THE WITNESSES TO ROMAN MILITARY D I P L O M A T A
JOHN MORRIS 
University of London
MARGARET ROXAN
Archaeological Institute, London
The auxiliary units of the Rom an arm y of the principate were chiefly 
recruited from peregrini (non-citizen provincials). Apart from units raised 
in newly conquered territories, enlistm ent was largely voluntary. An adequate 
supply of volunteers was ensured by the grant of Rom an citizenship and co­
nubium (R om an m arriage) to auxiliaries. Until about 140 their children born 
during service also received citizenship. From the tim e of Claudius auxiliaries 
and veterans of the fleets received pairs of small perforated bronze tablets, 
known to m odern scholars as diplom ata militaria, w hich recorded these 
grants. The text was inscribed in duplicate, on the inner and outer faces, and 
the tablets w ere then wired together and sealed, so that any suspected alter­
ations to the outer face could be checked by breaking the seal in the presence 
of an authorised official, and com paring it w ith the sealed text. It looks as 
though Claudius devised a m eans of stopping an abuse of certificates issued 
by his predecessors on less durable m aterial.
Sim ilar certificates, granting conubium only, were issued to veterans of 
citizen units stationed in Rome (th e Praetoriani and Urbani). No diplomata 
are known to have been issued to veterans of frontier citizen units, for whom 
bronze certificates were evidently not considered necessary; one is however 
known from the U rban cohort stationed in Lyon ( CIL XVI 133, of 16 March 
192). The need to guard against m isuse of certificates legalising m arriages 
entered into by serving soldiers was clearly lim ited to the great cities of Rome 
and Lyon.
The w ording of the diplomata is sim ple but verbose. ’The Em peror (w ith 
the date of his tribunicia potestas and other titles) grants Rom an citizenship 
and m arriage rights to those who serve (or have served) in such and such 
units' followed by the details of the individual recipient (w ith consular and 
day date). The text covered the inner faces of the two tablets and was repeated 
on the o u ter face of one. The other face bore nam es of seven witnesses who

attested that the certificate was a tru e copy excerpted from a list engraved in 
bronze and displayed in Rome.
No auxiliary diplomata issued after the accession of Severus in 193 have yet 
been discovered. Fleet diplomata continued to be issued at least until 250 and 
those to praetorian guards and u rb an cohorts until at least 306, the latter 
apparently annually on January 7th; in 230 and 237 diplomata were issued 
to equites singulares (CIL XVI 144 and 146).
A conservative estim ate of the num bers of soldiers who survived the re­
quisite term of service suggests th at a t least 2,000 diplomata a year m ust have 
been required from Flavian to mid-Antonine times for auxilia alone. The total 
num ber of diplomata of all kinds from Claudius to Diocletian m ust have been 
of the order of a q uarter to half a m illion. Of these 257, including fragments, 
have survived and been recorded, and fresh diplomata are nowadays disco­
vered at an average rate of two or three a year. Most have been published 
by H. Nesselhauf in CIL XVI (1936) and XVI Supplem ent (1955); a list of 
those discovered since those publications is given on p. 301 (List 1). The 
names of w itnesses are preserved, wholly or in part, in 120 diplomata (List 2, 
p. 304). The purpose of this article is to discuss those witnesses.
Only about one in every three o r four thousand w itness lists survives ; 
but the form of the surviving few is consistent enough to dem onstrate beyond 
reasonable doubt th at it was repeated in those that are now lost. The ordering 
and nature of the witnesses shows two clearly defined changes.
In the first period, until 73/74, all witnesses were fellow soldiers or com­
patriots of the recipient. As yet, only one witness, Q. Publicius Crescens, is 
known to have attested m ore than one diploma, and the o th er witnesses to 
the two that he signed were all m en from the same region. Then, during the 
sixty years betw een Vespasian’s censorship and H adrian’s last years, the same 
witnesses commonly sign num erous auxiliary and fleet tablets, but they sign 
in no fixed order. In the third period, from 133/138 onward, seven witnesses 
signed in strict o rder of seniority. W hen the position at the head of the list 
fell vacant each m an moved up one step, and a new witness norm ally began 
to sign in seventh place; but sometimes a new nam e first appears in an in­
term ediate position.
In all periods witnessing procedures for diplomata of City troops were 
unaffected by Vespasian's and H adrian’s reform s and certificates continued to 
be signed by w itnesses who appear to be colleagues of the veterans.
The evidence is set out below, separately for each period, prefixed by the 
lists of diplomata m ade known since CIL XVI Supplement, and of those with 
extant witness lists, and followed by indices of witnesses and a discussion of 
the evidence.

List I. Post CIL XVI and Supple­
ment Diplomas
List 2. Diplomata corresponding to 
the periods of tables and indices 
Table 1 A. Auxilia et classes. Period 
1: A. D. 52 — 73/74 
Table 1 B. Praetoriani 
Table 2. Period 2: A. D. 73/74 — 
138. Names of witnesses appear­
ing more than once and the order 
of signature
Table 2 A. Witnesses in the period 
A. D. 129—140
Table 3. Period 3 : A. D. 138 — 212.
Names of witnesses and their 
order in diplomata with complete 
or restorable lists
Index 1. Period 1 : A. D. 52 — 73/74.
301 Nomina (and cognomina) signato­
rum 313
304 Index 2. Period 2 : A. D. 73/74 — 
134/138. Nomina (and cognomina)
307 signatorum 316
308 Index 3. Period 3: A. D. 138 — 212. 
Nomina (and cognomina) signato­
309
rum
Index 4. Cohortes praetorianae et 
urbanae. Nomina (and cognomi­
320
311
na) signatorum
Index 5. Imperial names among the
321
witnesses A. D. 73/74 — 133/134 
Index 6. Recurring nomina among
323
312 the witnesses after A. D. 73/74 324
LIST 1
POST CIL XVI and Supplement diplomas.
Recipients classified:
P = Praetorian 
L = Legionary 
A = Auxiliary 
S = Special grant 
C = Fleet
UC = Urban Cohort 
[W] = names of witnesses preserved 
[w] = names of witnesses partially preserved 
I = Tabella I preserved 
II = Tabella II preserved.
(f) = fragmentary.
1. Studien zu den Militärgrenzen Roms VI (Köln-Graz, 1967) 94 ff. H. Lieb. P. A.D. 
73. I (f).
2. Starinar 18 (1967) 21 ff. D. V.-Todorović. A (Moesia) April 28, 75. I, II [W].
3. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 16, 2 (1975) 121 ff. R. Melior, E. Har­
ris. A (Syria) November 7, 88. I, II [W],
4. Studia in honorem Acad. D. Dečev (1959) 317 ff. L. Botušarova. A. (Syria) May 12, 
91. I.
5. Klio 37 (1959) 210 ff. B. Gerov. A (Syria) May, 12, 91. II (f) [w].
6. Dacia si Pannonia inferior (Bucharest, 1973) 102 ff. I. I. Russu. A (Moesia su­
perior) August 14, 99. II (f) [w],
7. Journal of Roman Studies 50 (1960) 238, 14. R. P. Wright. A (Britannia) May 1 — 
July 17, 105. II (f). [w],
8. Syria 44 (1967) 339 ff. H.-G. Pflaum. A/C (Aegyptus) September 24, 105. I, II [W].
9. Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblätter 38 (1973) 124 ff. H.-J Kellner. A (Raetia/Moesia 
inferior) 103/105. I (f).
10. Bulletin d’ archeologie marocaine 4 (1960) 573. M. Euzennat, J. Marion. A (Maure­
tania Tingitana?) 100/107 II (f) [w].

11. Antiquités africaines 3 (1969) 115 ff. M. Euzennat. A (Mauretania Tingitana?) 
82/109. II (f)( [w],
12. Bulletin archéologique du Comité des travaux historiques 1955/6 (1958) 83. R. 
Thouvenot. A (Mauretania Tingitana?) 105/110? II (f) [w].
13. Unpublished. To be published in Arheologija 1977? A (Thracia) July 19, 114. I, 
II [W],
14. Antiquités africaines 3 (1969) 117, 2. M. Euzennat. A? (Mauretania Tingitana?) 
98/117. I (f).
15. Dacia si Pannonia inferior (Bucharest, 1973) 83 ff. I. I. Russu. A? (Dacia supe­
rior?) 106/117. II (f) [w],
16. Bulletin d'archéologie marocaine 4 (1960) 582, 54. M. Euzennat, J. Marion. A. 
(Mauretania Tingitana,) c. 118? II (f) [w].
17. Athenaeum N. S. 36 (1958) 4 ff. G. Forni. S (Dacia superior) June 29, 120. I, II [W],
18. Antiquités africaines 3 (1969) 118 ff, 4. M. Euzennat. A (Mauretania Tingitana?) 
90/120 II (f).
19. Bulletin de Vinstitut d’ archéologie bulgare 27 (1964) 187 ff. C? S? (Uncertain) 121? 
II (f) [w].
20. Dacia N. S. 18 (1974) 155 ff. I. I. Russu. A (Dacia Porolissensis, Pannonia inferior) 
August 10, 123.1 (f).
21. Dacia N.S. 16 (1972) 281 ff. C. Petolescu. A? (Uncertain) October 15, 123?? I (f).
22. Bulletin d’ archéologie marocaine 2 (1957) 238, 40. M. Euzennat. A (Mauretania 
Tingitana?) 90/124. I (f).
23. Germania 39 (1961) 93 ff. A. Radnóti. A( Raetia) 121/125 I (f).
24. Studii .si Communicari (Apulum) 4 (1961) 119 ff. I. I. Russu. A (Uncertain) 123/125
I (f).
25. Acta Musei Napocensis 2 (1965) 135 ff. C. Daicoviciu, L. Groza. S (Dacia superior) 
February 12 (or Jan. 31) 126.1, II [W],
26. Thamusida 1 (1965) 192, 818. J. P. Callu, J. P. Morel, R. Rebuffat, G. Hallier. A? 
(Mauretania Tingitana??) 126? II (f).
27. Germania 34 (1956) 75 ff. K. Kraft; Germania 47 (1969) 178 ff. H. U. Nuber. A 
(Raetia) 125/128. I (f).
28. Unpublished. A (Pannonia inferior) April 30, 129. II [W].
29. Journal of Roman Studies 51 (1961) 63 ff. C. Daicoviciu, D. Protase. A (Dacia 
Porolissensis) July 2, 133.1.
30. Germania 46 (1968) 118 ff. A. Radnóti. Uncertain. 135? II (f) [w].
31. Bulletin d’ archéologie marocaine 7 (1967) 643 ff. R. Thouvenot. A (Mauretania 
Tingitana?) 117/138. I (f).
32. Buchimi : Das Römerlager von Buciumi (Cluj 1972) 118 ff. E. Chirilä, N. Gudea, 
V. Lucäcel, C. Pop. A (Dacia Porolissensis) 119/138. I (f).
33. Klio 37 (1959) 196 ff. B. Gerov. A (Dacia inferior) December 13, 140. I, II [W].
34. Bulletin archéologique du Comité des travaux historiques (1954) 59. R. Thouve­
not. A? (Mauretania Tingitana?) 133/140? II (f) [w].
35. Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblätter 38 (1973) 127 ff. H.-J. Kellner. Uncertain. 133/140?
II (f) [w],
36. Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblätter 31 (1966) 90 ff. H.-J. Kellner; Germania 47 (1969) 
181 ff. H. U. Nuber. A (Raetia) 139/141.1 (f).
37. Journal of Roman Studies 47 (1957) 196/7. D. Atkinson. (Britannia?) 141/147. 
II (f) [w],
38. Studii fi Communicari (Apulum) 4 (1961) 123/124. I. I. Russu. Uncertain. 141/147. 
II (f) [w],
39. Fundberichte aus Schwaben N. F. 15 (1959) 73 ff. H. Nesselhauf A (Raetia) 153. 
1 (f).
40. Bulletin archéologique du Comité des travaux historiques 1954 (1956) 63/64. M. 
Thouvenot. A (Mauretania Tingitana) December 28, 154.1 (f).

41. Bulletin Arch. Soc. Staline 9 (1953) 61 ff. I. Venedikov. A (Moesia inferior) 
146/154.1 (f).
42. Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblätter 33 (1968) 95 ff. H.-J. Kellner. A (Raetia) 153/157. 
I (f).
43. Dacia sj Pannonia inferior (Bucharest 1973) 90 ff. I. I. Russu. A (Dacia Porolis- 
sensis) September 27, 154/157? II (f) [w] cf. CIL XVI 110.
44. Epigraphische Studien 5 (1968) 1 ff. G. Alföldy. A (Germania inferior) 158. I (f).
45. Bulletin archéologique du Comité des travaux historiques 1955—56 (1958) 8 6 ff. R. 
Thouvenot. A (Mauretania Tingitana) 151/160. I (f).
46. Publications du Service des Antiquités du Maroc 9 (1951) 179, I, c. R. Thouvenot; 
Antiquités africaines 3 (1969) 122/3, 5. M. Euzennat. A (Mauretania Tingitana) 
157/160. II (f) [w],
47. Chiron 2 (1972) 449 ff. B. Overbeck. A (Moesia superior) February 8 , 161.1.
48. Bulletin archéologique du Comité des travaux historiques (1954) 52. R. Thouve­
not. A (Mauretania Tingitana?) 138/161. I (f).
49. Antiquités africaines 3 (1969) 122/124, 6 . M. Euzennat. A. (Mauretania Tingitana?) 
136/161.1 (f).
50. Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblätter 38 (1973) 129 ff. H.-J. Kellner. Uncertain. 138/161?
I (f).
51. Antiquités africaines 3 (1969) 124/5, 7. M. Euzennat. A. (Uncertain) 138/161? I (f).
52. Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 9 (1958) L. Barckóczi. A 
(Pannonia superior) 163.1 (f).
53. Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblätter 33 (1968) 92 ff. H.-J. Kellner. A? (Raetia?) 
161/163.1 (f).
54. Materiale si Cercetari Arheologice 2 (1956) 703 ff. I. I. Russu. A (Dacia Poro­
lissensis) July 21, 164.1, II. [W],
55. Buciumi : Das Römerlager von Buchimi (Cluj 1972) 119. E. Chirilä, N. Gudea, V. 
Lucacel, C. Pop. A (Dacia Porolissensis) July 2Ì?, 164. I (f).
56. Athenaeum N. S. 36 (1958) 183 ff. G. Forni. A (Dacia Porolissensis) July 21? 164.
1 (f).
57. Germania 39 (1961) 103 ff. A. Radnóti. A (Raetia) 167/168.1 (f).
58. Dacia fi Pannonia inferior (Bucharest 1973) 101, 21 I. I. Russu. No details. 
Suggested Dacia Porolissensis Marcus/Verus. I (f).
59. Bulletin d’ archéologie marocaine 4 (1960) 572. M. Euzennat, J. Marion. Uncertain. 
Mauretania Tingitana? 161/180? I (f).
60. Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblätter 31 (1966) 92/93. H.-J. Kellner. Uncertain. Raetia? 
Hadrian/Marcus? I (f).
61. Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblätter 38 (1973) 129 ff. H.-J. Kellner. Uncertain. Raetia? 
Hadrian/Marcus? II (f).
62. Unpublished. C. August 30, 212. I, II. [w],
63. Živa Antika 12 (1962—4) 380 ff. S. Dušanić, P. Petrovič. P/UC January 7, 222. I,
II. [W].
64. Arheologija (Sofia) 4, 4 (1962) 52 ff. D. Stoynova-Serefimova. P. January 7, 224. I.
65. Unpublished. P. January 7, 228. I?
6 6 . Arheologija (Sofia) 13 (1971) 48 ff. Spas Mašov. P. January 7, 236. I, II. [W],
67. Athenaeum N. S. 38 (1960) 3 ff. M. Bizzarri, G. Forni. P. Janary 7, 306. I, II. [W].
6 8 . Dacia si Pannonia inferior (Bucharest 1973) 101, 22. I. I. Russu. A (Dacia Porolis­
sensis?) Undated. II (f).
69. Germania 47 (1969) 186 ff. H. U. Nuber. A? (Raetia?) Post 140.1 (f).
70. Alba Regia XI (Székesfehérvar) (1971) 118, Taf. 49. E. Vagò. A? Uncertain. Per­
haps Trajanic? II (f) [w].
A. Helinium 4 (1964) 52 ff. M. E. Marien. January 18, 108. IL [W].

LIST 2.
DIPLOMATA CORRESPONDING TO THE PERIODS OF TABLES AND INDICES
Period 1 AD 52 — 73/74 
Diplomata 1 —19, 25, + l .1 
Witnesses extant for:
Diploma Date Province/legion/fleet2
1. C. 52 Dec. 11 Misenum
2 . A . ante 54 Feb. 13 Illyricum
3. A . 54 Iun. 18 Syria?
5. A . 64 Iun. 15 Raetia?
7. L. 6 8 Dec. 22 a I Adiutrix
8 . L. 6 8 Dec. 22 b I Adiutrix
9. L. 6 8 Dec. 22 c 1 Adiutrix
1 0 . L. 70 Mar. 7 a II Adiutrix
1 1 . L. 70 Mar. 7 b II Adiutrix
1 2 . C. 71 Feb. 9 a Misenensis
14. C. 71 Apr. 5 b Ravennas
15. C. 71 Apr. 5 c Misenensis
16. C. 71 Apr. 5 d Misenensis
18. P. 71/74 Mai. 30
19. 64/74 Fragmentary. No complete name restorable.
1 In all tables a n d indices CIL X V I num bers are given w ithout prefix. Diplomata not included in 
CIL XVI are in d icated by + before th e n u m b er; in these cases the n u m b er co rresp o n d s to the list on 
p. 301—303. Details of d ate and provenance are given only for diplomata in w hich th e nam es of w itnesses 
are preserved. N orm ally th ere w ere seven w itnesses an d the only variations fro m th is are noted e. g. w9. 
If only p a rt of a w itn ess list has been preserved, because the diplom a is frag m en tary o r dam aged, the 
nam es th a t are still legible, in w hole o r in part, are indicated e.g. w3.
In every case w h ere nam es of w itnesses a re p reserv ed they appear on th e o u te r face of the second 
tab let of th e diplom a. CIL XVI 25, of D ecem ber 30, 72 (for date see H . Lieb, Studien zu den Militär­
grenzen Roms 6 [K öln-G raz, 1967] 95, n . 19) w as issu ed to a m an from the second praeto rian cohort 
b u t only th e second ta b le t has survived. The o u te r face of this tab let is b lan k . T his is th e only know n 
instance.
2 The so-called legionary diplomata of AD 68 an d 70 w ere issued to m en w ho h ad served in the 
Italian Fleets before being drafted into form ations w hich w ere la te r ratified as legions. They are really 
Fleet diplomata, m o d ified to su it special circum stances, and are included as such in T able 1 A.
Abbreviations u s e d th ro u g h o u t: P = P raeto rian co h o rt; UC = U rban co h o rt; L = Legion; A = Au­
xilia; S = Special g ra n t; C = Classis.
Period 2 AD 73/74 — 134/138
Diplomata 20—24, 26—82, 8 8 , 105, 158—173, 176,1 + 2—+ 30, + 70, App. 
Witnesses extant for:
Diploma Date Province/fleet
20. A. 74 Mai. 21 Germania
+ 2. A . 75 Apr. 28 Moesia
22. A. 78 Feb. 7 a Moesia
23. A. 78 Apr. 15 b Germania
24. C. 79 Sep. 8 Aegyptus
26. A. 80 Iun. 1 3 Pannonia
28. A. 82 Sep. 20 Germania/Moesia
29. A. 83 Iun. 9 Aegyptus
30. A. 84 Sep. 3 Pannonia
* A new date ran g e (123/129) has been suggested fo r CIL XVI 176 by M. E uzennat, Antiquités afri- 
caines 3 (1969) 115 ff.

(1 0) 31. A. 85 Sep. 5 Pannonia
32. C. 8 6 F eb.17 a Aegyptus
33. A. 8 6 Mai. 13 b Iudaea
159. A. 8 8 lan. 9 a Mauretania Ting.
35. A. 8 8 Nov. 7 b Syria
(15) + 3. A. 8 8 Nov. 7 c Syria
36. A. 90 Oct. 27 Germania sup.
+ 5. A. 91 Mai. 12 Syria
37. C. 92 lun. 14 FI. Moesica
38. A. 94 lui. 13 a Delmatia
(2 0 ) 39. A. 94 Sep. 16 b Moesia sup.
41. A. 97 lan. — Moesia inf? w4
42. A. 98 Feb. 20 Pannonia
+ 70. A. c. 98? w4
+ 6 . A. 99 Aug. 14 Moesia sup.
(25) 46. A. 100 Mai. 8 Moesia sup.
48. A. 103 lan. 19 Britannia
49. A. 105 lan. 12 a Moesia sup.
50. A. 105 Mai. 13 b Moesia inf.
+ 7. A. 105 Mai. 1 —lui. 17 c Britannia
(30) + 8 . A. 105 Sep. 24 d Aegyptus
55. A. 107 lun. 30 a Raetia
56. A/C. 107 Nov. 24 b Mauretania Caes.
+ 1 0 . A. 100/107 Mauretania Ting? w 2
161. A. 109 Oct. 14 Mauretania Ting. w4
(35) + 1 1. A. 82/109 Mauretania Ting. w 2
163. A. 1 1 0 lui. 2 a Dacia
164. A . 1 1 0 lui. 2 b Pannonia inf.
160. A/S. 110 (106) Aug. I lc Dacia
+ 1 2 . A. 105/110? Mauretania Ting? w 2
(40) + 13. A. 114 lui. 19 a Thracia
61. A. 114 Sep. 1 b Pannonia inf.
65. A. 98/117? w 2
+ 15. A? 106/117 Dacia (sup?) w 3
166. A. 118 Mar. 28 Mauretania Ting.
(45) + 16. A. c .118?
Mauretania Ting. w 2
6 8 . S. 120 lun. 29 a Dacia sup.
+ 17. S. 120 lun. 29 b Dacia sup.
167. A. 1 0 0 / 1 2 0 Mauretania Ting? w 3
168. C. 1 2 1
w 3
(50) + 19. c?s? 1 2 1 ?
69. A. 122 lui. 17 Britannia
70. A. 124 Sep. 16 Britannia w4
+ 25. S. 126 Feb. 12 or lan. 31 Dacia sup.
72. C. 127 Oct. 1 1 Praet. Ravennas w 6
(55) 74. C. 129 Feb. 18 a Praet. Misenensis
75. A. 129 Mar. 22 b Dacia inf.
20 — A rheološki vestnik
305

Diploma Date Province/fleet
+ 28. A. 129 Apr. 30 c Pannonia inf?
76. A. 133 lui. 3 Pannonia sup.
78. A. 134 Apr. 2 a Moesia inf.
(60) 79. C. 134 Sep. 15 b Praet. Misenensis
105. A. 128/134 Raetia? w 5
+ 30. 135? w 1
App.2 108 Ian. 18
2
Bronze tab let.. . . 'honestam m issionem d ed im u s'. S im ilar to a diplom a in size and shape, w itnessed
in the sam e m anner.
Period 3 AD 138—212
Diplomata 83—87, 89— -104, 106—136,174—175, 177—188, + 31—+ 62, + 6 8 , + 69.
Witnesses extant for:
Diploma Date Province/fleet
83. A/C. 138 Feb. 28 Moesia inf.
87. A. 139 Nov. 22 Syria Pal.
177. C. 140 Nov. 26 a Praet. Misenensis
+ 33. A. 140 Dee. 13 b Dacia inf.
(5) 89. 133/140 a w 4
+ 34. 133/140 b Mauretania Ting? w4
+ 35. 133/140? c w 2
178. A. 146 lui. 19 Pannonia sup.
+ 37. 141/147 a Britannia? w 3
(1 0) + 38. 141/147 b w 2
95. P. 148 Feb.29 a
96. A . 148 Oct. 9 b Pannonia sup.
179. A/C. 148 Oct. 9 c Pannonia inf.
180. A/C. 148 Oct. 9 d Pannonia inf.
(15) 97. A. 149 lui. 5 Pannonia sup.
99. A. 150 Aug. 1 Pann. inf./Maur. Caes.
1 0 0 . C. 152 Sep. 5 Praet. Ravennas
102. C. 153 Dee. 24
104. A. 154 Nov. 3 Pannonia sup.
(2 0 ) + 43/110. A . 154/157? Sep. 27 Dacia Por. w 4
107. A. 157? Dee. 13 Dacia sup.
108. A. 158 lui. 8 Dacia sup.
109. 146/158 w 3
+ 46. A. 160 Mauretania Ting. w 2
(25) + 54. A. 164 lui. 21 Dacia Por.
. 120. A . 165 Feb. 18 Moesia sup?
121. A. 166 Mar. or. Apr. Raetia
123. A. 167 Mai. 5 Pannonia inf.
126. 158/178
w 3
(30) 128. A . 178 Mar. 23 Lycia Pamphylia
188. 175/180
w 4
127. C. c. 185/190
133. UC. 192 Mar. 16 coh. XIII urb. Lugdun.
136. P. 2 1 2
(35) + 62. C. 212 Aug. 30 Pr. Ant. Misenensis

Period 4 AD 212—306 
Diplomata 137—157, + 63—+ 67.
Witnesses extant for:
Diploma Date Diploma Date
+ 63. P/UC. 222 Ian. 7 (5) + 6 6 . P. 236 Ia n .7
189. P. 224 Ia n .7 147. P. 243 Ian. 7
143. P. 226 Ian .7 155. P. 254 Ia n .7
145. P. 233 Ian .7 + 67. P. 306 Ia n .7
TABLE 1 A
Period I 52-
Diploma
Date
Found
Recipient 
Origo of
recipient
Witnesses
Origo 
Macedonia:
Thessalonica 7
Dyrrachium 1 — 6
Bessus
Philippi
Apri
Illyricum:
Salona
Iader
Epidaurum
Risinium
Macedonia 
Nedinum 
None given
Status 
Eques Romanus 
Beneficiarius 
navarchi 
Beneficiarius 
tribuni 
Centurio 
Decurio 
Miles
coh. IV praet 
Miles
coh. IX praet
Veteranus
Missicius
classis
None given 1—7
Auxilia et Classes
■73/74.
1 3 1 0 11 1 2 14
52 54 70 a 70 b 71 a 71 b
Dec. 1 1 Iun. 18 Mar. 7 Mar. 7 Feb.9 Apr. 5
Stabii Moesia Thrace Hercula­
neum
Thrace Salona
C A L L C C
Bessus
(Thrace)
Thrace? Bessus
(Thrace)
Desi-
diati
(Illyria)
Sappei
(Thrace)
Maezii
(Dalma­
tia)
1—6
1
2,3,4
5,6
1,2
4
3.6
5.7
1—7
1,3,4
2
6
5,7
1,5
3,4,7
2
6
1, 2
3,4
1—7 1,3—7 5—7

Diploma 2 5 7 8 9 15 19
Date ante 54 64 6 8 a 6 8 b 6 8 c 71c 64/74
Feb. 13 lun. 15 Dec. 22 Dec. 22 Dec. 22 Apr. 5
Found Sirmium Noricum Stabii Stabii Sardi­ Pompeii Moesia
nia
Recipient A A L L L C
?
Origo of Corna- Helvetii Phrygia Syria Sardi­ Syria
?
recipient cati nia
(Pan­
nonia)
Witnesses
Origo
Sardinia
Sardinia
1,2,4,
5,7
Ma(e)onia
Caralis
3
1, 2 ,4,5, 
6 , 8 ,9,
Sulci 3
Asia Minor 
Ephesus? 6
Syria
Apamea 1
Antioch
2, 3,4, 
5
3,5,6
Laodicea 1,2,7
Caesarea 
Stratonis 
None given 1—7 1 —9 6,7 7
4
*
Status
Eques
Romanus
Veteranus
1
lee. I Adiutricis 7
Veteranus 6,7
None given 1—7 1 —9 1 —7 1 —5 1— 6 , 8 ,9 2—7
* *
* un id en tifiab le origo . .]ens(is) given fo r tw o w itnesses 
** One of th e incom plete nam es is follow ed by dec(urionis?)
TABLE 1 B Praetoriani
Diploma 18
Date 71/74 
Mai. 30
Found Sirmium
Origo of recipient 
Origo of witnesses
Savaria
Siscia 1, 2, 6 , 7
Sirmium 3, 4,5

TABLE 2
Period 2 AD 73/74 — 138
Names of witnesses appearing more than once and the order of signature1
Name Date: 74 78
a
78
b
79 80 82 83 84 8 6 8 8
a
8 8
be
90 91 92 94
a
P. Atinius Rufus 5 2 7 1 2 5 4 1
M. Stlaccius Philetus 2 6
C. Alfius Priscus 2 — — — 7?
L. Pullius Speratus 3 1 4 5*
Q. Mucius Augustalis 4 — 1 1 2 — — i 1
L. Pullius Verecundus 5 — — — — — — 7 2 — —
y*
L. Pullius Ianuarius 6 7 7
C. Pompeius Eutrapelus 3 2 2 — — — 5 4 3
C. Claudius Sementivus 4 — 5 — — — 4
C. Iulius Clemens 3 — 4 — — — 5
C. Lucretius Modestus 6 3 3 — 3 3 3 4
P. Atinius Amerimnus 7 6 *
M. Calpurnius Iustus 1 — 2 — 2 3?
C. Iulius Helenus 5 — 6
Cn. Egnatius Vitalis 41 3*
Q. Orfius Cupitus 51 2 *
Witnesses signing once or
identification unsure 6 6 5 1 1 — 1 3 5 6 — 1 4 4 2
Names of witneses
missing — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
1 R estorations in italics. Diplomata of u n certain date o r in very frag m en tary condition o m itted from 
this tab le a re : + 70, + 10, + 11, + 12 , 65, + 15, + 16, 167, 168, 105, + 30.
Diplomata w ith w itn esse s w ho sign once o n ly : + 2, 31, 33 (fo r dates a n d nam es see L ist 2 and 
Index 2).
* W itness ap p earin g in o th e r sections of table.
94 97 98 99 100 103 105 105 105 107 107 108
L. Pullius Speratus 4* — — — 7
L. Pullius Verecundus —* — — — 6 — 4 — — 2 — —*
P. Atinius Amerimnus —* — — — — — 5 4 4 4 — —*
Cn. Egnatius Vitalis 5*
Q. Orfius Cupitus 1*
Q. Aemilius Soterichus 3 — — — — — — — — — 1
P. Caulius Vitalis 7 — — — — 4 — 7 7 3 — 6 *
P. Caulius Restitutus 4? — — — — — 3 3
T. Flavius Secundus 2 — — 3
Q. Pompeius Homerus 5 7 1 1 — 2 2 1 — 4
Q. Apidius Thallus 3 — — — — — 6 — 2*
A. Ampius Epaphroditus 2 — — — — — — 1
C. Iulius Aprilis 4 — — — — — — 7
C. Vettienus Modestus 5 5 3 — — 7 — —
Ti. Claudius Menander 7 — — — — — —*

94 97 98 99 100 103 105 105 105 107 107 108 
b a b d c a b A p p .
Ti. Iulius Urbanus 1 1 1 — — —*
L. Pullius Trophimus 6 — — — — —*
C. Iulius Paratus 7 — — — — — '*
M. Iulius Clemens 5 5 — — —*
Ti. Iulius Euphemus 6 6
C. Tuticanius Saturninus 5 — —*
C. Iulius Eutuchus 2 —*
P. Atinius Trophimus 3*
M. Iunius Eutychus 5*
Witnesses signing once or
identification unsure 2 3 5 5 1 2 1 — — — 5 —
Names of witnesses missing — 3 — — — — — — — — — —
109 110 110 110 114 114 118 120 121 1212122 
Name a b c a b ab
L. Pullius Verecundus
—* 2 — 2 3 3 — — — 5
_*
P. Atinius Amerimnus 4* 3 — 3
P. Caulius Vitalis
_* _
— — 2 7 4
Q. Apidius Thallus
*
4
C. Vettienus Modestus
* --*
Ti. Claudius Menander
*
1*
Ti. Iulius Urbanus
_* _
— — 1 6 1 — — — 3*
L. Pullius Trophimus —* 4 — 5
C. Iulius Paratus 5* 6 — 6 — 5 — — — —
_: *
M. Iulius Clemens 7*
C. Tuticanius Saturninus 6 * 5 — 4
C. Iulius Eutuchus
* *
P. Atinius Trophimus
_* _
— — 5
M. Iunius Eutychus
_* 7
— 7 — — — 2
P. Cornelius Alexander i — 1
A. Cascellius Proculus 7 — 6 — — — — 3?
C. Vettienus Hermes
4 — — — — 2 ? —*
C. Caesius Romanus
2 — — —
_*
L. Vibius Vibianus
3 — — — —*
P. Atinius Crescens
7 7 7 7
P. Atinius Florus
5 3
L. Atteius Atteianus
1 — —
_*
Q. Fabius Bithus
4
L. Pullius Anthus
5 5 — 7*
Ti. Claudius Eros
6 6
L. Equitius Gemellus
4
L. Pullius Daphnus
4*
Q. Lollius Festus
6 *
Witnesses signing once or
identification unsure — —
6 — 1 2 1 — — 2 2
Names of witnesses missing 3 —

Name 124 126 127 129 129 129 133 134 134 138 
a b c a b
L. Pullius Verecundus
_*
— — 6
C. Vettienus Modestus
_*
— — 5
Ti. Claudius Menander
_*
— 5? 3 6 2 1 —
1 /*
Ti. Iulius Urbanus 5* 1 — 1 —
1
C. Iulius Paratus 7*
C. Iulius Eutuchus
_:*
— —
—
— 5
C. Vettienus Hermes
_:*
7 — 7 7 7 7 — 7
C. Caesius Romanus
_*
2 3 2
L. Vibius Vibianus
— *
3 1 — 1 3
L. Atteius Atteianus
_;*
— — 5
L. Pullius Anthus
— *
— — — 5 4
L. Equitius Gemellus
_" k
5 — — 4
L. Pullius Daphnus
_
4
—
— 3 — 3 — 3 3*
Q. Lollius Festus
_*
6 2 — 2 — 6
P. Attius Severus 6? — — — — — 2 — 2
2*
P. Attius Festus 4 — — 4*
T. Flavius Laurus 5 — — 5*
T. Flavius Romulus 1 4
Ti. Iulius Felix 2 5 6*
C. Iulius Silvanus 4 6
y*
Witnesses signing once or
identification unsure — — 2 — — 1 — 4 — —
Names of witnesses missing 4
TABLE 2 A
Witnesses in the period 129—140
Name Date: 129 
b
129
c
133 134
a
134
b
138 139 140
a
Ti. Claudius Menander 6 2 1
—
1 1 1 i
P. Attius Severus —
—
2 — 2 2 2 2
L. Pullius Daphnus 3 - 3 — 3 3 3 3
P. Attius Festus — — 4 — — 4 4 4
T. Flavius Laurus — — 5 — — 5 5 5
Ti. Iulius Felix — — — 2 5 6 6 6
C. Iulius Silvanus — — — 4 6 7 7 7
L. Vibius Vibianus 1 3
Q. Lollius Festus 2 — 6
L. Equitius Gemellus 4
1 . Pullius Anthus 5 4
C. Vettienus Hermes 7 7 7 — 7
Ti. Iulius Urbanus — 1
C. Iulius Eutuchus — 5
Q. Iulius Amandus — 6
T. Flavius Romulus
—
— — 1 4
T. Erredius Alcides — — — 3
D. Valerius Faustianus — — — 5
D. Valerius Saturninus — — — 6
Ti. Claudius Hermes — — — 7

TABLE 3
Period 3 AD 138—212
Names of witnesses and their order in diplomata with complete or restorable lists.
Name
138
139
140 
a
140
b
146 148
b
148
cd
149
150
152
153
154
157?
158
Ti. Cl. Menander 1 1
P. Attius Severus 2 2 1
L. Pullius Daphnus 3 3 2 1 i
P. Attius Festus 4 4
T. FI. Laurus 5 5
M. Servilius Geta 3 2 2 1 1 1 *
L. Pullius Chresimus 4 3 3 2 2 2 *
M. Ulpius Blastus 4
M. Sentilius Iasus 6 5 4 — 3 3 3*
Ti. Iulius Felix 6 — 6 5 5 4 4 4
C. Iulius Silvanus 7 7 7 6 6 5 5
C. Bellius Urbanus
5*
L. Pullius Velox 6
C. Pomponius Statianus
6 6 *
P. Ocilius Priscus 7 7 7 7 T
Diplomata omitted from this table because they are very fragmentary and/or the 
date depends wholly upon the witness lists are: 89, + 34, + 35, + 37, + 38, + 43/110, 
109, + 46, 126.
O
O N
164 in'
157? 165 2
Name
158 166 167 178 d
192 2 1 2
M. Servilius Geta 1* 1
L. Pullius Chresimus
2 *
M. Sentilius Iasus 3*
Ti. Iulius Felix 4* 2 1
C. Bellius Urbanus 5* 3 2 1
L. Pullius Primus 4 3
L. Sentius Chrysogonus 5 4 2
C. Pomponius Statianus 6 * 6 5
L. Pullius Zosimus 7 6
P. Ocilius Priscus 7* — 7
Ti. Iulius Crescens 3
L. Pullius Marcio 4 i 1 1
Sex. Vibius Romanus 5
C. Publicius Lupercus 6 2 2 2
M. Iunius Pius
7 3 3 3
Ti. Cl. Cassander
4 — 4
Ti. Cl. Epinicus
5
Ti. Cl. Iulianus
4 5
L. Pullius Benignus
6 5 6
Ti. Iulius Dativus
7
C. Fannius Aresco (?)
G
C. Fannius------f ---------
7

Period 1 AD 52—73/74
NOMINA SIGNATORVM: auxilia et Classes
M. AEMILI VS Capito
D. ALARIVS Pontificalis
Alexander Magnus (sic)
C. ANTIST(IV)S Marinus
Sex. APVLEIVS Macer
M. ARRIVS Rufus
L. BETVEDIVS Primigenius, Valens
P. CAETENNIVS Clemens
C. CAISIVS Victor
P. CARVLLIVS P. f. <G >al. Sabinus
A . CASCELLI VS Successus
C. CASSIVS Longinus
Cn. CESSIVS Cn. f. Col. Cestus
Ti. CLAVDIVS Chaerea; Demosthenes; Epaphroditus; Qui. Fidinus
C. CORNELIVS Ampliatus
Cn. CORNELIVS Florus, Ionicus
L. CORNELIVS Optatus, Simo
Appius DIDIVS Praxia
C. DVRRACHINVS Anthus
T. FANIVS Celer
Ti. FONTEIVS Cerialis
L. GRAECIVIVS Felix
P. GRALTIVS P. f. Aem. Provincialis
T. GRATTIVS Valens
M. HELENIVS Primus
C. HELVIVS Lepidus
C. HERENNIVS Faustus
C. HERENNVLEIVS Chryseros
C. IVLIVS Agathoclus; Agrippa; Aquila; Charmus; C. f. Col. Libo; Cornel.
Niger; Sace[rd?]os; Senecio; Theopompus 
Ti. IVLIVS Fab. Cestianus; Pardala; Pudens 
T. IVLIVS Rufus
D. L1BVRNIVS Rufus
L. LICINIVS Pudens
L. LVCILIVS Aristo; Chresimus; Proculus
P. LVCRETIVS P. f. Voi. Apulus
P. LVRIVS Moderatus
Q. LVSIVS Saturninus
Sex. MAGIVS Rufus
C. MARCIVS Proculus
L. MESTIVS L. f. Aem. Priscus
N. MINI VS Hyla
M. NASSIVS Phoebus
L. NOVELLIVS Crispus
L. NVMERIVS Lupus
L. NVTRIVS Venustus
C. OCLATIVS Macer
C. PACILIVS Priscus
Q. PETRONIVS Musaeius
M. PONTIVS Pudens
T. POMPONIVS Epaphroditus
L. POMPONIVS Hyginus
P. POPILLIVS Rufus
Q. POBLICIVS Crescens1
I I n B o th 70 b a n d 71 b m o s t w itn e s s e s h a v e a D a lm a tia n o r ig in . T h is is p r o b a b ly th e s a m e m a n , 
w h o c a m e f r o m I a d e r (71 b ) .

Q. PVBLICIVS Crescens; 1 Macedo
L. PVBLICIVS Germullus
L. RENNIVS Oriens
L. RVFINVS Chaerea
C. SABINIVS Nedymus
C. SALLVSTIVS Crescens
L. SECVRA Alexandrus
P. SERVILIVS Adiutor
T. SEXTIVS Primus
M. SLAVIVS Putiolanus
M. TITINIVS Macer
L. VALERIVS Acutus; Herma; Verus; Volsenus
M. VALERIVS Alex<s>and<er>; Diodorus; Firmus
L. VELINA (?) Nauta
C. VETIDIVS C. f. Vol. Rasinianus
P. VIBIVS Maximus
Q. VIBIVS Sauricus
L. VITELLIVS Sossianus
COGNOMINA SIGNATORVM Date1
L. Valerius ACVTVS 70 b
P. Servilius ADIVTOR ante 54
C. Iulius AGATHOCLVS 71 c
C. Iulius AGRIPPA 6 8 b
M. Valerius ALEX<S>AND<ER> 71 d
ALEXANDER MAGNUS (sic) 71 d
L. Secura ALEXANDRVS 6 8 b
C. Cornelius AMPLIATVS 52
C. Durrachinus ANTHVS 52
P. Lucretius APVLVS 70 a
C. Iulius AQVILA 70 a
L. Lucilius ARISTO 64
M. Aemilius CAPITO 6 8 c
T. Fanius CELER 71 b
Ti. Fonteius CERIALIS 6 8 a
Cn. Cessius CESTVS 71 c
Ti. Iulius CESTIANVS 71 d
Ti. Claudius CHAEREA 6 8 b
L. Rufinius CHAEREA 71 d
C. Iulius CHARM VS 6 8 a
L. Lucilius CHRESIMVS 64
C. Herennuleius CHRYSEROS 71 a
P. Caetennius CLEMENS 71 b
Q. Poblicius CRESCENS 71 b
Publicius 70 b
C. Sallustius CRESCENS 71 a
L. Novellius CRISPVS 70 a
Ti. Claudius DEMOSTHENES 71 c
M. Valerius DIODORVS 6 8 b
Ti. Claudius EPAPHRODITVS 71 c
T. Pomponius EPAPHRODITVS 52
C. Herennius FAVSTVS 6 8 c
L. Graeciraus FELIX 6 8 c
Ti. Claudius FIDINVS 6 8 a
M. Valerius FIRMVS 54
Cn. Cornelius FLORVS 71 a
L. Publicius GERMVLLVS 70 b
1 See T a b le I A f o r d e ta ils o f d a te a n d d ip lo m a n u m b e r .

L, Valerius HERMA 6 8 c
L. Pomponius HYGINVS 64
N. Minius HYLA 52
Cn. Cornelius IONICVS 64
C. Helvius LEPIDVS 70 b
C. Iulius LIBO 6 8 a
C. Cassius LONGINVS 54
L. Numerius LVPVS 54
Q. Publicius MACEDO 70 b
Sex. Apuleius MACER 54
C. Oclatius MACER 6 8 c
M. Titinius MACER
ALEXANDER MAGNUS (sic)
54 
71 d
C. Antist(iu)s MARINVS ante 54
P. Vibius MAXIM VS 71 b
P. Lurius MODERATVS 71 b
Q. Petronius MVSAEIVS 70 b
L. Velina? NAVTA
6 8 b
C. Sabinius NEDYMVS 52
C. Iulius NIGER
71 d
L. Cornelius OPTATVS
6 8 b
L. Rennius ORIENS 64
Ti. Iulius PARDALA 6 8 a
M. Nassius PHOEBVS 70 b
D. Alarius PONTIFICIALIS 6 8 c
Appius Didius PRAXIA 71 c
L. Betuedius PRIMIGENIVS 71 a
M. Helenius PRIMVS ante 54
T. Sextius PRIMVS 64
L. Mestius PRISCVS 52'
C. Pacilius PRISCVS 64
L. Lucilius
PROCVLVS 64
C. Marcius PROCVLVS 71 b
P. Graltius
PROVINCIALIS 6 8 a
Ti. Iulius
PVDENS 70 a
L. Licinius PVDENS 71 d
M. Pontius PVDENS 70 a
M. Slavius
PVTIOLANVS 6 8 c
C. Vetidius
RASINIANVS 70 a
M. Arrius RVFVS 6 8 a
T. Iulius RVFVS 71 b
D. Liburnius RVFVS 71 a
Sex. Magius RVFVS 54
P. Popillius RVFVS 71 a
P. Carullius SABINVS 70 a
C. Iulius
SACE[RD?]OS 6 8 b
Q. Lusius SATVRNINVS 64
Q. Vibius
SAVRICVS ante 54
C. Iulius
SENECIO 6 8 c
L. Cornelius SIMO 71 c
L. Vitellius
SOSSIANVS ante 54
A . Cascellius
SVCESSVS ante 54
C. Iulius
THEOPOMPVS 71 c
L. Betuedius VALENS 71 a
T. Grattius
VALENS ante 54
L. Nutrius
VENVSTVS 52
L. Valerius
VERVS 71 d
C. Caisius
VICTOR 6 8 c
L. Valerius
VOLSENVS 54

Period 2 AD 73/74 — 134/138 
NOMINA SIGNATORVM:
Q. AEMILIVS Soterichus
C. ALFIVS Priscus
L. A LLIV S--------------------
A . AMPIVS Epaphroditus
P. ANNIVS Trophimus
Q. APIDIVS Thallus
Q. AQVILIVS C. f. Voi., Campanus
L. ARRIVS Iustus
P. ATINIVS Amerimmus; P. f. Vel., Augustalis; Crescens; Florus; Hedonicus;
Rufus(trib-) Pal.; T ro p h im u s;----------------(2)
L. ATTEIVS Atteianus
P. ATTIVS Festus*; Severus*
L. AVRELIVS Potitus
L. CAECILIVS Flaccus; L. f. Quir., Iovinus
Q. CAECILIVS Victor
C. CAESIVS Romanus
Sex. CAESONIVS Callistus
M. CALPVRNIVS Iustus
L. CANNVTIVS Lucullus Clu., Tuder
A. CASCELLIVS Proculus
P. CAVLIVS Gemellus; Restitutus; V ita lis ;--------------- (1)
C. CLAVDIVS Sementivus
Ti. CLAVDIVS Erastus; Eros; Felix; Hermes; Iustus; Menander1 *; Vitalis 
L. CLEVANIVS Firmus
P. COELIVS Q. f. Fai., Brutus Rufus
D. CONSIVS Alcimus
P. CORNELI VS Alexander; Verecundus
Sex. CORNELIVS Epagatus
C. CVRTIVS Niger
L. DOMITIVS L. f. Coi., Verus
Cn. EGNATIVS Vitalis
M’. EGNATIVS Celer
M. EGNATIVS Rufus
Sex. ELEIVS Pudens
L. EQVITIVS Gemellus
T. ERREDIVS Alcides
Q. FABIVS Bithus
C. FICTORIVS Politicus
T. FLAVIVS Abascantus; Laurus*; Romulus; Secundus;--------(1)
A . FVLVIVS Iustus
C. HOSTILIVS Martialis
Q. IVLIANVS Amandus
C. IVLIVS Aprilis; Clemens; Eutychus; Helenus; Longinus; Maximus; Paratus;
Saturninus; Severus; Silvanus*; V alens;---------------------- (2)
L. IVLIVS C. f. Silvinus, Carthag.
M. IVLIVS Clemens
Q. IVLIVS Lentulus
Sex. IVLIVS C. f. Fab., Italicus, Rom.
Ti. IVLIVS Euphemus; Felix*; Fronto; Urbanus
M. IVNIVS Eutychus
C. IVNIVS Primus
Q. IVNIVS Sylla
A . LAPPI V S ----------------
-----------------------------( ) n u m b e r o f s ig n a tu r e s la c k in g cognomina.
* N a m e w h ic h a p p e a rs in in d ic e s a n d ta b le s o f p e r io d s II a n d II I.

A . LARCIVS Phronimus
M. LOLLI VS Fuscus; Rufus
Q. LOLLIVS Festus; Pietas
Sex. LOSSIVS T. f. Gal., Apollinaris
T. LOSSIVS T. f. Gal., Severus
C. LVCRETIVS Modestus
P. LVSCIVS Amandus
C. M A ECIV S-----------------
M. MAECIVS Eupator
Sex. MANLIVS Cinnamus
P. MANLIVS Laurus
P. M IL IV S ------------------(MANLIUS or MANILIVS?)
Cn. M ATICIV S---------------------(cf. Cn. EGNATIVS)
Q. MVCIVS Augustalis
L. NAEVIVS Vestalis
L. NONIVS Victor
C. NORBANVS Primus
— NVMERIVS Capito
Q. O R FIC IV S-----------------(cf. Q. ORFIVS)
Q. ORFIVS Cupitus
C. PAPIVS Eusebes
P. PETRONIVS Paullus
C. POMPEIVS Eutrapelus
Q. POMPEIVS Homerus
Cn. POMPEIVS Maximus
C. POMPTINIVS Hyllus
Sex. PRIVERNIVS Celer
L. PVLLIVS Anthus; Daphnus;* Epaphroditus; Heracla; Ianuarius; Speratus;
Trophimus; Verecundus;------------ (4)
C. QVINTIVS Philetus
P. QVIRINIVS Pothus
P. SALLIENVS Philumenus
M. SALVIVS Norbanus Fab.
C. SEMPRONIVS Secundus
P. SERTORIVS Celsus
L. SESTIVS Maximus
P. SILI VS Hermes
M. STLACCIVS Iuvenalis; Philetus
C. TERENTIVS Natalis; Philetus
M. TETTIVS ---------------------
A. TITINIVS Iustus
L. TVRRANIVS Maximus
C. TVTICANIVS Helus; Saturninus
L. VALERIVS Basterna
D. VALERIVS Faustianus; Saturninus
P. VALERIVS Rufus
C. VETTIENVS Hermes; Modestus
Q. VETTIVS Octavus
M. VETVRIVS Montanus
L. VIBIVS Vibianus
T. VIBIVS Zosimus
T. VILLIVS Heraclida
A . VOLVMNIVS Expectatus
Fragmentary, lacking praenomen and cognomen
A T IN IV S ------------------------(cf. P. Atinius Amerimnus)
-A V L IV S --------- (cf. P. Caulius Restitutus; Gemellus; Vitalis)
C A V L IV S -------------------(2) (cf. P. Caulius Restitutus; Gemellus; Vitalis)
F V L V IV S ------------------------(cf. A. Fulvius Iustus)
P V L L IV S ------------ (cf. L. Pullii)

First and last dates of known signatures are given.
T. Flavius ABASCANTVS 98
___ ____
AGATHOPVS 97
T. Erredius ALCIDES 128/134?—134
D. Consius ALCIMVS 8 6
P. Cornelius ALEXANDER (106) 1 1 0 — 1 1 0
Q. Iulianus AMANDVS 129
P. Luscius AMANDVS 1 1 0
P. Atinius AMERIMNVS 82—110
— — AMPLI AT VS 128/134?
L. Pullius ANTHVS 120—129
Sex. Lossius APOLLINARIS 75
C. Iulius APRILIS 100—108
L. Atteius ATTEIANVS 120—129
P. Atinius AVGVSTALIS 75
Q. Mucius AVGVSTALIS 79—90
L. Valerius BASTERNA 98
Q. Fabius BITHVS 1 2 0
P. Coelius BRVTVS RVFVS 75
Sex. Caesonius CALLISTVS 98
Q. Aquilius CAMP ANES 75
— A/umerius CAPITO 8 6
M’. Egnatius CELER 78
Sex. Privernius CELER 78
___ —
CELER 83
P. Sertorius CELSVS 8 6
___ —
CHARITO 1 2 1 ?
Sex. Manlius CINNAM VS 94
C. Iulius CLEMENS 82—90
M. Iulius CLEMENS 105—109
P. Atinius CRESCENS 118—121
Q. Orfius CVPITVS 92—94
L. Pullius DAPHNVS* 122—148
Sex. Cornelius EPAGATVS 8 6
A . Ampius EPAPHRODITVS 100—108
L. Pullius EPAPHRODITVS 98
Ti. Claudius ERASTVS 8 6
Ti. Claudius EROS 1 2 0 —1 2 1 ?
M. Maecius EVPATOR 114
Ti. Iulius EVPHEMVS 105
C. Papius EVSEBES 103
C. Pompeius EVTRAPELVS 80—91
C. Iulius EVTYCHVS 107—129
M. Iunius EVTYCHVS 108—120
A . Volumnius EXPECTATVS 94
D. Valerius FAVSTIANVS 134
Ti. Claudius FELIX 1 1 0—c. 1 0 0 /1 2 1
Ti. Iulius FELIX* 128/134?—167
P. Attius FESTVS* 133—140
Q. Lollius FESTVS 122—133
L. Clevanius FIRMVS 8 8
L. Caecilius FLACCVS 85
P. Atinius FLORVS 118—120
Ti. Iulius FRONTO 8 8
M. Lollius FVSCVS 91
P. Caulius GEMELLVS 105
L. Equitius GEMELLVS 121?—129
P. Atinius HEDONICVS 103
C. Iulius HELENVS 8 6 — 8 8

C. Tuticanius HELVS 1 1 0
L. Pullius HERACLA 94
T. Villius HERACLIDA 107
Ti. Claudius HERMES 134
P. Silius HERMES 86—97?
C. Vettienus HERMES 114—134
— —
HERMES 97 (cf. P.
Q. Pompeius HOMERVS 98—108
C. Pomptinius HYLLVS 107
— — HYPATVS c. 1 0 0 / 1 2 0
L. Pullius IANVARIVS 79—90
L. Caecilius IOVINVS 74
Sex. Iulius ITALICVS 74
L. Arrius IVSTVS 8 8
Ti. Claudius IVSTVS 114
M. Calpurnius IVSTVS 86—92
A . Fulvius IVSTVS 1 2 2
A. Titinius IVSTVS 78
M. Stlaccius IVVENALIS 78
T. Flavius LAVRVS* 133—140
P. Manlius LAVRVS 80
Q. Iulius LENTVLVS 75
—
LEONA 118
C. Iulius LONGINVS 85
L. Cannutius LVCVLLVS 74
___
— au--------- MACER 8 6
C. Hostilius MARTIALIS 8 6
C. Iulius MAXIM VS 8 6
Cn. Pompeius MAXIMVS 78
L. Sestius MAXIMVS 84
L. Turranius MAXIMVS 78
Ti. Claudius MENANDER* 103—140
C. Lucretius MODESTVS 82—91
C. Vettienus MODESTVS 100—129
M. Veturius MONTANVS 78
C. Terentius NATALIS 8 6
C. Curtius NIGER 8 8
M. Salvius NORBANVS 74
— —
NYMPHODOTUS 97
Q. Vettius OCTAVVS 90
C. Iulius PARATVS 105—124
P. Petronius PAVLLVS 8 8
C. Quintius PHILETVS 8 6
M. Stlaccius PHILETVS 79—80
C. Terentius PHILETVS 1 1 0
P. Sallienus PHILVMENVS 8 6
A . Larcius PHRONIMVS 107
Q. Lollius PIETAS 78
C. Fictorius POLITICVS 1 1 0
P. Quirinius POTHVS f
p
t — k
o
L. Aurelius POTITVS 78
C. Iunius PRIMVS 98
C. Norbanus PRIMVS 107
C. Alfius PRISCVS 78—83?
___ ___
PRISCVS 83 (cf. C.
A . Cascellius PROCVLVS 110—128/1
Sex. Eleius PVDENS 85
P. Caulius RESTITVTVS 97?—105
___ — RESTITVTVS 97 (cf. P.
C. Caesius ROMANVS 118—129
T. Flavius
ROMVLVS 134

P. Atinius RVFVS 74—84
p. Coelius BRVTVS RVFVS 75
M. Egnatius RVFVS 8 8
M. Lollius RVFVS 78
P. Valerius RVFVS 85
C. Iulius SATVRNINVS 94
C. Tuticanius SATVRNINVS 107—110
D. Valerius SATVRNINVS 78
T. Flavius SECVNDVS 98—103
C. Sempronius SECVNDVS 74
C. Claudius SEMENTTVVS 80—88
P. Attius SEVERVS* 1247—146
_ _ SEVERVS 124 (Cf. P. Attius Severus)
C. Iulius SEVERVS 85
T. Lossius SEVERVS 75
C. Iulius SILVANVS* 134—154/157?
L. Iulius SILVINVS 74
Q. Aemilius SOTERICHVS 94—107
L. Pullius SPERATVS 79—100
Q. Iunius SYLLA 84
Q. Apidius THALLVS 99—114
P. Annius TROPHIMVS 107 (cf. P. Atinius Trophimus)
P. Atinius TROPHIMVS 108—114
L. Pullius TROPHIMVS 105—110
C. Iulius VALENS 85
P. Cornelius VERECVNDVS 84
L. Pullius VERECVNDVS 79—129
L. Domitius VERVS 75
L. Naevius VESTALIS 78
L. Vibius VIBIANVS 118—129
Q. Caecilius VICTOR 85
L. Nonius VICTOR 1 2 2
P. Caulius VITALIS 94—118
Ti. Claudius VITALIS 1 0 0
Cn. Egnatius VITALIS 92—94
Ti. Iulius VRBANVS 105—129
Ti. Vibius ZOSIMVS 79
INDEX 3
Period 3 AD 138—212
NOMINA SIGNATORVM:
P. ATTIVS Festus; Severus
C. BELLIVS Urbanus
Ti. CLAVDIVS Cassander; Epinicus; Iulianus; Menander
C. FANNIVS Aresco (?);------ f ---------
T. FLAVIVS Laurus
Ti. IVLIVS Crescens; Dativus; Felix
C. IVLIVS Silvanus
M. IVNIVS Pius
P. OCILIVS Priscus
C. POMPONIVS Statianus
C. PVBLICIVS Lupercus
L. PVLLIVS Benignus; Chresimus; Daphnus; Marcio; Primus; Velox; Zosimus
M. SENTILLIVS Iasus
L. SENTIVS Chrysogonus
M. SERVILIVS Geta
M. VLPIVS Blastus
Sex. VIB IVS Romanus

First and last dates of known signatures are given.
C. Fannius ARESCO(?) 192
L. Pullius BENIGNVS c. 185/190—212
M. Ulpius BLASTVS 148
Ti. Claudius CASSANDER c. 185/190—212
L. Pullius CHRESIMVS 146—158
L. Sentius CHRYSOGONVS 164—178
Ti. Iulius CRESCENS 178
L. Pullius DAPHNVS 122—148
Ti. Iulius DATIVVS c. 185/190
Ti. Claudius EPINICVS c. 185/190
Ti. Iulius FELIX 134—167
P. Attius FESTVS 133—140
M. Servilius GETA 146—166
M. Sentibus IASVS 140—158
Ti. Claudius IVLIANVS 192—212
T. Flavius LAVRVS 133—140
C. Publicius LVPERCVS 178—212
L. Pullius MARCIO 178—212
Ti. Claudius MENANDER 103—140
M. Iunius PIVS 178—212
L. Pullius PRIMVS 164—167
P. Ocilius PRISCVS 148—167
Sex. Vibius ROMANVS 178
P. Attius SEVERVS 1247—146
C. Iulius SILVANVS 134—157?
C. Pomponius STATIANVS 154—167
L. Pullius VELOX 149—153
C. Bellius VRBANVS 1577—178
L. Pullius ZOSIMVS 164—167
C. Fannius F 192
INDEX 4
COHORTES PRAETORIANAE ET VRB ANAE 
NOMINA SIGNATORVM 
C. ACONIVS Maximus (Sisc(ia))
P. AELIVS Alexander; Bassanus; Carus; Iulianus; Rufianus; Stratullinus;
Vitalis
T. AELIVS Senilianus
L. ANTONIUS Saturninus
P. APPEIVS Marcellinus
M. ASCANIUS Domesticus
C. ATTICIVS Valens
M. AVRELIVS Aelianus; Amandus; Augustalis; Diogenes; Dionysius; Dizes;
Longinus Ma(c)rinus; Maximus; Mucapor; Mucianus; Nepo- 
tianus; Quintianus; Sabinianus; Tesibus; Valens; Valerius; Vi- 
thus
T. AVRELIVS Secundus
L. AVRELIVS Simplicius
P. BELLICIVS Vicentius
C. CAELIVS Germanicinus
Ti. CLAVDIVS Aurelianus
T. CLAVDIVS Barbarus; Bassus; Mucianus; Surio
C. CVRTIVS Secundus Sirm(ium)
L. DIGITIVS Valens
C. EQVITIVS Rufinus 2 1
21 — A rheološki vestnik 321

L. FESCENNA Priscus
T. FLAVIVS Festus Sisc(ia); Maximianus
M. GALLIUS Priscianus
C. IVLIVS Celer
Sex. IVVENTIVS Ingenuus Sirm(ium)
M. LVCILIUS Saturninus Sisc(ia)
G. MASILIVS Ingenuus
M. MOLLIVS Agatopus
G. POPILIVS Fortunatus
M. RVTILIVS Hermes Sisc(ia)
P. SEPTIMIVS Bassus
M. STATORIVS Sabinus Sirm(ium)
VALERIVS Albanus; Gaianus; Ianuarius; Traianus; Valens; Victor; Vitali- 
anus; Vitalis
C. VALERIVS Gaianus; Victor
M. VLPIVS Cepianus; Marcianus
VLPIVS Po<n>tens 
C. VLPIVS Valens
COGNOMINA SIGNATORVM 
M. Aurelius AELIANVS
Date
243
M. Mollius AGATOPVS 236
Valerius ALBANVS 306
P. Aelius ALEXANDER 148
ALEXANDER 2 1 2
Ti. Claudius AVRELIANVS 243
M. Aurelius AMANDVS 145
M. Aurelius AVGVSTALIS 2 2 2
AVLVSANVS 2 1 2
T. Claudius BARBARVS 224
P. Aelius BASSANVS 254
T. Claudius BASSVS 236
P. Septimius BASSVS 236
P. Aelius CARVS 226
M. Aurelius DIOGENES 236
C. Iulius CELER 148
M. Ulpius
Aurelius
CEPIANVS 226
M. DIONYSIVS 233
M. Aurelius DIZES 236
M. Acsanius DOMESTICVS 148
T. Flavius FESTVS 71/74
G. Popilius FORTVNATVS 236
Valerius GAIANVS 306
C. Valerius GAIANVS 226
C. Caelius GERMANICINVS 254
M. Rutilius HERMES 71/74
Valerius IANVARIVS 306
'c. Aelius IVLIANVS 243
Sex. Iuventius INGENVVS 71/74
G. Masilius INGENVVS 236
M. Aurelius LONGINVS 226
M. Aurelius MA<C>RINVS 254
P. Appeius MARCELLINVS 254
M. Ulpius MARCIANVS 224
T. Flavius MAXIMIANVS 2 2 2
C. Aconius MAXIMVS 71/74
M. Aurelius MAXIMVS 224
M. Aurelius MVCAPOR 224
M. Aurelius MVCIANVS 243
T. Claudius MVCIANVS 233

M. Aurelius NEPOTIANVS 2 2 2
Ulpius PO<N>TENS 233
M. Gallius PRISCIANVS 224
L. Fescenna PRISCVS 148
M. Aurelius QVINTIANVS 254
M. Aurelius SABINIANVS 233
P. Aelius RVFINIANVS 226
C. Equitius RVFINVS 148
M. Statorius SABINVS 71/74
SABINVS 2 1 2
L. Antonius SATVRNINVS 148
M. Lucilius SATVRNINVS 71/74
T. Aurelius SECUNDVS 2 2 2
C. Curtius SECUNDVS 71/74
T. Aelius SENILIANVS 2 2 2
L. Aurelius SIMPLICIVS 254
P. Aelius STRATVLLINVS 2 2 2
T. Claudius SVRIO 243
M. Aurelius TESIBVS 224
THRASVS 2 1 2
Valerius TRAIANVS 306
C. Atticius VALENS 243
M. Aurelius VALENS 226
L. Digitius VALENS 148
Valerius VALENS 306
C. Ulpius VALENS 233
M. Aurelius VALERIVS 2 2 2
P. Bellicius VICENTIVS 254
Valerius VICTOR 306
C. Valerius VICTOR 243
Valerius VITALIANVS 233
P. Aelius VITALIS 224
Valerius VITALIS 306
M. Aurelius VITHVS 226
----------------ARIS(gen.) 2 1 2
2 1 2
—
--------- ERIANVS 2 1 2
INDEX 5
Imperial names among the witnesses 73/74 — 133/134
First Interval between latest possible 
signature grant and first signature, in years
C. IVLII
Clemens 82 42
Longinus 85 45
Severus 85 45
Valens 85 45
Helenus 8 6 a 46
Maximus 8 6 a 46
Saturninus 94 b 54
Aprilis 1 0 0 60
Paratus 105 a 65
Eutychus 107 b 67
TI. IVLII 
Fronto 8 8 a 51
Euphemus 105 b 6 8
Urbanus 105 a 6 8
Last
signature
90
8 8 b
108 (App.)
124
129
105 d 
129 c

First Interval between latest possible Last
signature grant and first signature, in years signature
TI. CLAVDII
Erastus 8 6 b 18
Vitalis 1 0 0 32
Menander 103 35 140
Felix 1 1 0 b 42 c. 1 0 0 /1 2 0 ?
Iustus 114 b 46
Eros 1 2 0 b 52 1 2 1 ?
T. FLAVII
Abascantus 98 2
Secundus 98 2 103
Laurus 133 37 140
Romulus 134 a 38 134 b
Imperial names among the witnesses 133/134 — 212
TL IVLII
Crescens 178 141
Dativus c. 185/190 148
Felix 134 a 97 167
TI. CLAVDII
Cassander c. 185/190 117 2 1 2
Epinicus c. 185/190 117
Hermes 134 a 6 6
Iulianus 192 124 2 1 2
M. VLPII
Blastus 148 cd 31
Imperial names among witnesses of diplomata issued to praetoriani
T. FLAVIVS Festus 71/74 c. 2
P. AELIVS Alexander Ì45 7
C. IVLIVS Celer 145 105
INDEX 6
Recurring nomina among witnesses after 73/74
First Last
signature signature
PVLLII*
L. P. Verecundus1 79 129 a
L. P. Speratus 79 1 0 0
L. P. Ianuarius 79 90
L. P. Heracla 94
L. P. Epaphroditus 98
1 1 0 c
L. P. Trophimus 105 a
L. P. Anthus 1 2 0 a 129 c
L. P. Daphnus 1 2 2 148 c
PVLLII who first signed after 133/134. 
L. P. Chresimus 146 158
L. P. Velox 149 153
L. P. Zosimus 164 167
L. P. Primus 164 167
* Nomina w h ich ap p ea r before and after th e late H adrianic reorganisation.
Nomina w hose recu rren ce is of doubtful significance — IV N II, POMPEII an d V IB II, are om itted. 
1 Length of service suggests tw o m en involved.

First
signature
Last
signature
L. P. Marcio 
L. P. Benignus
ATINII
P. A. Rufus Pal.
P. A. P. f. Vel. Augustalis
P. A. Amerimnus
P. A. Hedonicus
P. A. Trophimus
P. A. Crescens
P. A. Florus
ATTII*
P. A. Severus
P. A. Festus 
CAECILII
L. C. L. f. Quir. Iovinus
L. C. Flaccus
Q. C. Victor
CAVLII 
P. C. Vitalis 
P. C. Restitutus
P. C. Gemellus 
EGNATII
M. E. Celer 
M. E. Rufus 
Cn. E. Vitalis 
LOLLII
M. L. Rufus
Q. L. Pietas 
M. L. Fuscus 
Q. L. Festus 
LOSSII
Sex. L. T. f. Gai. Apollinaris 
T. L. T. f. Gai. Severus 
MAECII
C. M.---------
M. M. Eupator 
MANLII 
P. M. Laurus 
Sex. M. Cinnamus 
STLACCII 
M. S. Iuvenalis 
M. S. Philetus 
TVTICANII 
C. T. Saturninus
C. T. Helus 
VALERII (i)
P. V. Rufus
L. V. Basterna 
VALERII (ii)
D. V. Faustianus 
D. V. Saturninus 
VETTIENI
C. V. Modestus 
C. V. Hermes
178 2 1 2 ?
185/190 2 1 2
74 84
75
82 1 1 0 c
103
108 (App.) 114
118 1 2 1 ?
118 1 2 0 ab
124 146
133 140 b
74
85
85
94 b 118
97? 105 c
105 a
78
8 8
92 94
78
78
91
1 2 2 133
75
75
91
114 b
80
94 a
78
79 80
107 1 1 0 a
1 1 0 b
85
98
134
134
1 0 0 129 a
114 a 134 b

Before V espasian’s reform , half the extant witness lists give the status of 
all or some of the signatories (Table 1 A, p. 307-8). Three are equites Romani-, 
all the rest are veterans or serving soldiers. They do not however seem to have 
any close relationship to the unit concerned; two of the w itnesses to a grant, 
found in Moesia, to a cavalryman in 54 were members of the fleet, while con­
versely the w itnesses of the first two fleet diplomata of 71 included two 
cavalry decuriones and a serving miles praetorianus. Two thirds of the 
extant lists also give the origo of some or all of the witnesses. They usually 
came from the sam e province as the recipient, but not always; the witnesses 
to a Phrygian’s grant in 6 8 (a) are six Sardinians and one Tpesius', probably 
Ephesian.
It has som etim es been assum ed th at these grants w ere w itnessed in the 
provinces concerned, and explanations have been advanced to explain the 
legality of w itnesses certifying a tru e copy of a tablet exhibited in Rome 
which they had not seen. There are no good grounds for this assumption, 
and strong evidence against it. In theory, the milites cohortium praetoriano­
rum IV and IX, both with origo at Philippi, who signed grants to Thracians 
in M arch 70 and February 71, m ight have been in Thrace at these dates, but 
their proper and m ore probable place was at Rome. Similarly, the two classi­
ca of 54, one a veteran, the other serving, might have been m em bers of the 
Moesian flotilla, but more probably belonged to one of the Italian fleets. More­
over, though the witnesses came from the same province, they were not al­
ways near neighbours ; in 52, the M acedonian signatories came from Dyrrachi­
um and Thessalonica, some 250 km. distant from each other, and in 6 8 (b ) the 
Syrians came from Antioch and Caesarea Stratonis, some 600 km. apart. But 
the m ost striking indication that the witnesses personally inspected the lists 
exhibited in Rome is that it is only in this period that precise references are 
given, as e.g., CIL XVI 16 (71 AD) tab(ula) III, pag(ina) VI, loc(o) X IX , with 
sim ilar wording in half of these early docum ents (CIL XVI 5 and 9—14). Since 
such exact reference was not deem ed necessary in later periods, when the 
witnesses w ere clearly clerks living in Rome, it is m ost im probable th at it 
was made by rem ote provincials who had never seen the lists. W ith 17,000 
urban troops in Rome, as well as a large floating population of provincial 
soldiers in the castra peregrinorum and num erous veterans, plenty of fellow 
provincials are likely to have been available in the City for each veteran 
discharged. Since all texts are ’ certified a true copy' (descriptum et recogni­
tum ) it is probable that at all tim es the signatories personally verified the 
lists exhibited. It may be that the custom of choosing witnesses from the 
same province as the recipient was a legacy from an earlier period, before 
Claudius, w hen grants may have been issued locally; and that Vespasian 
discontinued the custom because the trouble of seeking out men from the 
right province proved a bothersom e nuisance.

Vespasian's innovation was to tran sfer the responsibility for certifying 
the accuracy of the texts from individuals to clerks in a governm ent depart­
m ent. The change coincided w ith 73/74, and the diploma of 21 May 74, issued 
before the end of the census, shows the process of change. Six of the seven 
witnesses follow the old m ethod; they signed no other know n diploma, and, 
though they nam e no m ilitary ranks, five of them give th eir names in the 
fashion peculiar to the army, w ith tribe and/or origo given after the cogno­
men. B ut one of them , Atinius Rufus, was the first w itness to sign num erous 
grants, in his case eight known texts over a period of ten years. He was plain­
ly the first of the clerks. At about the sam e time, some alterations were m ade 
to the w ording of diplomata ; their significance is discussed by Géza Alföldy 
in Historia 17 (1968) 215 ff. and by John Mann in Epigraphische Studien 9 
(1972) 233 ff.
Period 3.
The transition to H adrian’s system is separately set fo rth in Table 2 A. 
It effectively began w ith the Pannonian diploma of 2 July 133. It m ay have 
been introduced regionally, since the seniority there established is, in the 
known diplomata, broken only by the Moesian diploma of 2 April 134, attested 
by new w itnesses, none of whom had signed previously, while the fleet diploma 
of 15 Septem ber 134 shows only one variation from the strict seniority which 
is otherw ise consistently m aintained from 133 onward.
The sharp and sudden change pinpoints one among H adrian’s well attested 
adm inistrative reform s. Aurelius Victor, (Epitom e de Caesaribus 14, 10—12), 
w riting soon after 360, stated th at H adrian 'established public and palatine, 
as well as m ilitary appointm ents in the pattern which has persisted, w ith a 
few changes by Constantine, until to-day'. H adrian’s reform s of the civil 
service, at equestrian level, have been discussed by H.-G. Pflaum, and in the 
m ilitary sphere by Eric Birley.1
The m ost inform ative guide to the organisation and standing of senior 
civil service clerical grades of the late em pire is contained in the Codes. Their 
evidence, w h ith other sources, has been brought together by A.H.M. Jones . 2
It is fullest for the fifth century, eighty or m ore years after V ictor’ s time, 
b ut the principles, if not all the detail, were well established by his day, and 
accord well w ith the evidence of the diplomata for H adrian’s innovations.
Each office (scrinium ) had a fixed num ber of established civil servants 
{statuti), and a considerably larger num ber of non-established supernum e­
raries. ’Prom otion was strictly by seniority, each clerk ( exceptor) rising step 
by step until he became . . . proxim us, the senior m em ber of his scrin iu m . . . 
As the proxim us of each scrinium retired . . . he could sell the vacancy thus 
created at the bottom of the list for the fixed price of 250 solidi to the senior 
supernum erary, and if he refused, to the next, and so on till a willing p u r­
chaser was found. Seniority among the supernum eraries was not fixed exactly 
by date of enrolm ent, for those who w orked in the office m ight be moved up 
the list... over the heads of those who did not. . . . Those who acquired an

established post had also to pay... an entrance fee.' (LRE 576). 'When a 
vacancy arose by the death of an established officer (sta tu tu s) it was similarly 
offered to the senior supernum erary, b u t in this case the 250 solidi went to 
the heirs or assigns of the deceased statutus.' (SRG 169—170).
The sums specified, and perhaps also the titles, are not relevant to earlier 
centuries; and in the late empire, to accelerate prom otion of the swelling 
mass of supernum eraries, the head of the office was obliged to retire, after 
three years in the fourth century, one year in the fifth century, a compulsion 
not yet in force in the second century. B ut the late em pire system of seniority 
closely corresponds to seniority of signing diplomata introduced in H adrian’s 
time. E ither he first introduced the distinction between a fixed establishm ent 
of statuti and the supernum eraries, or else restricted signature to statuti) 
previously, since Vespasian’s census, all or most of the large staff had signed. 
From Hadrian, whenever the head of the office retired, he was succeeded 
by the second senior signatory, and m ost others moved up one step, creating 
a vacancy for the senior supernum erary. But about a third of the newcomers, 
whose names are indented in Table 3, did not begin at the bottom , as, bet­
ween 140 and 146, Geta and Chresimus replaced Festus and Laurus, over the 
heads of three previous signatories. They correspond to senior supernum e­
raries who bought their posts from the heirs of deceased predecessors.
One detail of the witness lists is not explained by the late em pire evidence. 
Among over 200 signatures after 134, there are four instances, m arked w ith a 
dash (— ) in Table 3, where the norm al witness is absent b u t later returns. 
Two of them are readily explained. Cassander, absent in 192, signed again in 
the sam e place in 212 as in 185/190, if the witness list is rightly restored. Of 
three diplomata issued on the sam e day in 148, one for Pannonia superior, 
was signed by the norm al fourth w itness, Iasus, b u t in the other two, for 
Pannonia inferior, he is missing, and the fourth w itness was Blastus, otherwise 
unrecorded. Since it is probable th a t the witnesses personally inspected and 
checked the list from which they excerpted nam es, if Iasus or Cassander 
were absent, through illness, injury or any other reason, when the list was 
checked, the senior supernum erary was the proper person to replace them, 
for that occasion only.
The two o th er instances are not so easily explained. Iasus’ first signature, 
in December 140, in sixth place, replaced Felix, who had first signed six years 
earlier, and signed for 27 years m ore, eventually heading the list. But Iasus 
continued to sign, from 146, before and not after Felix. Similarly, from 164 
to 167 Zosimus replaced Priscus as seventh witness, but signed before him in 
sixth place in 167. N either of them replaced a deceased colleague. The common 
factor is th at b o th abnorm al prom otions coincided w ith the retirem ent of 
the first witness, when everyone else w ent up one step; and both concerned 
the bottom tw o places. Another apparent anomaly concerns Iulianus, the tem ­
porary replacem ent for Cassander, who signed in this capacity above Be­
nignus in 192, although the latter had moved up from sixth to fifth place on 
the retirem ent of Epinicus. In 212 Iulianus once m ore signed above Benignus, 
this tim e replacing him in fifth place and Benignus retiring to sixth position.
A variety of explanations m ight be guessed in all three cases, such as loss 
of seniority through prolonged absence, and it may be th at future discoveries

will clarify the reason. But the cause is plainly a trivial detail of office routine, 
and three exceptions in two hundred prove the rule, th at H adrian’s reform 
of this departm ent closely resem bles the organisation of late em pire offices.
The nam es and descriptions of witnesses give strong evidence of their 
changing status. Before Vespasian’s censorship, the soldiers and veterans 
who w itnessed th eir colleagues’ grants varied from private soldier to Eques 
Romanus. One of them, the Pannonian Flavius Festus, who signed a grant 
to a praetorianus in 71/74, was evidently a recently enfranchised auxiliary, 
possibly prom oted to the praetoriani for distinguished services in 69. Under 
the Flavians and Trajan m any of the signatories w ere of relatively low social 
standing. The three T. Flavii of 97 and 98 were alm ost certainly im perial 
freedm en, and so perhaps was Ti. Claudius Erastus of 8 6 . Upwards of a dozen 
nomina recur w ith up to half a dozen different individuals, sharing the same 
praenomen (Index 6 , p. 324-5), the tribe and affiliation of the two Lossii of 75 
suggest th at they w ere brothers. P. Atinius Rufus (74) adds after his name, 
as though it w ere an origo, P a la tin a ), one of the four tribes into which the 
poorer citizens of Rome w ere commonly enrolled; he looks like a relative of 
P. Antinius P. f. Vel. Augustalis (75), perhaps a freedm an’s son, taking the 
tribe of his fath e r’s patron. There are a high proportion of Greek cognomina, 
not yet com m on among citizens of standing; and also of Latin and provincial 
cognomina th a t w ere norm ally confined to hum bler folk, Augustalis, Cinna- 
mus, Expectatus, Pietas, Verecundus and the like.
There was a significant shift u nder Trajan. There are no Ulpii, except for 
B lastus in 148, and no other im perial nomina later than Flavius. Except for 
the two Attii of 124 and 133, there are no new recurring nomina after 107, 
and no m ore hum ble Latin cognomina. After 114, until the middle of the 
second century, Greek cognomina are confined to m en w ith nomina already 
attested, including Flavii, Claudii and Iuliii, except for Alcides in 133. In 114 
the practice of abbreviating diplomata texts was also initiated.
After 134, these tendencies hardened and accelerated. There are no re­
curring nomina, except for the entrenched Pullii. The only im perial nomina, 
ap art from Blastus, are two Ti. Iulii and three Ti. Claudii, all of them men 
whose citizenship dated back five generations (Index 5, p. 323-4). Except among 
them and the Pullii, there are only a couple of Greek cognomina, in the middle 
and later second century proportionately fewer th an senators from the Greek 
speaking provinces, no longer a m ark of lowly origin. W ith few exceptions, 
the names w ould pass unrem arked among a list of senators and equites. In 
theory of course any m an w ith such a nam e m ight be a freedm an of a patron 
w ith the sam e nomen. Tribe and filiation were n ot given after 75, and bare 
nam es cannot by themselves prove conclusively anything about status. Their 
m ost striking feature is the total absence of men w ith recent im perial nomina, 
who m ight have been im perial freedm en. It is not probable th at a government 
office which contained no im perial freedm en included freedm en of private 
persons. The overall im pression is th at from H adrian onw ards the signatories 
were m en of substance, probably scribae, or m en of sim ilar standing; and 
from the late republic onwards scribae ranked upon the fringes of the eques­
trian order (references in Jones SRG 154 ff.). Their status was probably not 
dissim ilar to th at of their late em pire successors, who in the late fourth

century retired w ith the titles of vicarii and consulares, in the fifth century 
as clarissimi and com ites consistorii (Jones LRE 577—578).
It is not possible to identify w ith confidence the office in which these 
signatories w orked. Their business was to supply soldiers w ith authentic 
copies of citizenship grants. They m ight have belonged to a secretariat which 
dealt w ith the arm y, or w ith citizenship, or both. The most likely guess is that 
they form ed a departm ent within the office of ab epistulis. His title describes 
his basic function, to send out letters em anating from the em peror, on m atters 
m ilitary and civil, for which purpose he had in the second century an asso­
ciate ab epistulis graecis. His responsibilities are m ost fully set forth in 
Statius, Silvae, 5, 1, illum inated by Suetonius, Divi Vespasiani, 4, 1. His m ajor 
concerns were arm y appointm ents and ensuring the despatch of corn supplies 
from Africa and Egypt. It is therefore possible that the m an who is recorded 
in an inscription from Amalfi (ILS 1671) as :
Ti. Claudius divi l(ibertus) Erastus scriniarius ab epistulis signed the diploma 
of 8 6 in fourth place. The term scriniarius, denoting all m em bers of the office, 
including the approxim ate equivalents of the later superunum eraries, accords 
with the large num ber of witnesses who signed under the Flavians.
As well as illustrating the structure of second century adm inistration, the 
study of the witnesses helps to date fragm entary diplomata. The indices here 
provided may help the editors of future discoveries; they also give greater 
precision to a few already published. A single instance m ust here serve as 
example. CIL XVI 127 is dated 13 May, ’ Severo et Ponpeiano cos'. CIL, fol­
lowing the original publication (N otizie degli Scavi 1898 p. 41, where there 
is an excellent photograph) gives the year as 173, Severo I I et Pompeiano II 
consulibus ordinariis. Apart from the witnesses, this date is virtually impossi­
ble, for two reasons; all known diplomata are meticulously accurate in ter­
minology, so th at the omission of the iteration figure w ould m ake this frag­
m ent unique in its error, if the year were 173; and it is not conceivable that 
in the 170s the ordinarii could have rem ained in office as late as May. A 
known diplomata are dated by the consuls in office on the day of issue, not 
by the ordinarii of the year, after suffecti succeeded them. Several Severi and 
Pompeiani are known to have been suffecti in the later second century, but 
the year of this pair is not yet known. From the witness list (Table 3, where 
the date bracket c. 185/190 is suggested) it is clear that the date is not m uch 
earlier than 192, when the first three witnesses are identical and the fifth has 
moved up one step, and since five of its witnesses also survived to sign in 
212, if the restoration of the nam es in that year is correct. But the date is 
well after 178, since the first three witnesses of that year had retired or died, 
and the fourth, sixth and seventh signatories of 178 had become the first 
three of CIL XVI 127.
The changes in the witnesses to m ilitary diplomata describe the evolution 
of one small detail of Roman adm inistration. From the earliest known text, 
issued in 52 AD, the wording was inscribed in standardised wording, in a 
standard form , either by governm ent clerks, or possibly by personnel of the 
provincial com m and concerned. At first, they w ere certified by m ilitary men 
connected w ith the units involved, perhaps chosen from those in Rome, at 
the castra peregrinorum, at the tim e. Vespasian transferred the certification

to a governm ent office, staffed in the main by m en of relatively low origins; 
but for tw o generations th at office observed no protocol or standard pro­
cedure in selecting which of its clerks took responsibility for certifying the 
accuracy of the grant. H adrian im posed a strict seniority, and enhanced the 
standing of established posts, whose ordering closely resem bles the adm ini­
strative practice of the late em pire. By themselves, the diplomata do not 
show w hether these changes concerned only their own sm all office, or the 
whole or larger p art of the adm inistrative offices of the central government 
of the em pire. The evidence of Aurelius Victor and of the Codes and other 
late texts suggests H adrian’s reform s, and perhaps also Vespasian’s, con­
cerned the whole of the adm inistration. If that is so, then the changes revealed 
by a study of diploma witnesses should, at least in outline, be parallelled in 
o ther offices. They may serve as a yardstick for the interpretation of the more 
fragm entary evidence, largely epigraphic, that concerns other government de­
partm ents.
1 A convenient summary of the work 
of H.-G. Pflaum concerning equestrian 
ranks in the civil service, with the latest 
views of the Hadrianic reforms, may be 
found in Abrégé des procurateurs éque- 
stres (adapted by S. Ducroux and N. 
Duval) Paris (1974), especially pp. 6 —9; 
military reforms have been discussed by
E. Birley, Roman Britain and the Ro­
man Army Kendal (1961) 133 ff. and Car­
nuntum Jhb. 1957 (1958) 13 ff. Some of 
the Constantinian changes referred to 
by Victor must be related to the sepa­
ration of civilian and military careers.
2 The Later Roman Empire (LRE) 
Oxford (1964) 565 ff.; Studies in Roman 
Government and Law (SRG) Oxford 
(1968) 151—175 (= Journal of Roman 
Studies 39 (1949) 35—55).
PRIČE NA RIMSKIH VOJAŠKIH DIPLOMAH 
Povzetek
Rekrutacija za pomožne enote rimske vojske je potekala predvsem med pere­
grini in je v največji meri temeljila na prostovoljnem vpisu, zadosten dotok pro­
stovoljcev pa je zagotavljala ugodnost, da so si pridobili rimsko državljanstvo in 
conubium. Da so ta privilegij lahko izkazali, so vojaki pomožnih enot in veterani 
rimske flote dobivali od Klavdija dalje diplomata militaria, na katerih so bile pri­
dobljene pravice uradno zapisane. Tekst je bil napisan na notranji strani obeh 
ploščic in ponovljen na zunanji strani le ene, medtem ko je druga zunanja stran 
nosila podpise sedmih prič, ki so potrjevale točnost kopije, ekscerpirane iz origi­
nala v Rimu.
Enaka diplomata, ki so zagotavljala le pridobitev pravice do conubium, so bila 
izdana veteranom mestnih enot Rima (Praetoriani, Urbani) in jih od drugod ne 
poznamo (izjema je CIL XVI 133).
Tekst diplom je preprost: »Cesar z datumom tribunicia potestas in drugimi 
naslovi) podeljuje rimsko državljanstvo in pravico poroke onemu, ki služi (ali je 
služil) v tej in tej enoti« in se nadaljuje s podatki o prejemniku ter datumom po­
delitve.
Diplomata, izdana vojakom pomožnih enot po 1 . 193, niso znana, veteranom rim­
ske flote so jih izdajali najmanj do 1 . 250, veteranom mestnih enot pa do 1 . 306.
Glede na število vojakov, ki so dopolnili službeno dobo, je bilo izdanih od fla- 
vijske do sredine antoninske dobe samo za vojake pomožnih enot letno najmanj 
2000 diplom. Število diplom vseh vrst, izdanih od Klavdija do Dioklecijana, znaša 
računamo, od 250 do 500 tisoč. Od teh se jih je ohranilo zelo malo. 257 je objav­

ljenih v CIL XVI (1936) in suplementu XVI (1955). Kar je bilo najdenih po objavi 
suplementa, objavlja avtor na seznamu 1. Imena prič so ohranjena vsega na 120 
diplomah (seznam 2 ).
Povprečno se je na 3—4000 prič ohranila imensko po ena, vendar je njih sestava 
tako dosledna, da je morala biti analogna na vseh izgubljenih. Vrstni red in označbe 
prič pa kažejo določene spremembe.
V prvem obdobju (do 73/74) so vse priče vojaški tovariši in rojaki prejemnika, 
vendar seznami kažejo, da niso imele nikakršne zveze z vojaško enoto prejemnika. 
Res je, da so vse v vojaški službi in da so večinoma iz iste province kot prejem­
nik, niso pa vse iz istega rodu vojske in niti niso bližnji sosedje. Domneva, da so 
bile diplome izdajane v provincah, ne more biti ne ovržena in ne potrjena. Pre­
cizne reference, znane le iz tega obdobja, kažejo, da so priče same preverjale ori­
ginal oz. kopijo. Ob številnih vojakih v samem Rimu ni bilo težko najti primerne 
osebe za podpis. Navado, da so podpisniki izhajali iz iste province kot prejemnik, 
je odpravil Vespazijan.
Z Vespazijanovo reformo se prenese odgovornost overjanja diplome na pisarje 
državnega urada. Reforma se krije z letom 73/74. Diploma z dne 21. maja 74 že nosi 
ime priče (Atinius Rufus), ki je nato v obdobju desetih let podpisala osem znanih 
diplom in je morala imeti funkcijo pisarja. Vendar pa podpisniki diplom vse do 
Hadrijanove reforme ne podpisujejo v nikakršnem utrjenem zaporedju. V istem 
času se premeni tudi tekst diplom (cf. Géza Alföldy v Historia 17 [1968] 215 in John 
Mann v Epigraphische Studien 9 [1972] 233).
Tretje obdobje (od 133/138 naprej) označujejo Hadrijanove reforme, prehod v to 
fazo je posebej prikazan na tabeli 2 A. Najbolj očitna sprememba je strogo določen 
vrstni red podpisovanja prič po stopnjah, ki jih imajo statuti v scrinium.
Aurelius Victor {Epitome de Caesaribus 14, 10—12) navaja, da je vzpostavil Ha­
drijan sistem imenovanja, tako v civilni kot v vojaški sferi, ki velja še v njegovem 
času. Reforme v civilni sferi obravnava H. G. Pflaum, v vojaški sferi pa Eric Birley1 
Najbolj informativni so glede stopenj v administraciji kodeksi in najbolj pregledno 
je te podatke zbral A. H. M. Jones.2
V poznem imperiju ima scrinium določeno število nameščencev, statuti in su­
pernumerarii, s tem da ima vsak pisar {exceptor) možnost napredovanja po stopnjah, 
dokler ne postane proximus in načeluje scrinium. Z njegovim odhodom se vsi 
statuti povzpnejo za stopnjo navzgor, izpraznjeno najnižje mesto pa je ponujeno 
naj starejšemu med supernumerarii. Ta sistem se sklada z razvrstitvijo prič na di­
plomah. Tretjina znanih seznamov prič (tabela 3) pa kaže, da so včasih lahko su­
pernumerarii preskočili nekaj mest in se pojavili kot priče pred nekaj starimi 
statuti.
Vprašanja, kateremu uradu so pripadali podpisovalci diplom, se ne da popol­
noma rešiti; najverjetneje so pripadali oddelku v uradu ab epistulis, čigar kom­
petence je najpopolneje navedel Statius, Silvae, 5, 1, in pojasnil Suetonius, Divi 
Vespasiani, 4, 1 .
Analiza imen in podatkov prič na diplomah izkazuje še drugačne spremembe. 
Pred Vespazijanom so bile vse priče vojaške osebe, katerih status je segal od na­
vadnih vojakov do Eques Romanus. Priče iz flavijskega in Trajanovega časa so, kot 
kažejo imena, izvirale iz nižjih slojev. Številna so grška cognomina, tedaj še redka 
med premožnejšimi osebami, ter latinska in provincialna cognomina, običajno 
vezana, na nižje sloje (Augustalis, Cinnamus, Expectatus, Pietas, Verecundus ipd.). 
Že v Trajanovem času pride do pomembne spremembe. Nič več se ne pojavljajo ce­
sarska nomina, po 1 . 107 se ne pojavljajo več nova nomina in cognomina nižjih 
slojev, grška cognomina pa so vezana na že znana nomina. Po 1 . 134 se te tendence 
še okrepijo. Novih cesarskih nomina takorekoč ni in grška cognomina so redka. 
Z redkimi izjemami bi bila imena tedanjih prič lahko na seznamih senatorjev in 
equites. Teoretično bi bile te osebe lahko osvobojenci, vendar odsotnost cesarskih 
nomina izključuje to možnost. Najverjetneje so bile priče, podpisane na diplomah, 
od Hadrijana dalje, osebe z uglednim družbenim položajem, verjetno scribae. Njih 
status pa se verjetno ni mnogo razlikoval od statusa njih naslednikov v poznem 
imperiju, z nazivi vicarii, consulares (4. stol.) in clarissimi, comites consistorii 
(5. stol.).

Analize diplom kažejo razvoj malega dela rimske administracije. Same po sebi 
diplome ne kažejo, v kakšnem obsegu so spremembe, ki so jih zadevale, zajemale 
celotno rimsko administracijo, vendar pa navedbe Aurelija Viktorja, kodeksov in 
poznejših tekstov kažejo, da so Hadrijanove in verjetno tudi Vespazijanove reforme 
zajele celotno administracijo. Če je tako, potem kažejo spremembe pri diplomah 
vsaj okvirno na vzporedne spremembe v drugih uradih. Analize diplom lahko tako 
služijo analizam bolj fragmentarnih, predvsem epigrafskih spomenikov, seveda pa 
tudi preciznejši določitvi novo odkritih in že objavljenih diplom (primer CIL 
XVI 127).