hold a sword, probably made by specialized artisans following the troops, as well as a group of fragments of a lorica with refined ageminata decoration: both types of finds can certainly be traced back to the local cult devoted to Isis, and it may be assumed that both the shrine and the bronze workshops were still in activity, at least until about 275, as documented by the dedication to the empress—a sign of the financial means of the curial class of Industria.45 The strategic centrality of the shrine of Industria—in the context of a well-documented and valuable study on the sacra peregrina in the Cisalpine area—was given due prominence by Silvia Giorcelli Bersani, who, while conscious of the fact that the site was located on the VardacateIndustria tract, that is, on an apparently secondary route that made it necessary to abandon the consular routes, pointed out that the attendance of the sanctuary of Isis had nevertheless increased from the third century, thanks to its ability to accommodate—without losing its Egyptian character—also the Eastern cults of Serapis, Ammon, Harpocrates, and Zeus-Mithras-Helios: The industriense center likely represented a place of elaboration of a syncretistic culticity, of oriental origin, such as that proposed in the Severan age and later by some III century emperors. So the sanctuary, located in an area undergoing profound economic and social transformations, traditionally strongly tolerant and open to diversified religious traditions, was capable of reworking and hosting syncretistic suggestions of henotheistic matrix and to propose itself as a devotional stop for Augusti and Augustae in transit with their courts; the inscription to Ulpia Severina, wife of Aurelian, was placed in a public place by decree of decurions, thus with the consent of the local 44  CIL XVI 155 = Pais 1884, p. 128, no. 957 = ILS 2010 = AÉ 2011, 40 = EDCS12300359 = SupplIt. 12, 1994, p. 46 (G. Mennella). 45  Vaschetti 2011, p. 166: “it is conceivable that … daily life continued, despite the uncertainty of the period, without any notable changes in the housing structures and sacred area. The mention of the college of decurions in the dedication to Ulpia Severina shows that the highest municipal magistracy was still active and able to take on ‘representative expenses,’ such as the white marble slab in honor of the Augusta, although it certainly was not easy for anyone, in times of economic crisis, insecurity, and inflation, to maintain such commitments.”

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

97

senate, which evidently in the mid III century kept its administrative prerogatives intact and knew how to deal with the new course of the times, including from a diplomatic aspect, by displaying its gratitude to an empress.46

In short, that dialogue established between local elites and the central power continued also through the praise paid to the Augustae coniuges. 5. Statue base with inscription, mutilated in the lower part, missing the upper part and damaged on the right side (maximum height preserved 39  cm  ×  width 67  cm  ×  thickness 18.5–20.5  cm; letters 5.5  cm [l. 1], 4.5 cm [l. 2], 4.7 cm [l. 3]), with beveled edges, from Verona, in regio X (Venetia et Histria), and preserved at the Museo Lapidario Maffeiano (inv. no. 28219); the letters are regular, rather worn and there are triangular punctuation marks.47 As I was personally informed, with courtesy and expertise, in a preliminary private conversation, by Dr. Margherita Bolla, Head of the Musei Civici of Verona and the Museo Archeologico al Teatro romano of Verona, the nature of the mineral is indeed unclear: if it was local limestone (incorrectly called “marble,” but is actually ammonitic limestone), then it would definitely be from Verona or the surrounding area; if, on the other hand, it was actual white marble, the question would remain open (Scipione Maffei provided no information on the provenance/finding, while Mommsen included the epigraph among the local ones and this is how it has been considered ever since). As a result of further checks carried out later on behalf of Dr. Bolla, I was officially informed that it is crystalline marble (Figs. 3.14, 3.15, and 3.16). To Ulpia Severina Augusta, wife of our lord emperor Aurelian.

Unfortunately, we do not know the exact location where the epigraph was found, and therefore we can only speculate that the statue was situated in a topographically prominent area within the urban center. In any case, the strategic importance of Verona cannot be doubted, located at the crossroads of the viae Postumia (which led from Liguria to Illyria), Gallica (which connected Turin to Aquileia) and Claudia Augusta (which connected Modena with the Rhine) from where armies departed for military campaigns. Moreover, thanks to the course of the river  Giorcelli Bersani 2014, pp. 175–176.  Maffei 1749, p. cii, no. 5 = CIL V 3330 = Alföldy 1984, p. 129, no. 200 = EDCS04202376. See Sartori 1960, p. 250; Estiot and Modonesi 1995, pp. 9–10. 46 47

98 

M. CASSIA

Fig. 3.14  Photograph and interpretive transcription of the inscription from Verona, Museo Lapidario Maffeiano. (© Musei Civici and Museo Archeologico al Teatro Romano, reproduced with permission of Dr. M. Bolla.)

Fig. 3.15  Apograph of the inscription from Verona. (Reproduced from F.S. Maffei, Museum Veronense, Veronae 1749, p. cii, no. 5.)

Adige, the site was part of the system of navigation that crossed the Po plain.48 This neuralgic role, so to speak, of Verona seems to have been particularly important from the middle of the third century, not only because, as is well known, in the early summer of 249, right near this city, the decisive clash between Decius and Philip the Arab took place (indeed, the latter died on the battlefield),49 but above all because Gallienus, as documented by the inscription engraved on the lintel of the two arches of Porta Borsari, in AD 265 used the services of two figures, Aurelius Marcellinus and Julius Marcellinus, to carry out a very rapid

 See Cavalieri Manasse 2018, pp. 41–83.  Aur. Vict. 28, 10: his actis filio urbi relicto ipse quamquam debili per aetatem corpore adversum Decium profectus Veronae cadit pulso amissoque exercitu; Eutrop. 9, 3: ambo deinde ab exercitu interfecti sunt, senior Philippus Veronae, Romae iunior; see Zosim. 1, 22, 2. 48 49

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

99

Fig. 3.16  Card of the inscription from Verona by archeologist Bruna Forlati Tamaro (1897–1987). (© Musei Civici and Museo Archeologico al Teatro Romano, reproduced with permission of Dr. M. Bolla.)

restoration—in just nine months—of the walls of Colonia Augusta Verona Nova Gallieniana:50 in short, the emperor was: The protagonist of Verona’s inclusion in a major defense system, which ran from Concordia to Milan, against the increasingly frequent invasions.51

50  CIL V 3329 = ILS 544 = Horster 2001, pp. 98; 340, no. X 6, B = AÉ 1965, 113 = AÉ 2008, 264 = EDCS-04202375: Colonia Augusta Verona Nova Gallieniana. Valeriano II et Lucilio co(n)ss(ulibus) (!), muri Veronensium fabricati ex die III nonis Aprilium, / dedicati pr(idie) non(is) Decembris, iubente sanctissimo Gallieno Aug(usto) n(ostro), insistente Aur(elio) Marcellino, v(iro) p(erfectissimo), duc(e) duc(um), curante Iul(io) Marcellino, v(iro) e(gregio). On the identity of the two figures (dux ducum and vir egregius) and the new proposal for reading the inscription, see Buonopane 2008, pp. 125–136. 51  Forlati Tamaro 1973, p. 522.

100 

M. CASSIA

In this perspective, we should by no means underestimate the fact that the excavations conducted between 1971 and 1973, in the area of Vobarno, about 70 km northwest of Verona, brought to light tombs with grave goods, among which—in addition to numerous bronze objects (ten armillae with serpentiform ends, a votive pendant in the shape of a little foot, two dice for games, three decorated dog tags, a chiseled belt buckle, a fibula spring)—the following stands out: a small bronze (Antoninianus?), with traces of silvering, of empress Ulpia Severina, wife of Aurelian, probable coinage in the interregnum between the emperors Aurelianus and Tacitus.52

6. Engraved statue base (height 122.5 cm × width 67 cm × thickness 61 cm), made of gray limestone with a profiled frame and rough back part (Fig. 3.17), found in 1842 “in the rubble of a house at the walls toward the harbor near the temple of Rome and Augustus” in the forum of Pola (Fig.  3.18), in regio X (Venetia et Histria) and preserved at the local Arheološki Muzej Istre (Archaeological Museum of Istria).53 To Ulpia Severina Augusta, mater castrorum, wife of our lord Aurelian, Augustus invictus, the res publica of Pola (placed).

Again, as we have already seen in the cases of Augustum Semta, Egnatia, Clusium, Industria, and as we shall see in the case of Volubilis (see below), the place of discovery appears to be decidedly significant considering the importance of the forum in relation to the urban plan. Moreover, in order to contextualize our epigraph in a more historically precise way, it should be noted that in the second half of the third century, the res publica of Pola was able to sustain the expense of erecting a statue and that, within the fabric of the city, there was an area designated precisely for the worship of the emperor and his family. Indeed, under Augustus the city of Pola had become a colonia and had undergone a major urban expansion, evident, in  Simoni 1973, vol. 2, pp. 267–276, in particular p. 273.  CIL V 29 = Forlati Tamaro 1947, no. 43 = Alföldy 1984, pp. 78–79, no. 7 = EDCS04200029. See Girardi Jurkić 1983, p. 8. 52 53

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

101

Fig. 3.17  Photograph and interpretive transcription of the inscription from Pola. (http://www.edr-­edr.it/edr_programmi/view_img.php?id_nr=093927, reproduced with permission of Dr. K.  Zenzerović, Archaeological Museum of Istria, Pula, Croatia and © M. Cassia.)

particular, in the building, right in the immediate vicinity of the forum, of a temple in honor of the princeps himself, that is still very well preserved. There are also some inscriptions dedicated to various members of the Julio-Claudian dynasty. 54 The statue plinths in the 54  CIL V 18 = CIL V 582, 2 = ILS 110 = Forlati Tamaro 1947, no. 21 = EDCS04200018 (datable to AD 45): Romae et Augusto Caesari divi f(ilio) patri patriae; CIL V 23 = CIL V 582, 4 = Forlati Tamaro 1947, no. 36 = Alföldy 1984, p. 77, no. 1 = EDCS-04200023 (datable between AD 14 and 31): Neroni Caesari / Germanici f(ilio) / Ti(beri) Augusti nep(oti) / divi Augusti pronep(oti) / [; CIL V 24 = Pais 1884, p. 222, no. 1091 = Forlati Tamaro 1947, no. 37 = ILS 198 = Alföldy 1984, pp. 77–78, no. 2 = EDCS04200024 (datable to 37–41 AD): [Ti(berio) C]laudio / [Dru]si German(ici) f(ilio) / [Ner]oni Germanico / [augu]ri sodali Aug(ustali) / [sod]ali Titio co(n)s(uli). See in general Girardi Jurkić 2004, pp. 5–6.

102 

M. CASSIA

Fig. 3.18  Plan of the city of Pola (the forum is located at no. 7; the temple of Augustus is at no. 5). (Modified by M. Cassia after B. Forlati Tamaro, s.v. Pola, in Enciclopedia dell’Arte Antica, Classica e Orientale, vol. 6, Roma 1965, p. 262.)

nearby forum for various emperors and their relatives—in addition to Ulpia Severina, also Claudius, Vespasian, Marcus Aurelius, Septimius Severus, Caracalla, Galerius, and Licinius were honored, and there was also a simulacrum of the dea Victoria—shows how Pola had

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

103

reserved a central area in the topographical space of the colonia for imperial worship.55 Besides Hercules, patron deity of the city, Jupiter, Juno, Minerva, and Venus were also worshipped, while in the surrounding area the cults of Isis, Sol, Luna, Mithras, Bona Dea, Terra Mater, Fortuna, Liber Augustus, Asclepius Augustus, and Flora can be attested.56 The image of the late Obellia Maxima, engraved on a shrine dated to the first century AD and decorated with figures of Attis and Serapis57—together with the discovery of a head of Attis, a statue and two blocks with reliefs also depicting the parhedros (“divine assistant”) of Cybele—suggests not only that the Magna Mater cult was consistently rooted in the site, but also that there was probably a shrine in the immediate vicinity of Pola itself.58

55  CIL V 25 = Forlati Tamaro 1947, no. 38 = Alföldy 1984, p. 78, no. 3 = EDCS04200025 (datable to AD  45): Ti(berio) Claudio / Drusi f(ilio) Caesar[i] / Augusto Germ(anico) / pontif(ici) max(imo) trib(unicia) pot(estate) V / imp(eratori) VIII co(n)s(uli) III desig(nato) / IIII p(atri) p(atriae); CIL V 26 = Forlati Tamaro 1947, no. 40 = Alföldy 1984, p. 78, no. 4 = EDCS-04200026 (datable to 73 AD): [I]mp(eratori) Caesa[ri] / Vespasiano A[ug(usto)] / pontifici ma[x(imo)] / trib(unicia) pot(estate) IIII imp(eratori) [X] / p(atri) p(atriae) co(n)s(uli) IIII de[sig(nato) V]; CIL V 27 = CIL V 582, 5 = CIL X 1482 = Forlati Tamaro 1947, no. 41 = Alföldy 1984, p. 78, no. 5 = EDCS-04200027 (datable to AD  198): Imp(eratori) Caes(ari) / L(ucio) Septimio Severo / Pio Pertinaci Aug(usto) / pont(ifici) max(imo) trib(unicia) p(otestate) VI / imp(eratori) XI co(n)s(uli) II p(atri) p(atriae) / M(arcus) Aurel(ius) Menophilus / ornatus iudicio eius / equo publ(ico) sacerdos / Tusculan(us) aedil(is) Polae / cum Menophilo patre / lib(erto) Augg(ustorum) nn(ostrorum) ex procurat(ore) / indulgentissimo / l(ocus) d(atus) d(ecreto) d(ecurionum); CIL V 28 = Forlati Tamaro 1947, no. 42 = Alföldy 1984, p. 78, no. 6 = EDCS-04200028 (datable to 213 AD): Imp(eratori) Caes(ari) / M(arco) Aurelio / Antonino Pio Fel(ici) Aug(usto) / Part(hico) max(imo) Brit(annico) max(imo) pont(ifici) max(imo) trib(unicia) pot(estate) XVI / imp(eratori) II co(n)s(uli) IIII p(atri) p(atriae) proco(n)s(uli) / divi Severi fil(io) divi M(arci) Anto/nini nep(oti) divi Antonin(i) Pii / pronep(oti) divi Hadriani / abnep(oti) divi Traiani et / divi Nervae adnep(oti) / Magno Imperatori / d(ecreto) d(ecurionum); CIL V 30 = Forlati Tamaro 1947, no. 44 = EDCS-04200030 (datable between 286 and 305 AD): [Imp(eratori) Cae]s(ari) M(arco) Aurelio / [Valerio] Maximia/[no Pio] Felici / [Invict]o Aug(usto) [; CIL V 31 = CIL V 582, 6 = CIL X 1483 = Forlati Tamaro 1947, no. 45 = Alföldy 1984, p. 79, no. 8 = EDCS-04200031 (dated between 307 and 323 AD): Imp(eratori) C(a)esa(ri) [[Val(erio)]] / [[Liciniano Lici]]/[[nio]] Pio Felici / Invicto Aug(usto) / res p(ublica) Pol(ensium) d(evotus) N(umini) m(aiestatique) e(ius). 56  Girardi Jurkić 2004, pp. 6–13. 57  CIL V 203 = Forlati Tamaro 1947, no. 335 = Vermaseren 1978, pp. 99–100, no. 248 = EDCS-04200289. 58  Girardi Jurkić 2004, p. 16.

104 

M. CASSIA

7. Engraved statue base (height 95.5  cm  ×  width 55  cm  ×  thickness 52 cm) from Tarraco in Hispania Citerior; the names of Severina and her husband have been erased, although the reading and integration are certain (only the In of Invictus at l. 5 is no longer visible); the script used is italics in capital letters (Figs.  3.19a, b and 3.20).59 The reasons for the erasion are not clear.60 The base had already been used to honor a certain C. Clodius Chariton between the late first and early second centuries AD and was subsequently reused to be dedicated to the empress:61 regarding the possible motivations for the reuse of the base, according to Christina Hotalen, it is not clear “if this dedication was an example of carelessness, or an attempt to flatter the empress”:62 To the domina sanctissima,63 Ulpia Severina, Piissima,64 Augusta, mater castrorum et senatus et patriae, wife of our lord emperor Caesar Lucius Domitius Aurelianus, Augustus invictus, Marcus Asidonius Verus Faventinus, vir perfectissimus, a studiis Augusti,65 most devoted to their Numen and (to their) maiestas, (laid).

Strobel detected in this epigraphic text “die volle Titulatur der Kaiserin in der letzten Phase der Regierung Aurelians.”66 According to Ricciardi, 59  CIL II 14, 2, 927 = Alföldy 1975, no. 87 (e tav. lxvii, 3) = Serra Vilaró 1928, pp. 97–98, no. 11 (e tav. liv, fig. 2) = AÉ 1930, 150 = AÉ 1938, 13 = EDCS-03400037. 60  Sotgiu 1961, p. 31. 61  The inscription is engraved within a frame in an inverted position (CIL II 14, 1329 = Alföldy 1975, no. 457 = EDCS-03400156): C(aio) Clodius / Charitoni / L(ucius) Gavius / Servatus / amic(o) opt(imo). See Ruiz de Arbulo Bayona 1990, p. 134; Panzram 2002, p. 90; Gutiérrez Garcia 2011, pp. 327; 337 and footnote 11. 62  Hotalen 2020, p. 82, footnote 193. 63  On the use of this adjective in the epigraph from Tarraco see Mayer 1993, p. 169: Clauss 1999, p. 277; Berrens 2004, p. 123 and footnote 331. 64  Harvey 2004, p. 49 and footnote 16, noted how in the context of the rare use of piissimus for Augusti between the third and fourth centuries, the case of Ulpia Severina piissima represents an exception; other piissimi imperatores were Trebonianus Gallus and Volusianus (AÉ 1973, 275; 1979, 302), Diocletian (CIL VI 40715; AÉ 1990, 865), Constantine (AÉ 1969/1970, 695), Licinius (AÉ 1961, 88), the sons of Constantine (CIL VI 40769), Julian (AÉ 1924, 71), Jovian (AÉ 1901, 197), Valentinian, and Theodosius (AÉ 1972, 66). 65  PIR2 A 1217, s.v. M. Asidonius Verus Faventinus, p. 243; PLRE I, s.v. M. Asidonius Verus Faventinus 2, p. 325. On the correlation between the Latin expression a studiis and the Greek expression ἐπὶ τῆς παιδείας, attested by an epigraph of Rome in the age of Hadrian (IG XIV 1085 = IGRR I 136 = IGUR I 62: ἀρχιερεῖ Ἀλεξανδρείας καὶ Αἰγύ-|πτου πάσης Λευκίωι Ἰουλίωι Οὐηστί-|νωι καὶ ἐπιστάτηι τοῦ Μουσείου καὶ | ἐπὶ τῶν ἐν Ῥώμηι βιβλιοθηκῶν Ῥωμαι-|κῶν τε καὶ Ἑλληνικῶν καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς παι-|δείας Ἁδριανοῦ τοῦ Αὐτοκράτορος καὶ ἐπι|στολεῖ τοῦ αὐτοῦ Αὐτοκράτορος [- - -]), see Magie 1905, pp. 30; 72. 66  Strobel 1998, p. 124.

Fig. 3.19  (a and b) Photograph and apograph of the inscription from Tarraco. (Reproduced from J.  Serra Vilaró, Excavaciones en la necrópolis romano-cristiana de Tarragona, in Memoria de la Junta superior de excavaciones y antiguedades 104, 1928, p. 97, fig. 57.)

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

105

106 

M. CASSIA

Fig. 3.20  Interpretive transcription of the inscription from Tarraco. (© M. Cassia.)

the use of domina in the inscription might appear surprising, but it should perhaps be framed in a process of “gradual move toward dominus as common parlance for the emperor and empress.”67 The title domina for Severina, in our view, should come as no surprise, since it is found in Latin inscriptions for Iulia Domna,68 Iulia  Ricciardi 2007, pp. 288–289. A mention of the use of the term domina in this inscription for Severina can also be found in Eck 2017, p. 1. 68  CIL III 14192,12 = AvPergamon 16 = AÉ 1903, 150 = EDCS-30200375 from Pergamum, dating from 211 onward, since she is referred to as “mother of Augustus”: Iuliae Aug(ustae) matri Aug(usti) / et castrorum et senatu‹s=I› / et patriae domina[e] / suae / Romanius Montan[us] / proc(urator) Aug(usti) famil(iarum) glad(iatoriarum); CIL VI 2149 (p. 3295, 3826) = CIL XV 7125 = TermeDiocleziano-01, p. 311 = EDCS-18100866, from Rome, dating from 195 to 217: Iuliae Au/g(ustae) dominae / matri cas(trorum) / it(us) im(m)unis; CIL VI 1872 = ILS 7266 = Tedeschi Grisanti and Solin 2011, p. 289 = EDCS-18100688, from Rome dated to 206 AD: Ti(berio) Claudio Esquil(ina) Severo / decuriali lictori patrono / corporis piscatorum et / urinator(um) q(uin)q(uennali) III eiusdem corporis / ob merita eius / quod hic primus statuas duas una / Antonini Aug(usti) domini n(ostri) aliam Iul(iae) / Augustae dominae nostr(ae) s(ua) p(ecunia) p(osuerit) / una cum Claudio Pontiano filio / suo eq(uite) Rom(ano) et hoc amplius eidem / corpori donaverit HS X mil(ia) n(ummum) / ut ex usuris eorum quodannis / natali suo XVII K(alendas) Febr(uarias) / sportulae viritim dividantur / praesertim cum navigatio sca/ pharum diligentia eius adquisita / et confirmata sit ex decreto / ordinis corporis piscatorum / et urinatorum totius alv(ei) Tiber(is) / quibus ex s(enatus) c(onsulto) coire licet s(ua) p(ecunia) p(osuerunt) // Dedic(ata) XVI K(alendas) Sept(embres) Nummio Albino et Fulvio Aemiliano co(n)s(ulibus) / praesentibus / Iuventio Corneliano et / Iulio Felicissimo / patronis / quinquennalib(us) / Claudio Quintiano et / Plutio Aquilino / curatorib(us) / Aelio Augustale et / Antonio Vitale et / Claudio Crispo. 67

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

107

Maesa,69 Iulia Avita Mamaea,70 Cornelia Salonina,71 and then Galeria Valeria.72 8. Engraved statue base (height 114.5 cm × width 60.5 cm × thickness 51.5 cm; letters 3.5–4 cm; frame 75 cm height × 40.5 cm width × 42 cm thickness; engraved area 65.5 cm × 34 cm) found during excavations at Banasa (today Sidi Ali bou Jenoun in the Garb plain, 17 km from Machraâ Belak-siri and 30 km from the Atlantic Ocean) in Mauretania Tingitana (Figs. 3.21 and 3.22).73 To Ulpia Severina Augusta, wife of Emperor Caesar Lucius Domitius Aurelianus, Pius, Felix, Augustus, the respublica of Banasa,74 devoted to their Numen and (to their) maiestas, (laid). 69  CIL VI 40679a = CIL VI 1079, from Rome, dated between 218 and 222: [Imp(eratori) Caesari M(arco) Au]relio Antonino Invicto Pio Felici Augusto / [indulgentissimo] ac super omnes principes fortissimo / [et Maesae Aug(ustae) domi]nae suae et Iuliae Aug(ustae) matri eius dominae nostr(ae) / [. 70  CIL XV 7336 = EDCS-37900531, from Rome dated between 222 and 235: D(ominae) n(ostrae) Iuliae Mam(a)eae A[ug(ustae)] / [Po]lychronius Aug(usti) lib(ertus) fec(it) / VIIII; CIL III 13724 = ILBulg, no. 264 = Lungarova 2012, no. 263 = Sharankov 2020, pp. 315–316, no. 2 = EDCS-29601659, from Beklemeto in Moesia Inferior, datable to 234 AD: [I(ovi)] O(ptimo) M(aximo) / [c]eterisqu[e] di{i}s / deabusq(ue) Geni[o] loc[i] / huiusce praesid[i]/ [bu]s Haemi montis / ob felicissimum a[d]/ventum do[mini n]o[s]/[tr]i M(arci) [Aureli] [[Seve]]/ [r]i A[l]e[xandri]]] Pii / [Fe]licis Invicti San[c]/[t]issimi Augus[ti et] / [d]om[inae nostrae [[Iuli]]/[[ ]ae Avitae(?) Mamaeae]]] / Sanctissimae Augus/[t]ae C(aius) Quintus Decius / [v(ir)] c(larissimus) leg(atus) Aug(usti) pr(o) pr(aetore) provinciae / [Mo]es(iae) inf(erioris) [[c[a]n[d]i[datus Aug(usti?)]]] / [Max]imo II et Urbano [co(n)s(ulibus)]. 71  CIL II 7, 258 = CIL II 2200 = ILS 552 = AÉ 2016, 753 = EDCS-09000274, from Cordova in Baetica, dated between 255 and 259: D(ominae) n(ostrae) Corneliae Saloninae / Aug(ustae) coniugi d(omini) n(ostri) / Imp(eratoris) Caes(aris) P(ubli) Licini Gallieni / Pii Fel(icis) et Invicti Aug(usti) / Dacici maximi Germanici / maximi trib(unicia) potest(ate) IIII / co(n)s(ulis) III imp(eratoris) III p(atris) p(atriae) proco(n)s(ulis) / provinciae Baeticae devota / Numini maiestatiq(ue) eius / COR[; Hispania Epigraphica 2001, 251 = EDCS-28701504, from Cordova in Baetica: [D(ominae) n(ostrae) Corneliae Salo]/[ninae] Aug(ustae) c[oniugi d(omini) n(ostri)] / Imp(eratoris) Caes(aris) Pub(li) Licini Gallien[i] / Pii Felicis Invicti Aug(usti) / res publica Cord(ubensium) / devota / Numini maiestatiq(ue) / eius. 72  CIL III 13661 = ILS 8932 = EDCS-31300275, from Apamea Cibotus, in the province of Asia, dated between 311 and 313: D(ominae) n(ostrae) Gal(eriae) Valeriae / sacratissimae / ac piissimae Aug(ustae) / matrique castro/rum / [Va]l(erius) Diog. 73  Chatelain 1934, p. 174, no. 4 = Euzennat et al. 1982, p. 101, no. 106 = AÉ 1934, 44 (see AÉ 1942/1943, 115) = EDCS-08800090. See Labory 2003, p. 44, no. 106, where on l. 7 Banasitanorum is preferred rather than Banasensium. 74  On the use of the expression respublica Banasitanorum in third-century official epigraphs, see Hamdoune 1999, p. 306 and footnote 24.

108 

M. CASSIA

Fig. 3.21  Photograph and apograph of the inscription from Banasa. (© from M. Euzennat, J. Marion, J. Gascou, Y. de Kisch, Inscriptions antiques du Maroc. 2. Inscriptions latines, Paris 1982, p. 101, no. 106, reproduced with permission of Antiquités africaines [Dr. A.  Mendes da Silva] and reproduced from AÉ 1934, p. 16, no. 44)

Banasa, like Pola, also became a colonia under Augustus and played a truly significant economic role in the African province during the first three centuries of the Empire.75 Indeed, archeological evidence allows us to assume the presence of various commercial activities connected with the processing of agricultural products, wheat and oil above all, with stone quarrying, wool weaving, brickmaking, and fishing.76 Therefore, the  Bravo Jiménez and Fernández Uriel 2015, pp. 739–747.  For an overview of activities see Alaioud 2004, pp. 1899–1911. For a comprehensive study on Banasa, see the monographs by Thouvenot and Luquet 1951; Thouvenot 1954. 75 76

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

109

Fig. 3.22  Interpretive transcription of the inscription from Banasa. (© M. Cassia.)

financially prosperous respublica Banasitanorum was able to erect statues for the emperors Decius and Claudius II Gothicus as documented by the inscribed plinths, as well as a simulacrum in honor of Severina.77 In the Banasa inscription, the Numen of the living Aurelian is venerated like that of Decius and Claudius II, but the only empress honored in her lifetime is Severina.78 Among the deities, besides those of the classical pantheon— such as Jupiter, Juno, Minerva, Mercury, Bacchus, Hercules, Apollo, Venus, and Hygieia—members of the higher social strata, of senatorial and equestrian extraction79 also worshipped Cybele, Isis, and Attis. 9. Engraved statue base (height 176  cm  ×  width 66  cm  ×  thickness 54 cm; letters 1–5 cm), consisting of two fragments found in 1915 and 77  Euzennat et al. 1982, p. 99, no. 103 = Labory 2003, p. 44, no. 103 = AÉ 1942/1943, 113 = EDCS-08800087 (datable to 250 AD): Imp(eratori) [Caes(ari) C(aio) Mes]/sio Q(uinto) [Traiano] / Decio [P(io) F(elici) Aug(usto) p(ontifici) m(aximo)] / proco(n)s(uli) / trib(unicia) p[ot(estate) - - - co(n)s(uli) - - - res] / publ(ica) Ba/[nasit(anorum)] / [devota Numini] / [maiestatiq(ue) eius]; Euzennat et al. 1982, pp. 99–100, no. 104 = Labory 2003, p. 44, no. 104 = AÉ 1934, 43 = AÉ 1942/1943, 114 = EDCS-08800088: Imp(eratori) Caes(ari) / M(arco) Aur(elio) C/[laudio] / Pio Fel(ici) Invicto / Aug(usto) pont(ifici) / maximo [tribun(iciae)] / potestatis [- - -] / co(n)s(uli) proc[o(n)s(uli)] / res publ(ica) Banasit(ana) / devota Numini ma/iestatiq(ue) [eius]; Euzennat et al. 1982, p. 100 had put forward the hypothesis of an addition to l. 2 of C[arinus] or C[aro], but Rebuffat 1992, p. 447, categorically ruled out both hypotheses. 78  Alaioud 2008, p. 549: “Ulpia Severina est honorée par la ville de Banasa dévouée à sa puissance divine.” 79  Alaioud 2008, pp. 556; 558, tab. 2.

110 

M. CASSIA

1917 in the macellum of Volubilis in Mauretania Tingitana and dedicated by the ordo of the city (Fig. 3.23).80 To Ulpia Severina Augusta, wife of our lord Aurelian, Augustus invictus, the respublica of Volubilis placed by decree of the ordo.

Two interesting elements should be noted: firstly, the location of the statue in the macellum, the authentic beating heart of the economic activities of the urban center, next to the forum of the city, another aggregating hub of the social life of the community;81 secondly, it should be noted how the respublica, before paying homage to Severina, had already honored the Augustae of the Severan age, namely Annia Aurelia Faustina, third wife of Elagabalus, and Iulia Avita Mamaea, mother of Severus Alexander, as well as Cornelia Salonina, consort of Gallienus.82

80  ILAfr, p. 181, no. 617 = ILM, p. 25, no. 79 = Euzennat et al. 1982, pp. 260–261, no. 409 = Labory 2003, p. 70, no. 409 = Volubilis 52 = EDCS-08800369. See also Mastino 1987, table XXII. 81  See Lenoir et al. 1986, pp. 208–209, who, however, rejected the identification of the area with a macellum. 82  Euzennat et al. 1982, pp. 247–248, no. 387 = ILAfr no. 613 = ILM no. 69 = Labory 2003, p. 67, no. 387 = Volubilis 35 = AÉ 1916, 89 = EDCS-08800348 (196 AD): … Iuliae Domnae Aug(ustae) matri castrorum; Euzennat et al. 1982, p. 316, no. 503 = Labory 2003, pp. 82–83, no. 503 = EDCS-08800449 (Iuli[ae] / [Aug(ustae)); see Rebuffat 1992, p. 463, no. 503, where a date between AD 199 and 201 can be hypothesized based on Caracalla’s tribunicia potestas; CIL VIII 9993 = CIL VIII 9996 = CIL VIII 10950 = CIL VIII 10951 = LBIRNA 459 = LBIRNA 460 = Volubilis 37 = Volubilis 38 = CIL VIII 21828 = CIL VIII 21851 = CIL VIII 21852 = ILAfr no. 608 = ILM no. 70 = ILM no. 71 = Euzennat et al. 1982, pp. 250–251, no. 390 = Euzennat et al. 1982, pp. 251–252, no. 391 = Labory 2003, p. 67, no. 390 = Labory 2003, pp. 67–68, no. 391 = AÉ 1916, 100 = AÉ 2013, 116 = EDCS-59100083 (216–217 AD): Iuliae Aug(ustae) Piae Fel]ici matri / [Aug(usti) et c]astrorum et senatus et patriae; on the shrewd use of the titles of Iulia Domna as guardian of the dynastic succession of Caracalla see Zurutuza, Kuz 2012, pp. 2499–2502; Euzennat et al. 1982, p. 255, no. 398 = Labory 2003, p. 69, no. 398 = Volubilis 42 = AÉ 1936, 39 = EDCS-08800359 (218–222 AD): [[Iuliae Sohaemi]]/ [[ae Bassianae]] / [[Aug(ustae) matri Augus]]/[[ti nostri]]; Euzennat et al. 1982, p. 256, no. 400 = Labory 2003, p. 69, no. 400 = Volubilis 44 = AÉ 1936, 40 = AÉ 1937, 24 = EDCS-08800361: [[Anniae Fausti]]/[[nae]] Aug(ustae) [[coniug]]/[[gi Aug(usti) n(ostri)]] et matri / Caesaris n(ostri); Euzennat et  al. 1982, pp. 257–258, no. 403 = Labory 2003, p. 70, no. 403 = Volubilis 46 = EDCS-08800364 (222–235 AD): [Iu]liae Mam(a)e/ae Piae Felici / Augustae matri / Aug(usti) n(ostri); ILM no. 73 = EDCS-11901030: [Iu]liae Mam[a]eae / Piae Felici / Augustae matri / Aug(usti) n(ostri); Euzennat et al. 1982, p. 260, no. 407 = ILAfr no. 615 = ILM no. 77 = Labory 2003, p. 70, no. 407 = Volubilis 50 = EDCS-08800367 (255–258 AD): Co[rneliae Saloni]nae / Aug(ustae).

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

111

Fig. 3.23  (a and b) Photographs and interpretive transcription of the inscription from Volubilis. (© reproduced by courtesy of Prof. Cristiana Cesaretti https:// d b . e d c s . e u / e p i g r / b i l d e r. p h p ? s _ l a n g u a g e = i t & b i l d = $ I A M -­S _ 0 0 4 0 9 . jpg;$IAM_02_02_00409_1.jpg;$IAM_02_02_00409_2.jpg;PH0009551&nr=2; https://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?s_language=it&bild=$IAM-­S _00409. jpg;$IAM_02_02_00409_1.jpg;$IAM_02_02_00409_2.jpg;PH0009551&nr=3 and © M. Cassia.)

10. Inscription found at Palaiopoli on the island of Andros (Aegean, Northern Cyclades), engraved on a marble slab and dedicated by the Ἀνδρίων πόλις (Figs.  3.24 and 3.25). The epigraph was found in the

112 

M. CASSIA

Fig. 3.24  Apographs of the inscription from Andros. (Reproduced from Ph. Le Bas, Inscriptions grecques et latines, recueillies en Grèce par la Commission de Morée. V. Îles de la Mer Égée, Paris 1839, p. and CIG II, ed. A.  Boeckh, Berlin 1843, p. 1069, no. 2349o.) Fig. 3.25  Interpretive transcription of the inscription from Andros. (© M. Cassia.)

square, more precisely in the garden of George, son of Demetrius Stilianos, during the excavation directed by Stephen Cleanthes, architect of the Greek government, commissioned by Ephorus of the Aegina Museum.83 83  CIG II 2349o (where we read at l. 1 [Τ]ὴν [ἐπι]φα[ν]εστάτην unlike Le Bas 1839, p. 91, no. 177, who had integrated Τὴν εὐσεβεστάτην and at l. 3 [Ο]ὐ[λπ.], unlike PH 78093, where Αὐρ. is found) = IG XII 5, 748. See Sotgiu 1961, p.  79; Sotgiu 1975, p.  1049; Petrochilos 2010, p. 151, no. 86 (with bibliography therein). On 23.12.2021, I inquired about the whereabouts of the document from Prof. Nikolaos Petrochilos, Minister of Culture and Sport and scholar of the epigraphic material of Andros, who, on 25.12.2021, promptly and courteously replied to me that he had always searched for this inscription in vain and that perhaps, left in the place of its discovery, it might have been lost. This last piece of information was confirmed (by e-mail reply dated 31.12.2021, prot. no. 605189/13-12-21) by Dr. Eleni Kalavria, archeologist at the Ephorate of Antiquities of the Cyclades, who, despite the search carried out in the archives and storerooms of the Museum of Andros, was unable to find the epigraph.

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

113

The city of Andros (honored) our most noble lady Aurelia (sic!). Severina Augusta.84

David Magie had translated ἐπιφανεστάτη κυρία into the Latin domina nobilissima and considered this the only known case; later Hugh J. Mason, although not referring to the epigraph of Severina, offered a fundamental and unequivocal confirmation of the Latin translation of Magie through reference to a bilingual inscription for Philip the Arab from Phrygia bearing both the Greek expression ἐπιφανέστατος Καῖσαρ and the corresponding Latin periphrasis nobilissimus Caesar.85 11. Engraved white limestone base of statue, comprising three fragmentary blocks (a: width 37 cm × height 34 cm; b: width 38 cm × height 55 cm; c: width 40 cm × height 35 cm), found by Paton incorporated in the wall of the Boghdaylik mosque (today Böğrüdelik), ancient πόλις Ἀνινησίων, near Nysa in Caria (today in the district of Sultanhisar, Aydın province). “It is possible that c, which is in the same character, is the continuation of a, but there is a sensible difference in the width of these two stones” (Fig. 3.26).86

84  On the form Αὐγούστη, a “cast” rarely used in place of Σεβαστή, see Magie 1905, pp. 35; 69. The American scholar, as is well known, had identified three distinct possibilities of rendering Roman institutions into Greek: (1) per comparationem, that is, when a term, already existing within Greek law, is transferred to a Roman institution with a similar or equivalent meaning; (2) per translationem, that is, when Latin expressions are reproduced in Greek by means of a literal translation and mostly through terms with the same basic meaning; and (3) per transcriptionem, that is, when the Latin word is simply reproduced in Greek letters in the form of a graphic “cast”: Magie 1905, p. 2; see also Famerie 1998, pp. 57–60. 85  CIL III 14191 = OGIS 519 = IGRR IV 598 = Riccobono 19412, no. 107 = MAMA X 114 = Petition p. 145 = Freis 19942, 145 = AÉ 1898, 102 = AÉ 1898, 128 = EDCS30000349 (da Altintaş). See Magie 1905, p. 69, 1974, p. 49. Similarly mention can also be made of bilingual milestones from Magnesia (AD 200/201: McCabe 1991a, no. 297 = PH260738) and from Stratonicea (AD 201, McCabe 1991c, no. 92 = PH262605), in which the same correspondence occurs. 86  Paton 1900, pp. 79–80, no. 10a-b = AÉ 1900, 145 = SEG 30, 1379 = McCabe 1991b, no. 30*3 = Blümel 2019, pp. 160–161, no. 592. See Robert 1980, pp. 328–329 (with a photo of the apographs).

114 

M. CASSIA

Fig. 3.26  Apographs and interpretive transcription of the inscription from Anineta. (Reproduced from W.R. Paton, Sites in E. Karia and S. Lydia, in JHS 20, 1900, p. 79, fig. X and © M. Cassia.) The city of Anineta (honoured) Ulpia Severina Augusta, wife87 of our lord emperor Caesar Lucius Domitius Aurelianus Augustus … the city under the curator Aurelius ….

12. Bilingual miliarium (milestone), in Greek and Latin (162  cm height × 58 cm diameter; letters 6 cm), reused several times, found in the cemetery to the southwest of Hacılar, in the vicinity of Izmir in Lydia, 87  On the multiple nuances present in the Greek language to indicate the female partner of the couple (in addition to γυνή, also ἄλοχος, “bed partner,” in reference to the intimate sphere; σύμβιος, “life partner,” in connection with everyday life; and δάμαρ, “wife,” in the more formal sense of the civil status of spouse) see Cassia 2017, p. 80.

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

115

Fig. 3.27  Apograph and interpretive transcription of the inscription from Smyrna. (Reproduced from CIL III, ed. Th. Mommsen, Berlin 1873, p. 119, no. 472 and © M. Cassia.)

initially preserved in the Museum of İzmir and now located in the public park by the sea near Karşıyaka (Fig. 3.27).88 Emperor Caesar Lucius Domitius Aurelianus Pius, Felix, Augustus and Ulpia Severina Augusta. 6 miles from Izmir.

Kienast, Eck and Heil considered the erasion of only the name of Aurelian on this milestone as a possible indication of “vorübergehende damnatio memoriae,” while previously Sotgiu had been more cautious: “Aurelian’s name has been erased in some inscriptions, and the reasons for this are unclear for the time being.”89 Moreover, according to the scholar, Aurelian’s milestones, with rare exceptions, did not relate to actual road restoration and/or maintenance works, but appeared to originate from purely political motives and were expressions of homage addressed by the cities to the emperor; this is evident in this particular milestone, since the name of the empress is also 88  CIL III 472 = CIG II 3179c-e = IGRR IV 1482c = SEG 17, 521= French 2014, pp. 119–123, no. 057A (2). We follow the integration of ll. 3–5 proposed by Petzl 1982, pp. 294–296, no. 815b. 89  Kienast, Eck, Heil 20176, p. 225; Sotgiu 1961, p. 31. A parallel can be established with a milestone of Philip the Arab and Otacilia Severa dated to 244 and from Scupi in Moesia Superior (IMS VI 198 = AÉ 1984, 758 = EDCS-11201381: Imp(eratori) Caes(ari) / M(arco) Iul(io) Philip/po P(io) F(elici) Invic/to Aug(usto) Parth(ico) / max(imo) trib(unicia) / p[o]t(estate) et Otaci(liae) / S{s}eve(rae) Aug(ustae) / m(ille) p(assus).

116 

M. CASSIA

there.90 However, so-called “milestones-dedications”—that is, not real milestones but rather honorary epigraphs in their own right—should not bear indications concerning the distance, whereas in our case this data is evident. In addition to the inscription for Severina, testifying to the importance of the Smyrna-Sardis road, the same milestone had been and would be used for: 1. Septimius Severus, Caracalla with Geta and Iulia Domna (201–202 AD): [Imp(eratori) Caes(ari) L(ucio) Septimio Sev]/[ero P]io [Pertinaci Aug(usto)] / Arabico [Adiabenico Par]/thico m[aximo p(ontifici) max(imo) tr(ibunicia) p(otestate) IX] / imp(eratori) XI [co(n)s(uli) proco(n)s(uli) p(atri) p(atriae) et] / Imp(eratori) Caes(ari) M(arco) [Aurelio] / Antonin[o Augusto [[et P(ublio) Sept]]]/[[[imio Getae nob(ilissimo) Caesari]]] / et Iulia[e Domnae Aug(ustae)] / et matri [castrorum] / m(ilia) VI //. Ἡ λαμπροτά[τη καὶ πρώτη πόλεων] | τῆς Ἀσίας καὶ δὶς νεωκόρος | τῶν Σεβαστῶν Σμυρναίων | πόλις ἀνέστησεν ἐπὶ ἀνθυπάτ(ου) | Λολλιανοῦ Γεντιανοῦ; 2. Diocletian and Maximian (289?–305 AD): Im[p(eratori) Caes(ari) C(aio) Aur(elio) Val(erio) Dioclet]iano Par/th[ico  - -  - S]arm(atico) max(imo) / [- - - et Imp(eratori) Caes(ari) M(arco) A]ur(elio) Val(erio) / M[- - -]m() Carp(ico) Sarm(atico) / m[ax(imo) - - -] / [a Smyrna m(ilia) p(assuum) V]I //; 3. Constantine I, Constantine II, Constans, and Constantius (334–337 AD): DD(ominorum) NN(ostrorum) / Constantini / max(imi) Victoris / triumfatoris / semper Aug(usti) / [[et [Constantini]]] / et Constanti / et Constanti(s) / nobb(ilissimorum) Caess(arum) / m(ilia) VI //; 4. Valentinian I and Valens (28.03.364–23.08.367 AD): DD(ominis) NN(ostris) / Fl(avio) Valentiniano / et Fl(avio) Valenti / Victorr(iosissimis) s(em)p(er) / Augg(ustis) //.91 Although the milestone was found in the suburban area, Smyrna, “twice neokoros” (on this specific title see infra, epigraph no. 13), 90  Sotgiu 1961, pp. 50; 53–54. Another aspect concerns the abundance of milestones coming from African provinces (Numidia, Africa Proconsularis and Mauretania Caesariensis), a fact that was certainly not accidental but of unclear interpretation, perhaps attributable to an increase in vigilance in areas of the Empire considered to be particularly turbulent: Sotgiu 1961, pp. 47; 56; Watson 1999, p. 154. 91  Petzl 1982, pp.  294–296, no. 815a, c-d = French 2014, pp. 119–123, no. 057A (1, 3–4) (with extensive bibliography therein).

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

117

Fig. 3.28  Apograph and facsimile of the inscription from Perinthus. (Reproduced from AÉ 1927, p. 22, no. 81 and from E. Kalinka, Altes und Neues aus Thrakien, in JÖAI 23, 1926, col. 133.)

nevertheless, the city claimed the initiative with regard to the emperors and the only two women “immortalized” in stone, the Augustae Iulia Domna, mater castrorum, and Severina. 13. Quadrangular marble base of statue (with simple trim on all four sides and roughly hewn sides and back), carved on two fragmentary blocks (height 111 cm × width 49 cm × thickness 45 cm; letters l. 1–4: 4 cm, ll. 5 and 6: 3  cm; place of preservation unknown), found at Perinthus in Thrace (Perinthus-Heraclea, today Marmara Ereğlisi) and dedicated by the Περινθίων πόλις, which could boast its double neokoros status and was located just 36  km southwest of Caenophrurium, where Aurelian had been assassinated (see supra, Chap. 2, § 2) (Figs. 3.28 and 3.29).92 For good luck. The most illustrious city of Perinthus, twice neokoros, (honored) Ulpia Severina, Goddess Victory, Augusta.

According to Strobel, the titling Θεὰ Νείκη Σεβαστή is the equivalent of Deus Invictus Augustus and therefore the inscription should be placed “in die Zeit der Alleinherrschaft der Kaiserwitwe nach der Ermordung Aurelians.”93 As for the use of the title Νίκη/Victoria, it is placed in connection with military successes and holds a prominent place in the epigraphic evidence 92  Kalinka 1926, Beibl. col. 133, no. 29 = AÉ 1927, 81 = Sayar 1998, pp. 197–198, no. 13. On the double neokoros title of the city indicated in the epigraph for Severina see Schönert 1965, p. 46; Burrell 2004, p. 242; Raycheva 2015, p. 29. 93  Strobel 1998, p. 124; different from Estiot 2005, p. 164: “Divine Victoire.”

118 

M. CASSIA

Fig. 3.29  Interpretive transcription of the inscription from Perinthus (upper margin and lower region). (© M. Cassia.)

of Aurelian. This feature makes it less surprising that Νίκη also appears in inscriptions dedicated to his consort.94 Therefore, the translation, proposed by the authors of PLRE, of θεά as diva,95 as if Severina were now deceased and had obtained deification by her husband, should be rejected; in this case the hypothesis, based on the quantitatively conspicuous and qualitatively incontrovertible numismatic evidence, of a government by Augusta alone after the killing of Aurelian could no longer be supported (see supra, Chap. 2). Therefore, the inscription should be included among those that present an assimilation of Augustae to deities such as the Victoria/Νίκη with clear reference to military successes and in correlation with the appellation of mater castrorum, already attributed, as noted above (see supra, Chap. 2, § 2), to Faustina the Younger, Iulia Domna, Iulia Maesa, Iulia Aquilia

 Ricciardi 2007, p. 289. Aurelian is defined victoriosus Augustus (CIL XI 1214), [fortis]simus et victoriosissimus princeps (CIL VI 1112), [sa]nctissim[us et] super omn[es pr]incipes vic[toriosis]simus (CIL XI 3878), perpetuus victoriosissimus indulgentissimus imp. (CIL VIII 10177; VIII 10205; VIII 10217 = ILS 578). Among the numerous cognomina ex virtute attributed to the emperor are those of Germanicus maximus (received in 270 or at the latest in 271, following their victories over the Juthungi: see Rambaldi 2006, pp.  207–235), Gothicus maximus (in the last months of 271) and Parthicus maximus (certainly in 272, after winning over the Parthians allied with Zenobia), who are respectively reflected in the coin legends VICTORIA GERMANICA, VICTORIA GOTHIC(A) and VICTORIA PARTHICA: Sotgiu 1961, pp. 18–19; 22–24. On the ideological use of the title perpetuus in African milestones see Daguet 1992, pp. 173–186. 95  PLRE I, s.v. Ulpia Severina 2, p. 830. 94

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

119

Severa, Iulia Avita Mamaea, Otacilia Severa, Herennia Etruscilla, and Cornelia Salonina.96 We should also mention the observation of Watson, who noted that in particular cases the Latin term deus is attributed to Aurelian in epigraphs found in Italy, Spain, and North Africa, testifying to the fact that the emperor “was worshipped as a god in the west during his own lifetime;” this subtle distinction in Greek is not noticeable and both the emperor and his wife were granted “full divine status on Greek inscriptions in their lifetime.”97 The English scholar’s reflection also took due account of numismatic documentation. Aurei, dupondii, and asses issued by the Roman mint between January and September 275 bear on the obv. the bust of Aurelian, radiate and loricate, facing right, with the legend IMP AVRELIANVS AVG and on the rev. the diademed bust of Severina facing right on a crescent moon, with the inscription SEVERINA AVG. In the same time span, the same mint issued denarii bearing on the obv. the diademed bust of Severina facing right, with the legend SEVERINA AVG and on the rev. Venus facing left with scepter and Cupid, and the legend VENUS FELIX. The same type is found in denarii issued in the name of the empress alone between September and November 275, alongside Aureliani with the same legend and image on the obv., and on the rev. Venus with helmet, shield and scepter, and the legend VENVS VICTRIX. In this specific numismatic iconography, Watson has keenly captured a kind of binary correspondence aimed to emphasize the “parallelism” between husband and wife regarding the relationship between the divine and imperial power: as Aurelian is considered to be the counterpart of Iuppiter, so Severina is associated with the god’s wife, Iuno Regina (on this deity present both on issues of Zenobia and on those of Severina see infra, § 2); just as the emperor’s armor is decorated with the busts of Sol and Luna, so the empress is represented with the crescent moon. Similarly, in the epigraphic sphere, the inscriptions that define deus Aurelian (see also supra, with specific reference to the epigraph from Augustum Semta), while living, find precise confirmation in the dedication to Severina Θεά.98 96  Angelova 2015, pp. 198; 341, nota 89. For the assimilation of Augustae to deities see Mikocki 1995, above all pp. 83; 125–126; 128; 130; 146. On the subject in general see also Wrede 1981, pp. 31–63. 97  Watson 1999, p. 187. See Angelova 2015, pp. 198 (Victoria/Νίκη); 304, footnote 112 (mater patriae); 338, footnote 19 (mater castrorum); 341, footnote 89 (Victoria/Νίκη); 355, footnote 8 (PIA FELIX on the coins); and 342, footnote 91 (mater castrorum). 98  Watson 1999, pp. 183–188.

120 

M. CASSIA

In any case, the formula present in the epigraph from Perinthus does not constitute a unicum: in fact, an honorific inscription comes from the island of Kos (locality “Casa Romana”), dated to the second century AD and engraved on the upper part with a white marble statue base dedicated to an Augusta—whose name is not legible—again identified with the goddess Victoria: ἀγαθῇ τύχηι- | Θεὰν Νείκην | Σεβαστήν, | Τύχην πόλεως | [Α]ὖλος Οὐήδι-|[ο]ς Σεραπίων | […]//ΙΓ[.].ΡΙ[- - -] | [- - - - -].99 Given the particular title and the structure of the epigraphic text, one might at least think that the document constitutes an illustrious precedent of the inscription at the base of the statue dedicated to Ulpia Severina by the Περινθίων πόλις.

2   The Titles of Σεπτιμία Ζηνοβία Σεβαστή If at this point, an extremist claim such as that of Burns, according to which “Aurelian’s empress Ulpia Severina is as obscure as Zenobia is famous,”100 seems untenable, nevertheless, it will be useful to make a comparison between the empress’s titling and that epigraphically documented for her counterpart, namely, the Palmyrene Queen; we do not intend to catalog the inscriptions dedicated to Zenobia here, but only, more modestly, to highlight, with the help of some particularly significant texts, the main elements of identity, similarity, and dissimilarity found in the titles borne by the two sovereigns. a. Milestone found on the bridge of the wadi Finar, south of Byblos (Syria-Phoenicia), which can be dated to AD 268–270: [Αὐτοκράτορι Καίσαρι | Μ(άρκῳ) Αὐρ(ηλίῳ) Κλαυδίῳ, | ἀρχιερεῖ μεγίστ]ῳ, [ὑ]π[άτῳ], | ἀνθυπάτ[ῳ πατρὶ πατρίδος] | ἀνεικήτῳ Σεβαστῷ, | καὶ Σεπτιμίᾳ Ζηνοβίᾳ | Σεβαστῇ, μητρὶ τοῦ [δεσπό-]|του ἀηττήτου ἡμῶν Αὐτο- ]|κράτορος Οὐαβαλλά[θου] | Ἀθηνοδώρου. To Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius Claudius [II Gothicus], great high priest, consul, proconsul, father of the fatherland, Augustus unconquered, and to Septimia Zenobia, mother of our unconquered lord,101 Emperor Vaballathus Athenodorus.102  IG XII 4, 2, 1004. See also Kaniotis 2015, p. 26.  Burns 2007, p. 235. 101  See the Diccionario Griego-Español online (http://dge.cchs.csic.es/xdge/ἀήσσητος); Leopold 1852, s.v. ἀήσσητος, p. 17: “invictus”; s.v. ἀνίκητος, p. 82: “invictus.” 102  CIG III 4503b = IGRR III 1027 = IGRR III 1065 = OGIS 647. 99

100

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

121

b. Cylindrical milestone (130  cm height  ×  110  cm upper diameter × 135 cm lower diameter) with Greek and Palmyrene engravings found by William Henry Waddington in 1861 west of Palmyra (now Tadmur in Syria), on the Palmyra-Emesa road. It was reused in the Diocletian age with the erasion of the upper part to engrave a Latin inscription: [Ὑπὲρ νείκης καὶ σω]-|τηρίας Σεπτιμίας Ζηνο-|βίας τῆς λαμπροτάτης | βασιλίσσης, μητρὸς [τοῦ | β-|ασιλέως Σεπτι[μίου] | Ἀθηνοδώρου]. (the following text is in Palmyrene). For the victory and salvation of Septimia Zenobia, clarissima103 Queen,104 mother of King Septimius Athenodorus.105

c. Milestone found on the Palmyra-Emesa road: [Ὑπὲρ σωτηρίας Ζηνοβίας] | βασιλίσσης, [μ]ητρὸς τοῦ | βασιλέως [Σεπτι?]μ[ίου] | Ἀντ[ι]ό[χου].

103  On the title of clarissima/λαμπροτάτη given to Zenobia, see Gnoli 2017, pp. 67–99, especially pp. 69–70; in general, on the titling of Zenobia and Vaballathus, see Gallazzi 1975, pp. 249–265. 104  Philastr. divers. her. 64 Heylen 1957: Queen in the East; HA Aur. 27, 2: regina Orientis; Malal. 12, 26, p.  229 Thurn 2000: Σαρακηνὴ βασίλισσα; Phot. bibl. 265, p.  60 Henry 1977: τῶν Ὀσροηνῶν βασιλίς; Zon. 12, 27, vol. 3, p. 153 Dindorf 1870: Παλμυρηνῶν βασιλίσσα Ζηνοβία. The term regina may also be present in a Latin epigraph from Durostorum in Moesia Inferior (CIL III 12456 = IScM-04, 88 = AÉ 1891, 50 = EDCS31400081 = [I]mp(erator) Aure(lianus) vicit [reginam] / [Ze]nobiam inviso[sque tyrannos] / [inter Ca]rsium et Sucid[avam] / [delevit] Duros[torum] Aurel(ianum) [. The name of the Queen could also be found in an epigraph in Greek and Palmyrene, mutilated, engraved on a plumbea tessera from Antioch, preserved today in France at the Cabinet des médailles: CΕ[Π ΖΗΝΟΒΙ]Α Η ΒΑCΙΛΙCΑ: Equini Schneider 1993, p.  26. It is unclear whether Zenobia received the royal title only after her husband’s death or while Odenathus was still alive: Equini Schneider 1993, pp. 32–33. 105  CISem II, pp. 151–152, no. 3971 = Waddington 1870, p. 609, no. 2628 = IGRR III 1028 = OGIS 649 = Kalinka 1900, Beibl. coll. 24–25, no. 10 (who dates the milestone to between AD 267 e il 271) = Hillers and Cussini 1996, no. 317; see Equini Schneider 1993, p. 26; Sartre’s French translation is given from Palmyrene (Sartre and Sartre 2014, p. 280, no. 2): “pour le salut et la victoire de Septimius Vaballathus Athenodorus, le très illustre Roi des Rois et corrector (w’ pnrtt’) de tout l’Orient, fils de Septimius Odainath, Roi des Rois; et pour le salut de Septimia Bath-zabbai, la très illustre reine, mère du Roi des Rois, fille d’Antiochos. 14e mille.” On the Diocletian inscription, see Yon and Gatier 2009, no. 32 = AÉ 1921, 92 = EDCS-16201249: D(omino) n(ostro) / Aur(elio) Val(erio) Diocle[tiano] / col(onia) Pa[lmyra] / XIIII.

122 

M. CASSIA

For the salvation of Zenobia, Queen, mother of King Septimius (?) Antiochus.106

d. Inscription in Greek and Palmyrene, which can be dated to August 271 and is engraved on one of the shafts of the great colonnade of Palmyra, southeast of the tetrapylon: Σεπτιμίαν Ζηνοβίαν τῆν λαμ-|προτάτην εὐσεβῆ βασίλισσαν | Σεπτίμιοι Ζάβδας ὁ μέγας στρα-|τηλάτης καὶ Ζαββαῖος ὁ ἐνθάδε | στρατηλάτης, οἱ κράτιστοι, | τὴν δέσποιναν, ἔτους βπφʹ, μηνεὶ Λώῳ. (the following text is in Palmyrene). Septimius Zabdas, commander-in-chief, and Septimius Zabbaios, local commander, most powerful, (honored) Septimia Zenobia, clarissima, Pia, Queen, lady,107 in the month of August in the year 582 (of the Seleucid era = AD 271).108

106  Kalinka 1900, Beibl. col. 25, no. 11 = IGRR III 1029 = OGIS 650. Sartre and Sartre 2014, p. 87; 280, no. 2, consider Zenobia to be “mère du roi fille d’Antiochos.” According to Sartre and Sartre 2014, p. 280, no. 3, another milestone, found on the Palmyra-Emesa road (a 30-minute drive from the previous one) and bearing the text βασιλέος [Δα]ρείου | βασιλέως [Σεπτ(ιμίου)] Ἀντιόχου (“of King Darius, of King Septimius Antiochus”), contains the name of Zenobia and could be integrated “[pour le salut de la très illustre reine Zénobie], mère du roi [fille d’]Antiochos.” The text is edited in Kalinka 1900, Beibl. col. 25, no. 12 (with apograph; see OGIS 651) and, according to the scholar, col. 26, dates to a time following the defeat of Palmyra in 272, when, after Aurelian’s return to Rome, a revolt of the Palmyrenians occurred, who killed the Roman commander Sandario and elected Antiochus as king, a relative of Zenobia; the uprising was suppressed with ruthless cruelty in 273. Another milestone (Waddington 1870, p. 609, no. 2629 = CIL III 6049 = CIL III 6727 = Thomsen 1917, p. 26, no. 39), also found on the Palmyra-Emesa road, reused in the Diocletian age and bearing the text ]G | [- - - -]Y | [- - - Dio]cletian | col(onia?) Palm(yra) | [… ρε … του … τιτοβ … Ἀντιόχου, according to Sartre and Sartre 2014, p. 280, no. 4, constitutes another fragmentary dedication to the “[… mère] du roi [fille d’Antiochos].” 107  The attribution of the title δέσποινα—equivalent to δεσπότης by which Odenathus is designated in another epigraph (Hillers and Cussini 1996, no. 291, AD 258)—may also be present in an inscription dedicated by Vorodes, an eminent personage of Palmyra, to the young prince Odenathus: IGRR III 1032; see Gawlikowski 1985, pp. 255–256, no. 10; Potter 1990, p. 385; Gnoli 2019, pp.  257–275. But see the serious perplexities of Gnoli 2007, p. 84, about the possible mention of δέσποινα in ll. 3–4, a reading deemed incompatible with the earlier reference to Vorodes. 108  IGRR III 1030 = ILS 8807 = Waddington 1870, pp. 603–606, no. 2611 = Cantineau et alii 1930, no. 20 = CISem II, pp. 119–120, no. 3947 = Yon 2012, no. 57. The text in Palmyrene reads “statue of Septimius Bath-zabbai, the illustrious and pious Queen …”: see Starcky and Gawlikowski 1985, p. 63.

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

123

Fig. 3.30  Antoninianus from Emesa: on the obv. bust of Zenobia facing right, diademed, draped, on a crescent moon with the legend S ZENOBIA AVG; on the rev. Juno standing, facing left, holding a patera in her right hand, a scepter in her left, with a peacock at her feet and a star in the left field, with the legend IVNO REGINA (RIC V 2, p. 584, no. 2, var.). (© zenobia/RIC_0002v with permission of wildwinds.com, ex CNG.)

The numismatic data that document with clear evidence that the Palmyrene βασίλισσα and the Roman Augusta were intentionally “compared” also contribute to dispelling any possible doubt about the legitimacy of such a comparison between the two women.109 The Palmyrene Queen, in the wake of some Augustae who had preceded her, is portrayed on coins with a hairstyle resembling that of the Syriac Iulia Domna, Iulia Maesa, and Iulia Soaemias Bassiana, but also that of Cornelia Salonina, wife of Gallienus; moreover, on the rev. of some coins, we can see Iuno Regina, holding a patera in her right hand and a scepter in the left and flanked by a peacock (Fig. 3.30).110 It certainly cannot be considered coincidental that the same iconography on the obv. and rev. respectively is also 109  Ricciardi 2007, pp. 293; 336: “the monetary reforms of 273–274 might be related to Severina’s appearance on coins and her new titulature, but there is no evidence that connects the two events. Aurelian’s decision to accord his wife the title may be a reaction to Zenobia’s self-proclamation as Augusta in 272. Perhaps as a means of establishing a contrast between the impropriety of Zenobia and the virtue of Ulpia Severina, Aurelian incorporated his wife into public imagery … Severina, on the other hand, played almost no role in Aurelian’s public imagery until the end of his reign. The empress did not appear on coins or inscriptions until 274, perhaps relegated to obscurity until Zenobia became a self-proclaimed Augusta in the east. When Severina did enter into the public forum, the imagery invoked traditional qualities of Roman women, again likely as a reaction to the power of Zenobia.” 110  Southern 2008, p. 119.

124 

M. CASSIA

Fig. 3.31  Sestertius or as from Rome, XI issue, January–September 275 AD: on the obv. bust of Severina facing right, diademed, draped with the legend SEVERINA AVG; on the rev. Juno standing, facing left, holding a patera in her right hand, a scepter in her left, with a peacock at her feet and the legend IVNO REGINA, in exergue numeral ϛ (RIC V 1, p.  316, Rome 7). (© severina/ RIC_0007 with permission of wildwinds.com, ex Freeman & Sear.)

found on Severina coins (Fig.  3.31). Estiot and Denise Modonesi have categorically stated that “the reign of Queen Zenobia had certainly represented a valid antecedent to the regency of the emperor’s wife.”111 This sense of the stark contrast between two Augustae, one “apocryphal” and one “authentic,” connected by a cause and effect relationship, is also clearly  present in the rather recent reflection of Byron Lloyd Waldron: “the Palmyrene Empire honored Zenobia as Augusta, and Aurelian’s wife Ulpia Severina became an Augusta.”112 Certainly, the experience of a government ruled by a “foreign” Queen, who for some years even managed to keep more than one emperor at bay and was eventually defeated by Aurelian, must have been well understood in the imagination of the ruling classes, but the presence in epigraphs as on the coins of a legitimate Augusta, while showing elements of affinity with Zenobia’s titling and iconography, nevertheless fits into a definite pattern, for it was already traced by the preceding illustrious Augustae, from whom the Palmyrene Queen had the “audacity” to draw inspiration.

111 112

 Estiot and Modonesi 1995, p. 10.  Waldron 2018, p. 180.

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

125

Bibliography Alaioud 2004: S.M.  Alaioud, L’économie de Banasa à l’époque provinciale, in M.  Khanoussi, P.  Ruggeri, C.  Vismara (eds.), L’Africa romana: ai confini dell’Impero. Contatti, scambi, conflitti. Atti del XV Convegno di Studio, Tozeur 11–15 dicembre 2002, vol. 3, Roma 2004, pp. 1899–1911. Alaioud 2008: S.M. Alaioud, La vie religieuse à Banasa: témoignages archéologiques, in J. González (ed.), L’Africa romana: le ricchezze dell’Africa. Risorse, produzioni, scambi. Atti del XVII Convegno di Studio, Sevilla 14–17 dicembre 2006, vol. 1, Roma 2008, pp. 549–558. Alföldy 1975: G. Alföldy, Die römischen Inschriften von Tarraco, Berlin 1975. Alföldy 1984: G.  Alföldy, Römische Statuen in Venetia et Histria. Epigraphische Quellen, Heidelberg 1984. Alföldy 2002: G.  Alföldy, Eine eradierte Kaiserinschrift aus Valentia (Hispania Citerior), in ZPE 141, 2002, pp. 257–260. Angelova 2015: D.N. Angelova, Sacred Founders. Women, Men, and Gods in the Discourse of Imperial Founding, Rome through Early Byzantium, Oakland 2015. Assandria 1921: G.  Assandria, Lapide dedicata a Severina moglie di Aureliano imperatore (270–275) rinvenuta nell’antica città d’Industria, in Atti della Società Piemontese di Archeologia e Belle Arti 10, 1, 1921, pp. 52–53. Babelon, Cagnat, Reinach 1893: E.  Babelon, R.  Cagnat, S.  Reinach, Atlas archéologique de la Tunisie, Paris 1893. Berrens 2004: S.  Berrens, Sonnenkult und Kaisertum von den Severern bis zu Constantin I. (193–337 n. Chr.), Stuttgart 2004. Bianchi Bandinelli 1925: R. Bianchi Bandinelli, Clusium. Ricerche archeologiche e topografiche su Chiusi e il suo territorio in età etrusca, Roma 1925. Blümel 2019: W.  Blümel, Die Inschriften von Tralleis und Nysa. Teil II.  Die Inschriften von Nysa, Bonn 2019. Bravo Jiménez, Fernández Uriel 2015: S. Bravo Jiménez, Ma.P. Fernández Uriel, La presencia augustea en el Norte de Marruecos: las deductiones de Iulia Constantia Zilil, Iulia Campestris Babba y Iulia Valentia Banasa, in P. Ruggeri, M.B. Cocco (eds.), L’Africa romana: momenti di continuità e rottura. Bilancio di trent’anni di convegni “L’Africa romana”. Atti del XX Convegno Internazionale di Studi, Alghero-Porto Conte Ricerche 26–29 settembre 2013, vol. 1, Roma 2015, pp. 739–747. Buonopane 2008: A. Buonopane, Un dux ducum e un vir egregius nell’iscrizione di Porta Borsari a Verona (CIL, V, 3329), in P.  Basso, A.  Buonopane, A.  Cavarzere, S.  Pesavento Mattioli (eds.), Est enim ille flos Italiae … Vita economica e sociale nella Cisalpina romana. Atti delle Giornate di Studio in onore di Ezio Buchi, Verona 30 settembre–1 dicembre 2006, Verona 2008, pp. 125–136. Burns 2007: J. Burns, Great Women of Imperial Rome. Mothers and Wives of the Caesars, London-New York 2007.

126 

M. CASSIA

Burrell 2004: B.  Burrell, Neokoroi. Greek Cities and Roman Emperors, Leiden-­ Boston 2004. Cagnat 1893: R.  Cagnat, Découvertes des Brigades topographiques de Tunisie en 1893 (d’après Toussaint), in BCTH 1893, pp. 203–241. Callu 2000: J.-P. Callu, Pia Felix, in RN 155, 2000, pp. 189–207. Camodeca 1971: G. Camodeca, Sulle proprietà senatorie in Campania con particolare riguardo al periodo da Augusto al III secolo, in CCG 16, 2005, pp. 121–137. Camodeca, Marazzi, Stanco, Tagliamonte 2015: G.  Camodeca, F.  Marazzi, E.A.  Stanco, G.  Tagliamonte, Allifae (Alife). Introduzione, in S.  Capini, P. Curci, M.R. Picuti (eds.), Fana, templa, delubra. Corpus dei luoghi di culto dell’Italia antica (FTD)—3, Paris 2015, pp.  7–18 (https://books.openedition.org/cdf/3816?lang=it#entries). Cantineau et alii: J. Cantineau et alii (eds.), Inventaire des inscriptions de Palmyre, fasc. 3, Beyrouth 1930. Caracciolo 2014–2015: G.  Caracciolo, Chiusi Romana. La collezione epigrafica della Cattedrale e del Chiostro di S.  Francesco, Diss. Laurea Magistrale in Archeologia a.a. 2014–2015, Roma. Caracciolo, Gregori 2017: G. Caracciolo, G.L. Gregori, Epigrafia e storia del territorio. Inediti dall’ager Clusinus nel Museo Civico Archeologico delle Acque di Chianciano Terme, in G.A.  Cecconi, A.  Raggi, E.  Salamone Gaggero (eds.), Epigrafia e società dell’Etruria romana. Atti del Convegno di Firenze, 23–24 ottobre 2015, Roma 2017, pp. 147–160. Caracciolo 2018: G. Caracciolo, Chiusi romana. Ricerche di prosopografia e di storia socio-economica, Diss. Köln 30.10.2018. Cassia 2017: M.  Cassia, “Pellegrine” nell’Egitto romano: “voci” femminili dal Colosso di Memnone, in Hormos n.s. 9, 2017, pp. 29–99. Cavalieri Manasse 2018: G. Cavalieri Manasse, Verona: la città oltre le mura, in AAC 29, 2018, pp. 41–83. Cenerini 2009: F. Cenerini, Dive e donne. Mogli, madri, figlie e sorelle degli imperatori romani da Augusto a Commodo, Imola 2009. Chatelain 1934: L. Chatelain, 12 Jouin 1934. Séance de la Commission de l’Afrique du Nord, in BCTH 1934, pp. 172–182. Chieco Bianchi Martini 1965: A.M.  Chieco Bianchi Martini, Intervento, in Santuari di Magna Grecia. Atti del IV Convegno di Studi sulla Magna Grecia 1964, Napoli 1965, pp. 227–231. Clauss 1999: M.  Clauss, Kaiser und Gott: Herrscherkult im römischen Reich, München-Leipzig 1999. Costarella, Isabella 2006: A. Costarella, C. Isabella, Due iscrizioni imperiali e una epigrafe sepolcrale nella città di Piedimonte Matese (Caserta), in Epigraphica 68, 2006, pp. 322–326.

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

127

Daguet 1992: A. Daguet, L. Domitius Aurelianus perpetuus imperator, in AntAfr 28, 1992, pp. 173–186. Degrassi 1946–1947: N. Degrassi, La via seguita da Traiano nel 105 per recarsi nella Tracia, in RPAA 23, 1946–1947, pp. 167–183. Dessau 1923: H. Dessau, s.v. Semt(a), in RE II A 2, 1923, col. 1148. Donvito 20033 (1988): A. Donvito, Egnazia. Dalle origini alla riscoperta archeologica, Fasano (Brindisi) 20033 (1988). Eck 2017: W. Eck, Annäherung an eine Frau: domina te amo alias derido, in RhM 160, 2017, pp. 109–112. Equini Schneider 1993: E.  Equini Schneider, Septimia Zenobia Sebaste, Roma 1993. Ernout, Meillet 1967: A.  Ernout, A.  Meillet, Dictionnaire étimologique de la langue latine. Histoire des mots, Paris 196. Estiot 2005: S. Estiot, L’interrègne de Séverine et l’accession de l’empereur Tacite: faut-il vraiment croire l’HA?, in G.  Bonamente, M.  Mayer (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquium Barcinonense, Munera 22, Bari 2005, pp. 157–180. Estiot, Modonesi 1995: S. Estiot, D. Modonesi, La dedica veronese a Vlpia Severina Avgvsta, in Estiot 1995a, pp. 9–10. Euzennat, Marion, Gascou, de Kisch 1982: M. Euzennat, J. Marion, J. Gascou, Y. de Kisch, Inscriptions antiques du Maroc. 2. Inscriptions latines, Paris 1982. Fabretti 1880: A. Fabretti, Dell’antica città di Industria detta prima Bodincomago, in Atti della Società Piemontese di Archeologia e Belle Arti 3, 1880, pp. 17–115. Famerie 1998: É. Famerie, Le latin et le grec d’Appien. Contribution à l’étude du lexique d’un historien grec de Rome, Geneve 1998. Fayer 1994: C.  Fayer, La familia Romana. Aspetti giuridici ed antiquari. Parte prima, Roma 1994. Fayer 2005a: C.  Fayer, La familia Romana. Aspetti giuridici ed antiquari. Sponsalia, matrimonio, dote. Parte seconda, Roma 2005. Fayer 2005b: C.  Fayer, La familia Romana. Aspetti giuridici ed antiquari. Concubinato. Divorzio. Adulterio. Parte terza, Roma 2005. Fishwick 2007: D. Fishwick, Numen Augustorum, in ZPE 160, 2007, pp. 247–255. Forlati Tamaro 1947: B. Forlati Tamaro, Inscriptiones Italiae, Regio X. Fasc. 1, Pola et Nesactium, Roma 1947. Forlati Tamaro 1973: B. Forlati Tamaro, La storia di Verona vista nelle iscrizioni, in Il territorio veronese in età romana. Atti del Convegno tenuto a Verona il 22-23-24 ottobre 1971, Verona 1973, pp. 517–529. French 2014: D.H.  French, Roman Roads & Milestones of Asia Minor. Vol. 3. Milestones. Fasc. 3.5 Asia, Ankara 2014. Fuchs 1895: F. Fuchs, s.v. Aurelianus (L. Domitius Aurelianus), in DE I, Roma 1895, pp. 930–937. Gallazzi 1975: C. Gallazzi, La titolatura di Vaballato come riflesso della politica di Palmira, in NAC 4, 1975, pp. 249–265.

128 

M. CASSIA

Galsterer-Kröll 1972: B.  Galsterer-Kröll, Untersuchungen zu den Beinamen der Städte des Imperium Romanum, in Epigraphische Studien 9, 1972, pp. 44–145. Gascou 1982: J.  Gascou, La politique municipale de Rome en Afrique du Nord II. Après la mort de Septime-Sévère, in ANRW II 10, 2, Berlin-New York 1982, pp. 230–320. Gawlikowski 1985: M.  Gawlikowski, Le princes de Palmyre, in Syria 62, 1985, pp. 251–261. Giorcelli Bersani 2014: S.  Giorcelli Bersani, Rappresentazioni del divino nella Tarda Antichità: quali indizi per una storia del sacro in Cisalpina?, in E. Murgia, F.  Fontana (eds.), Sacrum facere. Atti del II Seminario di Archeologia del Sacro. Contaminazioni: forme di contatto, traduzione e mediazione nei sacra del mondo greco e romano, Trieste 19–20 aprile 2013, Polymnia. Studi di Archeologia 6, Trieste 2014, pp. 163–185. Girardi Jurkić 1983: V. Girardi Jurkić, I nomi delle colonie e dei municipi sulle epigrafi romane in Istria, in Centro di Ricerche Storiche—Rovigni. Atti 13, 1, 1983, pp. 7–17. Girardi Jurkić 2004: V. Girardi Jurkić, Culti e riti di Pola antica e del suo agro, in Centro di Ricerche Storiche—Rovigni. Atti 34, 2004, pp. 3–32. Gnoli 2007: T. Gnoli, The Interplay of Roman and Iranian Titles in the Roman East (1st–3rd Century A.D.), Wien 2007. Gnoli 2017: T. Gnoli, Palmyrena, in V. Neri, B. Girotti (eds.), La storiografia tardoantica. Bilanci e prospettive. In memoria di Antonio Baldini, Milano 2017, pp. 67–99. Gnoli 2019: T. Gnoli, A Notable Palmyrénien: Septimius Vorōd, in U. Hartmann, T. Stickler, F. Schleicher (hrsg.), Iberien zwischen Rom und Iran, Beiträge zur Geschichte und Kultur Transkaukasiens in der Antike, Stuttgart 2019, pp. 257–275. Gundel 1953: H.G. Gundel, Devotus numini maiestatique eius. Zur Devotionsformel in Weihinschriftender römischen Kaiserzeit, in Epigraphica 15, 1953, pp. 128–150. Gutiérrez Garcia 2011: A.  Gutiérrez Garcia, The Exploitation of local Stone in Roman Times: the Case of north-eastern Spain, in World Archaeology 43, 2, 2011, pp. 318–341. Hamdoune 1999: Ch. Hamdoune, Relecture de la dédicace impériale IAM 2 98 de Banasa, in ZPE 127, 1999, pp. 301–306. Harvey 2004: B.K. Harvey, Two Bases of Marcus Aurelius Caesar and the Roman Imperial Succession, in Historia 53, 1, 2004, pp. 46–60. Hemelrijk 2015: E.A. Hemelrijk, Hidden Lives, public Personae. Women and civic Life in the Roman West, Oxford-New York 2015. Henry 1977: R. Henry, Photius. Biblio thèque. Tome VIII. Codices 257–280, Paris 1977. Heylen 1957: F. Heylen, Philastrius Brixiensis. Diversarum hereseon liber, CCSL 9, Turnholti 1957.

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

129

Hillers, Cussini 1996: D.R.  Hillers, E.  Cussini, Palmyrene Aramaic Texts, Baltimore 1996. Homo 1904: L.  Homo, Essai sur le règne de l’empereur Aurélien (270–275), Paris 1904. Horster 2001: M.  Horster, Bauinschriften römischer Kaiser. Untersuchungen zu Inschriftenpraxis und Bautätigkeit in Städten des westlichen Imperium Romanum in der Zeit der Prinzipats, Stuttgart 2001. Hotalen 2020: Ch. Hotalen, Embodying the Empire: Imperial Women and the Evolution of Succession Ideologies in the Third Century, Diss. University of South Florida 2020. Kalinka 1900: E. Kalinka, Notizen aus dem Leithagebiete, in JÖAI 3, 1900, Beibl. coll. 1–36. Kalinka 1926: E.  Kalinka, Altes und Neues aus Thrakien, in JÖAI 23, 1926, coll. 118–208. Kaniotis 2015: A.  Kaniotis, Epigraphic Bulletin for Greek Religion 2012 (EBGR 2012), in Kernos 28, 2015, pp.  1–82 (http://journals.openedition.org/ kernos/2337). Labory 2003: N.  Labory, Inscriptions antiques du Maroc. 2. Inscriptions latines. Supplément, Paris 2003. Le Bas 1839: Ph. Le Bas, Inscriptions grecques et latines, recueillies en Grèce par la Commission de Morée. V. Îles de la Mer Égée, Paris 1839. Lenoir, Lenoir, Akerraz 1986: M.  Lenoir, E.  Lenoir, A.  Akerraz, Le forum de Volubilis. Eléments du dossier archéologique, in Los foros romanos de las provincias occidentales. Actas de la Mesa redonda, Valencia 1986, Madrid 1987, pp. 203–219. Leopold 1852: E.F. Leopold, Lexicon Graeco-Latinum Manuale, Lipsiae 1852. Lepelley 1981: C.  Lepelley, Les cités de l’Afrique romaine au Bas-Empire. Tome II. Notices d’histoire municipale, Paris 1981. Lungarova 2012: P.P.  Lungarova, Rimskite kultove v provincija Dolna Mizija. Katalog na pametnicite, Veliko Tarnovo 2012. Maffei 1749: F.S. Maffei, Museum Veronense, Veronae 1749. Magie 1905: D. Magie, De Romanorum iuris publici sacrique vocabulis sollemnibus in Graecum sermonem conversis, Leipzig 1905. Marrocco 1951: D. Marrocco, L’antica Alife, Piedimonte d’Alife 1951. Mason 1974: H.J.  Mason, Greek Terms for Roman Institutions. A Lexicon and Analysis, Toronto 1974. Mastino 1987: A.  Mastino, La ricerca epigrafica in Marocco: (1973–1986), in A.  Mastino (ed.), L’Africa romana. Atti del IV Convegno di Studio, Sassari 12–14 dicembre 1986, Sassari 1987, pp. 337–384. Mayer, El paganismo cívico de los siglos II y III en la Hispania Citerior: su reflejo en la epigrafía, in Ciudad y comunidad cívica en Hispania. Siglos II y III d.C. Cité et communauté civique en Hispania. Actes du colloque, Madrid 25–27 janvier 1990, Madrid 1993, pp. 161–175.

130 

M. CASSIA

McCabe 1991a: D.F.  McCabe, Magnesia Inscriptions. Texts and List, Princeton 1991. McCabe 1991b: D.F. McCabe, Nysa Inscriptions. Texts and List, Princeton 1991. McCabe 1991c: D.F.  McCabe, Stratonikeia Inscriptions. Texts and List, Princeton 1991. Merlin 1944: A. Merlin, Inscriptions Latines de la Tunisie, Paris 1944. Mesnage 1912: J. Mesnage, L’Afrique chrétienne. Évêchés et ruines antiques d’après les manuscrits de M.er Toulotte, et les découvertes archéologiques les plus récentes, Paris 1912. Mikocki 1995: T. Mikocki, Sub specie deae. Les impératrices et princesses romaines assimilées à des déesses. Étude iconologique, Roma 1995. Miller 1916: K. Miller, Itineraria Romana. Römische Reisewege an der Hand der Tabula Peutingeriana, Stuttgart 1916. Pais 1884: E.  Pais, Corporis Inscriptionum Latinarum Supplementa Italica, Roma 1884. Panzram 2002: S. Panzram, Stadtbild und Elite: Tarraco, Corduba und Augusta Emerita zwischen Republik und Spätantike, Stuttgart 2002. Parma, Soldovieri 2020: A. Parma, U. Soldovieri, La raccolta epigrafica del Museo Civico Raffaele Marrocco di Piedimonte Matese, Piedimonte Matese 2020. Paton 1900: W.R.  Paton, Sites in E.  Karia and S.  Lydia, in JHS 20, 1900, pp. 57–80. Peachin 1990: M. Peachin, Roman Imperial Titulature and Chronology, A.D. 235–284, Amsterdam 1990. Perassi 2002: C. Perassi, I ritratti monetali di Ulpia Severina, in RIN 103, 2002, pp. 337–372. Perassi 2014: C. Perassi, Ritratti monetali delle Augustae nel III secolo d.C.: una crisi di genere?, in Un confronto drammatico con il XXI secolo: l’Impero romano del III secolo nella crisi monetaria. Atti del Convegno, Biassono 9 giugno 2012, Biassono 2014, pp. 193–232. Petraccia Lucernoni, Traverso 2002: M.F.  Petraccia Lucernoni, M.  Traverso, Testimonianze epigrafiche di sacerdoti e militari con cognomina grecanici provenienti dai centri sul litorale adriatico, in L. Braccesi, M. Luni (eds.), I Greci in Adriatico. 1. Atti del convegno internazionale, Urbino 21–24 ottobre 1999, Hesperìa 15, Roma 2002, pp. 241–254. Petrochilos 2010: N.  Petrochilos, Συμβολὲς στὴν ἱστορία καὶ προσωπογραφία τῆς ἀρχαίας Ἄνδρου. Ἐπιγραφικὲς καὶ φιλολογικὲς μαρτυρίες, Ἀνδριακὰ χρονικά 42, Andros 2010. Petzl 1982: G. Petzl, Die Inschriften von Smyrna, vol. 1, Bonn 1982. Pflaum 1970: H.-G. Pflaum, La romanisation de l’ancien territoire de la Carthage punique à la lumière des découvertes épigraphiques récentes, in AntAfr 4, 1970, pp. 75–118. Poinssot Louis, Lantier 1923: L. Poinssot Louis, R. Lantier, Q. Geminius Sabinus, Princeps peregrinorum, in CRAI 3, 1923, pp. 197–201.

3  THE EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES 

131

Potter 1990: D.S. Potter, Prophecy and History in the Crisis of the Roman Empire. A Historical Commentary on the Thirteenth Sibylline Oracle, Oxford 1990. Rambaldi 2006: S. Rambaldi, Aureliano in Cisalpina. I riflessi delle invasioni alamanniche nelle testimonianze archeologiche, in Ocnus 14, 2006, pp. 207–235. Raycheva 2015: M.  Raycheva, The Imperial Cult in Perinthos, in Archaeologia Bulgarica 19, 2, 2015, pp. 23–34. Rebuffat 1992: R. Rebuffat, Compléments au recueil des Inscriptions Antiques du Maroc, in A. Mastino (ed.), L’Africa romana. Atti del IX Convegno di Studio, Nuoro 13–15 dicembre 1991, vol. 1, Sassari 1992, pp. 439–501. Ricciardi 2007: R.A. Ricciardi, Where Did All the Women Go: The Archaeology of the Soldier Empresses, Diss. University of Cincinnati 2007. Robert 1980: L.  Robert, Monnaies d’Anineta, in L.  Robert, À travers l’Asie Mineure. Poètes et prosateurs, monnaies grecques, voyageurs et géographie, Paris 1980, pp. 325–334. Ruiz de Arbulo Bayona 1990: J. Ruiz de Arbulo Bayona, El foro de Tarraco, in Cypsela 8, 1990, pp. 119–138. Salama, Desanges, Duval, Ben Baaziz 2010: P.  Salama, J.  Desanges, N.  Duval, S. Ben Baaziz, Carte des routes et des cités de l’Est de l’Africa à la fin de l’antiquité. Nouvelle édition de la carte des “Voies romaines de l’Afrique du Nord” conçue en 1949 d’après les tracés de Pierre Salama, Turnhout 2010. Sartori 1960: F.  Sartori, Verona romana: storia politica, economica, amministrativa, in V. Cavallari, P. Gazzola (eds.), Verona e il suo territorio. I. Preistoria-­ Verona romana, Verona 1960, pp. 159–259. Sartre, Sartre 2014: A. Sartre, M. Sartre, Zénobie, de Palmyre à Rome, Paris 2014. Sayar 1998: M.H. Sayar, Perinthos-Herakleia (Marmara Ereğlisi) und Umgebung. Geschichte, Testimonien, griechische und lateinische Inschriften, Wien 1998. Schönert 1965: E. Schönert, Die Münzprägung von Perinthos, Berlin 1965. Serra Vilaró 1928: J. Serra Vilaró, Excavaciones en la necrópolis romano-cristiana de Tarragona, in Memoria de la Junta superior de excavaciones y antiguedades 104, 1928. Sharankov 2020: N. Sharankov, Decius as Governor of Lower Moesia and Severus Alexander’s Visit to the Province in A.D. 234, in ZPE 214, 2020, pp. 309–319. Silvestrini 2000: M. Silvestrini, Note sui culti orientali dell’Italia sud-adriatica, in Ch. Delplace, F. Tassaux (eds.), Les cultes polythéistes dans l’Adriatique romaine, Pessac 2000, pp. 193–205. Simoni 1973: P. Simoni, Testimonianze romane a Gavardo, a Vobarno e a Salò, in Atti del Convegno Internazionale per il xix centenario della dedicazione del Capitolium e per il 150° anniversario della sua scoperta, vol. 2, Brescia 1973, pp. 267–276. Sotgiu 1961: G. Sotgiu, Studi sull’epigrafia di Aureliano, Sassari 1961. Sotgiu 1975: G. Sotgiu, Aureliano (1960–1972), in ANRW II 2, Berlin-New York 1975, pp. 1039–1061.

132 

M. CASSIA

Southern 2008: P. Southern, Empress Zenobia. Palmyra’s Rebel Queen, London-­ New York 2008. Starcky, Gawlikowski 1985: J. Starcky, M. Gawlikowski, Palmyre, Paris 1985. Stazio 1964: A. Stazio, La documentazione archeologica in Puglia, in ACSMG 1964, pp. 153–179. Strobel 1998: K.  Strobel, Ulpia Severina Augusta: eine Frau in der Reihe der illyrischen Kaiser, in E.  Frézouls, H.  Jouffroy (eds.), Les empereurs illyriens. Actes du Colloque de Strasbourg 11–13 octobre 1990, Strasbourg 1998, pp. 119–153. Taeger 1956: F. Taeger, Zur Geschichte der spätkaiserlichen Herrscherauffassung, in Saeculum 7, 2, 1956, pp. 182–195. Taeger 1960: F.  Taeger, Charisma. Studien zur Geschichte des antiken Herrscherkultes, vol. 2, Stuttgart 1960. Tedeschi Grisanti, Solin 2011: G. Tedeschi Grisanti, H. Solin, Dis Manibus, pili, epitaffi et altre cose antiche di Giovannantonio Dosio, Pisa 2011. Thomsen 1917: P.  Thomsen, Die römischen Meilensteine der Provinzen Syria, Arabia, und Palästina, in ZPalV 40, 1917, pp. 1–103. Thouvenot 1954: R. Thouvenot, Julia Valentia Banasa, Rabat 1954. Thouvenot, Luquet 1951: R. Thouvenot, A. Luquet, Banasa, Rabat 1951. Thurn 2000: I. Thurn, Ioannis Malalae Chronographia, Corpus Fontium Histo riae Byzantinae. Series Berolinensis 35, Berolini-Novi Eboraci 2000. Uggeri 1983: G. Uggeri, La viabilità romana nel Salento, Fasano 1983. Vaschetti 2011: L.  Vaschetti, Dall’inizio del III secolo alla fine della Tarda Antichità, in E.  Zanda (ed.), Industria città romana sacra a Iside. Scavi e ricerche archeologiche 1981–2003, Torino-Londra-Venezia-New York 2011, pp. 163–188. Vermaseren 1978: M.J. Vermaseren, Corpus Cultus Cybelae Attidisque (CCCA). IV. Italia—Aliae Provinciae, Leiden 1978. Waddington 1870: W.H. Waddington, Inscriptions grecques et latines de la Syrie, Paris 1870. Waldron 2018: B.L. Waldron, Diocletian, Hereditary Succession and the Tetrarchic Dynasty, Diss. University of Sydney 2018. Watson 1999: A.  Watson, Aurelian and the Third Century, London-New York 1999. Wienand 2015: J. Wienand, Deo et domino: Aurelian, Serdica und die restitutio orbis, in JNG 65, 2015, pp. 63–99. Wrede 1981: H. Wrede, Consecratio in formam deorum. Vegöttlichte Privatpersonen in der römischen Kaiserzeit, Mainz am Rhein 1981. Yon 2012: J.-B. Yon, Inscriptions grecques et latines de la Syrie. XVII. 1. Palmyre, Bibliothèque archéologique et historique 195, Beyrouth 2012. Yon, Gatier 2009: J.-B. Yon, P.-L. Gatier, Choix d’inscriptions grecques et latines de la Syrie, Beyrouth 2009.



Concluding Remarks

In his famous work The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Edward Gibbon wrote of the “interregnum” between Aurelian’s violent death and the accession of his successor to the throne as follows: [T]he contention that ensued [i.e., after Aurelian’s death] is one of the best attested, but most improbable events in the history of mankind. The troops, as if satiated with the exercise of power, again conjured the senate to invest one of its own body with the Imperial purple. The senate still persisted in its refusal; the army in its request. The reciprocal offer was pressed and rejected at least three times, and whilst the obstinate modesty of either party was resolved to receive a master from the hands of the other, eight months insensibly elapsed: an amazing period of tranquil anarchy, during which the Roman world remained without a sovereign, without a usurper, and without a sedition. The generals and magistrates appointed by Aurelian continued to execute their ordinary functions; and it is observed that a proconsul of Asia was the only considerable person removed from his office, in the whole course of the interregnum.1

Compared to this picture of “an amazing period of tranquil anarchy … without a sovereign” presented with subtle irony by the illustrious English intellectual and politician, referring to HA Aur. 40, 4 (per sex menses 1  Gibbon (1789, pp. 49–50). Chastagnol (1994, p. 1027), referred to Gibbon’s text as “un excellent commentaire” to the event of the interregnum.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 M. Cassia, The Roman Empress Ulpia Severina, Queenship and Power, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28651-3

133

134 

CONCLUDING REMARKS

imperatorem Romanus orbis non habuerit), numismatic sources enable us to either seriously question or at least downplay the content and duration of this drastic statement and, above all, to identify in this delicate transitional phase a figure of reference, holder of imperial power, Ulpia Severina Augusta, widow of Aurelian. She may have been from the Danubian (or Dacian?) area originally, as suggested by the anecdotal evidence handed down by the Historia Augusta regarding Ulpius Crinitus (Watson), who indeed, if anything, “owed” his dubious existence to the empress (Estiot, Modonesi); this is also suggested by the discovery in Dacia—albeit isolated but no less significant—in the cemetery of Iernut of a coin of Severina struck by the mint of Ticinum. To this we can add the “mischievous” comparison alluded to in the Historia Augusta between the conqueror of the same Dacia, the Hispanic Trajan, and Aurelian, who abandoned Dacia (Estiot, Modonesi). We must also not forget another important reference to Dacia: the sacrifice of the Dacisci soldiers, also attested by the Historia Augusta, on the occasion of the repression of the Roman mint workers in 271. While Tacitus may be seen as another “emperor-soldier” (Syme, Gnoli) and not a senior representative of the senate, we should not underestimate the function of “stabilizing factor”—one could even say the role of mediator—for the upper echelons of power carried out by Severina (Cenerini); she lavished gold donativa on the soldiers and was celebrated in the inscription from Pola as mater castrorum and in the one from Tarraco not only as mater castrorum but also as senatus et patriae. This testified to the fact that, irrespective of the fanciful historiographical elaboration of the senatorial interregnum, the need for a rebalancing and convergence between diametrically opposed aspects (dealing with the military and motherhood) was nonetheless felt, as had already happened in the past—with Iulia Domna, wife of Septimius Severus, Iulia Aquilia Severa, consort of Elagabalus, Iulia Avita Mamaea, mother of Severus Alexander, Iulia Maesa, grandmother of Elagabalus and Severus Alexander, Otacilia Severa, wife of Philip the Arab—and as would happen later with Magnia Urbica, wife of Carinus. On the other hand, at least according to the reports in the Historia Augusta, Aurelian showed he was inclined to reestablish the all-female senaculum of Severan age, as if at certain particularly delicate junctures some female emperors matres castrorum et senatus could fulfill a liaison function between the army and the senate, thus between military power and tradition, bearing witness to the consolidation of that “new role” of the female presence in the center of power (Cenerini) in the era of Elagabalus (who, not surprisingly, shared with

  CONCLUDING REMARKS 

135

Aurelian the strong impetus given to the cult of the Sol, a true transposition in the capital of the veneration paid to the Palmyrene Malakbêl). Indeed, regarding Elagabalus, matrem suam in senatum rogari iussit and, as if to compensate for the weakness and effeminacy of her son, Iulia Soaemias Bassiana, mulier, made her entrance into the senate loco viri. The beard and spiky mustache that characterize Severina on some coins are certainly the result of contingent factors (lack of an official portrait of the Augusta in the mints, the rapid pace of the production of coinage, use of the same punch regardless of the gender of the figure), but they may also reflect well-defined political choices (Perassi, Ricciardi, and Varner). Indeed, in order to reign alone, Severina was forced not only to pander to the troops with donativa, but also, at times, even to “change gender,” to “masculinize herself,” in order to be truly equated with Aurelian and thus exercise, in the months of the interregnum, imperial power in place of her deceased husband: the ideal arena of this “transformation” was the coinage field, a perfect, capillary system of communication with all the subjects of the entire imperial structure. The coin issues depicting Severina alone from September to November 275 are very well represented in number by the Venèra hoard (as many as 524 issues among Aureliani and denarii) found in the Verona area (one of the epigraphs for the empress also comes from there), hidden in conjunction with the war events of the year 287. The analysis of Severina’s portrait on the coins shows not only masculine appearance, reminiscent of the figure of her husband, but also advanced age; according to the Historia Augusta, these features were “pasted” onto Tacitus. If this reconstruction is plausible, the anonymous author has mystified reality, attributing to Aurelian’s successor somatic characteristics, such as the wrinkles of old age, that appear on some of Severina’s coins. The portrayal of the empress with masculine features could also be seen in juxtaposition to the representation of Queen Zenobia, to whom the Historia Augusta itself attributes vox clara et virilis (HA Trig. Tyr. 30, 16) and the fact that viriliter ac fortis se gessit (HA Gall. 13, 5); indeed, she is described as adsueta to hard work, like her spouse Odenathus, and even fortior marito (HA Trig. Tyr. 15, 8). In addition, the masculine depiction of Severina could also be interpreted as a response to the senate and the army in the third century: for the anonymous author of the HA, by the late fourth century—or in the age of Honorius (Mazzarino) or in the late fifth century (Gnoli)—a government held by a woman without the presence, albeit purely for the sake of formality, of a man at the head of the

136 

CONCLUDING REMARKS

empire was unacceptable. Thus, in the fourth and fifth centuries, the “threatening” suggestion of a third-century female ruler had to be quashed either by oblivion—which would also seem to have affected the sculpture and glyptics, since portraits of busts and gems were almost invariably considered not attributable to the empress or otherwise of very dubious provenance—or with very extensive treatment such as that given by the Historia Augusta to Zenobia, the foreign Queen, perhaps because she was a mother of sons, unlike Severina, who gave her husband filiam solam. This hypothesis could in fact also find a rationale in the comparison between Severina and Zenobia on the basis of numismatic iconography and the coin legends: the depiction of the empress on coins—from the hairstyle to the crescent moon, from the association with IVNO REGINA for both women to the identification with VENVS FELIX (the latter attribute is carried by Aurelian in epigraphs from Augustum Semta, Egnatia, Banasa, and Smyrna, but in this case attributed on the coin to a female deity) and VENVS VICTRIX for Severina alone—emphasizes the comparison and at the same time accentuates the contrast, because it deliberately evokes the features of her “apocryphal” counterpart, while the terms CONCORDIA and, indeed, FELIX attested by the coins seem to embody the ethical and political counterbalance of the Palmyrene Queen, who, though denoted in the Historia Augusta by some significant positive traits (prudentia, constantia, gravitas as well as largitas and tristitia depending on the circumstances) nevertheless appears marked by a certain superbia (haughtiness) and insolentia (Aur. 27, 1: Zenobia superbius insolentiusque rescripsit quam eius fortuna poscebat). It is very clear from the summary table (Fig. A.1) how, alongside elements of dissimilarity—such as the titles of coniux/γυνή and

Fig. A.1  Summary table of titles attributed by epigraphic texts to Septimia Zenobia and Ulpia Severina. (© M. Cassia)

  CONCLUDING REMARKS 

137

piissima/εὐσεβεστάτη in the case of Severina, as opposed to λαμπροτάτη βασίλισσα/regina in the case of Zenobia—undeniable factual similarities emerge (like the term δέσποινα used for the Palmyrene Queen, comparable to domina/κυρία used for the Roman empress, albeit with the reinforcement of the superlative adjectives sanctissima/ἐπιφανεστάτη or the expression mater castrorum et senatus et patriae comparable in some respects to μῆτερ τοῦ δεσπότου ἀητήτου/τοῦ βασιλέως) and especially clearly indicated identities, as in Augusta/Σεβαστή/Αὐγούστη and εὐσεβής/pia. On the other hand, however, it must be said that, unlike with coin legends and monetary iconography, on objects for private use, such as the carnelian gold ring found in Georgia and depicting a βασίλισσα Ulpia of the Ἀσία wearing a distinctive oriental headdress—an object with a very specific iconography and a significant exception in the general picture of oblivion of the real features of the sovereign in the sphere of sculpture and glyptics—the graphic and iconographic message appears to be free from political conditioning and thus from a—albeit transitory—transgender identity, so to speak, documented on some issues struck in the name of Severina alone. Moreover, there are the epigraphs, documents that are not for private use, it is true, but nor as all-pervading as money in circulation: the epigraphic surface, unlike the monetary field or the carving on the gem set in the ring, represented a third place, in which the strictly iconographic aspect was enhanced through the erection of a statue of the empress, and the individual city could focus on graphic communication, which left space for messages of a purely political nature that could not be conveyed by means of the coins forged by the Imperial mints. As can be seen from the summary table of inscriptions for Severina (Fig. A.2), she is honored on a total of fourteen epigraphs: based on the geographical distribution (Fig. A.3) and the large number of attestations (Fig. A.4), we can see that as many as six come from Italy (nos. 1–6, fairly well distributed over the territory of the peninsula between south, center, and north), one from Spain (no. 7), three from Africa (nos. A; 8–9), and four from the Aegean, Asia Minor, and Thrace (nos. 10–13); ten are in Latin (nos. A; 1–9) and four in Greek (nos. 10–13). Although Africa was the first to honor Severina, not yet Augusta but already pia coniux (no. A) of Aurelian, it was clearly in Italy (43%)—the land in which the royal couple must have had an important base of

138 

CONCLUDING REMARKS

City A. Augustum Semta

Region

Type

Africa Proconsularis

Statue base

1.

Egnatia

Regio II (Apulia et Calabria)

Statue base

2.

Allifae

Regio IV (Samnium)/ I (Latinum et Campania)

Statue base

3.

Clusium

Regio VII (Etruria)

Statue base

4.

Industria

Regio IX (Liguria)

Slab

5.

Verona

Regio X (Venetia et Histria)

Statue base

6.

Pola

Regio X (Venetia et Histria)

Statue base

7.

Tarraco

Hispania Citerior

Statue base

8.

Banasa

Mauretania Tingitana

Statue base

9.

Volubilis

Mauretania Tingitana

Statue base

10.

Andros

Aegean

Slab

11.

Anineta

Caria

Statue base

12.

Smirne

Lydia

Milestone

Thrace

Statue base

13. Perinthus

Place of discovery near a “haouta” Sacellum of eastern divinity

Sanctuary of Isis

forum

macellum

Fig. A.2  Table summarizing the inscriptions for Ulpia Severina. (© M. Cassia)

  Concluding Remarks 

139

Fig. A.3 Geographical distribution of epigraphic attestations of Ulpia Severina. (Modified by M.  Cassia after https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:Map_of_Ancient_Rome_271_AD.svg.)

29% Greek inscriptions

Italy, Spain, and Africa

71% Latin inscriptions

Aegean, Asia Minor, and Thrace

Fig. A.4  Pie chart showing epigraphic attestations of Ulpia Severina on a linguistic and geographical basis. (© M. Cassia.)

140 

Concluding Remarks

consensus among the city elites (as shown by the dedicatees who operated in an official capacity decuriones of Egnatia, ordo splendidissimus Clusinorum, res publica Polensium)—where in the years 274–275 the need was most felt to dedicate inscriptions to the Augustan couple. We may assume that this was not done in a random manner, at least judging from the places where discoveries were made, with the presence of cults devoted to oriental deities—favored, in general, by the armies and, especially, by those emperors who based power and consensus on the militia—such as the sacellum of Attis (Egnatia, but also Allifae and Pola) or the shrine of Isis (Industria). In particular, although the information regarding the discovery of the inscription from Industria does not enable us to state that the slab was originally located within the place of worship dedicated to the Egyptian goddess Isis, nevertheless, if we take into account the fact that the site was only partially excavated, we can certainly hypothesize a connection with this deity. This is also in keeping with the location of the statue base from Egnatia, and we may speculate that the accolades to Severina could also be traceable to some extent to the cults propagated by her husband Aurelian in a well-orchestrated political framework, within which the image of the coniux was to play an important role alongside her husband, in the prospect of marital CONCORDIA “publicized” by the monetary issues struck both by the couple and in the name of the widow. In all ten Latin inscriptions (nos. A and 1–9) Severina is invariably coniux domini nostri, while only in epigraph 11 she is γυνή τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν; the only exception is the term γυνή, used in the inscription of Anineta, a word generally homologous with uxor (as ἀνήρ is of vir, sexually connoted as unequivocally masculine), less “technical” than the feminine γαμετή and the masculine γαμέτης, which are subtly varied with a fundamental distinction of gender. In 12 (milestone), Severina is mentioned alongside the emperor without the indication of the marriage bond, and in the text of 13 she is honored as the personification of Θεὰ Νίκη. Coniux, on the other hand, is an “asexual” word, in the sense that it refers indistinctly to the wife or the husband (spouse), while uxor is charged with a distinctly legal significance and identifies a legitimate wife. The fact that in the Historia Augusta—where the empress is not even called by name and indeed if anything is remembered for her vacuous aspirations tunicopallium blatteo serico—the term uxor is used, which is “only” feminine and indicates therefore that woman is identified with vanity, according to a truly worn-out cliché, further highlights the constant lexical choice of the epigraphic documents, since it places the two

  Concluding Remarks 

141

members of the imperial couple on absolute equal terms from a linguistic point of view (Cenerini), both coniuges without distinction of gender. Very often the texts are found engraved on bases of statues that, placed in particularly significant sites, were certainly intended to highlight the reverence paid publicly by each community to the empress, albeit in the short time she held the reins of the Empire. Unfortunately, only the plinths have survived (a total of 11, if we include the one from Augustum Semta) and we do not therefore possess the simulacra that would have allowed a more stringent comparison with the monetary iconography and a better understanding of the visual impact that the monuments must have had within the cities or in significant transit places, as in the case of Clusium, where the statue of the empress was probably placed along the perimeter wall in the immediate vicinity of Porta Lavinia. The sites in the Augustan regiones where the dedications to Severina were found are all junctions, fundamental roads (even the apparently secondary one in Industria) of a road network that certainly conveyed traffic of goods and men but was also meant to facilitate the movement of the troops. Egnatia on the Via Traiana, Allifae on the Via Latina, Clusium on the via Cassia, Industria on the Via Taurinorum, Verona on the Via Postumia, and Pola on the Via Flavia constitute the points of a network that spanned the entire peninsula, on the one hand toward the Alps and on the other in the direction of the maritime outlet through Brindisi. This is all in line with the prominence assumed by centers such as Industria or Verona, which, besides having made dedications to Severina, show at the same time their own concrete presence on the political scene of the third century, as documented by the epigraphic mentions of Gordian III and Furia Sabinia Tranquillina, Philip the Arab, Decius, Valerian, and Gallienus. In this regard, we should mention the case of the epigraph of Allifae, a community moved by the pressing need to rectify it, or at least to hurriedly correct the score, so that first it honors Tacitus for a very short time and immediately afterward, on the back of the epigraph for Severina, it honors Probus: this truly unique coincidence can only substantiate and confirm the fact that, albeit for a few months, these two emperors were preceded in office by an “anomalous” colleague. The four epigraphs in Greek show the interest in the emperor (nos. 11 and 12) and his wife (nos. 10–13) by the Hellenic ruling classes belonging to the Ἀνδρίων πόλις in the Aegean, Περινθίων πόλις on the Sea of Marmara, πόλις Ἀννινησίων in Caria, as well as the need for constant maintenance of the important road axis from Smyrna to Lydia; the

142 

Concluding Remarks

inscription, referred to as a “milestone-dedication” (Sotgiu), was nevertheless supposed to serve the function of a roadside cippus, since it also bears indication of distance—which led all the way to the Euphrates and connected the eastern and western parts of Asia Minor. The two African inscriptions, geographically very close to each other (Banasa and Volubilis), attest to the consonance of views between the emperor on one hand and two important cities of Mauretania Tingitana on the other, namely, the respublica Banasitanorum and the respublica and ordo Volubilitanorum, to which we should add the municipium of Augustum Semta in Africa Proconsularis, in a perspective constantly aimed at establishing a privileged relationship between the individual community and the Augusta (in a manner not unlike what happened with Iulia Domna or Cornelia Salonina and analogous with the cases of Egnatia, Clusium, and Pola). Of all these honorific inscriptions placed by city administrations, the one from Tarraco represents a unicum for two reasons—perhaps connected—because both names of the imperial couple were erased and also because the epigraph constitutes a dedication placed not by a collectivity but carried out in a personal capacity by a vir perfectissimus, a studiis Augusti (perhaps in connection with the reconquest of the Imperium Galliarum sanctioned in 274 by the surrender of Tetricus). If we exclude the case of Egnatia, where the damage would have been caused by a sharp instrument used with a view to re-using the inscribed base, we are looking at a “differentiated” damnatio memoriae, in that in Tarraco the epigraph is dedicated to Severina, but the names of both spouses were erased, while in Smyrna the text bore the names of both, but only Aurelian’s was erased. Thus, the Latin honorific inscription found in a Hispanic and Western context may have undergone “politically correct” censure: in the uncertainty of the interregnum period, it might have appeared more prudent to make the names of both Augustus and Augusta disappear; instead, in the Greek eastern area, more specifically in Asia Minor, a “milestone-dedication” could safely be retouched to attest to an occurrence of a “change of kingship” in which the Σεβαστή took over, albeit for a short time, from the Σεβαστός. This is in perfect harmony with other epigraphic attestations of Severina from Greek-speaking areas, such as the island of Andros, where the islanders paid tribute to the κυρία Αὐγούστη alone, without even naming her husband; moreover, the πόλις of Anineta dedicated a statue to the Σεβαστή, and the πόλις of Perinthus—geographically very close to the site of the assassination of Aurelian—not only erected a simulacrum to the

  Concluding Remarks 

143

Σεβαστή, again in this case without making any reference to her spouse, but also honored her as Θεὰ Νίκη. Special attention should be paid to the titles. Severina bears the title Augusta/Σεβαστή—and in one case Αὐγούστη (Andros)—on almost all the inscriptions (except that from Augustum Semta), and the title of mater castrorum (Pola), which can also be seen on the Tarraco inscription along with et senatus et patriae, in close correlation with the appellative PIA FELIX in the monetary legends, a titling already attested for Iulia Domna and Cornelia Salonina and to be considered potentially allusive to fecundity (Callu). Then the expression Numini maiestatique eius (Augustum Semta and Clusium) recurs in two cases and, in two other cases, Numini maiestatique eorum (Tarraco and Banasa). As we have seen, in the epigraphs from Andros and Perinthus, the husband is not indicated (while in the milestone from Smyrna, although the marital relationship is not indicated, Aurelian is mentioned); despite being Αὐγούστη (perhaps not coincidentally this is the only occurrence of this rare term in place of Σεβαστή, as if, with regard to the literal translation or translatio, the graphic “cast” or transcriptio possessed an added value in a politically changed situation), Ulpia Severina is not indicated as the “wife of” Aurelian; indeed, in one case she is ἐπιφανεστάτη (or εὐσεβεστάτη, according to another integration) κυρία (Andros) and in another she is even equated with Θεὰ Νείκη (Perinthus). While it is true that the monetary legend AVG in the singular may not be absolutely diriment, we can nevertheless unquestionably trace to the time of the interregnum the epigraphic mention of the Αὐγούστη/ Σεβαστή alone in the inscriptions of Andros and Perinthus, moreover both bearing titles not found in the other inscriptions—such as ἐπιφανεστάτη/ εὐσεβεστάτη κυρία ἡμῶν, that is, nobilissima/piissima domina nostra (see domina sanctissima, piissima in the epigraph from Pola) or Θεὰ Νείκη/Dea Victoria (Perinthus) as a kind of compensation, if not to say “replacement,” of Aurelian dominus noster and—since it is impossible to attribute a cognomen ex virtute to a woman—also of the victorious military campaigns of the emperor, in whose epigraphs and coins reference to Augustus victoriosus and the Victoria frequently appear. In addition, the perfect analogy between husband and wife is confirmed by the fact that, first of all, Aurelian, still living, was honored as deus in the epigraphs and as deus et dominus on the coins (Sotgiu). Although Severina could not boast of such titles on the official documents of an issuing State authority, that is, on coins, nevertheless she received the laudatory epithets of κυρία and θεά in

144 

Concluding Remarks

epigraphs dedicated to her by city communities: in short, having become a widow, the empress was officially proclaimed domina in Andros and dea in Perinthus. The particular prominence that we have given the epigraph from Perinthus in this account could be further justified by the objective fact of the very short distance of this site from the one in which—while moving with the army against the Persians according to the Historia Augusta—the emperor was assassinated (between September and October of 275), at Caenofrurium, a mansio strategically located between Byzantium and Perinthus-Heraclea. It was here that the news of Aurelian’s killing in a court plot in Thrace—a region of that vast Balkan area of which the emperor himself was a native—had probably come first from the neighboring mansio, and it was therefore precisely in the Περινθίων πόλις that the information could plausibly have had a “media” response through the dedication of an epigraph to the now widowed empress alone. It should not be forgotten that on the opposite bank of the Propontis, opposite Perinthus, the mint of Cyzicus was based, which, along with those of Rome, Ticinum, and Siscia, consecrated a gold issue to the empress. Even where on the rev. of some coins issued by the mints of Serdica and Antioch in the name of Severina alone there is a scene, with a strongly evocative flavor, of dextrarum iunctio between the empress and a male figure, there remains the distinct feeling that the subliminal political message is always and everywhere that of a regency pro tempore under the sign of a conjugal CONCORDIA explicitly propagandized to validate the (almost) total “equivalence” of Severina’s reign, albeit in absentia of her husband. If in the East it had been possible for a woman, Zenobia, to be—albeit as usurper—the arbiter of the fate of one of the three “torsos” of the Empire until Aurelian had reconquered the Palmyrene kingdom, then why could not the legitimate consort of the newly deceased “Illyrian” emperor, in such a difficult situation (in which, by the way, the Palmyrene Queen, though defeated, would still have been alive, at least according to one line of evidence), rule the fortunes of the State in the capacity of Augusta alone? Compared to a rebel βασίλισσα, as the widow of a δεσπότης, the legitimate Augusta, as the widow of the dominus et deus, constituted a perfect counterbalance in a delicate moment of interregnum: only a domina and a dea at the same time could have, albeit transiently (perhaps precisely in those duobus mensibus in which Tacitus is said to have lingered in Baiano according to the Historia Augusta?), taken over imperial power—thus not an interregnum without an Augustus, but a regnum held by an Augusta—until the army (rather than the senate, destined in any case to ratify the decision made) expressed its preference for a successor worthy of her deceased husband.

Bibliography

Abascal Palazón, Ramallo Asensio 1997: J.M. Abascal Palazón, S.F. Ramallo Asensio (eds.), La ciudad de Carthago Nova. 3. La documentación epigráfica, Murcia 1997. Alaioud 2004: S.M.  Alaioud, L’économie de Banasa à l’époque provinciale, in M.  Khanoussi, P.  Ruggeri, C.  Vismara (eds.), L’Africa romana: ai confini dell’Impero. Contatti, scambi, conflitti. Atti del XV Convegno di Studio, Tozeur 11–15 dicembre 2002, vol. 3, Roma 2004, pp. 1899–1911. Alaioud 2008: S.M. Alaioud, La vie religieuse à Banasa: témoignages archéologiques, in J. González (ed.), L’Africa romana: le ricchezze dell’Africa. Risorse, produzioni, scambi. Atti del XVII Convegno di Studio, Sevilla 14–17 dicembre 2006, vol. 1, Roma 2008, pp. 549–558. Alföldi 1964: A.  Alföldi, Zwei Bemerkungen zur Historia Augusta, in J.  Straub, A.  Alföldi (eds.), Historia Augusta Colloquium (Bonn 1963), Bonn 1964, pp. 1–8. Alföldi-Rosenbaum 1994: E.  Alföldi-Rosenbaum, Heliogabalus’ and Aurelian’s Stag Chariots and the Caesar Contorniates, in G.  Bonamente, F.  Paschoud (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquium Genevense, Munera 1, Bari 1994, pp. 5–10. Alföldy 1975: G. Alföldy, Die römischen Inschriften von Tarraco, Berlin 1975. Alföldy 1984: G.  Alföldy, Römische Statuen in Venetia et Histria. Epigraphische Quellen, Heidelberg 1984. Alföldy 2002: G.  Alföldy, Eine eradierte Kaiserinschrift aus Valentia (Hispania Citerior), in ZPE 141, 2002, pp. 257–260.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 M. Cassia, The Roman Empress Ulpia Severina, Queenship and Power, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28651-3

145

146 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allard 2006: V. Allard, Aurélien, restitutor orbis et triomphateur, in M.H. Quet, A. Giardina, M. Christol (eds.), La “crise” de l’Empire romain de Marc Aurèle à Constantin: mutations, continuités, ruptures, Paris 2006, pp. 149–172. Amon 2018: H. Amon, Gallien, Claude le Gothique, Aurélien et le bon empereur dans les Caesares d’Aurelius Victor, in Interférences 10, 2018, pp. 1–13. Andrade 2018: N.J. Andrade, Zenobia. Shooting Star of Palmyra, New York 2018. Angelova 2015: D.N. Angelova, Sacred Founders. Women, Men, and Gods in the Discourse of Imperial Founding, Rome through Early Byzantium, Oakland 2015. Arena 2021: G. Arena, La cura del potere e il potere della cura. Studi su Galeno, Roma 2021. Arslan 2017: E. Arslan, Ancora sulla riforma di Aureliano. XX e XX I: due nominali distinti?, in BCercleNum 54, 2017, pp. 2–17. Arzone 2020: A. Arzone, Alcune riflessioni sul ripostiglio della Venèra (Verona) e sui grandi tesori monetali di carattere pubblico, in I. Baldini, A.L. Morelli (eds.), Beni da conservare. Forme di tesaurizzazione in età romana e medievale, Ornamenta 7, Bologna 2020, pp. 33–54. Assandria 1921: G.  Assandria, Lapide dedicata a Severina moglie di Aureliano imperatore (270–275) rinvenuta nell’antica città d’Industria, in Atti della Società Piemontese di Archeologia e Belle Arti 10, 1, 1921, pp. 52–53. Avaliani 2019: E. Avaliani, Finding Meaning in the Past: Reinterpretation of the Late Roman Artifact, the Golden Ring with a Carnelian Intaglio from the Museum of Georgia, in Σκολή 13, 2, 2019, pp. 503–512. Avaliani 2021: E. Avaliani, What’s in a Name? Who might be Basilissa Ulpia from Mtskheta?, in G.R. Tsetskhladze, A. Avram, J. Hargrave (eds.), The Greeks and Romans in the Black Sea and the Importance of the Pontic Region for the Graeco-­ Roman World (7th century b.c.–5th century A.D.): 20 Years On (1997–2017). Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress on Black Sea Antiquities, Constanţa 18–22 September 2017, Oxford 2021, pp. 634–640. Babelon, Cagnat, Reinach 1893: E.  Babelon, R.  Cagnat, S.  Reinach, Atlas archéologique de la Tunisie, Paris 1893. Baglivi 1998–1999: N.  Baglivi, Interreges … post interregnum nuncupati? (su Hist. Aug. Tac. 14, 5), in Orpheus 19–20, 2, 1998–1999, pp. 259–269. Baldini 1978: A.  Baldini, Discendenti a Roma da Zenobia? in ZPE 30, 1978, pp. 145–149. Barbieri 1952: G. Barbieri, L’albo senatorio da Settimio Severo a Carino (193–285), Roma 1952. Barnes 1972: T.D. Barnes, Some Persons in the Historia Augusta, in Phoenix 26, 2, 1972, pp. 140–182. Bastien 1993: P.  Bastien, Le buste monétaire des empereurs romains, vol. 2, Wetteren 1993. Bastien 1994: P.  Bastien, Le buste monétaire des empereurs romains, vol. 3, Wetteren 1994.

 BIBLIOGRAPHY 

147

Belloni 2004 (1993): G.G. Belloni, La moneta romana. Società, politica, cultura, Roma 2004 (1993). Bergmann 1977: M. Bergmann, Studien zum römischen Porträt des 3. Jahrhunderts n. Chr., Bonn 1977. Bernareggi 1974: E. Bernareggi, Familia monetalis, in NAC 3, 1974, pp. 177–192. Bernoulli 1894: J.J. Bernoulli, Römische Ikonographie. Zweiter Teil. Die Bildnisse der römischen Kaiser. III.  Von Pertinax bis Theodosius, Stuttgart-Berlin-­ Leipzig 1894. Berrens 2004: S.  Berrens, Sonnenkult und Kaisertum von den Severern bis zu Constantin I. (193–337 n. Chr.), Stuttgart 2004. Bianchi Bandinelli 1925: R. Bianchi Bandinelli, Clusium. Ricerche archeologiche e topografiche su Chiusi e il suo territorio in età etrusca, Roma 1925. Biondani 2004: F. Biondani, La scoperta e il recupero del ripostiglio della Venèra: nuovi dati dalle fonti archivistiche, in Quaderni della bassa Veronese 1, 2004, pp. 17–36. Biondani 2005: F. Biondani, Ricerca e tutela archeologica nel basso Veronese alla fine dell’Ottocento: l’attività di Stefano De Stefani, in G.  Leonardi, S.  Rossi (eds.), Archeologia e idrografia del Veronese a cent’anni dalla deviazione del fiume Guà (1904–2004). Il Museo archeologico di Cologna Veneta e le prime ricerche archeologiche nella pianura veronese. Atti della Giornata di Studi “La necropoli del Fiume Nuovo,” Cologna Veneta 2004, Saltuarie dal laboratorio del Piovego 6, Cologna Veneta 2005, pp. 153–196. Biondani 2008: F. Biondani, La scoperta del ripostiglio della Venèra: nuovi documenti, in Quaderni della bassa Veronese 2, 2008, pp. 5–11. Bleckmann 1992: B.  Bleckmann, Die Reichskrise des III.  Jahrhunderts in der spätantiken und byzantinischen Geschichtsschreibung. Untersuchungen zu den nachdionischen Quellen der Chronik des Johannes Zonaras, München 1992. Bleckmann 2002: B. Bleckmann, Die severische Familie und die Soldatenkaiser, in H.  Temporini-Gräfin Vitzthum (ed.), Die Kaiserinnen Roms. Von Livia bis Theodora, München 2002, pp. 265–339. Blümel 1933: C.  Blümel, Römische Bildnisse. Katalog der Sammlung antiker Skulpturen, Berlin 1933. Blümel 2019: W.  Blümel, Die Inschriften von Tralleis und Nysa. Teil II.  Die Inschriften von Nysa, Bonn 2019. Bonamente 2010: G. Bonamente, Optimi principes-diui nella Historia Augusta, in L.  Galli Milić, N.  Hecquet-Noti (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquium Genevense in honorem F.  Paschoud septuagenarii. Les traditions historiographiques de l’Antiquité tardive: idéologie, propagande, fiction, réalité, Munera 30, Bari 2010, pp. 63–82. Bonnet 2018: C.  Bonnet, Gli dèi di Palmira nel cuore di Roma, in C.  Bonnet, E. Sanzi (eds.), Roma, la città degli dèi. La capitale dell’Impero come laboratorio religioso, Roma 2018, pp. 235–249.

148 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bovini 1943: G.  Bovini, Osservazioni sulla ritrattistica romana da Treboniano Gallo a Probo, in Monumenti antichi dei Lincei, pubblicati per cura della Reale Accademia d’Italia 39, 2, 1943, pp. 240–255. Braccesi 2017: L. Braccesi, Zenobia l’ultima regina d’Oriente. L’assedio di Palmira e lo scontro con Roma, Roma 2017. Bravo Castañeda 2004: G.  Bravo Castañeda, Otra reina en Roma: Zenobia de Palmira, in G. Bravo Castañeda, R. González Salinero (ed.), Extranjeras en el mundo romano, Madrid 2004, pp. 81–93. Bravo Jiménez, Fernández Uriel 2015: S. Bravo Jiménez, Ma.P. Fernández Uriel, La presencia augustea en el Norte de Marruecos: las deductiones de Iulia Constantia Zilil, Iulia Campestris Babba y Iulia Valentia Banasa, in P. Ruggeri, M.B. Cocco (eds), L’Africa romana: momenti di continuità e rottura. Bilancio di trent’anni di convegni “L’Africa romana”. Atti del XX Convegno Internazionale di Studi, Alghero-Porto Conte Ricerche 26–29 settembre 2013, vol. 1, Roma 2015, pp. 739–747. Breytenbach 2005: M.M.  Breytenbach, A Queen for all Seasons: Zenobia of Palmyra, in Akroterion 50, 2005, pp. 51–66. Bryant 1999: C.  Bryant, Imperial Family Roles. Propaganda and Policy in the Severan Period, in E.  Dal Covolo, G.  Rinaldi (eds.), Gli imperatori Severi. Storia, Archeologia, Religione, Roma 1999, pp. 23–30. Buck 1995: D.F. Buck, The Reign of Aurelian in Eunapius’ Histories, in AHB 9, 2, 1995, pp. 86–92. Buonopane 2008: A. Buonopane, Un dux ducum e un vir egregius nell’iscrizione di Porta Borsari a Verona (CIL, V, 3329), in P.  Basso, A.  Buonopane, A.  Cavarzere, S.  Pesavento Mattioli (eds.), Est enim ille flos Italiae … Vita economica e sociale nella Cisalpina romana. Atti delle Giornate di Studio in onore di Ezio Buchi, Verona 30 settembre–1 dicembre 2006, Verona 2008, pp. 125–136. Buonopane 2020: A.  Buonopane, Manuale di epigrafia latina. Nuova edizione, Roma 2020. Burgersdijk 2004–2005: D.  Burgersdijk, Zenobia’s Biography in the Historia Augusta, in Talanta 36–37, 2004–2005, pp. 139–151. Burns 2007: J. Burns, Great Women of Imperial Rome. Mothers and Wives of the Caesars, London-New York 2007. Burrell 2004: B.  Burrell, Neokoroi. Greek Cities and Roman Emperors, Leiden-­ Boston 2004. Bussi 2003: S.  Bussi, Zenobia/Cleopatra: immagine e propaganda, in RIN 104, 2003, pp. 261–268. Cades 1836: T. Cades, Catalogo di una collezione di Impronte in stucco cavate dalle più celebri Gemme incise conosciute che esistono nei principali Musei e Collezioni particolari di Europa, Roma 1836. Cagnat 1893: R.  Cagnat, Découvertes des Brigades topographiques de Tunisie en 1893 (d’après Toussaint), in BCTH 1893, pp. 203–241.

 BIBLIOGRAPHY 

149

Callu 1969: J.-P. Callu, La politique monétaire des empereurs romains de 238 à 311, Paris 1969. Callu 1995: J.-P. Callu, L’interrègne de Séverine, in Orbis Romanus Christianusque. Travaux sur l’Antiquité tardive rassemblés autour des recherches de Noël Duval, Paris 1995, pp. 13–31. Callu 1996: J.-P. Callu, Aurélius Victor et l’interrègne de 275: problèmes historiques et textuels, in G. Bonamente, M. Mayer (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquia IV. Colloquium Barcinonense MCMXCIII, Munera 7, Bari 1996, pp. 133–145. Callu 2000: J.-P. Callu, Pia Felix, in RN 155, 2000, pp. 189–207. Camodeca 1971: G. Camodeca, Sulle proprietà senatorie in Campania con particolare riguardo al periodo da Augusto al III secolo, in CCG 16, 2005, pp. 121–137. Camodeca, Marazzi, Stanco, Tagliamonte 2015: G.  Camodeca, F.  Marazzi, E.A.  Stanco, G.  Tagliamonte, Allifae (Alife). Introduzione, in S.  Capini, P. Curci, M.R. Picuti (eds.), Fana, templa, delubra. Corpus dei luoghi di culto dell’Italia antica (FTD)—3, Paris 2015, pp.  7–18 (https://books.openedition.org/cdf/3816?lang=it#entries). Cantineau et alii: J. Cantineau et alii (eds.), Inventaire des inscriptions de Palmyre, fasc. 3, Beyrouth 1930. Caracciolo 2014–2015: G.  Caracciolo, Chiusi Romana. La collezione epigrafica della Cattedrale e del Chiostro di S.  Francesco, Diss. Laurea Magistrale in Archeologia a.a. 2014–2015, Roma. Caracciolo, Gregori 2017: G. Caracciolo, G.L. Gregori, Epigrafia e storia del territorio. Inediti dall’ager Clusinus nel Museo Civico Archeologico delle Acque di Chianciano Terme, in G.A.  Cecconi, A.  Raggi, E.  Salamone Gaggero (eds.), Epigrafia e società dell’Etruria romana. Atti del Convegno di Firenze, 23–24 ottobre 2015, Roma 2017, pp. 147–160. Caracciolo 2018: G. Caracciolo, Chiusi romana. Ricerche di prosopografia e di storia socio-economica, Diss. Köln 30.10.2018. Carlà, Marcone 2011: F.  Carlà, A.  Marcone, Economia e finanza a Roma, Bologna 2011. Carson 1965: R.A.G.  Carson, The Reform of Aurelian, in RN 7, 1965, pp. 225–235. Casella 2020: M. Casella, Il ruolo di Galeria Valeria nelle dinamiche della politica tetrarchica, in Klio 102, 1, 2020, pp. 236–272. Cassia 2017: M.  Cassia, “Pellegrine” nell’Egitto romano: “voci” femminili dal Colosso di Memnone, in Hormos n.s. 9, 2017, pp. 29–99. Cassia 2020a: M.  Cassia, La seta nella Historia Augusta: soltanto un simbolo di luxus?, in Commentaria Classica 7, 2020, pp. 87–113. Cassia 2020b: M. Cassia, “La stola e il silenzio”? “Parole” di donna in un epitaffio catanese d’età imperiale, in Gerión 38, 1, 2020, pp. 55–81. Cavalieri Manasse 2018: G. Cavalieri Manasse, Verona: la città oltre le mura, in AAC 29, 2018, pp. 41–83.

150 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Cazzaniga 1972: I.  Cazzaniga, Psogos ed épainos in Zenobia. Colori retorici in Vopisco e Pollione (H.A.). Addenda, in PP 27, 1972, pp. 156–182. Cenerini 20092 (2002): F. Cenerini, La donna romana. Modelli e realtà, Bologna 20092 (2002). Cenerini 2009: F. Cenerini, Dive e donne. Mogli, madri, figlie e sorelle degli imperatori romani da Augusto a Commodo, Imola 2009. Cenerini 2015: F. Cenerini, Il ruolo di Faustina Minore nel principato di Marco Aurelio, in Montesquieu.it 7, 2015, pp. 1–13. Cenerini 2016a: F. Cenerini, L’indagine sulla donna romana: fra modelli e stereotipi, in Cenerini, Mastrorosa 2016, pp. 7–12. Cenerini 2016b: F.  Cenerini, Il ruolo e la funzione della Augustae dai Giulio-­ Claudi ai Severi, in Cenerini, Mastrorosa 2016, pp. 21–46. Cenerini 2016c: F. Cenerini, Le matronae diventano Augustae: un nuovo profilo al femminile, in F. Cenerini, F. Rohr Vio (eds.), Matronae in domo et in re publica agentes. Spazi e occasioni dell’azione femminile nel mondo romano fra tarda Repubblica e primo Impero. Atti del Convegno di Venezia 16–17 ottobre 2014, Trieste 2016, pp. 23–49. Cenerini 2017: F.  Cenerini, Faustina Minore, Avidio Cassio, Marco Aurelio, in V. Neri, B. Girotti (eds.), La storiografia tardoantica. Bilanci e prospettive. In memoria di Antonio Baldini, Milano 2017, pp. 101–117. Cenerini 2022: F. Cenerini, Augustae o “imperatrici”?, in B. Girotti, G. Marsili, M.E. Pomero (eds.), Il potere dell’immagine e della parola. Elementi distintivi dell’aristocrazia femminile da Roma a Bisanzio, Spoleto 2022, pp. 1–22. Cenerini, Mastrorosa 2016: F. Cenerini, I.G. Mastrorosa (eds.), Donne, istituzioni e società fra tardo antico e alto medioevo, La Botte di Diogene 8, Lecce 2016. Charles-Gaffiot, Lavagne, Hofman 2001: J.  Charles-Gaffiot, H.  Lavagne, J.-M. Hofman, Moi, Zénobie reine de Palmyre, Paris 2001. Chastagnol 1979: A. Chastagnol, Les femmes dans l’ordre sénatorial: titulature et rang social, in Revue Historique 103, 262, 1979, pp. 3–28. Chastagnol 1980: A.  Chastagnol, Sur la chronologie des années 275–285, in P. Bastien, F. Dumas, H. Huvelin, C. Morisson (eds.), Mélanges de numismatique, d’archéologie et d’histoire offerts à Jean Lafaurie, Paris 1980, pp. 75–82. Chastagnol 1994: A. Chastagnol, Histoire Auguste. Les empereurs romains des IIe et IIIe siècles, Paris 1994. Chatelain 1934: L. Chatelain, 12 Jouin 1934. Séance de la Commission de l’Afrique du Nord, in BCTH 1934, pp. 172–182. Chieco Bianchi Martini 1965: A.M.  Chieco Bianchi Martini, Intervento, in Santuari di Magna Grecia. Atti del IV Convegno di Studi sulla Magna Grecia 1964, Napoli 1965, pp. 227–231. Christol 1997: M. Christol, L’Empire romain du IIIesiècle. Histoire politique (de 192, mort de Commode, à 325, concile de Nicée), Paris 1997. Cizek 1991: E.  Cizek, La succession d’Aurélien et l’échec de Tacite, in REA 93, 1991, pp. 109–112.

 BIBLIOGRAPHY 

151

Cizek 1994: E. Cizek, L’empereur Aurélien et sons temps, Paris 1994. Clauss 1999: M.  Clauss, Kaiser und Gott: Herrscherkult im römischen Reich, München-Leipzig 1999. Coates-Stephens 2012: R. Coates-Stephens, The Walls of Aurelian, in R. Behrwald, Ch. Witschel (eds.), Rom in der Spätantike. Historische Erinnerung im städtischen Raum, Heidelberger Althistorische Beiträge und Epigraphische Studien 51, Stuttgart 2012, pp. 83–109. Conca 2007: F. Conca, Zosimo. Storia nuova, Milano 2007. Conway 2006: Ch.P.M.  Conway, Aurelian’s Bellum monetariorum: an Examination, in Past Imperfect 12, 2006, pp. 1–21 (https://journals.library. ualberta.ca/pi/index.php/pi/article/view/1578/1104). Corso, Mugellesi, Rosati 1988: A.  Corso, R.  Mugellesi, G.  Rosati, Gaio Plinio Secondo. Storia naturale. V.  Mineralogia e storia dell’arte. Libri 33–37, Torino 1988. Costarella, Isabella 2006: A. Costarella, C. Isabella, Due iscrizioni imperiali e una epigrafe sepolcrale nella città di Piedimonte Matese (Caserta), in Epigraphica 68, 2006, pp. 322–326. Crisafulli 2012: C. Crisafulli, La riforma di Aureliano e la successiva circolazione monetale in Italia, in M. Asolati, G. Gorini (eds.), I ritrovamenti monetali e i processi storico-economici nel mondo antico, Padova 2012, pp. 255–282. Cubelli 1992: V. Cubelli, Aureliano imperatore: la rivolta dei monetieri e la cosiddetta riforma monetaria, Firenze 1992. Cussini 2005: E. Cussini, Beyond the Spindle: Investigating the Role of Palmyrene Women, in E. Cussini (ed.), A Journey to Palmyra. Collected Essays to remember Delbert R. Hillers, Leiden-Boston 2005, pp. 26–43. Daguet 1992: A. Daguet, L. Domitius Aurelianus perpetuus imperator, in AntAfr 28, 1992, pp. 173–186. Davenport 2014: C.  Davenport, M.  Claudius Tacitus: senator or soldier?, in Latomus 73, 1, 2014, pp. 174–187. Degrassi 1946–1947: N. Degrassi, La via seguita da Traiano nel 105 per recarsi nella Tracia, in RPAA 23, 1946–1947, pp. 167–183. Den Hengst 1994: D. Den Hengst, Some Notes on the Vita Taciti, in G. Bonamente, F.  Paschoud (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquium Genevense, Bari 1994, pp. 101–107. Dessau 1923: H. Dessau, s.v. Semt(a), in RE II A 2, 1923, col. 1148. Dey 2011: H.  Dey, The Aurelian Wall and the Refashioning of Imperial Rome, A.D. 271–855, Cambridge-New York 2011. Dodgeon, Lieu 1991: M.H. Dodgeon, S.N.C. Lieu, The Roman Eastern Frontier and the Persian Wars (A.D. 226–363). A Documentary History, London-New York 1991. Donvito 20033 (1988): A. Donvito, Egnazia. Dalle origini alla riscoperta archeologica, Fasano (Brindisi) 20033 (1988).

152 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Drinkwater 2005: J.  Drinkwater, Maximinus to Diocletian and the “crisis,” in A.K. Bowman, P. Garnsey, Av. Cameron (eds.), The Cambridge Ancient History. Second Edition. Volume XII. The Crisis of Empire, A.D. 193–337, Cambridge 2005, pp. 28–66. Eck 1974a: W. Eck, s.v. Ulpius 33, in RE Suppl. XIV, 1974, col. 939. Eck 1974b: W.  Eck, s.v. Ulpia Severina Augusta 57, in RE Suppl. XIV, 1974, coll. 943–944. Eck 2017: W. Eck, Annäherung an eine Frau: domina te amo alias derido, in RhM 160, 2017, pp. 109–112. Eckhel 1797: J.H. Eckhel, Doctrina numorum veterum, vol. 7, Vindobonae 1797. Elefante 1982: M.  Elefante, A proposito del “senaculum mulierum” (SHA Ant. Hel. 4, 3; Aurel. 49, 6), in RAAL Napoli n.s. 57, 1982, pp. 91–107. Engster 2011: D. Engster, Das römische Frauenideal und die Vorstellung von weiblichen Kämpfern, in J.E.  Fries, U.  Rambuschek (eds.), Von wirtschaftlicher Macht und militärischer Stärke: Beiträge zur archäologischen Geschlechterforschung. Bericht der 4. Sitzung der AG Geschlechterforschung auf der 79. Jahrestagung des Nordwestdeutschen Verbandes für Altertumsforschung e.V. in Detmold 2009, Münster-New York 2011, pp. 199–225. Enmann 1884: A. Enmann, Eine verlorene Geschichte der römischen Kaiser und das Buch De viris illustribus urbis Romae, in Philologus Suppl. 4, Göttingen 1884, pp. 335–501. Equini Schneider 1993: E.  Equini Schneider, Septimia Zenobia Sebaste, Roma 1993. Equini Schneider 2002: E. Equini Schneider, Zenobia e il suo tempo, in A. Gabucci (ed.), Zenobia. Il sogno di una regina d’Oriente, Milano 2002, pp. 23–27. Ernout, Meillet 1967: A.  Ernout, A.  Meillet, Dictionnaire étimologique de la langue latine. Histoire des mots, Paris 196. Esposito, Fabbri, Giovanetti et alii 2017: D. Esposito, M. Fabbri, F. Giovanetti et alii (eds.), Le Mura Aureliane nella storia di Roma. 1. Da Aureliano a Onorio. Atti del Primo Convegno, Roma 25 marzo 2015, Roma 2017. Estiot 1983: S. Estiot, Le trésor de Maraveille, in TMon 5, 1983, pp. 9–115. Estiot 1987: S.  Estiot, Tacito e Floriano. Volume II. 2, in J.-B.  Giard (ed.), Ripostiglio della Venèra. Nuovo Catalogo Illustrato, Verona 1987. Estiot 1988: S. Estiot, Un as d’Aurélien appartenant à la collection Hans-Georg Pflaum, in BSFN 8, 1988, pp. 439–441. Estiot 1990a: S. Estiot, Une monnaie d’or d’Aurélien frappée à Ticinum, in BSFN 7, 1990, pp. 875–877. Estiot 1990b: S.  Estiot, Aurélien et Tacite: monnaies d’or et faux modernes, in BSFN 9, 1990, pp. 923–927.

 BIBLIOGRAPHY 

153

Estiot 1991a: S.  Estiot, Or et billon: l’atelier de Milan sous Aurélien (270–274 A.D.), in R. Martini, N. Vismara (a cura di), Ermanno A. Arslan Studia dicata. Vol. 2. Monetazione romana repubblicana ed imperiale, Milano 1991, pp. 449–502. Estiot 1991b: S.  Estiot, Rome: la première émission d’or au nom d’Aurélien, in BSFN 3, 1991, pp. 49–54. Estiot 1993: S. Estiot, La première émission d’or au nom d’Aurélien à Siscia (270 A.D.), in T. Hackens, G. Moucharte (eds.), Proceedings of the XIth International Numismatic Congress, vol. 2, Bruxelles-Louvain-la-Neuve 1993, pp. 327–334. Estiot 1994: S. Estiot, Un antoninien inédit de Ulpia Severina, in BSFN 8, 1994, pp. 818–821. Estiot 1995a: S. Estiot, Aureliano. Volume II. 1, in J.-B. Giard (ed.), Ripostiglio della Venèra. Nuovo Catalogo Illustrato, Roma 1995. Estiot 1995b: S. Estiot, Aureliana, in RN 150, 6, 1995, pp. 50–94. Estiot 1996: S.  Estiot, Le troisième siècle et la monnaie: crises et mutations, in J.L. Fiches (ed.), Le IIIe siècle en Gaule Narbonnaise. Données régionales sur la crise de l’Empire. Actes de la Table ronde du GDR 954 “Archéologie de l’espace rural méditerranéen dans l’Antiquité et le haut Moyen Âge,” Aix-en-Provence, La Baume 15–16 septembre 1995, Sophia Antipolis 1996, pp. 33–70. Estiot 1998: S.  Estiot, Aurélien: numismatiques et épigraphie, in E.  Frézouls, H.  Jouffroy (eds.), Les empereurs illyriens. Actes du Colloque de Strasbourg 11–13 octobre 1990, Strasbourg 1998, pp. 97–117. Estiot 1999: S.  Estiot, L’or romain entre crise et restitution, 270–276 ap. J.-C., I. Aurélien, in JS 1999, pp. 51–165. Estiot 2004: S. Estiot, Monnaies de l’Empire romain. XII. 1. D’Aurélien à Florien (270–276 après J.-C.). Volume 1, Paris 2004. Estiot 2005: S. Estiot, L’interrègne de Séverine et l’accession de l’empereur Tacite: faut-il vraiment croire l’HA?, in G.  Bonamente, M.  Mayer (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquium Barcinonense, Munera 22, Bari 2005, pp. 157–180. Estiot, Amandry 1990: S.  Estiot, M.  Amandry, Aurélien: trois monnaies d’or inédites de l’atelier de Milan (270 A.D.), in BSFN 1, 1990, pp. 727–732. Estiot, Bonté 1997: S.  Estiot, F.  Bonté, Aurélien et Séverine: trois raretés et un inédit, in BSFN 1, 1997, pp. 4–9. Estiot, Modonesi 1995: S. Estiot, D. Modonesi, La dedica veronese a Vlpia Severina Avgvsta, in Estiot 1995a, pp. 9–10. Euzennat, Marion, Gascou, de Kisch 1982: M. Euzennat, J. Marion, J. Gascou, Y. de Kisch, Inscriptions antiques du Maroc. 2. Inscriptions latines, Paris 1982. Fabretti 1880: A. Fabretti, Dell’antica città di Industria detta prima Bodincomago, in Atti della Società Piemontese di Archeologia e Belle Arti 3, 1880, pp. 17–115. Famerie 1998: É. Famerie, Le latin et le grec d’Appien. Contribution à l’étude du lexique d’un historien grec de Rome, Geneve 1998.

154 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Fayer 1994: C.  Fayer, La familia Romana. Aspetti giuridici ed antiquari. Parte prima, Roma 1994. Fayer 2005a: C.  Fayer, La familia Romana. Aspetti giuridici ed antiquari. Sponsalia, matrimonio, dote. Parte seconda, Roma 2005. Fayer 2005b: C.  Fayer, La familia Romana. Aspetti giuridici ed antiquari. Concubinato. Divorzio. Adulterio. Parte terza, Roma 2005. Felletti Maj 1958: B.M.  Felletti Maj, Iconografia romana imperiale da Severo Alessandro a M. Aurelio Carino (222–285 d.C.), Roma 1958. Fisher 1929: W.H.  Fisher, The Augustan Vita Aureliani, in JRS 19, 1929, pp. 125–149. Fishwick 2007: D. Fishwick, Numen Augustorum, in ZPE 160, 2007, pp. 247–255. Fittschen, Zanker 1983: K. Fittschen, P. Zanker, Katalog der römischen Porträts in den Capitolischen Museen und den anderen komunalen Sammlungen der Stadt Rom, vol. 3, Roma 1983. Flaig 1992: E. Flaig, Den Kaiser herausfordern: die Usurpation im römischen Reich, Frankfurt am Main 1992. Floriani Squarciapino 1966: M. Floriani Squarciapino, s.v. Severina, in Enciclopedia dell’Arte Antica, Classica e Orientale, vol. 7, Roma 1966, p. 228. Forlati Tamaro 1947: B. Forlati Tamaro, Inscriptiones Italiae, Regio X. Fasc. 1, Pola et Nesactium, Roma 1947. Forlati Tamaro 1965: B. Forlati Tamaro, s.v. Pola, in Enciclopedia dell’Arte Antica, Classica e Orientale, vol. 6, Roma 1965, pp. 261–264. Forlati Tamaro 1973: B. Forlati Tamaro, La storia di Verona vista nelle iscrizioni, in Il territorio veronese in età romana. Atti del Convegno tenuto a Verona il 22-23-24 ottobre 1971, Verona 1973, pp. 517–529. Freis 19942: H. Freis, Historische Inschriften zur römischen Kaiserzeit von Augustus bis Konstantin, Darmstadt 19942. French 2014: D.H.  French, Roman Roads & Milestones of Asia Minor. Vol. 3. Milestones. Fasc. 3.5 Asia, Ankara 2014. Frézouls 1994: E. Frézouls, Le rôle politique des femmes dans l’Histoire Auguste, in G.  Bonamente, F.  Paschoud (a cura di), Historiae Augustae Colloquium Genevense, Munera 1, Bari 1994, pp. 121–136. Fuchs 1895: F. Fuchs, s.v. Aurelianus (L. Domitius Aurelianus), in DE I, Roma 1895, pp. 930–937. Gabucci 2002: A.  Gabucci (ed.), Zenobia. Il sogno di una regina d’Oriente, Milano 2002. Gaggero 1996: G.  Gaggero, Memorie del passato nella propaganda politica di Zenobia, in A.F. Bellezza (ed.), Un incontro con la storia nel centenario della nascita di Luca de Regibus: 1895–1995. Atti del pomeriggio di Studio a Vogogna d’Ossola, 1 luglio 1995, Genova 1996, pp. 211–222. Gaggero 2005: G. Gaggero, Nuove considerazioni su alcuni modelli femminili di Zenobia, in L. Santi Amantini (ed.), Dalle parole ai fatti: relazioni interstatali e comunicazione politica nel mondo antico, Roma 2005, pp. 111–119.

 Bibliography 

155

Gallazzi 1975: C. Gallazzi, La titolatura di Vaballato come riflesso della politica di Palmira, in NAC 4, 1975, pp. 249–265. Galsterer-Kröll 1972: B.  Galsterer-Kröll, Untersuchungen zu den Beinamen der Städte des Imperium Romanum, in Epigraphische Studien 9, 1972, pp. 44–145. Gascou 1982: J.  Gascou, La politique municipale de Rome en Afrique du Nord II. Après la mort de Septime-Sévère, in ANRW II 10, 2, Berlin-New York 1982, pp. 230–320. Gatti 1961: C.  Gatti, La politica monetaria di Aureliano, in PP 77, 1961, pp. 93–97. Gawlikowski 1985: M.  Gawlikowski, Le princes de Palmyre, in Syria 62, 1985, pp. 251–261. Giard 1995: J.-B. Giard, Gordiano III-Quintillo. Volume I, in J.-B. Giard (ed.), Ripostiglio della Venèra. Nuovo Catalogo Illustrato, Roma 1995. Gibbon 1789: E. Gibbon, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. A New Edition, vol. 2, Basil 1789. Giesecke 1933: W. Giesecke, Die Münzreformen der Kaiser Caracalla, Aurelianus und Diocletianus, in Frankfurter Münzzeitung 4, 1933, pp. 65–70. Giorcelli Bersani 2014: S.  Giorcelli Bersani, Rappresentazioni del divino nella Tarda Antichità: quali indizi per una storia del sacro in Cisalpina?, in E. Murgia, F.  Fontana (eds.), Sacrum facere. Atti del II Seminario di Archeologia del Sacro. Contaminazioni: forme di contatto, traduzione e mediazione nei sacra del mondo greco e romano, Trieste 19–20 aprile 2013, Polymnia. Studi di Archeologia 6, Trieste 2014, pp. 163–185. Giorcelli Bersani 2016: S. Giorcelli Bersani, Donne romane: storie “di genere” vere, possibili, improbabili, in Cenerini, Mastrorosa 2016, pp. 405–430. Girardi Jurkić 1983: V. Girardi Jurkić, I nomi delle colonie e dei municipi sulle epigrafi romane in Istria, in Centro di Ricerche Storiche—Rovigni. Atti 13, 1, 1983, pp. 7–17. Girardi Jurkić 2004: V. Girardi Jurkić, Culti e riti di Pola antica e del suo agro, in Centro di Ricerche Storiche—Rovigni. Atti 34, 2004, pp. 3–32. Girotti 2011: B. Girotti, I ritratti di Zenobia nella Historia Augusta: tra simbologia e inventio, in I. Baldini, A.L. Morelli (a cura di), Oggetti-simbolo: produzione, uso e significato nel mondo antico, Ornamenta 3, Bologna 2011, pp. 195–209. Girotti 2022: B. Girotti, Consapevolezza e inconsapevolezza dei limiti delle proprie azioni: l’insolentia nella storiografia tardoantica, in M. Cassia, G. Arena (eds.), Res et verba. Scritti in onore di Claudia Giuffrida, STUSMA 18, Milano 2022, pp. 383–395. Giussani 1968: C.  Giussani, Cornelio Tacito. Opere. Annali, Storie, Germania, Agricola, Dialogo degli oratori, Torino 1968. Gnoli 2007: T. Gnoli, The Interplay of Roman and Iranian Titles in the Roman East (1st–3rd Century A.D.), Wien 2007.

156 

Bibliography

Gnoli 2017: T. Gnoli, Palmyrena, in V. Neri, B. Girotti (eds.), La storiografia tardoantica. Bilanci e prospettive. In memoria di Antonio Baldini, Milano 2017, pp. 67–99. Gnoli 2019a: T. Gnoli, A Notable Palmyrénien: Septimius Vorōd, in U. Hartmann, T. Stickler, F. Schleicher (eds.), Iberien zwischen Rom und Iran, Beiträge zur Geschichte und Kultur Transkaukasiens in der Antike, Stuttgart 2019, pp. 257–275. Gnoli 2019b: T. Gnoli, Aureliano nel IV secolo, in T. Gnoli (ed.), Aspetti di Tarda Antichità: storici, storia e documenti del IV secolo d.C., Bologna 2019, pp. 27–64. Gnoli 2020: T. Gnoli, Alcuni temi arcaici presenti in Trebellius Pollio e in Flavius Vopiscus, in Lexis n.s. 38, 2, 2020, pp. 553–578. Göbl 1993: R. Göbl, Die Münzprägung des Kaisers Aurelianus, Wien 1993. Gosling 1996: A. Gosling, Recensione a Estiot 1995a, in Scholia Reviews n.s. 5, 1996, p. 21 (https://casa-­kvsa.org.za/legacy/ScholiaUpdate/96/96-­21est.htm). Graham 1987: G.G. Graham, Senacula and Meeting Places of the Roman Senate, in CJ 83, 1, 1987, pp. 39–50. Gricourt 2000: D.  Gricourt, Caro-Diocleziano. Volume IV, in J.-B.  Giard (ed.), Ripostiglio della Venèra. Nuovo Catalogo Illustrato, Verona 2000. Gricourt, Holland, Blet-Lemarquand 2014: D.  Gricourt, D.  Holland, M.  Blet-­ Lemarquand, Donativa, thésaurisation et corpus monétaire: à propos d’aurei lyonnais inédits (275–281) du trésor de Fontaine-la-Gaillarde, in RN 171, 2014, pp. 195–219. Groag 1903: E. Groag, s.v. Domitius 36, in RE V 1, 1903, coll. 1347–1419. Guillemain 2009: J.  Guillemain, La monetazione di Probo a Roma, 276–282 d.C. Volume III. 1, in J.-B. Giard (ed.), Ripostiglio della Venèra. Nuovo Catalogo Illustrato, Roma 2009. Gundel 1953: H.G. Gundel, Devotus numini maiestatique eius. Zur Devotionsformel in Weihinschriftender römischen Kaiserzeit, in Epigraphica 15, 1953, pp. 128–150. Gutiérrez Garcia 2011: A.  Gutiérrez Garcia, The Exploitation of local Stone in Roman Times: the Case of north-eastern Spain, in World Archaeology 43, 2, 2011, pp. 318–341. Haklai-Rotenberg 2011: M.  Haklai-Rotenberg, Aurelian’s monetary Reform: between Debasement and public Trust, in Chiron 41, 2011, pp. 1–139. Halsberghe 1972: G.H. Halsberghe, The Cult of Sol Invictus, Leiden 1972. Hamdoune 1999: Ch. Hamdoune, Relecture de la dédicace impériale IAM 2 98 de Banasa, in ZPE 127, 1999, pp. 301–306. Hanslik 1972: R. Hanslik, s.v. Zenobia 2, in RE X A, 1972, coll. 1–7. Hartmann 2008: U. Hartmann, Claudius Gothicus und Aurelianus, in K.-P. Johne, U.  Hartmann, Th. Gerhardt (eds.), Die Zeit der Soldatenkaiser. Krise und Transformation des Römischen Reiches im 3. Jahrhrundert n. Chr. (235–284), vol. 1, Berlin 2008, pp. 297–323.

 Bibliography 

157

Harvey 2004: B.K. Harvey, Two Bases of Marcus Aurelius Caesar and the Roman Imperial Succession, in Historia 53, 1, 2004, pp. 46–60. Hedlund 2008: R. Hedlund, “… achieved nothing worthy of memory”. Coinage and Authority in the Roman Empire C A.D. 260–295, Uppsala 2008. Hekster 2002: O. Hekster, Commodus. An Emperor at the Crossroads, Leiden 2002. Helm 1956: R. Helm, Eusebius Werke. VII. Die Chronik des Hieronymus, GCS 47, Berlin 1956. Hemelrijk 2015: E.A. Hemelrijk, Hidden Lives, public Personae. Women and civic Life in the Roman West, Oxford-New York 2015. Henry 1977: R. Henry, Photius. Biblio thèque. Tome VIII. Codices 257–280, Paris 1977. Heylen 1957: F. Heylen, Philastrius Brixiensis. Diversarum hereseon liber, CCSL 9, Turnholti 1957. Hidalgo de la Vega 2000: M.J.  Hidalgo de la Vega, Plotina, Sabina y las dos Faustinas: la función de las Augustas en la política imperial, in SHHA 18, 2000, pp. 191–224. Hidalgo de la Vega 2012: M.J.  Hidalgo de la Vega, Las emperatrices romanas. Sueños de púrpura y poder oculto, Salamanca 2012. Hidalgo de la Vega 2013: M.J. Hidalgo de la Vega, Mujeres poderosas: las emperatrices sirias, sucesión dinástica, imagen pública, in R.M. Cid López, E. García Fernández (ed.), Debita uerba. Estudios en homenaje al profesor Julio Mangas Manjarrés, Oviedo 2013, vol. 2, pp. 499–518. Hidalgo de la Vega 2017: M.J.  Hidalgo de la Vega, Zenobia, reina de Palmira: historia, mito y tradiciones, in FlorIlib 28, 2017, pp. 79–104. Hidalgo de la Vega 2021: M.J. Hidalgo de la Vega, Zenobia de Palmira, una reina poderosa en tiempos convulsos, in P.  Pavón Torrejón (ed.), Conditio feminae. Imágenes de la realidad femenina en el mundo romano, Roma 2021, pp. 799–824. Hild 1877: J.A. Hild, s.v. Saturnalia, in Ch. Daremberg, E. Saglio, Dictionnaire des Antiquités Grecques et Romaines, vol. IV 2, Paris 1877, pp. 1080–1083. Hillers, Cussini 1996: D.R.  Hillers, E.  Cussini, Palmyrene Aramaic Texts, Baltimore 1996. Hohl 1911a: E. Hohl, Vopiscus und die Biographie des Kaisers Tacitus, in Klio 11, 1911, pp. 178–229. Hohl 1911b: E. Hohl, Vopiscus und die Biographie des Kaisers Tacitus. II. Prüfung der Vita Taciti des Vopiscus, in Klio 11, 1911, pp. 284–324. Homo 1904: L.  Homo, Essai sur le règne de l’empereur Aurélien (270–275), Paris 1904. Horster 2001: M.  Horster, Bauinschriften römischer Kaiser. Untersuchungen zu Inschriftenpraxis und Bautätigkeit in Städten des westlichen Imperium Romanum in der Zeit der Prinzipats, Stuttgart 2001.

158 

Bibliography

Horster 2007: M.  Horster, The Emperor’s Family on Coins (Third Century): Ideology of Stability in Time of Unrest, in O.  Hekster, G.  Kleijn, D.  Slootjes (eds.), Crises of the Roman Empire. Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop of the International Impact of Empire, Nijmegen June 20–24, 2006, Leiden 2007, pp. 291–310. Hotalen 2020: Ch. Hotalen, Embodying the Empire: Imperial Women and the Evolution of Succession Ideologies in the Third Century, Diss. University of South Florida 2020. Houston 1990: G.W. Houston, The Altar from Rome with Inscriptions to Sol and Malakbel, in Syria 67, 1, 1990, pp. 189–193. Hulrich-Bansa 1962: O. Hulrich-Bansa, Gli antoniniani colla marca della zecca di Mediolanum (260–268), in RIN 10, 1962, pp. 13–41. Jacob 2004: P.  Jacob, Aurelians Reformen in Politik und Rechtsentwicklung, Göttingen 2004. Johne 1991: K.-P. Johne, Tacitus, der Kaiser und der Konsul, in Listy filologické/ Folia philologica 114, 2–3, 1991, pp. 144–149. Johne 2008a: K.-P. Johne, Das Kaisertum und die Herrscherwechsel, in M. Haake, K.-P.  Johne, U.  Hartmann, Th. Gerhardt (eds.), Die Zeit der Soldatenkaiser. Krise und Transformation des Römischen Reiches im 3. Jahrhrundert n. Chr. (235–284), Berlin 2008, pp. 583–632. Johne 2008b: K.-P. Johne, Der “Senatskaiser” Tacitus, in K.-P. Johne, U. Hartmann, Th. Gerhardt (eds.), Die Zeit der Soldantekaiser: Krise und Transformation der römischen Reiches im 3. Jahrhundert n. Chr. (235–284), vol. 1, Berlin 2008, pp. 379–395. Johne 2021: K.-P. Johne, Kaiser Tacitus und die Grotte von Taya. War M. Claudius Tacitus ein Aristokrat oder ein Soldat?, in Oriente/Occidente. Rivista internazionale di studi tardoantichi 2, 2021, pp. 47–60. Jones 2015–2016: P. Jones, Rewriting Power: Zenobia, Aurelian, and the Historia Augusta, in CW 109, 2, 2015–2016, pp. 221–233. Jones 1939: T.B. Jones, Three Notes on the Reign of Marcus Claudius Tacitus, in CPh 34, 1939, pp. 366–369. Kalinka 1900: E. Kalinka, Notizen aus dem Leithagebiete, in JÖAI 3, 1900, Beibl. coll. 1–36. Kalinka 1926: E.  Kalinka, Altes und Neues aus Thrakien, in JÖAI 23, 1926, coll. 118–208. Kaniotis 2015: A.  Kaniotis, Epigraphic Bulletin for Greek Religion 2012 (EBGR 2012), in Kernos 28, 2015, pp.  1–82 (­http://journals.openedition.org/ kernos/2337). Katsari 2005: C.  Katsari, The Monetization of Roman Asia Minor in the Third Century A.D., in S. Mitchell, C. Katsari, D.C. Braund (eds.), Patterns in the Economy of Roman Asia Minor, Swansea 2005, pp. 261–288.

 Bibliography 

159

Kienast 1974: D.  Kienast, Die Münzreform Aurelians, in Chiron 4, 1974, pp. 547–566. Kienast, Eck, Heil 20176: D.  Kienast, W.  Eck, M.  Heil, Römische Kaisertabelle. Grundzüge einer römischen Kaiserchronologie. 6., überarbeitete Auflage, Darmstadt 20176. Klotz 1923: A. Klotz, s.v. Sigillaria, in RE II A 2, 1923, col. 2278. Körner 2011: Ch. Körner, Transformationsprozesse im Römischen Reich des 3. Jahrhunderts n. Chr., in Millenium 8, 2011, pp. 87–123. Kolb 1976: F.  Kolb, Kleidungsstücke in der Historia Augusta: Textkonjekturen und -emendationen zu AS 33, 4.41, 1. A 45, 5, mit einem Exkurs über die Dalmatica, in A.  Alföldi (eds.), Bonner Historia Augusta Colloquium 1972/1974, Bonn 1976, pp. 153–171. Kolb 2010: A.  Kolb, Augustae. Zielsetzung, Definition, prosopographischer Überblick, in A.  Kolb (eds.), Augustae. Machtbewusste Frauen am römischen Kaiserhof? Herrschaftsstrukturen und Herrschaftspraxis II. Akten der Tagung in Zürich 18–20. 9. 2008, Berlin 2010, pp. 11–35. Kotula 1966: T.  Kotula, Aurélien et Zénobie: l’unité ou la division de l’Empire?, Wrocław 1966. Krause 2007: Ch. Krause, Herrschaft und Geschlechterhierarchie: zur Funktionalisierung der Zenobiagestalt und anderer Usurpatoren in den Viten der Historia Augusta, in Philologus 151, 2, 2007, pp. 311–334. Külzer 2008: A.  Külzer, Ostthrakien (Eurōpe),̄ Tabula Imperii Byzantini 12, Wien 2008. Kuhoff 1993: W.  Kuhoff, Iulia Aug. mater Aug. n. et castrorum et senatus et patriae, in ZPE 97, 1993, pp. 259–271. Kytzler 1994: B. Kytzler, Frauen der Antike: von Aspasia bis Zenobia, Zürich 1994. Labory 2003: N.  Labory, Inscriptions antiques du Maroc. 2. Inscriptions latines. Supplément, Paris 2003. Laconi 2003: S. Laconi, Pius Felix Invictus Augustus: una titolatura imperiale tra tradizione pagana e innovazione cristiana, Roma 2003. Lafaurie 1974: J. Lafaurie, La date de la réforme monétaire de Aurélien, in BSFN 29, 1974, pp. 517–524. Lafaurie 1975a: J.  Lafaurie, L’Empire gaulois. Apport de la numismatique, in ANRW II 2, Berlin-New York 1975, pp. 853–1012. Lafaurie 1975b: J.  Lafaurie, Réformes monétaires d’Aurélien et de Dioclétien, in RN 17, 1975, pp. 73–138. Le Bas 1839: Ph. Le Bas, Inscriptions grecques et latines, recueillies en Grèce par la Commission de Morée. V. Îles de la Mer Égée, Paris 1839. Lenoir, Lenoir, Akerraz 1986: M.  Lenoir, E.  Lenoir, A.  Akerraz, Le forum de Volubilis. Eléments du dossier archéologique, in Los foros romanos de las provincias occidentales. Actas de la Mesa redonda, Valencia 1986, Madrid 1987, pp. 203–219.

160 

Bibliography

Leopold 1852: E.F. Leopold, Lexicon Graeco-Latinum Manuale, Lipsiae 1852. Lepelley 1981: C.  Lepelley, Les cités de l’Afrique romaine au Bas-Empire. Tome II. Notices d’histoire municipale, Paris 1981. Lichtenberger 2011: A.  Lichtenberger, Severus Pius Augustus: Studien zur sakralen Repräsentation und Rezeption der Herrschaft des Septimius Severus und seiner Familie (193–211 n. Chr.), Leiden 2011. Lippold 1995: A.  Lippold, Kaiser Aurelian (270–275): seine Beziehungen zur Stadt Rom und zum Senat im Spiegel der Historia Augusta, in G. Bonamente, G.  Paci (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquium Maceratense, Munera 4, Bari 1995, pp. 193–207. Lippold 2006: A. Lippold, Rolle und Bild der Frauen in der Historia Augusta, in Ch. Ulf (ed.), Frauen und Geschlechter, vol. 1, Köln-Wien 2006, pp. 355–369. Lo Cascio 1984: E. Lo Cascio, Dall’Antoninianus al “laureato grande”: l’evoluzione monetaria del III secolo alla luce della nuova documentazione di età dioclezianea, in Opus 3, 1984, pp. 133–201. Lo Castro 20052 (2001): G. Lo Castro, Eusebio di Cesarea. Storia ecclesiastica. 2, Roma 20052 (2001). Longo 2009: K. Longo, Donne di potere nella Tarda Antichità. Le Augustae attraverso le immagini monetali, Reggio Calabria 2009. López Sánchez 2004: F. López Sánchez, Du masculin dans le féminin: les pouvoirs réels de Séverine (274–275 ap. J.-C.) et d’autres femmes à Rome. L’apport de la numismatique, in Y. Perrin, T. Petit (eds.), Iconographie impériale, iconographie royale, iconographie des élites dans le monde gréco-romain, Saint-Étienne 2004, pp. 249–261. Loriot 1999: X. Loriot, Problèmes d’historiographie impériale à la fin du IIIesiècle, in BSAF 1999, pp. 147–154. Lungarova 2012: P.P.  Lungarova, Rimskite kultove v provincija Dolna Mizija. Katalog na pametnicite, Veliko Tarnovo 2012. Maffei 1749: F.S. Maffei, Museum Veronense, Veronae 1749. Magie 1905: D. Magie, De Romanorum iuris publici sacrique vocabulis sollemnibus in Graecum sermonem conversis, Leipzig 1905. Mancini 2001: R. Mancini, Le Mura Aureliane di Roma. Atlante di un palinsesto murario, Roma 2001. Marrocco 1951: D. Marrocco, L’antica Alife, Piedimonte d’Alife 1951. Martin 2000: J.-P. Martin, Sol Invictus: des Sévères à la tétrarchie à travers les monnaies, in CCCG 11, 2000, pp. 297–307. Martin 2006: J.-P. Martin, Les Augustae du IIIe siècle (238–275). Leur rôle d’après leur monnayage, in J. Champeaux, M. Chassignet (eds.), Aere perennius. En hommage à Hubert Zehnacker, Paris 2006, pp. 267–279. Martindale 1980: J.R.  Martindale, Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire: Addenda et Corrigenda to Volume I, in Historia 29, 4, 1980, pp. 474–497.

 Bibliography 

161

Mason 1974: H.J.  Mason, Greek Terms for Roman Institutions. A Lexicon and Analysis, Toronto 1974. Mastino 1987: A.  Mastino, La ricerca epigrafica in Marocco: (1973–1986), in A.  Mastino (ed.), L’Africa romana. Atti del IV Convegno di Studio, Sassari 12–14 dicembre 1986, Sassari 1987, pp. 337–384. Mastino, Ibba 2012: A. Mastino, A. Ibba, L’imperatore pacator orbis, in M. Cassia, C.  Giuffrida, C.  Molè, A.  Pinzone (eds.), Pignora amicitiae. Scritti di storia antica e di storiografia offerti a Mario Mazza, Tomo 3, Acireale-Roma 2012, pp. 139–212. Mattingly 1939: H. Mattingly, The Imperial Recovery, in S.A. Cook, F.E. Adcock, M.P.  Charlesworth, N.H.  Baines (eds.), The Cambridge Ancient History. Volume XII. The Imperial Crisis and Recovery A.D. 193–324, Cambridge 1939, pp. 297–351. Mayer 1993: M.  Mayer, El paganismo cívico de los siglos II y III en la Hispania Citerior: su reflejo en la epigrafía, in Ciudad y comunidad cívica en Hispania. Siglos II y III d.C. Cité et communauté civique en Hispania. Actes du colloque, Madrid 25–27 janvier 1990, Madrid 1993, pp. 161–175. Mazza 1973 (1970): M.  Mazza, Lotte sociali e restaurazione autoritaria nel III secolo d.C., Roma-Bari 1973 (Catania 1970). Mazza 1986: M.  Mazza, Le maschere del potere. Cultura e politica nella Tarda Antichità, Napoli 1986. Mazzarino 1951: S. Mazzarino, Aspetti sociali del IV secolo. Ricerche di storia tardoromana, Roma 1951 (Milano 2002). Mazzarino 1956 (1986): S.  Mazzarino, L’Impero romano, vol. 2, Roma-Bari 1956 (1986). Mazzarino 1965–1966 (1990): S.  Mazzarino, Il pensiero storico classico, vol. 3, Roma-Bari 1965–1966 (1990). Mazzarino 1980: S. Mazzarino, Sulla storiografia greca intorno alla grande crisi del III secolo d.C., in S. Mazzarino, Il basso Impero. Antico, tardoantico ed èra costantiniana, vol. 2, Bari 1980, pp. 26–32. McCabe 1911: J. McCabe, The Empresses of Rome, New York 1911. McCabe 1991a: D.F.  McCabe, Magnesia Inscriptions. Texts and List, Princeton 1991. McCabe 1991b: D.F. McCabe, Nysa Inscriptions. Texts and List, Princeton 1991. McCabe 1991c: D.F.  McCabe, Stratonikeia Inscriptions. Texts and List, Princeton 1991. Mecella 2021: L. Mecella, Milano e l’anarchia militare, in G. Albini, L. Mecella (eds.), Un ponte tra il Mediterraneo e il Nord Europa: la Lombardia nel primo millennio. Atti del Convegno Internazionale di Studi, Milano 28–29 novembre 2019, Milano-Torino 2021, pp. 57–93. Merlin 1944: A. Merlin, Inscriptions Latines de la Tunisie, Paris 1944.

162 

Bibliography

Mesnage 1912: J. Mesnage, L’Afrique chrétienne. Évêchés et ruines antiques d’après les manuscrits de M.er Toulotte, et les découvertes archéologiques les plus récentes, Paris 1912. Migliorati 2013: G.  Migliorati, Origine, prefettura del pretorio (?) e consolati dell’imperatore Tacito, in Epigraphica 75, 1–2, 2013, pp. 195–204. Mikocki 1995: T. Mikocki, Sub specie deae. Les impératrices et princesses romaines assimilées à des déesses. Étude iconologique, Roma 1995. Milani 1880: L.A. Milani, Il ripostiglio della Venèra. Monete romane della seconda metà del terzo secolo, Roma 1880. Milani 1886: L.A. Milani, Di alcuni ripostigli di monete romane (studi di cronologia e storia), in Museo Italiano di Antichità Classica 2, 1886, coll. 254–370. Miller 1916: K. Miller, Itineraria Romana. Römische Reisewege an der Hand der Tabula Peutingeriana, Stuttgart 1916. Milne 1933: J.G.  Milne, A Catalog of Alexandrian Coinage in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford 1933. Mochi Sismondi 1930: C. Mochi Sismondi, Zenobia “regina dell’Oriente”. Quadri storici sugli ultimi anni di Palmira, Roma 1930. Molin 1999: M. Molin, Haud dissimilis Magno Alexandro seu Caesari dictatori: l’empereur Aurélien, in CCG 10, 1999, pp. 347–354. Molinier Arbo 2014: A.  Molinier Arbo, Zénobie reine de Palmyre: quand une Orientale prend le pouvoir dans l’Histoire Auguste, in A.  Gonzalès, M.T.  Schettino (eds.), L’idéalisation de l’autre: faire un modèle d’un anti-­ modèle. Actes du 2e Colloque SoPHiA tenu à Besançon les 26–28 novembre 2012, Besançon 2014, pp. 183–203. Molinier Arbo 2016: A. Molinier Arbo, Femmes de pouvoir entre Orient et Occident aux derniers siècles de l’Empire: réflexions autour du témoignage de l’Histoire Auguste, in Cenerini, Mastrorosa 2016, pp. 47–80. Morelli 2010: A.L. Morelli, Madri di uomini e di dèi. La rappresentazione della maternità attraverso la documentazione numismatica di epoca romana, Bologna 2010. Mosshammer 1984: A. Mosshammer, Georgius Syncellus. Ecloga chronographi ca, Leipzig 1984. Neri 1999: V. Neri, Considerazioni sul tema della luxuria nella Historia Augusta, in F.  Paschoud, Historiae Augustae Colloquium Genevense 1998, Bari 1999, pp. 217–240. Neri 2002: V.  Neri, L’imperatore come miles: Tacito, Attalo e la datazione della Historia Augusta, in G.  Bonamente, F.  Paschoud, Historiae Augustae Colloquium Perusinum, Munera 18, Bari 2002, pp. 373–396. Pabst 1997: A.  Pabst, Comitia imperii. Ideelle Grundlagen des römischen Kaisertums, Darmstadt 1997. Pais 1884: E.  Pais, Corporis Inscriptionum Latinarum Supplementa Italica, Roma 1884.

 Bibliography 

163

Panzram 2002: S. Panzram, Stadtbild und Elite: Tarraco, Corduba und Augusta Emerita zwischen Republik und Spätantike, Stuttgart 2002. Pareti 1961: L.  Pareti, Storia di Roma e del mondo romano. VI.  Da Decio a Costantino (251–337 d.Cr.), Torino 1961. Parisi Presicce, Motta, Gallitto et alii 2018: C. Parisi Presicce, R. Motta, A. Gallitto et alii (eds.), Mura di Roma. Memorie e visioni della città, Monumenta Capitolina Selecta 1, Roma 2018. Parma, Soldovieri 2020: A. Parma, U. Soldovieri, La raccolta epigrafica del Museo Civico Raffaele Marrocco di Piedimonte Matese, Piedimonte Matese 2020. Paschoud 1995: F.  Paschoud, Les sources de la Vita Taciti, in G.  Bonamente, G. Paci (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquium Maceratense. Atti del Convegno sulla Historia Augusta. III, Munera 4, Bari 1995, pp. 269–280. Paschoud 1996: F.  Paschoud, Histoire Auguste. V. 1. Vies d’Aurélien, Tacite, Paris 1996. Paschoud 20022: F. Paschoud (ed.), Zosime. Histoire nouvelle. Tome I. Livres I-II, Paris 20022. Pastor Muñoz, Pastor Andrés 2009: M.  Pastor Muñoz, H.F.  Pastor Andrés, Zenobia, in A. Pociña Pérez, J.M. García González (eds.), En Grecia y Roma. 3. Mujeres reales y ficticias, Granada 2009, pp. 323–347. Paton 1900: W.R.  Paton, Sites in E.  Karia and S.  Lydia, in JHS 20, 1900, pp. 57–80. Pausch 2010: D.  Pausch, Libellus non tam diserte quam fideliter scriptus? Unreliable Narration in the Historia Augusta, in Ancient Narrative 8, 2010, pp. 115–135. Pausch 2011: D. Pausch, Aurelian in der Historia Augusta: ein Kaiser und seine Biographie zwischen Literatur- und Geschichtswissenschaft, in U.  Egelhaaf-­ Gaiser, D.  Pausch, M.  Rühl (eds.), Kultur der Antike: transdisziplinäres Arbeiten in den Altertumswissenschaften, Berlin 2011, pp. 129–151. Peachin 1983: M.  Peachin, Johannes Malalas and the Moneyers’ Revolt, in C.  Deroux (ed.), Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History, vol. 3, Bruxelles 1983, pp. 325–335. Peachin 1990: M. Peachin, Roman Imperial Titulature and Chronology, A.D. 235–284, Amsterdam 1990. Perassi 1997: C. Perassi, Recensione a Estiot 1995, Ripostiglio, in Aevum 71, 1, 1997, pp. 199–203. Perassi 2002: C. Perassi, I ritratti monetali di Ulpia Severina, in RIN 103, 2002, pp. 337–372. Perassi 2014: C. Perassi, Ritratti monetali delle Augustae nel III secolo d.C.: una crisi di genere?, in Un confronto drammatico con il XXI secolo: l’Impero romano del III secolo nella crisi monetaria. Atti del Convegno, Biassono 9 giugno 2012, Biassono 2014, pp. 193–232.

164 

Bibliography

Petraccia Lucernoni, Traverso 2002: M.F.  Petraccia Lucernoni, M.  Traverso, Testimonianze epigrafiche di sacerdoti e militari con cognomina grecanici provenienti dai centri sul litorale adriatico, in L. Braccesi, M. Luni (eds.), I Greci in Adriatico. 1. Atti del convegno internazionale, Urbino 21–24 ottobre 1999, Hesperìa 15, Roma 2002, pp. 241–254. Petrochilos 2010: N.  Petrochilos, Συμβολὲς στὴν ἱστορία καὶ προσωπογραφία τῆς ἀρχαίας Ἄνδρου. Ἐπιγραφικὲς καὶ φιλολογικὲς μαρτυρίες, Ἀνδριακὰ χρονικά 42, Andros 2010. Petzl 1982: G. Petzl, Die Inschriften von Smyrna, vol. 1, Bonn 1982. Pflaum 1960: H.-G.  Pflaum, Denier inédit de Séverine, in BSFN 15, 1960, pp. 440–441. Pflaum 1963: H.-G. Pflaum, Monnaie inédite d’Aurélien de Cyzique, in BSFN 18, 1963, pp. 269–270. Pflaum 1970: H.-G. Pflaum, La romanisation de l’ancien territoire de la Carthage punique à la lumière des découvertes épigraphiques récentes, in AntAfr 4, 1970, pp. 75–118. Pini 1974: D.  Pini, La regina di Palmira. Le esplorazioni archeologiche lungo le favolose vie carovaniere del deserto siriaco, Firenze 1974. Poinssot Louis, Lantier 1923: L. Poinssot Louis, R. Lantier, Q. Geminius Sabinus, Princeps peregrinorum, in CRAI 3, 1923, pp. 197–201. Polverini 1975: L. Polverini, Da Aureliano a Diocleziano, in ANRW II 2, Berlin-­ New York 1975, pp. 1013–1035. Potter 1990: D.S. Potter, Prophecy and History in the Crisis of the Roman Empire. A Historical Commentary on the Thirteenth Sibylline Oracle, Oxford 1990. Price 1973: M.J.  Price, The Lost Year: Greek Light on a Problem of Roman Chronology, in NC 1973, pp. 75–86. Rambaldi 2006: S. Rambaldi, Aureliano in Cisalpina. I riflessi delle invasioni alamanniche nelle testimonianze archeologiche, in Ocnus 14, 2006, pp. 207–235. Rathbone 1986: D. Rathbone, The Dates of the Recognition in Egypt of the Emperors from Caracalla to Diocletian, in ZPE 62, 1986, pp. 101–131. Raycheva 2015: M.  Raycheva, The Imperial Cult in Perinthos, in Archaeologia Bulgarica 19, 2, 2015, pp. 23–34. Rea 1972: J.R. Rea, The Oxyrhynchus Papyri. Volume xl, London 1972. Rebuffat 1992: R. Rebuffat, Compléments au recueil des Inscriptions Antiques du Maroc, in A. Mastino (eds.), L’Africa romana. Atti del IX Convegno di Studio, Nuoro 13–15 dicembre 1991, vol. 1, Sassari 1992, pp. 439–501. Requena Jiménez 2003: M. Requena Jiménez, Lo maravilloso y el poder: los presagios de imperio de los emperadores Aureliano y Tácito en la Historia Augusta, Valencia 2003. Requena Jiménez 2013: M. Requena Jiménez, Cómo murió el emperador Marco Claudio Tácito: (SHA. Tac. 17, 5), in A&R 7, 1–2, 2013, pp. 65–82.

 Bibliography 

165

RIC V 1: P.H. Webb, in H. Mattingly, E.A. Sydenham (eds.), The Roman Imperial Coinage. Vol. V. Part 1, London 1927 (19723). RIC V 2: P.H. Webb, in H. Mattingly, E.A. Sydenham (eds.), The Roman Imperial Coinage. Vol. V. Part 2, London 1933 (19723). Ricciardi 2007: R.A. Ricciardi, Where Did All the Women Go: The Archaeology of the Soldier Empresses, Diss. University of Cincinnati 2007. Robert 1980: L.  Robert, Monnaies d’Anineta, in L.  Robert, À travers l’Asie Mineure. Poètes et prosateurs, monnaies grecques, voyageurs et géographie, Paris 1980, pp. 325–334. Rohde 1881: T. Rohde, Die Münzen des Kaisers Aurelianus, seiner Frau Severina und der Fürsten von Palmyra, Miskolcz 1881. Rohrbacher 2016: D. Rohrbacher, The Play of Allusion in the Historia Augusta, Madison 2016. Ruiz de Arbulo Bayona 1990: J. Ruiz de Arbulo Bayona, El foro de Tarraco, in Cypsela 8, 1990, pp. 119–138. Salama, Desanges, Duval, Ben Baaziz 2010: P.  Salama, J.  Desanges, N.  Duval, S. Ben Baaziz, Carte des routes et des cités de l’Est de l’Africa à la fin de l’antiquité. Nouvelle édition de la carte des “Voies romaines de l’Afrique du Nord” conçue en 1949 d’après les tracés de Pierre Salama, Turnhout 2010. Salzman 2017: M.R. Salzman, Aurelian and the Cult of the Unconquered Sun: the Institutionalization of Christmas, Solar Worship, and Imperial Cult, in O. Tal, Z. Weiss (eds.), Expressions of Cult in the Southern Levant in the Greco-Roman Period. Manifestations in Text and Material Culture, Turnhout 2017, pp. 37–49. Sartori 1960: F.  Sartori, Verona romana: storia politica, economica, amministrativa, in V. Cavallari, P. Gazzola (eds.), Verona e il suo territorio. I. Preistoria-­ Verona romana, Verona 1960, pp. 159–259. Sartre, Sartre 2014: A. Sartre, M. Sartre, Zénobie, de Palmyre à Rome, Paris 2014. Saunders 1991: R.T. Saunders, A Biography of the Emperor Aurelian (A.D. 270–275), Diss. University of Cincinnati 1991. Savino 2017: E. Savino, Ricerche sulla Historia Augusta, Pozzuoli-Napoli 2017. Savio 2002: A. Savio, Monete romane, Milano 2002. Sayar 1998: M.H. Sayar, Perinthos-Herakleia (Marmara Ereğlisi) und Umgebung. Geschichte, Testimonien, griechische und lateinische Inschriften, Wien 1998. Scarborough 1973: J. Scarborough, Aurelian: Questions and Problems, in CJ 68, 4, 1973, pp. 334–345. Schnetz 1942: J. Schnetz, Itineraria Romana. Vol. II. Ra vennatis Anonymi Cosmographia et Guido nis Geographica, Stuttgart 1942. Schönert 1965: E. Schönert, Die Münzprägung von Perinthos, Berlin 1965. Schwartz 1970: J.  Schwartz, Sur le mode de composition de la Vita Aureliani, in G. Alföldy, J. Straub (eds.), Bonner Historia Augusta Colloquium 1968/1969, Bonn 1970, pp. 239–246.

166 

Bibliography

Selem 1994 (1973): A. Selem, Ammiano Marcellino. Le Storie, 2 vols., Milano 1994 (Torino 1973). Serra Vilaró 1928: J. Serra Vilaró, Excavaciones en la necrópolis romano-cristiana de Tarragona, in Memoria de la Junta superior de excavaciones y antiguedades 104, 1928. Sharankov 2020: N. Sharankov, Decius as Governor of Lower Moesia and Severus Alexander’s Visit to the Province in A.D. 234, in ZPE 214, 2020, pp. 309–319. Sidrys 2020: R.V.  Sidrys, The Mysterious Spheres on Greek and Roman Ancient Coins, Oxford 2020. Silvestrini 1993: M.  Silvestrini, Il potere imperiale da Severo Alessandro ad Aureliano, in A.  Carandini, L.  Cracco Ruggini, A.  Giardina (eds.), Storia di Roma. III.  L’età tardoantica. 1. Crisi e trasformazioni, Torino 1993, pp. 155–191. Silvestrini 2000: M. Silvestrini, Note sui culti orientali dell’Italia sud-adriatica, in Ch. Delplace, F. Tassaux (eds.), Les cultes polythéistes dans l’Adriatique romaine, Pessac 2000, pp. 193–205. Simoni 1973: P. Simoni, Testimonianze romane a Gavardo, a Vobarno e a Salò, in Atti del Convegno Internazionale per il xix centenario della dedicazione del Capitolium e per il 150° anniversario della sua scoperta, vol. 2, Brescia 1973, pp. 267–276. Sommer 2021: M.  Sommer, Römische Geschichte von den Anfängen bis zum Untergang, Stuttgart 2021. Soraci 2005–2006: C.  Soraci, Dalle “frumentationes” alle distribuzioni di pane. Riflessioni su una riforma di Aureliano, in Quaderni Catanesi di Studi Antichi e Medievali 4–5, 2005–2006, pp. 345–437. Sotgiu 1961: G. Sotgiu, Studi sull’epigrafia di Aureliano, Sassari 1961. Sotgiu 1975: G. Sotgiu, Aureliano (1960–1972), in ANRW II 2, Berlin-New York 1975, pp. 1039–1061. Southern 2008: P. Southern, Empress Zenobia. Palmyra’s Rebel Queen, London-­ New York 2008. Starcky, Gawlikowski 1985: J. Starcky, M. Gawlikowski, Palmyre, Paris 1985. Stazio 1964: A. Stazio, La documentazione archeologica in Puglia, in ACSMG 1964, pp. 153–179. Stiernon 1990: D.  Stiernon, s.v. Héraclée de Thrace, in DHGE 23, 1990, coll. 1306–1337. Stoneman 1992: R. Stoneman, Palmyra and its Empire. Zenobia’s Revolt against Rome, Ann Arbor 1992. Straub 1966: J.  Straub, Senaculum id est mulierum senatus, in J.  Straub (ed.), Historia Augusta Colloquium 1964–1965, Bonn 1966, pp. 221–240. Strobel 1998: K.  Strobel, Ulpia Severina Augusta: eine Frau in der Reihe der illyrischen Kaiser, in E.  Frézouls, H.  Jouffroy (eds.), Les empereurs illyriens.

 Bibliography 

167

Actes du Colloque de Strasbourg 11–13 octobre 1990, Strasbourg 1998, pp. 119–153. Strobel 2013: K. Strobel, Herrscherwechsel, politische Verfolgung, Bürgerkriege in der römischen Kaiserzeit: zwischen Rekonziliation, Amnestie und Säuberung, in K. Harter-Uibopuu, F. Mitthof (eds.), Vergeben und Vergessen? Amnestie in der Antike. Beiträge zum 1. Wiener Kolloquium zur Antiken Rechtsgeschichte, 27–28.10.2008, Wien 2013, pp. 285–298. Stroppa 1999: A.  Stroppa, Traduzione, in M.  Sordi, A.  Stroppa, A.  Galimberti (eds.), Cassio Dione. Storia romana. Volume VI. Libri LVII–LXII, Milano 1999. Suski 2002: R.  Suski, Aurelian and the Senate: a few Remarks upon Emperor Aurelian’s Policy of political Nominations, in T. Derda, J. Urbanik, M. Węcowski (eds.), ΕΥΕΡΓΕΣΙΑΣ ΧΑΡΙΝ. Studies presented to Benedetto Bravo and Ewa Wipszycka by their Disciples, Warzaw 2002, pp. 279–291. Syme 1971: R.  Syme, Emperors and Biography. Studies in the Historia Augusta, Oxford 1971. Syvänne 2020: I. Syvänne, Aurelian and Probus: The Soldier Emperors Who Saved Rome, Philadelphia (Great Britain) 2020. Taeger 1956: F. Taeger, Zur Geschichte der spätkaiserlichen Herrscherauffassung, in Saeculum 7, 2, 1956, pp. 182–195. Taeger 1960: F.  Taeger, Charisma. Studien zur Geschichte des antiken Herrscherkultes, vol. 2, Stuttgart 1960. Tedeschi Grisanti, Solin 2011: G. Tedeschi Grisanti, H. Solin, Dis Manibus, pili, epitaffi et altre cose antiche di Giovannantonio Dosio, Pisa 2011. Thomsen 1917: P.  Thomsen, Die römischen Meilensteine der Provinzen Syria, Arabia, und Palästina, in ZPalV 40, 1917, pp. 1–103. Thouvenot 1954: R. Thouvenot, Julia Valentia Banasa, Rabat 1954. Thouvenot, Luquet 1951: R. Thouvenot, A. Luquet, Banasa, Rabat 1951. Thurn 2000: I. Thurn, Ioannis Malalae Chronographia, Corpus Fontium Histo riae Byzantinae. Series Berolinensis 35, Berolini-Novi Eboraci 2000. Turcan 1969: R. Turcan, Le délit des monétaires rebellés contre Aurélien, in Latomus 28, 1969, pp. 948–959. Uggeri 1983: G. Uggeri, La viabilità romana nel Salento, Fasano 1983. Usener 1905: H. Usener, Sol Invictus, in RhM 60, 1905, pp. 465–491. Valentini 2022: A.  Valentini, Ornamenta delle matrone, ordo matronarum e i matronalia nella Roma repubblicana e in età augustea, in B. Girotti, G. Marsili, M.E. Pomero (eds.), Il potere dell’immagine e della parola. Elementi distintivi dell’aristocrazia femminile da Roma a Bisanzio, Spoleto 2022, pp. 23–38. Van’t Dack 1991: E. Van’t Dack, Commode et ses épithètes Pius Felix sous les Sévères, in G. Bonamente, N. Duval (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquium Parisinum, Paris 1991, pp. 311–335.

168 

Bibliography

Varner 2008: E.R.  Varner, Transcending Gender: Assimilation, Identity, and Roman Imperial Portraits, in MAAR, Suppl. 7, 2008, pp. 185–205. Vaschetti 2011: L.  Vaschetti, Dall’inizio del III secolo alla fine della Tarda Antichità, in E.  Zanda (ed.), Industria città romana sacra a Iside. Scavi e ricerche archeologiche 1981–2003, Torino-Londra-Venezia-New York 2011, pp. 163–188. Vermaseren 1978: M.J. Vermaseren, Corpus Cultus Cybelae Attidisque (CCCA). IV. Italia—Aliae Provinciae, Leiden 1978. Vetters 1950: H. Vetters, Dacia Ripensis, Wien 1950. Vitucci 1952: G. Vitucci, L’imperatore Probo, Roma 1952, p. 22. Vlassa 1962: N. Vlassa, Un cimitir de incinerati̧ e de la sfîrşitul veacului III, de la Iernut [Cimetière à incinération de Iernut de la fin du IIIe siècle], in Studii ši Cercetări de Istorie Veche 13, 1, 1962, pp. 153–155. Vogt 1924: J.  Vogt, Die alexandrinischen Münzen. Grundlegung einer alexandrinischen Kaisergeschichte, Stuttgart 1924. Von Geisau 1935: H.J. von Geisau, s.v. Καινοφρούριον, in RE Suppl. VI, 1935, col. 138. Waddington 1870: W.H. Waddington, Inscriptions grecques et latines de la Syrie, Paris 1870. Waldron 2018: B.L. Waldron, Diocletian, Hereditary Succession and the Tetrarchic Dynasty, Diss. University of Sydney 2018. Wallinger 1990: E. Wallinger, Die Frauen in der Historia Augusta, Wien 1990. Watson 1992: A. Watson, Review to Peachin 1990, in JRS 82, 1992, pp. 298–299. Watson 1999: A.  Watson, Aurelian and the Third Century, London-New York 1999. Wegner 1979: M.  Wegner, Das römische Herrscherbild. IV.  Gordianus III. bis Carinus, Berlin 1979. Weiser 1983: W.  Weiser, Die Münzreform des Aurelianus, in ZPE 53, 1983, pp. 279–295. White 2015: J.F.  White, The Roman Emperor Aurelian. Restorer of the World, Barnsley 2015. Wieber 2006 (2000): A. Wieber, Die Augusta aus der Wüste—die palmyrenische Herrscherin Zenobia, in Th. Späth, B. Wagner-Hasel (eds.), Frauenwelten in der Antike. Geschlechterordnung und weibliche Lebenspraxis. Sonderausgabe, Stuttgart 2006 (2000), pp. 281–310. Wienand 2015: J. Wienand, Deo et domino: Aurelian, Serdica und die restitutio orbis, in JNG 65, 2015, pp. 63–99. Winsbury 2010: R.  Winsbury, Zenobia of Palmyra. History, Myth and the Neo-­ classical Imagination, London 2010. Wrede 1981: H. Wrede, Consecratio in formam deorum. Vegöttlichte Privatpersonen in der römischen Kaiserzeit, Mainz am Rhein 1981.

 Bibliography 

169

Yon 2012: J.-B. Yon, Inscriptions grecques et latines de la Syrie. XVII. 1. Palmyre, Bibliothèque archéologique et historique 195, Beyrouth 2012. Yon 2019: J.-B. Yon, Femmes de Palmyre, in DHA Suppl. 18, 1, 2019, pp. 183–203. Yon, Gatier 2009: J.-B. Yon, P.-L. Gatier, Choix d’inscriptions grecques et latines de la Syrie, Beyrouth 2009. Yonge 1979: D.  Yonge, The So-called Interregnum Coinage, in NC 19, 1979, pp. 47–60. Zahran 2003: Y. Zahran, Zenobia between Reality and Legend, Oxford 2003. Zawadzki 1995: T. Zawadzki, Princeps necessarius magis quam bonus (HA A 37, 1): quelques remarques sur la morale politique dans l’antiquité tardive, in M.  Weinmann-Walser (ed.), Historische Interpretationen: Gerold Walser zum 75. Geburtstag dargebracht von Freunden, Kollegen und Schülern, Stuttgart 1995, pp. 203–212. Zawadzki 1998: T.  Zawadzki, L’Histoire Auguste et les empereurs illyriens (249–282), in E. Frézouls, H. Jouffroy (eds.), Les empereurs illyriens. Actes du Colloque de Strasbourg 11–13 octobre 1990, Strasbourg 1998, pp. 20–27. Zawadzki 2005: T. Zawadzki, L’empereur Tacite et l’épigraphie, in G. Bonamente, M.  Mayer (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquium Barcinonense, Munera 22, Bari 2005, pp. 305–322. Zecchini 1998: G. Zecchini, I cervi, le Amazzoni e il trionfo “gotico” di Aureliano, in G. Bonamente, G. Heim, J.-P. Callu (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquium Argentoratense, Munera 11, Bari 1998, pp. 349–358. Zecchini 2017: G. Zecchini, Conclusioni, in R. Cristofoli, A. Galimberti, F. Rohr Vio (eds.), Costruire la memoria. Uso e abuso della storia fra tarda Repubblica e primo Principato, Venezia 14–15 gennaio 2016, Roma 2017, pp. 245–248. Zurutuza, Kuz 2012: H.A.  Zurutuza, C.E.  Kuz, Una mirada histórico-­ antropológica sobre Volubilis, in M.B. Cocco, A. Gavini, A. Ibba (eds.), L’Africa romana. Trasformazione dei paesaggi del potere nell’Africa settentrionale fino alla fine del mondo antico. Atti del XIX Convegno di Studio, Sassari 16–19 dicembre 2010, vol. 3, Roma 2012, pp. 2497–2506.

Index of Ancient Sources1

L Literary sources Ammianus Marcellinus Antiochenus, Rerum gestarum quae exstant; 22, 2, 3, 40n48; 27, 4, 12, 40n48 Beda, Chronica, Th. M1w`2aZommsen, MGH, Chron. Min., vol. 3, Berolini 1896; 384, p. 293, viiin2 Caius Plinius Secundus, Naturalis historia; 12, 41, 84, 2n2; 33, 19, 63, 57n86 Cassius Dio, Historiae Romanae, U.P. Boissevain, 3 voll., Berlin 1895-1901 60, 33, 3, 57n87 Cornelius Tacitus, Annalium (ab excessu divi Augusti) quae exstant; 12, 42, 2, 57n89; 12, 56, 57n87

1

Epitome de Caesaribus; 35, 1, viiin2; 35, 4, 12n21; 35, 10, 36n36 Eusebius Caesariensis; Historia ecclesiastica 7, 30, 21, viiin2 Eutropius, Breviarium ab Urbe condita; 8, 2, 1, 9n14; 8, 6, 10n15; 9, 3, 98n49; 9, 13, 2, 15n26; 9, 14, 12n20; 9, 15, 2, 40n46 Flavius Magnus Aurelius Cassiodorus; Chronica Gallica varia, Th. Mommsen, MGH. Chron. Min., vol. 1, Berolini 1892 429, p. 642, viiin2; Chronica, Th. Mommsen, MGH. Chron. Min., vol. 2, Berolini 1894 984, p. 148, viiin2; Chronica Urbis Romae, Th. Mommsen, MGH. Chron. Min., vol. 1, Berolini 1892 p. 148, viiin2, 40n46

 Note: Page numbers followed by ‘n’ refer to notes.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 M. Cassia, The Roman Empress Ulpia Severina, Queenship and Power, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28651-3

171

172 

INDEX OF ANCIENT SOURCES

Literary sources (cont.) Galenus Medicus, De methodo medendi libri xiv, C.G. Kühn, Claudii Galeni opera omnia, vol. X, Leipzig 1825, pp. 1-1021 13, 22, X 942, 2n2 Georgius Cedrenus, Compendium historiarum, I. Bekker, vol. 1, Bonn 1838; p. 455, viiin2 Georgius Syncellus, Ecloga chronographica, A. Mosshammer, Georgius Syncellus. Ecloga chronographica, Leipzig 1984; p. 469, l. 25, viiin2; p. 470, ll. 5-7, 15n26 Hieronymus Stridonensis, Chronicon ad annum post natum Abraham, R. Helm, Eusebius Werke. VII. Die Chronik des Hieronymus, GCS 47, Berlin 1956; chron. a. Abr. 2290 (271 d.C.), p. 222, viiin2; chron. a. Abr. 2293 (274 d.C.), p. 223, 15n26; chron. a. Abr. 2295 (275 d.C.), p. 223, 40n46 Historiae Augustae Scriptores, A. Chastagnol, Histoire Auguste. Les empereurs romains des IIe et IIIe siècles, Paris 1994, Alexander Severus; 41, 1, 2n2 Historiae Augustae Scriptores, A. Chastagnol, Histoire Auguste. Les empereurs romains des IIe et IIIe siècles, Paris 1994, Antoninus Heliogabalus; 4, 1-3, 4 Historiae Augustae Scriptores, A. Chastagnol, Histoire Auguste. Les empereurs romains des IIe et IIIe siècles, Paris 1994, Aurelianus; 10, 2,

9n13; 10, 2-3, 6; 10, 2-15, 9n12; 11, 1, 7n11; 11, 7-8, 7n11; 13, 1, 7; 14, 4-15, 1-2, 7; 27, 1, 136; 27, 2, 123n104; 35, 5, 39; 37, 4, viiin2; 38, 2-4, 12n18; 40, 1-41, 15, 35n34; 40, 4, 133; 40-41, 34n31; 41, 3, 35n34; 42, 1-2, 3, 82; 45, 5, 1; 46, 1, 3n6; 50, 2, 2, 82 Historiae Augustae Scriptores, A. Chastagnol, Histoire Auguste. Les empereurs romains des IIe et IIIe siècles, Paris 1994, Gallieni duo; 13, 5, 135 Historiae Augustae Scriptores, A. Chastagnol, Histoire Auguste. Les empereurs romains des IIe et IIIe siècles, Paris 1994, Hadrianus; 17, 3, 2n3 Historiae Augustae Scriptores, A. Chastagnol, Histoire Auguste. Les empereurs romains des IIe et IIIe siècles, Paris 1994, M. Aurelius Antoninus philosophus; 17, 4, 2n2 Historiae Augustae Scriptores, A. Chastagnol, Histoire Auguste. Les empereurs romains des IIe et IIIe siècles, Paris 1994, Quattuor tyranni; 15, 8, 2n2 Historiae Augustae Scriptores, A. Chastagnol, Histoire Auguste. Les empereurs romains des IIe et IIIe siècles, Paris 1994, Tacitus; 1, 1, 34n32; 2, 1-2, 35n33; 2, 6, 35n34; 3, 2, 35n34; 4, 5-7, 34n30; 5, 1, 34n30; 6, 2-7, 34n30; 7, 5-7, 39n43; 11, 6, 3; 13, 5, 36n37; 14, 5, 36n37; 17, 5, 38n41

  INDEX OF ANCIENT SOURCES 

Historiae Augustae Scriptores, A. Chastagnol, Histoire Auguste. Les empereurs romains des IIe et IIIe siècles, Paris 1994, Triginta tyranni; 15, 8, 135; 30, 1-5, 17n27; 30, 1-27, 16; 30, 16, 135; 30, 27, 15n26 Ioannes Antiochenus, Fragmenta ex Historia chronica, S. Mariev (recensuit, Anglice vertit, indicibus instruxit), Ioannis Antiocheni Fragmenta quae supersunt omnia, Berolini-Novi Eboraci 2008; 183, p. 338, viiin2 Ioannes Malalas, Chronographia, I. Thurn, Ioannis Malalae Chronographia, Corpus Fontium Historiae Byzantinae. Series Berolinensis 35, Berolini-­ Novi Eboraci 2000; 12, 26, p. 229, 123n104; 12, 30, p. 230, viiin2; 12, 30, p. 231, 13n23 Ioannes Zonaras, Epitome historiarum, L. Dindorf, Lipsiae 1870; 12, 27, vol. 3, p. 153, viiin2, 123n104; 12, 27, vol. 3, pp. 152-153, 14n25; 12, 27-28, vol. 3, p. 153, 38n42 Iordanes, Itineraria Antonini Augusti; 138, 3, 40n47; 230, 9, 40n47; 323, 6, 40n47; 332, 7, 40n47 Iordanes, Itinerarium Burdigalense; 609, 12-16, 88n26 Iordanes, Romana, Th. Mommsen, MGH.AA., vol. 5, 1, Berolini 1832; 290, p. 37, viiin2 L. Cae(ci)lius Firmianus Lactantius, De mortibus persecutorum; 6, 2, 40n46

173

Paulus (?) Orosius Presbyter Hispanus, Historiae adversum paganos, K. Zangemeister, Lipsiae 1882; 7, 23, 3, viiin2 Philastrius Brixiensis, Diversarum hereseon liber, F. Heylen, CCSL 9, Turnholti 1957; 64, 123n104 Photius, Bibliotheca, R. Henry, Photius. Bibliothèque. Tome VIII. Codices 257-280, Paris 1977; 265, p. 60, 123n104 Polemius Silvius, Laterculus, Th. Mommsen, MGH.AA. Chron. Min., vol. 1, Berolini 1892; 1, 49, pp. 521-522, 13n23 Polemius Silvius, Ravennatis Anonymi Cosmographia, J. Schnetz, Itineraria Romana. Vol. II. Ravennatis Anonymi Cosmographia et Guidonis Geographica, Stuttgart 1942; 4, 6, p. 48, l. 36, 40n47; 4, 6, p. 48, l. 40, 40n47 Sex. Aurelius Victor Afer, Liber de Caesaribus; 28, 10, 98n49; 35, 6, 12n19; 35, 8, 40n46; 35, 9-36, 1, 36n35 Strabo Geographus, Geographica; 6, 3, 7 C 282, 87n24 Suda, Lexicon, A. Adler, Suidae Lexicon, voll. 1-4m Leipzig 1928-1935; Μ 1223, s.v. Μονιτάριοι, 13n22; Φ 340, s.v. Φιλικήσιμος, 13n22 Tabula Peutingeriana; 8, 5, 40n47 Zosimus, Historia nova; 1, 22, 2, 98n49; 1, 61, 2, ixn7; 1, 62, 1, 40n48; 1, 62, 3-1, 63, 1, 38n41

174 

INDEX OF ANCIENT SOURCES

I Inscriptions Abascal Palazón, Ramallo Asensio 1997: J.M. Abascal Palazón, S.F. Ramallo Asensio (ed.), La ciudad de Carthago Nova. 3. La documentación epigráfica, Murcia 1997; no. 44, 58n92 AÉ; 1891, 50, 123n104; 1894, 58, 81n12; 1894, 59, 78n4; 1898, 102, 116n85; 1898, 128, 116n85; 1900, 145, 116n86; 1901, 197, 104n64; 1903, 150, 106n68; 1916, 89, 113n82; 1916, 100, 113n82; 1921, 92, 124n105; 1923, 28, 81n14; 1924, 71, 104n64; 1927, 81, 119n92; 1930, 150, 104n59; 1934, 43, 109n77; 1934, 44, 107n73; 1936, 39, 113n82; 1936, 40, 113n82; 1937, 24, 113n82; 1938, 13, 104n59; 1938, 24, 82n17; 1942/1943, 113, 109n77; 1942/1943, 114, 109n77; 1942/1943, 115, 107n73; 1950, 57, 81n14; 1961, 88, 104n64; 1965, 113, 99n50; 1969/1970, 695, 104n64; 1972, 66, 104n64; 1972, 284, 82n17; 1973, 275, 104n64; 1979, 302, 104n64; 1989, 192, 86n21; 1990, 865, 104n64; 1993, 500, 86n21; 1993, 504, 84n20; 1994, 636, 94n38; 2002, 851, 82n17; 2004, 1680, 82n17; 2006, 360, 90n30; 2008, 16, 81n14; 2008, 264, 99n50; 2011, 40, 96n44; 2012, 1875, 81n14; 2013, 116, 113n82; 2016, 753, 107n71

Alföldy 1975: G. Alföldy, Die römischen Inschriften von Tarraco, Berlin 1975; no. 87, 104n59; no. 457, 104n61 Alföldy 1984: G. Alföldy, Römische Statuen in Venetia et Histria. Epigraphische Quellen, Heidelberg 1984; p. 77, no. 1, 101n54; pp. 77-78, no. 2, 101n54; p. 78, no. 3, 103n55; p. 78, no. 4, 103n55; p. 78, no. 5, 103n55; p. 78, no. 6, 103n55; pp. 78-79, no. 7, 100n53; p. 79, no. 8, 103n55; p. 129, no. 200, 97n47 Alföldy 2002: G. Alföldy, Eine eradierte Kaiserinschrift aus Valentia (Hispania Citerior), in ZPE 141, 2002, pp. 257-260: p. 257, 82n17 Allifae: N. Mancini, Allifae, Piedimonte Matese 2005; 14, 90n30; 15, 92n32; 25, 92n34 Assandria 1921: G. Assandria, Lapide dedicata a Severina moglie di Aureliano imperatore (270-275) rinvenuta nell’antica città d’Industria, in Atti della Società Piemontese di Archeologia e Belle Arti 10, 1, 1921, pp. 52-53: p. 52, 94n38 AvPergamon: C. Habicht, Altertümer von Pergamon 8,3. Die Inschriften des Asklepieions, Berlin 1969; no. 16, 106n68 B. Gerov, Inscriptiones Latinae in Bulgaria repertae (ILBulg), Sofia 1989; no. 264, 107n70 Blümel 2019: W. Blümel, Die Inschriften von Tralleis und Nysa. Teil II. Die Inschriften von Nysa, Bonn 2019; pp. 160-161, no. 592, 116n86

  INDEX OF ANCIENT SOURCES 

Cagnat 1893: R. Cagnat, Découvertes des Brigades topographiques de Tunisie en 1893 (d’après Toussaint), in BCTH 1893, pp. 203-241: pp. 222-223, no. 51, 78n4 Cantineau et alii: J. Cantineau et alii (éds.), Inventaire des inscriptions de Palmyre, fasc. 3, Beyrouth 1930; no. 20, 125n108 Chatelain 1934: L. Chatelain, 12 Jouin 1934. Séance de la Commission de l’Afrique du Nord, in BCTH 1934, pp. 172-182: p. 174, no. 4, 107n73 CIG; II 2349o, 115n83; II 3179c-­ e, 116n88; III 4503b, 122n102 CIL; II 2200, 107n71; II 3413, 58n92; II 3738, 82n17; II 3832, 82n17; III 472, 116n88; III 6049, 125n106; III 6727, 125n106; III 12456, 123n104; III 13661, 107n72; III 13724, 107n70; III 14191, 116n85; III 14192,12, 106n68; V 18, 101n54; V 23, 101n54; V 25, 103n55; V 26, 103n55; V 27, 103n55; V 28, 103n55; V 29, 100n53; V 30, 103n55; V 31, 103n55; V 203, 103n57; V 582, 2, 101n54; V 582, 4, 101n54; V 582, 5, 103n55; V 582, 6, 103n55; V 3329, 99n50; V 3330, 97n47; V 7492, 95n42; VI 1079, 107n69; VI 1112, 120n94; VI 1872, 106n68; VI 2149, 106n68; VI 40679a, 107n69; VI 40715, 104n64; VI 40769, 104n64; VIII 4877, 82n17;

175

VIII 10177, 120n94; VIII 10205, 120n94; VIII 10217, 120n94; VIII 10950, 113n82; VIII 10951, 113n82; VIII 21828, 113n82; VIII 21851, 113n82; VIII 21852, 113n82; VIII 23114, 78n4, 80; VIII 23115, 81n12; VIII 23116, 81n13; VIII 9993, 113n82; VIII 9996, 113n82; IX 2327, 90n30; IX 2328, 92n32; IX 2329, 91n31; IX 2339, 92n34; X 1482, 103n55; X 1483, 103n55; XI 1214, 120n94; XI 2099, 92n35; XI 3878, 120n94; XV 7125, 106n68; XV 7336, 107n70; XVI 155, 96n44 CIL II: Universidad de Alcalá– Centro CIL II; II 7, 258, 107n71; II 14, 13, 82n17; II 14, 19, 82n17; II 14, 317, 82n17; II 14, 1329, 104n61; II 14, 2, 927, 104n59 CISem: Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum. Pars Secunda. Tomus III. Fascisulus Primus, Parisiis 1936; pp. 119-120, no. 3947, 125n108; pp. 151-152, no. 3971, 124n105 Costarella, Isabella 2006: A. Costarella, C. Isabella, Due iscrizioni imperiali e una epigrafe sepolcrale nella città di Piedimonte Matese (Caserta), in Epigraphica 68, 2006, pp. 322-326:; p. 323, 90n30; pp. 324-325, 91n31 ELST: F. Beltrán Lloris, Epigrafía latina de Saguntum y su territorium, Valencia 1980; 22, 82n17

176 

INDEX OF ANCIENT SOURCES

Inscriptions (cont.) Epigraphic Database Roma (EDR); 107084, 94n38; 113024, 90n30; 136015, 92n32; 149857, 92n35 Epigraphik-Datenbank Clauss-Slaby (EDCS); EDCS-03400037, 104n59; EDCS-03400156, 104n61; EDCS-04200018, 101n54; EDCS-04200023, 101n54; EDCS-04200024, 101n54; EDCS-04200025, 103n55; EDCS-04200026, 103n55; EDCS-04200027, 103n55; EDCS-04200028, 103n55; EDCS-04200029, 100n53; EDCS-04200030, 103n55; EDCS-04200031, 103n55; EDCS-04200289, 103n57; EDCS-04202375, 99n50; EDCS-04202376, 97n47; EDCS-06100148, 86n21; EDCS-08601002, 81n14; EDCS-08601003, 81n14; EDCS-08601004, 81n14; EDCS-08601005, 81n14; EDCS-08800087, 109n77; EDCS-08800088, 109n77; EDCS-08800090, 107n73; EDCS-08800348, 113n82; EDCS-08800359, 113n82; EDCS-08800361, 113n82; EDCS-08800364, 113n82; EDCS-08800367, 113n82; EDCS-08800369, 110n80; EDCS-08800449, 113n82; EDCS-09000274, 107n71; EDCS-09100020, 82n17; EDCS-09100348, 82n17; EDCS-10800005, 84n20; EDCS-11201381, 117n89; EDCS-11901030, 113n82; EDCS-12300359,

96n44; EDCS-12401839, 92n32; EDCS-13001119, 82n17; EDCS-16201249, 124n105; EDCS-18100688, 106n68; EDCS-18100866, 106n68; EDCS-22100253, 92n35; EDCS-24300167, 78n4; EDCS-24300168, 81n12; EDCS-24300169, 81n13; EDCS-28701504, 107n71; EDCS-29601659, 107n70; EDCS-30000349, 116n85; EDCS-30200375, 106n68; EDCS-31300275, 107n72; EDCS-31400081, 123n104; EDCS-33500456, 82n17; EDCS-37900531, 107n70; EDCS-59100083, 113n82 Euzennat, Marion, Gascou, de Kisch 1982: M. Euzennat, J. Marion, J. Gascou, Y. de Kisch, Inscriptions antiques du Maroc. 2. Inscriptions latines, Paris 1982; p. 99, no. 103, 109n77; pp. 99-100, no. 104, 109n77; p. 101, no. 106, 107n73, 108; pp. 247-248, no. 387, 113n82; pp. 250-251, no. 390, 113n82; pp. 251-252, no. 391, 113n82; p. 255, no. 398, 113n82; p. 256, no. 400, 113n82; pp. 257-258, no. 403, 113n82; p. 260, no. 407, 113n82; pp. 260-261, no. 409, 110n80; p. 316, no. 503, 113n82 Forlati Tamaro 1947: B. Forlati Tamaro, Inscriptiones Italiae, Regio X. Fasc. 1, Pola et Nesactium, Roma 1947; no. 21, 101n54; no. 36, 101n54; no. 37, 101n54; no. 38, 103n55; no. 40, 103n55; no.

  INDEX OF ANCIENT SOURCES 

41, 103n55; no. 42, 103n55; no. 43, 100n53; no. 44, 103n55; no. 45, 103n55; no. 335, 103n57 Freis 19942: H. Freis, Historische Inschriften zur römischen Kaiserzeit von Augustus bis Konstantin, Darmstadt 19942; 145, 116n85 French 2014: D.H. French, Roman Roads & Milestones of Asia Minor. Vol. 3. Milestones. Fasc. 3.5 Asia, Ankara 2014; pp. 119-123, no. 057A (1, 3-4), 119n91; pp. 119-123, no. 057A (2), 116n88 Gawlikowski 1985: M. Gawlikowski, Le princes de Palmyre, in Syria 62, 1985, pp. 251-261: pp. 255-256, no. 10, 125n107 Hillers, Cussini 1996: D.R. Hillers, E. Cussini, Palmyrene Aramaic Texts, Baltimore 1996; no. 291, 125n107; no. 317, 124n105 Hispania Epigraphica Online Database; 2001, 251, 107n71; 2002, 536, 82n17; 2009, 461, 82n17 Horster 2001: M. Horster, Bauinschriften römischer Kaiser. Untersuchungen zu Inschriftenpraxis und Bautätigkeit in Städten des westlichen Imperium Romanum in der Zeit der Prinzipats, Stuttgart 2001; p. 340, no. X 6, B, 99n50 IG; XII 4, 2, 1004, 121n99; XII 5, 748, 115n83; XIV 1085, 104n65 IGRR; I 136, 104n65; III 1027, 122n102; III 1028, 124n105; III 1029, 125n106; III 1030,

177

125n108; III 1032, 125n107; III 1065, 122n102; IV 598, 116n85; IV 1482c, 116n88 IGUR; I 62, 104n65 ILLimisa: Z. Benzina Ben Abdallah, Catalogue des inscriptions latines inédites de Limisa (Ksar Lemsa), in AntAfr 40-41, 2004-2005; pp. 99-203, 8, 82n17 ILS; 110, 101n54; 198, 101n54; 485, 58n92; 544, 99n50; 552, 107n71; 578, 120n94; 585, 82n17; 587, 90n30; 2010, 96n44; 7266, 106n68; 8807, 125n108; 8932, 107n72; 8942, 81n13 Inscriptions latines d’Afrique (ILAfr, Tripolitaine, Tunisie, Maroc), Paris 1923; no. 608, 113n82; no. 613, 113n82; no. 615, 113n82; no. 617, 110n80 Inscriptions latines d’Algérie (ILAlg), Paris 1922-, 01; pp. 123-124, no. 1269, 82n17 IScM-04: E. Popescu, Inscriptiones Scythiae Minoris Graecae et Latinae. IV. Tropaeum, Durostorum, Axiopolis, Bukarest 2015; 88, 123n104 J. Corell, Inscripcions romanes de Valentia i el seu territori (IRVT-01), Valencia 1997; 22, 82n17 J. Corell, Inscripcions romanes de Valentia i el seu territori, vol. 2 (IRVT-02), Valencia 2009; 17, 82n17; 24, 82n17 J. Corell, Inscriptiones romanes de Saguntum y el seu territori (IRSAT), Valencia 2002; 31, 82n17

178 

INDEX OF ANCIENT SOURCES

Inscriptions (cont.) Kalinka 1900 (E. Kalinka, Notizen aus dem Leithagebiete, in JÖAI 3, 1900), Beibl. coll. 1-36; coll. 24-25, no. 10, 124n105; col. 25, no. 11, 125n106; col. 25, no. 12, 125n106 Kalinka 1926: E. Kalinka, Altes und Neues aus Thrakien, in JÖAI 23, 1926, coll. 118-208: col. 133, no. 29, 119n92 Labory 2003: N. Labory, Inscriptions antiques du Maroc. 2. Inscriptions latines. Supplément, Paris 2003; p. 44, no. 103, 109n77; p. 44, no. 104, 109n77; p. 44, no. 106, 107n73; p. 67, no. 387, 113n82; p. 67, no. 390, 113n82; pp. 67-68, no. 391, 113n82; p. 69, no. 398, 113n82; p. 69, no. 400, 113n82; p. 70, no. 403, 113n82; p. 70, no. 407, 113n82; p. 70, no. 409, 110n80; pp. 82-83, no. 503, 113n82 Last Statues of Antiquity Database; 1885, 81n13; 1886, 81n12 LBIRNA: A. Saastamoinen, The Phraseology and Structure of Latin Building Inscriptions in Roman North Africa, Helsinki 2010; 459, 113n82; 460, 113n82 L. Chatelain, Inscriptions Latines du Maroc (ILM), Paris 1942; no. 69, 113n82; no. 70, 113n82; no. 71, 113n82; no. 73, 113n82; no. 77, 113n82; no. 79, 110n80 Le Bas 1839: Ph. Le Bas, Inscriptions grecques et latines,

recueillies en Grèce par la Commission de Morée. V. Îles de la Mer Égée, Paris 1839; p. 91, no. 177, 115n83 Lungarova 2012: P.P. Lungarova, Rimskite kultove v provincija Dolna Mizija. Katalog na paetnicite, Veliko Tarnovo 2012; no. 263, 107n70 Maffei 1749: F.S. Maffei, Museum Veronense, Veronae 1749; p. cii, no. 5, 97n47, 98 MAMA; X 114, 116n85 McCabe 1991a: D.F. McCabe, Magnesia Inscriptions. Texts and List, Princeton 1991; no. 297, 116n85 McCabe 1991b: D.F. McCabe, Nysa Inscriptions. Texts and List, Princeton 1991; no. 30*3, 116n86 McCabe 1991c: D.F. McCabe, Stratonikeia Inscriptions. Texts and List, Princeton 1991; no. 92, 116n85 Merlin 1944: A. Merlin, Inscriptions Latines de la Tunisie, Paris 1944; no. 777, 81n14; no. 778, 81n14; no. 779, 81n14; no. 782, 81n14 OGIS; 519, 116n85; 647, 122n102; 649, 124n105; 650, 125n106; 651, 125n106 Pais 1884: E. Pais, Corporis Inscriptionum Latinarum Supplementa Italica, Roma 1884; p. 128, no. 957, 96n44; p. 129, no. 960, 95n40; p. 129, no. 961, 95n41; p. 129, no. 962, 95n40; p. 222, no. 1091, 101n54 Parma, Soldovieri 2020: A. Parma, U. Soldovieri, La raccolta

  INDEX OF ANCIENT SOURCES 

epigrafica del Museo Civico Raffaele Marrocco di Piedimonte Matese, Piedimonte Matese 2020; pp. 76-77, no. 4, 90n30; p. 78, no. 5, 91n31 Paton 1900: W.R. Paton, Sites in E. Karia and S. Lydia, in JHS 20, 1900, pp. 57-80: pp. 79-80, no. 10a-b, 116n86 Petition: T. Hauken, Petition and Response. An Epigraphic Study of Petitions to Roman Emperors (181-249), Bergen 1998; p. 145, 116n85 Petzl 1982: G. Petzl, Die Inschriften von Smyrna, vol. 1, Bonn 1982; pp. 294-296, no. 815a, c-d, 119n91; pp. 294-296, no. 815b, 116n88 PH: The Packard Humanities Institute, Searchable Greek Inscriptions; PH 78093, 115n83; PH260738, 116n85; PH262605, 116n85 Rebuffat 1992: R. Rebuffat, Compléments au recueil des Inscriptions Antiques du Maroc, in A. Mastino (a cura di), L’Africa romana. Atti del IX Convegno di Studio, Nuoro 13-15 dicembre 1991, vol. 1, Sassari 1992, pp. 439-501: p. 463, no. 503, 113n82 Sartre, Sartre 2014: A. Sartre, M. Sartre, Zénobie, de Palmyre à Rome, Paris 2014; p. 280, no. 2, 124n105; p. 280, no. 3, 125n106; p. 280, no. 4, 125n106 Sayar 1998: M.H. Sayar, Perinthos-­ Herakleia (Marmara Ereğlisi) und Umgebung. Geschichte,

179

Testimonien, griechische und lateinische Inschriften, Wien 1998; pp. 197-198, no. 13, 119n92 SEG; 17, 521, 116n88; 30, 1379, 116n86 Serra Vilaró 1928: J. Serra Vilaró, Excavaciones en la necrópolis romano-cristiana de Tarragona, in Memoria de la Junta superior de excavaciones y antiguedades 104, 1928; pp. 97-98, no. 11, 104n59 Sharankov 2020: N. Sharankov, Decius as Governor of Lower Moesia and Severus Alexander’s Visit to the Province in A.D. 234, in ZPE 214, 2020, pp. 309-319: pp. 315-316, no. 2, 107n70 Sotgiu 1961: G. Sotgiu, Studi sull’epigrafia di Aureliano, Sassari 1961; p. 84, no. 15, 81n14 SupplIt, 11: Supplementa Italica, G(nathia), T(olentinum), M(evaniola), P(arma), A(thesin), Roma 1993; p. 32, no. 5, 84n20; pp. 27-29 no. 1, 86n21 SupplIt, 12: Supplementa Italica, At(tidium), In(dustria), I(ulium) C(arnicum), Au(sugum), Roma 1994; p. 46, 95n40; pp. 46-47, 95n41; p. 49, no. 3, 95n43; pp. 49-50, no. 4, 94n38 Tedeschi Grisanti, Solin 2011: G. Tedeschi Grisanti, H. Solin, Dis Manibus, pili, epitaffi et altre cose antiche di Giovannantonio Dosio, Pisa 2011; p. 289, 106n68

180 

INDEX OF ANCIENT SOURCES

Inscriptions (cont.) Thomsen 1917: P. Thomsen, Die römischen Meilensteine der Provinzen Syria, Arabia, und Palästina, in ZPalV 40, 1917, pp. 1-103: p. 26, no. 39, 125n106 Vermaseren 1978: M.J. Vermaseren, Corpus Cultus Cybelae Attidisque (CCCA). IV. Italia-­ Aliae Provinciae, Leiden 1978; pp. 99-100, no. 248, 103n57 Volubilis: M. Vukov et alii (ur.), Studia honoraria archaeologica, Zagreb 2020; 35, 113n82; 37, 113n82; 38, 113n82; 42, 113n82; 44, 113n82; 46, 113n82; 50, 113n82; 52, 110n80 Waddington 1870: W.H. Waddington, Inscriptions grecques et latines de la Syrie, Paris 1870; p. 609, no. 2628, 124n105; p. 609, no. 2629, 125n106; pp. 603-606, no. 2611, 125n108 Yon 2012: J.-B. Yon, Inscriptions grecques et latines de la Syrie. XVII. 1. Palmyre, Bibliothèque archéologique et historique 195, Beyrouth 2012; no. 57, 125n108 Yon, Gatier 2009: J.-B. Yon, P.-L. Gatier, Choix d’inscriptions grecques et latines de la Syrie, Beyrouth 2009; no. 32, 124n105 P Papyri The Oxyrhynchus Papyri; XII 1455, ll. 20-26, 30n17; XIV 1633, 30n17; XXII 2338, 2, l. 39, 30n17

C Coins Milne 1933: J.G. Milne, A Catalog of Alexandrian Coinage in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford 1933; no. 4453, 54 RIC V 1; p. 299, Serdica 305, 83; p. 299, Serdica 305-306, 82n18; p. 315, Lugdunum 1, 51; p. 315, Rome 2, 51; p. 315, Rome 4, 50; p. 316, Rome 6, 50; p. 316, Rome 7, 124; p. 316, Siscia 12, 52; p. 316, Ticinum 8, 52, 64; p. 317, Serdica 17, 53; p. 318, Antioch 19, 54 RIC V 2; p. 584, no. 2, var., 123 Vlassa 1962: N. Vlassa, Un cimitir de incineraţie de la sfîrşitul veacului III, de la Iernut [Cimetière à incinération de Iernut de la fin du IIIe siècle], in Studii ši Cercetări de Istorie Veche 13, 1, 1962; p. 155, fig. 5, 64; pp. 153-155, 64n102 L Legislative sources Fragmenta Vaticana iuris Anteiustiniani, Th. Mommsen, Codicis Vaticani n. 5766 in quo insunt iuris anteiustiniani fragmenta quae dicuntur Vaticana, Berlin 1860; 284, pp. 356-357, 40n48; 325, p. 373, 40n48 Riccobono 19412: S. Riccobono, Fontes iuris Romani antejustiniani. Pars prima. Leges, Florentiae 19412; no. 107, 116n85

Index of Names of People1

A Aelia Flaccilla, 57 Aelius Augustalis, 106n68 Agrippa, viiin2 Agrippina the Youger, 57 Alamanni, 55 Alexander, Severus, 2n2, 15, 110, 134 Ammianus, 46 Ammon, 96 Annaei, 82 Annaeus Saturninus, 81, 81n13 Antiochus, Septimius, 13, 122, 125n106 Antoninus Pius, 8 Antonius Vitalis, 106n68 Apollo, 38n41, 109 Arellius Fuscus, 33

Ariadne, 57n88 Asclepius Augustus, 103 Attalus, 47n66 Attis, 87, 90, 92, 92n34, 103, 109, 140 Aurelian (emperor), ixn7, x, xi, 2n2, 4, 13n22, 14, 17, 28, 34n30, 36, 39, 40n46, 43, 61, 82, 93, 97, 115, 119, 124, 144 Aurelian (proconsul of Cilicia), 3 Aurelius (curator), 114 B Bacchus, 109 Bona Dea, 103 Bonosus, 2n2

 Note: Page numbers followed by ‘n’ refer to notes. Anthroponyms, gyneconyms (with the exception of “Ulpia Severina”), ethnonyms, and theonyms have been included. In the case of Latin onomastics, in general we have preferred, for reasons of convenience and speed of retrieval within the list, to indicate the anthroponym or gyneconym on the basis of the first onomastic term and not to follow the usual procedure of taking into account the nomen of the gens. 1

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 M. Cassia, The Roman Empress Ulpia Severina, Queenship and Power, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28651-3

181

182 

INDEX OF NAMES OF PEOPLE

C Caecilia Paulina, vii Caracalla, xiin15, 26, 102, 113n82, 116 Carinus, vii, viiin2, 1n1, 47n66, 57, 134 Carus, 47n66 Cassius Dio, 57 Castrians, 12 C. Clodius Chariton, 104 Cicero, 3n5 Claudius, 16, 57, 57n87, 102 Claudius Crispus, 106n68 Claudius Pontianus, 106n68 Claudius Quintianus, 106n68 Claudius II Gothicus, viiin2, 1n1, 25, 43, 109 Cleopatra, 16 Concordia, 34, 50–52, 64, 99, 136, 140, 144 Constans, 16 Constantine, 81, 104n64 Constantine II, 116 Constantius Chlorus, 81 Constantius II, 116 Cornelia Gallonia, vii Cornelia Salonina, vii, xii, 53n81, 57, 57n88, 58, 58n92, 80, 81, 107, 110, 119, 123, 142, 143 Cornelia Supera, vii Cupid, 50, 119 D Dacians, 10, 12, 87, 134 Dea Syria, 86 Dea Victoria, 102, 143 Decebalus, 10 Decius, vii, 57, 98, 109, 141 Dido, 16 Diocletian, 24, 25, 58, 104n64, 116, 121, 124n105, 125n106 Domitia Longina, 57n88 Domitian, 57n88

E Elagabalus, ixn7, 4, 5, 110, 134, 135 Emilianus, vii Esquilina (tribus), 106n68 Eunapius, 40n48, 45n62, 46 Euphemia, 53n81 Eusebius, 45 Eutropius, 9 F Faltonius Probus, 33 Faustina the Younger, 57, 58, 118 Faustinus, 13 Felicissimus, 11–13, 13n23 Flavia Cypare, 86 Florian, 36, 62n99 Fortuna, 103 Fulvius Aemilianus, 106n68 Furia Sabinia Tranquillina, vii, 95, 141 G Galen, 2n2 Galeria Valeria, 57, 57n88, 58n91, 107 Galerius, 57, 102 Galla Placidia, xii, xiin14, xiii, 53n81 Gallienus, vii, xii, 7, 16, 17, 25, 55n84, 57, 95, 98, 110, 123, 141 Genius loci, 107n70 Germanic tribes, 25 Gordian III, 141 H Hadrian, 2n3, 8–10, 15n26, 87, 104n65 Harpocrates, 96 Hercules, 103, 109 Herennia Etruscilla, vii, x, 57, 57n88, 58, 119 Herennianus, 16

  INDEX OF NAMES OF PEOPLE 

Hunila, 2n2 Hygieia, 109 I Isis, 96, 103, 140 Iulia Domna, xii, xiin14, 42, 53n81, 57–59, 57n88, 80, 81, 106, 113n82, 116, 118, 123, 134, 142, 143 Iulius Felicissimus, 106n68 Iusta Grata Honoria, 53n81 Iuventius Cornelianus, 106n68 J Jerome, 46 Jovian, 104n64 Julian, 40n48, 46, 104n64 Julius Marcellinus, 98 Juno, 103, 109, 123, 124 Jupiter, 103, 109 Juthungi, 55 L Lactantius, 45 Lembarians, 12 Liber Augustus, 103 Licinia Eudocia, 57n88 Licinia Eudoxia, 53n81, 57n88 Licinius, 102, 104n64 Livia, x Lucius Iulius Vestinus, 104n65 Luna, 103, 119 M Magna Mater (Cybele), 86, 86n21, 87, 90, 92n34, 103 Magnia Urbica, vii, x, 57, 57n88, 58, 134

183

Malakbêl (Belos), ixn7 Malalas, 13n23 Marcellinus, Aurelius, 98 Marcus Asidonius Verus Faventinus, 104 Marcus Aurelius, 2n2, 57, 58, 102 Maximian Herculius, 24, 25, 40 Maximinus the Thracian, vii Mercury, 109 Minerva, 103, 109 Mithras, 103 Mucapor, 40 N Nerva, 9 Nummius Albinus, 106n68 O Obellia Maxima, 103 Octavian Augustus, x, 2, 17n27, 47, 48n69, 56n85, 79–81, 91, 100, 102, 104, 107, 108, 110, 115, 120, 144 Odenathus, vii, 16, 123n104, 125n107, 135 Otacilia Severa, vii, 58, 117n89, 119, 134 P Papiria (tribus), 96 Parthians, 120n94 Pertinax, 103n55, 117 Philip the Arab, vii, 98, 113, 117n89, 134, 141 Plinius the Elder, 57, 90 Plutius Aquilinus, 106n68 Probus, viiin2, 25, 39, 41, 45, 91, 91n31, 141 Ptolemies, 16

184 

INDEX OF NAMES OF PEOPLE

Ptolemy, 90 Publius Anneius Probus, 95 Pulcheria, 57n88

Timolaus, 16 Trajan, 6–11, 6n10, 9n13, 11n17, 14, 87

Q Quintillus, viiin2, 25

U Ulpius Crinitus, 5–17, 65, 136 Urbanus, 107n70

R Regalianus, vii Riparians, 12 Romanius Montanus, 106n68 S Scythians, 37 Septimius Athenodorus, 120, 121, 124n105 Serapis, 96, 103 Severans, 53n81, 58n91, 79n7, 90, 92 Severus, Septimius, 27n8, 57, 80, 102, 116, 134 Silius Italicus, 90 Sol, 103, 119, 135 Strabo, 87, 87n24, 90 Sulpicia Dryantilla, vii, x T Tacitus (historian), 57 Tacitus, Marcus Claudius (emperor), vii, viiin2, xi, xiii, 3, 4, 23, 26n6, 30, 32n22, 33–65, 62n99, 91, 100, 134, 135, 141, 144 Terra Mater, 103 Tetricians (father and son), 13 Theodosius I, 57 Theodosius II, 57n88 Tiberius Claudius Severus, 106n68

V Vaballathus, 13, 120 Valentinian I, 116 Valentinian III, xiii, 45n62, 57n88 Valerian, vii, 5–8, 95, 141 Valeriana Galliena Pia Vindex (cohort), 96 Valerius Diogenes, 107n72 Venus (Felix and Victrix), 50, 103, 109, 119 Vespasian, 102 Victor, Aurelius, 32n22, 33, 34n31, 36, 42, 46, 49 Victoria, vii, x, 102, 117, 118, 120, 143 Victorinus, vii, 13 Vorodes, 125n107 Z Zabbaios, Septimius, 122 Zabdas, Septimius, 122 Zeno, 57n88 Zenobia (Septimia Bath-zabbai), vii, x, xi, xin11, 13–17, 15n26, 17n27, 31, 42, 59, 62, 62n99, 62n100, 80, 119–124, 120n94, 123n104, 125n106, 126n109, 135–137, 144 Zeus-Mithras-Helios, 96 Zonaras, Joannes, 14, 15, 37, 44, 46, 47 Zosimus, 37, 40n48, 46, 47

Index of Place Names1

A Adige, 98 Aegean, 83, 137, 141 Africa, 79n7, 83, 137 Africa Proconsularis, 78, 79, 82n17, 117n90, 142 Allifae (Piedimonte Matese), 90–92, 140, 141 Alps, 55, 141 Altintaş, 113n85 Andros, 111–113, 115n83, 142–144 Anineta, 114, 140, 142 Antioch, 13, 13n23, 30–32, 31n19, 49, 53, 54, 80, 123n104, 144 Apamea Cibotus, 107n72 Appia (via), 87, 87n24 Apulia et Calabria, 83 Aquileia, 97 Arcisa, 92 Armenia, 10

Asia, 33, 63n101, 107n72, 133, 135 Asia Minor, 27n8, 83, 95, 137, 139, 142 Assyria, 10 Atlantic (Ocean), 107 Augustum Semta (Henchir Zemba/ Dzemda), 77n1, 78, 79, 82, 100, 119, 136, 141–143 Aurilianas Turres, 88 Aydın, 113 B Baetica, 107n71 Baia, 38, 39 Banasa (Sidi Ali bou Jenoun), 107–109, 136, 142, 143 Barium (Bari), 87 Beklemeto, 107n70 Beneventum, 87n24

 Note: Page numbers followed by ‘n’ refer to notes. Coronyms, poleonyms, oronyms, odonyms, nesonyms, hydronyms, and thalassonyms are included. 1

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 M. Cassia, The Roman Empress Ulpia Severina, Queenship and Power, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28651-3

185

186 

INDEX OF PLACE NAMES

Berlin, 52, 55n84, 112, 115 Beroes civitas, 88 “Borghetto,” 23 Brentesion (Brindisi), 87n24 Butontones, 88 Butuntum (Bitonto), 87 Byblos, 120 Byzantium (Costantinople), 6, 39, 40, 144 C Caelian Hill, 12 Caenophrurium (Kurfallı), viiin2, 39, 40n46, 41, 117 Campania, 38, 39, 43 Canusium, 87n24 Capitolium, 57n89 Caria, 113, 141 Carthage, 78 Carthago Nova, 58n92 Casa Colella (Piedimonte Matese), 91 Casaleone, 23, 24 “Casa Romana” (Kos), 120 Caserta, 90 Cassia (via), 93, 141 Celia, 87n24 Cerea, 23 Cilicia, 3, 37 Claudia Augusta (via), 97 Clusium (Chiusi), 92, 93, 100, 141–143 Concordia, 50–52, 64, 99, 136, 140, 144 Cordova, 107n71 Cyclades, 111, 115n83 Cyzicus, 27, 31, 49, 54, 144 D Dacia, 10, 11, 11n17, 63, 64, 134 Dacia Ripensis, viiin2

Danube, 45 Daunians, 87n24 E Egnatia (Fasano), 83–89, 87n24, 100, 136, 140–142 Emesa, ixn7, 121, 123, 125n106 Este, 23, 24 Etruria, 92, 93 Euphrates, 10, 142 Europe, 38, 40n48 F Faïd-Dzemda, 78, 78n4 France, 123n104 G Gallica (via), 97 Garb, 107 Gazzo, 24 Georgia, 62, 63, 137 H Hacılar, 114 Herdonia, 87n24 Hispania Citerior, 58n92, 82n17, 104 I Iernut, 63, 134 Illyria, 97 Illyricum, 11n17 Industria (Monteu da Po), 93–96, 100, 140, 141 Italica, 9 Italy, 24, 83, 119, 137 Iuliana Turres, 88 ̇ Izmir, 114, 115

  INDEX OF PLACE NAMES 

K Karşıyaka, 115 Kos, 120 L Latium et Campania, 90 Lebanon, 25 Legnago, 24 Leonatiae civitas, 88 Liguria, 93, 97 Limisa, 82n17 Lugdunum, 25, 27, 28, 32, 47, 49, 51, 54, 55, 59 Lydia, 114, 141 M Machraâ Belak-siri, 107 Maeotian (Swamp), 37 Magnesia, 116n85 Mantua, 24 Mauretania Caesariensis, 117n90 Mauretania Tingitana, 107, 110, 142 Mesopotamia, 10 Milan, 49n71, 99 Minucia (via), 87n24 Modena, 97 Moesia, 9n12 Moesia Inferior, 107n70, 123n104 Moesia Superior, 117n89 Monteu da Po, 93, 95 Mtskheta, 62, 63 N Netium, 87n24 Numidia, 117n90 Nysa, 113 O Oxyrhynchus, 30

187

P Palaiopoli, 111 Palatine Hill, 6 Palmyra, ixn7, 13n23, 30, 121, 122, 125n106, 125n107 Pannonia, 24 Pedicli, 87n24 Pergamum, 106n68 Perinthus-Heraclea (Marmara Ereğlisi), 41, 117, 144 Peucetians, 87n24 Phrygia, 87, 113 Pola, 42, 58, 100–103, 108, 134, 140–143 Pontus, 37 Porta Borsari (Verona), 98 Porta Lavinia (Chiusi), 92, 92n35, 141 Postumia (via), 141 Q Quirinal Hill, 4 R Rhine, 97 Rome, viiin2, ix, ixn7, xiii, 3, 5, 12, 13n23, 15n26, 16, 17, 24, 27, 30–32, 35, 38, 41, 43, 45, 47, 49–51, 54, 55, 55n84, 59–61, 100, 104n65, 106n68, 107n69, 107n70, 124, 125n106, 144 S Sagunto, 82n17 Samnites, 87n24 Samnium, 90 San Francesco (church), 92 Sanguinetto, 23, 24 San Salvatore (convent), 90 Sardis, 116

188 

INDEX OF PLACE NAMES

Scupi, 117n89 Selymbria, 41 Serdica (Sofia), x, 25, 28, 49, 52, 53, 83, 144 Sicily, 3 Siscia, 27, 31, 49, 52, 54, 60, 144 Smyrna, 115, 116, 136, 141–143 Spain, 9, 83, 119, 137 Stratonicea, 116n85 Sultanhisar, 113 Syria, 54, 121 Syria-Phoenicia, 120 T Tadmur, 121 Tarraco, 58, 104–106, 134, 142, 143 Thrace, 40, 40n46, 41, 83, 117, 137, 144 Thuburbo Maius (Henchir Kasbat), 78 Thubursicu Numidarum, 82n17 Ticinum, 27, 30–32, 31n19, 32n27, 47, 49, 52, 54, 55, 59, 63, 134, 144 “Treveri”/Trier, 13, 25 Tripolis, 25

Tunisia, 78 Turin, 93, 94, 97 U Umbria, 93 V Valentia, 82n17 Vardacate, 96 Venèra, 23–33, 55, 135 Venetia et Histria, 97, 100 Verona, 23, 24, 26, 28, 97–100, 135, 141 Vico S. Pietro (Piedimonte Matese), 91 Vicus Annaeus (near Henchir Ksour Dzemda), 81 Villa Gaetani (Piedimonte Matese), 90 Volubilis, 100, 110, 111, 142 W Wadi Finar, 120

Index of Modern Authors1

A Abascal Palazón, J.M., 58n92 Alaioud, S.M., 108n76, 109n78, 109n79 Alföldi, A., 17n27 Alföldi-Rosenbaum, E., 17n27 Alföldy, G., 82n17, 97n47, 100n53, 101n54, 103n55, 104n59, 104n61 Allard, V., ixn3 Amon, H., 36n35 Andrade, N.J., xin11 Angelova, D.N., x Arena, G., 2n2 Arslan, E., 26n6 Arzone, A., 24n1, 27n7, 27n8 Assandria, G., 77n1, 94n38 Avaliani, E., 63

1

B Babelon, E., 78n4 Baglivi, N., 36n37 Baldini, A., 15n26 Barbieri, G., 5 Barnes, T.D., 8 Bastien, P., 57n88 Belloni, G.G., 26n6 Bergmann, M., 55n84 Bernareggi, E., 13n23 Berrens, S., 104n63 Bianchi Bandinelli, R., 92n35 Biondani, F., 24n1 Bleckmann, B., 32 Blümel, W., 113n86 Bonamente, G., 3n7 Bonnet, C., ixn7 Bovini, G., 59n95

 Note: Page numbers followed by ‘n’ refer to notes.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 M. Cassia, The Roman Empress Ulpia Severina, Queenship and Power, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28651-3

189

190 

INDEX OF MODERN AUTHORS

Braccesi, L., xin11 Bravo Castañeda, G., xin11 Bravo Jiménez, S., 108n75 Breytenbach, M.M., xin11 Bryant, C., 59n93 Buck, D.F., 40n48 Buonocore, M., 91n31 Buonopane, A., 58n91, 99n50 Burgersdijk, D., 17n27 Burns, J., 120 Burrell, B., 117n92 Bussi, S., 17n27 C Cagnat, R., 80 Callu, J.-P., xii, 14, 15n26, 26n6, 29, 31, 32, 42, 48, 53n81, 80, 82, 143 Camodeca, G., 92n32 Cantineau, J., 125n108 Caracciolo, G., 92n35 Carlà, F., 26n6 Carson, R.A.G., 26n6 Casella, M., 58n91 Cassia, M., 2n2 Cavalieri Manasse, G., 98n48 Cazzaniga, I., xin11 Cenerini, F., 5, 134, 141 Charles-Gaffiot, J., xin11 Chastagnol, A., 8, 42 Chatelain, L., 107n73 Chelotti, M., 84n20, 86n21 Chieco Bianchi Martini, A.M., 87n22, 87n23 Christol, M., 43n55 Cizek, E., 5, 29, 31, 32, 59n95 Clauss, M., 104n63 Coates-Stephens, R., ixn4 Conca, F., 15n26 Conway, Ch.P.M., 26n6 Corazza, G., 90n30

Costarella, A., 90n30, 91n31 Cresci Marrone, G., 94n38 Crisafulli, C., 26n6 Cubelli, V., viiin2, 13n23 Cussini, E., 125n107 D Daguet, A., 120n94 Davenport, C., 45 Degrassi, N., 87n25 Den Hengst, D., 47n66 Dessau, H., 78n4 Dey, H., ixn4 Dodgeon, M.H., xin11 Donvito, A., 87n22, 87n23, 88n27, 90n28 Drinkwater, J., 43n55 E Eck, W., 8, 29, 32, 115 Eckhel, J.H., 5, 31 Elefante, M., 5n8 Engster, D., 17n27 Enmann, A, 37, 45 Equini Schneider, E., xin11, 123n104, 124n105 Ernout, A., 79n5 Esposito, D., ixn4 Estiot, S., xii, 14, 27, 29–31, 44, 48, 53, 124, 134 Euzennat, M., 107n73, 109n77, 110n80, 113n82 F Fabbri, M., ixn4 Fabretti, A., 95n40 Famerie, É., 115n84 Fayer, C., 79n5 Felletti Maj, B.M., 5

  INDEX OF MODERN AUTHORS 

Fernández Uriel, Ma.P., 109n75 Fisher, W.H., 8 Fishwick, D., 79n7 Fittschen, K., 55n84 Flaig, E., 44, 45 Floriani Squarciapino, M., 59n95 Forlati Tamaro, B., 99 Freis, H., 116n85 French, D.H., 64n102, 116n88, 119n91 Frézouls, E., 17n27 Fuchs, F., 5 G Gabucci, A., xin11 Gaggero, G., 17n27 Gallazzi, C., 123n103 Gallitto, A., ixn4 Galsterer-Kröll, B., 80n9, 81n11 Gascou, J., 79, 80 Gatier, J.-B., 124n105 Gatti, C., 13n23 Gawlikowski, M., 125n107, 125n108 Giard, J.-B., 25 Gibbon, E., 133 Giesecke, W., 26n6 Giorcelli Bersani, S., 96 Giovanetti, F., ixn4 Girardi Jurkić, V., 100n53, 101n54, 103n56, 103n58 Girotti, B., 17n27 Gnoli, T., 45, 46, 134, 135 Göbl, R., 31, 32 Gosling, A., 27n9 Graham, G.G., 5n8 Gregori, G.L., 93n37 Gricourt, D., 24 Groag, E., 5, 31 Guillemain, J., 25n5 Gundel, H.G., 79n7 Gutiérrez Garcia, A., 104n61

191

H Haklai-Rotenberg, M., 26n6 Halsberghe, G.H., ixn7 Hamdoune, Ch., 108n74 Hanslik, R., xin11 Hartmann, U., 30n17 Harvey B.K., 104n64 Hedlund, R., 44, 45 Heil, M., viiin2, 29, 43n55, 115 Hekster, O., 53n81 Hemelrijk, E.A., 86n21 Hidalgo de la Vega Ma, J., xin11, 58n90 Hild, J.-A., 3n4 Hillers, D.R., 125n107 Hofman, J.-M., xin11 Hohl, E., 37n39, 47n66 Homo, L., 5, 6n10, 29, 30n14, 77n1 Horster, M., 28n11, 99n50 Hotalen, Ch., 104 Houston, G.W., ixn7 Hulrich-Bansa, O., 25 I Ibba, A., ixn3 Isabella, C., 90n30, 91n31 J Jacob, P., ixn7 Johne, K.-P., 32 Jones, P., 17n27 Jones, T.B., 47n66 K Kalinka, E., 119n92, 124n105, 125n106 Katsari, C., 27n8 Kienast, D., viiin2, 29, 30n14, 43n55, 115

192 

INDEX OF MODERN AUTHORS

Klotz, A., 3n4 Kolb, A., vii Kolb, F., 2n2 Körner, Ch., 43n56 Kotula, T., xin11 Krause, Ch., 17n27 Kuhoff, W., 58n91 Külzer, A., 40n46, 40n47 Kuz, C.E., 113n82 Kytzler, B., xin11 L Labory, N., 107n73, 109n77, 110n80, 113n82 Laconi, S., 53n81 Lafaurie, J., 26n6 Lantier, R., 81n14 Lavagne, H., xin11 Le Bas, Ph., 115n83 Lenoir, M., 110n81 Leopold, E.F., 122n101 Lepelley, C., 78n4, 82n15 Lichtenberger, A., 58n91 Lieu, S.N.C., xin11 Lippold, A., 17n27 Lo Cascio, E., 26n6 Longo, K., 28n11 López Sánchez, F., 61 Loriot, X., 47n66 Lungarova, P.P., 107n70 Luquet, A., 109n76 M Maffei, F.S., 97 Magie, D., 113, 115n84 Mancini, R., ixn4 Marcone, A., 26n6 Marrocco, D., 92n34 Martin, J.-P., ixn6, 28n11 Martindale, J.R., 9n12

Mason, H.J., 113 Mastino, A., ixn3, 110n80 Mattingly, H., 31, 31n20, 43n55 Mayer, M., 104n63 Mazza, M., ixn7 Mazzarino, S., ixn3, 5, 6n10, 35n34, 37n38, 45n63, 135 McCabe, D.F., 116n85, 116n86 McCabe, J., 5 Mecella, L., 47n67 Meillet, A., 79n5 Merlin, A., 81n14 Mesnage, J., 78n4 Migliorati, G., 45 Mikocki, T., 120n96 Milani, L.A., 24, 25 Miller, K., 40n47, 88n26 Mochi Sismondi, C., xin11 Molin, M., 37n40 Molinier Arbo, A., 17n27, 37n40 Morelli, A.L., 28n11 Motta, R., ixn4 N Neri, V., 47n66 P Pabst, A., 44, 45 Pais, E., 95n40, 95n41, 96n44, 101n54 Panzram, S., 104n61 Pareti, L., 5, 41 Parisi Presicce, C., ixn4 Parma, A., 91n31 Paschoud, F., 2n2, 40n48, 47n66 Pastor Andrés, H.F., xin11 Pastor Muñoz, M., xin11 Paton, W.R., 113 Pausch, D., 3n7, 9n12 Peachin, M., 13n23, 37n40

  INDEX OF MODERN AUTHORS 

Perassi, C., xii, 29, 49, 55, 55n84, 56n85, 59, 61, 62, 77n1, 135 Petraccia Lucernoni, M.F., 86n21 Petrochilos, N., 115n83 Petzl, G., 116n88 Pflaum, H.-G., 27n9, 80n8 Pini, D., xin11 Poinssot Louis, L., 81n14 Polverini, L., 39, 42, 45 Potter, D.S., 125n107 Price, M.J., 31, 31n20 R Ramallo Asensio, S.F., 58n92 Rambaldi, S., 120n94 Rathbone, D., 30n17 Raycheva, M., 119n92 Rea, J.R., 30n17 Rebuffat, R., 109n77 Requena Jiménez, M., 38n41 Ricciardi, R.A., 55n84, 62, 62n100, 77n1, 104, 106n67, 120n94, 126n109, 135 Robert, L., 116n86 Rohde, T., xi, 26n6, 31, 32 Rohrbacher, D., 8 Ruiz de Arbulo Bayona, J., 104n61 S Salama, P., 78n4 Salzman, M.R., ixn6 Sartori, F., 97n47 Sartre, A., 124n105, 125n106 Sartre, M., 124n105, 125n106 Saunders, R.T., 3n7 Savino, E., 9n13 Savio, A., 26n6 Sayar, M.H., 119n92 Scarborough, J., 27n9 Schönert, E., 119n92 Schwartz, J., 3n7

193

Serra Vilaró, J., 104n59 Sharankov, N., 107n70 Sidrys, R.V., 57n88 Silvestrini, M., 11n17 Simoni, P., 100n52 Soldovieri, U., 91n31 Solin, H., 106n68 Sommer, M., 43n55 Soraci, C., ixn5 Sotgiu, G., 5, 27n9, 29, 77, 77n1, 115, 117n90, 142, 143 Southern, P., 126n110 Starcky, J., 125n108 Stazio, A., 87n22 Stiernon, D., 40n48 Stoneman, R., xin11 Straub, J., 5n8 Strobel, K., xii, 1n1, 8, 31, 32, 47, 48, 104, 117 Suski, R., ixn7 Syme, R., 8, 9n12, 37, 37n40, 39–42, 44–46, 134 Syvänne, I., 2n2, 15n26 T Taeger, F., 82n18 Tedeschi Grisanti, G., 106n68 Thomsen, P., 125n106 Thouvenot, R., 109n76 Traverso, M., 86n21 Turcan, R., 13n23 U Uggeri, G., 87n25, 88n27 Usener, H., ixn7 V Valentini, A., 5n9 Van’t Dack, E., 53n81 Varner, E.R., 61, 62, 62n99, 135

194 

INDEX OF MODERN AUTHORS

Vaschetti, L., 96n45 Vermaseren, M.J., 103n57 Vetters, H., 11n17 Vitucci, G., 41 Vlassa, N., 64 Vogt, J., 30 Von Geisau, H.J., 40n46 W Waddington, W.H., 121, 125n106 Waldron, B.L., 124 Wallinger, E., 2n3 Watson, A., ixn3, 3n7, 8, 10, 29, 43–45, 43n56, 44n57, 44n58, 64, 117n90, 119, 134 Webb, P.H., 31 Wegner, M., 55n84

Weiser, W., 26n6 White, J.F., 15n26 Wieber, A., xin11 Wienand, J., 82n18 Winsbury, R., xin11 Wrede, H., 120n96 Y Yon, J.-B., 125n108 Yonge, D., 32n22 Z Zahran, Y., xin11 Zanker, P., 55n84 Zawadzki, T., 8 Zecchini, G., xn9 Zurutuza, H.A., 113n82