Ausonius of Bordeaux: Genesis of a Gallic Aristocracy

AUSONIUS OF BORDEAUX AUSONIUS OF BORDEAUX Genesis of a Gallic aristocracy Hagith Sivan London and New York First ...

Author: Hagith Sivan

111 downloads 1186 Views 1MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

AUSONIUS OF BORDEAUX

AUSONIUS OF BORDEAUX Genesis of a Gallic aristocracy

Hagith Sivan

London and New York

First published 1993 by Routledge 11 New Fetter Lane, London EC4P 4EE This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2004. Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada by Routledge Inc. 29 West 35th Street, New York, NY 10001 © 1993 Hagith Sivan All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Sivan, Hagith Ausonius of Bordeaux: genesis of a Gallic aristocracy/Hagith Sivan p. cm. Includes bibliographical references (p. ) and index. 1. Ausonius, Decimus Magnus. 2. Poets, Latin—France— Bordeaux—Biography. 3. Aristocracy (Social class)—Gaul— History. 4. Rome—History—Empire, 284—476—Biography. 5. Bordeaux (France)—Antiquities, Roman. 6. Bordeaux (France) in literature. 7. Gaul—Politics and government. 8. Gaul— Intellectual life. 9. Gaul in literature. I Title. PA6223.S58 1993 871´.01–dc20 [B] 92–16629 ISBN 0-203-16847-X Master e-book ISBN

ISBN 0-203-26366-9 (Adobe eReader Format) ISBN 0-415-08614-0 (Print Edition)

To Helena and Dvorah

CONTENTS

List of maps List of genealogical tables Preface List of abbreviations

ix x xi xiv

1

INTRODUCTION

1

2

THE EMERGENCE OF A LATE ROMAN GALLIC ARISTOCRACY

6

Part I Bordeaux: Municipal aristocracy and urban economics 3

THE CITY

31

4

GENS AUSONIANA

49

5

SCHOOLS AND SCHOLARS

74

Part II Trier: Seat of an empire 6

THE COURT OF VALENTINIAN I

97

7

THE COURT OF GRATIAN

119

8

CONCLUSION

142

Appendix: Revisions, editions and the dating of Ausonius’ works

148

Concordance Notes Bibliography Index

165 166 220 236

MAPS

1

Gaul in the fourth century (Inset: Ausonius’ route described in the Mosella)

15

2

Late Roman Bordeaux and the site of Saint Christoly

41

3

Aquitania, some urban and rural sites

67

ix

GENEALOGICAL TABLES

The Arborii and the Ausonii 1

First, second and third generations (maternal)

50

2 Fourth generation (maternal) and first generation (paternal) 52 3

Fifth generation (maternal) and second generation (paternal)

57

4

Sixth generation (maternal) and third generation (paternal)

60

x

PREFACE

This book marks the end of a four-year-long relationship with a remarkable man. In hindsight, our time spent together has been enjoyable despite some tedious moments. One great advantage was our shared appreciation of the French landscape and its wine. I am indebted not only to Ausonius for leading me to Bordeaux, but also to my hosts at the Maison des Pays Ibériques on the campus of the university of Bordeaux III. In pursuing Ausonius I have had some memorable adventures. One occurred at Eastertime in 1987 after descending into the wellconcealed crypt of St Paul’s church at Narbonne in the congenial company of Yves Solier, the municipal archaeologist. On our emerging, covered with the dust of centuries, an innocent believer at the church was so startled that she imagined herself to be a modernday witness to the resurrection. That same Easter I was offered the kind hospitality of the monastic community at Lagrasse near Narbonne. I attended their all-night Byzantine-style services on Holy Saturday and nodded off while holding a candle, thus burning my trousers. As a student, I was privileged to study in Aix-en-Provence where the late Paul-Albert Février revealed to me the world of late Roman urbanism. In Marseille, Daniel Bardy and the Centre de Vie et d’Arts have always proved kind and entertaining hosts; in Montpellier, Mlle Demougeot allowed me to ‘talk Ausonius’ over an excellent meal. At Bordeaux, Jean-Pierre Bost bore all my questions with unending patience. He also introduced me to much new archaeological material. Our journey to Plassac, a site of a late Roman villa which he has been excavating, showed me that archaeological forays, at least in France, can be great fun. I came xi

AU SON I U S OF BORDEAUX

back not only with a better understanding of the countryside in late antique Aquitaine, but also equipped with a number of excellent bottles of local wine purchased en route (let it be recorded, however, that I could not afford a single bottle of the outstanding Chateau Ausone). Thanks to Professor Bost I also Visited’ Nymfius in his villa at Valentine, beautifully situated not far from the Pyrenees and close to Saint Bertrand de Comminges. Anne-Marie Demailly, Robert Etienne, Louis Maurin and many others at Centre Pierre Paris, Université de Bordeaux III, were kind and helpful. At the Direction des Antiquités Régionales, Jean-François Pichonneau and Marie-Agnès Gaidon discussed with me their recent excavations at Bordeaux, and Danny Barraud, the municipal archaeologist, shared my opinion of the importance of late Roman Bordeaux as an economic centre. In Paris, Jacques Fontaine, André Chastagnol and Catherine Balmelle listened patiently to my ideas and allowed me to share something of their vast knowledge of late antiquity. Colleagues in Canada and the UK have also been generous with time and advice. T.D.Barnes, R.P.H.Green and J.Harries read a full draft in the summer of 1990 and offered useful comments. Financial assistance towards the cost of my research was provided by the university of the Witwatersrand and the Human Sciences Research Council (Institute for Research Development), neither of which is responsible for the views here expressed. Katy Cleary offered invaluable editorial assistance; and at Wits computer centre Rosa Kotsiovos and Koola Theodoropoulos were ever ready to assist. I wish to offer my humble thanks to a host of anonymous readers who are bound to recognise themselves (sometimes verbatim) in the following pages. If, like Prudentius, I were in a position to dispense crowns of martyrdom, I would have little hesitation in conferring them on John Drinkwater, Ralph Mathisen and Kent Rigsby. Presuming on a very brief acquaintance made at a conference on fifth-century Gaul (organised by John Drinkwater in 1989), I have plagued John ever since with queries and puzzles, and finally with, a full draft of this book. John’s generosity and his vast knowledge of Roman Gaul made him naturally vulnerable to such assaults. At the same conference I also met Ralph Mathisen who bravely embraced me upon my arrival. (Others merely frowned at my appearance, since I had just arrived from the City of Lights and was clad in a pair of fashionable black shorts.) Ralph’s immense knowledge of late xii

PRE FACE

Roman prosopography saved me from many embarrassing errors. In 1989/90 I also spent some months at Duke university where the kindness of Kent Rigsby extended well beyond that of a senior colleague. Every morning I would besiege his office with my latest revelations and he would listen patiently or read through what I had written. In this fashion we travelled from Sardis with Eunapius, to Nantes with Eusebius, and to Bordeaux with Ausonius. To John, Ralph and Kent, then, Ausonius and myself express our humble gratitude. Need I say that all the faults are mine alone? HSS Johannesburg, 1992

xiii

ABBREVIATIONS

SOURCES AASS AE AJP Amm. ANRW BAR.IS/BS BHL CCSL CIL CJ CPh CQ CR CRAI CSEL CTh FHG GCS HA HSCP HTR ILCV

Acta Sanctorum L’année épigraphique American Journal of Philology Ammianus Aufstieg und Niedergang de römischen Welt (ed. H.Temporini) British Archaeological Reprints. International Series/British Series Bibliotheca Hagiographica Latina Corpus Christianorum Scriptorum Latinorum Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum Codex Justinianus Classical Philology Classical Quarterly Classical Review Comptes rendus de l’académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum Codex Theodosianus Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum (ed. C.Müller) Die Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller der Ersten Jahrhunderte Historia Augusta Harvard Studies in Classical Philology Harvard Theological Review Inscriptiones Latinae Christinae Veteres (ed. E.Diehl) xiv

AB B REVIATION S

ILS JHS JRS MGH AA/ SRMS MH NDig. Occ. PL PLRE REA RH RM SCh TAPA TZ ZPE

Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae (ed. H.Dessau) Journal of Hellenic Studies Journal of Roman Studies Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Auctores Antiquissimi/Scriptorum Rerum Merovingicarum Museum Helveticum Notitia dignitatum in pertibus Occidentis Patrologia Latina The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire I (1971) and II (1980) Revue des études anciennes Revue historique Rheinisches Museum für Philologie Sources chrétiennes Transactions of the American Philological Association Trierer Zeitschrift Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphie ROMAN OFFICES

CRP CSL MM MO PA PP PPG PUC PUR QSP VUR

comes rerum privatarum comes sacrarum largitionum magister memoriae magister officorum praefectus annonae praefectus praetorio praefectus praetorio Galliarum praefectus urbis Constantinopolis praefectus urbis Romae quaestor sacri palatii vicarius urbis Romae EDITORS OF AUSONIUS’ WORKS

Schenkl, 1883 (MGH AA V. 2, Berlin) Peiper, 1886 (Leipzig, Teubner) Evelyn-White, 1919–21 (Cambridge, Mass. and London, Loeb) (English translation) Pastorino, 1971 (Turin) Prete, 1978 (Leipzig, Teubner) Green, 1991 (Oxford) xv

1 INTRODUCTION

To explore the genesis of an aristocracy through the career of a single individual is similar to taking a short stroll down a very long lane. The limits imposed by the lifetime of Ausonius must be acknowledged at the outset. Indeed, it would be impossible to probe the nature of fourth-century Gaul, its political system and literary culture, through a study of one man’s experiences. The eyes of Ausonius, and those of the author, are firmly focused on the well-defined orbit of Bordeaux, Aquitania and Trier, and on the rise of the Gallic municipal aristocracy to the rank of provincial nobility. Readers who derive comfort from labels and familiar terminology will find it difficult to fit this book into any specific category. It is neither a biography of Ausonius nor a close study of his literary works. There is already a plethora of the latter, and my own interests go beyond the strictly biographical outlook.1 Instead, I have combined various aspects of historical, archaeological, arthistorical, religious and literary approaches. The result is a presentation from the widest possible perspective of an individual who rose to the top of the late Roman imperial administration and the political ladder in record time. I have included in this presentation an outline of the particular topographical, economic, social and cultural milieu which produced such a phenomenal career and eventually gave rise to a new Gallic aristocracy. This account does not claim to be definitive. All over France and elsewhere within the old Roman limes the work of classical archaeologists continues to shed new light on old assumptions. Given the present state of our knowledge, the most that can be offered is a comprehensive introduction to Ausonius and his world.2

1


The man whose career and compositions serve as the subject of the present inquiry was born at the beginning of the fourth century (c. 310) and died during its last decade.3 His place of birth was Bordeaux, a city which always held a special place in his affections. His father was a medical man and his mother he describes as belonging to a noble family. A political biography of Ausonius would trace the ascent of his family from obscure beginnings to the most eminent civil offices in the empire. Such a biography would draw attention to the fact that young and talented members of Ausonius’ family chose the liberal professions as useful vehicles of social and economic mobility. After thirty years of teaching at Bordeaux, first as a grammarian and then as a rhetor, Ausonius moved to the Gallic capital of Trier to join the newly established court of Valentinian I as a tutor to his young son, Gratian. A few months before the death of Valentinian, the ambitious poet from Bordeaux was appointed to his first imperial office (quaestor in charge of formulating imperial legislation). A few months after the emperor’s death, Ausonius, his family and his friends started to occupy the most important civilian posts in the bureaucratic hierarchy. Between 376 and 380, under the regime of Gratian, the gens ausoniana appeared as the most influential clan in the western empire, and ambitious Gauls, some clearly under the auspices of Ausonius, appeared on the political stage.4 By 381 the imperial court had moved to Italy and the Ausonii retired to their Aquitanian estates to pursue rural leisure. By 383 the Gallic euphoria which had resulted from Gaul’s exploitation of the ascendancy of Ausonius at the Treveran court was over. AIM AND PLAN Through the extremely well-documented career of Ausonius, this book aims to explore the evolution of the Gallic aristocracy in the fourth century. Underlying this exploration is an attempt to trace Gallic thinking vis-à-vis the emperor and the empire, and vice versa. Any study that sets out to investigate a process of aristocratic naissance or renaissance needs first to define the term ‘aristocratic’. A discussion of the meaning of aristocracy opens Chapter 2. What were the criteria for becoming an aristocrat and how did one establish a credible claim to nobility? Inevitably, every definition is to some extent arbitrary. Serious gaps in the data for late thirdand early fourth-century Gaul have compounded the difficulty of supplying an accurate definition. 2

I NTRODUCTION

A basic working axiom of historians of late Roman Gaul has been that the series of usurpations between 260 and 274, known as the Gallic empire, represented a ‘come-back’ by the Gauls to the stage of imperial politics.5 This reappearance after centuries of absence from high office, it has been argued, was further invigorated by the presence of the legitimate imperial court in Gaul from the end of the third century and throughout the fourth century.6 In this light, Ausonius was simply the most successful in a long line of aspiring Gallic politicians. Yet another view of the same process points to a significant gap in the wake of the fall of the Gallic empire, a gap which saw the slow and gradual emergence of a new aristocracy in Gaul. By the time Ausonius appeared on the political scene, in the second half of the fourth century, the formation of this new aristocracy was far from complete.7 To assess the significance of Ausonius’ career to the rise of the Gallic aristocracy it is essential to consider the relationship between the imperial court and the Gauls. Interaction between Roman emperors and their Gallic subjects in the period between the fall of the Gallic empire and the ascendancy of Gauls within the imperial administration is reviewed in the second chapter. In particular, Gallic office-holdings are highlighted in order to gauge any discernible pattern. Wealth, birth and education have traditionally been considered the hallmarks of good aristocratic breeding. The sources of wealth in fourth-century Gaul seem to be due to the survival or rapid recovery of urban centres. Neither the literary sources nor archaeological excavations, however, enable us to reconstruct a complete picture of late Gallic urbanism. It seems clear, though, that fortunes varied: some cities experiencing decline whilst others enjoyed prosperity. Bordeaux belonged to the latter category and its hitherto unsuspected wealth would have provided the necessary resources for the growth of a municipal élite. At the end of his Ordo, Ausonius proudly claims that he is a civis in both Rome and Bordeaux. Rome he venerates; Bordeaux he loves (diligo Burdigalam, Romam colo, 20.40). His biography reveals strong attachment to his urban roots, but his description is insufficient to recreate a full picture of fourth-century Bordeaux. Recent excavations in the city and its vicinity have necessitated a reevaluation of the nature of urban life in late Roman Bordeaux. On the basis of these excavations a new image of the city as a prosperous economic centre, with significant art and craft industries, has 3


emerged to enrich the Ausonian descriptions. The excavations, many of which have not been published, are surveyed in the third chapter. Reconstructing the human aspect of late Roman Bordeaux depends very much on Ausonius’ writings. His Parentalia and Professores, character sketches of relatives and friends, provide a unique insight into the population of late Roman Bordeaux. They also point to considerable fluctuations in social and economic status and to the intermittent acquisition of aristocratic requisites. Few families in late antiquity, and none in Gaul, serve as a better focus for a discussion of the rise of provincial clans than the gens ausoniana.8 Indeed, the family of Ausonius is an excellent example of social mobility in the Roman empire.9 But to understand the precise meaning of such mobility a detailed analysis of the careers of individual members of the family is necessary. In the fourth chapter I explore, generation by generation, the origins and development of the Ausonian clan, from its first recorded ancestors in the late third century to the mid-360s. The emphasis is on the means that enabled a provincial family like the Ausonii-Arborii to combine their resources of talent, wealth and status to produce the first known administrative dynasty in fourth-century Gaul. It is also possible now, on the basis of recent archaeological surveys of Aquitanian villae and their monumental decoration, to paint a picture of the surroundings of Gallic magnates in the countryside at leisure. Bureaucracy and education in late antiquity have often been coupled, and not without reason. The imperial services, with their hierarchical officia (bureaux), had to rely for their smooth running on persons with a certain degree of literacy. Whether or not the type of education then supplied by provincial schools or universities (another name for schools) prepared graduates to become efficient administrators is another matter. But the fact remains that those with a pedagogical background often obtained key positions. The purpose of the fifth chapter, therefore, is to analyse the careers of members of the Bordelais schools in order to distinguish patterns of advancement and relations with the imperial hierarchy. The findings show the extent to which education was an instrument of social, economic and political mobility in late antique Gaul.10 In the second part of the book the focus shifts to Trier and to the courts of Valentinian I and Gratian. The political ascent of Ausonius at court is examined against the background of factionalism and the manipulation of power conferred through office. The sixth chapter 4

I NTRODUCTION

reflects on the significance of the leap from Bordeaux to Trier for a man like Ausonius, and reveals the extent to which a Gallic court, dominated by a Pannonian emperor and his transplanted subjects, was receptive to ambitious locals. Who were the Gauls in positions of power at the Treveran court when Ausonius arrived in Trier and how did one’s presence at court itself determine future career patterns and possibilities? A change of regime, even within one dynasty, is a time of profound transformation. The death of Valentinian I and the accession of his sons was accompanied by a power struggle from which Ausonius and his allies emerged victorious. How this victory was achieved and in what ways the gens ausoniana proceeded to accumulate offices and influence are among the issues addressed in the seventh chapter. The nature of Ausonius’ domination, and its meaning for the history of the Gallic aristocracy, together form the focal point of this inquiry. The lot of a politician whose imperial patron suffered a violent death was variable, to judge by fourthcentury examples.11 Ausonius was one of the lucky ones and was allowed to retire peacefully to Bordeaux and his Aquitanian estates. A central issue occupies the conclusion to this book: what was the specific contribution of Ausonius’ ascendancy to the development of the Gallic aristocracy in the fourth century? The exploration of this question allows us to appreciate the consolidation of the Gallic nobility into a class that aspired to produce, less than a century after Ausonius, an imperial ruler, Avitus, and a notorious collaborator with the barbarians, Arvandus, both, however, falling outside the present discussion. A thorny problem which plagues all editors of Ausonius is that of textual authenticity. None of the four major editions published between 1883 and 1978 has been greeted with universal consensus.12 The year 1991 witnessed the appearance of a fifth by R.P.H. Green. One irritating result is the various numbers which each editor attaches to a work of Ausonius. My Appendix does not pretend to solve any of the textual issues relating to the Ausonian corpus. I feel, however, that any work on Ausonius ought at least to inform the unwary reader of the problems involved. Hence, in the Appendix, I provide a list of textual references to revisions and ancient editions and suggest revised datings for some of the works. The Appendix is followed by a Concordance.

5

2 THE EMERGENCE OF A LATE ROMAN GALLIC ARISTOCRACY THE MEANING OF ARISTOCRACY A discussion concerning Ausonius’ career and its place within the emergence and formation of a provincial aristocracy needs, in the first place, to define aristocracy. One well-known study of the late Roman aristocracy has presented a broad canvass of aristocratic activities as important components of class definition.1 It shows that the ways in which a nobleman beguiled his leisure (otium) were just as significant as his time spent in office. Each occupation and pursuit was intrinsic to the accumulation of unparalleled power, wealth and authority. Through correspondence, dinner parties, arranged matches and journeys, a busy and power-minded nobleman could build up an impressive network of friends, contacts, clients and relatives. The cream of the aristocracy (according to another modern study) based their claim to exclusive nobility on the acquisition of the two top offices in the administration—the praetorian prefecture and the consulship.2 Some offices certainly bestowed greater prestige than others, and the growing association between rank and office is evident. In an age in which the consulship was often reserved for the emperors, their relatives or their generals, it was quite difficult for civilians, even the blue-blooded, to become consul. The office was the emperor’s to bestow and a much coveted honour. 3 Besides unparalleled prestige, however, the consulship could confer only limited real power. By contrast, the praetorian prefecture imparted widescale influence which a man like Sextus Petronius Probus could fully exploit.4 Born to the noble clan of the Petronii and marrying into the even nobler family of the Anicii, Probus became praetorian prefect several times and in consecutive years.5 His position afforded 6

A LATE ROMAN GALLIC ARI STOCRACY

him valuable opportunities for creating and enlarging ties with clientele. It also enabled him to place protégés in key appointments and to further his own wealth, power and authority. Probus, to be sure, is merely the most spectacular example of the intricacy that hides behind the term aristocracy. The advantages of birth and inherited wealth and status were, in his case, exploited to the full through the further assumption of the authority inherent in a public office. Each factor contributed to enhance the other as public spheres of influence became the natural extension of private domains of aristocratic activities.6 His family further exemplifies the hereditary patterns of eminence and power in their conscientious effort to preserve aristocratic prerogatives within the nexus of relatives and dependants.7 For individuals with less pedigree and resources, admission to senatorial ranks could be acquired either at birth, by a son of a senator, or by obtaining a special certificate from the emperor (codicilli). Yet neither method entailed access to the senate at Rome. Enrolment in the Roman senate itself involved a financial transaction, namely the payment of dues by the candidate.8 No legal distinction seems to have applied to the terms senator and clarissimus, which the laws used indiscriminately to mark senatorial rank. The two other senatorial denominations, spectabilis and illustris, came to signify internal divisions within the rank. Throughout the fourth century a growing number of provincials obtained senatorial rank, either through the exercise of office or through an honorary appointment (the latter often depending on their financial means). Earlier residency requirements (in Italy) were abolished and those enjoying senatorial status were allowed to remain in their original abodes. As a result, a new social and territorial equilibrium was gradually formed between classes, provinces and imperial centres. Social mobility, involving change of residence, profession and class, has been signalled as a remarkable feature of life in the later Roman empire.9 The bleak picture derived from imperial legislation, particularly from laws pertaining to municipal aristocracies (curiales) in the provinces, can be qualified by examples of upward mobility. After all, downwardly mobile people do not get encomia and remain, for the most part, anonymous. The complexity of issues involving aristocratic status, activities, influence, power and authority may appear to preclude precise definitions of the term aristocracy. Ancient sources seem to reflect the vagueness of modern analyses. Symmachus’ famous description 7


of the Roman senate as the pars melior generis humani (the better part of mankind) is complimentary but vague.10 The phrase was used in a private correspondence to a fellow aristocrat and has therefore only limited value as a reflection of public opinion. Late Roman laws, sedulous in their definition of class privileges and obligations, distinguish degrees of senatorial rank, but do not explain the criteria for becoming clarissimus, spectabilis or illustris. 11 The lack of information provided by the sources is hardly surprising, since from the third to the fifth centuries class boundaries were flexible and criteria for membership of a given order constantly had to be redefined.12 Ammianus Marcellinus offers a brilliantly satirical sketch of the Roman senatorial aristocracy of the fourth century.13 Snobbery, emphasis on external appearances, minute attention to respects due to him, highly developed self-consciousness of his status, overdecorated houses which blind the viewer with their wealth, sumptuous banquets in which every imaginable delicacy graces the table, and an undue display of his real power over dependants, are a few of the hallmarks of a Roman aristocrat. One would never mistake him for a lesser personage than he is: the trappings of status and wealth were there for all to see. In a speech of thanks to the emperor Gratian for his consulate in 379, Ausonius names three categories of men who, through the consulship, were entitled to the highest senatorial rank, that of nobiles: military commanders (viri gloriae militaris); nobles with established ancestry (viri nobilitatis antiquae); and men known for their loyalty and expertise (viri fide incliti et officiis probati). 14 He himself, although strictly speaking a bureaucrat, did not quite fit this last category.15 Ausonius’ outlook emphasises the importance of office in determining social status. The inclusion of soldiers and bureaucrats in the highest social order shows that loyalty to emperors, who were often themselves novi homines, had its rewards. Underlying all three Ausonian categories is the common and formal exercise of power (potentia) in the civil or military spheres.16 On the other side of the scale were those who had to submit to authority either voluntarily or as a result of coercion. Indeed, it is all too easy to forget that the exercise of power, formal or informal, invariably entails submission and obedience on the part of a large number of unrecorded individuals. As Ausonius’ categorisation further implies, different career 8


patterns led to senatorial rank. Like Ausonius, modern scholarship has distinguished between ‘senatorial’ and ‘bureaucratic’ types of career.17 An Italian senator would typically start as quaestor or praetor, both offices then a mere shadow of their previous glory and only serving to introduce the young aristocrat to Roman society; then followed the governorship of a province, usually in Italy or Africa; a third step would be the vicariate; and finally, as the crown of an active career, would come the prefecture of Rome, Italy or Gaul—all three offices a stepping-stone to the consulate. It must be remembered, however, that offices did not always follow each other in direct sequence. Often a substantial gap occurred between one office and the next. Nor should it be forgotten that many members of the Italian senatorial aristocracy probably never held office. Only a limited number could in practice reach the offices which entailed membership of the most exclusive senatorial circles. A bureaucrat, on the other hand, would typically hold a succession of court offices from headship of a department, through the comitiva, to one of the prefectures. The emperor Constantius II, known for his attention to the imperial bureaucracy, made a point of promoting men of proven administrative experience.18 Thus an important office like that of the magister officiorum or the comes sacrarum largitionum could only be reached after ten years in the administration. The impression of precise distinctions between senatorial and bureaucratic careers, however, is deceptive. One often finds mixed patterns: senators who held ‘bureaucratic’ offices or bureaucrats who occupied a ‘senatorial’ office. And although certain offices were more likely to have been held by senators, this was not invariably the case. The existence of significant grey areas prompted the imperial legislator to issue many laws which prescribed the precise rank attendant on each career grade.19 That military offices could precede an essentially civil office like the consulship demonstrates not only the vital role of the army in the later empire but also a certain degree of interaction between military and civilian spheres.20 Many of the emperors themselves reached the throne through the army, and not always from a top position. In their persons they connected the civil and military hierarchies as they stood at the top of each and were the supreme dispensers of honours. 21 Their dependence on and genuine sympathy with the military dictated a mutually beneficial alliance and not a few members of the ruling imperial houses were married into families of leading generals. Like the aristocracy, the top 9


echelon of the army often consisted of rival generals, each promoting his own candidates and supporters. Failure to understand the workings of the military aristocracy was fatal to emperors as the example of Gratian shows. The generals, often barbarian or semibarbarian in origin, may have lacked qualifications through birth, but their control of a body of trained soldiers gave them the sort of power that wealth could buy but birth did not guarantee. Lineage was a sensitive issue. The antiquity of one’s family was an important factor at Rome. 22 As the fourth century progressed, members of the senatorial aristocracy delved further into the mythical past to unearth a succession of heroic ancestors with the help of ingenious genealogists.23 A line of consuls, heroes and gods was marshalled to obtain distinction. Such feats were less plausibly accomplished in the provinces, although occasional claims could be heard there also.24 Ausonius implies that noble blood could carry one as far as the consulship, but in the long run a man’s nobility depended on the extent to which it could be proven or believed. Indeed, people with lineage were not necessarily aristocrats except by literary courtesy and Ausonius himself would move the aristocratic goalposts according to the addressee. Even in the early principate very few senators could look back to their agnatic ancestors to substantiate a claim to dignitas. Hence, the search was made for other standards of social status, principally wealth (which became indispensable and publicised) and a respectable circle of kin.25 It is precisely the element of wealth which is absent from Ausonius’ list of consular components given in his Gratiarum Achio (see above p. 8). The omission may have been deliberate. An imperial panegyric was not the appropriate occasion on which to dwell on the promotion of the rich. Yet there is no doubt that the unique place of the Roman senatorial aristocracy in contemporary society was secured by the extent of their wealth. Many senators possessed enormous wealth and landed properties spread over several provinces.26 The acquisition of wealth in the later Roman empire could be accomplished in various ways: some legal and acceptable; others illegal and unsavoury. One way was to hold an influential office in the imperial administration.27 It was a cyclical situation: wealth guaranteed authority or potentia, and authority increased wealth. Wealth and birth combined to secure a valuable home basis from which an aristocrat could operate. A reconstruction of a process of aristocratic naissance can typically start at some municipality with an individual who weathered a particular crisis 10


and managed to increase his property by a timely acquisition of neighbouring lands of the less fortunate. He then proceeds to acquire local status in the home community through the exercise of a municipal office and, at times, through a display of public munificence. Through luck, work and useful marriages the municipal magnate builds up a prestige that extends beyond his home district. He becomes a ‘leader’ or an aristocrat whose status receives further confirmation from a move to a major metropolis, the assumption of office in the imperial administration, and the creation of a network of patronage of which he is the centre. Upon retirement, his local position, now considerably enhanced as an affluent and aristocratic ex officio puts him in a position to dispense favours and help others along a similar path.28 This is, of course, merely a simplified version of what often happened. The combination of local status and official power of the sort invested in an administrative position was potent enough to draw the attention of the imperial legislator who attempted, in vain one may presume, to stem the vast array of abuses that often arose.29 To exercise one’s official authority in one’s home province, asserts the law, was nothing short of an usurpatio. Ausonius can be accused of another omission in his imperial panegyric. In the late empire, with the emergence of Christianity as a state religion and the proliferation of Christian emperors, the factor of religious affiliation carried aristocratic weight. 30 Since Constantine had embraced Christianity, the adoption of the imperial creed often became a matter of prudent politics.31 The advantages of joining the ever-growing circle of Christians did not escape the eyes of shrewd aristocrats. A recent survey of the civil administration between 317 and 361 claims that among holders of top positions there were more Christians than pagans; the exceptions being the officers of Constans and the office of the Roman urban prefecture.32 Clearly, those who mostly depended on imperial patronage found it useful to follow the leader, as even did some of the noble families of Rome. The Anicii scored considerably over their fellow nobles by becoming one of the first aristocratic families to convert.33 Similarly, from the end of the fourth century the ascetic-minded daughters of the Roman senatorial aristocracy performed a valuable public relations function for their families. In 373 the departure of one of these, Melania, for the unknown shores of the Middle East caused something of a scandal at Rome. Twentyseven years later she 11


returned to Italy as a family and public heroine.34 At the beginning of the fifth century the Anician heiress, Demetrias, took the veil of consecrated virginity in a muchpublicised ceremony. On her right was Proba, her grandmother and Probus’ widow, who allegedly had opened the gates of Rome to Alaric’s Goths in 410.35 Neither wealth nor office could have remedied the damage to the family’s reputation as efficiently and spectacularly as Demetrias’ gesture. Christianity was also a significant social unifier. It united generals and aristocrats in pursuit of patronage over holy men and sacred precincts.36 Furthermore, a conversion of an influential person also created a chain reaction which involved similar adaptation for his subordinates and dependants.37 What, then, is the meaning of aristocracy? It is evident from the brief discussion above that the plurality of contributing factors precludes precise definitions. So intricate is the interaction between them that even the broadest definition is not likely to capture the relation of the obvious and the subtler aspects of aristocratic status, power and authority. For the purpose of the present discussion, however, it is clearly essential to isolate the more sizable and readily estimable factors which contributed to the making of an aristocrat. Patterns of office-holdings are fairly well documented and can serve as a useful indication of ascent within the administrative hierarchy. They are particularly important in the fourth century as the mobility of the court appeared to have played a major role in the creation of provincial aristocracies. Evidence concerning the rank of a man at birth or information about his family background is sometimes stated and can at times be inferred. Affiliation, therefore, with an élite, municipal or senatorial, is another aristocratic factor which is considered here. Lastly, the economic position of an individual is also taken into account as a measurable factor of social status. To understand Ausonius’ political ascendancy and its role within the genesis of a Gallic aristocracy, it is first necessary to assess the extent to which the three aristocratic components of office, birth and wealth were present in Gaul during the late third and the early fourth centuries, and the extent to which they determined the formation of a new aristocracy. For this purpose I have assembled the evidence for the existence of wealth (of the type which would enable its possessor to qualify for admittance to the senate); of lineage (extending to pre-Constantinian ancestry); and, above all, of imperial office, in order to form an impression of the Gallic upper 12


class before Ausonius. For the sake of convenience I shall use the term aristocracy or upper class interchangeably to denote the class affiliation of those investigated. A few caveats first. The nature of the evidence at our disposal is uneven, not to say skewed. Literary and epigraphical sources supply information about Gallic office-holders. But in many cases the indications of their patria are fragile, and for most the precise territorial origins, such as a city or a province within Gaul, remain hypothetical. Nomenclature, where a Gallic connection can be established, remains important, particularly if continuity can be discerned. One must remember, however, that studies on Latin cognomina and the geographical distribution of names have not taken chronological factors into account.38 The epigraphic evidence for Gaul is scarce and ill dated; nor is it possible to determine what proportion of the original volume of inscriptions has survived. Where a Gallic onomastic can be established, however, the appearance in different periods of homonyms can probably be regarded as a measure of continuity. Such unclarity generates, at times, a rather detailed prosopographical discussion. Hagiography and the evidence of artistic monuments can also be used to explore aristocratic origins or wealth. Neither have been examined before in conjunction with an attempt to trace the emergence of the late Roman Gallic aristocracy. Nor is their use without its attendant difficulties. A discussion of hagiographical literature is outside the scope of this study, but the problems connected with the use of this material must be mentioned. Hagiographical narratives often designate a future saint as a scion of a noble family. Such a designation can apply to municipal aristocracy, namely the curials, or to senatorial aristocracy: often we can do no more than guess. Also, the value of the information supplied by the hagiographers differs according to the period of composition, the aim of the vita, and the sources available at that point.39 The usefulness of artistic monuments as evidence is limited by the anonymity of the dead. Richly decorated marble sarcophagi and finely executed mosaics point to a rich clientele. In most cases, the names of those who commissioned the works are unknown, but a concentration of funerary monuments, for example, within an urban cemetery, clearly implies the existence of considerable local economic resources. These sarcophagi also establish territorial identity for the deceased and their families, for the choice of burial ground is connected either with the family’s origin or with the 13


ownership of property in the area. Mosaics, particularly those found on rural estates, are another important indication of wealth. As in the case of those who commissioned the carved marble sarcophagi, the names of the estate owners where mosaics have been unearthed remain unknown. Surveys of mosaics all over Gaul reveal significant regional differentiation.40 They also indicate contacts, both artistic and commercial, between the countryside and the city through the exchange of talent and materials. It has been customary to associate the presence of the imperial court in Gaul with the re-emergence of the Gallic aristocracy in late antiquity.41 The reasoning behind this assertion is that the formation of a Gallic aristocracy appears understandable only with the enrolment of Gauls in the bureaucracy. The question is: are we dealing with the ‘emergence of the Gallic gentry as imperial administrators’, or with already established aristocrats who ‘chose to assume high office’ as an extension of their social and economic position?42 To elucidate this question it is necessary to turn to a chronological survey of Gallic office-holders from the time of Diocletian to the court era of Ausonius in the 370s with concluding remarks on the evidence of rank and wealth. THE IMPERIAL COURT IN GAUL: THE TETRARCHY In the course of the years recorded in Gallic history as the Gallic empire (260–74), a remarkable number of Gauls appear on the imperial and consular fasti.43 After two centuries of extremely low representation on the Roman senate since the suppression of the Gallic revolt of AD 70, such a burst of activity may reinforce the view that once the court resided in Gaul, particularly for a significant period of time (as in the case of Constantinus and Constans between 337 and 350), the traditional relationship between the ruling emperor and the Gallic aristocracy changed.44 A resident court, it may be further argued, facilitated and refuelled the readiness of Gauls to serve the emperors and the rulers’ willingness to employ members of the local aristocracy. For with a court residing in Gaul, it became feasible for local potentates to enjoy the benefits of imperial office whilst continuing to exert their influence at home. Yet were emperors, from Diocletian onward, as eager as their Gallic predecessors to continue to recruit Gauls into imperial service? Diocletian’s succession in 284 prompted certain administrative changes including the restructuring of Gaul. 45 Instead of its 14

Map1


traditional partition into Tres Galliae, Germania and Narbonensis, Gaul was redivided along new lines into the Diocesis Galliarum (Germania, Belgica and Lugdunensis) and the Diocesis Viennensis (Narbonensis, Aquitania and Novempopulana). A distinction was thus introduced between the south and the north of Gaul which had long-lasting effects. The northern parts were controlled from Trier, which also served as the seat of the new Gallic praetorian prefect (PPG) under whose jurisdiction fell Spain and Britain in addition to all of Gaul.46 The capital of the southern parts was initially the city of Vienne, where the vicar of the Gauls resided. Some time around the middle of the fourth century the diocesan capital moved, probably to Bordeaux.47 Diocletian’s perception of an area which had proved fertile soil for usurpers and a major target for barbarian migrations is reflected not only in the new division, but also in the establishment of imperial residences in Gaul. First Trier in the north and then Arles in the south hosted the rulers of the western empire. The choice of Trier was the result of defensive calculations; that of Arles was due to practical considerations such as the city’s proximity to Italy, its harbour facilities and its location on a major road connecting Italy to Spain.48 Under the Tetrarchy the names of some of the office-holders suggest a Gallic provenance. There are several references to provincial governors in hagiographical narratives. An Asterius is recorded as a provincial governor in the early years of the fourth century. 49 He and another provincial governor, his predecessor Euticius, were responsible for the persecution of Christians.50 Both are called praeses, provincial governor, perhaps of Narbonensis where the persecution took place. Euticius is also called praefectus by the hagiographer who must have mistaken the title for that of vir perfectissimus. The name Euticius is Greek. The office of the two governors indicates a middling position in the imperial hierarchy and an equestrian rank. Another hagiographical praeses is Crispinus, who is also recorded at the same time (c. 304) as a persecutor of Christians.51 He may have been related to another hagiographical governor in Gaul during the reign of Aurelian (270–5).52 In all these cases assignation of Gallic origin remains hypothetical but not impossible. Epigraphic sources also make a contribution to the meagre Gallic prosopography under the Tetrarchy. Two inscriptions from Segusio (CIL V 7248–9) record a vir perfectissimus and praeses Alpium Cottiarum by the name of Aurelius Saturninus in 286/305. 16


The cognomen appears in Gaul but is also found in other western provinces, particularly in Africa.53 Better known and better attested is Eumenius, a rhetor, who was appointed by Constantius I as magister memoriae in charge of imperial correspondence (293/8).54 He was the first Gallic scholar that we know of at this time to reap the rewards of good education and rhetorical talents by obtaining an imperial post. Eumenius’ family had come from Greece to settle in Gaul around the middle of the third century. He was thus a second-generation Gaul. After holding the office of magister memoriae, Eumenius, now a member of the equestrian order, returned to Autun to a well-paid professorial chair and subsequent comfortable retirement. Eumenius’ career offers some instructive parallels with that of Ausonius and throws light on an important aspect of bureaucratic advancement, namely an exceptional level of literacy. Both he and Ausonius came from an educational background which led to imperial appointments requiring their training and literacy. Their families had been uprooted, but successfully resettled in a new environment. Ausonius’ father was a medical doctor whilst Eumenius’ grandfather was a professional rhetorician, and their physical mobility had been a contributing factor to their own and their children’s social and economic advance. No less interesting is the connection between Eumenius and his urban home, the city of Autun. His choice as an advocate on Autun’s behalf was probably due to his family’s local status, and to the additional lustre of an imperial appointment. In expressing his gratitude to the emperor Constantius I for imperial support, Eumenius did not forget to advertise his own act of generosity towards his home town and its people. Upon reflection and although it is hazardous to argue ex silentio, it is nonetheless an admissible view that these few names hardly point to a change in traditional imperial attitudes towards the employment of Gauls. Perhaps selective employment on a limited scale may best describe the imperial policy of the Tetrarchy vis-à-vis Gaul. After the Gallic empire with its Gallic emperors and consuls, the seeming absence of Gallic names from the lists of prominent positions under the Tetrarchy is remarkable. Allowing for the haphazard nature of the evidence, such an absence indicates that a serious disruption of aristocratic records occurred in the aftermath of the Gallic empire, as well as the resumption of traditional policies regarding Gallic recruitment. It also supports the view that the Gallic aristocracy of 17


the late empire rose from the ashes of the third century to form a new class with new faces. Office-holding, to conclude, was not a factor likely to contribute to the formation of a late Roman Gallic aristocracy, at least under the Tetrarchy. FROM CONSTANTINE TO JULIAN (306–55) During the half century between the accession of Constantine and the arrival of Julian, two usurpers appeared in Gaul and more Gallic names emerge. In the ranks of provincial governors one finds M.Alfius Apronianus under Constantine I as praeses Viennensis, then an equestrian province; Cupitus, as a governor or a high financial officer in Belgica I in 315 (CJ 1.62.1); Flavius Sanctus, a relative of Ausonius by marriage, as a governor in Britain in the early 340s; and Crispinus, as a governor of an unknown province in 353.55 The cognomen Cupitus belongs to the Gallic-Italian group of names which occur from Pannonia to Spain, with significant concentration in Noricum/Pannonia and southern Gaul.56 The distribution of the cognomen Crispus points to a continuous area along the Danube and the Rhine, with sporadic attestations in Gaul.57 In the course of the fourth century, only two people bearing the derivative Crispinus, other than the Gallic Crispini, are recorded as having held office.58 Possible links have been traced between the three Crispini known in Gaul: the two hagiographical praesides from the time of the Tetrarchy, and their namesake in the middle of the fourth century ,59 The family seems to have held property in southern Gaul (Narbonensis). While homonymity and property are not sufficient to establish a pattern of continuity, the hypothesis of a dynasty of provincial governors should not be dismissed. Gallic identity has also been claimed for Marcellinus, who appears on the political scene as comes rerum privatarum under Constans in 349/50 and a few months later as the magister officiorum of a usurper.60 He played an instrumental role in the somewhat theatrical elevation of Magnentius in Autun. There in the course of a family banquet for Marcellinus’ son, Magnentius appeared in full imperial regalia and was proclaimed emperor.61 At Rome, the city which Marcellinus was sent to secure for the new ruler, he ordered the killing of several members of Constantine’s family. Marcellinus’ flexibility, evident in the services rendered first to the legal ruler of Gaul and then to his murderer, is worth noting. 18


Less apparent are Marcellinus’ motives for transferring his loyalty from one ruler to another. Perhaps he had been worried by Constans’ financial difficulties. It is impossible, however, to tell to what extent Marcellinus represented a broader segment of Gallic aristocrats who, like him, sought remedy from a usurper. Equally adaptable was Remigius, first known in 355 as a financial officer (rationarius or numerarius) of yet another usurper in Gaul, Silvanus, after whose fall he reappeared as magister officiorum under Valentinian I.62 Remigius was from northern Gaul (Mainz, Germania I), where he owned property to which he retired at the end of his tenure in office.63 The pattern of his career is curiously the opposite of Marcellinus’, for Remigius gained his first recorded office under a usurper and must have been ‘rehabilitated’ by 365, when Valentinian established his court in Trier. A Gaul who played a prominent role in imperial politics in the second half of the fourth century, Saturninius Secundus Salutius, first appeared in office during the reign of Constantius II (337– 61). 64 Salutius’ Gallic identity and pagan sympathies are well attested. 65 His first recorded offices, praeses Aquitanicae and magister memoriae, were two non-senatorial commissions. Salutius was in all probability a novus homo, perhaps even an Aquitanian of local standing, if his first appointment can be taken as some indication of territorial origins. 66 His career is a mixture of bureaucratic and senatorial appointments, combining the proconsulship of Africa and the quaestorship (both under Constantius I I). Salutius’ major office, the prefecture of the Oriens, was conferred on him by Julian and confirmed by Valens. The most successful stages of his career, therefore, were attained in the eastern Roman empire away from his Gallic home. They serve as a useful example of the rewards attached to physical mobility in conjunction with the movements of the court. Rather more problematic is the case of Eutropius. A man by that name appears in the writings of Marcellus of Bordeaux as an eminent medical authority in the same city. He has been further identified as the historian Eutropius who was magister epistularum under Constantius II and later magister memoriae under Valens.67 These appointments required a highly articulate and well-educated person but they were not senatorial commissions. Like Salutius, therefore, Eutropius was probably not of senatorial origin, although he later embarked on a typical senatorial career which included the proconsulship of Asia. If he was indeed a Gaul, the most significant 19


aspect of his career is its development once again in the eastern parts of the empire. In this respect, both Eutropius and Salutius must have been role models for other Gauls who pursued career opportunities away from home. Among such itinerant Gauls were three notable supporters of the usurper Procopius and early adherents of Theodosius. An early and interesting example of the advantages of proximity to members of the imperial house, even those in exile, is offered by the career of Exsuperius, a rhetorician trained in the schools of Bordeaux.68 He tutored the children of Dalmatius in Narbonne and was rewarded, upon the family’s recall, with a governorship in Spain in the late 330s. At the end of his career, Exsuperius was able to retire in style to his Aquitanian estate, having accumulated wealth both from his teaching and his political office. In brief, some developments are evident in the half century from 305 to 355. Several Gauls occupied (though not always under legitimate rulers) court positions which were primarily associated with a display of rhetorical skills. For the first time, and in both the east and the west, Gauls are found in typical senatorial office. But none became prefect or consul before Julian, nor is it possible, on the basis of their known cursus, to associate any with an aristocratic background. Property ownership in their territory of origin can be established for some, but it is often unclear whether it accrued through inheritance or through office. The evidence, it must be emphasised, is very erratic. Yet it can be ascertained that on the whole the Diocletianic policy of select and limited appointments for Gauls continued to be upheld even under resident emperors. JULIAN AND GAUL In 355 the emperor Constantius I I sent his nephew, Julian, as Caesar to Gaul to restore order in the provinces which had recently experienced two usurpations and a number of barbarian invasions. Five years later Julian was proclaimed Augustus by his troops.69 Luckily for all concerned the civil war which loomed on the horizon was forestalled by the unexpected death of Constantius, and Julian duly ascended the imperial throne. Soon after this, in 361, Secundus Salutius became the praetorian prefect of the Oriens. That same year, a man by the name of Claudius Mamertinus, possibly also a Gaul, was appointed the praetorian prefect of Italy.70 Salutius and 20


Mamertinus are the first recorded Gauls to have held these prominent offices. A year later Mamertinus became consul the first known Gallic appointment to the office since the time of the Gallic empire. Still under Julian, the Gaul Claudius Avitianus was appointed vicarius Africae in 362.71 Avitianus’ Gallic identity is based on a reference by Sulpicius Severus to a comes in Tours, and nomenclature lends support to the connection.72 Among the Julianic provincial governors in Gaul, two deserve particular attention. One is Aprunculus, a Gaul skilled in rhetoric and prophecy, who became rector Narbonensis (governor) in 361/2.73 He prophesied to Julian the death of his uncle and was duly rewarded with office when his prophecy was fulfilled. His predecessor in office was Numerian who, on the basis of references in Ausonius, Ammianus and the Historia Augusta, can be identified as a scion of the family of Carus, Carinus and Numerian, a thirdcentury imperial dynasty from Narbonensis. 74 Numerian provides a unique example of aristocratic continuity and his family apparently managed to retain their ownership of a south Gallic estate throughout the upheavals of the third century. In 358 Numerian, then out of office, was sued for misconduct in office by Delphidius, the most vehement orator of the age, who hoped to make the prosecution a show-case for his talent.75 The ensuing court-room drama was enacted in the presence of Julian, then heir to the ruling imperial house. In spite of the skilled prosecutor, Numerian acquitted himself and vanished from sight. Under Julian, Gallic names appear for the first time in the military sphere. Flavius Iovinus was appointed magister equitum in 361. 76 A pagan by origin, Iovinus may have converted to Christianity at some point in his career, and most likely after Julian’s death. His name is connected with the construction of a church at Reims where, if he was not born, he certainly had property.77 Iovinus became consul in 367, an example of Ausonius’ assertion that military careers led directly to the consulship in the same way as aristocratic lineage and exemplary loyalty to the emperor. Flavius Lupicinus’ military career started under Julian in 359 in Gaul as magister equitum and after a brief lull was resumed under Valens in the east. 78 He was a literary man of proud disposition. The name is rare, and the late Roman Lupicini are known almost entirely from Gaul.79 The advancement of Gauls at home through civil and military ranks obtained under Julian cannot have been a coincidence. Like 21


Gratian later on, Julian received his political apprenticeship in Gaul. He had a clear stake in enlisting support in Gaul, particularly in view of his tenuous relations with the Gallic praetorian prefect, Florentius, and with his ever-suspicious uncle, Constantius II. Although his elevation in Paris seems to have been largely engineered by the military, the support of Gallic networks of local magnates connected with the Gauls at court cannot altogether be dismissed.80 In short, between the end of the Gailic empire in the early 270s and Julian’s Gallic residence in the late 350s, the surviving evidence does not suggest close relations between the Gallic aristocracy and the resident imperial court. The imperial presence in Gaul did little to further the emergence of a Gallic nobility until Julian. The brief euphoria of the Gallic empire waned and for nearly three-quarters of a century Gauls only make occasional and isolated appearances as low-ranking office-holders. By the time Ausonius reached the court in the late 360s, barely a decade had passed since Gauls first held prominent imperial offices after the fall of the Gallic empire. Under Julian, the central government’s reversal of attitude to the recruitment of Gauls was largely a response to the circumstances confronting Julian in the late 350s and to his Gallic ‘background’. Of course, the silence of the records in the interim period does not necessarily indicate the absence of an aristocratic class. It may point to an aristocracy in the making which belatedly appeared on the stage of imperial administration. What sort of evidence exists, then, for the types of wealth and social status usually associated with an aristocracy? RANK AND WEALTH Records of saints and holy men who lived in the first half of the fourth century reveal an interesting, if somewhat uniform, picture of elevated social status. Venantius Fortunatus, the sixth-century biographer of Hilary of Poitiers, associates his hero (born c. 315) with a family known for the lustre of its nobility.81 The fact that Hilary had been an advocate and had held secular office before his election as bishop of his native city suggests that he belonged at least to a municipal aristocratic rank. Another Aquitanian, this time a migrating saint called Paulinus, became bishop of Trier in the middle of the fourth century. Paulinus belonged to the most noble stock in Aquitania.82 His predecessor in office, Maximinus (330–47), 22


was born to illustrious ancestors in Poitiers.83 Both vitae are very late (tenth century) but the connection between Aquitania and Trier seems authentic. Contacts between the south-west and the north-east are attested throughout the early empire and were maintained throughout the fourth century.84 Victor, a civis of Marseille and a martyr under Maximianus, is another saintly hero of aristocratic background who lived in the early years of the fourth century ,85 He is called vir clarus, possibly a mistaken abbreviation for vir clarissimus, and his trial was referred directly to the Augustus. Both his title and the implied importance of his case may indicate senatorial status. Moreover, if the language of the early hagiographer is to be trusted, Victor was a Gaul, and a native of Marseille. He is perhaps representative of a broader segment of affluent Gauls then in Provence, a hypothesis which would seem to support the sarcophagi at Arles (see p. 25). Noble ancestry was attributed to one of Ausonius’ school colleagues in Bordeaux in the first half of the fourth century. The man was Acilius Glabrio, whose name alone evoked a line of noble ancestors and links with the great Italian clan of the Acilii Glabriones.86 In a poem commemorating the early death of Acilius, Ausonius boasts no less than Dardanian descent for his friend. The claim cannot be substantiated and is therefore merely proof of a touching friendship rather than ancient lineage. Yet the very fact that it was even possible to stake spurious claims to nobility points to a significant lacuna in aristocratic records. Recently enriched men could and did exploit this fact by linking themselves to a lineage of greater or lesser nobility. Ausonius mocks one man for boasting of Mars and Romulus as his forefathers. 87 His real parents were apparently total nonentities but he obviously had enough money to support such far-fetched claims. Where office-holding and propertied background can be associated, as in the cases of Iovinus and Remigius, such property was inherited or acquired in northern Gaul. The choice of sites close to the imperial court may indicate an opportunist interest on the part of local wealthy owners to further their social status through imperial offices. Where property is attested elsewhere in Gaul, as in the case of Numerian, it had been in the possession of the family for some generations. Important as these indications of wealth and office are, they are too few at present to be claimed as representative of a significant segment of contemporary Gallic society. Wealth, of course, was primarily landed holdings. Some insight 23


into the wealth of individual Aquitanians can be gained from looking at their country dwellings. Recent surveys of rural estates in Aquitania reveal large-scale residences with sumptuous bath houses and colourful mosaic pavements.88 In many cases it is possible to discern signs of fourth-century restoration and renovation as a result of partial destruction or decay in the third century.89 Some people, then, had the means to restore and embellish their houses on a grand scale. Unfortunately, it is impossible to determine whether the owners at this stage were new masters or heirs of previous landlords. An analysis of patterns of land-holding in the area does not provide decisive data.90 The general wealth of the region is attested by its ability to supply the army stationed in Gaul throughout the fourth century.91 The extent of land occupation in southern Gaul appears remarkable. According to one recent study of rural landscapes between AD 200 and 400, southern Gaul enjoyed an exceptionally high level of land occupation between AD 300 and 400.92 Ausonius’ homeland was apparently dotted with mediumsized and large rural estates which provided their owners with every imaginable aristocratic amenity.93 A curious story of Ammianus tells about an anonymous landowner in Aquitania whose lavish hospitality caused his downfall.94 At a dinner party to which an official of the emperor Constantius II was invited, the Aquitanian host spread a tablecloth richly embroidered with purple patterns which resembled imperial insignia. The affluent gentleman probably merely wished to display his magnificent silverware such as has been unearthed by recent excavations.95 This innocent hospitality, however, directed at an emissary of an emperor known for his excessively suspicious nature, spelt doom for him and his family. His death, remarks Ammianus, destroyed the family’s ancestral wealth.96 The story is instructive for it informs us of the wealth and nobility of an otherwise unattested Aquitanian family. The case cannot have been unique. So rich were some Aquitanian families of the period that they were able to construct fortified residences filled with ‘essential’ aristocratic amenities. One such construction enabled the fifthcentury descendants of the family to safely pursue their aristocratic recreation in full view of the Visigothic capital of Bordeaux.97 Also near Bordeaux was the estate of Ausonius’ fatherin-law, a distinguished member of the local municipal aristocracy. There he was able to indulge himself in the hunt in moments of leisure and relaxation.98 He is just one example of the rapidity with 24


which members of a new aristocracy could adopt and adapt to traditional aristocratic pursuits. Another Aquitanian, a fellow teacher of Ausonius in Bordeaux, has been associated with one of the largest villae so far excavated in the south-west. The man, Nepotianus, may have been the owner of the vast and impressive Montmaurin (north of Saint Bertrand de Comminges) in an area known as Nebouzan.99 The identification is based on the similarity between his name and that of the region. Another teacher, likewise from Bordeaux, and a younger contemporary of Ausonius, also possessed a rural estate, perhaps large enough to support a fictitious claim to nobility.100 If toponymy can be employed as a useful tool of research, perhaps more estateowners will be identified. It is not altogether unlikely that a number of mediaeval villages owed their inception and their names to a Gallo-Roman family of late antiquity. To what extent does the apparent wealth of the countryside correspond to contemporary urbanism? In spite of a general impression of urban decline conveyed by fourth-century laws, legal rhetoric and urban architecture, and reinforced by numerous modern studies, the image of late Roman urbanism is considerably more nuanced than hitherto supposed. 101 Differences existed not only between one province and another but also between regions and districts. Within the Gallic context, there is evidence of urban wealth, particularly in Narbonensis. In the pagan and Christian cemeteries of Arles numerous carved marble sarcophagi have been found.102 The sarcophagi were imported from Italy, throughout the fourth century, and probably in an already finished state. The Christian sarcophagi reflect a precocious aristocratic conversion to the new imperial creed. Along with their pagan counterparts, they more importantly attest a large and rich clientele. Among those buried in Arles, a woman by the name of Marcia Romana Celsa may serve as a representative of the largely anonymous group of Arlesian dead.103 She was the wife of Fl. Ianuarinus, consul in 328. Although the consul was not a Gaul, the fact that Celsa was buried in Arles implies that her family owned property there. Perhaps she was born there. At any rate, she possessed senatorial rank, as did a number of those buried in the magnificent funerary monuments that still grace the Arlesian cemetery of Alyscamps. Further insight into the wealth of Gallic individuals is afforded by the recorded acts of public generosity in the early parts of the fourth century. Still in Arles, a vir perfectissimus, Iulius Athenaeus, 25


contributed to the restoration of the forum of Arles during the reign of Constantius II.104 In southern Aquitania (Novempopulana, Saint Bertrand de Comminges) a long verse inscription commemorates the activities of Nymphius, parens provinciae, who arranged public spectacles at his own expense for the benefit of the provincials.105 His death was mourned by many cities, as well as by the provincial assembly. Nymphius may have been a provincial patron or sacerdos provinciae, an office often associated with wealth and local standing; no other office is attested for him. Allowing for the impressionistic and fragile nature of documentary, hagiographical and archaeological evidence for prosopographical purposes, these isolated pieces of evidence point to the re-emergence of an aristocracy in Gaul in a period when the imperial court did not supply the means to acquire wealth and social rank. The roots of this nascent aristocracy may partially be found in the economic recovery experienced by regions like Narbonensis and Aquitania after the Gallic empire. Mamertinus implies that this aristocracy had already gained enough maturity and ambition to resent its exclusion from the imperial scene and to become embroiled in the usurpations of the mid-fourth century. In his panegyric of Julian, Mamertinus says that just before Julian arrived in Gaul, many aristocrats either perished or were enslaved. 106 No names are given, but Julian is represented as bringing salvation to the province. Like records of office-holding in Gaul, records providing evidence of wealth and rank imply that Julian’s reign did signify a turning point in the annals of the nascent Gallic aristocracy. To return to the question which was posed at the beginning of the discussion: did the seventy-five-year period between Diocletian and Julian witness the formation of a fully-fledged aristocracy who, when the opportunity arose, chose to assume office, or were the Gallic officials whose names survived merely members of gentry anxious to further their position through imperial service? It can indeed be argued that the formative quality of this period is primarily a reflection of the state of our information. The fact remains that the fortuitous preservation of Ausonius’ works is (for us) the major element and that no clear-cut answer can be offered until the evidence of Ausonius is minutely examined. A launch of the investigation must start, therefore, where Ausonius did, in the city of Bordeaux. There it is possible to identify the physical background against which his family lived, his 26


education and teaching career, and a whole spectrum of viri litterati who had similar aspirations. The example of Arles, whose economy was based on its favourable commercial position, demonstrates the importance of urban activities. Successful entrepreneurs from the cities, who had originally acquired their wealth through commercial ventures, invested it in the time-honoured way in land. Bordeaux provides an example of the rapid and successful recovery of a city after the confusion and destruction of the third century. Its recovery was due to the timely coincidence of economic prosperity, individual ambition and thriving municipal institutions, and it allows us to chart the rise of a municipal aristocracy.

27

Part I BORDEAUX: MUNICIPAL ARISTOCRACY AND URBAN ECONOMICS

3 THE CITY

BORDEAUX BEFORE AUSONIUS Literary sources before Ausonius are for the most part silent about Bordeaux.1 Strabo noted the foreign origins of the Biturgi Vivisces, the tribe in whose territory Bordeaux lay, and Martial regarded the Bordelais as stupid.2 In the third century the city served as the scene of Tetricus’ elevation, and an anonymous traveller to the Holy Land in 333 noted its geographical position on the river Garonne and its access to the Atlantic. 3 The best way of recapturing life in the early imperial city is through numerous surviving inscriptions and engraved monuments, some reused as building materials for the late Roman walls.4 The inscriptions tell about the people who lived in Bordeaux, their origins, beliefs and artistic tastes. From the reliefs, we can see their faces and occasionally glimpse moments of daily life. Bordeaux was established around the third century BC on marshy land traversed by several rivers and bordering on the Garonne. It had a natural harbour formed by an inner projection of the Garonne, presumably a decisive factor in the choice of site. Perhaps the early inhabitants also regarded the marshes as a form of natural protection, although the superabundance of water had caused perennial floods. The city was primarily a market place and retained its economic importance after the Roman conquest. Classical urbanism arrived in the wake of the Romans, and with it the wines of Italy. From being importers, the Bordelais soon became exporters of their own wines, having turaed to viticulture in the first century AD. The wine was stored and distributed in pottery vessels which the Bordelais bought from well-established Gallic workshops like the Graufesenque. 31


Throughout the first three centuries AD Bordeaux did not have walls. The surface area of the inhabited open city has been estimated at 120 hectares. Around the living quarters a series of cemeteries formed a belt which distinguished the domain of the living from that of the dead.5 Along the harbour most of the land was occupied by storage depots for merchandise. People on the whole lived in spacious accommodation and only a few lived near the harbour. The commercial role of Bordeaux was dependent on its harbour and its strategic location along roads leading from the Atlantic to the Mediterranean and from north-eastern Gaul to Spain. The city was also well situated for overland travelling to the Gallic metropolis of Lyon. It was possible to reach Lugdunensis either through Saintes in the north, or through Perigueux in the north-east, and even through Agen in the south-east. To reach Spain one could proceed through Dax, while the Mediterranean and Narbonne were reached either through Agen, along the land road which followed the Garonne, or through Eauze and Auch in the south. This orientation may have influenced the street layout of the city. Two modern streets, the rue Sainte Catherine and Cours de l’Intendance, have been identified as the cardo maximus and decnmanus respectively. The former was eventually included within the walled city; the latter was left extra muros. Their relations to the rest of the urban topography, as well as to the so-far unidentified municipal forum, have never been clarified. It is known, however, that, perhaps as a result of the natural topography of the site, not all the streets were aligned parallel to the two major roads, contrary to the classical scheme. (See Map 2, p. 41 for the city’s natural topography.) Two magnificent carved marble sarcophagi, discovered not far from Bordeaux, reflect the economic resources of those able to order such imported luxuries.6 Citizens with more modest means had to content themselves with locally produced funerary monuments as the numerous stelae recovered from the ramparts show.7 Public architecture of the early imperial centuries is preserved in the form of two monuments which still grace modern Bordeaux—a Severan amphitheatre (Palais Galien) and a temple or triumphal construction (Piliers de Tutelle). 8 The amphitheatre was built of small and carefully arranged bricks; the Piliers must have towered above most buildings in the ancient city, displaying attractive sculptures and imposing columns. The city which re-emerged after the crises of the third century bore, at first glance, little resemblance to its prosperous predecessor. 32

TH E CITY

Recent archaeological discoveries and studies of urban activities in late Roman Gaul and elsewhere in the empire, however, have contributed to a far-reaching modification of the overall impression of urban decline. Bordeaux is a case in point and an evaluation of its urban fortunes and their impact on individuals’ lots is best achieved against a brief general survey of Gallic urbanism and civic perceptions in late antiquity. CITYSCAPE IN LATE ROMAN GAUL The late antique city in the west has traditionally been regarded as a pale reflection of its thriving precursor of the early empire.9 The visible transformation of the cityscape into fortified units seemingly enclosing a reduced population has lent visual substance to this view. Yet upon closer inspection there is little doubt that the fates of cities varied greatly, not only from one province to another but also within a single region.10 A number of factors such as imperial support and presence, administrative status (provincial or diocesan capital), the physical location of the city and its trading links, combined to contribute to the rise of one and the decline of another. Ammianus, a Greek from a bustling eastern metropolis, described Gaul in the middle of the fourth century as an urban tissue comprising many cities.11 Among those listed, Cologne and Tongres are singled out for their wealth and population, Autun for its huge ancient walls, and Avenches for its abandoned state and semi-ruined buildings. 12 These few glimpses portray an urban scene with significant variations. Two regions, Aquitania and Viennensis, are noted for the number of their cities. Many of the cities of Aquitania were of considerable size like Bordeaux, Clermont, Saintes and Poitiers.13 An analysis of the late Gallic cityscape shows that in some cases urban decline had set in well before the barbarian invasions of the third century.14 Amiens, for example, had been a prosperous city under the Flavians and the Antonines. Following a fire sometime in 160–80, Amiens experienced a depression which was intensified by the invasions of 263–75.15 As a result, parts of the living areas were abandoned to make way for cemeteries. The surface area of Amiens within its walls extended to about 20 hectares compared with the 140 hectares of the open city. The amphitheatre, one of the choice civic features of the early imperial city, bolstered the walls of the late Roman city. Ammianus describes Amiens as an important urban 33


centre in Belgica.16 In 367 Valentinian spent an extended period there because of unexpected sickness.17 In spite of its economic depression the city retained something of its military and administrative importance. By contrast, Tours, which had been nearly destroyed in the third-century invasions, reached its heyday between the fourth and the sixth centuries.18 The popularity of its saintly bishop, Martin, proved decisive in its development, as did its advantageous location on the Loire. The reconstruction of the social history of a given city from literary and archaeological sources remains hypothetical. Ammianus could merely offer the most superficial observations, but his comments on Cologne and Tongres reflect the existence of a social class whose wealth was evident even to a casual observer. The number, size and magnificence of public monuments doubtless implied a thriving population. Wealth, of course, is a relative term and the cities which Ammianus knew intimately, like Antioch, Alexandria and Rome, displayed riches beyond Gallic dreams. Nonetheless, it seems that in some cases Gallic urbanism in the middle of the fourth century provided a sufficient basis for the growth of a municipal aristocracy whose impact could immediately be perceived by a foreign visitor. Ausonius’ Ordo Urbium Nobilium, an unusual collection of poems commemorating twenty cities from Rome to Bordeaux, includes five from Gaul: Trier, Arles, Narbonne, Toulouse and, for personal reasons, Bordeaux.19 Trier is singled out for her proximity to a river, her military and commercial role, and her walls. Arles is noted for her urban layout which made the river a central passage, and for her focal commercial position.20 Toulouse’s features are her brick walls, her advantageous location between the mountains and Aquitania, and the size of her population. Narbonne’s natural position, with a harbour and lakes, her nearness to the Pyrenees, her commercial wealth, and the central urban temple are likewise praised. Ausonius’ Gallic survey calls attention to the cities’ most conspicuous visual aspects and their major economic functions. Upon approaching a city in late Roman Gaul a visitor would have been immediately struck by its walls. By far the most typical feature of the cityscape, walls also represented the essence of urbanism in visual illustrations of late antique landscapes, from maps to mosaics and small objects.21 Walls defined the extent of a city within an open countryside. They also reflected a transition from a period of relative peace to one of instability and unrest. In Gaul, although several cities 34

TH E CITY

had had walls for centuries, nearly all were girded with ramparts after the barbarian invasions of the late third century.22 Ausonius marvelled at the walls of Trier and Toulouse.23 The former were noted for their size, the latter for their building materials. Trier’s ramparts followed the natural topography of the city for more than 6 km, enclosing a huge urban space. In Toulouse, the builders of the walls used carefully chosen bricks to create the impression of security and splendour. Both, in fact, had been built in the second century, when municipal and imperial resources were easily available for such large-scale projects.24 For Ammianus, the only wall worthy of mention was the ancient rampart of Autun. It was built in the reign of Augustus, extended 6 km in length with 54 towers, and is still one of the best preserved Roman ramparts in France.25 Ammianus was struck by the incongruity between the size of the population and the area enclosed within the walls. This discrepancy between demographic resources and urban space reflected a dwindling population. The Aeduan sources of urban labour thus became insufficient to maintain and defend the huge expanse of the walled city.26 Perhaps this state of affairs was the result of an imperial disfavour caused by the support which the city’s leading inhabitants lent to Magnentius.27 By contrast, fourth-century Toulouse’s human and financial resources kept pace with its expanding economy. Toulouse experienced demographic explosion, forcing the municipal authorities to accommodate people inside the walls in new living suburbs.28 The city was attractive enough to serve as a suitable refuge for high-class exiles of the imperial family.29 Even at this early stage the Tolosan municipal council could afford to employ renowned teachers of grammar and rhetoric.30 At the beginning of the fifth century Toulouse offered an ideal venue for a royal capital.31 Arles became a highly important trading centre due to its proximity to the Rhone. Its living quarters expanded across both banks of the Rhone, making the river an internal road as well as a meeting point for transport from the north and the south. 32 Constantius II spent the winter of 353 there celebrating the thirtieth anniversary of his rule and gracing the famed circus with his imperial presence. Public entertainment required considerable urban space in Arles. The city’s circus and amphitheatre could accommodate no fewer than 40,000 spectators. Such large public buildings demonstrate the amazing speed with which Arles recovered from the devastations of the late third century.33 Its 35


continuing prosperity throughout the fourth and the fifth century owed a great deal to the presence of emperors and high officials.34 One of the aspects of urbanism which Ausonius’ Ordo raises is the military role which a city was sometimes called upon to play. Trier is an outstanding example, for the city served as a producer and supplier of arms and cloths for the Roman military machine on the Rhine. 35 The city’s proximity to the Rhine ensured efficient transport to the frontier, and its location on fluvial and overland routes enabled it to receive and distribute merchandise from Gaul and elsewhere. In the fourth century Christianity started to transform the cityscape.36 The integration of this new religion into the existing framework of urbanism seems to have been gradual but far-reaching. When Ausonius composed his survey of Gallic cities, centres of pagan worship were still a conspicuous component of the urban layout. In Narbonne, the famous Capitol, a notable example of provincial imperial cult architecture, continued to attract attention.37 From Ausonius’ language, however, it is unclear whether or not the temple continued to be frequented with the same ardour as it had been throughout earlier centuries. His silence regarding Christian centres of worship indicates that the cathedral was not as yet a dominant visual factor in the cityscape. He witnessed the last phase of classical urbanism, before the city was transformed by Christian topography. The first visible traces of the presence of Christianity within urban territory are usually seen in the cult of the dead. Outside the city walls the Christian community could obtain space to bury its dead in burials ranging from simple tombstones to elaborate mausolea.38 Cemeteries were also locations for the celebration of rites and for demonstrations of religious solidarity. In Arles, for example, the still enchanting cemetery of the Elysian Fields (Alyscamps, a good pagan name for a Christian place), became a factor of some importance in urban planning. Its popularity grew so rapidly that the Arlesian municipality had to adapt the urban road system to accommodate the frequent visitors to the cemetery. No connection can apparently be made between cemeteries and the so-called episcopal groups (church, baptistery and bishop’s residence) where the bishops ran the daily affairs of their flocks.39 The invariable location of such groups, where known, is in the heart of an inhabited area, built on the site of a preexisting structure. The most spectacular and perhaps atypical example is the double cathedral of Trier constructed on top of luxury town residences in the 330s.40 36

TH E CITY

Neither Ausonius nor Ammianus refer to Gallic fora, an omission that may at first appear surprising. After all, the forum of an early imperial city served as a central focus of urban life. Perhaps the political and administrative functions of a city were taken for granted by both writers.41 Ausonius’ Ordo emphasises above all the economic function of the city. Trier, Arles and Narbonne were major centres of commerce, importing and exporting goods from or to every part of the empire. To ensure a viable economy the layout of a city was carefully chosen. All the Gallic cities of Ausonius’ Ordo were built near drinking and/or navigable water, whether a natural harbour on the sea, a river or a natural fountain. In the case of Trier, merchandise came via the Moselle from all parts of the empire. The Rhone brought merchandise to Arles and circulated Arlesian goods to other Gallic regions; and Narbonne’s harbour received the products of Spain, Africa, Sicily and the east.42 Such large-scale commercial activities illustrate the remarkable economic resilience of some Gallic cities. Their flexibility generated a class of affluent citizens who amassed enough property to enable them to claim nobility and to seek office as a means of advancing their position still further. Urbanism, therefore, provides independent evidence concerning the life, wealth and beliefs of the nobility. Underlying the late antique image of a city are also changing perceptions of civic affiliation. It appears that people were no longer interested in the sort of publicity which previously found an expression in inscriptions, but wished to be remembered for different reasons and actions.43 The presence of a social class with aristocratic attributes has been deduced in the previous chapter from its visual legacy and prosopography. A survey of the mutations and fluctuations of Gallic urbanism in the fourth century showed how in several documented cases cities can provide an adequate framework for analysing the genesis of a new municipal aristocracy. The importance of urban economics to this process can best be approached through an examination of Ausonius’ own city, Bordeaux. The invaluable work of archaeologists in modern Bordeaux has provided a completely new insight into the urban tissue of the late Roman city. Much of this work is still in progress but it has already provided enough information to show an astonishing degree of economic prosperity and highlights the physical environment of the emerging nobility of late antique Gaul.

37


AUSONIAN BORDEAUX: LITERATURE AND ARCHAEOLOGY The opening lines of Ausonius’ poem honouring Burdigala praise three prominent features of the city: its surrounding vineyards, rivers and human resources.44 The Bordelais, according to their fourth-century bard, were famed for their manners and wisdom no less than for their municipal council.45 Bordeaux’s climate and soil are eulogised with equal pride. The poem sketches an image of a well-ordered urban space dominated by walls and lofty towers. Within the walls one could observe regularly positioned streets, houses and gates. Above all, one would notice the harbour which intruded into the very heart of the enclosed urban territory. Several points emerge, especially the traditionally close connection between the urban capital and the rural hinterland. Wine and cereals, typical products of the countryside, were distributed through the city and constituted its major sources of wealth. To facilitate the flow of trade, the protecting walls of the city enclosed the harbour. This was unusual urban planning, plainly dictated by the importance of the Garonne as a commercial route. Bordeaux’s newly defined urban space intra muros was carefully divided into insulae bordering on streets and avenues of varying widths. Each of the major roads within the city now terminated at a gate. In essence, then, Ausonius’ description of his native city underlines the impact which the construction of ramparts had on the layout of urban space. With the erection of walls around Bordeaux, the city’s contacts with its immediate and more distant environments were channelled through its gates, both on land and by water. Several axes of circulation are evident: roads which connected various parts of the enclosed city; traffic between the castrum and the suburbs; roads leading from Bordeaux to other parts of Aquitania; and a fluvial axis of transport along the Garonne which connected the city’s harbour to Narbonensis, the Atlantic and Britain. The architects of late Roman Bordeaux further took into account the problem of the supply of fresh drinking water. An important feature of the new layout was a marble fountain, the location of which has not yet been ascertained. 46 Ausonius describes it in the most exuberant terms as sacred, nurturing, perennial, clear, azure, profound, sonorous, shady and opaque, guardian deity of the city, clear and smooth. The fountain was 38

TH E CITY

seemingly not only useful but decorative too. It was dedicated to Divona, and was in all likelihood connected with the river Devèze which, in Ausonius’ time, traversed the heart of the walled city. Despite its beauty, however, this water monument decreased intra muros urban space, increased the level of noise and created an impression of a crowded city.47 Late Roman Bordeaux, to judge from archaeological finds, was encircled by walls which measured some 700 m by 450 m, and enclosed an area of 32 hectares.48 The Bordelais castrum was among the larger ones in Aquitania; in Gaul it was considered of medium size, falling far short of the circumference of cities like Trier and Metz.49 Ammianus described the Aquitanian cities as big urban centres, but he can hardly have been referring to the intra muros space alone. Bordeaux’s walls reached a maximum estimated height of 9 m; their thickness varied between 2.8 m and 5 m; and the number of gates, according to recent calculations, may have been as many as fourteen. Among these, three gates along the northern wall, including the one leading to Médoc; three in the east, including the Porta Navigera which controlled the harbour traffic; and four to the south, including the one leading to Toulouse. The circumscribed space of the city covered about a quarter of the estimated territory of early imperial Bordeaux. It seems clear, however, that the walled city was not intended to contain the entire urban population. Among the materials used for the construction of the walls were carved stones previously employed in buildings or as funerary stelae and inscriptions. Their reuse in an otherwise carefully planned project prompts the question of the fate of their original sites. Were they abandoned at some point in the third century and later used as quarries for the parts of the walls which required large blocks? Or were they dismantled when the defensive ramparts on which the safety of the city now depended were erected? Both explanations are possible. The survival of public buildings like the Palais Galien and the Piliers de Tutelle for many centuries afterwards shows that some monuments, at least, escaped dismantling. An excavation on a site beneath the ancient rampart (rue Dieu) has revealed the remains of an early-empire occupation site which was abandoned due to the construction of the walls. 50 Theexisting city plan had to be modified to accommodate the superimposed walls with their considerable width, towers and ditches. Moreover, it seems that the construction of the walls 39


marked a deliberate transition from an urban plan which conformed to natural topographical elements, to one regulated within an orthogonal frame. What impact did the urban transformation of late Roman Bordeaux have on the human and economic resources of the city?

To date, the most ambitious archaeological project carried out in Bordeaux covered an area of some 8,000 m2 in the heart of the ancient castrum, on a site now known as the commercial centre of Saint Christoly (Map 2).51 Three major undertakings, in 1973–4, 1982 and 1983, unearthed an important section of late antique and early mediaeval Bordeaux and revealed a settlement of exceptional density. The excavations of Saint Christoly enable the historian to reconstruct for the first time a picture of the city during a period hitherto known mostly and not well from literary sources. They also demonstrate the difficulties involved in modern urban archaeology at Bordeaux. The excavators had to work knee-deep in mud and water and the threat of flooding caused many interruptions. A more serious problem was the invasion of the site by modern bulldozers during the intervals between campaigns, forcing the excavators to re-establish the site’s stratigraphy with every new exploration. Thanks to the Saint Christoly excavations it is possible to gain some insight into the economy of late Roman Bordeaux. The excavations have also made it possible to estimate with some precision the impact on the topography of the city of the construction of Bordeaux’s walls, and in particular have shed light on the evolution of the residential and industrial quarters along the rivers leading to the harbour. The area of the excavations included what had been the confluence of two rivers, the Peugue and the Devèze. In order to accommodate the rising walls, the Peugue was diverted and only the water of the Devèze continued to flow into the harbour. Silt gradually collected in the Devèze, eventually making navigation impossible and the harbour was abandoned during the sixth century.52 Another perhaps equally unforeseen result of the new city plan emerged after the banks of the Devèze were dyked. This project caused the water level gradually to rise which aggravated the perennial problem of flooding. The sheer magnitude of the operation devised to safeguard the harbour,

40

Map 2


however, reflects Bordeaux’s economic recovery soon after the troubles of the late third century. During excavations conducted in 1984 along the ancient canalisation of the river Peugue, indications were discovered of a planned evacuation. 53 An entire sector covered with a huge embankment dating to the beginning of the fourth century was exposed. All previous structures in the area which bordered the wall had been carefully levelled to make room for the wall and for a gap running alongside (presumably a passageway). Along the Devèze, the excavators were able to identify warehouses and workshops which bear testimony to the continuous and constant use of the river and the port for commercial purposes, and to the intensity of artisan and trading activities in the fourth and the fifth centuries. Some warehouses were provided with a system of heating in order to dry and store grain. It seems that, during the second part of the fourth century in particular, major constructions were undertaken on the right bank of the Devèze, where every available part of the city space, including previously unused areas, was reclaimed. Patterns of settlement in the suburban territory of Bordeaux apparently consisted of living quarters alternating with areas used for agriculture or industry. One such area emerged in 1984 during a trial trench along rue Fodaudège, between the amphitheatre of Palais Galien and the cemetery of Terre Nègre. No traces of habitation were unearthed although the site is located between two important poles of Roman Bordeaux.54 On the other hand, the area of St Seurin, west of the amphitheatre, with its fourth-century church and cemetery, became a lively residential area and a focus for religious celebrations which drew worshippers from the surrounding regions.55 The walls of late Roman Bordeaux clearly enclosed only a section of the inhabited city. The range of economic life in late Roman Bordeaux can be deduced from the thousands of sherds of the so-called céramique estampée tardive or late Roman ware.56 Many of these sherds bear engraved patterns which distinctly recall the repertoire of motifs used by contemporary mosaic craftsmen in Aquitania. They include vegetal, geometrical and floral themes as well as religious symbols, above all the Christian chrism. On the basis of both the exceptional quantity of pottery finds at Saint Christoly and at other excavation sites in Bordeaux, and their distribution in the Aquitanian countryside, it has been surmised that Bordeaux served not only as 42

TH E CITY

a centre of diffusion but also as a centre of production. Although at this point it is still impossible to determine the precise chronological development of this type of pottery, its range falls between the fourth and the sixth centuries. Bordeaux is the only urban centre in Aquitania which has yielded such vast quantities of late pottery. Perhaps this is a matter of chance, but there is no doubt that Bordelais pottery, a newly established industry, was a major product of the late Roman city. The finds reflect the extent of the city’s trading links and the volume of its economy. In Aquitania the type of pottery associated with Bordelais workshops has been found in nearly every excavated or surveyed site, rural and urban, from as far south as Saint Bertrand de Comminges near the Pyrenees to the Loire in the north. The diffusion of Bordelais pottery in localities close to rivers emphasises the importance of fluvial navigation for commercial purposes.57 Ausonius himself frequently corroborates this and testifies to continuing maritime connections between Bordeaux and Britain.58 The excavations of Saint Christoly have unearthed an unprecedented density of habitation. They have also shed light on another remarkable aspect of daily life in late Roman Bordeaux, namely the care taken by the inhabitants to overcome the constant threat of floods. Before constructing a building, the builders would site it well above the marshy soil. They also built dykes along the banks of the river in the heart of the city. Indeed, perhaps the most impressive aspect of public and domestic architecture in late Roman Bordeaux is the elaborate techniques employed to stabilise the marshy soil along the course of the river Devèze. In one place these included laying a foundation of big blocks of lime mixed with stone fragments (taken from dismantled monuments) to form a platform for the wooden constructions above. The most remarkable features of domestic architecture seem to have been hypocausts and mosaics. The installation of the former and the scale of the latter serve as evidence of the wealth and taste of the inhabitants. All the late mosaics unearthed in the quartier of Saint Christoly display a pattern of vegetal and geometric themes familiar from the Aquitanian mosaics of late antiquity. 59 Such themes are frequently found both in rural and urban contexts, demonstrating the close ties between city-dwellers and the inhabitants of the countryside at that time. In short, the excavations at Saint Christoly have shown that the enclosure of the city’s vital resources within four walls did not spell 43


its decline. The opposite was probably true. Late Roman Bordeaux was characterised by intense urbanism and the finds show that all available space, including areas previously uninhabited, was fully exploited. The inclusion of the harbour and river within the walls demonstrates their continuing importance to the industrial and economic activities of the citizens. Urban recovery in Bordeaux must have begun as early as the end of the third century. One indicator of this is that from this time there was a continuous influx of people to the city from other parts of Gaul, and particularly from other urban centres in Aquitania.60 Another indication is the obvious attraction of the city to professionals such as skilled medical practitioners and academics. At the beginning of the fourth century the municipal council already had enough money to establish quality schools and to offer competitive salaries to teachers. The demand for better education and better medical services spells the existence of an affluent social class which could afford both. So wide-ranging were the resources of the city and its countryside in late antiquity that they were able to help create a new municipal aristocracy. ARCHAEOLOGY AND RELIGION IN FOURTH-CENTURY BORDEAUX It is difficult to estimate the initial impact of Christianity on urbanism.61 The first visible trace of Christianity in Bordeaux is a thirdcentury altar inscription in memory of Domitia.62 She arrived from Trier and was married to a man named Leo who had been classified as a freedman. Dated to c. 260 Domitia’s funerary inscription may illustrate the problems involved in adopting an outlawed religion. Her death is commemorated in two formulae, one clearly pagan, the other with Christian undertones.63 This ambiguity has left modern scholars uncertain about her precise religious affiliation. As soon as the ban on Christianity was lifted, the Bordelais ecclesiastical authorities actively participated in religious politics in the prefecture. In 314 Bordeaux sent a representative bishop to the council of Arles.64 His name, Orientalis, may indicate an eastern provenance. His successors displayed less enthusiasm for activities beyond their immediate province. No names are preserved until the year 380 which witnessed the travels of Delphinus to Spain. He was motivated to attend a council in Spanish Saragossa by the threat of 44

TH E CITY

Priscillianism. 65 This movement, later pronounced heretical, originated in northern Spain and quickly spread into Aquitania.66 The popularity of Priscillian in significant urban centres including Eauze and Bordeaux was fast becoming a major factor in the ecclesiastical life of the province. Moreover, the clergy could not fail to note the wealth of some of his supporters.67 The ecclesiastical establishment of Bordeaux felt so threatened that in 384/5 Delphinus presided over a synod which condemned Priscillian and hastened his execution.68 The events raise several intriguing questions. Why did the excessive piety of Priscillian find such a ready response in various Aquitanian cities? Why did the orthodox resort to extreme measures in reaction to the spread of the movement? What did they fail to offer to the Christian community in the city? In the late 380s and 390s asceticism had won its first significant converts in the guise of Paulinus (of Nola) and Sulpicius Severus, but even they had to leave the city to pursue their ascetic practices.69 Perhaps, then, the only acceptable form of Christianity within an urban context was a respectable and conventional form of religiosity. Such attitudes go a long way to explain Ausonius’ religious affiliation, a question which has engendered much scholarly debate.70 Religious piety could be expressed in a way which the imperial house itself legitimised. In the late 320s Constantine’s mother Helena embarked on a pilgrimage to the Holy Land.71 The first known person to imitate her and to record the impressions of his pilgrimage was a man from Bordeaux who made the long journey in 333.72 The motivation for his journey and the nature of his reception upon his return to Bordeaux cannot be conjectured. A possible motive, expressed by another pilgrim, was the chance of sharing the experience with friends at home via correspondence.73 There were also certain advantages to the timely adoption of the new imperial creed in some extreme but endorsed form. Ausonius refers to consecrated virgins in his family as early as the 320s. 74 Their presence may have conferred a certain social distinction on their family which naturally would have aided its successful integration into a host society. Since 1959 excavations to establish the Christian origins of the city have been conducted on the site of the church of St Seurin. The area around this church formed the centre of the first Christian quarter established extra muros in the fourth century.75 Not far from it, in the cemetery of Terre Nègre, the Bordelais Christians buried their dead. The excavations identified a baptistery, a church, 45


funerary structures and a cemetery around the martyrium of the saint. These structures precede the earliest securely dated church of St Seurin in the sixth century. Their main function was to serve as a cult centre for the suburbia of Bordeaux. Easter celebrations there, attended by Ausonius, drew considerable crowds.76 In one of the rooms unearthed under the basilica of St Seurin, a mural painting was discovered. As far as can be established it includes geometrical patterns and a scene of marine life featuring a sea-horse carrying an Amor.77 Its manner of execution has been defined as careless and haphazard, and stylistic criteria point to a date in the late third or early fourth century. The function of the room has not been clarified. It may have formed part of a private house converted into a church. If the paintings antedated the conversion, their preservation in the new religious context indicates the ease with which Christianity adapted to the existing environment. The establishment of a suburban episcopal group at a fair distance from the enclosed city is indicative of Christian urbanism in the fourth century. Clearly there was a sufficiently large community in the north-western suburbs of Bordeaux to require such a complex. Since the precise measurements of the St Seurin complex are unfortunately lacking, it is impossible to deduce the financial resources of the community. The unknown pilgrim of 333 was an affluent man with time on his hands. Ausonius’ family enjoyed growing economic power as the century proceeded. The family of Paulinus (of Nola), another pillar of the Christian community in Bordeaux, was wealthy by senatorial standards. Some Bordelais adherents of Priscillian had sufficient property to sustain him and his followers for some time. Yet not all Christians in fourth-century Bordeaux could have been wealthy. Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the early church of St Seurin is its location along a road which led to no known pagan public monuments. To reach the early church from the city the believers had to use a road now called chemin de St Médard. It is unclear whether the road was paved initially or only after the establishment of St Seurin as a cult centre. If the latter is correct, the popularity of a centre of Christian worship in this particular location influenced the street orientation of late Roman Bordeaux and its urban traffic. Evidence for the presence of nascent Christianity inside the city walls is rather more sparse. A colourful mosaic was discovered in 1964 in the course of the construction of a new department store on 46

TH E CITY

the ancient cardo maximus (rue Sainte Catherine, Les Nouvelles Galeries). 78 It shows water fountains with dolphins, bands of garlands, floral pyramids and trees laden with fruit. The whole may have been calculated to evoke an image of paradise. As such, the mosaic fits into a documented series of iconography known as ‘the fountain of life’.79 The architectural context has not been clarified, and the imagery can be interpreted as either pagan or Christian. Stylistic considerations point to a date in the fourth or fifth century and with it, perhaps, to a Christian context. The motives depicted on the Bordelais mosaic also recall the vegetal themes which frequently appear on rural mosaics in Aquitania. Recently archaeology has provided another insight into the religious ambience of late Roman Bordeaux. In 1986, an excavation in the grounds of a department store (Parunis) on cours Victor Hugo brought to light a structure which has been identified as a Mithraeum.80 Built on the site of a Flavian house, the Mithraeum occupied an area of some 200 sq.m. and consisted of a main hall (18.4m×10.3m) divided into three parts with a central nave. Such dimensions categorise the Bordelais Mithraeum as one of the largest in Gaul and indicate the importance of the cult to the city. 81 Furthermore, the very existence of a Mithraeum in the west of Gaul, where only a few traces of the cult of Mithras had hitherto been discovered, is a valuable testimony to its spread beyond previously perceived limits. The Bordeaux Mithraeum has several characteristics in common with other such sanctuaries. It is almost entirely buried in the ground; the tripartite division of the central space is accentuated by columns along the benches at the side; and there is an elevated niche in one wall.82 Although no attempt was made by the builders to adapt the sanctuary to the plan of the pre-existing structure, the building respects the principal alignments of urban planning in this quarter. According to the excavators, the Mithraeum was built in the first part of the third century, occupied throughout the second half of the century, destroyed sometime later, but reoccupied during the first half of the fourth century, to be once more destroyed, this time for good, in the second part of that century. Among the finds on the site were several small votive altars and statues of Mithras’ companions: Cautes with his torch turned up to symbolise the rising of the sun and Cautopates with his torch pointing down to earth, wearing a Phrygian cap, his face young and unbearded.83 One of the votive altars portrays on one side a person 47


with a lion’s head holding a key in his left hand, while two snakes encircle his legs. This unusual image can be identified as the figure of Chronos-Saturn or Aion. Another find is that of a relief depicting the birth of Mithras out of rocks. Although this Mithraeum is the one and only sanctuary discovered at Bordeaux, two other Mithraic finds from a much earlier era have also been discovered in the city. They are statues of the companions of Mithras and their imagery is similar to that of the two statues found on the site of Parunis. Perhaps they originally came from this site. Their idiosyncrasies contribute to what can be seen as a local, Aquitanian variety of the cult of Mithras.84 Despite the scarcity of religious data in an urban context, several observations can be made. Cult centres clearly occupied a significant portion of the urban space extra muros. The choice of location reflects the existence of a nearby community of believers and the need for easy access for those travelling any distance. The positioning of these centres outside the city walls may also indicate a lack of sufficient space within the enclosed area to accommodate either the followers of Mithras or of Christ. Perhaps in fourthcentury Bordeaux traditional foci of private and state worship still competed for valuable urban space. The bishop of Bordeaux was only able to move the cathedral inside the city walls in the late sixth century and even then it was first placed next to a rampart, at the edge of the enclosure. Traversing Bordeaux in the fourth century must have been an interesting experience. Upon reaching the city by boat the traveller would disembark in the very heart of the walled city. Heading west, he could pay his respects to Mithras; riding north, he could pray to Christ. If thirsty he would wait in a queue with the citizens to drink from the marble fountain of Divona. If in need of entertainment, the tourist could proceed to the amphitheatre of the Palais Galien just south of St Seurin. The houses of the rich and the poor were visible throughout the city. At a distance the urban rich had their country estates where the well-connected traveller could enjoy the fresh air of the countryside and the hospitality of his wealthy friends. Within such a socio-economic landscape a municipal aristocracy could develop without significant disruption.

48

4 GENS AUSONIANA The Formation of a Provincial Aristocracy

At the height of his career Ausonius twice commented in public on his family background. When his father Iulius Ausonius died in 378, Ausonius composed verses describing the character, family and career of the deceased at some length.1 By that date, the author himself was prefect and consul designate, and his son was also a prefect. Iulius Ausonius was the product of two Aquitanian cities, Bazas and Bordeaux, and a member of the curia in each.2 He was a successful medical practitioner before turning to politics under the auspices of his son. His main attribute, according to Ausonius, was that he neither shunned nor craved honours.3 With this approach to career opportunities, or perhaps in spite of it, Iulius Ausonius rose from membership of a municipal provincial council to become governor of an entire prefecture. A year after his father’s death and towards the end of his tenure as consul, Ausonius reverted to the theme of his origins. ‘A family not to be ashamed of and a city not unknown’ are the words with which he chose to describe his background in the Gratiarum Actio to Gratian in front of a Treveran court audience.4 Several meanings can be attached to the phrase. In the first place, it highlights the magnanimity of an emperor who conferred the highest imperial honours on a relatively unknown provincial family from a Gallic city. The words also emphasise the range of contemporary social mobility, showing that successful non-aristocrats could enjoy the same status and respect as those of noble descent. His aim in emphasising this point may have been to claim equality with his consular colleague, for that year Ausonius had been paired with a blue-blooded aristocrat from the city of Rome, Quintus Clodius Hermogenianus Olybrius, a man who could point to a series of ancestral figures (imagines) as proof of his nobility.5 Lastly, the phrase 49


hints at the advantages of an accessible resident imperial court for the local Gallic nobility. The point had been made often enough before by other Gauls and was well summarised by a contemporary visitor who described Gaul as a province in constant need of emperors whose presence there was indeed beneficial but costly.6 The connection clearly outlined in the Gratiarum Actio between Ausonius’ urban roots and gens ausoniana is significant. It implies that the fortunes of the two were closely bound together. Ausonius expanded on the family theme in a series of poems (Parentalia) devoted to his relatives.7 The information they contain is unique. No other Gallic family in late antiquity is as well documented as Ausonius’. A detailed exploration of the gens, generation by generation, provides an invaluable insight into the physical, social, economic and political mobility involved in the formation of a provincial clan. It shows how the commercial prosperity of Bordeaux created opportunities for financial and professional successes which did not exist in smaller Aquitanian towns; how patterns of administrative careers which had been launched from Bordeaux lifted Ausonius’ status above that of his fellow provincials; and how a careful choice of vocations and spouses gradually contributed to the development of a network which centred on Bordeaux, extended to Aquitania, and eventually enabled Ausonius to operate from the court at Trier. Ausonius’ maternal ancestry can Genealogical table 1 The Arborii: first, second and third generations of Ausonius’ family on the maternal side (last quarter of the third century)

be traced through four generations, the first two featuring Argicius and an unnamed ancestor (x)—the father and grandfather respectively of Caecilius Arg icius Arborius (Ausonius’ grandfather). This line of descent displays some rare names: between 260 and 395 Argicius is only attested in this genealogy and Arborius had very limited circulation. 8 These ancestors originated in Autun and also had connections and property in the areas of Lyon and Vienne.9 They seemingly formed a network of 50

GENS AU SONIANA

local provincial ties based on intermarriage and accumulated wealth within an extended region of central and eastern Gaul. Their wealth, claims Ausonius, excited the envy of successive Gallic usurpers and eventually caused their downfall in the late 260s, during the reigns of Victorinus and the Tetrici.10 After they were forcibly uprooted, their ties with central Gaul were severed and the family lost its social and economic standing in that region for good. Yet the tradition of Aeduan noble origins was faithfully transmitted from father to son.11 Suspicion has been recently cast on the authenticity of Ausonius’ claim to Aeduan nobility on his mother’s side. A tale of lost fortunes and aristocratic grandparents would have been hard to disprove, it is maintained, since the reigns of Victorinus and the Tetrici wrought confusion in the annals of third-century Gaul.12 Certainly by the time the claim was made public, over a century after the events, it could be neither proved nor refuted. The very fact that it could be made indicates, above all, the position which Ausonius had achieved by then. Allowing for an element of exaggeration in Ausonius’ assumption of extended provincial nobility and wealth, the essence of the claim could still have been authentic: perhaps his mother’s family had indeed owned property which carried curial status. There is, moreover, no good reason to reject the geographical validity of his statement which links his maternal ancestry to a residence in central Gaul. Autun had played a major role in the struggle for supremacy in Gaul during the late 260s. 13 In the aftermath of the city’s fall families involved in the events found it prudent to move away and southern Aquitania offered a sufficiently safe refuge. The region was also close to Spain, a province that managed to escape the worst of the century’s invasions and usurpations. Exiled from Autun, the Arborii settled in Dax (Aquae Tarbellicae), a choice which requires some explanation since the city was of secondary importance. The only distinctions it could boast were its warm natural springs (still popular) and its location on one of the main routes to Spain from Bordeaux.14 Perhaps it was with Spain in mind that Ausonius’ ancestors turned southward but stopped, for some unknown reason, in Dax. One wonders if Ausonius’ obscure reference to the ‘arrows of persecuting fortune’ implies that the family’s survival continued to be threatened even in a place as remote as Dax.15 It is more probable, however, that the phrase was simply intended to describe vividly their unhappy lot. 51


A generation later the son of the family, Caecilius Argicius Arborius, himself born in Aquitania, married a local woman. This was the first recorded Aquitanian alliance of the exiled Aeduan family and must have established them more firmly in the area. Aemilia Corinthia Maura, Argicius’ bride, gained the epithet ‘black’ from her dark complexion.16 She is claimed to belong to the proceres, the highest municipal nobility; another reference to her in another poem merely mentions her poverty. 17 Ausonius, who usually referred to a person’s noble lineage (especially within his own family) is noticeably silent on the subject in his poem honouring Maura.18 This conflicting data can probably be reconciled on the assumption that, like her husband, Maura’s background was that of impoverished local aristocracy. She may, however, have enjoyed a superior social standing to that of her spouse, at least locally, since all their children bore her nomen. The notable aspect of Argicius’ wedding is that he married into a local family that boasted of some status even if they lacked the requisite finances. Genealogical table 2 Fourth generation of Ausonius’ family on the maternal side / First generation of the family on the paternal side (beginning of the fourth century)

Argicius and Maura ended their life as modestly as they had started.19 They had four children—one son and three daughters. The figure four appears with a certain regularity in Ausonius’ family.20 In view of the rate of infant mortality perhaps such a number was necessary to ensure continuity. Of the three sisters, one (Aemilia Dryadia) died shortly before she was to be married; another (Aemilia Aeonia) married Ausonius’ father; and the third (Aemilia 52

GENS AU SONIANA

Hilaria) elected to remain single.21 The choice of female names is interesting. Aeonia continues the tradition of rare names. A masculine form of the name is attested in Gaul in the late fifth/early sixth century, and the man (Aeonius or Eonius) was bishop of Arles and relative of Caesarius of Arles. Dryadia is unknown outside the gens arbortana/aasoniana. Hilaria, a cognomen denoting gentleness of character, is attested more frequently among women than men, and among Christians than pagans.22 Aemilia Hilaria practised medicine, perhaps midwifery.23 She is also called a virgo devota. This term when used in a religious context usually denotes Christian affiliation, and particularly membership of a community of pious women.24 If she was born a Christian, at the time of her birth (c. 300) her parents would have been converted to an as yet illegal creed. The spread of Christianity in preConstantinian Gaul is an ill-documented process for the most part. Evidence concerning the Christian community in Lyon may indicate Greek-eastern origins, and lack of specific references to Diocletianic martyrs seems to indicate that Christian Gauls escaped the brunt of later persecutions.25 The presence of early converts to Christianity in a family that apparently originated in the Lyonnaise and the unique place of Lyon within the early development of the creed may not be a mere historical coincidence. Perhaps Ausonius’ maternal family had arrived in Aquitania already committed to the cause of Christianity. Their move to Bordeaux, therefore, may have been partially motivated by a desire to be near a larger Christian community, some of whose members, like Domitia and Orientalis, were also immigrants.26 Without doubt, however, the Arborii’s relocation is closely connected with the career of the most successful member of the fourth generation Arborii, Aemilius Magnus Arborius.27 The only male offspring of Arborius and Maura, he must have been his parents’ special care and his chosen name reflects their hopes that he should prosper.28 A transfer from Dax to Bordeaux took the Arborii from a secondary provincial city in Novempopulana to a provincial metropolis in Aquitania. Neither the move nor the reasons behind it are recorded. A desire to improve the family’s fortunes in a city with a thriving economy and many openings seems a reasonable enough motivation. Furthermore, already at this early date Bordeaux offered excellent educational facilities, an important calculation in the minds of any concerned parents. Upon graduation from the school of rhetoric at Bordeaux 53


Arborius moved to Toulouse where he succeeded in obtaining a municipal chair of grammar. At Toulouse he married into a local family of some wealth and standing. 29 Since at that stage he presumably had only his youth and his salary to his credit, the bride’s family may have regarded his Bordelais background and existing opportunities for advancement as a sufficient investment. Leaving Toulouse, Arborius embarked on a legal career which took him to other parts of southern Gaul and even to Spain. He may have hoped, in vain as it turned out, to use his talents and his Tolosan contacts to enter the lucrative realm of the imperial administration.30 On his return to Toulouse in the late 320s, Arborius gained a chair of rhetoric. The timing of his return was excellent since the emperor Constantine’s half-brothers Dalmatius and Constantius were then resident in Toulouse.31 Arborius’ academic position and his social standing gained him a much-coveted entry into this Gallic imperial circle. Arborius’ career exemplifies several points: the advantages of a Bordelais education even at this early stage; the social and economic capital which an enterprising man on the move could potentially acquire; and the advantages inherent in proximity and access to members of the imperial house. When the princes were recalled to Constantinople, Arborius was summoned to the court to tutor the eldest son of Constantius, an unnamed brother of Gallus and Julian.32 His tenure in the east was short. In 337 he shared the fate of his patron and his pupil and perished in the bloody coup d’état which followed Constantine’s death. 33 Years later his nephew Ausonius engineered the return of Arborius’ body for family burial in Gaul.34 The importance of Arborius’ achievements for the fortunes of an impoverished family of dubious social standing cannot be exaggerated. He was the first to use his Bordelais education to look for a position outside the city. In his new domicile he was able to contract an advantageous marriage with a woman from a family of high social and economic standing. Through his wife, the matrimonial network of the Aquitanian Arborii now extended to Narbonensis and to the important urban centre of Toulouse. His reputation and his connection with the house of Constantine paved the way to similar successes in the field of education for younger members of the family. Between 305 and 310, before Arborius gained fame and fortune, his sister Aemilia Aeonia married a man by the name of Iulius 54

GENS AU SONIANA

Ausonius. He was born in Bazas, some 70 km south-east of Bordeaux and, like the Arborii, was attracted to the flourishing larger city, where he would enjoy greater opportunities and scope to practise his chosen profession of medicine. 35 Thus provincial immigration within Aquitania, with Bordeaux as the obvious focus, linked the destinies of the Arborii and the Ausonii. Similar pursuits constituted another common denominator: both Iulius Ausonius and Aemilia Hilaria, his sister-in-law, were medical practitioners. The two families also apparently shared a predilection for unusual family names (see Genealogical Table 2). Callippio is a rare name, unattested elsewhere. Contemtus is equally rare, perhaps not surprisingly in view of its meaning (the despised). Aside from Iulius Ausonius’ brother, only two people are known by this name. Veneria’s name is an example of a theophoric cognomen with a clear pagan connotation, but nevertheless popular among Christians.36 One characteristic of Ausonius pater has excited much speculation among modern scholars. Ausonius’ remark concerning his linguistic usage, sermo impromptus Latio, verum Attica lingua/ suffecit culti vocibus eloquii (‘slow to speak Latin but with a command of Greek sufficient to employ expressions of elegance’), implies much better knowledge of Greek than of Latin.37 French scholars since Jullian have taken this as an indication of Celtic, even Druidic descent.38 They cite as further evidence the fact that the names given to the daughters in the family, like Dryadia, can be traced to Celtic roots, and claim that Iulius Ausonius and other family members employed well-known and respected Druidic healing practices. It is also claimed that the prominence assigned to the fountain of Divona in Ausonius’ praise of Bordeaux relates to the importance of sacred springs in Druidism. Even astrological pursuits on the maternal side of Ausonius’ family have been recruited to substantiate Druidic origins.39 These arguments appear too tenuous to support a theory of Celtic-Druidic affiliation and neglect to take into account the fact that Ausonius would not have hesitated to make capital of such a background had it existed. He certainly did not fail to mention the Druidic connections of another immigrant family at Bordeaux, that of the rhetor Attius Patera, who had come from the heart of ancient Druidic territory.40 Eastern-Greek rather than Celtic origins would appear to explain Iulius Ausonius’ comparative mastery of Greek. The names of Iulius’ siblings for example, Cataphronia and Callippio, are derived from Greek (and not Celtic) roots as, for that matter, is the name 55


Dryadia. Of the known Cataphronii in the late third and fourth centuries, one was a native of Byblus in Phoenicia and the other possibly a relative of Ausonius.41 There are other factors, aside from names, that militate in favour of a Greek rather than a Celtic origin. One is the dominance of Greeks in the medical profession in Gaul.42 Another is the presence of Greek or ‘Syrian’ merchant communities in many urban centres in late antique Gaul.43 Commercial interests, the backbone of these communities, can perhaps be demonstrated in the activities of the brothers of Iulius Ausonius: one died during a trading mission to Britain; the other amassed and lost considerable fortunes, probably also owing to commercial ventures. 44 Both apparently used Bordeaux as their base of operations, and their financial dealings may have been intended to build up the family’s fortunes using the auspicious economic climate of their new environment. Iulius’ ethnic origins are important insofar as they shed light on the role of Bordeaux as a centre of contemporary acculturation. In spite of an immigrant’s limited language skills, the city offered a professional the best possible opportunities in Aquitania and a greater chance of integration into the existing community fabric. Bordeaux, it seems, welcomed immigrants, an aspect which further implies considerable urban prosperity. In times of hardship no place is likely to open its door to foreigners, talented as they may be. Iulius Ausonius’ likely Greek origins have, however, provoked the further suggestion that he had very humble, even servile origins. 45 This proposal is intended to account for Ausonius’ reticence about his paternal ancestry, and for the Greek family name (‘westerner’). That Greek names occur in Ausonius’ family throughout its history is true enough (Hesperius, Thalassius, Cataphronia, etc.). But if we were to conclude that every person in the west with a Greek name and no recorded ancestry was a freedman, the result would be absurd. Unlike the forcible exile of the Arborii from central to south-west Gaul, the move of the Ausonii from Bazas to Bordeaux did not entail the severance of local ties. Not only did Iulius Ausonius become an honorary member of the curia of Bazas, but his granddaughter, Ausonius’ niece, later married into another Bazadais family, that of Paulinus. The Ausonii also managed to retain their property in the area until the beginning of the fifth century.46 Iulius Ausonius was an exception in his family in that he was the only member to marry and the only male to enjoy long life. His two 56

GENS AU SONIANA

brothers died early and without heirs, as did his brother-in-law Aemilius Magnus Arborius. The fact may have eventually contributed to the accumulation of considerable financial resources in the hands of Ausonius. Of the elder Ausonius’ two sisters, Iulia Veneria died at an early age while Iulia Cataphronia, a virgo devota, lived to an old age.47 Perhaps, like Aemilia Hilaria, Cataphronia’s apparent Christian faith hints at an early conversion. In this connection, Iulius’ Greek origins appear even more plausible as the decision to settle in Gaul may have partly been due to the traditional contacts between Gallic and eastern Christianity. 48 The preponderance of unmarried women, coupled with the relatively early demise of men, contributed to the creation of households largely consisting of widows or spinsters.49 In this light, it is natural that the women in the family played an important role in the early education of the young. Ausonius was brought up in the house of his maternal grandmother Aemilia Corinthia Maura.50 Genealogical table 3 Fifth generation of Ausonius’ family, maternal side / Second generation, paternal side (second quarter of the fourth century)

57


The professional success of Aemilius Magnus Arborius and Iulius Ausonius in the fields of education and medicine respectively opened up new social and economic opportunities for the younger generations. Iulius’ daughter Iulia Dryadia married in the late 320s into a leading curial family of Bordeaux which provided the family with an entrée to the established municipal aristocracy there. 51 Her husband, Pomponius Maximus, was a primoris, a term which denotes affiliation with the municipal primates, or chiefs of the curia. 52 Ausonius does not refer to Pomponius’ family; their nobility was in all likelihood recently attained. Pomponius’ standing in the city, and the rising fortunes of Aemilius Magnus Arborius in Toulouse promoted another advantageous marital alliance for the Ausonii, that of Decimius Magnus Ausonius and Attusia Lucana Sabina. Through Attusius Lucanus Talisius, Sabina’s father, the Arborii and the Ausonii extended their local contacts to a family with lineage and wealth. Talisius belonged, in the words of his son-inlaw, to ‘a nobility celebrated from their beginnings’ which numbered several recorded generations.53 The words are vague but they may indicate an honorary senatorial status. 54 Perhaps Talisius had managed to avoid curial duties by acquiring senatorial rank, since he could clearly afford the transfer.55 His name is interesting. Close to Attusius is the rare name Attus which is of Sabinian (Italian) origin but can also be Celtic. The distribution of the name Lucanus is concentrated in Narbonensis, northern Italy, southern Spain and along the Rhine and the Danube.56 The name of his daughter Sabina would seem to confirm an Italian connection.57 Talisius devoted his time to aristocratic pursuits like estate management and the hunt, preferring to live on his estate than in the city.58 The precise extent of his landed property is unclear, but he bequeathed at least three separate estates to his daughters.59 His economic resources enabled him not only to commute between the city and the countryside but also to adopt the lifestyle and the ideals of the nobility. Talisius’ ties with Bordeaux imply economic interests in the growing and continuous prosperity of its urban and rural resources which, in turn, ensured his own fortunes. The marriage of the son of an immigrant doctor to a woman belonging to the highest echelon of provincial aristocracy signalled acceptance into the most exclusive and hitherto inaccessible Bordelais circles. Ausonius may have gained his initial access to the house of Talisius through the latter’s interest in rhetoric.60 Perhaps 58

GENS AU SONIANA

Talisius gave more credence to Ausonius’ tales of nobility and lost fortunes than some modern scholars. Dryadia’s marriage to a curial colleague of Talisius and the fame of Ausonius’ uncle as rhetor did lend a certain respectability to the prospective bridegroom. At the time of his marriage, around 330, Ausonius was a grammarian at Bordeaux.61 While hardly a very prominent academic position, it was certainly a promising beginning for a young man of 20 who had just graduated from the schools at which he now taught. In the fifth generation (maternal line) the Ausonii were first exposed to the imperial administration. Sabina’s sister, Namia Pudentilla, married Flavius Sanctus, governor (praeses) in Britain. The date of the appointment is unclear, although the 340s is a likely estimate.62 It is equally difficult to determine his rank. According to the Notitia Dignitatum, Britain had two consular and three praesidial provinces at the beginning of the fifth century.63 Appointment to the latter did not confer senatorial rank. There is some indication that Sanctus did enjoy senatorial status, although by birth rather than office.64 A provincial governorship was the sort of appointment that those already respected locally often obtained in order to reinforce their standing. A potens who left his city to serve the emperor in such a way would return with added prestige.65 Sanctus’ subsequent career, if any, is unknown. Perhaps after returning from Britain to Aquitania he settled into a life of rural leisure and respectability. Once established in Bordeaux, then, the Arborii and the Ausonii had gained access to the highest and most affluent social classes in Aquitania within a single generation. The relative rapidity with which the family rose from fairly humble beginnings to assume a place in the provincial upper classes is remarkable. Whether their ascent was typical is impossible to determine, but there were surely other enterprising individuals in the provinces with professional training who attained prominence. The documentation that profiles the success of Ausonius’ family merely allows us to witness in detail an example of the early formation of a new provincial aristocracy whose fortunes were closely linked with the economic recovery of the cities they inhabited. Socio-economic prosperity in fact ensured the successful integration of talented new immigrants into the established municipal upper classes. In the next (sixth) generation of the Arborii, the family’s social and economic status in Bordeaux and rural Aquitania was consolidated. Ausonius’ (unnamed) daughter, Talisius’ sole granddaughter, contracted two useful matches, each to a member of 59


Genealogical table 4 Sixth generation on the maternal side/Third generation on the paternal side (middle of the fourth century)

60

GENS AU SONIANA

a leading family in Bordeaux. Her first husband was Valerius Latinus Euromius, who was generis clari decus, procerum de stirpe natus (‘the pride of an illustrious family born of eminent parents’) and of a clan of celebrated nobility (genus clarae nobilitatis).66 The repeated emphasis on Euromius’ social status clearly implies that the family was pre-eminent in the city. Euromius’ administrative career took him to Illyricum, where he served as an advocate of the treasury (advocatus fisci), adviser to the praetorian prefect (assessor) and finally as a provincial governor (praeses), perhaps of Dalmatia.67 To pursue advancement, then, he had to leave home and to relocate to Greek-speaking provinces where a wife who (presumably) could speak the local language was likely to be an asset. His involvement in essentially financial positions is interesting and points perhaps to a moneyed background. The dates and order of his tenures are unclear, but they probably fall around the middle of the century.68 The significance of Euromius’ career within the general development of the Gallic aristocracy is also a matter of conjecture. Does it represent a stage at which local Gallic magnates with considerable economic resources and secure social standing desired membership of the imperial hierarchy? Bordeaux certainly had the ability to produce an affluent class of ambitious professionals and businessmen quite early on. According to Ausonius, Euromius died very young, and his career was cut short. Although he did not hold offices that carried senatorial rank, the possibility of senatorial status, by birth or through his parents by wealth, cannot be completely ruled out. His marital bond with Ausonius’ daughter certainly marked the continued ascent of the Ausonii. It is worth briefly pausing over Euromius. His career recalls the early stages of the immensely successful cursus of another Gaul, perhaps even Aquitanian, Saturninus Secundus Salutius. Emerging against a non-senatorial background but possibly wealthy, Salutius first became a governor of Aquitania and at some stage also comes, perhaps of the sacrae largitiones or of the res privatae, both offices requiring some financial skills.69 In Euromius’ case, a background of enrichment based, perhaps, on commerce, may have served as a useful training ground for the assumption of positions entailing financial responsibilities. Behind the careers of Euromius and Salutius it may be possible to discern the rise of a class of rich Aquitanians whose entry to financial circles of the imperial

61


administration was due to a robust economic position in their home community. The second marriage of Ausonius’ daughter, to Thalassius, brought the family once again into contact with the Pomponii, for Thalassius’ mother was Pomponia Urbica,70 possibly a member of the family of Pomponius Maximus, Ausonius’ brother-in-law.71 Her family is designated as noteworthy (genus clarum), while her husband Severus Censor Iulianus, is praised for his personal virtues, implying a non-noble origin.71 Pomponia, then, married beneath her social status, like Sabina and Ausonius’ maternal grandmother. Perhaps the real gain in the second marriage of Ausonius’ daughter was the consolidation of existing connections. Ausonius’ eldest son, named after his father, died in infancy.72 His second son Decimius Hilarianus Hesperius married an unknown woman and fathered three children. His wife was perhaps alive at the time the Parentalia was composed and hence excluded from the list of dead relatives commemorated there. Hesperius’ career played an important role in his father’s ascendancy at the court of Gratian and will be surveyed in due course. Among other members of this generation Megentira (the bearer of another unique name), daughter of Iulia Dryadia and Pomponius Maximus, contracted a marriage with a man from Bazas, the city of her paternal grandfather. Her husband Paulinus is described as a man of munici-pale genus on his father’s side, undoubtedly denoting curial stock.73 On his mother’s side he was stirpis Aquitanae, a vague phrase which perhaps alludes to the ownership of landed property in the province. 74 One of Ausonius’ estates was called Pauliacus, and was possibly bequeathed to his niece and Paulinus.75 Like Euromius and Sanctus, Paulinus embarked on an administrative career which took him to other parts of the empire. He served as scriniarius (financial officer), and rationalis of Lybia (diocesan treasurer of Africa).76 Once more we meet an Aquitanian who held positions of financial responsibility. His African tenure enabled him to acquire considerable wealth, perhaps in addition to his already existing resources.77 A generation later, when Ausonius’ influence sent several younger members of the family back to Africa, they were perhaps able to use the contacts already established by Paulinus.78 His fame and fortune were such that the Spanish province of Tarraconensis sought him as governor (corrector) and as a patron (350s?).79 It is unclear whether the term corrector is poetic or technical since it is not 62

GENS AU SONIANA

attested elsewhere in such a context.80 According to the Notitia Dignitatum the governor of Tarraconensis was of praesidial and not consular rank.81 Paulinus’ cursus, however, probably enabled him to acquire senatorial status.82 The connection with Spain is interesting. In spite of its proximity to Aquitania, only a few academics and aspiring politicians directed their steps thither. Ausonius’ maternal uncle Arborius briefly attempted to pursue a legal career there in the hope of advancement. A famed rhetorician of Toulouse, Exsuperius, was sent to Spain as a provincial governor.83 Paulinus, however, is the only member of Ausonius’ extended family whose activities in Spain had a lasting effect. He was apparently able to construct a network of clientele sufficiently important to be of use to his son and namesake Paulinus.84 Perhaps more than those of other figures connected with the Ausonii, the elder Paulinus’ achievements anticipated the pattern of administrative careers that anchored municipal families within the fabric of provincial aristocracy. He is the one established case of a patronus provinciae of Gallic origin.85 Megentira’s brother Pomponius Maximus Herculanus joined the ranks of municipal teachers as a grammarian and was apparently destined to succeed his uncle in the chair of rhetoric.86 Herculanus’ premature death prevented the continuation of the family’s teaching traditions into a third generation. No other young member of the family opted for a career in education. By the early 360s the family had attained a socio-economic position that no longer required the exercise of this sort of talent. Megentira’s other brother Magnus Arborius married Veria Liceria, who numbered an eloquent historian among her ancestors.87 This may be none other than the historian Eusebius of Nantes whose work served as a source for Ausonius’ historical composition on usurpers from Decius to Diocletian. 88 Liceria’s social and economic background are not mentioned. With a notable historian in her family, her social and economic status were immaterial. In any case, the Ausonii could afford by then to marry as they pleased. Euromius, Paulinus and Sanctus returned home to Bordeaux and Aquitania with the added value of the prestige attached to imperial service. Noble or humble as their origins may have been, they had amassed enough fortune and had acquired eminent enough positions within local society to desire or to need what the imperial administration could offer. Like Salutius, they must have perceived the advantages of office at a stage when very few Gauls left any 63


traces in the bureaucratic annals of the empire. Their alliance with members of the gens ausoniana demonstrated the fluidity and openness of Bordelais and Aquitanian society in the first half of the fourth century. As the city was consolidating its economic position, its leading citizens and landed gentlemen of the countryside were securing their place within its nascent provincial nobility. To sum up, in the first three generations liberal professions constituted a valuable asset which enabled the Arborii and the Ausonii to acclimatise to their new Bordelais environment. The family numbered two physicians and two teachers. Imperial legislation, which coupled medicine and education, entitled their practitioners to a number of immunities and privileges.89 This sort of preferential treatment enhanced the social standing of doctors and teachers in their own communities and allowed them access to social circles ordinarily closed to men of humble origins.90 Given the right aptitude, the choice of the teaching profession for ambitious young men was a sound one. Apart from legal privileges, rhetorical skills were extremely useful in bureaucratic offices and administrative careers. The career of Arborius exemplifies the social, economic and physical mobility that could result from teaching. There was, indeed, a certain concern to preserve and safeguard such advantages within the same family and in the same city by encouraging younger members to follow in the same footsteps. Arborius’ nephew and then his great-nephew entered the teaching profession, and it is evident that, in its first stages of provincial ascent, Ausonius’ family made a conscious use of talent as an instrument of economic and social mobility at both urban and provincial levels. A wise choice of spouses was another useful method of advancement and social integration which improved the family’s financial resources and created opportunities to serve in the imperial administration. Both Ausonius’ wife and his brother-in-law belonged to the highest echelon of the municipal aristocracy. The most significant alliance, however, was that of Megentira and Paulinus, and it symbolises the extent of the family’s success. At the turn of the century Iulius Ausonius had left Bazas with little more than a talent for healing and a good command of Greek. Three generations later his granddaughter returned there as a bride of a former provincial governor. It is interesting, though, to observe that although careers in the imperial administration required physical mobility, almost all the marriages recorded by Ausonius were local 64

GENS AU SONIANA

Aquitanian. With the exception of Arborius’ Tolosan wife, not a single Gallic man or woman outside Aquitania became a part of their marital network. The Arborii and the Ausonii, then, afford the historian of late antiquity an excellent example of social mobility based on talent, acquired skills and seized opportunities, and closely connected with the rising fortunes of one city and its prosperous hinterland. The turning point was the decision to move to a thriving urban centre like Bordeaux where the families could acquire training and improve their economic standing. The consolidation of local power over three generations meant that Ausonius’ family was poised to reap the rewards of provincial ascent even without a summons to the imperial court. The emergence of a new aristocracy in fourth-century Gaul is a silent and, for the most part, an ill-documented process. Perhaps the rise of the Arborii and the Ausonii was not so remarkable. After all, it can be claimed that medicine, rhetoric and law were the most socially mobile professions. Claudius Mamertinus, perhaps a Gaul from Autun, and a grandson of a talented Greek immigrant, had become consul just a few years before Ausonius was summoned to court.91 Salutius’ meteoric rise spans only five years (361–5) and nothing is known of the many years which he and his relatives must have spent in building up the sort of rank and prestige which made one regard the highest imperial appointments as a natural prerogative and an extension of an already existing power. In both cases the gain of a high office is connected with Julian. Their example, as well as that of the three administrative members of Ausonius’ family, seems to corroborate the hypothesis that Julian’s Gallic apprenticeship may have been a turning point in the relationship between government and Gauls. When in the mid-370s Ausonius reached a position of power and patronage, a significant number of Gauls suddenly appeared on the stage of the imperial bureaucracy in elevated positions. Their availability and their ability to assume power and authority point to a preexisting economic and social élite whose origins cannot be traced. The success of the Ausonii, therefore, cannot have been unique. Their singular advantage over their peers was the result of a lucky coincidence. Already wealthy and influential in his province, Ausonius was singled out by an imperial court in need of a good tutor. A survey of Ausonius’ school colleagues, the subject of the next chapter, highlights similar stories of success and others of failure. 65


Just how rich and prosperous Ausonius was before he joined the Treveran court is also worth considering in view of the unique information he supplies about the extent and sources of his patrimony. AUSONIAN PROPERTIES AND AQUITANIAN RURAL LIFE If a network of marriages enabled the family of Ausonius to gain social promotion, it also brought considerable material gain which, owing to a relatively high rate of infant and youth mortality, was eventually concentrated in a few hands. The question of Ausonius’ landed properties is a thorny one and has received attention far beyond its real importance. 92 The main interest in tracing the properties of Ausonius lies in understanding how their accumulation contributed to the process of social and economic advance. Their scope also provides insights into contemporary perceptions of wealth, its uses and abuses. Before looking at landed properties, it seems useful to recall possible sources of liquid assets aside from Ausonius’ academic salary. Ausonius had expectations regarding the fortunes of his two paternal uncles who had trading interests and who died childless, though in one case his expectations were frustrated since the uncle had managed to squander his gains just before his death.93 Ausonius was also the sole surviving heir of his maternal grandfather and uncle. It is unclear if Argicius left anything of value but Arborius, it may be recalled, married a wealthy Tolosan, and Ausonius was their ultimate beneficiary.94 In addition, Ausonius was the sole male heir of his father’s urban residence in Bordeaux.95 Iulius Ausonius’ flourishing practice had enabled him to die prosperous, and perhaps to have owned a suburban house in the Pagus Novarus, the parish of St Seurin.96 Lastly, Ausonius’ paternal aunt, Iulia Cataphronia, left him what he calls her ‘slender fortune’.97 When interpreting ‘slender’ it is worth remembering that by the time Ausonius inherited Iulia’s savings he was a rich man with a changed perception of what constituted wealth. The bulk of Ausonius’ accumulated property consisted of estates which came into his possession through various lines of inheritance. First, the much-debated herediolum (little heritage), a nameless estate affectionately so called by Ausonius in a poem devoted to a detailed description of the land.98 At 238 hectares it was hardly ‘a small patrimony’, although in comparison with the size of contemporary 66

Map3


Aquitanian estates like Montmaurin and Valentine, which covered several thousand hectares, herediolum can indeed be considered modest.99 According to Ausonius, the estate had been occupied by his father and, more surprisingly, by his paternal grandfather and great-grandfather as well. 100 The last two make their single appearance in this poem, giving rise to the suspicion that Ausonius inserted a deliberately misleading reference since herediolum is thought to have been the heritage of his wife.101 There is little reason to suspect him of an outright lie, rather of an exaggeration and possible pretension. The estate could have been owned by Iulius Ausonius who late in life was certainly in a position to acquire a modest-sized landed property. The addition of two more paternal ancestors who had nothing to do with the estate is a poetic touch that possibly illustrates Ausonius’ deep and sincere attachment to his heritage and his father. Herediolum has been variously located near Bazas, or Libourne, in places now called Loupiac, Lugaignac, Cagnac and Langon, all localities in the modern department of the Gironde.102 If the owner had indeed been Iulius Ausonius, it is reasonable to place the estate in the vicinity of Bazas, his city of origin. At some point the city honoured Iulius with membership (sine cura) in the municipal curia, possibly in appreciation of his medical fame. The possession of a landed property in the area would have also qualified him for the honour. The Bazadais herediolum may have bordered on Pauliacus, the estate of Paulinus’ family, which could explain the match between Paulinus and Ausonius’ niece. 103 Since none of their children survived to a mature age, the property eventually reverted to Ausonius. The most famous of Ausonius’ properties is Lucaniacum, the name of which points to a line of succession through his wife’s family.104 This, indeed, may have been the estate on which Sabina’s father, Attusius Lucanus Talisius, passed his days in an agreeable aristocratic fashion. It has been variously located in the area of Saint Emilion, St Georges de Montagne, Lugaignac and Bourg-surGironde, all again in the modern department of the Gironde, and all not far from Bordeaux. Talisius apparently owned two other properties which his other daughters inherited. One of Sabina’s sisters was an energetic woman, the wife of a former provincial governor who preferred to leave the management of their estate in her capable hands. The other, Attusia Lucana, and her husband Regulus lived near Saintes, north of Bordeaux, and had no off spring.105 Ausonius’ attested property in the 68

GENS AU SONIANA

Santonage in all probability, therefore, derived from these relations.106 Of course, the possibility that these estates came into the family through the bridegrooms cannot altogether be dismissed. The fact remains that owing to the coincidences of premature death and childlessness these properties fell to a single individual. Although the number of estates to which Ausonius refers in his writings may be as many as seven, it is impossible to identify more than four with any defined line of succession. The number compares well with the number of estates assigned to another successful academic, Libanius of Antioch, but falls short of the fifteen owned by a Roman aristocrat like Symmachus.107 Ausonius also supplies a detailed description of the herediolum. It was ideally situated at a short distance from a city, enabling its owner to enjoy both rustic tranquillity and the convenience of urban facilities.108 Proximity to sources of water was of prime importance and Ausonius’ herediolum had not only a river nearby, which the inhabitants used mainly for transport, but also a spring and a well to supply drinking water and water for the baths. 109 Most of the grounds were covered with woods. One-fifth was used for tillage and one-tenth for a vineyard. Only a small portion in this case was allocated to pasture. The main aim of this sort of rural establishment was to achieve a balanced economy and selfsufficiency. The villa boasted storage space sufficient to house no less than two years of supplies.110 In times of famine, however, some short-sighted and less well-stocked landowners in Aquitania had to resort to the help of neighbouring estates. From preliminary surveys of Aquitanian villae in antiquity it appears that many of them were restored or rebuilt in the fourth century.111 In some cases, however, no trace of previous settlement has been found, which implies that the house was built from scratch. Many of the villae have three features in common: an openair reception hall; extensive employment of mosaics as the main decoration of the interior; and bath houses. The mosaics have been well explored.112 Most of those catalogued so far in Aquitania have been dated to the fourth and fifth centuries. 113 This chronology stands in marked contrast to the dates so far established for mosaics elsewhere in Gaul, and reflects the unusual prosperity of the Aquitanian countryside. In Belgica and Lugdunensis the majority of the mosaic pavements belong to the second half of the second century and the first half of the third; in Narbonensis they are even earlier.114 69


Archaeology also provides a unique insight into several rural establishments of the sort owned by affluent Aquitanians in the fourth century. An easy drive of some seventy kilometres east of Bordeaux brings the modern traveller to the small town of Saint Emilion. All around are vineyards where the famed local wine is produced. On the outskirts of Saint Emilion is the so-called Villa du Palat.115 In late antiquity, on approaching the villa, the visitor’s eyes encountered a long pool shimmering with sparkling water. The main decorative feature of the entrance court was a marble fountain covered with a coloured mosaic depicting fish. The one-time owner of the villa, a man rather fond of marine life, also embellished the floors of his dining room with painted dolphins.116 Those who were lucky enough to have been invited to supper could feast their eyes on mosaics of vases with vine leaves artfully growing out of them and of baskets full of attractive fruit. It seems as though a conscious effort was made inside the villa to reflect the beauties of its natural environment. A longer journey from Bordeaux, this time heading south to the Pyrenees, brings one to the town of Saint Bertrand de Comminges. About ten kilometres east of the town, on a plain outside the village of Valentine near the Garonne, several tall columns proclaim the existence of what used to be a late Roman villa. In antiquity, a visitor to the villa would proceed through a vast cour d’honneur to a smaller reception area beyond which spread many rooms.117 Here, as in Saint Emilion, vast areas were covered with polychrome mosaics featuring geometrical and floral/vegetal motifs. South of the residential complex was a large thermal ensemble where a small pool was flanked by a rectangular mosaic combining linear compositions with floral pyramids. Neither Valentine nor Palat are unique. They belong to a growing corpus of late Roman villae in Aquitania which reveal an unusual density of rural estates along rivers, from the Dordogne in the north to the tributaries of the Garonne and the Adour in the south.118 Then, as now, the only exception was the area along the ocean, the Landes, which has always been sparsely populated. An evaluation of the size of these ancient estates is not easy. Nor has it ever been possible to excavate an entire complex, namely the pars urbana and the pars rustica. Modern estimates have been based on calculations of the territory of the mediaeval villages founded on their ruins. One evaluation sets the average size of the larger estates at no less than 2,000–4,000 hectares.119 70

GENS AU SONIANA

In addition to the mosaics, the existence of vast thermal complexes on private grounds reflects the substantial economic means of the owners.120 The construction of the baths often entailed the diversion of existing sources of water so that it is hardly surprising that virtually all the known Aquitanian villae are situated not far from rivers and sources of sweet mineral waters. Water, indeed, was an important element in the Aquitanian economy. Aside from baths, fountains and pools, the landowners in Aquitania monopolised public resources for use as private water sanctuaries. Two examples can be cited.121 On the territory of the vast villa of Montmaurin, a water sanctuary (160×100 m) was constructed in the second quarter of the fourth century.122 To date, no trace of previous occupation has been found. Among the components of this sanctuary were a market place and an inn, and at the centre, near a fountain, was a temple. The owners of Montmaurin, then, had healthy commercial instincts. Their conversion of a hallowed water source into a tourist attraction must have been extremely profitable. The lords of Valentine were no less practical. Near their residence they constructed a large semi-circular pool (14×9.5 m) flanked by a Nymphaeum. The area had long been known for its healing mineral waters, and the size of the thermal complex seems to indicate public rather than private use. Perhaps, like the owners of Montmaurin, those of Valentine charged admission. Opposite the thermal ensemble at Valentine, on the road itself, was a temple with an adjacent mausoleum. Here, an epitaph to Nymphius (Nymfius), one of the owners of Valentine, has been discovered: ‘His body bound fast by eternal slumber, here lies Nymphius, his pious soul enjoying the fruits of heaven…. Immortal you shall be, for your glory shall live on thriving with much praise through ages to come….’123 A fitting tribute to a parens provinciae (a title attributed to him, and for which no exact parallels are known). Among Nymphius’ recorded deeds was the arrangement of public games at his own expense. 124 He also seems to have been an important member of the concilium procerum, either the curia of Saint Bertrand de Comminges (the nearest urban centre to his villa) or the provincial assembly of Novempopulana where Valentine is situated.125 Perhaps he belonged to both. The inscription is unique not only in Aquitania but throughout late antique Gaul.126 Comparable examples, particularly relating to the public munificence of a private individual, are unknown there at this late date. 71


Ausonius left a full description of the life of an estate-owner in late Roman Aquitania.127 A typical day on an estate would start with a light wash. Then, in the seclusion of his private chapel, the master of the house would direct a prayer to the Master of the Universe.128 Following this came a cycle of morning greetings involving friends and clients. The main meal of the day was a social affair; Ausonius would entertain at least five guests, apparently a usual number around the dinner table. He also personally supervised the preparations, ensuring that the cook had everything adequately spiced. Spending time with friends was one of the advantages of life in the countryside. Invitations took various forms, from fairly lengthy letters full of trivialities to a pithy and concise communication.129 They were not always accepted. Axius Paulus, a literary man of some repute, declined to respond.130 Theon, a farmer of some means in the Médoc, also avoided Ausonius on account of a debt. 131 Ausonius urged Theon to ignore the debt and to set out by boat to join him in Lucaniacum. Theon had really no excuse to shun his friend’s company, claims Ausonius, especially since the distance between the Médoc and Lucaniacum was easily traversed.132 When visits were not feasible, a regular exchange of letters took place. Ausonius’ volume of correspondence is fairly limited, but many of his poems are accompanied by a dedicatory preface in the form of a prose or verse letter.133 The majority of his correspondents resided in Gaul, and the furthest that Ausonius’ emissary had to roam was to Spain and Italy.134 An exchange of literary compositions often accompanied or replaced regular correspondence. These compositions could elicit extravagant praise from the recipient. Ausonius’ greatest enthusiasm was reserved for a lengthy poem on the early kings of Rome composed by a former pupil, Paulinus.135 One can nearly visualise these two men lounging in their beautiful gardens on a pleasant evening, eating delicacies, drinking Bordeaux wine, and reading aloud poetry. The ambience must have been one of exclusivity. The chance to garnish one’s letters with Greek, as Ausonius did at times, must have been particularly satisfactory.136 Less poetically minded estate-owners would often exchange edible items rather than correspondence. Theon dispatched oysters to Ausonius in response to a request for verses.137 Médoc oysters and apples were local delicacies (still enjoyed today) and as such were frequently sent as gifts. Ausonius was not displeased with the offering, but could not resist making playful jibes at Theon’s 72

GENS AU SONIANA

expense in the verses he composed in response. When Theon did eventually present Ausonius with a composition, it clearly lacked literary skill, for Ausonius described it as ‘leaden’.138 On occasion literary men would also send food. Ausonius himself frequently sent birds and ducks from his estate, and from Spain Paulinus sent his old teacher the famous fish sauce of Barcelona, the garum, which must have been greatly appreciated.139 A letter from Ausonius to Paulinus, requesting help after a crop failure, provides interesting insights into the structure of the rural economy in Aquitania. 140 Paulinus was then still residing in Aquitania on his estate, Ebromagus. Ausonius sent his bailiff to Paulinus to gather provisions from neighbouring estates to relieve his own situation at Lucaniacum. Paulinus agreed to help, and the enterprising bailiff proceeded to comply with his master’s orders whilst lining his own pockets. The mode and extent of the bailiff’s travels reflected existing local agricultural infrastructures. He travelled mostly by boat along rivers, visiting the peasants (inquilini), villages (vici) and fortified towns (oppida) as he passed them. The main purpose of the journey was to barter for the necessary items, and the goods collected en route were stored on Paulinus’ grounds. Against this background of a prosperous countryside and cities which enjoyed a wide range of economic activities, one can better appreciate the inception and development of a network of rural and urban properties such as the one that accrued to Ausonius. He, the lucky beneficiary, did not have to live on his academic salary alone. His academic career, however, did play an ultimately significant role in his rise to power and it is worth considering the contribution of literary culture to personal advancement in greater detail.

73

5 SCHOOLS AND SCHOLARS

A Gallic panegyrist of 362 ascribed to the emperor Julian the credit for rekindling the languishing flames of literary studies in Gaul.1 This is a touching if somewhat misleading compliment that shows the concern of both men for education and letters. By the time Julian reached Gaul the most famous Gallic school of the early empire, the Aeduan Maenianum, was practically defunct and Julian’s presence did nothing to revive it. By contrast, the Bordelais schools were flourishing. A detailed exploration of the schools and scholars of fourth-century Bordeaux is one way of assessing the scope of educational activities in Gaul. Such an analysis also provides an insight into the impact of urban commercial prosperity on the formation of an affluent class that required quality education and human resources able to supply it. It further illuminates types of career that could carry men to the ranks of the imperial administration, and the extent to which their educational background prepared them for these posts. The basic source of information is a unique document, Ausonius’ Professores, a collection of poems on the school masters of Bordeaux. The poems are neither as comprehensive nor as detailed as the voluminous writings of the contemporary Libanius in Antioch, but like them, they illustrate the close ties between a city and its schools.2 Gallic education had long been held in high esteem. Pre-Roman Gaul had produced bards and orators and the Druids had earned a considerable reputation as teachers.3 Among subjects taught in the Druidic schools were astronomy, theology and physical sciences.4 The benefits of this educational system were apparently exclusively reserved for the nobility, but the extent of its influence ensured that the Druids’ language lingered for centuries after their elimination.5 With the coming of the Romans, the Druidic system was quickly 74

SCHOOLS AN D SCHOLARS

integrated into the scheme of primary and secondary education in the rest of the empire. By the early second century, the fame of Gallic rhetoric was such that, with one exception, all the protagonists of Tacitus’ Dialogue on Oratory came from Gaul. In the south, Toulouse acquired the epithet ‘city of Palas’, due to its appreciation of letters. So important did education become in early imperial Gaul that the province exported its knowledge to Britain, whence in older days the Gauls themselves had derived their learning.6 There seems no reason to doubt that Gallic education was seriously disrupted throughout the third century as a result of political upheavals. Some schools were destroyed and their scholars dispersed. Imperial panegyrics of the last years of the third and the early years of the fourth centuries call upon the residing emperors to extend imperial support to educational institutions. Such petitions resulted in a certain revival within the educational system. Imperial support also extended to the teachers and a series of laws from Constantine onwards announced the exemption of teachers from a variety of onerous municipal duties.7 A typical product of late antique schools in Gaul were speeches celebrating various events connected with the ruling imperial house.8 These displays of rhetorical talents had a considerable public and offer some idea of the ties between emperors and their subjects, schools and their cities. So popular these forms of advertisement became, that a province like Egypt bred generations of wandering poetic scholars, some of whom rose to fame and riches.9 Listening to encomiastic speeches in honour of cities, their leading citizens, emperors and their ministers, must have been a widely accepted form of entertainment, to judge by the surviving volume of Greek and Latin panegyrics. In Gaul, the early example of Eumenius of Autun points to various levels of interaction between education, the city and the imperial government.10 He delivered a panegyric in his home town of Autun, calling upon the emperor Constantius I to restore the city’s schools to their former prosperous state. His genuine appeal and considerable rhetorical skills were duly rewarded with a court appointment. At the end of his time at court, Eumenius chose to return to Autun and to resume his teaching career. His career shows the singular advantage of being in a position to attract the imperial eye.

75


AUSONIUS AND THE SCHOOL CURRICULUM If the value of education and literacy as a means of social mobility needs little demonstration, the relevance or irrelevance of that education to the administrative career posts obtained through it is another matter.11 It is, therefore, useful briefly to examine this aspect of contemporary education since what was actually taught in the schools is of importance, as are deviations from the standard curricula as far as these can be established.12 A number of Ausonius’ poems are closely linked with his views and experience as a teacher.13 They tell us something of the methods used to develop and improve the pupil’s faculty of memory and his vocabulary. They also reflect the teacher’s idiosyncrasies and individual preferences. Both as a teacher and a poet Ausonius certainly displayed a taste for the rare, the archaic and the unusual. The basic emphasis of the whole educational system was on advanced written and oral literacy. These skills, although limited, must have suited the needs of the society, since the system remained largely unaltered for several centuries. The programme of study for Gallic school children, whose masters are known to have been sometimes harsh, was crowded and occupied them from the early hours of the morning to bedtime. 14 Throughout the course of primary and secondary education the major instrument of study was mnemonics, and from earliest days the child was taught in a manner calculated to develop his memory. A teacher would start with monosyllabic words with some thematic coherence like parts of the body, the gods, items of food and the seasons of the year.15 Another teaching method employed a series of questions and answers which often lacked internal logic but which aided memorisation.16 Repetition was, of course, a basic ingredient at most levels of schooling and similar sounding words were especially useful in this respect.17 The teaching of Greek must have posed a real problem for a teacher in fourth-century Gaul and elsewhere in the west. If parents in the eastern provinces of the Roman empire had good reason to encourage their children to take up Latin, the language of law and imperial administration, no such motivation was present as regards Greek in the west. Greek, as nowadays, became a subject of luxury and a mark of an otiose culture. In fourth-century Bordeaux there was one chair of Greek grammar and apparently no lack of candidates. Ausonius himself had a special interest in Greek, perhaps due to his 76


family background. If, however, his ‘Greek’ poems reflect the methods used in the schools, it is hardly surprising that even minds as astute as Augustine’s had serious problems with the language.18 A Gallo-Roman child, at least in Bordeaux, was introduced to Greek through a comparison between the Latin and Greek alphabets.19 Beyond this elementary stage, the study of Greek proceeded through a canon of texts which prominently featured Homer and Menander, and which had remained unaltered since the Republic. Ausonius’ Ludus Septem Sapientum is worthy of attention for the insight it provides into the teaching of Greek in a Latin-speaking school. It is a collection of moral precepts by eminent wise men along the lines of the Disticha Catonis.20 One can imagine that children must have been fed up with so much moral preaching, especially in a foreign and difficult tongue. A good teacher like Ausonius, therefore, used his inventive skills to present the subject as a game, with each of the Greek sages mounting the stage to deliver his spiel as though a performer in a theatrical piece. Keeping to this formula, the Ludus even includes a chorus which summarises the wise sayings and promptly provides a translation. Whether Gallic school graduates emerged with a working knowledge of Greek is a matter of conjecture. Perhaps the more talented ones did attain a worthwhile standard, while the rest forgot the little they had known as soon as they left school.21 Preparation for ‘real life’ after school was limited. If Ausonius is to be believed, teachers and students would discuss the choice of a career in politics, law, commerce, agriculture and the army.22 The teacher would then provide a list of unsuccessful choices from the remote past and a trite conclusion. Antiquarianism, then, rather than practicalities, dominated the schools. A lesson in astronomy, for example, included an expose on the influence of the Zodiac on timely childbirth.23 Among more relevant themes was the calendar, a subject of wide interest in late antiquity as the number of verse compositions and visual illustrations attests. 24 Geography was limited to places associated with heroic and mythological figures,25 although we know that at least one school in Autun had a wall map.26 Were children in late Roman Gaul actually able to point to the Rubicon on a map? History, especially Roman, was of obvious importance. To judge by Ausonian compositions there was a wide use of lists which provided very basic information and were easy to memorise. Roman emperors from Caesar to Heliogabalus were presented in quick 77


succession, each with a snippet of information relating to the length of their reign and the mode of their death.27 The underlying motive for such a composition was primarily to emphasise the rewards of a just rule. Earlier epochs were also covered: Ausonius’ historical works include one on the royal period in Roman history.28 Subjects of nearer or contemporary history posed a problem, although Ausonius did actually write a verse composition on third-century usurpers.29 He is also accredited with chronicling the history of the world from its very beginning to his own time, a type of composition not likely to be used in the schoolroom. 30 The preference in the learning of history for abridgements and trivial accounts sometimes extended into later life as Ammianus, in criticising the reading habits of some members of the Roman senatorial aristocracy, confirms.31 A slight corrective to the picture drawn by Ausonius can be obtained from a school manual, perhaps Gallic, that has recently come to light.32 It describes two scenes enacted in the forum where issues of taxation and the administration of justice were discussed. One scene touches on the mechanism of tax collection, while the other introduces public trials. The topics were important as many students would go on to practise law in the west without attending law school, or to become a tax consultant without acquiring a degree in accounting. In fact, an ambitious and brilliant graduate would consider initiating prosecution in a case involving taxation as a first step to an administrative career.33 Unified as the basic school curriculum in the western Roman empire appears to have been, some local variations must have existed. One such instance can perhaps be found in a bizarre Ausonian poem entitled Grammaticomastix (the scourge of grammar).34 Among the monosyllables which the poem introduces there are several which can be read as a Celtic magic recipe. The geographic roots of the author become even more apparent when he discusses at length the cities of Gaul, several of which he knew at first hand (Ordo Urbuim Nobilium). The first line of the Ordo, with its reference to the city of Rome, proves that, even with a resident imperial court, it was the ancient capital that occupied a special place in the hearts of Gauls like Ausonius.35 The inclusion of no less than five Gallic cities in a list of twenty famous cities from all over the empire is a clear distortion of Gaul’s importance. The purpose of the catalogue is not known, nor is the logic behind the criteria for inclusion or exclusion.36 Perhaps the Ordo is a verbal lesson in the 78


geography of the empire, with a therefore understandable emphasis on Gaul. Another possibility is that the poem served to illustrate a literary text. The author’s personal enthusiasm is plainly reserved for his own city whose praises are sung in the longest entry ,37 Local pride, then, enlarged the basic plan to include a tribute to Gaul and to the city where the author’s school was located. It is not difficult to see that a school programme like the one offered in Gaul (and elsewhere, for that matter) was hardly calculated to change the ‘amateurish nature of the top levels of Roman imperial administration’.38 One had, then, to rely on the good sense of the appointee and the trustworthiness of those who recommended him.39 In this respect, an oral recommendation heard by the emperor’s own ears (in the case of panegyrists), and literary reputation in the form of published work, had a certain influence on considerations relating to administrative appointments. THE SCHOOLS OF BORDEAUX Bordeaux’s position as a provincial capital and her favourable commercial location created an auspicious environment for the development of educational institutions. Any belief that Bordeaux achieved a unique status in the area of education is chiefly due to the testimony of Ausonius himself and to a lack of evidence from other parts of Gaul. It is certain, however, that throughout the fourth century the city attracted and produced educators of note. Ausonius’ Professores commemorates his school colleagues from the beginning of the fourth century to the 360s.40 It provides invaluable information about educational structures, the teaching profession as a whole, and the careers of its individual practitioners.41 Among the teachers of Bordeaux there was a clear distinction between those who taught grammar and those who taught rhetoric.42 In each discipline the teachers could aspire to a chair, whether municipal or private. It is unclear how many chairs Bordeaux possessed or how they were funded. The numbers would have been related to the size of the urban population, the local demand for higher education, and also the city’s economic base, for the municipality had to assign funds to pay its teachers and to build its schools. Furthermore, they reflect imperial policy, since the number of teachers and students was monitored by the imperial government in an attempt to regulate the movement of students and to promote certain professions.43 79


Chronological evidence of the type needed to reconstruct the succession of chair-holders with any precision is lacking. A work like the Commemoratio Professorum Burdigalensium, our chief source of information, probably omitted teachers still active at the time of composition and ignored instances of more than one tenure of office. Such chronological indications as Ausonius provides are vague, ranging from quondam and aevo proximo to aevo recenti, and are relative to his own teaching period in the city.44 There is also hardly any evidence regarding the tenure of each chair-holder. If, as has been assumed, the average tenure of a municipal chair was five to six years, what did the teachers do before or, for that matter, after such a relatively short period?45 Perhaps they went elsewhere, established their own schools, changed vocation, or died young. Ausonius refers no less than thirteen times to the age of his colleagues at death. Two of the twenty grammarians, Acilius Glabrio and Herculanus, died young; a third, Phoebicius, only obtained his position at a fairly advanced age, and died an old man.46 These examples are too few to be considered representative of the grammarians in general. The longevity of the Bordelais rhetoricians drew more comments from Ausonius. Nepotianus died at 90, but the age at which he left his chair for a governorship is unclear. Patera, Sedatus and Staphylius died old men; Tiberius Victor Minervius only reached 60. 47 Delphidius lived to middle age, Arborius died at 40, and Luciolus as well as Alethius Minervius died young. Still, this is not sufficient in itself to determine with any degree of certainty the average tenure of each. Ausonius himself spent more than thirty years as a grammarian and a rhetor in the same schools. His career sequence includes, by one modern reconstruction, nearly a decade as an assistant to a grammarian (subdoctor) (c. 330–9); over twenty years as a grammarian (339–c. 360); and some six years as a holder of a chair of rhetoric (c. 360–c. 366).48 Somewhat more helpful indications regarding the structure of the Bordelais schools may be found in the professional relations between Ausonius and several of their members. Four people are clearly designated as his teachers: Macrinus the grammarian taught him as a boy (puerities); Sperchus and Corinthius, the Greek grammarians, taught him in his first years of schooling (annis primis); and Tiberius Victor Minervius also coached him.49 In addition, a debt is acknowledged throughout to Ausonius’ uncle Aemilius Magnus Arborius, who may have acted as both a teacher and an 80


unofficial mentor throughout his nephew’s schooling.50 In all cases, the teaching Ausonius received can be assigned to the second decade of the fourth century. Leontius, although older than Ausonius, was a childhood friend (socius iuventae). 51 Luciolus first studied with Ausonius, was his teacher, and finally his colleague.52 This sequence is similar to that of Acilius Glabrio who, although the same age as Ausonius, was the latter’s pupil, and was appointed a grammarian when Ausonius became a rhetor.53 This type of progression shows that age was of secondary importance in educational careers, for Luciolus, Ausonius and Acilius Glabrio all belonged to the same generation, each becoming in turn the other’s student and then colleague. In other words, a brilliant pupil was probably appointed as an assistant and was given the opportunity to coach not only younger students but also his peers. In this light, only a relative chronology of the Bordelais schools can be reconstructed for the years c. 320 to the 360s, with Tiberius Victor Minervius as the doyen in the 310s, other teachers of Ausonius (Attius Patera and Censorius Atticus Agricius) representing a middle stage, and Ausonius, Luciolus and Glabrio as the last recorded chair-holders in Bordeaux within this period. Thalassus must be the oldest holder of a chair since Ausonius heard of him as a little boy (parvulus). The decision to include him in the poem was based on the fact that his educational activity still took place during Ausonius’ lifetime.54 Herculanus, Ausonius’ nephew, was presumably the youngest of the Bordelais teachers commemorated in the Professores. Any attempt to go beyond a tentative chronology must take into account the number of municipal chairs of grammar and rhetoric in Bordeaux.55 A crucial piece of information, therefore, is an imperial law issued in 376 during Ausonius’ tenure as quaestor (sacri palatii). This constitution (CTh 13.3.11), known as Gratian’s school law, is chiefly concerned with regulating appointments to municipal chairs through the holding of elections and the provision of salary scales. It stipulates that grammarians should receive a remuneration of twelve annonae, and rhetors twice this amount. On the basis of this law modern speculations regarding the total number of chairs in fourthcentury Bordeaux offer a variety of options from three to no less than fourteen chairs of grammar and rhetoric.56 A recent study dealing with the structure of schools at Bordeaux has postulated the existence of two rival chairs of rhetoric in the city.57 Another study 81


on a similar topic has stressed the existence of a single chair of rhetoric and provided a reconstruction of the succession of rhetoricians and grammarians in the city during the fourth century. 58 Both the number and the sequence present serious problems. Gratian’s school law refers throughout to holders of chairs of rhetoric in the plural (rhetores and oratores). This usage should not obscure the fact that when the number of chairs in one city is specifically mentioned, this does not exceed three, namely, Greek grammar, Latin grammar and rhetoric.59 And since the city referred to is no less than the imperial capital of Trier, any claim for a greater number of chairs elsewhere in Gaul at that period must be viewed with caution. In a city like Bordeaux with its much smaller population, it seems impossible to contemplate the existence of more than three official chairs appointed by the curia and subsidised from 376 onward by the imperial treasury. The existence of privately endowed schools and chairs is, of course, a possibility not to be excluded, but their number cannot be estimated.60 This constitution is clear evidence of the growing intervention of the government in educational affairs.61 In 370 a law of Valentinian I (CTh 14.9.1) made the Roman urban prefect responsible for the behaviour of students at Rome. The prefect had to ensure that the students discharged their municipal duties at home and was further asked to provide a list of the best students for positions in the imperial administration. When the foundations were laid for a university in Constantinople in 425, the government limited the number of chairs (CTh 14.9.3), which would seem to imply that there was no restriction on numbers previously. One of the more interesting insights into contemporary education is provided by the information which CTh 13.3.11 provides about inter-urban competition for candidates to municipal chairs. A key sentence of the law can be translated as: ‘in each of the cities called metropolis, the election of notable professors of these subjects [e.g. grammar and rhetoric] may take place but we judge it unsuitable for each city to pay its learned men and teachers the stipend it pleases.’62 The acquisition of talent was, then, an important aspect of cultural urban life particularly in provincial capitals. Some of these cities would have been able to offer more lucrative positions and permanent appointments to favoured candidates. This type of competition contributed to a migration of talent from one urban centre to another. Ausonius testifies to the export of Bordelais 82


academics to various parts of the empire and to the smaller-scale import of teachers. How many pupils were studying under the Bordelais teachers at any one time? Ausonius was not as prolific a correspondent as Libanius.63 He kept in touch with only one of his Aquitanian pupils, the highly respected Paulinus (of Nola). Ausonius does mention, though, that the popular teacher Tiberius Victor Minervius had some 3,000 students during a career that spanned at least thirty years.64 Ausonius does not specify whether this number comprised only Bordelais students or whether it included all his pupils from Bordeaux, Rome and Constantinople. Whatever the case, a quick statistical calculation would make Minervius a teacher of 100 students of rhetoric a year. Most of the students at Bordeaux would come from Bordeaux and Aquitania. A few probably came from further-flung regions in Gaul. An affluent Italian family who wished their children to benefit from a Gallic education would import a Gallic tutor to Italy.65 As well as the quality of the teachers, Gallic parents would take into account the career options that a course of study provided and the administrative position of the city in which the school was located. Minervius’ students, like the majority of Libanius’, proceeded to the courts, the municipal councils and the imperial administration. THE SCHOLARS OF BORDEAUX: PHYSICAL MOBILITY AND THE PROFESSION OF EDUCATION That Bordeaux enjoyed a considerable reputation for producing high-calibre teachers seems evident both from the diffusion of local talent to other cities in the empire and from the small number of foreigners that settled there and managed to pursue a successful career. The competition for posts must have been stiff and resulted in many academics migrating to other areas. Among the Bordelais who apparently failed to obtain a chair in their city of birth was Ausonius’ own uncle Aemilius Magnus Arborius who moved to nearby Toulouse, and Exsuperius, who likewise taught at Toulouse and further south in Narbonne.66 Of the important urban centres in south-west Gaul, Toulouse and Narbonne received most of Bordeaux’s rejects, perhaps because of these cities’ relative proximity to the Aquitanian capital. In addition to those named above, Sedatus also emigrated to Toulouse, while one of his academic sons went to Narbonne.67 A few other cities in Gaul, 83


among them Poitiers, offered viable alternatives to the products of Bordeaux’s schools. According to one theory, Ausonius himself spent the first decade of his teaching career (c. 330–c. 340) looking for a teaching job in various cities of southern Gaul.68 If competition for the available municipal posts had driven Arborius, Exsuperius and Sedatus away from Bordeaux, others left for different reasons. Two had to leave because of family pressure. Marcellus left at his mother’s insistence, perhaps because of a disagreement over the family’s inheritance.69 He went to Narbonne where he initially did well but later (as he deserved, according to Ausonius) lost his students and his wealth. Dynamius was driven out of Bordeaux by an unsavoury love affair. 70 His amorous adventures seem to have gained him a certain notoriety for he had to live under an assumed name in Spanish Lerida. An attempt to return to Bordeaux proved short-lived and he remained thereafter in Spain. Of the Bordelais educators who taught outside Gaul several scored notable successes. Three, Minervius, Patera and Agricius, taught at Rome, where they may each have occupied a municipal chair of rhetoric.71 An unnamed son of the rhetorician Sedatus also taught there in an unknown capacity.72 Minervius and Patera taught in Bordeaux as well, but the sequence of their teaching careers is difficult to determine.73 The possibility of two tenures, before and after teaching abroad, cannot be ruled out. 74 Two Bordelais graduates even taught in the eastern part of the empire. Ausonius’ uncle Arborius tutored in Constantinople a young member of the house of Constantine. Minervius also taught in the eastern imperial capital in some capacity, possibly occupying a municipal chair.75 Very few outsiders succeeded in obtaining a chair of grammar or rhetoric in Bordeaux. We know of one Greek grammarian, Citarius, who came from Sicily, and a whole family of noted rhetoricians that originated in Armorica. Both did well in Bordeaux, the former marrying a rich and noble wife, the latter establishing a remarkable pedagogical dynasty. Another possible import is Staphylius, a teacher of rhetoric from Auch in Novempopulana who may have worked in Bordeaux. Concordius, a Latin grammarian, was a refugee from an unspecified place.76 The scarcity of suitable teachers of Greek in Gaul was acknowledged in the imperial law of 376 (CTh 13.3.11). It is noteworthy, however, that in the course of the fourth century Bordeaux had to rely on only one external recruit to fill the chair of Greek grammar. Perhaps the problem did not arise in 84


Bordeaux due to the availability of local talent among members of its Greek-speaking community. Physical mobility in pursuit of career opportunities was clearly not a phenomenon limited to Gallic educators. Augustine in Africa both studied and taught away from home, in the great metropolis of Carthage. His disappointing experience as a teacher there and an ambition to broaden his chances took him across the Mediterranean to Italy. Roman students, alas, proving no less obnoxious than African pupils, Augustine moved once more, this time to a chair of rhetoric in Milan. The proximity of the court gave this appointment unlimited prospects and Augustine was set to marry a rich wife and to reap the benefits which his status and her money opened up.77 His Gallic counterparts shared the thought that the nearer one got to a court the better one’s chances of promotion were. Even Rome, the bastion of wealthy and cultured aristocrats, had its attractions and its rewards.78 SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL MOBILITY: THE EVIDENCE OF THE SCHOLARS OF BORDEAUX So far it has been established that in Aquitania at least a career in teaching often entailed physical mobility. To understand more about the profession and the opportunities it offered it is useful to examine in detail the careers of some of the individuals concerned. One avenue to imperial service open to well-educated young men was to distinguish themselves in the law courts. Ausonius’ uncle Arborius tried his luck in Novempopulana and Spain as an advocate in the 320s, before obtaining an academic chair in Toulouse. In the late 350s Delphidius went so far as to prosecute a provincial governor on charges of maladministration in the presence of Caesar Julian.79 He even tried a short cut to imperial appointment in the mid-360s by supporting the cause of a usurper. The earliest recorded successful (and legal) foray of a Bordelais teacher into the imperial administration belongs to Nepotianus. He was a grammarian and later a rhetor, a career jump equalled only by that of Ausonius. He also became governor (praeses) of a province, perhaps Tripolitania, sometime in the 330s—a career move that must have been due to Nepotianus’ outstanding rhetorical skills.80 The office did not carry senatorial rank; it was an established stage in the career patterns of other Gallic officials in the first half of the 85


century.81 Another successful career was that of Exsuperius. At Narbonne he tutored the sons of Dalmatius in the late 320s, and when the latter was recalled to Constantinople, Exsuperius obtained through his former pupils an appointment as governor (praeses) in Spain. 82 Although the position did not carry senatorial status, Exsuperius did well financially. Unlike Arborius, another Bordelais at the court of Constantinople, Exsuperius successfully avoided the fate of his patrons and lived to enjoy an old age of leisure and luxury. His case, like Arborius’, demonstrates the potential benefits derived from nearness and accessibility to the imperial family. The social origins of Nepotianus and Exsuperius remain unknown. Ausonius merely states that the latter’s parents were born in Bordeaux.83 Where the background of teachers in fourth-century Bordeaux can be determined, a remarkable variety is apparent. Three men, Crispus, Sucuro and Urbicus, are presented as sons of freedmen. All became grammarians; none a rhetor.84 Urbicus could not have fathered the noble Urbica (whose son married Ausonius’ daughter) nor was he a relative of the Urbica who was stoned to death by a fanatic mob in Bordeaux for her support of Priscillian c. 385.85 Mobile as fourth-century Bordelais society may have been, talented sons of freedmen apparently could not progress beyond a chair of grammar. Several other Latin grammarians were of humble origins (humilis stirps).86 Noble descent is claimed for the rhetor Censorius Atticus Agricius, one of the few Bordelais teachers recorded with tria nomina. 87 Whetherhis economic resources matched his noble background remains unknown, but he certainly used his rare rhetorical talent to advance his professional and economic status. Agricius is recorded teaching at Rome, as a successor to Nazarius and Patera. He may have been related to Agroecius, the fifth-century grammarian and bishop of Sens.88 Certainly an ecclesiastical career would not have been considered inappropriate for a scion of a successful and eminent rhetorician.89 Agricius may also have been connected with the noble Atticus, who is hailed as clarus ab antiquis by Venantius Fortunatus.90 Ausonius’ uncle Arborius appears on the list of Bordelais teachers with a registered claim to municipal nobility on both sides of the family.91 Ausonius’ nephew Herculanus belonged to the higher echelons of the municipal nobility through his father Pomponius Maximus. Marcellus (another beneficiary of geographical relocation) married the daughter of the nobilis Clarentius in 86


Narbonne where he was a grammarian. Ausonius’ inclusion of the name of Marcellus’ father, an unusual feature in the Professores, perhaps indicates high social status.92 The groom and his father-inlaw, then, would have belonged to the ranks of the municipal aristocracy in Bordeaux and Narbonne respectively. The most interesting social background to be recorded is that of the grammarian Acilius Glabrio.93 Ausonius records his father’s name, Acilius or Aquilinus, and also refers to a host of ancestors leading right back to Aeneas.94 Both the name of the grammarian and his ‘nobility’ further imply affiliation with the famed Italian senatorial family of the Acilii Glabriones. Neither this presumed connection nor the claim to Trojan descent stand up to scrutiny. The claim to spectacular connections is spurious and was probably invented either by Glabrio himself or by Ausonius as a pun on the coincidence of names. The fate of the known descendants of other Bordelais teachers can serve as an indicator of the status achieved by the parents. Attius Patera, initially a foreigner from Bayeux, managed to create a dynasty of rhetoricians, with a son (Delphidius) and grandson (Alethius Minervius) holding chairs of rhetoric in Bordeaux, and a father holding a chair of Latin grammar in the same city through his influence. (Some years later Ausonius’ influence would similarly secure positions for his father and younger relatives, only then within the imperial administration.) This Armorican family provides a fascinating case study of the conscientious use of talents for social and political advance, and its history will be studied below in some detail (pp. 91–3). The survival of the dynasty throughout a whole century is remarkable, as is the preservation of the family’s prestige, which was acknowledged at the beginning of the fifth century by none other than the saintly Jerome. Less successful was a son of the rhetor Luciolus who also tried to follow his father’s profession.95 A modest measure of success was gained by two families of grammarians, that of Sperchus and his son Menestheus, both holders of the chair of Greek grammar, and that of Iucundus, whose brother Leontius was also a grammarian.96 With the exception of the Ausonii and the family of Patera, the most notable record of continuity appears to belong to the family of Sedatus, a Bordelais who emigrated to Toulouse where he held a chair of rhetoric, and whose sons taught in Narbonne and Rome.97 Perhaps the family can be further connected with a fifth-century bishop of Nîmes by the name of Sedatus who is addressed in highly 87


respectful terms (sanctus patronus) by Ruricius.98 Another episcopal descendant, the early fifth-century bishop of Toulouse Exsuperius, has been attached to his homonym, the rhetor at Toulouse.99 This connection is not implausible, but remains hypothetical. Where factors of economic status and mobility can be established, the picture once more presents a wide range of differences. A wellknown teacher like Tiberius Victor Minervius, in spite of a career at Rome, Constantinople and Bordeaux, enjoyed only modest means. A scion of a pedagogical dynasty like Alethius Minervius appears to have been a wealthy man, whether through inheritance, his own enterprise or marriage. 100 Several holders of chairs of Greek and Latin grammar are categorised as poor. 101 Augustine’s experience in Rome, as well as an imperial law of 376, confirm that teachers received scant and insecure incomes.102 A salary, then, was hardly likely to have been a source of wealth unless, like Marcellus, one enjoyed an unusual reputation, could command high fees and had numerous private pupils.103 It is hardly surprising, therefore, that in most cases of recorded wealth the assets seem to have accrued through marriage and a dowry. Ausonius’ uncle married a wealthy Tolosan from an eminent curial family, as did Sedatus in the same city. Citarius, a Sicilian by origin, obtained a noble and rich wife as well as a chair in Bordeaux, as did Dynamius in Spanish Lerida.104 Alethius Minervius, the son of Delphidius and grandson of Patera, supplemented his own income with that of his wife. Exsuperius is an example of wealth accruing from a career that combined education with imperial service, for in addition to charging high fees he also had useful imperial contacts and may have used his governorship to enrich himself. He certainly had enough money to retire in style to a residence in or near Cahors, as did Nepotianus.105 Luciolus the rhetor had clientes, a term implying the possession of landed property.106 Ausonius does not specify the type of wealth acquired by any of the more affluent teachers. In some cases landed property is indicated. Acilius Glabrio owned an estate.107 The political careers of men like Nepotianus and Exsuperius would have gained them access to sources of wealth other than inheritance or salaries. A succession of imperial laws granting immunities and privileges to teachers and doctors implies that a significant number of teachers qualified as decurions, if not by birth then through marriage and their own income. Most were probably of the lowest curial rank.108 To sum up, ambition and opportunism enabled a talented teacher 88


to broaden his career opportunities. Delphidius tried to gain entry into the ranks of the imperial bureaucracy after a stint as a prosecutor. Arborius and Exsuperius enjoyed the patronage of the imperial house under whose auspices the former became a royal tutor and a provincial governor. Nepotianus’ provincial appointment may have been due more to talent than to contacts. Not all educators were eager to seize any passing chance. Latinus Alcimus Alethius was one such exception. He had put his considerable rhetorical talents and legal eloquence to good use in a panegyric in honour of the consulship of Julian and his colleague Sallustius in 363. Yet Alethius never exploited the full range of opportunities which such an occasion offered.109 (Just a year before, a talented Gallic orator, Mamertinus, reached the summit of the imperial hierarchy by becoming consul, living proof of the rewards of the correct exercise of talent and eloquence.) Nothing is known of Alethius’ two surviving sons. Perhaps one is to be identified with another Alethius, a quaestor of the late fourth/early fifth centuries.110 The picture which emerges of the educational profession in fourth-century Bordeaux is varied, ranging from spectacular successes to the modest if not humble existence of teachers who evidently had to manage on a fairly small salary. There was no magic recipe for success, but incidental access to members of the imperial house was clearly useful. A calculated marital alliance which ensured both wealth and noble connections was another important asset. Whether lucky or unlucky, greedy or disinterested, all the cases studied centre on the pursuit of education as a profession. In this respect the career of Ausonius is not an aberration. He was following a well-travelled path to advancement, only going further than most. Not only was he able to exploit opportunities and his sheer good luck, but he also had a solid structure of wealth and social rank behind him which his family had been building up for some generations. Perhaps the closest parallel is the case of Themistius whose rhetorical talents carried him from Paphlagonia to the senate of Constantinople and to the imperial court. In the fifth century Egypt produced a string of poetic teachers whose active self-promotion and talent brought them considerable success. 111 Among them, Olympiodorus of Thebes became a successful diplomat, and Cyrus of Panopolis rose to the position of praefectus urbis Constantinopolis (and fell from favour as soon as his imperial patron was removed). The example of the pagan Themistius at the court of the pious 89


Theodosius raises the question of the relevance of religious affiliation to educational appointments, Much has been made of the notorious state intervention in education under Julian.112 However, in the case at least of the law forbidding Christians to teach throughout the empire, there is no trace of either its application or its effects in the schools of Bordeaux. On the rare occasions that religion is mentioned in connection with one of the professors of Bordeaux, the subject is paganism rather than Christianity (as in the case of Attius Patera and his family). The Christian affiliation of Patera’s daughter-in-law Euchrotia is merely hinted at and without other sources it would never have been possible to know the full extent of her devotion. The rest of the Bordelais educators were, if not Christians, at least indifferent to religious issues. Whether they were nominally pagans or Christians, individuals’ religious convictions do not appear to have been an issue in the selection procedure for an academic chair. Ausonius’ imperial appointment or ‘sudden rise from the obscurity of Bordeaux to the glory of Trier’ has been partly attributed to his ‘strong and informed Christian faith’.113 From our survey of Bordelais education, it is clear that this conclusion cannot be substantiated. Indeed, none of Ausonius’ poems which can be assigned to the pre-court period contain the slightest hint of personal religious affiliation, let alone of any particular attachment to Christianity.114 While a Christian background was hardly likely to be a disadvantage, the selection (in 366/7) of Ausonius as court tutor to a member of a newly established dynasty must be explained in different terms. Given the reputation of Bordelais education, which has been shown to have extended beyond the limes of Gaul, Valentinian would naturally have turned first to Bordeaux in his search for a tutor for his son. The city, indeed, was anything but obscure and enjoyed the status of an important provincial capital, perhaps even a diocesan capital, and was a major commercial and trading centre. As regards the selection of a particular individual, one cannot ignore the fact that Ausonius’ family, with its respectable record of wealth and office, was well established and socially and economically acceptable even before he went to Trier. Ausonius was therefore better placed than most Bordelais academics to obtain a key educational appointment at court. Moreover, his poetic talents gave him an additional edge over his colleagues, for few emperors could ever resist the temptation of adding literary lustre to their entourage. Yet the fact remains that the imperial summons reached 90


Ausonius when he was approaching the end of his academic career and nearing 60. His vast teaching experience would have weighed heavily in his favour, but there must have been younger teachers in Bordeaux worthy of the job. In this respect, the Armorican family of Patera merits attention. A CASE STUDY: A DRUIDIC PROFESSORIAL DYNASTY The histories of the individual members of Patera’s family are no less interesting (if less well documented) than those of Ausonius’ family.115 According to Ausonius, Patera’s family was connected with the temple of Belenus, a Celtic divinity in Bayeux. Phoebicius, the oldest recorded member of the family, had been a priest at that temple. The family laid claim to Druidic descent, thus asserting their pagan affiliation, perhaps to conceal their humble origins.116 They bore Greek names like Phoebicius and Delphidius which echoed their affiliation with Belenus-Apollo and their religious background. Phoebicius’ son Patera was named after the title of the priests of Apollo. The family was Romanised enough to add to the names of one of their sons the cognomen Tiro, a soldier. It is unclear exactly when and why they settled in Bordeaux. The cutting of imperial subsidies for pagan cults and temples might have compelled scions of priestly families to seek a more remunerative employment.117 More simply perhaps, Bordeaux’s vibrant economic climate offered a good chance to improve their own fortunes. Above all, the city offered much better scope for the exceptionally talented Attius Patera who was apparently the first of his family to emigrate there. According to Jerome, Patera taught at Rome in the late 330s, and his teaching career at Bordeaux dates to a generation before Ausonius’.118 Patera, then, may have taught first in Italy and then at Bordeaux, where he held a chair of rhetoric. Perhaps he even had two tenures in Bordeaux, before and after his Italian period. His teaching must have been remarkable, for he is called by Ausonius doctor potentium rhetorum. Among his pupils the most famous was his own son Attius Tiro Delphidius. Of all the teachers in fourth-century Bordeaux Delphidius is the only one who found a place in the imperial annals of Ammianus.119 Starting as a poet of considerable talent, Delphidius, like Arborius, embarked on a legal career with a view to an imperial appointment. Here we can see part of an emerging pattern among the graduates of 91


the Bordelais schools. Delphidius initiated a lawsuit against the exgovernor of Narbonensis when Julian, a young and energetic imperial nominee, was residing in Gaul. 120 The case may have involved tax mismanagement, since Julian’s concern in such matters was well known. Delphidius’ intervention on behalf of the wronged provincials brought him to Julian’s attention. In the event the prosecution failed, and Delphidius then sought to attract the attention of another ruler, this time a usurper. If the unnamed usurper or ‘tyrant’ of Ausonius’ poem in memory of Delphidius is Procopius, then at some point Delphidius must have followed Arborius and Tiberius Victor Minervius east to Constantinople.121 His seeming loyalty to a relative of Julian, who had failed to give him a political appointment, is curious. Perhaps Procopius was ready to employ Gauls in positions which they could not have obtained under Valens. In that case Delphidius was merely imitating other Gauls who chose to ally themselves with a usurper and so gain quick promotion. After the suppression of Procopius in 365, Valens sent a number of his supporters back home to Gaul. 122 Delphidius may have been in their number but the prestige of his father would have helped obtain his release. Another candidate for the role of Delphidius’ usurper is Magnentius who was elevated to the purple in the famous university town of Autun, in 351. From the time sequence of Ausonius’ poem, however, Procopius rather than Magnentius is the more likely ‘tyrant’. Although the political career of Delphidius ended prematurely, he was able to return to Bordeaux and to assume a municipal chair of rhetoric owing to his father’s eminence in the profession. In fact, Patera’s influence was so great that he was also able to secure a chair of grammar for his ageing father Phoebicius. Delphidius’ son Alethius Minervius, a rare enough name connected with Minerva, was the third member of the family to hold a chair of rhetoric in Bordeaux.123 He died young and without heirs. No less remarkable were the women of the family. We first meet them in the early 380s as devoted Christians. Between their migration to Bordeaux and the year 380, then, the family must have converted to Christianity. Perhaps the men, however, although married to Christian women, kept their original pagan/Druidic creed. This would explain the mention of their pagan affiliation in the Professores. Delphidius’ widow and daughter were ardent supporters of Priscillian.124 Euchrotia hosted him and his followers on her estate for a while, and her daughter was rumoured to have 92


had sexual relations with Priscillian. Despite the rumours one can discern genuine devotion to the ascetic ideals propounded by Priscillian and a certain dissatisfaction with the established orthodoxy in the city. When Priscillian embarked on his quest for official sympathy, first to Italy and then to Trier, Euchrotia accompanied him and was eventually executed with him. In the words of a colleague of Ausonius, she was guilty of nothing more than excessive piety.125 The women who were left in the family retained an active interest in Christianity. At the beginning of the fifth century a female descendant of an unnamed brother of Delphidius corresponded with St Jerome over matters of biblical exegesis.126 The history of Patera’s family raises several interesting points. In the first place it hints at the possibility of manufacturing nobility through claiming Druidic descent. Of course, the claim may have been to some extent authentic despite Ausonius’ caveat si fama non fallit fidem, since Ausonius did not like Delphidius. The family’s wealth and respectability, acquired after their move to Bordeaux, is also of interest. Alethius Minervius, the last member of the family in a chair of rhetoric, is noted for a robust financial status (divitiae) and a noble wife. If one had to hazard a guess, he, rather than Ausonius, would have been appointed court tutor to Gratian but for his untimely death. Perhaps, though, the brief political career of his father would not have endeared him to Valens’ brother. Four generations of Patera’s family effectively illustrate the range of avenues open to Gallic talent in the fourth century. From a secondary urban centre (Bayeux), the move to a Gallic metropolis enabled Patera to obtain a chair and fame. His move to Rome added to his reputation and enabled his son to explore possible methods of political advance. A failed lawsuit and the wrong choice of a political patron brought the family’s foray into politics to an abrupt end. Thereafter, their talents were once more invested in academic promotion and the consolidation of their local position. Between them they held three chairs of rhetoric in succession and one of grammar—a unique achievement by any standards. They married outstanding women and produced a veritable pedagogical dynasty, which in local terms was no less significant than that of the Ausonii. Yet, it was the lucky Ausonius who moved from Bordeaux to the imperial court at Trier, and there one can see how his Bordelais background prepared him for the eventual assumption of some of the most important positions in the imperial hierarchy. 93

Part II TRIER: SEAT OF AN EMPIRE

6 THE COURT OF VALENTINIAN I

VALENTINIAN I IN GAUL With the establishment of the court of Valentinian I in Trier (October 367), the new emperor resumed direct control over the affairs of the Gallic prefecture.1 Although an acknowledged imperial residence since the middle of the third century, Valentinian’s immediate predecessors preferred not to reside at Trier when in Gaul. Constantius II stayed in Arles (353/4), and Julian in Reims and Paris. Valentinian himself, when moving to the west, spent some months in Italy, and then proceeded to Gaul, settling first in Paris, then in Reims, Amiens, and finally in Trier. Gaul, and particularly its northern regions, had experienced a decade of successive encounters with the Germanic tribes along the frontiers.2 The least ruly were the Alamanni who, together with the Franks, invaded Gaul in the early 350s, and continuously menaced the north and the east. They quickly took advantage of the opportunities created by the usurpations of Magnentius in Autun in 350 and of Silvanus at Cologne in 354/5. Upon his arrival in 355 Julian, by his own account, found Gaul in chaos.3 Indeed, to use the statistics generously supplied by the young Caesar, no less than forty-five cities had been stripped of their defences; an area of some forty miles west of the Rhine was under barbarian occupation; and three times that size had been devastated and was no longer arable. The tasks facing Julian can hardly be exaggerated. Yet, it is worth noting that although parts of Gaul were seriously affected by instability along the northern frontiers, the impact on others, like Aquitania, seems to have been negligible. Julian chose to embark on a programme of pacification and restoration.4 He punished the supporters of the usurper Silvanus, 97


and also scored a significant military victory over the Alamanni as early as 357 near Strasbourg. This victory, coupled with a triumphant march along the Rhine and victories over the Franks, enabled him to lay the foundations for the reorganisation of the troubled province. In 359 he rebuilt a number of forts, constructed granaries and led an expedition across the Rhine into the old Agri Decumates.5 He then won over the hearts of the provincials by a just collection of taxes, and further secured his position within the local administration by vindicating a governor accused, with seemingly insufficient proof, of dubious financial dealings.6 Swift and impressive as Julian’s achievements were, they only lasted for a short time. His successor in Gaul, Valentinian, had to spend a good deal of his reign campaigning against the Alamanni on the Rhine. Moreover, the rapidity with which Julian’s arrangements collapsed upon his death emphasises the importance of the emperor’s personal involvement in maintaining order and tranquillity. One factor contributing to the renewed instability of the Gallic northern regions was the attitude of the imperial agents in charge who, through greed and short-sightedness, had aroused the anger of the Alamanni.7 That the presence of an emperor and an army in Gaul had become a matter of great urgency seems clear from the words of a deputation of Gallic cities asking for protection against barbarian attacks, and from the fact that the senior Augustus was entrusted with the western rather than the eastern part of the empire.8 So critical was the situation when Valentinian reached Gaul (September/October 365) that he declined to march to the help of his brother Valens whose reign was threatened at its outset by the usurpation of Procopius.9 Among the latter’s supporters in the east several Gauls stand out. One, Phronimius, had been appointed to the post of praefectus urbis Constantinopolis; another, Euphrasius, had become Procopius’ magister officiorum.10 Both are described as highly cultured by an author who claimed that Procopius’ usurpation had brought forward many unsavoury characters, ‘from the scum of the earth’. 11 Attius Tiro Delphidius, who had left Bordeaux to chase the shady honours of the palace in the vain hope of political glory, was another well-educated Gaul who possibly supported Procopius.12 The appearance of Gauls in high office in the east, seemingly ex nihilo, is an interesting phenomenon. Both Phronimius and Euphrasius must have owed their start in the imperial service to 98

COU RT OF VALE NTI NIAN I

Julian, and both chose to gamble on a member of his family (Procopius) as a successor in spite of a legitimately approved emperor (Valens). Perhaps they were unsure of their welcome under the new regime. After the fall of Procopius they were sent home to Gaul to stand trial for maiestas.13 Euphrasius was pardoned; he may have had some useful contacts at the court of Valentinian. The less fortunate Phronimius was banished to the Chersonese since his presence could have reminded the imperial brothers just how inferior they were to Julian. Perhaps Phronimius’ court contacts were less effective than those of Euphrasius. Delphidius was also pardoned, owing to the intervention of his father Attius Patera, a wellknown Bordelais rhetorician.14 The initial success of these Gauls demonstrates the advantages of a good education and enterprise under a favourable regime. While his brother was struggling to survive the first years of his reign in the east, Valentinian was kept busy by the raids of the Alamanni. According to Ammianus, the Gallic provinces also experienced other troubles, perhaps Bagaudic insurrections.15 In 367 Valentinian fell ill and the question of succession was raised for the third time within three years. Two court factions emerged at Amiens, each with its own candidate: one was identified as Gallic, while the other was presumably Pannonian. 16 The Gauls nominated a civilian, Rusticus; their rivals backed a military man with considerable experience in Gallic affairs, Severus, then magister peditum. The tension was diffused when Valentinian recovered and forthwith proceeded to nominate his 8-year-old son, Gratian, as full colleague with the title of Augustus. 17 As Ammianus remarks, this was a radical departure from established imperial practices.18 The Gallic imperial candidate in 367, Sextius Rusticus Iulianus, was a man of non-senatorial origin who was then magister memoriae, a palatine office requiring the constant display of rhetorical talent.19 Between Eumenius (at the end of the third century) and Rusticus, the magister memoriae must have acquired considerable prestige, as the illustrious career of another Gallic magister memoriae, Salutius, attests.20 Since the office was closely connected with the court its bearers were very much in the public eye. Like Salutius before him, Rusticus may have been prudent enough to reject an unconsidered offer of the imperial throne. A civilian with limited sources of support would have stood little chance against a military rival in times that obviously required the 99


undivided loyalty of the army.21 Rusticus’ prudence, whatever its motive, was rewarded in due course. Among Rusticus’ supporters at the time, one Gaul may be identified as Remigius, the magister officiorum in the year 367.22 For Remigius the reign of Valentinian inaugurated the resumption of a political career cut short in 355, and his possible participation in the proceedings surrounding Valentinian’s illness reflects his renewed political influence. The Gallic faction that supported Rusticus operated in Amiens where its members probably enjoyed some local support. Remigius was a landowner of some substance in northern Gaul.23 He was also evidently quite willing to line his pockets when the occasion arose and readily extended his costly protection to allies in need. 24 Like Rusticus, Remigius presumably hastily transferred his allegiance back to the ruling dynasty as soon as Valentinian showed signs of recovery. The ability of a Gallic faction to put up its own Gallic candidate as a possible imperial successor by mid-367 is not without significance. The history of Gallic co-operation at court before this attempt to manipulate the throne can no longer be fully recovered. Whether or not a Gallic court faction had also been behind the promotion of Salutius in earlier imperial crises remains a matter for speculation.25 The residence of a court in northern Gaul, and above all, the readiness of usurpers and of emperors from Julian onward to employ Gauls presented new opportunities for politically-minded locals with enough wealth to substantiate ambition.26 It is important for the reconstruction of the society which Ausonius was about to enter to determine whether the 367 episode indicates the existence of a local Gallic interest group active in northern Gaul and possessing enough resources and presence of mind to step into an imperial vacuum, or a faction of Gauls who happened to be imperial officials. Too few details are known to provide more than a tentative answer. The dominant note struck by the Gallic faction in the 367 crisis may reflect the involvement both of wealthy local owners and of several influential officials in a concerted and ad hoc effort to forestall another Pannonian choice. Gratian’s elevation has been well dramatised by Ammianus and embellished with no less than two speeches of Valentinian.27 Less than three years previously the newly elected emperor was heard to address a rather noisy assembly which demanded the elections of a co-ruler.28 On that occasion, Ammianus as well as Valentinian knew that Valens was to be chosen.29 If the choice of Gratian seems to 100


have been less of a premeditated action, the prompt appearance of the boy in full imperial regalia surely hints at some preparations.30 In the first speech in Amiens Valentinian appealed to his audience to endorse his choice on the grounds of their familiarity with Gratian, the military record of his family and, above all, the boy’s excellent education which guaranteed his correct development. 31 One wonders just how reassuring were these words to the assembled listeners. Some doubt may have been evident since Valentinian delivered a second public speech, this time directly addressed to the young Gratian, in which he essentially repeated the gist of his earlier words.32 A belief that good education can breed just rulers is a common enough sentiment, but the emphasis on Gratian’s education implies the presence of a recognised imperial tutor. The question of the selection of a royal tutor had probably arisen as soon as the court had moved to Gaul on a permanent basis, and when Gratian reached an age that required continuous tuition. 33 Ausonius’ credentials would have made him the preferred candidate for several reasons. In the first place his teaching experience was considerable. The presence of a man who had bred generations of students and who had some literary reputation would have been an asset at any court. Nor was he a mere provincial upstart, for members of his family had already filled various functions in the imperial administration under legitimate emperors. By 366/7 Ausonius may have had, in addition, one relative already installed in a senatorial position in the east under Valens.34 Ausonius’ own wealth may have further ensured preferential treatment. He expressed no surprise when he recalled his summons to the ‘golden palace’, as though generations of hard work, proven ability and local prestige led naturally from the province to court.35 THE BORDELAIS IN TRIER For a visitor from Bordeaux, arriving at the city of Trier must have been an awe-inspiring experience. The largest of the Gallic cities with an intra muros surface area of 285 hectares, Trier’s urban enclosure was some nine times greater than that of Bordeaux.36 The unfinished early imperial Porta Nigra even today conveys a sense of the ancient city’s grandeur.37 Since the reign of Constantius Chlorus the city had served as a favoured imperial residence overlooking the Rhine frontier, and later housing the prefecture of the Gauls. An 101


imperial mint was established and there was a large number of workshops producing weapons and clothing for the nearby Roman army.38 The importance of the city is clearly shown by its depiction in the calendar of 354 alongside Rome, Constantinople and Alexandria.39 It is symbolised by a victorious Amazon holding a shield in one hand and seizing the head of a vanquished barbarian in the other. To further emphasise the city’s military role the illustrator added a display of armaments, while decorated drinking vessels and a large horn of plenty attested the wealth of the city and the more peaceful pursuits of its inhabitants. The imperial presence throughout the fourth century left its imprint on the city’s architecture.40 Within the huge circuit of the city walls the centre of the city was dominated by the large-scale imperial baths (Kaiserthermen), the early imperial forum and imperial residences. 41 Nearby were the complexes of the early imperial Altbachtel temple, the spacious baths known as Barbarathermen, and the urban amphitheatre, all built on a magnificent scale during the first imperial centuries and the subjects of restorations and renovations in the later empire.42 The circus, although at some distance from the heart of the city, continued to form a major focus of attraction as is indicated by several magnificent contorniae and glass fragments depicting chariot races. Ausonius himself could not contain his enthusiasm when bidden by the emperor to compose funerary verses in honour of a race horse.43 When the emperors wished to receive their subjects in all due pomp and ceremony they used the aula palatina, or audience chamber (also called the Basilika).44 If they desired to pray to the Christian God they could proceed northward to the imposing double cathedral (Doppelbasilika or the Dom), so called on account of its plan which juxtaposed two structures. 45 Around these monuments were spread the living quarters of the city where bureaucrats, soldiers and civilians lived and maintained their homes.46 By all accounts, then, it was a city of stature even by Italian imperial standards. It is sad to reflect that a century later its impressive walls buckled under barbarian assaults. Among the factors which contributed to an accumulation of wealth in the area were Trier’s favourable position on the river Moselle, its long-standing commercial activities and the presence of an imperial mint. Numerous artefacts attest contacts with the rest of the Roman world as well as with the world beyond the limes.47 Not surprisingly, Trier attracted highly skilled artists and craftsmen 102


whose products still appear impressive. In particular, sculpture, painting and pottery flourished under private and imperial patronage as the number and quality of art objects found in the area show. A school of mosaics was responsible for the manufacture of colourful representations of mythical and everyday subjects.48 The region’s most impressive product was glass.49 The variety of shapes, colours and textures display a versatility yet to be equalled. Best known are the two-layered or cage-like cups (Diatretglas) which were decorated with an intricate and delicately wrought outer glass pattern. Other types of glass work were decorated with topics ranging from the labours of Hercules to Jonah, Daniel and Moses. The major leisurely occupations of the rich, such as the hunt, were also depicted, and their appearance on glass items reminds the beholder of the clientele for whom these luxury items were primarily produced.50 An occasional flash of humour is evident in deliberately distorted glass shaped like a monkey or a grotesque human face. Several poems composed soon after his arrival at court registered Ausonius’ reaction to his new surroundings. One of his first impressions of Trier resulted from a visit to a private house where a work of art depicting the punishment of Cupid so moved him that he translated the stupor of his admiration into the medium of poetry.51 It is somewhat difficult to judge the authenticity of his poetic images since Cupid’s punishment was a standard theme in literature and art.52 Even more than the city, the surrounding countryside (similar to that of Aquitania) moved Ausonius to compose a poetic masterpiece. A reader of the Mosella can sense the cosmopolitan atmosphere of Trier and the wealth and the beauty of its countryside. Ausonius describes a lush and green terrain dotted with a series of sumptuous villae which provided the perfect setting for a luxurious lifestyle.53 Many of these villae must have belonged to imperial officials who alternated their urban negotium with rural otium. Archaeology has documented a case, that of the villa of Welschbillig, some 15 kilometres north of Trier, where the vast compound featured an enormous pool (18×60 m).54 It further boasted a remarkable series of portrait busts of divinities, heroes, barbarians and famous philosophers, all gazing with some severity at the spectator. 55 Welschbillig may have formed the centre of a vast enclosure, surrounded by protecting walls which stretched to 72 km in length.56 103


Their existence is a reminder that the area was continuously threatened by barbarian excursions. In these surroundings the middle-aged Bordelais took up his imperial appointment in 366/7. A difference in age of some fifty years between Ausonius and Gratian clearly gave the older man considerable influence and say in the development of his royal charge. Ausonius firmly believed that a tutor must exert a certain control over his pupils but that any display of severity was to be tempered by true fondness.57 In his guide to the education of a young man, he was particularly anxious to emphasise the affection expected from a pupil towards his mentor, regardless of age. ‘Though grim with age, ungentle of voice, and threatening with harsh outbursts and frowning brows’, there was no need to fear or hate such a mentor.58 Teaching a future monarch naturally led to an emphasis on reading aloud and on proper articulation.59 Some knowledge of the history of Rome was clearly necessary too. Ausonius preferred Sallust’s text, perhaps because it was remote enough in time and sufficiently well composed to serve as a good literary example without prompting reflections on contemporary regimes. Suetonius was another popular author, and one who proved a fruitful source of abstraction. His work on the kings of Rome was condensed and versified by another famous pupil of Ausonius, Paulinus (of Nola).60 Indeed, if the relationship between Ausonius and Paulinus can be taken as an indicator of that between Ausonius and Gratian, there is no doubt of the deep and lingering attachment which the older man formed for both his young students, each nearly fifty years his junior. The praise Gratian received for his literary talents, his ability to compose poetry and his public speaking certainly rendered him in Ausonius’ debt.61 In this respect, at least, Ausonius had done a good job. The duties of a tutor at the imperial court included some unusual activities since the education of a monarch had to proceed beyond mere learning. Soon after his arrival at the court, the peace-loving Ausonius and the 8-year-old Gratian accompanied the Roman army of Valentinian on an expedition against the Alamanni.62 Needless to say, the two were kept at a safe distance from the scene of battle but the experience provided Ausonius with an opportunity to display his poetic talents and a brief taste of life on the frontier. Ausonius commemorated his impressions of these events in two epigrams on the source of the Danube and in a series of short poems 104


addressed to his German woman-captive, Bissula. They show him at his best, as a man who could observe, absorb and compose. According to their titles, the two epigrams on the Danube were composed at the emperor’s request. 63 Both are curious little compositions, mainly due to the rare appearance of Valens. In one epigram, the poet ‘informs’ Valens of the victories of his brother and nephew over the Suebi and hopes to carry back from the east news of a Gothic defeat.64 In the other, Ausonius celebrates the extension of the Roman realm to the sources of the Danube, anticipating a similar success for Valens as regards the sources of the Nile. Both poems also emphasise imperial unity and the military glory of the dynasty.65 Bissula, the pretty Suebian whom Ausonius won as ‘booty’, prompted a number of verses in which Ausonius, who had avowed eternal fidelity to his dead wife, expressed his delight in the young German.66 To say the least, the Bissula and the epigrams in honour of Sabina offer a fascinating psychological insight into Ausonius’ character. He seemed not in the least disturbed by the incongruity of his feelings. Perhaps, after all, in an age which fervently extolled and practised sexual renunciation, Ausonius’ sheer happiness with the successor to his wife comes as a relief.67 He was, however, careful to conclude an obscene poem with a caveat to the reader to distinguish between private morality and literary affectation.68 To judge by Ausonius’ descriptions one would think that when not fighting, the emperor and his soldiers whiled away their time at dinner parties and composing verses. The Griphus, or a riddle on the number three, emanated from a night spent on a military expedition. As drunk as Ausonius and his listeners may have been, the poet was certainly able to produce an impressive number of threesomes but with one surprising omission, the three Augusti— Valentinian, Valens and Gratian. The precise implication of the concluding verses, ‘drink three times; for three is a number above all others, and three [entities] is the one God’, has yet to be discussed.69 Back at court, life was more routine but there were always diversions. One such diversion occurred at a literary banquet of the sort much enjoyed by the emperor.70 As the subject of a word-game between himself and Ausonius Valentinian chose a wedding, which he then proceeded to describe, it seems, in Vergilian verses.71 This was a novel application of the greatest Latin school text of antiquity. No less startling to the modern mind was the contemporary 105


Christian use of Vergil as a Christian educational tool.72 In the hands of Proba, the book of Genesis and chosen sections of the New Testament were recast in verse, and Vergil’s words were endowed with new meaning. One wonders if the genre and the topic were selected as an amusing parody of the popularity of biblical epics. More likely, Valentinian’s and Ausonius’ centos attest the popularity of Vergil at the Treveran court. They also seem to contradict Ammianus’ verdict of Valentinian as a man who shunned the company of intellectuals.73 VALENTINIAN I AND AUSONIUS The Cento Nuptialis gave Ausonius an opportunity to display his considerable familiarity with poetic genres and the occasion allowed him to append a preface extolling his two imperial patrons. Valentinian’s pietas and prowess are praised, and his young son, Ausonius’ maxima cura, is proclaimed the magnae spes altera Romae.74 Ausonius may have been rather sensitive to issues of contemporary imperial propaganda since there are some curious parallels between this preface and Valentinian’s presumed speeches in 367 on the occasion of Gratian’s elevation to the rank of Augustus.75 Both men drew attention to the boy’s education and to the distinguished military background of the family. Above all, the collegiality of the western Augusti, so disparate in age and experience, was underlined. It is not altogether unlikely, then, that Ausonius modelled his preface to reflect current imperial thinking. He certainly had in mind Valentinian’s concern to ensure a smooth succession when he recited his most famous literary product at court, the Mosella. At the outset (vv. 1–17) of the poem, the reader is taken through a landscape evocative of past and present Roman victories. The localities and events mentioned are real enough.76 Bingen had been the scene of the unsuccessful revolt of Civilis in 71, but at the time of writing was a fortified city protecting the Gallic frontiers against invaders. Tabernae had witnessed the settlement of the Sarmatians by Constantius, a further manifestation of Roman power over barbarians. Finally, another reminder of the more recent past was the camp of Constantine in Noviomagus. This was the area which Ausonius and Gratian traversed on their way from the frontier along the Rhine back to Trier (see Map 1 (p. 15)). 106


At the conclusion of this short journey, and upon reaching the river Moselle, Ausonius recalls his beloved Aquitania, a peaceful region basking in the sun (vv. 17–22). Literary considerations as well as genuine sentiments combined, then, to form an ideal opening for a hymn to a river and its surroundings. From the war-torn area along the Rhine the reader is brought to the tranquil Moselle through the poet’s Aquitania and the Garonne. Ausonius next presents a series of bucolic scenes illustrating the daily pursuits of the Moselle’s local inhabitants and the variety of life in its waters. Playful battles, recalling the famed mock naval skirmishes commemorating Actium and Mylae, are minutely described. Emerging from the waters, the poet takes his listeners to the rural domains adorning the river’s banks. A significant number of his audience would have owned such estates and were in a position to appreciate the extravagant praise bestowed on the architecture. The listeners would have included highly placed officials and the emperor himself, as well as local aristocrats with interests at court. The emphasis on peace and ‘the almost tedious devotion to the idea of tranquillity’ has irritated some modern scholars who also accuse Ausonius of deliberately omitting any reference to the seriousness of the barbarian threat to Gaul.77 But this criticism overlooks the fact that neither at Bordeaux nor at Trier did Ausonius experience any serious disruption to the smooth tenor of his life. In this respect, at least, the Mosella is a true reflection of the poet’s personal experience and of the conditions existing in Aquitania. Scant references to concrete events and dangers is, as it seems, more the result of the literary dictates of the poetic genre (a hymn to a river) than of deliberate design. Modern interpretations of the Mosella are many and varied. Most notably it has been interpreted as a piece of propaganda designed to extol the military achievements of the ruling dynasty.78 Its aim, it is asserted, was to celebrate the renewed peace and prosperity of the Gallo-Romans owing to Valentinian’s campaigns. The poem, therefore, is a tissue of select presentations prepared for a court audience appreciative of imperial achievements.79 This viewpoint has naturally led some to seek a specific meaning in every part of the poem, and to regard even the famed catalogue of fish (much praised by Symmachus) as a reflection of the poet’s vision of the empire.80 In fact, it is the very absence of a clear-cut political aim that makes the poem difficult to interpret. There are, of course, references to the ruling house. A key passage in the poem (vv. 420– 107


6) refers to the military triumphs of Valentinian and Gratian beyond the limes, although no specific reference to any one battle is given. This is one indication that the Mosella probably preceded Solicinium (AD 368), the only notable victory known to have taken place in the course of Valentinian’s Rhine campaigns.81 Rather than restricting itself to one datable episode, however, the poem presents a subtle reflection of the early years of Valentinian. Like the preface to the Cento and the epigrams on the Danube, it projects into a military glory yet to be achieved. The idea of celebrating peace before it was actually achieved was not uncommon. Every imperial panegyric of late antiquity looked f orward to imperial victories over Rome’s sworn enemies. What makes the Mosella an unusual composition within this genre is its subject matter, a river, and the emphasis on nature. However, by painting a glowing picture of a tranquil countryside dotted with beautiful establishments and happy households, Ausonius accomplished no less than selfdeclared panegyrists. The appeal of the Mosella indeed exceeds the temporary application of an ordinary imperial panegyric.82 What, if anything, did Ausonius stand to gain from this remarkable display of literary talent? One suspects that aside from being genuinely moved and inspired by the sights along his journey back to Trier, the Mosella represents a carefully calculated bid for imperial favour. The timing of the poem supports this theory. It was presented after the elevation of Gratian in 367, a move that could be interpreted not only as unconstitutional but also as a sign of the dynasty’s insecurity.83 When the poem was recited Valentinian was concentrating all his military might in an effort to restore stability to the northern frontier. Time was not yet ripe for an ordinary imperial encomium such as Symmachus delivered after Solicinium, but Ausonius could have trusted his audience to appreciate the main thrust of his poem as it stood.84 And the Mosella has certainly a great deal to offer. It is Ausonius the poet at his best. His reward seems to have been the honorary rank of comes (tertii ordinis), which entitled him to a senatorial rank—no mean honour for a relative newcomer to the court.85 It should perhaps be emphasised that Ausonius was not an official propagandist of the dynasty but rather an opportunist. The clearest reflection of what he thought would please Valentinian appears in the first Christian poem that he composed at court, the Versus Paschales. The importance of religion in the educational programme of 108


Valentinian’s heir is difficult to assess. In the case of Constantine’s family a special effort seems to have been made to acquire the services of Christian tutors.86 Valentinian, a Christian of orthodox leanings who was reared in a sufficiently tolerant family to produce an Arian brother, was known for his religious moderation.87 At a place where the Life of Anthony and the rowdy Cento Nuptialis both had appreciative audiences, the creed of the imperial tutor was hardly likely to have been of great importance. We know that Gratian grew up to be an extremely pious young man who took his role as a Christian emperor very seriously indeed.88 But his religious evolution seems to have been gradual and only accelerated under the influence of Ambrose.89 Ausonius did, however, deem it politic to identify himself with the imperial creed through a string of Easter Verses (Versus Paschales). Amidst dutiful prayers to the One Above the ruling house was not neglected. 90 From the title, Versus Paschales pro Augusto dicti, the identity of the person being addressed is unclear, but the poem’s emphasis on Valentinian as the senior Augustus implies that it was dedicated to him.91 Since the verses also designate Gratian as an Augustus, the poem’s date falls between 367, his elevation to this rank, and 371, the birth of Valentinian II who is altogether omitted. Perhaps the joint consulship of Valentinian and Valens in 368, and the recent distinction conferred on the former’s son, provided an opportunity to combine a declaration of faith in the Trinity with a demonstration of loyalty to the three emperors. After twenty-three verses in honour of God, his Son and the Holy Spirit, Ausonius turns to what he calls ‘the earthly reflection’ of the Trinity, namely Valentinian I, Valens and Gratian. 92 The senior Augustus graciously embraces his two junior colleagues and happily shares with them an undivided realm.93 In a similar manner the socalled ‘missorium of Theodosius’ depicts a senior emperor seated centrally on an elevated throne underneath an arch. He is holding a globe in one hand and is flanked by two co-rulers, each drawn on a smaller scale.94 All three look straight into the eyes of the spectator with an unsmiling but majestic countenance. The symbolism of the symmetrical composition clearly conveys its message of hierarchy, harmony, power and order. The infrequent appearance of Valens in the pages of Ausonius suggests a deliberate insertion here to comply with current imperial propaganda. Valentinian and Valens, like later emperors, adhered to the fiction of a unified empire.95 Such a concept was strengthened by 109


the blood ties between the two emperors and by the notion of a single universe ruled by the Trinity. The attempt by both brothers to foster this image of unity is reflected in their simultaneous assumption of both the eastern and western consulships on repeated occasions. Throughout his reign, Valentinian was consul four times (365, 368, 370, 373), always with his brother. And although he felt unable to offer Valens practical support in 365, the dispatch of Procopius’ head to the west was a gory but spectacular manifestation of their collegiality.96 The nature of Ausonius’s Christianity is too often debated with too little profit.97 To judge by the place given to Christian themes in his corpus, Ausonius can hardly be considered a Christian poet like Prudentius. Ausonius’ poetry was not composed to convey a religious message and he certainly did not undergo a ‘conversion’ in a Prudentian or Augustinian sense, devoting his whole self to the service of the church.98 The type of extreme piety that caused the Aquitanian noble Sulpicius Severus to lead a life of asceticism on his estate and Ausonius’ own pupil, Paulinus (of Nola), to become a guardian of a saintly shrine in Italy, was incomprehensible to Ausonius’ measured outlook.99 Yet there is no doubt that he was a Christian and had grown up in a household in which apparently at least two members were devout believers.100 Perhaps Ausonius is best understood as a nominal pagan, just as Claudian has been described as a nominal Christian.101 The term is not frivolous. It indicates a belief in a certain code of behaviour and in a literary culture that was deeply rooted in classical paganism.102 Ausonius’ Easter Verses, like Claudian’s On the Saviour, were most likely occasional poetry written for an imperial celebration of an important Christian rite.103 When called upon, Ausonius could successfully mix politics and piety. In his speech of thanks to Gratian for his consulship he introduces a significant departure from the established pattern of imperial panegyrics by drawing attention to Gratian’s religious practices.104 Similarly innovative is the prayer to the Lord which concludes the speech. 105 He could also reflect contemporary religious trends. In the light-hearted Griphus (dedicated at some stage to the pagan Symmachus) Ausonius inserted a final comment on the Trinity which reveals his awareness of Arianism, the major religious issue of his day.106 In a province that witnessed within less than a decade the rule of Arian, pagan and orthodox emperors (Constantius II, Julian and Valentinian respectively), the choice of creed may have become a 110


political issue for individuals seeking access to the imperial court. Stories about a prominent Gallic politician, Saturninus Secundus Salutius, describe him torturing pagans and Christians alike to test the endurance of the former and to show the latter’s foolishness in producing martyrs. 107 Ausonius never obtained a position that afforded such a spectacular display of power and Gaul of the 360s and the early 370s was an unlikely arena for persecuting emperors and religiously fanatic officials. The essence of provincial Christianity, like that of Ausonius, appears to have resided in community-oriented activities like major festivals. Ausonius’ Easter Verses, celebrating a major event in Christian life, pay due respect to the creed of the court. No other Valentinianic composition, as far as these can be dated, contains references to Christianity. Making a bid for one’s favour through literary compositions was an acceptable enough mode of acquiring patrons. At court, moreover, one had excellent opportunities of forming friendships and alliances that could prove crucial. Ill defined an appointment as imperial tutorship may have been, it opened up informal avenues of patronage while keeping its bearer close to the source of all power and office, the emperor. CREATING A NETWORK: GAINS AND FAILURES To celebrate the Quinquennalia of Valentinian in 369, the Roman senate empowered the youthful Symmachus to present their monetary contribution. The choice was not fortuitous for in addition to noble blood and considerable wealth Symmachus also possessed a remarkable rhetorical talent. He was also an opportunist and he used the occasion to try and ingratiate himself with the emperor. In the course of two years’ sojourn in Trier, a period the senators could hardly have envisaged as necessary for the safe delivery of their money and congratulations, Symmachus pronounced no less than three imperial panegyrics. He also formed a friendship with Ausonius with whom he shared not only a love of literature but also an interest in current affairs. He would often enjoy the poet’s hospitality and engage in small talk at his table.108 Between 370 and 380, thirty letters were written to Ausonius by Symmachus; of those which Ausonius sent to him only two and a dedication of a poem survived. These bizarre proportions may merely be the result of early editorial decisions. Only seven of the letters sent to Ausonius were written before Valentinian’s death in 111


375. The friendship which had started so auspiciously in Ausonius’ Treveran lounge reached its climax only when Ausonius rose to power in the early years of Gratian.109 According to Ausonius, the relationship between himself and Symmachus was like that of a father to a son—a definition not far from the truth in view of their thirty-year age difference.110 This relationship serves as an indication of the type of links forged between the established Roman senatorial aristocracy and a nascent provincial nobility. Based initially on their personal love for literature, the tie between the ageing imperial tutor and the budding orator was strengthened through concrete needs and aspirations. For Ausonius, the friendship of the young noble Italian was a source of invaluable information regarding the inner workings of the single most influential aristocracy in the empire. This society was otherwise essentially closed to members of provincial aristocracies, even to those endowed with a senatorial rank. Symmachus was a symbol of what money, lineage and inherent authority could achieve. All the noble needed by the time he reached 30 was the stamp of official imperial approval—an appointment to a suitable administrative office. What, then, did he stand to gain from the friendship? One attraction would have been the congenial company of a likeminded literary man. This would have been of particular value in a cold climate and a city populated by crude soldiers and illeducated bureaucrats. Another attraction must have been Ausonius’ experience at court. He would certainly have been there long enough to be able to supply a newcomer like Symmachus with useful inf ormation on topics of current imperial propaganda. Lastly, his position as tutor to the heir apparent meant that he was well placed to occupy a position of power when his charge ascended the throne. Although a long-term investment then, good relations with Ausonius could potentially give Symmachus an edge over other Italian senators in the competition for power and authority. One example of mutual benefits is reflected in the panegyrics which Symmachus delivered at court. Some of the points which Symmachus raised on these occasions appear to echo several Ausonian themes.111 Early in 369, Symmachus delivered his first panegyric in honour of Valentinian in which he covered the first two years of his reign.112 Among the points which Symmachus makes is the similarity between God and the emperor, a theme which underlies Ausonius’ Versus Paschales.113 He also mirrors Ausonius’ 112


emphasis on the unity of the empire.114 It also seems possible to hear echoes of the Mosella in Symmachus’ allusion to the peace and order restored by the emperor on his accession.115 The appearance of the young emperor Gratian is another common feature of the two friends’ work. Symmachus, as well as Ausonius, emphasises the collegiality of the imperial rulers and the future hopes invested in the young ruler.116 In fact, Symmachus delivered a whole panegyric in honour of the then 10-year-old Gratian in which the dynastic ambitions of Valentinian received full support. ‘Hail, longed-for hope of a new age, a youth nurtured in the lap of the state, joy of the present and safety of the future’, are words which reflect similar themes in Valentinian’s speeches on the elevation of Gratian in 367.117 There was little else, aside from the youth’s elevation, that Symmachus could dwell on at this stage. And his words, needless to say, do not so much as hint at rivals and crisis. Rather, he is at pains to cite examples of other rulers who, like Gratian, had been raised to prominence at a young age. The issue of unconstitutionality, pointed out by Ammianus, was thus skilfully obscured. An exchange of exquisite compliments was the essence of polite correspondence between highly literate men. Upon his return to Italy Symmachus promptly fulfilled the demands of polite friendship, even apologising for the slight delay in renewing their contact.118 The sincerity of words like neminem esse mortalium quem prae te diligam (‘no mortal do I hold in greater affection than you’) can be doubted.119 They were, however, an essential part of the required terminology and usefully masked a particular kind of amicitia defined by Symmachus as a relationship in which each felt ‘free’ to further mutual interests.120 ‘With all your might you have been striving to keep a vigil on my behalf, and with a steadfast diligence you have maintained our friendship’, acknowledged Symmachus, professing a debt to Ausonius for a promotion, probably to the office of proconsul Africae.121 By then (late 373), Ausonius must have acquired enough influence at court to put in a good word for a friend who in fact already possessed all the prerequisites for office. Behind this somewhat superfluous expression of gratitude there is not even a hint of the current tension between the emperor and the Roman senatorial aristocracy. Such issues as the prosecution of nobles for adultery and witchcraft were not topics of discussion between unequals. Two of the letters exchanged during this period (370–5) recom 113


mend to Ausonius’ attention two of Symmachus’ protégés.122 The first candidate for Ausonian patronage was a philosopher; the second an advocate. For the unnamed philosopher Symmachus composed a brief covering letter asking Ausonius to look after him at court; Iulianus, the advocate, he praises warmly as a man whose services have never been for sale. For this reason, states his Italian patron, Iulianus merits all possible support.123 It is unclear what action Ausonius took in response to these letters or precisely what support he could provide. All we know is that Iulianus seems to have returned to Rome to rejoin Symmachus’ clientele.124 Such requests for extended patronage were part and parcel of aristocratic ethics. By addressing Ausonius in this way, Symmachus implicitly confirmed Ausonius’ position in the exclusive circle of senatorial patrons. It was obviously in Ausonius’ interests to respond as warmly as possible. Through Symmachus Ausonius came into contact with the most influential senator of the day, Sextus Petronius Probus.125 Probus’ wealth, lineage and power were widely known and acknowledged by a succession of emperors from Constantius II to Valentinian I.126 When Ausonius came to Trier, Probus had been praetorian prefect of Illyricum, and of Gaul, and had held the Italian prefecture for several consecutive years. In 371 he was consul with Gratian. Here was a man whose patronage could be of immense value to any member of a provincial aristocracy. When Probus approached Ausonius (possibly on the recommendation of Symmachus) in quest of suitable educational material for the younger members of his family, Ausonius responded as quickly as he could. He not only promptly ordered the desired copies but also appended a verse panegyric of 105 lines.127 In this poem Ausonius liberally flatters Probus and describes him as the most illustrious man of the realm, second only to the three emperors. He recalls the genealogical claims of the Anicii, and duly addresses Probus as a descendant of Romulus. A prayer for the continuation of the f family’s current good fortune predicts consulships for the son and the position of imperial consular colleague for the father, a rare and much-coveted honour. 128 Ausonius must have done some research on his subject for the composition cleverly touches on family pride and expresses support for future plans. He even promises Probus a full-length panegyric which he never in fact wrote. What was the aim of such extravagant flattery? It seems doubtful that Ausonius actually needed Probus’ help at court, although a 114


good word from an eminent individual in the ear of an attentive emperor would not have gone amiss. More likely, even at this stage in the early 370s, Ausonius was trying to extend his contacts beyond Gaul and the court into Italy and the Roman aristocracy, and he naturally wished to start at the top. As his subsequent career testifies, however, his literary efforts do not appear to have born fruit, and the hoped-for patronage was not forthcoming.129 Within the huge network of Anician patronage Probus failed to create room for a good poet. A novice in the game of politics like Ausonius learnt at first hand its risks and gains. His friendship with Symmachus enlarged his circle of correspondence, and provided a valuable ally in the inner circle of the Roman senatorial aristocracy. Being snubbed by Probus on the other hand may have retarded his entry into the administrative hierarchy of the empire. Presence at court had its advantages, for it gave one access to the emperor and his officials. By 375 Ausonius had been at the court for nearly a decade as tutor. During this period his connection with Gallic officials like Iulianus and Remigius can only be surmised. Whether they helped at all to secure for him his first office remains unclear. According to Symmachus, it was Fortuna who eventually rewarded the worthy with their just praemia. 130 Perhaps an element of luck cannot altogether be discounted. But behind the scenes Ausonius must have worked hard to acquire an imperial office, employing his wealth, family background and education to further his political ambitions. His circle of associates may have included officials like the notarius Syagrius who rose to fame and eminence in later years apparently under Ausonius’ patronage. There may have been others whose early alliance with Ausonius was not recorded. When during Gratian’s reign Ausonius attained an official position which enabled him to dispense favours, there was no dearth of candidates for his suffragium. His first attempts to use an office other than the tutorship for his own advancement reflect the advantages (and, at times, disadvantages) of holding an official appointment in the imperial administration. THE QUAESTORSHIP: FIRST STEPS It may strike the modern reader as odd that under the later Roman empire virtually any educated person could have assumed a responsible and high-powered office which nowadays would require 115


a considerable degree of expertise and experience. The quaestor in charge of formulating imperial legislation, for example, did not need to have a legal background other than that provided by the school of rhetoric. According to one ancient definition, above all the quaestor had to be morally upright and of proven loyalty to his imperial patron.131 Eloquence and knowledge of the law were secondary.132 Some controversy exists regarding the precise functions and sphere of influence of a late Roman quaestor. One view claims that the quaestor possessed the mere right of clothing imperial ordinances in the appropriate style; another extends the quaestor’s responsibilities to reviewing, investigating and composing laws.133 The question is important insofar as it determines the degree of authority conferred by the office. If the quaestor’s power lay merely in rhetoric, the possibility of exercising personal influence would have been limited. If, on the other hand, the quaestor had a real say in legal proceedings, the office offered an ideal opportunity to further one’s political ambitions. The actual situation probably lay somewhere between the two. Simply stated, the degree of personal influence largely depended on the personality of the emperor and his relations with the quaestor.134 Under a strong-willed and relatively well-informed ruler, the quaestor’s authority would have been curtailed, whereas with a young and impressionable monarch a trusted quaestor would have enjoyed a comparatively free rein. Ausonius, who served two emperors as quaestor, is a good illustration of this. Whatever the situation, the quaestorship did enable an enterprising and ambitious person to increase his chances of further promotion through the opportunities the post created for contact with provincials and administrators. Saturninus Secundus Salutius, appointed twenty years before Ausonius and the first Gaul recorded in the office, set a precedent by advancing from the quaestorship to a praetorian prefecture.135 Some time before the end of 375 Ausonius is found as quaestor to Valentinian. His appointment can be regarded as a delayed reward for years of loyalty to the dynasty, a trait much appreciated by the emperor. Four laws are recorded during Ausonius’ tenure (AugustNovember 375), CTh 12.6.16; 13.4.4; 13.6.7; and 9.1.12. 136 One possibly relates to the affair of Romanus, comes Africae in the late 360s/early 370s.137 Several cities in Tripolitania, much harassed by periodic incursions of nomadic tribes from the desert, asked Romanus for military aid. The comes conditioned his 116


help on the supply of 4,000 camels and declined to assist when his demand was not fulfilled. A series of provincial delegations to the imperial court complained about the comes, but several imperial commissions of inquiry and repeated intervention by Romanus’ powerful court contacts ensured that the case dragged on for years. Finally, in the mid-370s, the provincials were able to procure the comes’ dismissal on grounds of corruption. The case touched on the relations between local communities, the imperial hierarchy in the provinces and the central government, and made it imperative for the last to address the real issues at the root of the affair, namely war and taxation.138 CTh 12.6.16 (June 375?) required Chilo, the proconsul of Africa, to enforce the immediate registration of grain collected in lieu of tax. (Perhaps Romanus’ requisition of camels was equated with an ordinary demand for grain.) Certainly the method of tax collection and the control of the quantities of grain gathered at the imperial store houses had to be tightened up.139 CTh 13.6.7 (October 375?), also addressed to Chilo, dealt with the property transactions of the professional association of African shipmasters (navicularii) and possibly had no connection with the events in Tripolitania. Criminal cases in Sardinia were treated in CTh 9.1.12, which reaffirmed a previous stipulation that the accused could not testify against the accuser. Ausonius’ appointment came too late to have any real bearing on any of these laws. The quaestor’s hand may, however, be discerned in the treatment of Remigius, Romanus’ most powerful supporter at court. After Romanus’ dismissal (c. 373), Remigius retired peacefully to his estate near Mainz. In 376, one of Ausonius’ first actions after the death of Valentinian, and still as quaestor, was to reopen the case of Romanus and Remigius.140 The inquiry was conducted in Africa by Ausonius’ son Hesperius, then proconsul of the province; in Gaul the Pannonian Maximinus, then praetorian prefect, exposed Remigius’ complicity. There is little doubt that Ausonius’ involvement in legislative processes and the unsatisfactory conclusion of the case under Valentinian instigated these later developments and eventually led to a different resolution. Still in Africa, CTh 13.4.4, a law published during Valentinian’s lifetime, grants a number of exemptions to teachers of painting (picturae professores) providing they are freeborn (ingenui). These men owned property for they had slaves and traded in art objects. The new law allowed these teachers the free use of workshops, 117


exemption from duties of hospitalitas and exceptional freedom of movement. Previously no emperor had bestowed so many exemptions on any category of artists. It may be possible to detect the influence of Ausonius here, for he appreciated pictorial art and had been a member of the teaching profession all his life. Valentinian’s last quaestor, then, had seemingly little influence on the course of imperial legislation, but the office did allow him an overview of the intricacies of provincial administration. His presence at court, moreover, coupled with direct access to the emperor, his influence over Gratian and his own allies, were factors not to be discounted. When the emperor died unexpectedly in November 375, the quaestorship proved an ideal jumping board to power and authority. Gratian’s accession provided unique opportunities and his reign was to make his old tutor’s family, for a short while, one of the most influential in the western empire.

118

7 THE COURT OF GRATIAN

Ausonius had a chance to sum up his own career in a panegyrical address to the absent emperor Gratian in 379.1 In this Gratiarum Actio he presented his public image and unknowingly bade a lasting farewell to politics. Not unexpectedly, much space is devoted to the uniqueness of Ausonius’ consulate. Not only was he promoted over the heads of many others and paired with Quintus Clodius Hermogenianus Olybrius, but he was also designated senior consul.2 The year was indeed exceptional in that both consuls were civilians. Previously Gratian had honoured the general Merobaudes and members of the imperial house with consulships. Ausonius’ nomination marks the climax of a distinguished career and Gratian’s personal preference. On the other hand, the choice of Olybrius demonstrates the continuing power of the Anicii who were able to produce no less than two consuls within less than a decade.3 Displaying his true dramatic sense, Ausonius presents the emperor deliberating over the choice of consuls and the question of priority. To whom shall the dignity of the consul prior be awarded?4 To a man like Olybrius, whose career, ancestry and wealth traditionally assured such an honour and who was present with his supporters in Sirmium when the announcement was to be made?5 Or to Ausonius, a man ‘with a family not to be ashamed of, an unblemished life, and a pure home’?6 The issue was apparently debated and eventually sensibly decided on the basis of seniority.7 Both had been praetorian prefects under Gratian but Ausonius’ appointment pre-dated that of Olybrius. It was really a matter of protocol to award seniority to the senior officer. A series of images at the beginning of the Actio vividly illustrates the joys of the regime which conferred this singular honour on the speaker.8 Above all, the man who initiated this present happiness, 119


Gratian, is presented as an emperor who has surpassed all past rulers in clementia, largitas and bonitas.9 The attribution of such virtues formed a well-known topos, but this time the speaker could rely on his own experience to corroborate his assertions. After all, for some time Ausonius himself had been a prime beneficiary of the emperor’s probity. Gratian’s family is mentioned sporadically in the Actio. The consecration of Valentinian I by his dutiful son is mentioned once.10 The piety which prompted Gratian to accept joint rule with his brother in the west on the one hand, and to avenge his deceased uncle Valens on the other, is remarked on twice.11 Ausonius did not refer to Gratian’s own willingness to come to the aid of his uncle in 378 when the Goths were roaming over Thrace.12 It would perhaps have been undiplomatic to draw attention to Valens’ foolhardy attempt to score a single-handed triumph. So elusive are the Actio’s references to Valentinian I that Ausonius’ less wary listeners would have been led to believe that the empire had been eagerly awaiting the accession of Gratian. Yet, the sudden death of Valentinian in November 375 revealed the fragility of the new dynasty whose heirs were two boys, one 16, the other barely 4 years of age. At the moment of his father’s death in Illyricum Gratian was far away in Trier. At Brigetio, the scene of the imperial demise, were several experienced candidates and what an ancient observer described as a volatile army eager to influence the choice of an emperor.13 In the background was the ever impending threat of renewed Germanic invasions. In this uncertain moment, the cooperation of Merobaudes (the new magister militum), Cerealis (the later emperor’s brother-in-law) and the Pannonian Aequitius (himself a candidate in the 364 imperial elections, consul in 374, and magister militum in Illyricum since the beginning of Valentinian’s reign), summoned the 4-year-old Valentinian II from a nearby location and presented him to the troops as the new Augustus.14 Gratian’s acceptance of his brother’s unexpected promotion was quite unpredicted.15 Thereafter there were nominaliy two emperors in the west; in reality, the age of Valentinian II precluded his active participation in the management of the empire. Yet, even this prompt enterprise failed to fully guarantee a smooth succession and as a result, the beginning of Gratian’s reign is marked by intense court rivalries and several executions, among these that of the comes Theodosius.16 Less than three years later, the unexpected death of Gratian’s 120

COU RT OF G RATIAN

uncle on the battlefield in Adrianople ushered in a crisis of greater proportions. Surprisingly, Ausonius does not mention in the Gratiarum Actio the summons and subsequent elevation of Theodosius who was the alleged choice of a Gallo-Spanish court party of Ausonius. 17 Neither is there reference to Gratian’s magnanimity in choosing a man unrelated to himself solely on the basis of merit.18 Ausonius’ panegyric was delivered a few months after Theodosius’ elevation, to an emperor who supposedly had played an instrumental role in the proceedings, yet he remains silent on the subject. Either the Treveran court was singularly uninformed or, more likely, the issue of Theodosius’ accession must be reconsidered. Theodosius’ reappearance, after some three years of self-exile following the execution of his father in 376, occurred against a background of extremely low morale in the army, unauthorised wholesale murders and an imperial family which was unable to produce a fitting substitute.19 Influential as any court faction may have been, there was no assurance that its choice, even if approved by the emperor, would have been accepted by the army. A GalloSpanish court party, even with high-ranking civil officers as members, was unlikely to have had any contact with the eastern army and its commanders, or enough weight to force its candidate on them.20 It seems, therefore, necessary to look elsewhere for an explanation which would account not only for the unusual decision of recalling the son of an executed general but also for his apparent ready acceptance by the eastern army. Of the three surviving generals of Adrianople, Richomeres had been comes domesticorum under Gratian, Victor had served under Valens and Saturninus had been promoted to magister equitum just before the battle.21 Saturninus and Victor had a rich past in the army; Richomeres appears a relative newcomer. With the support and possibly even the demand of an army that had probably known Theodosius as dux Moesiae (his last appointment under Valentinian), it seems quite feasible to envisage the three engineering the recall of a popular general whose reputation was not tarnished by the recent shattering defeat. The subsequent career of the three generals under Theodosius seems to bear out their crucial role in the proceedings as well as their crucial support in the early days of his reign. Gratian, who was in Sirmium when all this happened, could do little except bestow his gracious assent on the proceedings as he had done in 375. 121


Ausonius’ silence seems to corroborate this hypothesis. The presence of Olybrius, his consular colleague, in Illyricum as the praetorian prefect of the east presupposes Anician collaboration with the supporters of Theodosius. History may not repeat itself, but the elevation of Theodosius in Sirmium strongly evokes the events surrounding the death of Valentinian I and the related activities of key military figures aimed at ensuring peaceful transition and placating the local military.22 On the former occasion the Anicians had been represented by the redoubtable Probus, then praetorian prefect of Illyricum. The ability of Anician politicians shrewdly and promptly to assess emergency situations and to participate in the decision-making process highlights one of Ausonius’ main weaknesses: he had no allies in the army even though his own Actio reflects a certain awareness of the significance of the military aristocracy of the empire.23 Thus, he is careful to designate Gratian as fortissimus, for pacifying in a single year the frontiers; liberalissimus, particularly towards the soldiers; and consultissimus, for his prompt handling of the crisis in the eastern empire.24 For a man who throughout his court career had neglected to cultivate close relations with the military aristocracy, Ausonius’ emphasis on the army and Gratian’s military prowess seem at first surprising. Over the centuries, however, descriptions of a victorious emperor and a loyal army had become standard themes in imperial panegyrics.25 In Gratian’s case, his young age and lack of military experience and familiarity with the army increased the importance of such a tribute. In a panegyric delivered at a provincial court the relationship between the emperor and provincials is obviously of prime interest. Security and taxation are common topics. Ausonius’ Actio claims that Gratian’s military policy gained peace for Gaul.26 This type of claim, although standard among the Gallic panegyrists of late antiquity, was particularly poignant here given that Gratian was far away at the time, fighting the enemies of the eastern Roman empire along the Danube. The relevance of this activity may not have been all that apparent to Gratian’s Gallic subjects. In response to the emperor’s absence, Ausonius promised to devote a separate work to his military achievements—a promise which remained as unfulfilled as that made in the Mosella.27 The imperial concern for Gaul was also demonstrated by remitting taxes, an act which Ausonius cites grateful citizens celebrating by burning official records.28 The Gratiarum Actio emphasises two crucial points regarding 122

COU RT OF G RATIAN

Ausonius’ career: one, his complete dependence on Gratian’s favours and goodwill; two, the importance of the local presence of the imperial court. Ausonius, it seems, never left Gaul, which underlines the correlation of his success to the court’s establishment in the region. 29 His perception of imperial politics was thus circumscribed by the centrality of Gaul in his schemes and he therefore remained insensitive to the need to build lasting networks all over the empire. Although relatives and friends were quickly placed in key positions in both Africa and Italy, the very nature of their office (which largely precluded long-term appointments) and Ausonius’ own urgency to move them to higher posts undermined the possibility of acquiring lasting influence. Furthermore, very few of the Ausonian appointees owned property in the regions which they temporarily controlled, an advantage which the Anicii, for example, continuously exploited. AUSONIUS’ LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITIES Just how far a man like Ausonius could advance under a weak and young ruler can easily be summarised. By 378 he and his son Hesperius were praetorian prefects; a year later Ausonius became a consul. Other members of the family, and a good number of friends, reached prominent positions with staggering rapidity. They were helped by the fact that during these years (376–9) Gratian and his chief military commander Merobaudes were busy not only maintaining and strengthening the work of Valentinian I along the Rhine and the Danube, but also with events in the east which culminated in the death of Gratian’s uncle and the accession of Theodosius. Even an older and more experienced man than Gratian would have found it difficult to keep a close watch over the activities of his officials in such circumstances. The real significance of Ausonius’ ‘ascendancy’ therefore requires careful assessment.30 Ausonius’ role as quaestor was already established in the early months of Gratian’s reign. The question remains whether Ausonius’ legislative activities can be interpreted as a means of personal advancement or simply as part of his duties at the imperial court. His involvement in laws based on routine matters and standard issues would have left little or no scope for personal intervention except with regard to stylistic features. A second type of legislation dealt with topics in which the quaestor had a measure of influence, particularly regarding the law’s content and sphere of application. 123


Only rarely is it possible to gauge the precise impact of a quaestor on a piece of imperial legislation. When all we know is the name of the quaestor, as is all too often the case, there is little room for conjecture. But when the background, the personality and the inclinations can be established, the quaestor’s influence may be discerned with some accuracy. Ausonius is a unique example of such a quaestor. His literary style is sufficiently attested to enable us to detect his hand in the formulation, content and purpose of the laws promulgated during his quaestorship.31 The quantity and scope of ‘Ausonian’ legislation under Gratian also facilitate an analysis of the scale of his intervention. The earliest recorded activity of Ausonius as quaestor to Gratian has been preserved in the form of four separate constitutions. Originally they were probably parts of a single decree dating to 1 January 376 addressed to the senate of Rome.32 Ausonius seems to have lost little time in exploiting his new-found influence to implement new political directives. CTh 9.1.13 specified that any provincial judge (provincialis iudex vel intra Italiam) could instigate an inquiry into criminal cases involving senators, but that cases which entailed capital punishment had to be referred to higher authorities (ad inclytas potestates) and on occasion to the emperor himself. This is somewhat ambiguous for in Gaul and Spain, at least, such cases would reach the court of Maximinus, then praetorian prefect and a rather unpopular appointee of Valentinian I, but the law also allowed for direct recourse to the emperor.33 Ausonius’ influence can be discerned in the clause which singles out for special treatment the territory under the jurisdiction of the urban prefect of Rome and its vicinity (PUR). In this region, criminal cases involving senators continued to be referred to the PUR but, if capital punishment was entailed, a committee of five men was expected to assist him in his judgment. 34 These men would themselves have been members of the senate. However, throughout the fourth century this body remains elusive and does not appear to have been called into service. Clearly the intent of the provision was to restrict the authority of the PUR while excluding intervention by officials such as the vicar of the city or the praefectus annonae. Under the previous regime, it was the intervention of the Pannonian vicars and annonarian prefects that had initiated senatorial trials at Rome. The imperial fiscus had to ensure that senators, particularly those with extensive properties in the provinces, paid taxes. CJ 3.24.2 124

COU RT OF G RATIAN

(January 376) stipulates that wherever a senator happens to reside or own property and ‘be sufficiently active’, either in the provinces or at Rome, he can be sued for not paying taxes either in the courts of the praetorian prefect, the urban prefect or even in the courts of the magister officiorum.35 The MO then was the Pannonian Leo, a Valentinian appointee; the PPG was still his co-patriot Maximinus.36 Both may have been anxious to ensure sound imperial finances. The lack of precision in the wording of the law may reflect Ausonius’ leniency towards the senators. The phrase ‘sufficiently active’ must certainly have been open to different interpretations, making it difficult to prove cases of tax evasion. The third January law, CTh 15.1.19, is more openly biased towards those of senatorial rank. It ordains that public funds are only to be spent on the maintenance and repair of old buildings in Rome and not on new structures.37 This afforded public-minded senators ample opportunity to enhance their reputation and gain popularity through the sponsorship of new building projects. 38 Respect for the ancient heritage of the city was ensured by disallowing the use of materials from existing monuments. In conjunction with this constitution public benefactors were allowed to use private stone quarries without paying the special taxes regularly imposed for quarrying and importing such material (CTh 10.19.8, January 376). Perhaps Ausonius was attempting not only to cater for known senatorial activities but also to sweeten the pill of regular senatorial taxation (CJ 3.24.2). Indirectly, by providing employment, the law may have also allowed the Illyrican economy some chance to recuperate after the systematic exploitation of the area by the prefect Petronius Probus.39 Taken together, the four constitutions to some extent reversed previous imperial policies regarding the senators and the city of Rome. Valentinian I, duly elected as emperor and ably assisted by his network of Pannonian associates, had been able to afford to alienate a segment of the Roman senate (although not the powerful scion of the Anicii). An emperor like Gratian, however, whose sole claim to the throne was a dynastic right and who still had to demonstrate military and administrative ability needed all the support he could get, especially from the rich senators of Rome. At Rome, in the assembly of the Roman senate in January 376, the senator Symmachus hailed the accession of Gratian as the opening of a new era.40 He was clearly thinking in terms of the relations between the imperial court and the Roman senatorial 125


aristocracy now that the ‘longed-for hope of a new age’ had finally dawned.41 Assurances were promptly given to the senate concerning the change of imperial policy vis-à-vis the Roman senatorial aristocracy. A letter announcing the goodwill and support of the new emperor reached the expectant senators in January 376.42 The senators’ reaction to the contents of the imperial letter was clearly of some importance to Ausonius: ‘What were the fathers’ sentiments regarding this oration?’ he asked Symmachus.43 And Symmachus, pre-empting the official senatorial reaction, gave a reassuring answer in a private letter to Ausonius dating to January 376. A few months later, in July 376, a law (CTh 1.6.7) addressed to the PUR, Aradius Rufinus, continued the pro-senatorial trend by purporting to curtail the all-powerful office of the praefectus annonae (PA). It also marked the return of Rufinus to the imperial administration, possibly owing to Ausonius’ initiative, after twelve years of absence. CTh 1.6.7 is careful to delineate the jurisdiction of the PA and to designate his position as secondary and subordinate to that of the PUR.44 In the recent Valentinianic past, becoming PA and thereby gaining control of the vital subsistence of the city and of free distribution of food, had proved a convenient method of winning popularity at the expense of other office-holders in the city. Valentinian I had acknowledged the importance of the position by appointing several of his favourites like Maximinus to the office. It had also proved a springboard to the vicariate of the city, as the careers of Maximinus, Ursicinus and Simplicius in the early 370s demonstrate.45 By the beginning of 377 the Gaul Gregorius, a close ally of Ausonius, was installed at Rome as the praefectus annonae.46 Since the office of the PA still carried weight it had to be entrusted to someone dependable. It continued to signal the beginning of a very distinguished career. Gregorius was later appointed quaestor and PPG, and was expected to become consul.47 He shared with Ausonius an appreciation of belles lettres and like his presumed patron, Gregorius appears in a top position without known apprenticeship. By mid-376 the vicar of Italy was Cataphronius, perhaps a relative of Ausonius.48 He was the recipient of two laws (CTh 8.5.31; 11.10.2) which dealt with public roads. One forbade imperial workers on the cursus publicus to receive payment from any source save the imperial treasury; the other reinforced separation between imperial and private services by forbidding the exaction of services from provincials along such roads. It is not the content of 126

COU RT OF G RATIAN

the laws that invites comment, however. The point to be noted is that Cataphronius is apparently the first member of Ausonius’ circle to be found in an Italian position. Finally, in January 377, a major bone of contention between the senatorial aristocracy of Rome and the imperial government was settled. Eight years earlier, Valentinian I had legalised the torture of senators suspected of maiestas (CTh 9.35.1). The result had been a series of trials which received wide coverage from Ammianus.49 The senators at Rome had to wait for the removal of Maximinus and other supporters of the previous regime to see this hated provision abolished. To their relief CTh 9.35.3 succinctly declared that all senators were exempt from torture: severam indagationem per tormenta quaerendi a senatorio nomine submovemus. This sort of manifestation of goodwill from a court bustling with the activities of a Gallic quaestor anxious to obtain support in Italy must indeed have been rather pleasing to the Roman senators. Many of them still remembered the harsh days of the Pannonians and the emperor who barred senators from the expected rewards of birth and wealth, namely office. Once senatorial legislation was in place, Ausonius turned his attention to the rich and potentially troublesome Africa. Hard on the heels of Theodosius’ execution (early 376), Ausonius’ son Hesperius was installed as the proconsul of Africa. His vicar was the noble Virius Nicomachus Flavianus whose appointment, like Rufinus’, the first in a dozen years, seems to denote another Ausonian effort to curry favour with notable members of the Roman senatorial aristocracy. A law addressed to him in March 376 (CTh 15.7.3) announced the restoration of athletic contests throughout the province with the express intention of keeping the people happy. It also encouraged local notables (primates viri) to enhance their popularity by financing these spectacles.50 While keeping Africa happy would have been on the priority list of any shrewd politician, the interests of the Ausonii, father and son, were also well served since the law advertised their benevolence and goodwill. It further demonstrates how standard imperial legislation could coincide with personal ambitions to work for the advantage of both the province and the imperial quaestor. That success in politics is often the result of a series of coincidences set in motion by one deliberate act can be seen in the conclusion of the affair of Romanus, former comes of Africa.51 Shortly after their arrival in Africa, Hesperius and his vicar 127


Nicomachus Flavianus launched an investigation aimed at settling the long-standing dispute between the provincials of Tripolitania and Romanus.52 Their report, which presumably exposed the guilt of Romanus, was ignored. Remigius (ex magister officiorum) and Merobaudes (magister peditum) acted on behalf of the former count at court.53 Maximinus, motivated not so much by sympathy for the Africans as by his enmity towards Remigius, intervened.54 The latter committed suicide; Romanus’ fate remains unclear. He might even have been acquitted.55 Merobaudes was unscathed. He was too valuable a man to touch and carried decisive influence with the army. The real beneficiary, however, of the murky business was Ausonius who could now calmly proceed to place relatives and friends in key African positions. Around the same time, the most notable African supporter of Valentinian I, Fl. Eupraxius (QSP, PUR in 374), a man well regarded by Ammianus and popular with the senate for his intervention on behalf of its members implicated in treason cases, vanished from the official annals for good.56 His disappearance may, of course, signify a peaceful retirement after reaching high office, but he was poised to attain the highest honour of all, the consulship. Ausonius proved no less fortunate in Gaul. Remigius’ removal from court left Maximinus still in the influential post of praetorian prefect. His days, however, were numbered, as he was fast losing support and control. By the middle of 376, his erstwhile associates, Doryphorianus (vicarius urbis Romae in 375/6) and Simplicius (his predecessor in office), both appointees of Valentinian I, were dead. 57 The last law (CTh 9.19.4, April 376) addressed to Maximinus in the capacity of PPG, is an exemplary instance of the obscurities which the stylistic preferences of a quaestor like Ausonius could introduce. The use of antiquarianisms and the lack of understanding of legal principles that it displays have been attributed to the influence of Ausonius.58 The law dealt with civil and criminal procedures with particular reference to forged documents, making it harder for the accused to pursue his defence. The precise circumstances behind the promulgation of this law are unknown, but cases involving forged documents may have been sufficiently widespread to warrant imperial intervention. Although the law was issued to the Gallic praetorian prefect, it was posted at Rome—an anomaly which has been taken to imply that Maximinus himself, ever ready to curtail the rights of defendants, had been its proposer.59 Less than two years later Ausonius’ successor in office 128

COU RT OF G RATIAN

had to formulate another law on the same subject in order to clarify the obscurities of CTh 9.19.4 and to rectify the practices advocated there.60 By May 376 Maximinus was replaced as PPG by Claudius Antonius. Symmachus considered the removal of the hated Pannonian as a signal achievement of Gratian’s early days.61 His elimination may mask another concerted effort by Aequitius and Merobaudes who, a few months before, had co-operated to secure the continuity of Valentinian’s dynasty. The behaviour of Maximinus’ son, Marcellinus, military commander in Valeria, earned his father several enemies, including the two powerful generals. 62 One accidental beneficiary of Maximinus’ death was Ausonius. Amidst the rivalries and executions which characterised the beginning of Gratian’s reign, the trusted quaestor was presented with the perfect opportunity to exercise his influence over the new emperor. Maximinus’ immediate successor to the Gallic prefecture, Antonius, corresponded with Symmachus, and shared with him and Ausonius literary interests as well as gastronomic delicacies.63 He is also reputed to have been an early Ausonian supporter and a corner stone of a Gallo-Spanish court alliance.64 Unlike Gregorius and Ausonius’ relatives, Antonius had experience in the imperial administration, having been magister scrinii and quaestor already under Valentinian. In a way, he appears in a better position than Ausonius to dispense patronage and favours. In his capacity as PPG Antonius was the recipient of a constitution which bears by far the clearest stamp of Ausonius’ conscientious efforts to extend his fame in Gaul and enlarge his network of Gallic allies.65 CTh 13.3.11 (May376) (or ‘Gratian’s school law’) provides state subsidies to certain municipalities to ensure the employment of the best possible grammarians and rhetors. Payment of grammarians was fixed at twelve annonae; rhetors were granted twenty-four. Unfortunately, these figures are not a precise indication of the economic status of teachers at the time, for this constitution only deals with subsidised municipal chairs.66 In reality, the income of educators varied greatly, as shown in the earlier analysis of the schools and scholars of Bordeaux (Chapter 5). Since the name of the quaestor was probably known to those affected by this legislation, it can safely be assumed that Ausonius’ personal standing in Gaul among the members of his former profession would have been greatly enhanced. CTh 13.3.11 also marks the beginning of a formal and fruitful collaboration between 129


Ausonius and Antonius. Their cursus present many similarities as each held the same office in the wake of the other in a clear effort by Ausonius to keep a check on Gaul and Italy and to reward his loyal supporters. Antonius was the recipient of other laws which reflect Ausonius’ style and personal interests, while addressing rather more standard issues. CTh 1.15.7 (January 377) deals with litigation within the Gallic prefecture. It asserts that vicars hold priority over military counts in civil cases, but that the opposite pertains in cases involving members of the army. The concern to maintain strict separation between the judicial spheres of the civil and the military authorities is hardly surprising. CTh 1.15.7 also proclaimed that in cases where the count and the vicar joined in judgment, the vicar’s position was superior. Perhaps one may glean here an attempt to reverse Valentinian’s favourable disposition towards the military. The late emperor had incurred much criticism, even from soldiers, for such preferential treatment.67 The law further reminded the public that the highest dignity belonged to the praetorian prefect, to whom all vicars were subordinate (praefecturae meritum ceteris dignitatibus antestet). This somewhat gratuitous reminder is understandable in view of the fact that Antonius’ successor in office was none other than Ausonius himself. In a similar vein, another piece of standard legislation bears Ausonius’ stamp. CTh 1.32.3 (March 377) held all procurators (treasury officials) responsible for their transactions and liable to severe corporal punishment if found guilty of misconduct in office. It was, of course, quite reasonable for the administration to try to combat corruption, but the stylisation of the law and the discrepancy between the nature of the offence and its punishment have been attributed to the intrusion of Ausonius’ literary tastes into the sober realm of the law.68 On occasions Ausonius certainly did let his fancy dictate the style and contents of the laws he fashioned, which is hardly surprising in view of the rhetorical training he, like many quaestors, had received. This licence indicates the measure of influence that Ausonius had acquired by this time. The addressee of this constitution was Flavius Eucherius, then comes sacrarum largitionum (in charge of imperial finances), and reputedly another member of a Gallo-Spanish court party symbolised, if not headed, by Ausonius. He was indeed a Spaniard and brother of the late Theodosius.69 His appearance in a position involving significant financial responsibilities implies substantial personal means. Like 130

COU RT OF G RATIAN

Gregorius, Eucherius seems to have obtained a top job without previous recorded experience in the imperial administration, in spite of an apparent disadvantage of being related to a man who had been recently executed under mysterious circumstances. In his case, perhaps, it may be feasible to detect Ausonius’ patronage. Overall, the quaestorship itself did not undergo radical change during Ausonius’ tenure. The styling of the constitutions formulated over the period, however, and their conscientious promotion of selfinterest do reveal the identity of the quaestor. Specific trends favoured by former legislators were generally adopted, perhaps in the interests of continuity. Rank was important in the treatment of individuals both in Rome, where the senators gradually regained the privileges lost under Valentinian I, and in provincial cities, where the chief decurions were exempt from the bodily tortures inflicted on their weaker colleagues (CTh 9.35.2). Some concern is shown for public welfare, for example in provisions regarding public roads or the orderly supply of food to the Roman populace (CTh 11.2.3; 8.5.34). Poetic intrusions into the sober realm of politics and law are apparent, with some adverse effects. Most importantly, the intentional obscurity of several laws necessitated later revisions. The growing influence of rhetoric on fourth-century imperial legislation had already added to the obfuscation of late imperial utterances. Laws bound to contribute to the popularity of Ausonius and his allies reveal the quaestor’s intention to increase his standing and to establish a network of supporters throughout the western provinces. Indeed, Ausonius’ period as quaestor demonstrates how readily the position could be exploited by an ambitious individual answering to a young and impressionable emperor. GENS AUSONIANA IN POWER A remarkable aspect of Ausonius’ court period under Gratian is the uncommonly rapid promotion of family and friends to the most important civil magistracies. As soon as the associates of the previous regime were removed, new faces quickly took their place on the political stage of the western Roman empire. A brief survey of these changes is given here, along with an analysis of the nature of the Ausonian political phenomenon and its place in the imperial hierarchy. Underlying this analysis is a search for the meaning and implications of Ausonius’ years in power for the Gallic upper classes of the later fourth century. 131


The period (376–80) is succinctly characterised by Ausonius himself in the rather sweeping statement praesedi imperio, rendered by Evelyn White as ‘I held sway over the Empire’. This power was achieved through the personal and extended acquisition of key offices in the civil hierarchy. In a brief summary of his career for the benefit of his grandson, Ausonius mentions his quaestorship, double prefecture, and the consulate.70 The theme of accumulated honours was slightly expanded in the laudatio funebris of his father Iulius, where references are made to the careers of other family members, and to the belated promotion of the elderly doctor himself.71 At the very start of the new regime, Ausonius cast his eyes on the proconsulship of Africa, a province of strategic importance and, possibly as significant for the Ausonii and their supporters, a top job in the hierarchy. No less than two family members and a close friend occupied the position between 376 and 379. Hesperius’ presence in Africa has been noted. Aside from having several laws addressed to him, he was also the subject of several inscriptions attesting his building activities.72 In January 378, Thalassius is recorded in the same office. He was Ausonius’ son-in-law, the second husband of his unnamed daughter. His parents were Severus Censor Iulianus and Pomponia Urbica, the latter ‘of famed stock’ (genus clarum).73 The move to acquire such a high-ranking office, which traditionally led to further promotion, signals a concerted attempt to advance the family’s fortunes as quickly as possible. Hesperius and Thalassius’ proconsulships show a deviation from the practice of annual magistracies, both serving for more than a year.74 Hesperius was further appointed as a praetorian prefect before the end of the proconsular year (377/8). Thalassius’ subsequent career is interesting. He was the first member of the gens ausoniana since Aemilius Magnus Arborius to turn eastward. In 376/7 he became vicarius Macedoniae, where his son Paulinus (of Pella) was born. He also had property in the area, probably purchased during his time in office. A tenure in the east was quite acceptable as a personal career move, but may have been motivated by a desire to reaffirm the family’s long-lost contacts with the Greek east. The dispatch of the octogenarian Iulius Ausonius to Illyricum as successor to the praetorian prefect there, Sextus Petronius Probus, is also worthy of examination.75 Ausonius may have been so anxious to get rid of the formidable Probus that he was willing to 132

COU RT OF G RATIAN

compromise when choosing a replacement. His ability to include his aged father in his scheme of family advancement, however, serves to demonstrate the extent of his influence at court. The appointment was, though, ridiculous and shows Ausonius’ ambitious nature at its worst. The detachment of Illyricum from the Italian prefecture for the duration of Iulius’ office is another of the anomalies which characterises the Ausonian administrative period. Iulius’ successor was the senatorial blue-blooded Q. Clodius Hermogenianus Olybrius. Olybrius, a relation of the Anicii, belonged to the breed of flexible politicians who did well both under Valentinian I (as PUR at the height of the anti-senatorial activities in the city (368–70)) and under Gratian (consul in 379). His regular appearance on the Gratianic fasti is a forceful reminder of the absence of another Anician politician, Sextus Petronius Probus. An early addressee of Ausonian flattery, Probus seems impervious to Gallic charm and held aloof from poet and politics from 375 to 383. He may, of course, simply have been tired of years of officeholding, but this hiatus in an otherwise exceptional senatorial career may also imply a certain antagonism between himself and a court filled with supporters of Ausonius and presided over by Ausonius’ pupil.76 In spite of Probus’ apparent retirement, the Anicii managed to match Ausonius’ thrust easily enough and captured the consulship, the most coveted civil honour in the empire, in exactly the same year as Ausonius. In the wake of Thalassius, a Flavius Syagrius, one of the two Flavii Syagrii to appear frequently in the annals of the imperial hierarchy in the late 370s and early 380s, was proconsul Africae (379/80). This Syagrius was elevated to high office through typical senatorial positions and was the last recipient of an Ausonian appointment in Africa. 77 His vicar there was a brother of Symmachus, Celsinus Titianus, whose career was cut short by his premature death. Syagrius later became urban prefect (381), praetorian prefect of Italy (382) and consul (382). His career marks a significant breakthrough for the Gauls, who now obtained offices in the highest echelons of the imperial hierarchy.78 It also shows Ausonius as a pole of attraction which brought to court Gauls who had already achieved status of leadership in their communities. Ausonius’ presence at a Gallic court may have then accelerated a natural process of search for more power and prestige. The other Syagrius pursued a bureaucratic career, rising from notarius in 369 to magister officiorum a decade later, followed by the Italian praetorian 133


prefecture. As in the case of Ausonius, this other Syagrius’ somewhat belated promotion was offset by a quick succession of important administrative appointments. The correlation between the short but brilliant careers of the Syagrii and the ascendancy of Ausonius (379 to 382) underlines their dependence on his help. The benefit was mutual, however, since their recruitment extended Ausonius’ Gallic network to Lyon, where the Syagrii were notable landowners. Ausonius himself, it may be recalled, claimed descent from a family with wealth and contacts all over Lugdunensis. 79 After this period the Syagrii vanished into peaceful retirement to reappear on the political scene a century later with a representative at the Burgundian court and as independent rulers in northern Gaul.80 Ausonius’ search for allies within his own city and province is perfectly understandable. As noted above, a key position in the city of Rome, that of praefectus annonae, was secured as early as 377 by the appointment of the Aquitanian Gregorius.81 Another Aquitanian, the Bordelais Siburius, rose apparently ex nihilo to another prominent position. He was a medical man and an associate of Iulius Ausonius with whom he is listed among wellknown medical personalities in fourth-century Bordeaux.82 By 376 Siburius was magister officiorum, an important court appointment, which had been occupied by several Gauls in the course of the century and reserved in the late 370s exclusively for Ausonius’ appointees. A favourite pupil, the Bordelais Paulinus (later of Nola), was appointed consul suffectus in 378 and governor of the Italian province of Campania (380/1). Neither appointment was remarkable but for the tender age of those selected and the fact that they were usually reserved for members of the Roman senatorial aristocracy.83 Paulinus’ family had enough property (in both Gaul and Italy) and senatorial contacts to secure his positions without Ausonius’ help, but the patronage of an influential figure must have proved advantageous nevertheless. Within the space of the first two years of Gratian’s reign, Ausonius managed to place his supporters and protégés in key provincial and court positions, from Africa to Illyricum, and from Rome to Trier. Needless to say, each of these appointments also entitled its holder to senatorial rank. By 377/8 the time was ripe to aim for the highest magistracies. Before January 378, Hesperius was installed as praefectus praetorio Italiae, following Claudius Antonius and succeeded by the 134

COU RT OF G RATIAN

two Syagrii. After years of exclusive Italian, indeed Anician, monopoly of the Italian prefecture, the appearance of three nonItalians, at least two of them Gauls, is extraordinary. One can almost envisage the senatorial shrugs of resignation if not contempt at this phenomenon. It is not surprising, therefore, that as soon as Gratian’s last Gallic prefects retired, the perennial Petronius Probus was recalled to office. To further the Gallic invasion of Italy a number of supporters were positioned in the city of Rome. Between 380 and 381, Arborius, Valerianus and (as mentioned above) Flavius Syagrius became praefecti urbis Romae. Arborius was Ausonius’ nephew, the son of Pomponius Maximus, primor at the curia of Bordeaux. Arborius is attested as a treasury officer in May 379 (CTh 1.32.4), directly succeeding another Ausonian supporter, Eucherius. 84 Valerianus is an interesting case. He may have been of Gallic origin, if Symmachus’ words can be taken literally.85 Several constitutions are addressed to him in his capacity as urban prefect.86 Three of these laws merit close examination. They deal with issues which were of great interest to career-minded individuals like Ausonius. CTh 6.10.2 acknowledged the important role of imperial secretaries (domestici et notarii) by equating their rank with that of consnlares, thereby enabling them to join the ordo senatorius.87 Another law stipulated that proconsuls, vicars, or consulares ranked above individuals who held these titles sine cura (CTh 6.22.5). Lastly, the magistri scriniorum acquired a rank equal to that of the vicars (6.26.2). This concern for palatine officers must have derived from Ausonius. He had a vested interest in securing senatorial privileges for supporters who held non-senatorial but key offices in the imperial bureaucracy. In response to this Gallic domination of top civil jobs in Italy, the Anicii seemingly attempted to wrest the urban prefecture back into Italian hands. Anicius Paulinus, an otherwise undistinguished senator who preceeded Paulinus (of Nola) in Campania, and another person with Anician connections, Valerius Bassus, both proceeded to hold the office.88 It was only to be expected that the most noble clan of the Roman senatorial aristocracy would put forward its own candidates and enjoy some success. The behaviour of some Ausonian appointees, like Macedonius, may have aided their cause. Macedonius was the minister of imperial finances (comes sacrarum largitionum) in 380/1 and three years later magister officiorum.89 During his tenure he apparently had a hand 135


in dubious financial deals for as soon as his imperial patron Gratian was dead, Macedonius was accused of misconduct.90 Accusations involving corruption were common in that period and usually difficult to judge, but there may have been a real grievance at the root of the Macedonius affair.91 Another pattern of Gallic succession can be established for the prefecture of the Gauls. Ausonius himself succeeded Claudius Antonius in the office in 377 and was followed two years later by Siburius and Gregorius. Some time in late 378, the prefectures of Italy and the Gauls were nominally united to honour Ausonius and his son. This collegiate prefecture appears to have been unique in the annals of the later empire, creating yet another Ausonian deviation from the norm.92 More than any other nomination or promotion, this unusual pattern of double prefectures symbolised the status of the gens ausoniana during these years. The Gallic monopoly over the Gallic prefecture in fact proved to have lasting effects. From the end of the fourth century and throughout the fifth, the office was regularly and nearly exclusively manned by Gauls. The importance of the office for the subsequent development of Gaul and its aristocracy cannot be exaggerated.93 An important aspect of Ausonius’ newly acquired influence was his ability to dispense favours to his amici and their protégés. Symmachus repeatedly recommended his protégés to Ausonius’ protection and clearly did not expect to be disappointed. Among them Palladius, a successful teacher of rhetoric at Rome, was sent to Trier in 379 to embark on a court career.94 He had no less than three patrons, Flavius Syagrius, then magister officiorum, Eutropius, former proconsul Asiae attached to the court of Gratian, and Ausonius himself. 95 Such patronage was apparently influential enough to secure for Palladius by 381 the office of comes sacrarum largitionum under Theodosius in the east.96 It is not certain which of the three patrons had sufficiently good contacts at the eastern court to procure the position. Ausonius’ network of allies may have included some Theodosian supporters, but Ausonius’ own role was probably minimal. Eutropius seems a more likely source of influence in this particular case. Many other instances of extended patronage are recorded. Ausonius’ help was solicited on behalf of a delegation from Sicily headed by a man named Ambrosius.97 The fate of their petition remains unknown. Potitus, a mutual friend, was recommended for promotion on the strength of his amicitia with both Ausonius and 136

COU RT OF G RATIAN

Symmachus.98 His appointment in 379 to the position of vicarius urbis Romae demonstrates the efficacy of such relationships.99 Other candidates for Ausonius’ suffragium enjoyed varying degrees of success. Several appear in important offices many years after Ausonius’ retirement.100 They may have owed their initial entry into political life to Ausonius. An interesting insight into the working of the SymmachusAusonius network is provided by Victor, if he is to be identified with the historian Sextus Aurelius Victor.101 The case is uncertain for in addition to the historian, there are two other Victors to whom the sources could be alluding.102 According to Symmachus’ letter to Ausonius, Victor had already filled an unspecified position in the administration but had experienced a change of fortune.103 Victor the historian had been consularis Pannoniae Secundae under Julian as early as 361 when his history was published, and had then dropped out of politics to reappear some twenty years later as a protégé of Symmachus.104 His fate at the court of Gratian is unknown. In 389 he was PUR under Theodosius after the fall of Magnus Maximus. Between his provincial appointment and his elevation to urban prefect, Victor was iudex sacrarum cognitionum (appellate judge), an office which he may have assumed under Gratian.105 It would seem, then, that Sextus Aurelius Victor, a man of some literary talent, started his career in a relatively conventional manner. His success, owing to the literary appreciation of the emperor Julian, can be measured not only by his inclusion in the coveted imperial hierarchy, but also by the visual and prominent tribute paid to him in erecting a statue to his honour in Trajan’s forum.106 If Victor symbolises the success of talented provincials he also demonstrates the attendant hazards. Valentinian I seemingly had no room in his administration for a man who spent his spare time composing imperial biographies. Ausonius, on the other hand, had some regard for this genre, as Symmachus must have known.107 If Victor wished to resume his career, he could do so under no better patronage than that of Symmachus and Ausonius. Before Victor could proceed beyond the role of an appellate judge, however, his literary patron at court retired and the emperor was murdered. Victor may have prudently retired from the scene during the contentious years 383 to 388. His patience was well rewarded under Theodosius who appreciated both loyalty and historical literature. Ausonius’ inclination to promote men of letters is hardly surprising. Nor is his apparent tendency to encourage men of relatively humble 137


origins. Such men were bound to retain loyalty to the man and the emperor from whose favours they had benefited. A man like Manlius Theodorus had an uninterrupted series of promotions from 376 to the end of Gratian’s reign.108 He was well remembered even after the removal of his imperial patron and enjoyed a second spell of successful promotions years after the family of his Aquitanian patron had resumed an obscure but dignified provincial life.109 Contacts among members of Ausonius’ circle of supporters are also evident. Symmachus corresponded with Syagrius, Antonius and Hesperius, to whose favours he likewise recommended several people. Indeed, the exchange of letters was their sole means of communication for Symmachus tactfully refrained from travelling to Trier, even to participate in the consular celebrations of Ausonius and Syagrius.110 Memories of the cold Treveran winters must have been vividly lodged in his mind. Symmachus exchanged fourteen letters with Hesperius, extolling in customary fashion the virtues of their amicitia. 111 He also recommended several people to him, none of whom had apparently been referred to Ausonius.112 The case of one of these, Priscianus, is interesting. He was a philosopher to whom the senate of Rome had promised salarii emolumenta. But the figure of the annonae to be paid to Priscianus caused some debate, and as a result Symmachus asked Hesperius to intervene.113 Apparently the guidelines issued in 376 by Hesperius’ father (CTh 13.3.11) regarding subventions to grammarians and rhetors in Gaul were not applied outside the judicial sphere of the Gallic prefecture. A concluding glance at the series of key offices held by Ausonius and his supporters and at the network formed across the western empire may at first give an impression of political strength and dominance. The crucial support of Gratian lends credence to this view, but it is in fact false. Within less than five years the power structure so carefully pieced together by Ausonius and his family seems to have dissolved. By 381 Gratian moved permanently from Gaul to Italy. The imperial capital was fixed at Milan, a city which had played host to the court before.114 The move was necessitated primarily by military considerations: the Danubian frontier was alive with hostile barbarians; the Ostrogoths were already in Pannonia; and the provinces of the eastern Roman empire were beset with wandering Visigoths. The Gallic prefecture, however, was enjoying a period of peace and tranquillity. Milan, then, rather than Trier, proved the 138

COU RT OF G RATIAN

more attractive option, and one which could provide a useful military base. Milan also controlled a major east-west route, and its wealth was practically legendary.115 As soon as it became apparent that the court had left Gaul for good, ambitious individuals who owed their access to the court to Ausonius and who had enjoyed their first taste of success through his influence with the emperor had to choose between following Ausonius into retirement and relocating to Italy. The presence from 379 of an emperor of western origins in Constantinople had already attracted many westerners. In quick succession, Eucherius and Antonius left the Gallic court and gathered at the eastern court to be duly rewarded with the consulship in 381 and 382 respectively. Another reputed member of Ausonius’ Aquitanian circle, Rufinus, who was also a correspondent of Symmachus in the early 380s, left Gaul to score notable successes in the east from 388 onward.116 None acknowledged a debt to Ausonius. Politically-minded people clearly have short memories. The choice of many in Gaul was to leave and pursue their careers in Italy where they fared with varying degrees of success. The move became a necessity for supporters of Gratian when Magnus Maximus came to power in Gaul and re-established an imperial court in Trier. There is some evidence that Hesperius, who remained at Trier until 383, was in Italy in 384, helping Symmachus in an unspecified capacity.117 He may have been involved in communications between Milan and Trier. A Spaniard by the name of Basilius, who did not follow Theodosius to Constantinople, reached the office of the comes sacrarum largitionum in 382–3.118 In the late 380s, a trio of Gallic brothers, Florentinus, Minervius and Protadius, demonstrated the potential for success in Italy and their ability to assimilate Italian aristocratic culture.119 By the beginning of the fifth century a son of another Gallic émigré regarded Rome as his true home and expressed much sorrow at the prospect of returning to his ancestral home in Gaul.120 Physical mobility, then, precisely what Ausonius lacked, was an essential requirement for promotion and for the maintenance of a viable network of supporters. Those who remained in Gaul found themselves faced with yet another dilemma in the 380s—whether to pursue a court career under the auspices of a usurper. Success was possible as the example of Flavius Euodius shows. He appears from nowhere in the chair of the Gallic praetorian prefecture in 385–6 and as consul in 386.121 Despite the attraction of such a meteoric rise, there were obvious 139


hazards in tying one’s fortune to that of an illegal ruler. After his consulship Euodius vanishes from the annals and his subsequent fate is unknown. When Gratian left Gaul he was open to influences other than Ausonius’. More forceful personalities, like Ambrose, now entered the stage of imperial politics. The charismatic bishop of Milan was certainly not one to waste such a precious opportunity of gaining influence at court and had already bestowed on the pious youth his treatise on dogma.122 Members of the senatorial aristocracy also promptly exploited the new situation. Ausonius’ influence in Italy had been largely dependent on the appointments that he had been able to engineer. By 382 the senator Valerius Severus was PUR, and at the end of the year another Roman aristocrat, Anicius Auchenius Bassus, took his place. By the end of 383 the prefecture of Italy was once again in the hands of Petronius Probus who, as Ammianus noted, was perennially in office. 123 All Ausonian appointees, upon reaching the end of their term, were replaced from Milan. When Gratian died Ausonius lost all influence at the imperial court of his successor Valentinian I I. Even his most enduring Italian contact Symmachus ended his voluminous correspondence by the early 380s.124 The careers of Ausonius’ Gallic protégés followed their patron’s into oblivion and they retired to their estates to indulge in the gentlemanly pursuit of leisure. After Siburius (PPG in 379) Gallic names cease to feature for a while on the list of the Gallic prefecture. Associates like Proculus Gregorius and the Syagrii disappeared from politics for good during the early 380s. Ausonius’ last political appearance can be dated to 383.125 Between 379 and 383 he may have been commuting between Bordeaux and Trier in the vain expectation of Gratian’s return to Gaul, but effectively his consulship marked the end of his political career.126 How important was Ausonius as a politician? Indeed, how important were civilian dignitaries generally in an age dominated by soldier-emperors and the increasingly powerful military aristocracy? To secure a lasting power structure within the fabric of late Roman imperial politics one had to take account of several crucial factors. Three of the most important were the army, the church and the senatorial aristocracy. Ausonius had limited contact with the last but almost none at all with the other two. The strong man of Gratian’s regime, Merobaudes (consul 377 and 383), a supporter of Remigius and Romanus, had probably little sympathy with either Ausonius or 140

COU RT OF G RATIAN

his son, who had exposed Romanus’ misconduct. His influence on Gratian (and over the army, one may add) was significant and may often have clashed with that of the Gallic minister.127 The affairs of the church, in Gaul and elsewhere in the west, remained outside the orbit of Ausonian interests. He never became a patron of saints or a major contributor to ecclesiastical projects. Ausonius’ efflorescence and eventual demise stand in contrast to the lasting power-construct of the Roman senatorial aristocracy in the late empire. Based on continuous accumulation of wealth, longterm alliances and the authority conferred by office, the senators of Rome managed to exploit the emperor’s absence in the same way as they exploited his presence. Ausonius’ Gallic supporters rose to eminence with limited provincial experience and lacking the farflung connections of their Italian counterparts. To retain their initial advantage, time and uninterrupted imperial support were necessary. Gratian’s move to Italy and his subsequent murder therefore unexpectedly but decisively destroyed the efforts of the nascent fourthcentury Gallic aristocracy to consolidate its achievements. The relocation of the court to Italy removed the one essential power base from which they could have furthered their position. Despite its brevity the brilliance of the Ausonian phenomenon did have a lasting effect. For the first time since the Gallic empire of the third century a significant number of Gauls had filled the most important civilian offices in the empire without interruption for almost eight years. Ausonius’ prominence and presence at the court supplied a golden opportunity for local aristocrats to add the lustre of office in the imperial administration to their recently acquired wealth and reputation. His brief ascendancy at court signalled the appearance of a significant number of Gallic nobles who, but for his patronage, would have remained influential local aristocrats without the experience or added prestige of the imperial administration. Their dominant presence at the Treveran court signalled a stage of maturity which could have been delayed had Ausonius not been there to open doors readily and widely.

141

8 CONCLUSION

Before the age of Ausonius the quest for a Gallic aristocracy in the later empire has to rely on a string of disconnected and haphazard testimonies. Wealth, rank and office, the essential criteria of an élite, led separate existences with only a few traces of interdependence before the middle of the fourth century. By then, a class of social and economic distinction apparently reached a mature enough development to seek an extension of status through office-holding. Because of the central government’s traditionally discreet attitude to the employment of Gauls in the imperial bureaucracy, the first Gallic attempts to enter the political arena had to be accomplished through a back door during the reigns of usurpers. When Julian resided in Gaul, the ambitions of local notables, as well as of parvenus, could at last be realised. Julian—first Caesar, then usurper and finally emperor—needed support and was ready to offer the usual reward of office. Accordingly, records of office-holding show a number of Gauls who reached a position of eminence under Julian. None is known, however, to have come from a securely established, aristocratic background. In the course of the first half of the century, there are also few indications of the type and scope of wealth that entitled one to senatorial status. A bond can be forged between the economic recovery of some Gallic urban centres and the rise of a new and affluent municipal aristocracy. A study of Ausonius’ city, family, property and professional milieu, therefore, provides a unique insight into the genesis of an aristocracy in late Roman Gaul within a specific urban background. In Bordeaux, recent archaeological excavations have thrown new light on the extent of urban economic activities. They show a city with a vibrant economy based on its advantageous commercial location. It was also a melting pot for 142

CONCLU SION

immigrants from all over Aquitania among whom Ausonius’ family constitutes the best-known example. Through continuous employment of talent, the choice of the right profession and prudent marital alliances, new immigrants like the Ausonii and the Arborii ranked amongst the leading families of the region within half a century. The importance of choosing a profession can be clearly seen in a survey of Ausonius’ school colleagues at Bordeaux. Their backgrounds differed as widely as did their professional success. Among them many tried to improve their lot through physical mobility and marriage. Some were lucky enough to teach pupils whose relatives were in a position to confer significant favours. A few gained ‘international’ fame in the realm of education. One or two held useful appointments in the imperial bureaucracy which enabled them to retire into the lap of luxury, perhaps with senatorial status. In one case, affinity with a most illustrious Italian clan was (falsely) claimed on the basis of nomenclature and property. Education, then, particularly for men of modest background, was certainly one avenue to a career in the imperial administration and a useful means of social and economic ascent. When the emperor Valentinian looked for a tutor for his son and heir he turned to Bordeaux and summoned one of the city’s betterknown citizens and teachers to the court. On the verge of retirement, the life of Ausonius experienced a sharp turn. At the Treveran court the Bordelais aristocrat learnt of imperial politics at first hand and entertained his employer with spectacular manifestations of his poetic talent. Between singing the praises of the Moselle and of Eros, Ausonius prepared his entry into the highest ranks of the administrative hierarchy. A few months before Valentinian died his patient scheming was rewarded when he was appointed quaestor in charge of legislation. The elevation of the young Gratian gave his old tutor the chance to place many relatives and friends in key positions in the administration. Ausonius’ own rapid rise from the quaestorship through the praetorian prefecture to the consulship symbolises the bright fortunes of the Gauls under Gratian. At the height of his career Ausonius acknowledged a lasting debt to the special tie of close affection between him and his emperor. He also admitted that the path to power and prestige led not only through loyal service in the bureaucracy, but also through social rank and military experience. His own poor relations with both the senatorial aristocracy and the 143


army he failed to mention. The former channelled their opposition to the Gallic domination at court through the influential Anicii. The power of the generals was unaffected since their services were indispensable to an emperor and their preferential treatment was thus secured. The influence of these two political forces eventually combined to stunt Ausonius’ ascendancy. It is difficult to estimate the importance and efficacy of Ausonius’ political phase. His prompt manoeuvres after the death of Valentinian show a certain astuteness and a determined effort to exploit the turn in events as fast as possible. Throughout the reign of Gratian relatives and friends continued to fill the highest ranks of the imperial administration—but their basis of power was limited. It depended on the exceptional imperial favours showered on one man, and on the relative stability of the empire. The unexpected death of Valens brought to the imperial throne in the east a westerner who drew support from the western court and attracted former supporters of Ausonius to Constantinople. In global imperial terms, the influence of Ausonius lasted as long as he was present at the court and as long as Gratian was in power. In Gallic terms, however, the unparalleled opportunities which the era of Ausonius had offered to fellow Gauls had far-reaching consequences. The presence of a Bordelais aristocrat at court encouraged other Gauls from a similar background to seek government employment, either as an extension of their local standing or as a springboard to inclusion in the ranks of the aristocracy. Without Ausonius the appearance of this aristocracy on the political stage would have been delayed. Perhaps the real test of a person’s importance in imperial politics is his subsequent fate. The murder of one’s patron and the murderer’s subsequent establishment of a nearby court render the outcome all the more poignant. Magnus Maximus’ elimination of Gratian and establishment of a court at Trier was exactly the blow that Ausonius had to face. Too old to move to Italy and to ingratiate himself with Valentinian II, he was allowed to retire to a graceful life in Aquitania.1 It is possible to argue, of course, that rulers, whether usurpers or legitimate emperors, did not commonly murder the supporters of a previous regime. The examples of Theodosius the elder after the death of Valentinian, and of Rufinus after the death of Theodosius the emperor point, however, to the very real possibility of a violent reaction. Events in the 350s showed local notables in Gaul that it was 144

CONCLU SION

prudent in sensitive situations to express support for the nearest contender. After all, Gauls had always appreciated the presence of royalty in their land. This attitude explains, in part at least, the relative ease with which Magnus Maximus, a usurper in 383 and the successor of Gratian, gained Gallic support in addition to the indispensable loyalty of the army.2 His eager Catholicism found a ready echo in the breasts of the Gallic bishops, and it probably also helped him gain recognition from the eastern court.3 Maximus’ regime was praised, albeit with some reservation, by one Aquitanian noble, Sulpicius Severus. 4 Gallic expressions of protest against Maximus were only uttered when he was safely out of the way for good. A school colleague of Ausonius, Pacatus, did his best to paint the deceased emperor in dark and sombre hues.5 The usurper’s elevation gave Gauls who did not belong to the circle of Ausonius a chance to enter or re-enter government service and so gain wealth through high office. Sextius Rusticus Iulianus, magister memoriae in 367 and proconsul Africae in 371–3, made a come-back as the urban prefect at Rome in 387. This was a natural if delayed conclusion to his earlier career.6 After Rusticus’ death his son, who had been born before his father joined the senatorial order, entered the Roman senate under the auspices of Symmachus. 7 Claudius Lupicinus was another beneficiary of Maximus’ regime. He was appointed (some time between 383 and 388) governor of the newly created province of Maxima Senonia (formerly part of Lugdunensis). He was also acknowledged as a provincial patron by three cities in his territory, Sens, Auxerre and Orléans (CIL XIII 921). The inscription commemorating this honour was set up in Aquitania near Agen, south-east of Bordeaux, perhaps on Lupicinus’ estate.8 Both the location of the inscription and the rank of the man (vir clarissimus) associate Lupicinus with the Aquitanian aristocracy of the later fourth century. Any further promotion, however, was cut short by Maximus’ defeat.9 It is really only with Maximus, the last ‘Gallic’ emperor, that the era of Ausonius can be said to have reached an end. It had engineered a series of imperial administrative promotions which reestablished Gaul’s position as a major force in imperial politics. In the long run, the Ausonian phenomenon enabled the late Roman Gallic aristocracy, still in its formative stages by the third quarter of the fourth century, to reach maturity. Maximus’ rule, being centred on Gaul, delayed the province’s reincorporation into the western empire and provided Gauls with a 145


breathing space of five more years to pursue ambitions near home. From 388 onwards, with the court safely ensconced in its Italian residences and appointments decided in Milan, Ravenna and Constantinople, the issue of physical mobility was again raised. Ambitious Gauls had to choose between voluntary dislocation or limited advancement in Gaul. In the early 380s, Rufinus the Aquitanian had already headed east to Constantinople like other western supporters of Theodosius. Others, like an enterprising trio of brothers (Florentius, Minervius and Protadius), travelled the shorter distance to Italy. Between them the brothers occupied from 385 to 400 the offices of comes sacrarum largitionum, quaestor, and praefectus urbis. 10 Their accumulated offices echo the career patterns of Ausonius and his family. Following their active and successful careers, the brothers returned to their Gallic estates whence they occasionally emerged to visit influential friends in Rome. 11 Another Gallic success story at the end of the fourth century and the beginning of the fifth is that of Lachanius and his son Rutilius Namatianus. Both reached the prefecture of the city of Rome.12 The appearance of Gauls in key jobs in the imperial administration in Italy as late as 415 may indicate a lingering Gallic influence at the western court. It seems as though, in spite of the dislocation of the court, the houses of Valentinian and Theodosius continued to favour Gauls. Yet it is impossible to be certain whether the examples just quoted disclose a measure of continuity or represent isolated and exceptional cases. For the rest of the fifth century, with few exceptions (including a solitary Gallic aristocrat in the curule chair in 360), the central government reverted to preJulianic attitudes vis-à-vis the Gallic aristocracy.13 Offices whose jurisdiction extended to Rome or to Italy were once again reserved mostly for members of the Italian senatorial aristocracy. The one exception was the Gallic praetorian prefecture, an office continuously occupied by Gauls throughout the fifth century. Even if in several aspects Ausonius was no more than a smalltime politician with limited understanding of the issues pertaining to the management of an empire, his era was instrumental in the development of an aristocratic identity in late Roman Gaul. He opened wide doors which Julian had merely unlocked. His influence, short as it may have been in terms of the Roman senatorial aristocracy, lasted long enough to give the nascent Gallic nobility a sense of its own importance. Their subsequent exclusion 146

CONCLU SION

from offices which were considered the natural prerogative of the senatorial aristocracy had at least two lasting effects. One found its expression in the Gauls’ acceptance of new local rulers, even if of barbarian origin. We hear of very few dissenting Gallo-Roman voices in Visigothic Aquitania.14 On the other hand, fierce loyalty to the phantom of empire continued to stir the hearts of some nobles for whom the church offered what the state could no longer provide, namely power and authority.15

147

APPENDIX Revisions, editions and the dating of Ausonius’ works

Let me state at the beginning that I have no desire to plunge into the deep and murky waters of Ausonian textual criticism. Greater minds than mine have failed to produce acceptable solutions and it is hoped that the most recent venture of producing yet another edition (Green, The Works of Amonius, 1991) will prove conclusive. Yet I feel that it is important for the reader to be presented with a synopsis of the central issues. The problems connected with the transmission of the Ausonian corpus are notoriously difficult.1 They stemprimarily from the fact that the families of manuscripts so far established contain only a very small number of works in common. Even works which appear more than once were transmitted with varying lengths and readings. In addition, several works were attributed in the course of the Middle Ages to other authors and consequently included in their collections. There is now also evidence that some of Ausonius’ works have been lost.2 One unfortunate result of all this is the lack of a single system of numbering in modern editions of Ausonius’ works. Thus Schenkl, Peiper, Pastorino, Prete and Green have assigned a different number to the same work. A table of concordance is given on p. 165 and in the text I have deliberately referred to works by their title rather than by an editorial number. Where numbers are used to mark the internal divisions of a work, I have followed Peiper, not out of personal preference but because Evelyn White’s Loeb translation of Ausonius, by far the most accessible to students, follows this numbering. Of the families so far established, the one represented by V (Voss. Lat. F 111, Leiden) provides a logical order of the works, starting with autobiographical poems, followed by those of an historical and erudite character, and finishing with the letters and 148

AP PE NDIX

the epigrams. The manuscript was written in the ninth century and was discovered on the Ile Barbe at Lyon. It was fully reviewed and analysed by De la Ville de Mirmont in three volumes which make fascinating reading.3 Two important works are found only in this family: the Parentalia and the Professores. A typical representative of the second family, Z, is T (Voss. Lat. Q 107, Leiden).4 Although containing many interpolations, it is also the only one to transmit the Gratiarum Actio. The importance of the third group, the Excerpta, lies in its being the sole transmitter of the Mosella. The fourth group is represented by P (B N 8500) and H (London, B M 2613), descended from a manuscript of Verona (the Veronensis), now lost.5 Notable attempts have been made to retrace these families to ‘editions’ compiled by Ausonius himself or his near contemporaries. In his edition Peiper postulated the existence of three separate editions by Ausonius himself, with V as the longest and relatively most accurate. Its archetype would have been a collection of opera omnia. Seeck espoused the existence of only one Ausonian edition (Z) and another assembled after his death and serving as the archetype of the other families.6 Jachmann, like Peiper, traced V to an Ausonian original, and opposed the theory which traced two groups of manuscripts with wide divergences to different editions issued by Ausonius himself.7 In his 1978 edition Prete attempted to explain different readings of works which appear in more than one f family of manuscripts by stipulating the existence of several editions by Ausonius himself and a final posthumous edition of opera omnia which served as a source of various anthologies, each representing one of the existing families of manuscripts. My purpose here is merely to trace what may be called Ausonian working methods through listing references in his works which seem to me to bear on the process of the composition, revision and circulation. No further attempt, it must be emphasised, has been made to link such testimonies to the manuscripts or to trace manuscript variants back to Ausonius’ hand. In fact, my main interest lies in the dating of various works, and I have already indicated throughout the book that in some cases I differ considerably from hitherto accepted scholarly opinions. As a working assumption I have followed Peter White in distinguishing between the stages of composition and that of the dedicatory presentation.8 The following is not exhaustive.

149


WORKING METHODS, EDITIONS AND REVISIONS 1.

2.

3.

4.

Ausonius lectori, 39–40: hic ergo [or: ego] Ausonius: sed tu ne temne, quod ultro/patronum nostris te paro carminibus. (This is me, then. But you, my reader, do not slight my request to act as patron to my poems.) Carmina probably refers to a collection of several poems preceded by this introduction.9 This could have been the ‘edition’ hinted at in the letter of Theodosius (below, no. 3) or one identical with the ‘imperial’ collection which may have been published twice, once with a dedication to the emperor, and later with a general dedication. Ausonius Syagrio, 3: sic etiam nostro praefatus habebere libro (serve, then, as a preface to ‘our’ book). Here is another detached dedication to a man to whom none of the surviving works is dedicated. The use of the term liber is fairly rare. Ausonius usually prefers libellus when describing one of his works.10 When used, the term applied to a collection of poems like the Professores. If the scope of the work/s to which this dedication was attached cannot be recovered, the event (of the dedication) relates in all likelihood to Syagrius’ consulate in 382.11 Theodosius Augustus Ausonio parenti salutem. The emperor refers to two types of Ausonian scripta: quae olim mihi cognita et iam per tempus oblita rursum desidero, nonsolum ut quae sunt nota recolantur, sed etiam ut ea, quae fama celebri adiecta memorantur, accipiam. (Writings which I had once known but forgotten with the passage of time I wish to reread, now that they have been published, as well as those which rumour has added to the former.) By adiecta one can understand either a recent collection or a number of poems in separate circulation. It is unclear whether the later works circulated privately or as an official collection. The imperial letter was probably written during Theodosius’ longest stay in the west between 388 and 391, by which time at least one, and perhaps two collections of Ausonius’ works were in circulation. If this is the case, the imperial request may have galvanised Ausonius into assembling most of his literary output to date. Domino meo et omnium Theodosio Augusto Ausonius tuus. In his answer to Theodosius’ letter, Ausonius refers to the introduction of revisions (vv. 18–20): quis nolit Caesaris esse liber,/ ne ferat indignum vatem centumque lituras,/ mutandas semper deteriore nota. (What book 150

AP PE NDIX

5.

6.

would refuse to be Caesar’s own to avoid the hand of an unworthy poet and countless ever inferior corrections.) Unless these words are to be taken as captatio benevolentiae, they imply current rewriting. Moreover, the imperial collection or edition is called carmina or liber (vv. 18), both terms probably signifying a work of considerable length. Through the publication of the list of contents of the lost Verona codex we also know that the correspondence between Ausonius and Theodosius included, in addition to (3) and (4), another letter by the poet to the emperor written in prose.12 Perhaps this lost prose letter formed a prose preface to the imperial collection in addition to the verse letter here.13 Ausonius was rather fond of appending both prose and verse prefaces to the same work as seen in the dedicatory prefaces to the Parentalia, Bissula, Technopaegnion and the Cento. If not Ausonius’ idea, the hand of a later editor who juxtaposed what may have been originally two separate communications is not altogether unlikely.14 Herediolum. The brief prose introduction to this poem was written by a hand other than Ausonius’: cum de palatio post multos annos honoratissimus quippe iam consul redisset ad patriam, villulam quam pater reliquerat introgressus his versibus lusit Luciliano stilo.15 (When after many years he returned most honoured and a consul from the imperial palace to his home, he wrote in Lucilianic verse about the small property that his father had left him.) These words have usually been considered those of a later editor, perhaps Ausonius’ own son or grandson.16 The author of this introduction took the trouble to refer to style specifications as did the compiler of the list of contents of Ausonius’ works in the Veronensis.17 Someone clearly thought such clarification necessary (perhaps in view of the bewildering number of metres which Ausonius used) to ensure the reader’s comprehension and appreciation. Epicedion in patrem. This poem is preceded by a prose introduction to the reader which includes the words: imagini ipsius hi versus subscripti sunt neque minus in opusculorum meorum seriem relati. (These verses were written underneath his portrait and were also included in my collected works.) The preface is found only in V, which also transmits a longer version of the poem than the one in Z. One version of the poem, possibly the shorter, was composed soon 151


7.

8.

9.

after the death of Iulius Ausonius in 378 in conjunction with the first publication of the Parentalia (below, no. 7). A revised and expanded version was prepared, it seems to me, for the imperial collection sent to Theodosius c. 390.18 It was surely in Ausonius’ interest to assure the emperor of his disinterest in politics after the stormy days of Magnus Maximus in Gaul, particularly since our poet had been allowed to retire in style and to live in peace and luxury in a territory controlled by Theodosius’ enemy. Parentalia. The poem includes two prefaces, one in prose, the other in verse, both addressed to the general readership. It is difficult to decide whether they originally preceded different editions and were later juxtaposed, or whether Ausonius simply indulged himself in a display of versatility in prose and in verse. There is some overlap between the two in material, but the information they provide is complimentary. As it stands, the arrangement of the commemorating poems lacks apparent logic, although one may assume that relatives were added as they died out.19 In this light I would tend to assign to the Parentalia, as has been assumed for the Epicedion, two versions and two dates of publication. Commemoratio professorum Burdigalensium. A brief verse preface precedes the poems, which are followed by two concluding portions (coronis; poeta).20 Oneconcluding section is addressed to the reader; the other to the dead subjects of the poem. This is the only Ausonian work which ends with this sort of ‘conclusion’, perhaps yet again indicating two versions and two occasions of publication. The arrangement of the material may have been perceived along chronological lines but no firm theory can be advanced. Epitaphia. When the professorial poems were assembled Ausonius decided to append to them a series of heroic epitaphs as he explains in a prose preface: ad rem pertinere existimavi, ut vel vanum opusculum materiae congruentis absolverem et libello…[sc. Professores] Epitaphia subnecterem…heroum. (I deemed it appropriate to bring to completion this vain little work of suitable material on heroic epitaphs in order to append it to my work on the teachers of Bordeaux.) As both the title and the contents of the prose preface indicate, the heroic epitaphs were supposed to include only Trojan figures. But the Epitaphia extends to epitaphs on Diogenes, on ‘the happy man’, on Lucius, on a horse and even to some contemporary pieces based 152

AP PE NDIX

10.

11.

12.

on poems now in the Anthologia Palatina.21 One poem in honour of a favourite horse was written at the behest of an emperor (iussu Augusti equo admirabili), perhaps Gratian. The Epitaphia may have been originally conceived as a schoolroom companion to Homer.22 Years later when Ausonius was looking for a coda to his professorial tributes he added to the Trojan epitaphs a few more poems which had nothing whatsoever to do with either the original heroic epitaphs or, for that matter, with the teachers of Bordeaux. The haphazard nature of the collection may also indicate a later editorial hand. Eclogarum liber.23 A verse dedication to Pacatus heads the collection known as the Eclogues. The contents of the dedication imply that Ausonius expected a few chosen readers to suggest if not carry out revisions and emendations (vv. 17–18: ignoscenda teget, probata tradet,/post hunc iudicium timete nullum). Pacatus was similarly honoured in the Ludus (below, no. 13). Evelyn White regards these lines as a polite farce.24 As trite as the words sound, revisions, whether initiated by the author himself or by tactful friends, were surely introduced. Bissula. The four surviving brief poems on Bissula, a pretty German blonde, are prefaced by no less than three introductory pieces. One is a prose letter to Paulus who had ‘forced’ Ausonius to rescue Bissula from just oblivion (poematia… rudia et incohata ad domesticae solacium cantilenae, cum sine metu et arcana securitate fruerentur, proferre ad lucem caligantia coegisti). Another, this time in verse, is also dedicated to Paulus and a third verse preface is addressed to the general readership of the poems. The juxtaposition of two dedications to the same person raises two possible solutions: either they were simultaneously composed and appended upon dispatch, or the prose letter heralded the sending of the Bissula while the verse dedications accompanied the poems. If the latter is plausible it would indicate the hand of a later editor who put the two together. Be that as it may, there is a clear chronological gap between the dates of the original composition and its dedication to Paulus. The general address to the reader indicates a stage of formal circulation when such an apology was deemed necessary. Technopaegnion. This collection of poems on various school topics was dedicated at least twice, once to Pacatus (found only in V), 153


13.

14.

the second time to Paulinus (found in Z alone), both dedications being in prose.25 For the second (Ausonius Paulino) there is no lemma (Schenkl) and the title was reconstructed by the editors of early printed editions. Moreover, each dedication was transmitted by a different manuscript family. A third preface (no. 4: praefatio monosyllabarum tantum in fine positarum (Peiper) or versus monosyllabis terminati exordio libero praefatio (Schenkl and Pastorino), is a composite of prose and verse and was once more addressed to Pacatus. Two stages of composition may be envisaged.26 The bulk of the collection, which includes poems ending with a monosyllable, was first gathered and prefaced with dedications to Pacatus. At the second stage, poems with lines beginning and ending with a monosyllable were written for Paulinus, Ausonius’ favourite pupil, and dedicated to him. Later, it was deemed advisable to combine all the didactic poems and the dedications were simply juxtaposed without attention to logic or to order. The last poem in the collection, the so-called Grammaticomastix, was apparently dedicated twice, once to Pacatus (V) and once to Paulinus (Z).27 It was easy enough to alter the name and send the poem to either. Ludus Septem Sapientum. The poem contains a prefatory verse letter addressed to Pacatus who is given a free rein to revise, change and emend. (Vv. 1–4: ignoscenda istaec an cognoscenda rearis,/adtento, Drepani, perlege iudicio./aequanimus fiam te iudice, sive legenda,/sive tegenda putes ca rmina, quae dedimus.)28 Whether or not Pacatus took the request seriously is immaterial. The ‘published’ version, transmitted by both V and P, presents significant variants. Caesares. The work consists of two main parts: monosticha, covering rulers from Caesar to Domitian and based on Suetonius; and tetrasticha, a series of short poems on emperors from Caesar to Heliogabalus, each with a brief preface. The first part was dedicated to Ausonius’ son Hesperius, possibly to help him to remember the duller episodes in Roman history.29 Strange as it may sound, Suetonius served as a useful source of verse compositions on historical subjects. Paulinus (of Nola) composed a highly praised poem on the kings of Rome based on Suetonius’ De Regibus (Ep. 23). It seems as though at least one poem in the present collection (De Ordine Imperatorum) was circulated separately.30 As it stands, 154

AP PE NDIX

15.

16.

17.

the Caesares is incomplete since the preface to the tetrasticha announces the inclusion of all emperors known to the poet. [libri de fastis] conclusio. A double dedication heads the remains of the so-called Fasti, one designating Hesperius as an addressee (Ausonius Hesperio filio sal.), the other Proculus Gregorius (consulari libro subiciendi quem ego ex cunctis consulibus unum coegi Gregorio ex praef.). The words of the dedication to Hesperius seem to designate him as the original recipient of the Fasti (v. 9: exemplum iam patris habes).31 One of the three surviving poems is dedicated to Proculus and probably meant to serve as a coda to the version addressed to him. The Veronian list of contents refers to a work entitled ad Hesperium filium concordie libri fastorum cum libris consularibus liber unus. Perhaps the Fasti, originally dedicated to Hesperius and terminating with Ausonius’ own consulate in 379, were later updated and rededicated to Gregorius who was a consular candidate in 383. A later editorial hand may have confused the issue and amalgamated the two dedications. Perhaps even Ausonius himself juxtaposed them. Griphus Ternarii Numeri. In a lengthy letter Ausonius informed Symmachus that the Griphus, here dedicated to him, had been written years before (latebat inter nugas meas libellus ignobilis). This is an indication of a significant time gap between the dates of composition and of formal dedication.32 The Griphus, as a matter of fact, had been circulated surreptitiously for some time. One result of this was the appearance of unauthorised versions which, according to Ausonius, were full of errors. (Igitur iste nugator libellus iam diu secreta quidem, sed vulgi lectione laceratus perveniet tandem in manus tuas.) Ausonius must have welcomed the opportunity to circulate a formally approved copy. Cento Nuptialis. The Cento, written at the specific behest of the emperor Valentinian, is preceded by a lengthy prose letter addressed to Paulus, the recipient of the Bissula. He and Ausonius obviously shared a taste for light-hearted literary entertainment. Originally, the Cento bore a verse dedication to Valentinian and Gratian (praefatio). Perhaps on that occasion the poem was recited at the court.33 When years later it was sent to Paulus, Ausonius prefaced the whole with a lengthy explanation about the genre. It is apparent that the juxtaposition of two dedications, each in a different style 155


18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

and to a different dedicatee, did not bother Ausonius in the least. Indeed, the prose letter gave him the opportunity to drop names and describe the circumstances of the Cento’s composition. Ep. 1 (Peiper), Symmachus Ausonio. The letter reflects contemporary attitudes to the circulation and ‘publication’ of literary works. According to Symmachus, once a work left the author’s hands it became a matter of public property (cum semel a te profectum carmen est, ius omne posuisti: oratio publicata res libera est, echoing Horace). This may have been a response to Ausonius’ complaint about the fate of works which circulated without his authority (above, no. 16). Ep. 2 (Peiper; 17 Schenkl), Ausonius Symmacho. Ausonius refers to a work of his which had been in circulation without his approval but which had luckily fallen into the hands of friends. (Sat est unius erroris quod aliquid meorum me paenitente vulgatum est, quod bona fortuna in manus amicorum incidit.) The work thereby avoided the fate of the Griphus (above, no. 16). Perhaps the work in question is the Mosella, which Symmachus knew through mutual acquaintances (Ep. 1.14, Callu). Ep. 7 (Peiper; 11 Schenkl), Rescriptum Paulo suo. A lengthy prose letter contains a reference to a request to send Paulus certain opuscula.34 The term may imply the pre-existence of an edition of Ausonius’ works or merely an intention to assemble an edition for the benefit of a literary and appreciative colleague. Perhaps Paulus had in mind a definitive edition of works previously dedicated to him. Instead of complying with the request, Ausonius sent Paulus verses which he had recited before. Ep. 12 (Peiper; 16 Schenkl), Ausonius Probo Praefecto Praetorio. An important letter consisting of a prose preface and a poem of 105 verses in which Ausonius promises the subject of his adulation, the redoubtable Sextus Petronius Probus, a work wholly dedicated to Probus’ career.35 (Fors fuat, ut si mihi vita suppetet, aliquid rerum tuarum quamvis incultus expoliam: quod tu etsi lectum non probes, scriptum boni consnles.) The promise remained unfulfilled like the one made in the Mosella (453 f.). It is curious that the letter was included in Ausonius’ collected works. Its inclusion, in spite of the apparent hostility between the two men, points to a late editorial hand and to a date after the death of both protagonists. Ep. 15 (Peiper; 7 Schenkl). Ausonius Theoni cum ei triginta ostrea grandia 156

AP PE NDIX

23.

quidem set tam pauca mississet. This letter contains references to Ausonian working methods and to the introduction of revisions. In view of his growing popularity, Ausonius sat down to revise older works and sent them to selected friends who would initiate wider circulation. According to the brief prose preface Ausonius had ‘fished’ out a poem which he had written in his youth on oysters and sent a revised version to Theon by way of retribution for the latter’s silence (inventa inter tineas epistula vetere, quam de ostreis et musculis adfectata obscuritate condideram, quae adulescens temere fuderam, iam senior retractavi). Many years, then, elapsed between the date of the original composition and its dedication. Ep. 20 (Peiper; 2 Schenkl). The letter has a lemma written in the third person which explains the circumstances of its composition. (Pater ad filium cum temporibus tyrannicis ipse Treveris remansisset et filius ad patriam [a patre, Schenkl] profectus esset. hoc incohatum neque inpletum sic de liturariis scriptum.) This ‘editorial note’ (Evelyn White II. 66) has led some to suppose that Hesperius, Ausonius’ son and the addressee of several poems, was the editor of a posthumous edition of his father’s works. In itself this lemma is insufficient to substantiate such an hypothesis. Later editorial intention is, however, an accepted theory. The family probably kept copies of Ausonius’ correspondence and exercised its own judgement regarding exclusion and inclusion. One such editorial decision resulted in the preservation of very few letters from Ausonius to Symmachus. By contrast, Symmachus’ editors preserved some thirty letters from their author to his Gallic correspondent.

What can be surmised from the preceding list about the working methods of Ausonius? In the first place, a distinction must be made between the time of composition and the date when a work was put into formal circulation, usually with a dedication to an individual or the reader. Secondly, it is possible to discern, at times, stages of composition, namely parts composed at different times. Unfortunately it is not always possible to determine their precise chronology. Often the only chronological indication included is a terminus ante quem supplied by the dedication. Yet any consideration of late additions must take into account the structure and the concept of the work as a whole. Revisions, very much in the modern sense of the word, were 157


introduced when an old poem was ‘brushed up’ before circulation. Such revisions could have been the work of Ausonius himself and also perhaps the result of the friendly suggestions of some addressees. Some works were revised, altered or expanded as the occasion arose or poetic fancy dictated. From the information gathered above it is impossible to postulate how many ‘editions’ were ‘issued’ by Ausonius himself and what was the scope of such an undertaking. For example, the ‘edition’ sent to the emperor Theodosius may have included all the works which had been in circulation until the year 390. At least one posthumous edition can be envisaged. It is perhaps necessary to refer here to Seeck’s well-known hypothesis regarding the oratio matutina of the Ephemeris.36 Seeck has maintained that the prayer was composed in several stages, each eventually reflected in different parts of the manuscript transmission. The previous survey indicates that such a process is not altogether implausible, but whether or not it applied to the oratio remains conjectural. The important point for our purpose is that the unity of the text as it stands cannot be taken for granted. LOCATIONS AND DATES Ausonius’ extant works are usually divided into three major groups based on the place and time of composition: the school period at Bordeaux; the court period at Trier; and the period of retirement back in Aquitania. In what follows I have listed chronological and topographical indications in an attempt to give some idea of the internal chronological progression of the works. Bordeaux (c. 330 to 366/7) 1.

2.

The earliest datable piece seems to be a letter from Ausonius to his father (Ep. 19 Peiper; 1 Schenkl) entitled Ausonius ad patrem de suscepto filio. It was written on the occasion of the birth of his son c. 330. Also belonging to an early date are the epigrams to Sabina, his wife (40; 53–5, Peiper), which were probably written between 330 and 340. Several poems with a marked didactic tone and purpose were first conceived in the schoolroom. Contrary to editors of Ausonius, I prefer to see them as original products of Ausonius’ teaching career rather than of aristocratic leisure.37 Nor do I regard as a mere coincidence the fact that all the poems were eventually dedicated 158

AP PE NDIX

3.

to school colleagues or pupils. These poems helped to establish his reputation as a teacher and their renown must have weighed in his favour when Valentinian was looking for a tutor. They include the Lndus, the Eclogues, and the Technopaegnion, all three dedicated to the rhetor Pacatus.38 The last was dedicated to an ex-pupil, Paulinus (of Nola). To this period also belong the various compositions on Roman history, such as the original Caesares and also the Epitaphia.39 Ordo Urbium Nobilium has usually been considered a product of Ausonius’ leisurely retirement in Aquitania after 383. Two references in the poem seem at first to support a late date. In the entry on the Italian city of Aquileia, Ausonius refers to the defeat and death of Magnus Maximus in 388. Yet, he also specifies that the city had not originally been featured in the collection and was only added as an afterthought when Aquileia became the scene of Magnus Maximus’ death in 388. The last two verses of the entry devoted to Bordeaux refer to Ausonius’ consulship in 379 and, like the Aquileian entry, appear as an afterthought. Clearly, the two events, Ausonius’ own consulship and the death of Gratian’s murderer, justified later additions. A closer look at the Ordo points to a date around 350. From the descriptions of Milan and Trier it is difficult to determine which was the imperial capital at the original time of composition: Milan, the imperial residence since the third century, is described as boasting of palatinae arces; Trier, another imperial residence since the previous century, is called Trevericae urbis solium. Trier is listed in the sixth place; Milan in the seventh, after Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria and Carthage. The order seems to reflect historical rather than contemporary importance. It is noteworthy that in the calendar of 354 Trier is featured as one of the four most important cities in the empire with Rome, Constantinople and Alexandria. It is possible, then, that Ausonius’ catalogue dates to before 354. More remarkably, Constantinople is designated by Ausonius in the Ordo as the new rival of Rome, but nowhere is it fully acknowledged as an imperial capital. No city outside Gaul seems to have been personally familiar to the author.40 The apparent lack of clear criteria for inclusion and exclusion may be explained by the poem’s probable original function as an illustration to a literary text.41 The inclusion of no less than five Gallic cities can feasibly be attributed to sheer local pride. 159


4.

5.

The Ordo has been transmitted in two versions (T and V/P) which differ from each other in both length and internal order. Among the omissions of T are Rome, Antioch and Alexandria, Aquileia and Toulouse. The other four Gallic cities feature in both families. The shorter version possibly represents an earlier one. The longer version may have been assembled in the late 380s, perhaps in conjunction with Theodosius’ request to receive an edition of Ausonius’ works. Professores. Like the Ordo, the professorial poems have been traditionally regarded as a product of aristocratic leisure. Once again this assumption is based on a single reference to a date in the 380s (Prof. 5.36–8 referring rather obliquely to the execution of the widow of Delphidius). None of the other chronological indications in the poem dates to later than 365, (assuming that the unnamed usurper of Delphidius is Procopius). Other datable information refers to the Gallic sojourn of Julian (357–61; 2.20–2) and to earlier members of the imperial house like Constantine’s half-brothers who spent some time in Gaul in the late 320s (16.10– 12; 17.9–11). With two exceptions (Herculanus and Censorius, 11 and 14), not a single one of those commemorated belonged to the generation after that of Ausonius. Originally, the cut-off point may well have been Ausonius’ departure from Bordeaux for Trier c. 366/7, certainly a momentous turning point in his life. Had the work been composed in the late 380s members of a younger generation would have been included. Moreover, the work finally chosen to accompany the formal publication of the Professores in the late 380s, the Epitaphia Heroum, bears an original didactic stamp. I would, therefore, put the date of the first professorial collection in the late 360s, when the poems served the admirable and timely purpose of bidding farewell to Bordeaux and its schools. Some twenty years later, having been briefly reworked, it was put into circulation. The Parentalia, like its kindred poem the Professores, has also been assigned to the late 380s on the basis of a single reference to Ausonius’ consulship in 379 (4.31–2). With the exception of Iulius Ausonius who heads the collection and who died in 378, no other date of either birth or death can be established past the 360s. If the publication of the Parentalia (as it stands) was conceived to complement both the Epicedion of 378–9 and the

160

AP PE NDIX

Gratiarum Actio of 379, it seems feasible that it was started at a time of separation, such as Ausonius’ move from Bordeaux to Trier in 366/7.

Trier (366/7 to 380/3) 6.

7.

The court period of Ausonius can be divided into works produced during the reign of Valentinian I and those written under Gratian. Versus Paschales is usually considered to be the first ‘imperial’ work. It has been dated to the year 368, the second consulship of Valentinian and Valens, based on the interpretation of the poem’s title, versus paschales proco dicti. The abbreviation proco has been variously completed as pro caesare, pro consulibus, pro Augusto, and even emended to Probo and prosodici.42 Yet the most that can be said with certainty about the date of the Easter verses is that the terminus post quem is 367, Gratian’s elevation to the rank of Augustus (v. 25), and that the terminus arte quem is 373, the fourth consulship of Valentinian and Valens. Elsewhere I have tried to show that the Mosella may be regarded as the earliest datable specimen of Ausonius’ court poetry.43 To recap briefly: (a) vv. 418 f. refer to common victories of Valentinian I and Gratian. No specific reference to one battle is given and the iuncti triumphi (v. 422) must have preceded Solicinium in 368, the only important and major clash between the Roman army and the Alamanni during the reign of Valentinian. (b) The problematic verses (409 f.) which mention a highly ranked individual cannot refer to a consul, as has usually been assumed, or even to Probus (consul 371). Neither the presumed similarities between the letter written to that dignitary (Ep. 12 Peiper) nor the terminology employed in the Mosella support this identification. (c) The last portion of the Mosella (438 f.) with its clear Vergilian echoes, refers to the consulship of Ausonius and to his retirement. Neither reference can be perceived within a Valentinianic context, and both must have been added at a later stage when Ausonius could claim ‘old ties of friendship in Belgicae’ (v. 439). Nor does it make sense to regard them as looking forward to a glorious future. It would have been presumptuous if not wildly imaginative to project a consulship for Ausonius at any time during the reign of Valentinian I. (d) Symmachus’ apparent ignorance of the poem which, according 161


8.

9.

10.

to my interpretation, had been written before he reached the court in 369, does not preclude an early date. He was equally unaware, it seems, of the Griphus, which was composed in 368 (in expeditione) and later dedicated to him. In short, while the traditional date of 370/1 is not altogether unlikely, an earlier date explains better the historical background of the poem and its function. Cupido Cruciatus describes Ausonius’ poetic reaction to the painted walls of a palatial house in Trier and probably belongs to the period of early Treveran impressions c. 367–9. A later date is, however, plausible. Several other works belong to the reign of Valentinian I. These include the Cento, written at the specific behest of the emperor; the Bissula, originally composed in honour of Ausonius’ Germanic mistress; and the Griphus, composed during the brief period in which Ausonius accompanied Valentinian and Gratian to the Rhine frontier in 367/8. Of the letters, Ep. 12 (Peiper) to Probus predates his consulate in 371, since the lemma reads Ausonius Probo Praefecto Praetorio. Moreover, the poem enclosed in the letter to Probus mentions the consulship as an event in the near future (vv. 25–6: nam primus e cunctis erit/consul, secundus pnncipici). Probus had been praetorian prefect since 365 and any date between the arrival of Ausonius at court (366/7) and Probus’ consulship (370/1) is plausible. I would opt for a date shortly after Ausonius’ arrival when the poet would have attempted to ingratiate himself with the allpowerful senator. The last piece to be written during Valentinian’s lifetime is the letter to Ursulus, a Treveran grammarian. It dates to the last months of 375 when Ausonius held the office of quaestor (Ep. 13.3 Peiper; 18 Schenkl). Between 367 and 375 Ausonius began to correspond with Theon of Médoc, as the first letter of Ausonius (Ep. 14 Peiper) which refers to his tutorship (v. 95: regio magistro) attests. After 370 he also corresponded with some regularity with Symmachus. The bulk of this exchange of letters belongs, however, to the early years of Gratian (376–80). The consulship of Ausonius in 379 generated a number of works including prayers such as the Precationes and the Oratio (if the latter is indeed an Ausonian work).44 The Fasti seems to have been another product of the same jubilant year. As already indicated I would add a version of the Parentalia to this year, not to mention of course the Gratiarum Actio.

162

AP PE NDIX

11.

12.

13.

The Epicedion commemorates the death of Iulius Ausonius in 378. It has been transmitted in two versions which seemingly denote two dates of composition—the first just after the sad event and the second in conjunction with an edition dedicated to Theodosius (above, no. 6, pp. 151–2). Since the lemma to Ep. 20 (Peiper, no. 23, p. 157) indicates a date around 383, when Magnus Maximus established his court in Trier, one needs to assume that between 379 and 383, when Ausonius no longer held any office, he commuted between Bordeaux and the capital. We know from the Eucharisticon of his grandson Paulinus of Pella that in 379 the poet spent some time at Bordeaux. The lemma mentions his presence in Trier. Liber Protrepticus (Ep. 22 Peiper; 13 Schenkl), ostensibly written for a grandson, is prefaced by a prose letter to Hesperius, Ausonius’ son and his grandson’s uncle. It contains references to the careers of various members of Ausonius’ family, like the proconsulship of Thalassius in 378 (43) and the prefecture of Hesperius in the same year (92). The consulship is mentioned in all the transmitted texts and dates this exhortation to 379 or immediately thereafter. Aquitania (383 to c. 395)

14.

15.

16.

Herediolum, to judge by its lemma, was composed after Ausonius returned home. Indeed the poem reads as a greeting, prompted by a long-awaited return to a beloved place. In a playful letter to Axius Paulus (Ep. 5 Peiper; 9 Schenkl) Ausonius ref ers to his old age as an unsuitable time to indulge in frivolous compositions (11–12: quamvis curam non ista senilem/solliritent frugique viro dignanda putentur). The poet’s period of retirement therefore seems an appropriate dating and this is confirmed by a reference to the Theodosian general Promotus (vv. 39–40), whose fame belongs to the years 388 to 392 (Symm. Ep. 3, 74–80). Some controversy exists concerning the date of the Epkemeris, a collection of poems describing the poet’s daily routine. Above all, the date of oratio matutina (Eph. 3) and its stages of composition or publication have been hotly debated for a century. Pastorino has assigned two different dates to the Ephemeris and the oratio, distinguishing two editions of the latter. Schenkl and Peiper support an early date preceding the court period. Evelyn White prefers a date during the Aquitanian retirement after 383. The poem does not disclose its place of composition or where the events described 163


17.

18.

19.

20.

took place. It tells of a typical aristocratic leisurely routine, hardly the type commonly associated with academics. A late date is certainly preferable. The entire correspondence with Paulinus of Nola dates to this last period and forms an important point of departure for any discussion of the period. In a detailed analysis, Desmulliez assigned them to the early 390s.45 All the prefaces addressed to Pacatus (Eclogues, Techno-paegnion, Ludus) were written after 389, when the Gallic panegyrist of Theodosius was rewarded with the proconsulship of Africa. Although Ausonius and Pacatus may have known each other for a while before that date, the dedications were written after the latter’s appointment as proconsul, since he is thus addressed in them. The exchange of letters with the emperor Theodosius, followed by an edition of Ausonius’ collected works, can be assigned to the years 388–91, Theodosius’ longest stay in the west and a period of relative calm between the suppression of the usurpation of Maximus and the murder of Valentinian II. Of the lost works of Ausonius, most intriguing are those relating to a comparison of the Hebrew and the Athenian calendars and to the meaning of Hebrew names (Prete XXVI), if indeed they are Ausonian compositions. These may have been composed during the leisure period in Aquitania. During the same time Ausonius’ interest in history found an outlet in several historical compositions which may have originally been conceived in the schoolroom, but which were finally written down during his retirement.46

164

CONCORDANCE OF THE NUMBERS GIVEN BY EACH EDITOR TO INDIVIDUAL WORKS (The proposed date of the work appears in brackets.)

165

NOTES

1 INTRODUCTION 1 R.Herzog, ed., Handbuch der lateinischen Literatur der Antike 5 (1989), 268–308 and C.-M.Ternes, ‘Ausone. Bibliographie objective et subjective’, Bulletin des antiquites luxembourgeoises 14 (1983), 3–126, for substantial bibliographies. 2 I have dispensed with a narrative of the historical context. A.Demandt, Die Spätantike (Munich 1989) provides an up-to-date account of major developments and institutions, although A.H.M.Jones, The Later Roman Empire (Oxford 1964) remains valuable. Since J.Matthews, Western Aristocracies and Imperial Court 364–425 (Oxford 1975), late Roman aristocracy has become a topic of much discussion, recently enlarged upon by R.MacMullen, Corruption and the Decline of Rome (New Haven and London 1988). The military threats of the period and Roman responses have been admirably treated by E.Demougeot in her series La formation de l’Europe et les invasions barbares (Paris 1979+). Late Roman economy has been treated by A.Bernardi, ‘Tendenze di fondo nell’economia del tardo impero romano’, Studia Ghisleriana 3 (1961), 257–321, an unjustly neglected article. For late Roman Gaul the two volumes (VII and VIII) of C.Jullian, Histoire de la Gaule (repr. Brussels 1964), supply a good general introduction. Southern Gaul has recently received another general overview by R.Klein, ‘Das Südliche Gallien in spätantiker Seit’, Gymnasium 98 (1991), 352–80. Gallic leadership has been discussed in terms of community structures and concerns, esp. in religious domains by R.Van Dam, Leadership and Community in Late Antique Gaul (Berkeley 1985); and for the Christianisation of Gaul, E.Griffe, La Gaule chrétienne à l’époque romaine (Paris 1964-6) is still basic. 3 Date of birth is caiculated on the basis of: his father’s age (about 90) in 378, which puts the birth of Iulius Ausonius c. 290 (Epicedion 61; Parentalia 1.4); and the proximity in age of Ausonius and his father, implying that the father was c. 20 when his son was born (Ep. 19.13–16 Peiper). The point is not without significance for, on average, only five in ten fathers lived to see a son wed, let alone a host of grown-up grandchildren. B.Frier, ‘Roman Life Expectancy. The Pannonian Evidence’, Phoenix 37 (1983), 328–4, esp. 329 table 1; R.P.Saller, ‘Men’s 166

NOTE S TO PAG ES 2–5

4 5

6

7

8

9 10

11

Age at Marriage and its Consequences in the Roman Family’, CPh 82 (1987), 21–34. L.A.A.Jouai, De magistraat Ausonius (Nijmegen 1938), 1 f.; A.D.Booth, ‘The Academic Career of Ausonius’, Phoenix 36 (1982), 329 n. 4. Ausonius’ date of death is calculated on the basis of his last dateable works, the letters written to Paulinus (of Nola) in the early 390s. P.Fabre, Essai sur la chronologie de l‘oeuvre de Saint Paulin de Nole (Paris 1948), 101, dates the last communications to 393/4; J.Desmulliez, ‘Paulin de Nole. Etudes chronologiques’, Recherches Augustiniennes 20 (1985), 63, prefers 392/3. Whatever the case, Ausonius lived an unusually long life, particularly in view of the relatively low life expectancy calculated for Gaul in comparison with other provinces during earlier periods. See Frier, ‘Roman Life Expectancy’, 335, 341 tables 4 and 6. For Ausonius’ own summary of his career, Protrepticus (Ep. 22 Peiper), 89 f. R.P.H.Green, The Works of Ausonius (Oxford 1991), XXIV f. C.Jullian, Histoire de la Gaule romaine I–VIII (Paris 1920–6), VII 44 f., 319; VI I I 378 f. aptly recaptured by E.Birley apud Y.Burnand, ‘Senatores romani ex provinciis Galliarum orti’, Tituli 5 (1982), 435–6 (= Epigrafia e ordine senatorio II). The year 260 is also adopted as a starting point by M.Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie 260– 527’, Francia 10 (1982), 531 f., an extension of Stroheker, below. K.F.Stroheker, Der senatorische Adel im spätantiken Gallien (Tüb-ingen 1948), 17, where the fourth-century aristocrats appear virtually ex nihilo as fully-fledged nobility. Matthews, Aristocracies, 350 f. J.F.Drinkwater, ‘Gallic Attitudes to the Roman Empire in the Fourth Century. Continuity or Change?’ in H.E.Herzig and R.Frei-Stolba, eds, Labor omnibus unus. Festschrift G.Walser (Stuttgart 1989), 136–53, esp. 142, for Ausonius as a parvenu of respectable curial but non-noble background who owed his good fortune to his professional ability. With Sidonius Apollinaris as a close second. On Ausonius’ family, C. Jullian, ‘Ausone et son temps’, RH 47 (1891), 241–66 and 48 (1892), 1–3 8; Jouai, Ausonius (n.1), 13–3 1; C.Favez, ‘Une famille galloromaine au 4e siècle’, MH 3 (1946), 118–31; R.Etienne, Bordeaux antique (Bordeaux 1962), 335–44, 362–72; and the introductions to the editions of Schenkl (1883), Peiper (1886, repr. 1976), and Pastorino (Turin 1971); see also Seeck’s introduction to the edition of Symmachus, MGH AA VI. M.K.Hopkins, ‘Social Mobility in the Later Roman Empire. The Evidence of Ausonius’, CQ 11 (1961), 239–49. D.Nellen, Viri Litterati. Gebildetes Beamtentum und spätrömisches Reich im Westen zwischen 284 und 395 n.Ch. (Bochum 1981), with a summary of results in tables on pp. 91–7 in which the family of Ausonius features prominently. The advantages of good education had been succinctly summarised by Symmachus: iter ad capessendos magistratus saepe litteris promovetur (Ep. 1.20, to Ausonius, of course). In 337 the death of Constantine was accompanied by a bloody coup d’état, in which potential rivals and their supporters were eliminated (Zosimus 11.40). The deaths of Julian in 363 and of Jovian in 364 167


prompted relatively calm transitions without outright bloodshed (Amm. 25.5; 26.1). The supporters of two mid-century usurpers in Gaul, Silvanus and Magnentius, were mercilessly punished (Amm. 14.5; 15.6). Of those who followed Procopius, some were executed in the wake of Procopius’ death (Amm. 26.10.1–2), while others were sent home to face trial (Amm. 26.10.6–8). Among the latter were two Gallic supporters who were accompanied on their journey from Constantinople by Procopius’ severed head. 12 Schenkl (MGH AA V.2 1883); Peiper (Teubner 1886); Pastorino (Turin 1971); Prete (Teubner 1978). The latter was reviewed by M.D.Reeve in Gnomon 52 (1980), 444–51. The most comprehensive review to date, however, is O.Seeck, Göttingische gelehrte Anzeigen 13 (1887) where Peiper’s edition comes under fire. Throughout I elected to refer to the edition of Peiper simply because it is the one used by Evelyn White in his English translation (Loeb 1919) which is readily available. I have endeavoured, however, to refer to individual works by their title rather than by number.

2 THE EMERGENCE OF A LATE ROMAN GALLIC ARISTOCRACY 1 J.F.Matthews, Western Aristocracies and Imperial Court 364–425 (Oxford 1975), with the illuminating remarks of P.Wormald, ‘The Decline of the Western Empire and the Survival of its Aristocracy’, JRS 66 (1976), 217–26. 2 T.D.Barnes, ‘Who were the Nobility of the Roman Empire?’ Phoenix 28 (1974), 444–9. But see the reservations of A.Chastagnol, ‘Le sénat dans l’oeuvre de Symmaque’, in F.Paschoud, ed., Colloque genevois sur Symmaque (Paris 1986), 77 who insists on a wide application of the term nobilitas. Even in the early empire it was often a matter of literary courtesy. R.P.Oliver, ‘Tacitean Nobilitas’, Illinois Classical Studies 3 (1978), 239–43. 3 R.S.Bagnall et al, Consuls of the Later Roman Empire (Atlanta 1987), 1–46. 4 J.-R.Palanque, Essai sur la préfecture du prétoire du Bas Empire (Paris 1933). 5 Alan Cameron, ‘Polyonomy in the Late Roman Aristocracy’, JRS 75 (1985), 178–82. W.Taegert, Claudius Claudianus Panegyricus dictus Olybrio et Probino consulibus (Munich 1988), 20 f. 6 R.MacMullen, Corruption and the Decline of Rome (New Haven and London 1988), 59; M.T.W.Arnheim, The Senatorial Aristocracy in the Later Roman Empire (Oxford 1972), passim. 7 Taegert, Claudius Claudianus, p. 19 n.1 for Anician bibliography. 8 P.Arsac, ‘La dignité sénatoriale au Bas Empire’, Revue historique de droit français et étranger 47 (1969), 217–18, 233–4; A.Chastagnol, ‘L’évolution de l’ordre senatorial aux IIIe et IVe siècles de notre ère’, RH 244 (1970), 305–14; idem, ‘Les modes de recrutement du sénat au IVe siècle 168


9

10

11

12

13 14

15

16

17 18 19

20 21

après J.-C.’, in Recherches sur les structures sociales dans l’antiquité classique (Colloque de Caen 1969) (Paris 1970), 187–211. A.H.M.Jones, ‘The Social Background of the Struggle between Paganism and Christianity’, in A.Momigliano, ed., The Conflict between Paganism and Christianity in the Fourth Century (Oxford 1963), 17–37. R.MacMullen, ‘Social Mobility in the Theodosian Code’, JRS 54 (1964), 49–53. Ep. I.52 to Praetextatus. A.H.M.Jones, The Later Roman Empire I (Oxford 1964, repr. in 2 vols 1973), 523 f., for a survey of the senatorial class. CTh 8.4.12; 7.12 (AD 372). A.Piganiol, L’empire chrétien 325–395, 2nd edn (Paris 1972), 381–6, 390–1; Arsac, ‘La dignité sénatoriale’, 198– 243. A.H.M.Jones, ‘The Caste System of the Later Roman Empire’, Eirene 8 (1970), 79–96, also in P.A.Brunt, ed., The Roman Economy. Studies in Ancient Economic and Administrative History (Oxford 1974), 396–418. Amm. 28.4.7–16. Gratiarum Actio 4.16: fecisti autem et facies alios quoque consules, piissime Gratiane, sed non et causa pari. viros gloriae militaris: habent enim tecum ut semper laboris, ita dignitatis plentmque consortium, virtutis quam honoris antiquiore collegio; viros nobilitatis antiquae: dantur enim multa nominibus et est stemma [Schenkl; fama, Peiper/ Evelyn White; Roma, Pastorino] pro merito; viros fide inclitos et officiis probatos. On the consulship in the later Roman empire, Bagnall et al., Consuls of the Later Roman Empire, 1 f. On the limits of accessibility to this office, M.Cesa and H.Sivan, ‘Alarico in Italia’, Historia 39 (1990), 361–74. Grat. Actio 4.16: quorum me etiamsi non secerno numero, tamen, quod ad honoris viam pertinet, ratione dispertio. See above, Ch. 4, p. 51, for Ausonius’ claims to a noble mid-third-century descent and lost ancestral wealth. J.A.Schlumberger, ‘Potentes and Potentia in the Social Thought of Late Antiquity’, in F.M.Clover and R.S.Humphreys, eds, Tradition and Innovation in Late Antiquity (Madison 1989), 89–104. In general, J.U.Krause, Spätantike Patronatsformen im Westen des Römischen Reiches (Munich 1987), and MacMullen, Corruption, passim, on widescale abuses of power throughout the later Roman empire. For Gaul, R.Van Dam, Leadership and Community in Late Antique Gaul (Berkeley 1985). A.Chastagnol, ‘La carrière sénatoriale du Bas Empire’, Tituli 4 (1982) (=Epigrafia e ordine senatorio), 167–94, for what follows. Amm. 21.16.3. Admittedly, many examples may be explained by exceptional circumstances such as the office of the praefectus urbis Romae under Valentinian I, filled by co-patriots from Pannonia to the great chagrin of the Roman aristocrats who had come to view it as their exclusive prerogative. CTh VI.6 ff. for laws. A.Demandt, ‘Der spätrömische Militaradel’, Chiron 10 (1980), 609–36. J.H.W.G.Liebeschuetz, Barbarians and Bishops (Oxford 1990), 24. 169

NOTE S TO PAGE S 10–11

22 F.Jacques, ‘L’ordine senatorio attraverso la crisi del III secolo’, in A. Giardina, ed., Società romana e impero tardoantico I (Rome 1986), 106 f., for a useful survey of the Italian aristocratic gentes. 23 Jerome, Ep. 108.1 for a well-known example, adducing among the ancestors of the virtuous Paula the Gracchi and the Scipiones. 24 Ausonius, Epig. 45 (Peiper), well worth quoting: Quidam superbus opibus et fastu tumens tantumque verbis nobilis, spernit vigentis clara saecli nomina, antiqua captans stemmata, Martem Remumque et conditorem Romulum privos parentes nuncupans. hos ille Serum veste contexi iubet, hos caelat argento gravi, ceris inurens ianuarum limina et atriorum pegmata. credo, quod illi nec pater certus fuit et mater est vere lupa. Translation: ‘Vain in his wealth and puffed up with haughtiness, this “somebody” is noble only in words. Illustrious names of the present he holds in contempt; ancient pedigrees he covets. He names no less than Mars, Remus and the founder Romulus as his very own parents. Them he orders to be sewn into silken garments. Their images he engraves on his heavy silver and affixes to the threshold of his doors and to the ceilings in his rooms. I think (he does this) because his father has never been known and his mother is really a prostitute.’

25 26

27 28 29 30 31

32

On the authenticity of this claim to ancient nobility, which is obviously discarded by Ausonius, see above, Ch. 2, p. 23. R.P.Saller, ‘Familia, Domus and the Roman Conception of the Family’, Phoenix 38 (1984), 355. D.Gorce, ed., Vie de sainte Melanie (SCh 90), 11. Amm. 27.11.1 on Probus’ extensive holdings. Olympiodorus Fr. 44 (Müller=41.2 Blockley). Araheim, Aristocracy, 143 f.; J.Harries, Treasure in Heaven. Property and Inheritance among Senators of Late Rome’, in E.M.Craik, ed., Marriage and Property (Aberdeen 1984), 54–70. G.E.M.de Ste Croix, The Class Struggle in the Ancient Greek World (Ithaca, NY 1981), in particular 42 and 114 f.; MacMullen, Corruption, passim. MacMullen, Corruption, 59, 74. CTh 8.8.4 (AD 386). P.Brown, ‘Aspects of the Christianization of the Roman Aristocracy’, JRS 11 (1961), 1–11. D.M.Novak, ‘Constantine and the Senate. An Early Phase of the Christianization of the Roman Aristocracy’, Ancient Society 10 (1979), 271–310. T.D.Barnes, ‘Christians and Pagans in the Reign of Constantius’, in

170


33

34 35 36 37

38

39

40

41 42

43

L’église et l’empire au IVe siècle (Fondation Hardt) (VandoeuvresGenève 1987), 301 f. Novak, ‘Constantine’, 290 f.; Anician women converted around the middle of the century to judge by the Probae Cento (CSEL 16, 514f.). Much has been written in recent years about the conversion of aristocratic females, especially to ascetic Christianity, and their influence over the religious decisions of male relatives. See, however, the questioning M.R.Salzman, ‘Aristocratic Women. Conductors of Christianity in the Fourth Century’, Helios 16 (1989), 207–20. Paulinus of Nola, Ep. 29.6 f. esp. 12. Jerome, Ep. 130 (on the consecration); Procopius, Bellum Vandalicum I.2.27 (on the rumour). Liebeschuetz, Barbarians and Bishops, 144–5; Matthews, Western Aristocracies, passim. As is clearly implied by Augustine, En. in Ps. 54.13: plerumque dicunt homines: neo remaneret paganus si ille (sc. nobilis) esset christianus; plerumque dicunt homines: et ille si fieret christianus, quis remaneret paganus? I.Kajanto, The Latin Cognomina (Helsinki 1965). Cf. R.von Haehling’s observations on the use of nomenclature for religious identity, Die Religionszugehörigkeit der hohen Amtsträger des römis-chen Reiches seit Constantins I Allemherrschaft bis zum Ende der Theodosianischen Dynastie (Bonn 1978), 25–8. T.D.Barnes, The New Empire of Diocletian and Constantine (Cambridge, Mass. 1982), 175–81, for general remarks on the uses and abuses of hagiography. Conveniently assembled in H.Stern, ed., Recueil général des mosaï-ques de la Gaule (X Supp. à Gallia). So far the regions covered include Gallia Belgica, Gallia Narbonensis and Aquitaine. C.Jullian, Histoire de la Gaule romaine VII, 32 f., VIII, 128 f., argues for a new class of enriched administrators under the Tetrarchy. J.F.Drinkwater, ‘Gallic Attitudes to the Roman Empire’, in H.E. Herzig and R.Frei-Stolba, eds, Labor omnibus unus (Stuttgart 1989), 150, v. Matthews, Western Aristocracies, 80. They include: Postumus (Y.Burnand, ‘Senatores romani ex provinciis Galliarum orti’, Tituli 5 (1982), 426 no. XLVI) (on the distribution of the cognomen in Gaul, A. Móscy, ‘Lateinische Cognomina als Geschichtsquelle. Zwei Typen der Provinzialrömischen Kultur’, Acta Archaeologia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 36 (1984), 205 and map 15); Victorinus (PLRE I. 965 (V 12)) whose Gallic identity is asserted but not explained by Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, Francia 10 (1982), 713 (V 1); Tetricus (Burnand, ‘Senatores’, 427 no. L.; PLRE I. 885 (T 1 and 2); PIR.2 III, 88 E 99), a name well attested in Gaul (five out of eleven occurrences are in C IL XI I I) Kajanto, Latin Cognomina, 266; and the following consuls (all of whom are absent from the ordinary consular fasti), Bassus, Censor and Sanctus (Burnand, ‘Senatores’, 427 nos LIII-LV); and Aper or Apronianus, Dialis, Lepidus and Rufus or Rufinus (M.Christol apud Burnand, 436 (discussion), but 171


44

45

46

47

48

49

50 51

52 53

Gallic origins contested by Burnand, 437; Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 637 connects Lepidus with Cl. Lepidus (CRP in late fourth/early fifth centuries) and his better-known relative, Cl. Postumus Dardanus (PPG 412/13 twice)). On the period in general, J.F.Drinkwater, The Gallic Empire (Stuttgart 1987). R.Syme, Tacitus (Oxford 1958), 451 f. (‘Tacitus and Gaul’) on the reluctance of the Roman government to employ Gauls after AD 71, and of the Gauls to serve. On the scarcity of men from the Three Gauls in equestrian and senatorial ranks under the early empire, J.F. Drinkwater, Roman Gaul (London/Canberra 1983), 202. Data derived from the Laterculus Veronensis in O.Seeck, Notitia Dignitatum. For its date, Jones, Later Roman Empire III, 381 (312–14); but earlier, according to W.Seston, Dioclétien et la Tétrarchie I (Paris 1946), 328–30, and A.Chastagnol, La préfecture urbaine à Rome sous le Bas Empire (Paris 1960), 3–4. Barnes, New Empire, 201–8. Already in 311 the Aeduan panegyrist of Constantine points out the physical differences and the various degrees of loyalty to the empire which distinguished northern Gaul from the southern regions—the further north, the more prevalent the barbarism (Pan. Lat. 5.7). Claudian calls the north auda Germania (Cons. St. 1.192), implying hostility to the empire. One may also wonder whether this change of orientation was the cause or the result of the reorganisation. A.Chastagnol, ‘Le diocèse civil d’Aquitaine au Bas Empire’, Bulletin de la, société nationale des antiquaires de France 1970, 272–90; idem, in Transformations et conflits au IVe siècle (Colloque de Bordeaux 1970) (Bonn 1978), 1–13. E.M.Wightman, Roman Trier and the Treveri (London 1970); Barnes, New Empire, 47 f. for principal imperial residences, with Trier featuring prominently before 330 (Constantine), and between 318 and 350 (Crispus, Constantinus and Constans respectively). Passio Victoris, AASS 5 Jul., Bibliotheca Hagiographica Latina (BHL) 8570; Anal Bollandiana 2 (1883), 317–21; E.Griffe, La Gaule chré-tienne à l’époque romaine (Paris 1964–6), I, 147, 154 f.; PLRE I. 118 (*A*1), perhaps in Narbonensis; Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 562, for a date c. 303. PLRE I. 316; Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 603. Passio S. Ferreolis, AAS S 5 Sept., 60 f.; PLRE I, 232 (*C* 3); Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 588 (C 2). Griffe, La Gaule, I, 162 n. 81, places the events earlier, in the reign of Decius. A homonym and possibly the same man is also known as a persecutor of Christians in Vienne, Passio S.Iuliani, BHL 4540, MGH SRM 1/2, 429. The vitae were written in the fifth century. Barnes, New Empire, 187, deems Crispinus spurious. Vita Sabiniani, AASS 2 Jan. 939 f.; PLRE I. 231 (*C* 1); Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 588 (C 1). PLRE I. 806 (S 8); Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 689 (S 1); Móscy, ‘Cognomina’, 209, for Gallic distribution; Kajanto, Latin Cognomina, 213, for African diffusion. 172


54 PLRE I. 294 (E 1). He is the deliverer of the fifth Latin panegyric (Galletier). W.Kuhoff, Studien zur zivilen senatorischen Laufbahn im 4 J. n. Ch. Ämter und Amtsinhaber in Clarissimat und Spektabilitat (Frankfurt 1983), 219, 424 n.45 on the office’s equestrian rank. Eumenius’ father was an Athenian rhetor who taught at Rome and Autun, Pan. Lat. V.17.3–4. 55 Apronianus: CIL XII 1852 (Vienne); PLRE I. 86 (A 4), AD 312–24; Kuhoff, Studien, 52 for equestrian rank. Cupitus: CJ 1.62.1 (Trier); PLRE I. 234, for a vicar, governor or financial officer. Crispinus: CTh 11.30.10; 12.1.2, dated to 353 by O.Seeck, Regesten der Kaiser und Päpste s.a. (Stuttgart 1919), but to 320 and 315 in mss, PLRE I. 232, for possibly a provincial governor. On Fl. Sanctus, Ausonius, Parentalia 18, a putative but unlikely descendant of the homonym Gallic consul of 269, above, Ch. 4, p. 59. 56 Móscy, ‘Cognomina’, 205 and map 13; Kajanto, Latin Cognomina, 296:79 out of the total of 118 appear in Celtic areas. 57 Móscy, ‘Cognomina’, 210 and map 20. 58 PLRE I. 232 (C 5, 6) in Egypt and Italy. 59 W.Held, ‘Die gallische Aristokratie im 4. Jahrhundert hinsichtlich ihrer Siedlungsstandorte und ihrer zentralen Stellung zur römischen Provinzial bzw. Zentraladministration’, Klio 58 (1974), 137, connecting the two fourth-century Crispini and assuming, without proving, that a provincial governor would own property in the province which he governed; Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 588 (C 1–3) for connecting all three. 60 PLRE I. 546 (M 8); Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 644 (M 3), for Gallic provenance. The choice of Autun, Marcellinus’ involvement in the events there and the ready support which he was able to enlist among the inhabitants indicate perhaps his elevated local status, based on property (?). The people of Autun must have had short memories, if they had forgotten what their ancestors had had to endure some eighty years before. 61 Zosimus, II, 42–3. 62 K.F.Stroheker, Der senatorische Adel im spätantiken Gallien (Tüb-ingen 1948), 207 no. 321; PLRE I. 763. 63 Amm. 30.2.10: Remigius…a muneribus rei publicae iam quiescens, negotiis se ruralibus dedit prope Moguntiancum in genitalibus locis, and above, Ch. 7, p. 19. 64 Stroheker, Adel, 213–14 no. 343, for birth around the turn of the century; PLRE I. 814–17 (Secundus 3); CIL CI 1764 for his cursus, and Kuhoff, Studien, 53. 65 Julian, Or. VIII.252A; von Haehling, Die Religionszugehörigkeit, 64–5, for discussion. 66 Held, ‘Aristokratie’, 129, for Aquitanian property. 67 Marcellus, de medicamentis, praef.: aliiqui nonnulli etiam proximo tempore illustres honoribus viri, cives ac maiores nostri, Siburius, Eutropius atque Ausonius commodarunt. Marcellus himself was magister officiorum under Theodosius in 394–5 and wrote his work in the early years of the fifth century.

173

NOTE S TO PAG E S 19–21

68 69 70

71

72

73 74

75 76 77

78

Stroheker, Adel 170 no. 136, identifies the Gallic Eutropius as the medical writer only; PLRE I. 317 (E 2), identifies the Bordelais with the historian and the office-holder. W. Den Boer, Some Minor Roman Historians (Leiden 1972), 114–15, for no shred of evidence to connect all these offices with one man, and finally, von Haehling, Die Religionszugehörigkeit, 211–37, painstakingly separates all the known Eutropii of the later fourth century, distinguishing between the Bordelais medical man, the historian, the proconsul Africae in 371 and the practorian prefect of the Oriens in 380. Recently, H.W.Bird, ‘Eutropius. His Life and Career’, Echos du monde classtque 32 (1988), 51–60, discounts the Bordelais background altogether. Ausonius, Professores 17 (Peiper); Stroheker, Adel, 171 no. 142; PLRE I. 321 (E 1). See also above, Ch. 5, p. 86. J.F.Matthews, Ammianus, 93 f. PLRE I. 540 (M 2); not in Stroheker, Adel. von Haehling, Die Religionszugehörigkeit, 295–6, for Gallic identity based on the inclusion and transmission of his panegyric in the corpus of Gallic panegyrics and on his familiarity with Gallic affairs (Pan. Lat. 11.3–5). Note, on the other hand, the omission of Ausonius, Alethius and Paulinus of Nola from the corpus (H.Sivan, ‘The Last Gallic Prose Panegyric’, Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History (1993)). Mamertinus has also been connected with the homonym Treveran rhetor of the late third century and the author of two panegyrics to Constantius I. A.Pallu de Lessert, Fastes des provinces africaines II (Paris 1901, repr. Rome 1969), 191–3; PLRE I. 126 (A 2). A number of Gauls may also have owed the beginning of their careers to Julian. They include Euphrasius and Phronimius, MO and PUC respectively under Procopius in 365. See above, Ch. 6, pp. 98–9. Sulp. Sev. Dial. III.3.1, 4.1, 8.1–2; Ven. Fortunatus V.Martini IV.120. Kajanto, Latin Cognomina, 304, for fifteen out of twenty-five cases being found in Celtic regions. His rivalry with Mamertinus (Amm. 27.7.1) signalled the end of his political career. Amm. 22.1.2: aruspicinae peritus, Aprunculus Gallus orator, promotus rector postea Narbonensis. Stroheker, Adel, 146 no. 24. HA Vita Cari 11; Ausonius, Professores 5; John of Antioch. fr. 178.3 (Numerianus); Amm. 18.1 (Numerius); Stroheker, Adel, 196 no. 262. On the origin of the family in Narbonne, A. Chastagnol, ‘La patrie de Carus’, Bonner Historia Augusta Colloquium 1977/78 (Bonn 1980), 50–60. Jerome, Chron. s.a. 355; Ep. 120, praef.; Sidonius, Ep. V.10.3; PLRE I. 246. Above, Ch. 5, p. 92. Stroheker, Adel, 185 no. 203; PLRE I. 462–3 (I 6); A. Demandt, ‘Magister Militum’, PW Supp. XII (1970), 580 f. CIL XII 3256 (St Agricola, Reims), with L.Pietri, ‘La conversion en Belgique seconde d’un ancien officier de l’armée de Julien. Jovin’, Revue du Nord 52 (1970), 443–53. Von Haehling, Die Religionsztigehörigkeit, 250–1 for his paganism (sic). PLRE I. 520 (L 6); Demandt, ‘Magister Militum’, 574 f., 585.

174


79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86 87 88

89

90

91

Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 640 (L 1) for Gallic identity; PLRE I. 520, for the appearance of his name on tiles from northeastern Gaul: CIL XIII 12871–5. Kajanto, Latin Cognomina, 328, for six examples of Lupicini, all Christians, and PLRE I. 519–21, for other Lupicini. J.F.Drinkwater, ‘The “Pagan Underground”, Constantius II’s “Secret Service”, and the Survival and the Usurpation of Julian the Apostate’, in C.Deroux, ed., Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History 3 (Brussels 1983), 348–87. Vita Hilarii ep. Pictavensis 6, MGH AA 4.2.1–7, Venantius Fortunatus, sixth century: apud Gallicanas familias nobilitatis lampade non obscurus; Stroheker, Adel, 182 no. 192 for birth date c. 315; Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 624 (H 1) for preecclesiastical career with J.Doignon, Hilaire de Poitiers avant l’exil (Paris 1971). Vita Paulini, BHL 6562/3, AASS 6 Aug., 676–9: ex Aquitaniacae regionis partibus nobilissima prosapia, tenth century with little originality; Stroheker, Adel, 200–1 no. 288; N.Gauthier, L’évangélisation des pays de la Moselle, IIIe-VIIle siècles (Paris 1980), 55–8, 75–7, 80. Vita Maximini II.1, MGH SRM 3.74–82, AASS 7 May 21–4: urbis Aquitanicae Pictavorum indigena clarissimis est ortus natalibus; Gauthier, L’évangélisation, 51–4; Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 649 (M 1). J.F.Drinkwater, Roman Gaul, 224 f. (contacts during the early empire); C.Jullian, Inscriptions romaines de Bordeaux I (Bordeaux 1887–90), 149 f. nos 45–74; R.Etienne, Bordeaux antique (Bordeaux 1962), 139 f. (survey of foreigners in Bordeaux, most of whom were from the north-eastern regions of Gaul). Passio Victoris, BHL 8570, Anal. Boll. 2 (1883), 317–21, AASS 5 July 144; Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 712 (V 1), fifthcentury date of composition. Ausonius, Professores 24, above, n. 80. Ausonius, Epig. 45, above, n. 19. C.Balmelle, Recueil général des mosaïques de la Gaule romaine (Supp. X à Gallia) IV. (Aquitaine) fasc. 1 and fasc. 2 (Paris 1980 and 1987) for a convenient point of departure. R.Monturet and H.Rivière, Les thermes sud de la villa gallo-romaine de Séviac, Gers (Supp. 2 a Aquitania) (Bordeaux 1986) for a detailed examination of a large and luxurious thermal complex on an Aquitanian estate of late antiquity. In Loupiac, near Bordeaux (Gironde), a first phase of the villa was dated to the second/third centuries, with restorations centring on the baths in the fourth, Gallia 33 (1975), 470. The villa of Lalonquette near Pau was completely restored in the fourth century after a fire in the third century, J.Lauffray et al., ‘Les établissements et les villas galloromaines de Lalonquette’, Gallia 21 (1973), 123–57. E.M.Wightman, ‘Peasants and Potentates’, American Journal of Ancient History 3 (1978), 97–128. The evidence is insufficient for more than a hypothetical reconstruction. Amm. 14.10.2 (AD 354); 17.8.1 (AD 358); Etienne, Bordeaux antique, 222 f. 175


92 T.Lewit, Agricultural Production in the Roman Economy AD 200–400 (BAR. IS 568)(Oxford 1991), passim; note that the Gallic sample is fairly narrow. 93 Above, Ch. 4, p. 69 f. 94 Amm. 16.8.8: tunc illud apud Aquitanos evenit quod latior fama vulgaret. veterator quidam ad lautum convivium rogatus et mundum, qualia sunt in his regionibus plurima, cum vidisset linteorum toralium purpureos clavos ita latissimos, ut sibi vicissim arte ministrantium cohaererent, mensamque operimentis paribus tectam, anteriorem chlamydis partem utraque manu vehens intrinsecus, structuram omnem ut amictus adornaverat principalis; quae res patrimonium dives evertit. M.F.A.Brok, ‘Majestatsfrevel durch Missbrauch des Purpurs (Amm. 16.8.8)’, Latomus 41 (1982), 356–61; Matthews, Ammianus, 518 n. 26. One wonders how accurate is Ammianus here. 95 Trésors d’orfèvrerie gallo-romaine, catalogue of an exhibition at the Musée du Luxembourg 1989 (Paris 1989). Note the Aquitanian examples, Thil (p. 240) and Monbadon (p. 278 f.). Also, the recent discovery of three magnificent plates in Beziers (Herault), M.-G.Colin et al., ‘Un trésor d’argenterie antique’, Archéologia 210 (1986), 26–34, for preliminary presentation. 96 Pace J.Rolfe, Loeb, I, p. 237, ‘this action ruined a rich estate’, perhaps too mild a translation. 97 Sidonius Carmen 22.117 f. describing the Burgus built probably before the middle of the fourth century. Stroheker, Adel, 200 no. 287, on the builder Pontius Paulinus, the generis princeps and father or grandfather of Paulinus of Nola. 98 Ausonius, Parentalia 8 (Peiper). 99 Ausonius, Professores 15 (Peiper); G. Fouet, La villa gallo-romaine de Montmaurin (Hte. Garonne) (XX Supp. à Gallia) (Paris 1969), 289, and above, Ch. 5 p. 88. 100 Ausonius, Professores 24 (Acilius Glabrio), H.Sivan, ‘A Late Gallic Branch of the Acilii Glabriones?’ Mnemosyne 44 (1991), 435–9. 101 Above, Ch. 3, p. 33 f. 102 F.Benoit, Les cimetières suburbains d’Arles dans l’antiquite chrétienne et au Moyen Age (Rome-Paris 1935); idem, Sarcophages paléochrétiens d’Arles et de Marseille (Paris 1954); P.-A.Février, ‘Sarcophages d’Arles’, Congrès archéologique de France, 184e session, 1976, Pays d’Arles (Paris 1979), 317–59. 103 CRAI 1974, 257 f.=Gallia 32 (1973), 507=AE 1974, 418. Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 577 (C 1). 104 CIL XII 668; PLRE I. 121, for the date. 105 CIL XIII 128; Stroheker, Adel, 196 no. 265. J.-M.Pailler, ‘L’énigme Nymfius’, Gallia 45 (1986), 164, for a mid-fourth-century date; H. Sivan, Town, Country and Province in Late Antique Gaul. The Example of CIL XI I I 128’, ZPE 79 (1989), 103 f. for an early fifthcentury date. 106 Pan. Lat. 3(11), 4.1: florentissimas quondam antiquissimasque urbes barbari possidebant; Gallorum illa celebrata nobilitas aut ferro occiderant aut immitibus

176


addicta dominis serviebat. The domini are probably Magnentius and Silvanus, but if the term is not synonymous with tyranni, then the events recorded possibly refer to the purge of 353/4 by Paul Catena (Amm. 14.4.6). Note, however, the implications of generally strained relations between usurpers and Gallic nobility, Pacatus, Pan. Lat. XII.25–8 with Nixon’s comments on topics of ‘stock invective’ (C.E.V.Nixon, Pacatus. Panegyric to the Emperor Theodosius (Liverpool 1987), 78 f.).

3 THE CITY 1 C.Jullian, Inscriptions romaines de Bordeaux, 2 vols (Bordeaux 1887–90); idem, Histoire de Bordeaux (Bordeaux 1895, repr. Marseille 1975); R.Etienne, Bordeaux antique (Bordeaux 1962), for basic surveys. 2 Strabo 4.2.1; Martial, Epig. 9.32.6. 3 Eutropius 9.10; P.Geyer and O.Cuntz, eds, ‘Itinerarium Burdigalense’, CCSL 175 (1965), 1–2. 4 CIL XIII 566–908 with Jullian, Inscriptions; E.Espérandieu, Recueil général des bas-reliefs de la Gaule romaine, II Aquitaine (Paris 1908, repr. Ridgewood, NJ 1965), 120 f. nos 1062–242; Bordeaux. 2000 ans d histoire. Catalogue (Bordeaux 1973), for representative examples. 5 Etienne, Bordeaux, 177 f. 6 Espérandieu, Recueil, nos 1240, 1242; Die antiken Sarkophagreliefs, eds F.Matz and B.Andreae III Die Musen Sarkophage by M.Wegner (Berlin 1969), 72 f., 394 f. no. 222 for a date between 230 and 240; Bordeaux. 2000 ans, no. 96. 7 F.Braemer, Les stèles funéraires à personnages de Bordeaux, I–III siècles (Paris 1959). 8 Etienne, Bordeaux, 187 f. 9 Among recent works on the ancient city, C.Ampolo, La città antica (Bari 1980); B.Stoob, ed., Die Stadt. Gestalt und Wandel (Vienna 1980); A.Pelletier, L’urbanisme romain sous l’Empire (Paris 1982). T. Lewit, Agricultural Production in the Roman Economy AD 200–400 (BAR. IS 568) (Oxford 1991), 13 f. on problems of interpreting archaeological evidence. 10 P.D.Garnsey, ‘Aspects of the Decline of the Urban Aristocracy in the Empire’, ANRW II.1 (1974), 229–52, on the need to introduce and distinguish regional varieties; R.MacMullen, Corruption and the Decline of Rome (New Haven and London 1988), ch. 2, for an overview of urban differentiations across the empire, and pp. 24–5 on insecurity as the root of all evil. C.Lepelley, Les cités de l’Afrique romaine au Bas-Empire, 2 vols (Paris 1979–81), for a model of its kind; and J.-U.Krause, ‘Das spätantike Städtepatronat’, Chiron 17 (1987), 1–80, on urban patroni in the western empire, with overwhelming numbers in Italy and Africa. Y.Dan, The City in Eretz-Israel in the Late Roman and Byzantine Periods (Jerusalem 1984), for urban prosperity. 11 Amm. 15.11.7–15; W.Sontheimer, ‘Der Exkurs über Gallien bei Ammianus Marcellinus’, Klio 20 (1926), 19 f. Ammianus’ traditional association with Antioch has been recently challenged and replaced by

177


12

13 14

15 16 17 18 19

20

21

22 23 24

25

Alexandria, J.F.Matthews, The Roman Empire of Ammianus (Baltimore 1989), 478–9; G.W.Bowersock, ‘Review of Matthews’, JRS 80 (1990), 247–8. Amm. 15.11.7: secunda Germania, prima ab occidentali exordiens cardine, Agrippina et Tungris munita, civitatibus amplis et copiosis; 11: moenium Augustuduni magnitudo vetusta; 12: Aventicum, desertam quidem civitatem sed non ignobilem quondam, ut aedificia semiruta nunc quoque demonstrant. He was probably using an official list of Gallic cities, like a proto Notitia Galliarum. On such lists, J.Harries, ‘Church and State in the Notitia Galliarum’ JRS 68 (1978), 26–43. Ibid .,13: prima provincia est Aquitanica, amplitudine civitatum admodum culta; 14: Viennensis civitatum exultat decore multarum. Histoire de la France urbaine (Paris 1980), 109 f., 399 f., for a good but unannotated introduction. E.Frézouls, ‘Evergétisme et constructions urbaines dans les Trois Gaules et les Germanies’, Revue du Nord (Mélanges E.Will) 260 (1984), 27–54, for late antique examples of continuing urban involvement. For a recent survey of Gallic urbanism, R.Bedon et al., Architecture et urbanisme en Gaule romaine, 2 vols (Paris 1988). D.Bayard and J.-L.Massy, Amiens romain (Amiens 1983), 213 f. Amm. 15.1.10: huic annexa secunda est Belgica, qua Ambiani sunt, urbs inter alias eminens. Amm. 27.6.4–16; Cons. Const. sub an., 367 for date and location. L.Pietri, La ville de Tours du IV au VI siècles (Rome 1983). R.Beck, Die ‘Tres Galliae’ und das ‘Imperium’ in 4 J. Studien zum Ordo Urbium Nobilium des Ausonius (Zurich 1969), for a detailed analysis; H.Szelest, ‘Die Sammlung “Ordo Urbium Nobilium” des Ausonius und ihre literarische Tradition’, Eos 61 (1973), 10 9–22 on its uniqueness. R.P.H.Green, The Works of Ausonius (Oxford 1991), 569 f. On its date see above, Appendix, p. 159. Ordo, 10; L.A.Constans, Arles antique (Paris 1921); P.-A.Février, ‘Arles aux IV et V siècles. Ville impériale et capitale régionale’, XXVI Corso di cultura sull’arte ravennate (Ravenna 1978), 127–58. Cf. the close relations between Arles and Trier which so impressed the traveller of Expositio totius mundi 58 (J.Rougé, ed., SCh 124 (Paris 1966)). I.Ehrensperger-Katz, ‘Les representations des villes fortifiées dans l’art paléochrétien et leur derivées byzantines’, Cahiers archéologiques 19 (1969), 1–27; A. and M.Levi, Itineraria picta (Rome 1967) for many illustrations. A.Blanchet, Les enceintes romaines de la Gaule (Paris 1907) for an overview. Ordo 6.5: lata per extentum procurrunt moenia collem; 18.2: cotilibus muris quam circuit ambitus ingens. Archéologie urbaine. Actes du colloque international, Tours 1980 (Paris 1982), 717–20 on Toulouse. On Trier, E.M.Wightman, Roman Trier and the Treveri (London 1970), 92 f.; H.Heinen, Trier und das Trevererland in römischen Zeit (Trier 1985), and above. Autun, Augustodunum, capitale des Eduens (Autun 1987) for the most recent; and R.Chevallier, Autun gallo-romaine, Supp. 9 à Caesarodunum (Tours 1962).

178


26 Amm. 16.2.1: muros spatiosi quidem ambitus sed carie vetustatis invalidos, with Matthews, Ammianus, 391. 27 Above, Ch. 2, p. 18. 28 Ordo 18.7–8: modo quadruplices ex se cum effuderit urbes, non ulla exhaustae sentit dispendia plebis. 29 Ausonius, Professores 16.10–11 (Arborius). 30 Ibid., 16; 17 (Exsuperius). 31 H.Sivan, The Visigothic Kingdom of Toulouse (unpublished diss., Columbia University 1983). 32 Ordo 10.4–9. 33 The recovery, however, was uneven, Du nouveau sur Arles antique. Revue d’Arles 1 (1987) for an overview of recent discoveries. My thanks to Claude Sintes for showing me around and to him and Jean Piton for sending me copies. I had the pleasure of visiting Arles several times in the expert company of Gaëtan Conges. 34 Arles became the seat of the PPG sometime between 395 and 407, J.-R. Palanque, ‘La date du transfert de la préfecture des Gaules de Trèves a Arles’, REA 36 (1934), 359–65, v. A.Chastagnol, ‘Le repli sur Arles des services administratifs gaulois en l’an 407', RH 249 (1973) 23–40, answered by Palanque in Provence historique 23 (1973), 29–38. On the prosperity of Arles in 418 see Honorius’ edict in G.Haenel, Corpus Legum (Leipzig 1857), no. 1171. 35 Ordo 6.4: imperii vires quod alit, quod vestit et armat. Cf. NDig. Occ. 9.37,38; 11.58, 77, with Wightman, Roman Trier, 67. 36 E.Griffe, La Gaule chrétienne à l’époque romaine, 3 vols (Paris 1964–6), still the basic study. Also useful is the Topographie chrétienne des cités de la Gaule, N.Gauthier and J.-C.Picard, eds (Paris, n.d.). 37 Ordo 19.14–17. M.Gayraud, ‘Narbonne aux trois premiers siècles ap. J.C.’, ANRW II.3 (1975), 829–59; idem, Narbonne antique des origines à la fin du IIIe siècle, Supp. 8 de la Revue arcbéologique de Narbonnaise) (Paris 1981), 258 f. Also useful is Y.Solier, Narbonne, monuments et musées (Guides archéologiques de la France 8) (Paris 1986). 38 The most spectacular example is the puzzling mausoleum in Arles discovered in 1970 next to the circus. M.Euzennat, ‘Le monument a rotonde de la nécropole du cirque a Arles’, CRAI 1972, 404–23. Its religious affiliation is not entirely clear. 39 P.-A.Février, ‘Christiana tempora’, in Histoire de la France urbaine, 424. 40 Trier. Kaiserresidenz und Bischofssitz (Mainz 1984), 161 f. (nos 61–5). 41 After all, by the second century most if not all cities were provided with large structures (MacMullen, Corruption, 7) and their presence hardly occasioned comment in later writers. 42 Ordo 6.6–7: largus tranquillo praelabitur amne Mosella,/longiqua omnigenae vectans commercia terrae; 10.6–8: per quem Romani commercia suscipis orbis…; 19.18–21: …toto tibi navigat orbe cataplus. 43 Cf. J.H.W.G.Liebeschuetz, ‘Epig raphic Evidence on the Christianisation of Syria’, in idem, From Diocletian to the Arab Conquest (Variorum repr.) (London 1990), 485–508, esp. 488–9. 179


44 Ordo 20.2: te,/o patria, insignem Baccho fluviisque virisque. 45 Ibid., 2–3: …virisque,/moribus ingeniisque hominum procerumque senatu. Perhaps answering Martial’s negative comments on the uncouth Bordelais. 46 Ordo 20.21–35. 47 Ausonius, Ep. 6.19 f. (Peiper). 48 M.C.Menendez, Structures, modes et procédés de construction des remparts du BasEmpire dans le sud-ouest de la Gaule (unpublished TER, Université de Bordeaux III, 1986–7), 37–61, for what follows with L.Maurin, ‘CIL VIII 1251 et l’enceinte romaine de Bordeaux’, Aquitania 5 (1987), 123–32. 49 For comparative sizes, S.Johnson, Late Roman Fortifications (London 1983), 262–9, with a typographical error for Bordeaux. 50 Unpublished reports. For a general overview, M.Gauthier, ‘Quinze ans de sauvetages archéologiques a Bordeaux’, in Archéologie urbaine (Colloque de Tours 1980) (Paris 1982), 86 f.; P.Debord et al., ‘Du nouveau sur Bordeaux antique’, in Actes du 104e congrès national des sociétés savantes (Bordeaux 1979), 165–78; D.Barraud, ‘Bordeaux retrouve son passé’, Archéologia 192–3 (juillet-août 1984), 59–72. 51 What follows is based on discussions with members of the Direction des Antiquités Régionales at Bordeaux, above all with D.Barraud, M.A.Gaidon and J.-F.Pichonneau (the final report on Saint Christoly is yet unpublished), and on unpublished and on some published material which includes Bordeaux, Saint Christoly. Sauvetage archéologique et histoire urbaine. (Catalogue of an exhibition at Bordeaux, Dec. 1982—Jan. 1983) (Bordeaux 1982); Bulletin de liaison et d’information (Direction des antiquites historiques d’Aquitaine. Association des archéologues d’Aquitaine) 1982–1-, which I owe to J.-G.Gorges, president of the association; Chronique d’archéologie bordelaise (Bulletin et mémoires de la société archéologique de Bordeaux et d’Aquitaine) 1973+; Gallia passim, esp. 33 (1975), 461–5. 52 P.Debord and J.Doreau, ‘Le port antique de Bordeaux’, Revue historique de Bordeaux et du département de la Gironde 24 (1975), 5–18. 53 Bull. de liaison et d’information 3 (1984) (Bordeaux 1985), pp. 32–4. 54 D.Barraud, ‘Chronique d’archéologie bordelaise 1984’, Bulletin et mémoires de la société archéologique de Bordeaux 75 (1984), 4. 55 Ausonius, Ep. 4 (Peiper). 56 J.Rigoir, Y.Rigoir and J.-F.Meffre, ‘Les derivées des sig illées paléochrétiennes du groupe atlantique’, Gallia 31 (1973), 207–63; M. Gauthier, ‘La céramique estampée tardive d’Aquitaine. Un siècle de trouvailles bordelaises’, Revue historique de Bordeaux 24 (1975), 19–45; C.Marmion, La sigillée tardive d’Aquitaine (unpublished TER, Université de Bordeaux III, 1984–5). 57 Ordo, 20 (Bordeaux), 18 f.; Ep. 26 (to Paulinus) passim on shipping corn via the river. 58 Ausonius, Parentalia 7 (Claudius Contemtus), a trading uncle who died in Rutupina tellus, namely Britain, but pace Evelyn White, Loeb I.69,

180


59

60

61 62

63

64 65 66 67 68 69

70 71 72 73 74 75

and more specifically Richborough, Kent. Parentalia 18 (Flavius Sanctus), brother-in-law and praeses of one of the British provinces. Green, Works of Ausonius, 311. The mosaics of Saint Christoly will appear in the third volume of C. Balmelle, Recueil général des mosaïques de la Gaule romaine IV (Aquitaine), 1 and 2. Idem, ‘A propos d’une mosaïque tardive de Bordeaux’, in Mosaïque. Recueil d’hommages à H.Stern (Paris 1982), 21–32, on one of the mosaics of Saint Christoly, assigning to it a sixth-century date v. G.Salies, BZ 174 (1974), 82, for a fourth-century date. Ausonius’ own family is a case in point. His father, a medical practitioner, emigrated from Bazas (Epicedion 4); his maternal grandparents from Dax (Parentalia 4). The basic study on Bordeaux is M.de Maille, Recherches sur les origines chrétiennes de Bordeaux (Paris 1959). CIL XIII 633=ICLV 4445=C. Jullian, Inscriptions, I 61; ILCV Maille, Recherches, 20 f.; Etienne, Bordeaux, 265–8; Römer in Gallien. Romanisierung Aquitaniens am Beispiel von Bordeaux (Catalogue of an exhibition, Munich 1967), 45–7. Side A of the inscription reads: Dis Manibus et memoriae Domitiae, civis Treverae, defunctae annos XX. Leo conjugi karissimae posuit. Side B reads: Hic jacet exanimen corpus Domitiae, civis Treverae, defunctae (ante diem) quintum Kalendas fehruarias, Postumo consule. On this practice, G.Sanders, ‘Les chrétiens face a l’épigraphie funéraire latine’, in D.M.Pippidi, ed., Assimilation et resistance a la culture grécoromaine dans le monde ancien. Travaux du VIe congrès inter. d’études classiques, Madrid 1974 (Bucarest-Paris 1976), 283–321. C.Munier, ed., Concilia Galliae 314–527 (CCS L 148) (1963). J. Gaudemet, ed., Conciles gaulois du IV siècle (SCh 241) (1977). Sulpicius Severus, Chron. 2.46.8–9. H.Chadwick, Priscillian of Avila (Oxford 1976); C.Stancliffe, Saint Martin and his Hagiographer (Cambridge 1983), 278 f. Pacatus, 29.3 (Pan. Lat. XII, Galletier). Sulp. Sev., Chron. 2.49. Stancliffe, Saint Martin, passim, for an evocation of the atmosphere, and particularly the hostility of ascetic practices. The exchange of letters between Ausonius and Paulinus throws invaluable light on religious perceptions in the early 390s, C.Witke, Numen Litterarum (Leiden 1971), 3–74; Green, Works of Ausonius, 637 f., 708 f. Above, Chs 5 and 6, pp. 90 and 109. E.D.Hunt, Holy Land Pilgrimage in the Later Roman Empire (Oxford 1982), 28 f. Itinerarium Burdigalense, 1–26. Hunt, Holy Land Pilgrimage, passim; H.Sivan, ‘Holy Land Pilgrimage and Western Audience. Notes on Egeria and her Circle’, CQ 38 (1988), 528–35. Ausonius, Parentalia 6 (Aemilia Hilaria); 26 (Julia Cataphronia). M.Gauthier, ‘Quinze ans de sauvetages archéologiques’, 371. R.Duru, ‘La crypte de l’église Saint Seurin de Bordeaux’, in La sauvegarde de l’art français 2 (1982), 79 f. on the baptistery. The church was in an area

181


76 77 78

79 80 81

82

83

84

known in Ausonius’ time as Pagus Novarus (Ep. 27.94–6), where the poet had a house; R.Etienne, ‘Ausone ou les ambitions d’un notable aquitain’, in Ausone, humaniste aquitain (Bordeaux 1986), 31 for map. Eps. 4.9; 6.17–18; 27.94–5. A.Barbet, ‘Peinture murale romaine à Bordeaux’, in idem, ed., Peinture murale en Gaule, BAR. IS 240 (1985), 103–12. H.Crochet and D.Nony, ‘Le sanctuaire paléochrétien de la rue Arnaud Miqueu, à Bordeaux’, Revue des musées de Bordeaux 3 (1969), 14–18; Bordeaux. 2000 ans d’histoire, 171. Once in the cafeteria, the mosaic can now be glimpsed in the electronics section of the store. T.Vellman, ‘La fontaine de vie’, Cahiers archéologiques 19 (1959), 29–43. Découvertes archéologiques sur le site de Parunis (Catalogue of an exhibition, Bordeaux, Musée d’Aquitaine, Feb.-May 1988). M.J.Vermasseren, Corpus Inscriptionum et Monumentorum Religionis Mithriaciae (The Hague 1956, 1980), for statistics on cult testimonies in Gaul. Compared with 125 finds assembled in Gaul, only 7 were found west of a line drawn between Narbonne and Trier. On Mithraism, F.Cumont, Textes et monuments figures relatifs aux mystères de Mithras, 2 vols (Brussels 1896–9); R.Beck, ‘Mithraism since Franz Cumont’, ANRW 2.17.4 (1984), 2001–115; M.J. Merkelbach, Mithras (Königstein 1984), reviewed by R.Beck, in Phoenix 41 (1987), 296–316. J.R.Hinnel, ‘The Iconography of Cautes and Cautopates. I. The Data’, Journal of Mithraic Studies I (1976), 36–67; R.Beck, ‘Cautes and Cautopates’, Journal of Mithraic Studies 2 (1977), 1–17. V.-J.Walters, The Cult of Mithras in the Roman Provinces of Gaul (Leiden 1974). Musées d’art et d’histoire de Chambéry (Catalogue by L.Valensi, 1969, 80–1). On the appeal of Mithraism to soldiers, bureaucrats and freedmen, R.L.Gordon, ‘Mithraism and Roman Society. Social Factors in the Explanation of Religious Change in the Roman Empire’, Religion 2 (1972), 92–121.

4 GENS AUSONIANA 1 Epicedion in patrem (Domestica 4, Peiper). The year 378 seems the likeliest date of the elder Ausonius’ death who knew of his son’s designation as consul for 379 but did not live to see him in office. R.P. H.Green, The Works of Ausonius (Oxford 1991), 279, on a date in 377. At that date, however, Ausonius was most unlikely to cherish any hope of a consulship. On the office see above, Ch. 2, p. 6. 2 Epicedion 2–6: vicinas urbes colui patriaque domoque,/Vasates patria, sed lare Burdigalam./curia me duplex et uterque senatus habebat/ muneris exsortem, nomine partipicem. 3 Ibid., 51: ipse nec adfectans nec detrectator honorum. Green, Works of Ausonius, 280, on an element of surprise in this phrase. 4 Grat. Actio 8.36: non possum fidei causa ostendere imagines maiorum …nec deductum ab heroibus genus ad deorum stemma replicare, nec ignotas opes et patrimonia sparsa sub regnis…sed patriam non obscuram, familiam non 182


5

6

7 8

9

10 11 12

13 14

15

paenitendam, an echo of Sallust, BJ, 85, 29, who puts similar words in the mouth of another celebrated novus homo. Cf. Ausonius lectori salutem 6–12: divisa per urbes/quattuor antiquas stirpis origo meae./hinc late fusa est cognatio. nomina multis/ ex nostra, ut placitum, ducta domo veniant./derivata aliis, nobis ab stemmate primo/et non cognati, sed genetiva placent. R.P.H.Green, ‘Prosopographical Notes on the Family and Friends of Ausonius’, Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies 25 (1978), 25–6 for a derisive attitude of Ausonius towards Roman aristocratic lineage. This was, however, hardly an affordable commodity in Ausonius’ case as his overtures to Probus plainly show, above, Ch. 6, p. 114. PLRE I. 640–2 (O 3) and stemmata 7, 24. Green, Works of Ausonius, 546, notes an Ammianic echo in the phrase patrimonia sparsa (27.11.1) where the subject, owner of many such properties, is Petronius Probus, relative of Olybrius. Pan. Lat. II–XII (Galletier), passim, with B.Saylor Rodgers, The Panegyrici Latini. Emperors, Colleagues, Usurpers, and the History of the Western Provinces (unpublished PhD, University of California, Berkeley 1978), passim. Green, Works of Ausonius, 298 f., for general introduction and literary structure. Parentalia 4.8: namque avus et genitor/proscripti, regnum cum Victorinus haberet/ ductor et in Tetricos recidit imperium, correctly restored as Argicius’ father and grandfather by Green, ‘Notes’, 19–20, repeated in idem, Works of Ausonius, 307. For the name Argicius, Professores 16.6; PLRE I. 102; M.Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie 260–507’, Francia 10 (1982), 506. PLRE I. 97, on one other contemporary Argicius. On Arboria, ILT 1147 (a Christian) with I.Kajanto, The Latin Cognomina (Helsinki 1965), 334. In the Chronicle of Hydatius (II.32) a magister militum by the name of Arborius appears at the service of Theodoric II, the Gothic ruler of Aquitania. Was this Arborius an otherwise unknown descendant of Ausonius? Parent. 4.3–6: Arborium, Haeduico ductum de stemmate nomen, complexum multas nobilitate domus, qua Lugdunensis provincia quaque potentes/Haedues, Alpino quaque Vienna iugo. Ibid., 7–10. Parentalia 2.2 (Aemilia Aeonia, Ausonius’ mother); Praefatiunculae 1.5–6 (Ausonius lectori); Prof. 16.7 (Aemilius Magnus Arborius). J.F.Drinkwater, The Gallic Empire (Historia Einzelschriften 52) (Stuttgart 1987), 80, restated in idem, ‘Gallic Attitudes to the Roman Empire’, in H.E.Herzig and R.Frei-Stolba, eds, Labor omnibus unus (Stuttgart 1989), 142 n. 31. P.le Gentilhomme, ‘Le désastre d’Autun en 269’, REA 45 (1943), 233–40. Notitia Galliarum 14.3; Archéologie urbaine (Colloque de Tours 1980) (Paris 1982), 467–71. Modern Dax presents an instructive case of fruitful co-operation between municipal authorities and local archaeologists. It is well worth a visit. Parent. 4.13: grassantis dudum fortunae tela paventem, interpreted by Green,

183


16

17

18 19 20

21 22

23

24

25

26 27

28

‘Notes’, 19, as the terror of subsequent barbarian invasions. Aquitania, however, remained largely outside the orbit of the Germanic invasions of the period. Parent. 5.3–4. The name Maura, derived from north-west African people, was found primarily in Spain and Africa (Kajanto, Latin Cognomina, 206). It is possible therefore that the attraction of the Spanish provinces for her descendants was due to Maura’s family having some connections there. Prof. 16 (Aemilius Magnus Arborius) 7–8: Tarbellica Maurae/matris origo fuit; ambo generis procerum. Parent. 4 (Caecilius Argicius Arborius) 14: pauperis Aemiliae condicio inplicuit. Parent. 5 (Aemilia Corinthia Maura avia). Ibid., 4.15–16. R.Etienne, ‘La démographie de la famille d’Ausone’, in Etudes et chronique de démographie historique (Rennes 1964), 15–25, based on his Bordeaux antique, 367–72. Parent. 25 (Aemilia Dryadia); 2 (Aemilia Aeonia); 6 (Aemilia Hilaria). Aeonius: K.F.Stroheker, Der senatorische Adel im spätantiken Gallien (Tübingen 1948), 142 no. 3 with Vita Caesari i.10; Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 545; R.W.Mathisen, ‘PLRE II. Suggested Addenda and Corrigenda’, Historia 31 (1982), 365, for a rank of vir clarissimus. Hilaria: Kajanto, Latin Cognomina, 261. One other Hilaria is known in Gaul, a diacona in Reims in the sixth century, and a relative of Remigius, the bishop of the city, Vita Remigii II.32, Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 624 (H 2). Parent. 6.6–8: more virum medicis artibus experiens./feminei sexus odium tibi semper et inde/crevit devotae virginitatis amor. On female medical practitioners, A, Rousselle, ‘La sage-femme et le thaumaturge’, in A.Pelletier, ed., La médecine en Gaule (Paris 1985), 241–51. On female healers in general, G.E.R.Lloyd, Science, Folklore and Ideology (Cambridge 1983), passim. E.Griffe, La Gaule chrétienne (Paris 1964), I, 371–3, on the term; P. Brown, The Body and Society. Men, Women and Sexual Renunciation in Early Christianity (New York 1988), ch. 18 on ‘house asceticism’ among women. Green, Works of Ausonius, 310, argues against a religious context but does not offer an alternative. The employment of the term pudicitia (v. 10) to describe Hilaria’s commitment to celibacy further supports a Christian context. Griffe, La Gaule chrétienne, I, 15 f., esp. 33 f. (on the persecution of 177 in Lyon) and 121 (on Diocletian). R.Lane Fox, Pagans and Christians (New York 1986), 273, on doubts concerning the Greek origins of western Christianity. Above, Ch. 3, p. 44. For what follows, H.Sivan, ‘A Forerunner of Ausonius. Notes on Aemilius Magnus Arborius, Ausonius’ Uncle’, Ancient History Bulletin 2 (1988), 145–9. Kajanto, Latin Cognomina, 133. To qualify for inclusion in the Professores, Arborius must have been born in Bordeaux (Prof. praefatio). On his date of

184


29 30 31

32 33

34 35 36

37 38

39

40 41 42

43

44

birth, Green, ‘Notes’, 20 (several years before Ausonius) and A.D.Booth, ‘Notes on Ausonius’ Professores’, Phoenix 32 (1978), 248 (c. 298). Parent. 3.10: te sibi Palladiae antetulit toga docta Tolosae; Prof. 16.9: nobilis et dotata uxor, domus et schola. Parent. 3.12–14: te Narbonensis Gallia praeposuit,/ornasti cuius Latio sermone tribunal/et fora Hiberorum quaeque Novem populis. Prof. 16.9–12: cultae principum amicitiae…. Commented upon by Ausonius in another poem, Epicedion 32: semper fictae principum amicitiae, probably as a reaction to Arborius’ death in 337. It is unclear whether the imperial exile was virtual or apparent, Green, Works of Ausonius, 353. Parent. 3.16; Prof. 16.15: docto…Caesare. Sivan, ‘Notes on… Arborius’, for the identity of the royal pupil. Prof. 16.16. Green, ‘Notes’, 21. Cf. the similar fate of an even more successful academic, Fl. Optatus, tutor of Licinius’ son, the first recorded patricius and consul in 334. He was killed in 337, Zos. 2.40.2; T.D.Barnes, The New Empire of Diocletian and Constantine (Cambridge, Mass. 1982), 107. Prof. 16.17–20. Epicedion 4. Parent. 1.13–14; Marcellus, de medicamentis, praefatio. Callippio: PLRE I. 174–5 (Callipius and Callippinus); Contemtus: Kajanto, Latin Cognomina, 287; CIL XI II 705; Ruricius, Ep. 2.14; Veneria: Kajanto, Latin Cognomina, 214, for 288 women v. 30 men in CIL, and 27 Christian women v. 18 Christian men. Epicedion 9–10. C.Jullian, ‘Ausone et son temps’, RH 47 (1891), 244; R.Pichon, Les dernièrs écrivains profanes (Paris 1906), 302–3; C. Favez, ‘Une famille gallo-romaine au 4 e siècle’, Museum Helveticum 3 (1946), 122; and, surprisingly, Green, ‘Notes’, 24, on Iulius Ausonius’ ‘little Greek’, idem, ‘Greek in Late Roman Gaul. The Evidence of Ausonius’, in E. M.Craik, ed., Owls to Athens. Essays to Sir K.Dover (Oxford 1990), 311 f., and repeated in Works of Ausonius, XXV, 276. Recently, M.Clavel-Lévèque, ‘Religion et société en Gaule. Tradition et identité’, in Sept siècles de civilisation gallo-romaine. Vus d’Autun (Autun 1985), 19–65, esp. 24–58. Prof. 4.7–8; 10.26–7. PLRE I. 186 (C 1 and 2). D.Gourevitch, ‘Présence de la médecine rationelle en Gaule romaine’, in Sept siècles…Vus d’Autun, 153–67, esp. 154. In Narbonne, all seven known doctors in the early empire were of Greek origin and all freedmen, M.Gayraud, Narbonne antique des origines à la fin du IIIe siècle, Supp. 8 de la Revue archéologique de Narbonnaise (Paris 1981), 548–50. H.Leclercq, ‘Colonies d’orientaux en Occident’, DACL 3.2.2273–5 on ‘Syriac’ communities in Gaul. R.Lambrecht, ‘Le commerce des “Syriens” en Gaule du haut empire a l’époque mérovingienne’, L’Antiquité classique 6 (1937), 35–61. Parent. 7: Claudius Contemtus and Iulius Callippio.

185


45 M.K.Hopkins, ‘Social Mobility in the Later Roman Empire. The Evidence of Ausonius’, CQ 11 (1961), 241, rejected by J.F.Matthews, Western Aristocracies and Imperial Court 364–425 (Oxford 1975), 81–2. 46 Paulinus of Pella, Eucharisticon 332. 47 Parent. 27 (Veneria); 26 (Cataphronia). 48 In the case of Bordeaux the connection is particularly apparent in the person of its first attested bishop, Orientalis, above, Ch. 3, p. 44. For Bazas there is an interesting and difficult to date story about an enterprising female pilgrim who brought back with her from the Holy Land relics of John the Baptist to grace the first church of the city, Gregory of Tours, Gloria Martyrum, 11, with Griffe, La Gaule chré-tienne, I, 386 n. 110; III, 37. 49 Ch. 1, n. 3 on life expectancy. B.D.Shaw, ‘Latin Funerary Epigraphy and Family Life in the Later Roman Empire’, Historia 33 (1984), 457– 97; idem, ‘The Family in Late Antiquity. The Experience of Augustine’, Past and Present 115 (1987), 351. 50 Parent. 5.9–10: haec me praereptum cunis et ab ubere matris/blanda sub austeris inbuit imperiis. 51 Parent. 12 (Iulia Dryadia); 15 (Pomponius Maximus, her husband) 6–7. 52 Contemporary legal sources use a variety of appellations for the chiefs of the curia including primates (CTh 3.30.6); principales (CTh 7.6.1); and primarii (CTh 12.1.39). 53 Parent. 8.2–4: clara ab exortu stemmata…veteres proavi. 54 PLRE I. 874 (T 2) for ‘ancient senatorial family of Bordeaux’ v. Stroheker, Adel, 222 no. 380, for municipal and not senatorial aristocracy. 55 Parent. 8.9: nosci inter primos cupiens, prior esse recusans (‘desiring to be known among the first, you shunned becoming the foremost’). 56 Attus: Kajanto, Latin Cognomina, 42, 176; Lucanus: A. Móscy, ‘Lateinische Cognomina als Geschichtsquelle’, Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 36 (1984), map 19 for visual illustration. 57 Cf. the attribution of Italian origins to the Pontii Paulini of Bordeaux, Paulinus’ (of Nola) family, C.Jullian, Histoire de Bordeaux (Bordeaux 1895; repr. Marseille 1975), VIII, 132. 58 Parent. 8.7–8, with H.Sivan, ‘Not a civis? A Note on Ausonius’ Parentalia 8 (Schenkl 10.6)’, Latomus 48 (1989), 879–80. 59 Above, Ch. 4, pp. 66 ff., on Ausonian properties. 60 Parent. 8.6. 61 A.D.Booth, ‘The Academic Career of Ausonius’, Phoenix 36 (1982), 329–43. 62 Parent. 19 (Pudentilla); 18 (Sanctus). The name Pudentilla is attested mostly in Africa and predominantly among women, Kajanto, Latin Cognomina, 264. PLRE I. 755 lists only one other, Aemilia Pudentilla, wife of Neratius Gallus, members of the illustrious Italian Neratii. PLRE I. 801 (S 2). 63 NDig. Oc. I.75 f.; 118–25. 64 W.Kuhoff, Studien zur zivilen senatorischen Laufbahn im 4 J. n. Ch. Ämter und

186


65 66 67

68 69 70

71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85

86 87 88

Ämtsinhaber in Clarissimat und Spektabilitat (Frankfurt 1983), 50–1, but he was certainly not a descendant of the homonym consul of the Gallic Empire pace PLRE I. 801 (S 1), followed by Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 688 (S 1). Above, Ch. 2, pp. 10–11. Parent. 14.1, 5–6. Parent. 14.9–10: hoc praefecturae sedes, hoc Illyris ora/praeside te experta est, fiscus et ipse cliens. Stroheker, Adel, 170 no. 132. PLRE I. 300, for a different order with Green, Works of Ausonius, 317; Seeck, Symmachus, MGH AA VI, LXXVI, for one office only in Dalmatia. Kuhoff, Studien, 308 no. 24, on the impossibility of a solution. Hopkins, ‘Social Mobility’, 243. Perhaps succeeding F.Iulius Rufinus Sarmentius (337/50), one of the three known praesides, Kuhoff, Studien, 57. PLRE I. 815, not specifying what sort of comes. Urbica: Parent. 30; Green, ‘Notes’, 22, for identifying her with a supporter of Priscillian who was stoned by a mob outside Bordeaux. Although attractive, the proposition is not very likely. Even Ausonius’ complete discretion could not completely ignore the manner of her death or its implications. Cf. the fairly clear reference to the misfortune of the family of a school colleague whose widow was executed, Prof. 5.36–8. Censor: Parent. 22; once more, not a descendant of a homonym consul of the Gallic empire, PLRE I. 196, Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 577. Matthews, Western Aristocracies, 82–3, for the identification. Parent. 10. Parent. 24.8. Ibid., 7. Ep. 16.16 (Peiper). Parent. 24.9–10. Ibid., 10: praemia optima capis. Above, Ch. 7, p. 127. Parent. 24. 11–12: nam correcturae tibi Tarraco Hibera tribunal/ praebuit, adfectans esse clienta tibi. Kuhoff, Studien, 54. NDig. Oc. I.64–7; 101–5. Kuhoff, Studien, 54, 305 no. 11. Parent. 3.14; Prof. 17.13. Parent. 23.14 (Paulinus): he died in Spain. Nymphius (CIL XIII 128) is called parens provinciae, a poetic term not attested elsewhere but probably meaning the same. H.Sivan, ‘Town, Country and Province in Late Roman Gaul’, ZPE 79 (1989), 103–13. Parent. 17; Prof. 11. Prof. 16.6. Prete XXVI; R.Weiss, ‘Ausonius in the Fourteenth Century’, in R.R. Bolgar, ed., Classical Influences on European Culture AD 500–7500 (Cambridge 1971), 67–72. R.P.H.Green, ‘Marius Maximus and Ausonius’ Caesares’, CQ 31 (1981), 229 and H.Sivan, ‘The Historian Eusebius (of Nantes)’, JHS (1992). 187


89 CTh 13.3; V.Nutton, ‘Archiatri and the Medical Profession in Antiquity’, PBSR 45 (1977), 191–226; F.Kudlien, Die Stellung des Ärztes in der römischen Gesellschaft (Forschungen zur antiken Sklaverei 18) (Stuttgart 1986). 90 R.Van Dam, Leadership and Community in Late Antique Gaul (Berkeley 1985), 128–30, on the importance of medicine in community life. 91 Above, Ch. 2, pp. 20–1. 92 Peiper cix-cx; P.Grimal, ‘Les villas d’Ausone’, REA 55 (1953), 113–25, ascribing to Ausonius one estate. A.Loyen, ‘Bourg-sur-Gironde et les villas d’Ausone’, REA 57 (1960), 113–26, endowing Ausonius with seven. He is followed by R.Etienne, Bordeaux, 357–9. Among repeated attempts to identify a modern excavated site with one of these villae, M.Gauthier, ‘La villa gallo-romaine du Palat a Saint-Emilion’, Bulletin de la société historique et arcbéologique de Saint Emilion 17 (1975), 45, a site not unworthy of Ausonius’ taste. The scholarly divergences are conveniently summarised by P.Bistaudeau, ‘A la recherche des villas d’Ausone’, Caesarodunum XVbis (1978) (Paris 1980), 477–87. 93 Parent. 7.3 (magna pecunia of Contemtus). 94 Parent. 4.15–16 (Arborius); Prof. 19.15 (dives). 95 Ep. 4.1–2 (urban residence). Iulius Ausonius died comfortably, non opulens nec egens, Epicedion. 7. 96 Above, Ch. 3, p. 45 f. 97 Parent. 26.5: de paupere summa. 98 De Herediolo (Domestica 1). 99 M.Rouche, L’Aquitaine des wisigoths aux arabes (Paris 1979), 215, on estimated size of large Aquitanian estates, averaging 2,000–4,000 hectares. It is impossible to give the precise size of any late antique estate, but the impression gained from sites such as Montmaurin and Valentine, both in southern Aquitania, is of vast holdings. G.Fouet, La villa gallo-romaine de Montmaurin (Hte. Garonne) (XX Supp. a Gallia) (Paris 1969); idem, ‘La villa gallo-romaine de Valentine (Hte. Garonne)’, Revue de Comminges 91 (1978), 145–57. 100 Hered. 1–2: Salve, herediolum, maiorum regna meorum,/quod proavus, quod avus, quod pater excoluit. 101 Hopkins, ‘Social Mobility’, 241. 102 Bistaudeaux, ‘Recherche’, 478, for a detailed survey. 103 Above, Ch. 4, p. 62. 104 Eps. 16.36; 26 (passim); 31.256 (Peiper). 105 Parent. 19 (Pudentilla) 6: rexit opes proprias otia agente viro. Parent. 21.7 (Attusia Lucana). 106 Ep. 4.3. 107 P.Petit, Libanius et la vie municipale a Antioche au IVe siècle ap.J.-C. (Paris 1955), App. 3, 407 f. allots a minimum of two estates but does not exclude the possibility of more. 108 Hered. 29: Haec mihi nec procul urbe sita est, nec prorsus ad urbem. 109 Ibid., 25–6: Fons propter puteusque brevis, tum purus et amnis;/ naviger hic refluus me vehit ac revehit.

188


110 Ausonius, unfortunately, does not inform the reader about the number of farmer-tenants that he had, saying merely that: cultur agri nobis nec superest nec abest (Hered. 24). 111 For a preliminary brief survey of the corpus of villae, D.Raguy, Les villas rurales dans l’Aquitaine augustéenne, 2 vols (unpublished TER, Université de Bordeaux I I I 1978–9). There are also useful bibliographical references in the corpus of mosaics by C. Balmelle et al., Recueil général des mosaïques de la Gaule romaine (Supp. X à Gallia) IV (Aquitaine fasc. 1 and fasc. 2 (Paris 1980 and 1987), passim. 112 Balmelle, Recueil, to be completed by a third volume on the Roman mosaics of Bordeaux and the Gironde. 113 The dates are based on pottery finds, coins and stylistic criteria. Problems still abide: late Roman pottery in Gaul still awaits a definitive study such as John Hayes’ study of African red slip ware. Also, gold and silver coins minted in the fourth century continued to circulate in the fifth and must therefore be evaluated with caution. See the useful comments of N.S.Ryan, Fourth-Century Coin Finds from Roman Britain (BAR. BS 183) (Oxford 1988), 148 f. 114 Balmelle, Recueil I.1–3. Province de Belgique (H.Stern); II.1–3. Province de Lyonnaise (H.Stern, M.Blanchard Lemée, J.-P.Darmon, H.Lavagne); Recueil III. 1–2. Province de Narbonnaise (H.Lavagne, J. Lancha). 115 M.Gauthier, ‘La villa gallo-romaine du Palat à Saint Emilion’, 45–58. 116 C.Balmelle, M.Gauthier and R.Monturet, ‘Mosaïques de la villa du Palat à Saint Emilion (Gironde)’, Gallia 38 (1980), 59–96. 117 G.Fouet, ‘La villa gallo-romaine de Valentine’. 118 Map 3 with Premiers temps chrétiens en Gaule méridionale. Antiquité tardive et haut Moyen Age, Catalogue (Lyon 1986), no. 264 (map) and passim. More generally, T.Lewit, Agricultural Production in the Roman Economy AD 200–400 (BAR. IS 568) (Oxford 1991), 27 f., and passim. 119 M.Rouche, L’Aquitaine, 215. Lewit, Agricultural Production, 21 f., for size classification. 120 R.Monturet and H.Rivière, Les thermes sud de la villa gallo-romaine de Séviac, Gers (Supp. 2 à Aquitania) (Bordeaux 1986) for a fully explored, mid-fourth century bath complex. 121 G.Fouet, ‘Exemples d’exploitation des eaux par des grands propriétaires terriens dans le sud-ouest au IV siècle’, Caesarodunum 10 (1975), 128–35, for Valenrine and Montmaurin. 122 G.Fouet, ‘Le sanctuaire des eaux de La Hillère à Montmaurin (Hte. Garonne)’, Gallia 30 (1972), 83–124. Balmelle, Recueil, IV. 1, 84–93 nos. 78–84. 123 CIL XIII 128, 1–2; 7–8: Nymfius aeterno devinctus membra sopore/hic situs est, caelo mens pia perfruitur/…immortalis eris, nam multa laude vigebit/vivax venturos gloria per poplulos. 124 Ibid., 11–12: excepere tuo quondam data munera sumptu/plaudentis populi gaudia per cuneos.

189


125 Ibid., 13–14: concilium procerum per te partia alma vocavit/seque tuo duxit sanctius ore loqui. 126 On the literary and religious context, J.-M.Pailler, ‘L’énigme Nymfius’, Gallia 44 (1986), 151–65; on the social, political and religious context, Sivan, ‘Country and Province in Late Roman Gaul’, ZPE 79 (1989), 103 f. 127 The main sources are the Ephemeris and the letters. I have introduced here a certain anachronism since they mostly date to the 380s and the early 390s, when Ausonius lived in exclusive and rather luxurious retirement. The point here, however, is to give an idea of the type of life connected with rural establishments in late Roman Aquitania. Cf. the detailed insights that the voluminous correspondence of Symmachus offers into the life of the super rich, J.F.Matthews, ‘The Letters of Symmachus’, in J.W.Binns, ed., Latin Literature of the Fourth Century (London 1974), 58 f. S.Roda, Commento storico al libro IX dell’epistolario di Q. Aurelio Simmaco (Pisa 1981) for a voluminous commentary on one book. 128 Cf. the routine a century later of the Visigothic king Theodoric II in his Aquitanian court, also starting with a private prayer, Sidonius Apollinaris, Ep. I.2; H.Sivan, ‘Sidonius Apollinaris, Theodoric II and Gothic-Roman Politics’, Hermes 117 (1989), 85–94. 129 Ep. 9, to Paulus, in Greek: “The consul of the Romans to the poet and the orator, Ausonius to Paulus. Hurry to see your friends.’ 130 To judge by the number of repetitive invitations enclosed in every surviving letter from Eps. 4 to 10. 131 Ep. 16.17–22. 132 Ibid., 3 f., with typical Ausonian puns on the number. Note that he claims that he could even get to Rome on foot within these three months. 133 The Eclogues were dedicated to Pacatus, as were the Technopaegnion and the Ludus; the Cupido to Proculus Gregorius; the Bissula and the Cento to Paulus, who must have been a cheerful and appreciative friend; the Griphus to Symmachus and the Technopaegnion, dedicated twice, to Paulinus. R.P.H.Green, The Correspondence of Ausonius’, L’Antiquité classique 49 (1980), 191–211. H.Sivan, ‘The Dedicatory Presentation in Late Antiquity. The Example of Ausonius’, Illinois Classical Studies 17 (1992), 83–101. 134 Ep. 12 was mailed to Probus in Sirmium; Ep. 2 to Symmachus in Capua. Cf. the vast geographical distribution of Jerome’s correspondents. 135 Ep. 23. 136 Green, ‘Correspondence’, and ‘Greek in Late Roman Gaul’. 137 Ep. 15: Ausonius Theoni cum ei triginta ostrea grandia quidem set tam pauca mississet. 138 Ep. 17.2: aurea mala, Theon, set plumbea carmina mittis. 139 Eps. 17–18; Ep. 25. 140 Ep. 26.

190


5 SCHOOLS AND SCHOLARS 1 Pan. Lat. 3.23: extincta iam litterarum studia flammasti. 2 R.P.H.Green, The Works of Ansonius (Oxford 1991), 328 f., on the poems’ literary aspects; P.Petit, Les étudiants de Libanius (Paris 1956). 3 Strabo 4.4.4; Caesar, BG 6.13. 4 Caesar, BG 6.14; Cicero, de divin. 1.41(90). 5 Mela 3.2 (19); Irenaeus (PG 7.44); HA, Alexander Severus 60; Jerome, Commentary on Ep. ad Galat. (PG 24.357). 6 Martial, Epig. 9.99 (on Toulouse). Caesar, BG 6.13: disciplina in Britannia reperta atque inde in Galliam translata esse existimatur; Tacitus, Agricola 21; Juvenal 15.111: Gallia causidicos docuit facunda Britannos. 7 It is unclear just how effective was Eumenius’ appeal since it seems that the school’s second lease of life lasted only for a few years. Pan. Lat. 8 of 312 depicts a city still in ruins; nor is there information about education in Autun after that date. CTh 13.3 detailing exemptions, and above, Ch. 4, p. 64. 8 S.G.MacCormack, ‘Latin Prose Panegyrics’, in T.A.Dorey, ed., Empire and Aftermath (London 1975), 143–205; and the overview with vast bibliography in R. Herzog, ed., Handbuch der lateinischen Literatnr der Antike V (1989), 161–72. 9 A.Cameron, ‘Wandering Poets. A Literary Movement in Byzantine Egypt’, Historia 14 (1965), 470–509. 10 Pan. Lat. 5; PLRE I. 294 (E 1), and above Ch. 2, p. 17. 11 On education in general, H.-I.Marrou, Histoire de l’éducation dans l’antiqmte (Paris 1964) is basic. For earlier periods, S.F.Bonner, Education in Ancient Rome (Berkeley 1971); M.L.Clarke, Higher Education in the Ancient World (London 1971), is useful on teaching methods. More recently, A.D.Booth, ‘Elementary and Secondary Education in the Roman Empire’, Florilegium 9 (1979), 1–14; R.A. Kaster, ‘Notes on Primary and Secondary Schools in Late Antiquity’, TAPA 113 (1983), 323–46; idem, Guardians of Language. The Grammarian and Society in Late Antiquity (Berkeley 1988) have added valuable insights. W.V.Harris, Ancient Literacy (Cambridge, Mass. 1989), 3–27, discusses definitions of literacy; 238 f., on late Roman literacy, advocating a narrow scope and ever-decreasing uses. 12 T.J.Haarhof, Schools of Gaul (Oxford 1920, repr. Johannesburg 1958), 52 f. for an excellent summary of the Gallic schools and their curricula. 13 These are the Technopaegnion, Eclogae, Ordo and Ludus, all dedicated to a school colleague, Pacatus. They seem to make most sense as products of a school milieu rather than court compositions (Green, Works of Ausonius, 421) or leisurely exercises (Schenkl, Peiper). For close parallels of poetgrammarians producing poetic school texts on subjects ranging from school fees to weights and measures, Cameron, ‘Wandering Poets’, (above, n.9), 492–4. On the need to distinguish between the (often late) dates of the prefaces and the date of the poems’ composition, above, Appendix, p. 157, and H.Sivan, ‘The Decdicatory Presentation in Late 191


14 15 16 17 18

19 20 21

22 23 24

Antiquity. The Example of Ausonius’, Illinois Classical Studies 17 (1992), 83–101. There are echoes of the 354 calendar in the Eclogues (Green, Works of Ausonius 421); and similar echoes in the Ordo (above, Appendix, p. 159). For the Technopaegnion Ausonius seems to have used virtually all the monosyllabic nouns in Latin (Green, Works of Ausonius 583), a feature which points to a sort of glossary or school dictionary. On the possibility of the Ludus emanating from a classroom, Green, Works of Ausonius, 597. The inclusion of exceedingly common or rare words in the Technopaegnion may lead one to disqualify it as a school text, but it is precisely such vagaries that explain the sterility of Roman education in late antiquity and the breeding of an esprit précieux among literary men (A.Loyen, Sidoine Apollinaire et l’esprit précieux en Gaule aux derniers jours de l’empire (Paris 1943)). (Note also the disagreement between Ausonius’ major editors, Peiper and Schenkl, concerning the Eclogae. For Schenkl these include only poems relating to the calendar, while the rest were composed and published independently. See now Green, Works of Ausonius, 420 f., 723 (concordance). We do know that at least one poem, de viro bono (VII.3 (Peiper)=XXX (Schenkl)) was circulated separately, R.Weiss, ‘Ausonius in the Fourteenth Century’, in R. R.Bolgar, ed., Classical Influences on European Culture AD 500–1500 (Cambridge 1971), 71–2). Protrepticon (Ep. 22, Peiper). On harsh attitudes of some school masters cf. Horace, Ep. 2.1.70, and Quintilian 1.3.14 (beatings at school). Technopaegnion 6, 8–12. Ibid., 12. For example: nox, vox; lex, mens, rex; lux, nux, frux, dux (Tech. 7.10, 6.2; 3.11, 13, 7.3; 7.12, 9.10, 9.3, 5.2, respectively). Conf. 1.13.20; H.-I.Marrou, Saint Augustin et la fin de la culture antique (Paris 1938), 27–46; P.Brown, Augustine of Hippo (Berkeley 1967), 36, 271. An objection to the possibility of teaching Greek via poems such as the Ludus may be raised if we apply today’s criteria for teaching undergraduates, but Greek was taught to very young children to whom one could not introduce more than a few new words or phrases in every lesson. Tech. 13. E. Baehrens, ed., in Poet. Lat. Min. III, 205–46. Ausonius himself complained of difficulties in learning Greek as a schoolboy (Prof. 8.13–6). Later, though, he vaunted his mastery of the language in a bilingual letter to an appreciative friend (Ep. 8). Paulinus of Nola, Ausonius’ brightest pupil, characterised his knowledge of Greek as inadequate (Ep. 46.2), although Jerome, Ep. 85, 3, commented on his ease with the language. See now Green, ‘Greek in Late Roman Gaul’, in E.M.Craik, ed., Owls to Athens (Oxford 1990), 311–19. Eclogae 2 (P)=XXVIII (S). Ibid., 7=XXXV. H.Stern, Le calendrier de 354 (Paris 1953); idem, ‘Les calendriers romains illustrés’, ANRW II.12.2 (Berlin 1981), 431–75; E.Courtney, ‘The

192


25 26

27

28 29

30 31 32 33 34 35

36

37 38 39

40

Roman Months in Art and Literature’, MH 45 (1988), 33–57. Some of the poems preserved in conjunction with illustrations have been attributed to Ausonius, D.Levi, ‘The Allegories of the Months’, Art Bulletin 23 (1941), 241–91, esp. 284, although Stern, Calendrier, 354, is more sceptical. Ausonius is also accredited with a lost work on the names of the Hebrew and Athenian months, Prete XXIV; M.D. Reeve, ‘Some Manuscripts of Ausonius’, Prometheus 3 (1977), 112–20. Above, Appendix, on questions of authenticity. Ecl. 20. Eumenius, Pro Instaurandis Scholis 20 (Pan. Lat. V.Galletier). O.A. W.Dilke, Greek and Roman Maps (London 1985), 53. On this rather fascinating subject of maps, A.D.von Den Brincken, ‘Weltbild der lateinishen Universalhistoriker Mappa Mundi’, Spoleto (Centro di studi sull’alto medioevo 1983), 377–408. The Caesares. R.P.H.Green, ‘Marius Maximus and Ausonius’ Caesares’, CQ 31, 1981, 226–36, claiming with reason that M M was not Ausonius’ source for the later biographies. De regibus qui regnaverunt in Ytalia (sic) inter bellum troianum et principium romani imperii, Weiss, ‘Ausonius in the Fourteenth Century’, 67–72. De imperatoribus res novas molitis a Decio useque ad Diocletianum versu iambico trimetro iuxta libros Eusebij nannetici ystorici (sic). Not Eusebius of Caesaria, pace Alan Cameron, ‘The Latin Revival of the Fourth Century’, in W.Treadgold, ed., Renaissances before the Renaissance, (Stanford 1984), 55. H.Sivan, ‘The Historian Eusebius (of Nantes)’, JHS (1992). Cronicam ab initio mundi useque ad tempus suum, Weiss, ‘Ausonius in the Fourteenth Century’. Amm. 28.4.14. C.Dionisatti, ‘From Ausonius’ School Days?’ JRS 72 (1982), 83 f. Prof. 5 (Delphidius) and above, pp. 21, 92. Ecl. 14 with F.Granucci, ‘Appunti di lessicologia gallica. Ausonio e il Grammaticomastix’, Romanobarbarica 9 (1986–7), 115–51. Ordo 1: Prima urbes inter, divum domus, aurea Roma. Rutilius Namatianus and Sidonius Apollinaris also witness to the magic exercised by the eternal city, F.Paschoud, Roma Aeterna (Rome 1967). R.Beck, Die ‘Tres Galliae’ und das ‘Imperium’ im 4 J. (Zurich 1969) for a political rationale. Green, Works of Ausonius, 569–70, on Ausonius simply collecting cities with a claim to fame. Ordo 20.1–40. R.P.Saller, Personal Patronage under the Early Empire (Cambridge 1982), 100. Ibid., 108 f., on the importance of recommendations, an observation which holds true for the late empire as well, to judge by the staggering number of such letters by Symmachus at Rome and Libanius in Antioch. On its raison d’être, Prof. praefatio 2–3: fama et carae religio patriae,/ et studium in libris et sedula cura docendi. On the criteria for exclusion or

193


41

42

43 44 45

46 47 48 49

50 51 52 53 54 55

56

57 58 59

inclusion, Epitaphia, Ausonius lectori: qui vel peregrini (Burdigalae) vel Burdigalenses peregre docuerunt. For the dates see Appendix, p. 160. R.Etienne, Bordeaux antique (Bordeaux 1962), 235–64 (‘une ville universitaire’) for a general introduction; C.Favez, ‘Une école galloromaine au IV siècle’, Latomus 7 (1948), 223–33; J. Hastinguas, ‘Vertus universitaires selon Ausone’, REA 55 (1952), 379–87. A.D.Booth, ‘The Academic Career of Ausonius’, Phoenix 36 (1982), 329–43; R.P.H.Green, ‘Still Waters Run Deep. A New Study of the Professores of Bordeaux’, CQ 35 (1985), 491–506. C.Kunderewicz, ‘Le gouvernement et les étudiants dans le Code Théodosien’, Revue historique de droit français et étranger 50 (1972), 575–88. Prof. 1.3; 4.3; 14.3. Green, ‘Waters’, 499. Average tenure has been calculated on the basis of Booth’s tables (‘Academic Career’, 339 and 341) where he names eight rhetoricians for a period of 53 years, and eleven grammarians (excluding Thalassus and Macrinus) for a period of 50 years. Prof. 24 (Acilius), 11–12: acerbo/funere praereptus; 11 (Herculanus), 4: lubricae iuventae…flexus; 10 (Phoebicius), 22: senem. Prof. 15.19; 4.4; 19.5 (in Toulouse); 20.13 (in Auch?). Booth, ‘Academic Career’, 331–3. Prof. 10.12–13: huic (Macrino) mea principio/credita puerities. 8.10: ceteri primis docuere in annis; 1.11: me quoque, on the number of Minervius’ students. Another possible teacher is Staphylus of Auch (Prof. 20) who taught Ausonius there, Booth, ‘Academic Career’, 332. Prof. 16; Parent. 4; above, Ch. 4, p. 53–4. Prof. 7.13. Ibid., 3.1–2: condiscipulus, magister, collega. Ibid., 24.5–6: puero conpar mihi, discipulus moc, meque dehinc facto rhetore grammaticus. Ibid., 12. Booth, ‘Academic Career’, 334 f.; Green, ‘Waters’, 493 f.; S.F. Bonner, ‘The Edict of Gratian on the Remuneration of Teachers’, AJP 86 (1965), 113–37; R.A.Kaster, ‘A Reconsideration of Gratian’s School Law’, Hermes 112 (1984), 100–14; H.Sivan, ‘Ausone et la legislation impériale. L’exemple de CTh 13.3.11, REA 91 (1989), 47–53. Haarhof, Schools, 115, for ten altogether; Etienne, Bordeaux, 240, for thirteen; A. Chastagnol, ‘Introduction’ in Transformations et conflits au IVe siècle (Colloque de Bordeaux 1970) (Bonn 1978), 1–13, ten, adding a chair of medicine; Green, ‘Waters’, 495, for two chairs of rhetoric ‘and more than one for Latin grammar’. Booth, ‘Academic Career’, 335, for one of rhetoric, and 340, for one for each grammarian (total of three). Kaster, Guardians, 455, for two chairs of Latin grammar, one of Greek grammar and one of rhetoric, totalling four. Green, ‘Waters’, passim. Booth, ‘Academic Career’, passim. CTh 13.3.11: Trevirorum vel clarissimae civitati uberius aliquid puta-vimus

194


60 61 62

63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71

72 73 74

75 76

77 78

deferendum, rhetori ut triginta, item viginti grammatico Latino, Graeco etiam, si qui dignus repperiri potuerit, duodecim praebeantur annonae. In second-century Athens there were only two chairs of rhetoric, one municipal, the other imperial: I. Avotins, ‘The Holders of the Chairs of Rhetoric at Athens’, HSCP 79 (1975), 313–24. Yet, the Digesta 27.1.6 grants immunities to no less than ten doctors, five sophists and five grammarians in large cities. Booth, ‘Academic Career’, 336. Kunderewicz, ‘Le gouvernement et les étudiants’ (above, n. 43), passim. Singulis urbibus, quae metropoles nuncupantur, nobilium professorum electio celebretur nec vero iudicemus, liberum ut sit cuique civitati suos doctores et magistros placito sibi iuvare compendio. My thanks to Tony Honoré for his help. Petit, Etudiants (n. 2, above), 166–70, for tracing the careers of 129 students, the majority of whom became government employees. Prof. 1.9–10: mille foro dedit hic iuvenes, bis mille senatus/adiecit numero purpureisque togis. Symm. Ep. 9.88. Sulp. Sev. Dial. I.27; II.4 on Aquitanian eloquence. Prof. 16, title and v. 11 (Arborius), Parent. 3.11; Prof. 17.7–8 (Exsuperius). Prof. 19.4 (Sedatus); 12 (his son). Booth, ‘Academic Career’, 331. Prof. 18. Ibid., 23.3 (Dynamius). Ibid., 1.4 with Jerome, Chron. s.a. 353 (Minervius at Rome); Jerome, Ep. 120 praef. (on Patera). Censorius’ place of teaching depends on the interpretation of the difficult verses of Prof. 14.7–10 (tam generis tibi celsus apex, quam gloria fandi,/gloria Athenaei cognita sede loci:/ Nazario et claro quondam delat Paterae/egregie multos excoluit iuvenes), which Booth, ‘Academic Career’, takes to imply Rome, but Green, ‘Waters’, prefers Bordeaux. A fourth Bordelais can perhaps be added but the case of Nazarius is difficult. For Bordelais connection, PLRE I.618 f.; Etienne, Bordeaux, 240; Pan. Lat. 2.147, Galletier; Green, ‘Waters’, 499, against Booth, ‘Notes on Ausonius’ Professores’, Phoenix 32 (1978), 244. Booth may be right. Prof. 19.12. Ibid., 1.4 specifies Constantinople, Rome and then (dehinc) Bordeaux. Green, ‘Waters’, 498. Patera’s possible Roman period is not mentioned in the poem written in his honour (Prof. 4) but is implied by Prof. 14.9 and stated by Jerome, Chron. s.a. 336. Prof. 16.15 (Arborius); 1.4 (Minervius). Ibid., 13 (Citarius); 4.7 (Patera’s origin) and below, p. 91. Prof., 20 (Staphylius) with PLRE I. 852 v. Booth, ‘Notes’, 248–9, for not teaching in Bordeaux. Ausonius claims that he included Staphylius in the Commemoratio out of personal affection. Prof, 10.19: profugus patria (Concordius). Brown, Augustine of Hippo, 19–72, in evocative detail. Note the silence of the Gallic panegyrists between 313 and 362, due perhaps to the establishment of a permanent court in the east. (Nazarius apparently delivered his in Rome in 321.) 195


79 Amm. 18.1 and above, n. 33. 80 Prof. 15.18: honore gesti praesidatus inclitus. G.Caputo, ‘Flavius Nepotianus. Comes et Praeses Provinciae Tripolitanae’, REA 53 (1951), 234–47 for the identification based on AE 64 (1952), 173, and for Ausonius’ patronage and a date in the mid-370s. 81 Above, Ch. 2, p. 16. 82 Prof. 17.7–10, between 335, Dalmatius’ censorship, and 337, his death. 83 Prof. 17.16: origo parentum. 84 Ibid., 21 (Crispus and Urbicus); 10 (Sucuro). Kaster, Guardians (prosopography 40, 146, 165), who also maintains that the three constitute an exception in the profession which otherwise drew recruits from higher social scales, pp. 21 and 101. 85 Prosper, Chron. 1187 (CM 1.462, AD 385) for Priscillian’s supporter; Ausonius, Parent. 30 (Pomponia Urbica). On the possible connection between the grammarian and the supporter of Priscillian, Kaster, Guardians, 165. Against any connection: Green, ‘Prosopographical Notes’, 22 (but identifying the Urbica of Prosper with that of Ausonius). 86 Prof. 10. 87 Ibid., 14.: tam generis tibi celsus apex, quam gloria fandi. 88 Green, ‘Prosopographical Notes’, 23, tentatively supported by Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 548 (A 3). 89 Cf. Nepotianus’ son who was identified with a bishop of Clermont, Green, ‘Prosopographical Notes’, 23, on the connection; Greg. Tur. Historia Francorum, 1.46 for the name. 90 Carm. 4.16; K.F.Stroheker, Der Senatorische Adel im spätantiken Gallien (Tübingen 1948), no. 44. 91 Prof. 16.8 (ambo genus procerum) and above, Ch. 3, p. 51. 92 Prof. 18.1: Marcello genitum. Ibid., 5–6: nobilis hic hospes Clarentius indole motus/egregia natam coniugio adtribuit. Probably not ‘a stranger of high birth’, pace Evelyn White, 127, but his host. Cf. Prof. 15.14–15 where the relations of guest/host are clearly denoted. 93 Prof. 24. For what follows, H.Sivan, ‘A Late Gallic Branch of the Acilii Glabriones?’ Mnemosyne 44 (1991), 435–9. 94 Prof. 24, taken at face value by Kaster, Guardians (prosopography 64), in the wake of all editors of Ausonius. Both names pose a textual problem. 95 Prof. 3.5–8. 96 Ibid., 8 (Sperchus and Menesthus with Kaster, Guardians, nos 139 and 99); 9 (Jucundus and Leontius) with Kaster, Guardians, nos 86 and 89. 97 Prof. 19. PLRE I.818; Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 691 (S1). 98 Ep. 2.18; 2.19. Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 691 (S2). 99 Green, ‘Prosopographical Notes’, 23; Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 606, for the bishop. 100 Prof. 1.36: angustas opes (TV Minervius); 6.38–9: divitias utriusque domus (Alethius M). 101 Ibid., 10.49 (pauper, Anastasius); 8.6 (fructus exilis, Greek grammarians); 7.10 (exilis cathedra, Leontius). Leontius is an unlikely candidate for the

196


102

103 104 105

106 107 108 109 110 111

112

113 114

115 116 117 118 119 120 121

owner of the villa of Loupiac (Gironde), where a fragmentary inscription (CIL XIII 911) gives this name. Alan Cameron, ‘Roman School Fees’, CR 15 (1965), 257–8; R.A. Kaster, The Salaries of Libanius’, Chiron 13 (1983), 37 f. for fluctuations and special imperial support; idem, Guardians, 112 f. on the grammarian’s direct and indirect sources of income. The latter include salaries from public funds, private tuition, occasional gifts and legal immunities. On the whole, it was a rather mediocre income. Prof. 18.5–8. Marcellus also contracted an advantageous marriage. Ibid., 16.9; 19.5–6 (Sedatus). Ibid., 13.9: coniugium nanctus cito nobilis et locupletis (Citatius); 23.5: quem locupletavit coniunx Hispana latentem (Dynamius). Exsuperius, ibid., 16.9: praedives; Nepotianus, ibid., 15.19. Nepotianus has been identified as owner of the vast and sumptuous villa of Montmaurin, G.Fouet, La villa gallo-romaine de Montmaurin (XX Supp. à Gallia) (Paris 1969), 289; and above, Ch. 2, p. 25. Prof. 3.11–12: …numquam inclamare clientes,/ad famulos numquam tristia verba loqui. Ibid., 24.78: cultor in agris/digne, diu partis qui fruerere bonis. Kaster, Guardians, 112–13, to judge by the size of their landed/taxable property. Prof. 2.14: omnem refugisti ambitum. Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 550; PLRE I. 39. G.Dagron, L’empire romain d’orient au IVe siècle et les traditions politiques d’hellénisme. Le témoignage de Thémistios (Travaux et Mémoires III) (Paris 1968); Cameron, ‘Wandering Poets’ (above, n.9). CTh 13.3.5=CJ 10.53.7 and Julian Ep. 61 (Bidez) with B.C.Hardy, ‘The Emperor Julian and his School Law’, Church History 38 (1968), 131–43; Kaster, Guardians; and E.Pack, Städte und Steuern in der Politik Julians (Coll. Latomus 194) (Brussels 1986), 261 f. Green, ‘Waters’, 505. See Concordance (p. 165) for datings. The Ephemeris is the only bone of contention. It is more likely to be a product of retired leisure than of a school holiday. N.K.Chadwick, Poetry and Letters in Early Christian Gaul (London 1955), 31–5, for a few splendid pages. Prof. 10.22–30; Booth, ‘Notes’, 236. Hopkins, ‘Social Mobility’, 245. Jerome, Chron. s.a. 336: Pater (a) rhetor Romae gloriossime docet; Ep. 120, praefatio: antequam ego nascerer. Cf. Amm. 18.1 with Ausonius, Prof. 5. Ammianus’ silence about Ausonius is deafening. On this court case, above, n. 33; H.Sivan, ‘Numerian the Intellectual’, Rheinisches Museum (forthcoming). Delphidius’ tyrant has been a subject of some controversy, and variously identified as: Magnentius (350–3) by PLRE I.246 and Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 591 following Seeck, ‘Delphidius’, in PW 4.2 (1901), 2503; Procopius (365–6) by Evelyn

197


122 123

124 125 126

White in Loeb I.107, followed by Booth, ‘Notes’, 237–8, and Green, ‘Prosopographical Notes’, 23; and Maximus (383–8) by Marx, Ausonius, in PW 2.2 (1896), 2573. Amm. 26.10.8 and above, Ch. 6, p. 98. Alethius Minervius is not the son of Tiberius Victor Minervius (pace Booth, ‘Notes’, 239–42 and Green, ‘Waters’, 502), who died intestate, most likely childless (Prof. 1.37: heredis egens) and a poor man, but of Delphidius, Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 653 (M1). Sulp. Sev. Chron. II.47. Pacatus 29.2 (Pan. Lat. XII) implicitly incriminating Magnus Maximus. Jerome, Ep. 120, praef.

6 THE COURT OF VALENTINIAN I 1 C.Jullian, Histoire de la Gaule romaine, 8 vols (Paris, 1920–6), VII, 234 f.; O.Seeck, Regesten der Kaiser und Päpste s.a. (Stuttgart 1919), on movements. 2 J.J.Hatt, Histoire de la Gaule romaine (Paris 1959), 291 f.; E. Demougeot, La formation de l’Europe et les invasions barbares II. 1 (Paris 1979), 86 f. 3 Ad Athen. 278d-279. 4 R.Browning, The Emperor Julian (Berkeley 1978), 79 f.; J.Matthews, The Roman Empire of Ammianus (Baltimore 1989), 81–93 on Julian in Gaul. 5 Amm. 18.1.2–6. 6 Amm. 17.3; 18.1, with H.Sivan, ‘Numerian the Intellectual. A Dynastic Survivor in Fourth Century Gaul’, Rheinisches Museum (forthcoming); and above, Ch. 5, n. 33. 7 Amm. 26.5.7. 8 Amm. 26.5.12: legationes urbium accessere nobilium, precantes ne in rebus duris et dubiis, inpropugnatas eas relinqueret, quas praesens eripere poterit discriminibus maximis, metu ambitiosi nominis sui Germanis incusso. Matthews, Ammianus, 1, 254, on the same theme in the Latin Panegyrics. Symm. Or. 1.15: sedem…in ea parte posuisti, qua totius rei publicae ruina vergebat. 9 Amm. 26.5.8 for the simultaneous arrival of the news about Procopius’ and the Alamanni’s revolts. Amm. 26.5.14; 7.11–12, on efforts to secure Africa and Illyricum, with Matthews, Ammianus, 191 f., esp. 198. 10 Amm. 26.7.4. 11 Ibid.: institutis bonarum artium spectatissimi, probably not of noble origins (pace Matthews, Ammianus, 225) Amm. 26.7.7: ex faece vulgari. 12 Ausonius, Prof. 5.29: vagus per omnes dignitatum formulas. For the connection between Delphidius and Procopius, above, Ch. 5, p. 92. 13 Amm. 26.10.8, in the rather gory company of Procopius’ severed head (Amm. 26.10.6). 14 Amm. 26.10.8: quod divo Iuliano fuit acceptus, cuius memorandis virtutibus ambo fratres principes obstrectabat, nec similes eius, nec suppares. So the misguided opinion of Ammianus on Valentinian. Ausonius, Prof. 5.31– 2: unde insecuto criminum motu gravi/donatus aerumnis patris, on Delphidius.

198


15 Amm. 27.2, esp. 11: praeter haec alia multa narratu minus digna conserta sunt proelia, per tractus varios Galliarum, quae superfluum est explicare, cum neque operae pretium aliquod eorum habuere proventus, nec historiam producere per minutias ignobiles decet. A pity Ammianus deemed them beneath his historian’s dignity. 16 Amm. 27.6.1: inter haec Valentiniano magnitudine quassato morborum, agitantesque extrema, colloquio occultiore Gallorum, qui aderant in commilitio principis, ad imperium Rusticus Iulianius, tunc magister memoriae, poscebatur. The other faction is not identified but its choice was heartily endorsed by Ammianus (27.6.3). Some members of this Gallic colloquium can probably be identified with the proceres Gallorum who supported Secundus as an imperial candidate in 363 and 364, Amm. 25.5.2–3. A.Alföldi, A Conflict of Ideas in the Late Roman Empire, trans. H.Mattingly (Oxford 1952), 13 f., for an excellent account. 17 Amm. 27.6.4. 18 Amm. 27.6.16: Valentinianus morem institutum antiquitus supergressus. Gratian had already been the recipient of an unusual title, that of nobilissimus puer, a year before his elevation. J.Doignon, ‘Le titre de Nobilissimus Puer porté par Gratien et la mystique littéraire des origines de Rome a l’avènement de Valentinien’, in R.Chevallier, ed., Mélanges A.Piganiol (Paris 1966), 1693–709. 19 PLRE I. 479 (I 37). 20 Above, Ch. 2, pp. 17, 19. 21 Cf. Secundus’ reaction to the proposal of the throne after the death of Julian, Matthews, Ammianus, 183, 507 n. 5. His reasons are not given by Ammianus, nor does he state that Rusticus actually declined the throne. The latter was never a favourite with the historian. 22 PLRE I. 763. Remigius’ tenure as MO has been variously dated to 367–73 (M.Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie 260–527’, Francia 10 (1982), 679); from the end of 364 to 372–3 (K.F.Stroheker, Der Senatorische Adel im spätantiken Gallien (Tübingen 1948), no. 321); and to 365–71 (M.Clauss, Der Magister Officiorum in der Spätantike (Munich 1980), 186). His presence in Amiens is implied by Ammianus 27.6.1. 23 On his connection with Mainz, Amm. 30.2.10. His wealth was sufficient to warrant the inclusion of his son Synesius in the Roman senate, Symmachus, Or. 7. 24 Amm. 15.5.36. 25 Above, n.16. 26 Echoes, however, of possible rivalry among the Gauls at court may be detected in a curious incident which took place in 365. Claudius Mamertinus, then praetorian prefect of Italy, Illyricum and Africa, was accused of peculation by Avitianus, former vicar of Africa, Amm. 27.7.1. Mamertinus was promptly replaced and both he and Avitianus vanished from the political stage. Avitianus later reappeared in Tours in the company of Martin. Mamertinus was perhaps from Autun, descendant of the homonym orator; Avitianus was an Aquitanian.

199


27

28 29

30 31 32 33

34

35 36

Amm. 27.6.6–9, 12–13. Matthews, Ammianus, 130, on conventions of ancient historiography regarding speeches which are essentially fitting words to the right occasion; 131, 506–7 n.2, on Julian’s death-bed speech as a reasonable presentation of the words actually said; 237 on proper imperial conduct and appropriate words. Valentinian’s speeches are not discussed. Amm. 26.2.2. Note how Ammianus interrupts the sequence of events with a digression (26.3) on Apronianus. Did he mean, in this way, to convey the controversial nature of Valens’ appointment? Amm. 27.6.10–11. Amm. 26.6.6–9, esp. 9: humanitate et studiis disciplinarum sollertium. The audience is described as splendore nobilium potestatum, 27.6.5. Perhaps Ammianus intended here to recall the events of 364 and to call attention to the even more controversial choice of Gratian. There is some disagreement concerning the precise date: L.A.A. Jouai, De magistraat Ausonius (Nijmegen 1938), 46 f. esp. 50, for the year 365, based on supposedly first-hand experience of Milan (Ordo 11); Evelyn White, Ausonius (Loeb), X, for 364; R.Etienne, Bordeaux antique (Bordeaux 1962), 342, for 367; Booth, The Academic Career of Ausonius’, Phoenix 36 (1982), 332 n. 12, for 366. Somewhere between the middle of 366 and summer of 367 appears feasible. Decimius Secundinus, proconsul Achaeae c. 365; R.von Haehling Die Religionszugehörigkeit der hohen Amtsträger des Römischen Reiches seit Constantins I Alleinherrschaft bis zum Ende der Theodosianischen Dynastie (Bonn 1978), 167, followed by Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 690 (S 1) and by W.Kuhoff Studien zur zivilen senatorischen Laufbahn im 4 J. n. Ch. Ämter und Amtsinhaber in Clarissimat und Spektabilitat (Frankfurt 1983), 184. But the matter remains hypothetical. I.Kajanto, The Latin Cognomina (Helsinki 1965), 292, supplies no less than 382 Secundini. A.Móscy, ‘Lateinische Cognomina als Geschichtsquelle. Zwei Typen der Provinzialsrömischen Kultur’, Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 36 (1984), 205 and 209, for Celtic roots and an area of distribution from Spain to Dalmatia (through Gaul and northern Italy). Protrepticon, 82–4; Praef. (Ausonius lectori), 25. Ancient descriptions of the late Roman Trier include Ausonius, Ordo 6, and Gratiarum Actio 1.3; Pan. Lat. 7.22 (ed. Galletier), calling Trier fortunatissima civitas; Expositio totius mundi 58 (ed. J.Rougé, SCh 124). Among modern surveys of the ancient city, E.M.Wightman, Roman Trier and the Treveri (London 1970), esp. 92 f. (on the fortified city) and idem, Gallia Belgica (London 1985), 234–9; H.Heinen, Trier und das Treverland in römischer Zeit (Trier 1985). For an illustrated introduction to the city in late antiquity, C.-M.Ternes and F.Faber, Trèves, capitale d’empire’, Les dossiers. Histoire et archéologie 85 (juillet 1984) with bibl.; and the comprehensive catalogue, Trier: Kaiserresidenz und Bischofssitz. Die Stadt in spätantiker und frühch-ristlicher Zeit (Mainz 1984). 200


37 38

39 40

41 42

43 44 45 46 47 48 49

50 51

52

53

54

H.Cüppers, ‘Die Stadtmauer des römischen Trier und das Graberfeld an der Porta Nigra’, TZ 36 (1973), 133–222. NDig Oc. 9.37–8; 11.58, 77; 12.26. There were also vast horrea near the Moselle which served to store large quantities of merchandise, H. Eiden, ‘Untersuchungen an den spätrömischen Horrea von St. Irminen in Trier’, TZ 24/6 (1956/8), 629–36. H.Stern, Le calendrier de 354 (Paris 1953), 142 Pl. I I I 2; Trier: Kaiserresidenz, no. 59. Trier: Kaiserresidenz, 351, includes an excellent map. One can observe two complexes next to the forum, the Palastanlage and the Doppelpalastanlage, that probably served as residences. Wightman, Trier, 98 f.; L.Hussong and H.Cüppers, Die Trierer Kaiserthermen (Mainz 1972). E.Gose, Der gallo-römische Tempelbezirk im Altbachtal zu Trier (Mainz 1972); Trier: Kaiserresidenz no. 4b, on the Barbarathermen throughout the second to fourth centuries; and nos 66–76 on the amphitheatre throughout the first to fourth centuries. Epitaphia 33 (ed. Peiper); W.von Massow, ‘Der Circus des römischen Trier’, TZ 18 (1949), 149–69; Trier: Kaiserresidenz, nos 77–84. Wightman, Trier, 103; Trier: Kaiserresidenz, nos 52–8 with bibliography. Der Trierer Dom (Rheinisches Verein für Denkmalpflege und Landschaftsschutz, Jahrbuch 1978/9) (Neuss 1980). As excavations have shown. See Trier: Kaiserresidenz, 68–74, esp. 68–9. Ausonius, Ordo 6.6–7: largus tranquillo praelabitur amne Mosella, longinqua omnigenae vectans commercia terrae. K.Parlasca, Die römischen Mosaiken in Deutschland (Berlin 1959). K.Goethert-Polaschek, Römische Gläser im Rheinischen Landesmuseum Trier (Trier 1980). The major centre of production was Cologne, but the imperial capital was obviously a main consumer if not a major producer. On the Cologne glass, F.Fremesdorf, Die Denkmäler des römischen Köln, vols III, V–VIII (Cologne 1958–67). Trier: Kaiserresidenz, nos 141, 144. Cupido, praef.: mirandi stuporem transtuli ad ineptiam poetandi. R.P. H.Green, The Works of Ausonius (Oxford 1991), 526 f., dating the poem to 365–7 with finishing touches later on. For a detailed analysis, W.Fauth, ‘Cupido Cruciatus’, Gräzer Beiträge 2 (1974), 39–60. N.Blanc and G.Gury, ‘Schémas italiens, schémas locaux. La representation des amours dans la peinture provinciale’, Documents d’arcbéolo-gie française 10: La peinture murale antique (ed. A.Barbet) (Paris 1987), 330–45. K.M.D.Dunbabin, The Mosaics of Roman North Africa (Oxford 1978), 86–7, for north African parallels. Wightman, Gallia Belgica, 215, 258 f., with general reservations on the extent of prosperity. For a rather bleak picture of decline and destruction, T.Lewit, Agricultural Production in the Roman Economy AD 200–400 (BAR. IS 568) (Oxford 1991), 34–5 and passim. Wightman, Trier, 169–70; A l’aube de la France. La Gaule de Constantin à Childeric (Paris 1981), no. 370. 201


55 H.Wrede, Die spätantike Hermengalerie von Welschbillig (Berlin 1972). Cf. the earlier (second-/third-century) Aquitanian villa of Chiragan with its numerous portrait busts. See E.Espérandieu, Recueil général des bas-reliefs de la Gaule romaine, II Aquitaine (Paris 1908, repr. 1965) 29 f. (Martres Tolosane) and nos 891–1011. 56 Wightman, Gallia Belgica, 2 59; H.Cüppers and A.Neyses, ‘Untersuchungen und Beobachtungen im südlichen Langmauerbezirk’, TZ 34 (1971), 227 f. 57 Protrepticon (Ep. 22, Peiper), passim. 58 Ibid., 75 (translated by Evelyn White). 59 On school curricula, above, Ch. 5, p. 76 f. 60 Ep. 23 (Peiper). 61 Epit. de caesaribus 47.4. 62 Amm. 27.10.10, for the presence of Gratian; Ausonius’ Bissula, Moselle, et al. for his own presence. 63 Epigs 28 and 30 (Peiper): Ad fontem Danuvii iussu Valentiniani Augusti. Titles reproduced in Schenkl and Peiper, but not in Green. 64 Epig. 28.5–10. 65 Especially Epig. 30.7: Augusto dabitur sed proxima palma Valenti, and below on the same idea in the Versus Paschales. 66 Epig. 40 (Peiper) ad uxorem and Epigs 53–5 to Sabina, both of which, as well as the Bissula, echo Catullus. 67 Recently, P.Brown, The Body and Society. Men, Women, and Sexual Renunciation in Early Christianity (New York 1988). 68 Cento nnptialis 4, quoting Martial, 1.4.8: lasciva est nobis pagina, vita proba. 69 Griphus 88: Ter bibe. tris numerus super omnia, tris deus unus and above, Ch. 6, p. 110, on Christianity at the court. Green, Works of Ausonius, 444 f., for general comments. 70 Amm. 30.9.4. 71 On the ancient cento, G.Salanitro, ed., Osidio Geta. Medea (Rome 1984); D.F.Bright, ‘Theory and Practice in the Vergilian Cento’, Illinois Classical Studies 9 (1984), 79–90. 72 Proba’s cento is perhaps the best-known example. On biblical epics, R. Herzog, Die Bibelepik der lateinischen Spätantike I (Munich 1975);M. J.Roberts, Biblical Epic and Rhetorical Paraphrase in Late Antiquity (ARCA 16) (Liverpool 1985); J.Fontaine, ‘La poésie chrétienne “mondaine” du centon de Proba aux petits vers d’Ausone’, in Naissance de la poésie dans l’ocddent chrétien (Paris 1981), 95–110; F.E.Consolino, ‘Da Osidio Geta ad Ausonio e Proba. Le molte possibilità del centone’, Atene e Roma 28 (1983), 133–51; J.-L.Charlet, ‘L’inspiration et la forme biblique dans la poésie latine, du IIIe au VIe siècles’, in J. Fontaine and C.Pietri, eds, Le monde latin antique et la Bible. Bible de tous les temps 2 (Paris 1985), 631 f. Most recently, the valuable W. Kirsch, Die lateinische Versepik des 4 J. (Berlin 1989). 73 Amm. 30.8.10. 74 Cento, praef. 4–9. 75 Amm. 27.6.6 f., and above, Ch. 6, p. 101.

202


76 77 78

79 80

81 82

83 84

85

86 87

Against Green, Works of Ausonius, 456, who takes the journey as a nonhistorical event. H.Isbell, ‘Decimus Magnus Ausonius’, in J.W.Binns, ed., Latin Literature of the Fourth Century (London 1974), 43. C.-M.Ternes, ‘La notion de “verus limes” dans la “Mosella” d’Ausone’, in La patrie gauloise d’Agrippa au VI siècle, Actes du colloque de Lyon 1981 (Lyon 1984), 355–74; R.Martin, ‘La Moselle d’Ausone, estelle un poème politique?’ Revue des études Latines 63 (1985), 237 f.; Green, Works of Ausonius, 457, adduces Valentinian encouragement. For what follows, H.Sivan, ‘Redating Ausonius’ Mosella’, AJP 111 (1990), 383–94, summarised above, Appendix, pp. 161–2. F.Marx, ‘Ausonius Lied von der Mosel’, RM 80 (1931), 373, 376–7, whose interpretation is rejected by Green, ibid. Martin, ‘La Moselle d’Ausone’, 247–9. Contrast R.P.H.Green, ‘Man and Nature in Ausonius’ Moselle’, ICS 14 (1989), 303–15, who insists on the negligibility of the human element in the poem. Amm. 27.10.8; 30.7.7, and Sivan, ‘Redating Ausonius’ Mosella’ (above, n.78). Symm., Ep. 1.14.4, on the appeal of the fish catalogue. Cf. similar riverine and marine motifs on contemporary mosaics in Gaul, Mosaïques romaines et paléochrétiennes du Musée du Louvre (Paris 1978), Pl. 133; and on small luxury objects, F.Baratte, ‘La vaisselle d’argent en Gaule’, Les dossiers. Histoire et archéologie 54 (juin 1981), 38–51; H.A.Cahn et al., Der spätrömische Silberschatz von Kaiseraugust (Derendingen 1984), for this magnificent plate. Above, p. 101, on Ausonius’ plausible presence in Amiens. Sivan ‘Redating Ausonius’ Mosella’, on a pre-Solicinium date for the poem. Green, Works of Ausonius, 456, distinguishes between an initial date of composition and its completion around 371. Praef. (Ausonius lectori), 35, lists the title as the first in the given cursus; The Gratiarum Actio 2.11 dates the rank before that of a quaestor; the Protrepticon ignores the title altogether, a possible indication of its honorary nature and of the need to separate its grant from that of the quaestorship (in spite of PLRE I. 140). In a letter to Symmachus (Ep. 2.4, Peiper), Ausonius reminds him of their time at court when they were both in comitatu. Symmachus is recorded as comes ordinis tertii after 365 and before 373, and the grant of this rank is usually associated with his sojourn at court in 369/70. Ausonius’ title may date to about the same time, subsequent to a recitation of the Mosella at court. Green, Works of Ausonius, 541, associates rank with a reward for educating Gratian. Stroheker, Adel, 151, seems to connect it with Ausonius’ arrival at court. J.Steinhausen, ‘Hieronymus und Laktanz in Trier’, TZ 20 (1951), 126– 54, esp. 127 f. Amm. 30.9.5. Augustine, Conf. 8.6.15 f., on the conversion of two young court officials after reading the Life of Anthony (c.370?). They have been identified as Jerome and Bonosus: T.D.Barnes, ‘Who Were the Nobility of the Roman Empire?’, Phoenix 28 (1974), 227; J.F.

203


88

89

90

91 92 93

94

95 96 97

98 99

100 101 102

103

Matthews, Western Aristocracies and Imperial Court 364–425 (Oxford 1975), 50. Doubt remains. On the Treveran period of Jerome, Steinhausen, ‘Hieronymus’, passim, for a date between 367 and 374. Evident from later anti-pagan actions such as A.Cameron, ‘Gratian’s Repudiation of the Pontifical Robe’, JRS 58 (1968), 96–102. A. Piganiol, L’empire chrétien (2nd edn, ed. A.Chastagnol) (Paris 1972), 227 f. and 246 f. on two stages of Gratian’s religious policies, assigning the repudiation to 379 versus Cameron’s 383. P.Nautin, ‘Les premières relations d’Ambroise avec l’empereur Gratien (Le De fide, livres I et II)’, in Y.-M.Duval, ed., Ambroise de Milan XVIe. centenaire de son élection episcopale (Paris 1974), 229–44, dating the first contacts to the end of 378. J.-L.Charlet, ‘Théologie, politique et rhétorique. La celebration poéti-que de Pâques a la cour de Valentinien et d’Honorius d’après Ausone et Claudien’, in La poesia tardoantica (Messina 1984), 259–87, esp. 261 on the imperial triad of the poem. It seems unlikely that lines 26–7 (utrumque…regnum) speak of four emperors, pace Green, Works of Ausonius, 270. Title reads proco dicti; on its possible meanings, above, Appendix, p. 161. Tale et terrenis specimen spectatur in oris, 24. Qui [sc. Valentinian]…utrumque/numine partitur regnum neque dividit unum, omnia solus habens atque omnia dilargitus, 26–8. On the fiction of imperial unity, M.McCormick, Eternal Victory (Cambridge 1986), 111 f. In Madrid, Real Academia de la Historia. S.G.MacCormack, Art and Ceremony in Late Antiquity (Berkeley 1981), 214–20 and Pl. 55; J. Arce, ‘El missorium de Teodosio I, precisiones y observaciones’, Archivio Español de Arquéologia 49 (1976), 119–40. A.Fabst, Divisio Regni (Bonn 1986), 56, 82, 90. Amm. 26.5.12; 10.6; 27.2.10. The bibliography is substantial. Among these, E.Castorina, ‘Lo spirito de cristianesimo in Ausonio’, Siculorum Gymnasium 29 (1976), 85–91; P.Langlois, ‘Les poèmes chrétiens et le christianisme d’Ausone’, Revne de philologie 43 (1969), 39–58; M.J.Pattist, Ansonius als Christen (Amsterdam-Paris 1925). C.Witke, Numen Litterarum (Leiden 1971), 102 f. C.Stancliffe, Saint Martin and his Hagiographer (Cambridge 1983), passim; W.H.C.Frend, ‘The Two Worlds of Paulinus of Nola’, in J.W. Binns, ed., Latin Literature of the Fourth Century (London 1974), 100–33; R.Van Dam, Leadership and Community in Late Antique Gaul (Berkeley 1985), passim, esp. 303 f. P.Brown, ‘Aspects of the Christianization of the Roman Aristocracy’, JRS 11 (1961), 1–11. Above, Ch. 4, pp. 53, 57. Alan Cameron, Claudian (Oxford 1970), 214. R.A.Markus, ‘Paganism, Christianity and the Latin Classics in the Fourth Century’, in J.W.Binns, ed., Latin Literature of the Fourth Century (London 1974), 1–21. Cameron, Claudian, 216, possibly not the Paschal mystery but baptism, Green, Works of Ausonius, 269–70. 204


104 Grat. Actio 14.63, 84; 18.79 f.: flexu tamen parvo nec a te procul convertar ad deum. S.MacCormack, ‘Latin Prose Panegyrics’, in T.A. Dorey, ed., Empire and Aftermath (London 1975), 166 f.; largely repeated in idem, ‘Latin Prose Panegyrics. Tradition and Discontinuity in the Later Roman Empire’, Revue des études augustiniennes 22 (1976), 60 f., and above, Ch. 7, p. 119 f. on the address in general. 105 Grat. Actio 18. 106 Above, n.69. The line is interpreted by T.Honoré, ‘The Making of the Theodosian Code’, ZSS 103 (1986), 209, as ‘frivolity of a nominal Christian’. On Arianism, M.Meslin, Les ariens d’occident (Paris 1967); R.C.Gregg and D.E.Groh, Early Arianism. A View of Salvation (Philadephia 1981). 107 Rufinus, HE, I.37; Socrates, HE, III. 19; Sozomen, HE, V.20; Pass. SS Bonosi et Maximiliani (T.Ruinach, Acta Martyrum 2nd edn, 610). 108 Ep. 1.14.4: in tuis mensis saepe versatus. On possible contacts through the mail before their actual meeting at Trier in 369, S.Roda, Commento storico ad libro IX dell’epistolario di Q. Aurelio Simmaco (Pisa 1981), 219–20 (referring to Ep. 9.88), and repeated in idem, ‘Una nuova lettera di Simmaco ad Ausonio? a propisito di Simm. Ep. IX.88’, REA 83 (1981), 273–80. The suggestion is embraced by G.W. Bowersock, ‘Symmachus and Ausonius’, in F.Paschoud, ed., Colloque genevois sur Symmaque (Paris 1986), 2. 109 Eps. I.14, 24, 35, 37, 38, 41, 43, dates of Callu, Symmaque I (1972). 110 Ep. 2 (Peiper): parentem et amicum. By 370 Ausonius was about sixty and Symmachus half that age. 111 The possibility, however, that both simply reflect current imperial propaganda cannot be altogether dismissed. 112 F.Del Chicca, Q. Aurelii Symmachi: Laudatio in Valentinianum seniorem (Rome 1984), with substantial bibliography. 113 Or. 1.1 (Seeck): similis est princeps deo pariter universa cernenti, qui cunctas partes novit imperii. Versus Pasc. 25, 28: Augustus, genitor… omnia solus habens. On rare expressions in both works, G.Haverling, Studies in Symmachus’ Language and Style (Göteborg 1988), passim. 114 Or. 1.13: vobis totum est in orbe commune. Vers. Pasc. 27: utrumque/ numine partitur regnum neque dividit unum. 115 Or. 1.15: sedem…in ea parte posuisti, qua totius rei publicae ruina vergebat. Ausonius’ Mosella may have preceded Symmachus’ orations, Sivan, ‘Redating Ausonius’ Mosella’, and above, Appendix, p. 161. 116 Or. 2.31: sciet res publica, geminis se custodibus esse munitam set quasi uni esse munificam, sub communi stipendio duos principes militare. Or. 3.2; 10: laus omnis amborum est…una est utriusque militia et cuniuncta felicitas: tu gaudes magisterio patris, ille contubernio iunioris. On its date, F.Del Chicca, ‘Per la datazione dell’oratio 3 di Simmaco’, Athenaeum 65 (1987), 534–41, proposing the early days of 370 in conjunction with the second panegyric on Valentinian. Cf. Cento, praef, esp.: magnae spes altera Romae. 117 Or. 3.2: salve novi saeculi spes sperata et in gremio rei publicae nutricis adolesce, laetitia praesentium, securitas posterorum. Amm. 27.6–9, 12–13. 205


118 Ep. I.35. 119 Ep. 1 (Peiper). 120 Ep. 37.2: quid tam liberum quam amicitia? Bowersock, ‘Symmachus and Ausonius’, 1–14, believing in the genuine affection between the two men; P.Bruggisser, ‘Orator dissertissimus’, Hermes 115 (1987), 106–15. 121 Ep. 37.1: summis copiis vigiliam pro meis rebus adniteris et amicitiam diligentia stabili perseveras. 122 Eps. I.41,43. 123 Ep. I.43: numquam in mercedem linguae ornamenta corrupit. 124 Ausonius, Ep. 2 (Peiper). 125 Probus may have also been personally at Trier in 371 for the celebration of his consulship or, for that matter, at any time during Valentinian’s reign. 126 PLRE I. 736–40; D.M.Novak, ‘Anicianae domus culmen. nobilitatis culmen’, Klio 62 (1980), 473–93; A.Cameron, ‘Polyonomy in the Late Roman Aristocracy. The Case of Petronius Probus’, JRS 75 (1985), 164–82, and above, Ch. 2, pp. 6–7. 127 Ep. 12 (Peiper). For analysis of literary influences, K.Thraede, ‘Zu Ausonius Ep. 16.2 (Sch.)’, Hermes 96 (1968), 608–28, noting the Vergilian echoes of vv. 82–93. 128 Ep. 12, vv. 16–17: qui solus exceptis tribus/eris erorum primus est. Ibid., 69– 72, second consulship for Probus, an unlikely honour for a civilian in the fourth century and one which never materialised; 96–9, predicting a consulship for Probus’ son, possibly the incumbent of this office in 395. On the unprecedented honour of an emperor being associated with a private citizen, Amm. 23.1.1 (Julian and Sallustius). 129 This theory is based on, admittedly, an argument from silence, since Probus’ disappearance from the administrative annals when Ausonius enjoyed his court heydays under Gratian and his reappearance in 383 argues for mutual aversion. Above, Ch. 7, pp. 133–5. 130 Ep. I.38. Matthews, Ammianus, 273, on friendship between Ausonius and Rusticus, based on a letter from Symmachus to the latter. Rusticus’ career, or the lack of it, under Gratian, and his support of Magnus Maximus, seem to point to the contrary. 131 Cassiodorus, Variae 10.6. (quoted in Honoré, ‘The Making of the Theodosian Code’, 140 n. 35). 132 Cass. Variae 6.5.1;4. 133 J.Harries, ‘The Roman Imperial Quaestor from Constantine to Theodosius II’, JRS 78 (1988), 148–72, esp. 151–5; Honoré, ‘The Making of the Theodosian Code’, 133–222, esp. 136 f. and 189. Note also Symmachus’ words to the quaestor Ausonius, Ep. I.23: quaestor es, concilii regalis particeps…precum arbiter, legum conditor. R. MacMullen, Corruption and the Decline of Rome (New Haven/ London 1988), 147–8, argues for imperial ignorance of laws issued in their name on the basis of contradicting laws. 134 Honoré, ‘The Making of the Theodosian Code’, 189, not neglecting the fact that a law was often the product of an initiative which had started in the provinces as a reaction to a given situation. 206


135 Amm. 27.6.14. On the advantages of professionalism in general, D. Nellen, Viri Litterati (Bochum 1981). 136 For the dates, Honoré, ‘The Making of the Theodosian Code’, 219, redating CTh 13.4.4. and 9.1.12 to June and August respectively instead of 374, pace the MS. and Seeck, Regesten s.a. 137 The basic study is still B.H.Warmington, ‘The Career of Romanus, Comes Africae’, Byzantinische Zeitschrift 9 (1956), 55–64. 138 Matthews, Ammianus, 383–4. 139 Ibid., 282. 140 Amm. 28.6.28.

7 THE COURT OF GRATIAN 1 The precise date of the Actio, according to Peiper, p. ciii, falls around August/September of 379, before Gratian returned to Trier whence CTh 13.3.12 was issued on 14 Sept. 2 Grat. Actio 3.12–13, esp.: cum clarissimo viro collega meo honore coniunctus. Nowhere is Olybrius mentioned by name! 3 Probus in 371. The two were apparently related through the women of the Anicii, although I doubt if Olybrius and Tyrrania Anicia Iuliana were the parents of Anicia Faltonia Proba, Probus’ wife, pace PLRE I. 732). Nor, by implication, was AFB the granddaughter of the poetess Faltonia Betitia Proba, Adelphius’ wife. The latter was, more likely, the mother of both Olybrius’ and Probus’ wives. 4 Grat. Actio 12.55: interrogatus, quem priorem decerneres consulem? 5 Ibid.: clarissimum virum collegam meum, quem praesentem habebat occasio, praelatum credidissent. 6 Ibid., 8.36: patriam non obscuram, familiam non paenitendam, domum innocentem, innocentiam non coactam. 7 Ibid., 12.56: quid de duobus consulibus designatis quaeritis, quis ordo sit nuncupationis? anne aliusquam quem praefectura constituit? Cf. CJ 12.3.1 (383/ 92): quis enim in uno eodemque genere dignitatis prior esse debuerat, nisi qui prior meruit dignitatem? On seniority, R.Bagnall et al., Consuls of the Later Roman Empire (Adanta 1987), 22. 8 Grat. Actio, 1.3. Note the deliberate contrast drawn between Gratian and his late father who becomes the villain of the piece. 9 Ibid., 15, where Gratian is compared with Cyrus! 10 Ibid., 2.7. 11 Ibid., 1.7; 8.39. Note the agreement between Ausonius and Ammianus 30.10.6 over the amicable relations between the two brothers versus the ecclesiastical versions which stress Gratian’s anger over the elevation of his small brother, Philos. 9.16, Socr. 4.31.7 and Zonaras. 13.17.2–6; for the latter, A.Piganiol, L’empire chrétien 325–395 (2nd edn, ed. A.Chastagnol) (Paris 1972), 223. R.P.H.Green, The Works of Ausonius (Oxford 1991), 541, on Ausonius implying in 2.7 that the elevation of Valentinian II was due to Gratian.

207


12 Amm. 31.11.6. 13 The basic narrative is Amm. 30.10; Zos. 4.19. The candidates included the popular Sebastianus who was promptly removed from Illyricum by a bogus mission engineered by Merobaudes. On the volatility of the Gallic army, Amm. 30.10.1: [Cohortes Gallicanae], quae non semper dicatae legitimorum principum fidei, velut imperiorum arbitri (not ‘the cohorts serving in Gaul’, as translated by Rolfe in the Loeb and followed by many, but those sent from Gaul, as Ammianus indicates elsewhere (29.6.16)). 14 Amm. 30.10.5, for the presence of Merobaudes and Cerealis; Zosimus 4.19.1 and Epit. de caes. 45.10, for that of Aequitius. Piganiol, L’empire chrétien, 223, for Probus as the possible moving spirit behind the events, followed by J.F.Matthews, Western Aristocracies and Imperial Court (Oxford 1975), 64. E.Stein, Histoire du Bas-Empire (2nd edn, ed. J.R.Palanque) (Paris 1959), I.183, calls the move ‘cette apparente usurpation’, but the four may have been worried lest the Gallic army refused to endorse the accession of the remote Gratian. 15 Amm. 30.10.6. 16 For good accounts, A.Alföldi, A Conflict of Ideas in the Late Roman Empire (Oxford 1952); and Matthews, Aristocracies, 64 f. One court party included Pannonian officials who had risen to power during the reign of their copatriot. Among its members were Maximinus (PPG), Doryphorianus (VUR), Simplicius (ex VUR), Leo (MO) and Viventius (ex PPG). On their activities at Rome during the heyday of senatorial ‘persecutions’, Amm. 28.1.1–56 for a partisan (i.e. pro-senatorial) view, with Alföldi, Conflict, esp. 48–95; Matthews, Aristocracies, 56 f.; idem, The Roman Empire of Ammianus (Baltimore 1989), 204 f., 272. The early days of Gratian also revealed the existence of a network whose apparent power broker was Ausonius the quaestor. Matthews, Aristocracies, 64–9; idem, Ammianus, 211. Although Ausonius may indeed prove a central vantage point for a survey of court politics, then, his centrality in the events may be doubted. On the removal of the Pannonians, above, Ch. 7, p. 129. The death of Theodosius seems to remain an unsolved mystery. Jerome’s Chronicle (s.a. 376) points to Maximinus and his associates as the agents responsible for the death of the popular commander in Africa. Orosius, 7.33.7, suggests jealousy as a motive. Ammianus is silent (E.A.Thompson, The Historical Work of Ammianus Marcellinus (Oxford 1947), 93 f., 138 f.); Matthews, Ammianus, 211, 215, 382. Theodosius treated Romanus and his friends in a way that could have hardly endeared him either to Romanus or to his powerful patron at court, Merobaudes. On the date of Theodosius’ execution, A. Demandt, ‘Der Tod des älteren Theodosius’, Historia 18 (1969), 598–626, esp. 600 f. One may note in this context the story relating to the last voyage of Merobaudes’ last patron, Magnus Maximus (Olympiodorus 19, Müller). After Theodosius the emperor defeated Maximus in Italy he sent the severed head of the usurper to Carthage, precisely where his father had been executed a dozen years before. 17 J.F.Matthews, ‘Gailic Supporters of Theodosius’, Latomus 30 (1971), 1073–99. 208


18 Cf. Themistius Or. 16.204c (ed. Downey) on Theodosius’ magnanimity in appointing a non-relative as consul (Saturninus in 383) and Pacatus 16.4 (Pan. Lat. 12: renuntiantur amici ante filios tuos consules, quia non poterant plus esse quam consules). Clearly a topos with a double edge. 19 Amm. 31.16.8 on the massacre of Gothic federates by Iulius. Zos. 4.26.6 claims that he had been authorised by the senate of Constantinople, but the assertion has been rightly suspected by Matthews, Ammianus, 217. 20 On its composition, Matthews, ‘Gallic Supporters’. 21 Amm. 31.13.9; PLRE I. 765; 957; 807. 22 Above, n.14, on Probus’ participation in 375. 23 Grat. Actio 4.16. Ibid., 17.76–8 also emphasises the amicable relations between emperor and army. 24 Ibid., 2.7. 25 Note, however, the interesting distinction drawn by Symmachus in Relatio 9, between real and false triumphs, D.Vera, ‘La polemica contro l’abuso imperiale del trionfo. Rapporti tra ideologia, economia e propaganda nel basso impero’, Rivista storica dell’antichità 10 (1980), 89–132, esp. 111–28. 26 Grat. Actio 2.8–9. 27 Ibid., 2.9: sed alia est ista materia et suo parata secreto. 28 Ibid., 16.73–4: videre in suis quaeque foris omnes civitates conflagrationem salubris incendii. ardebant stirpes fraudium veterum, ardebant seminaria futurarum. 29 Seeck, Symmachus, MGH AA LXXX; Callu, Symmaque I, 100 n. 1, objects, postulating on the basis of Ep. I.36 a trip of Ausonius to Milan in 379. It is unlikely that a major journey of this sort would be ignored by the traveller himself. 30 Matthews, Aristocracies, 69, on Ausonius’ family as ‘the most powerful political faction in the western empire’. Seeck, Symmachus, MGH AA VI, LXIX, more accurately, on the attitude of Ausonius to the empire as his own patrimony. On the background, Amm. 31 covers events in the eastern parts of the empire with an occasional glimpse at the west. E.Demougeot, La formation de l’Europe et les invasions barbares II.1 (Paris 1979), 121 f., for military activities in the west. H.von Petrikovitz, ‘Fortifications in the North-Western Roman Empire from the Third to the Fifth Centuries’, JRS 61 (1971), 178–218. 31 T.Honoré, ‘The Making of the Theodosian Code’, ZSS 103 (1986), 147 f.; 203 f. on the method; J.Harries, ‘The Roman Imperial Quaestor from Constantine to Theodosius II’, JRS 78 (1988), on the limits of the office and the validity of the literary or stylistic evidence. Above, Ch. 6, p. 115 f. 32 Seeck, Regesten s.a.; Honoré, ‘The Making of the Theodosian Code’, 219. CTh 9.1.13, dated to February in the MS.; 15.1.19, no indication of day or month in the MS.; 10.19.8, dated to August in the MS.; CJ 3.24.2, a month, March, but no year is given in MS. 33 Amm. 29.2.23 implying that Maximinus persecuted nobles even in Gaul; 29.3.3–9 for a list of victims, none, apparently, a senator. Two 209


34 35

36

37

38

39 40 41

42

43

44

cases deserve attention: the persecution of Africanus, advocate and an ambitious ex-governor whose patron was the magister militum Theodosius, and the persecution of two military tribunes accused of supporting Procopius apparently years after the events. Africanus was executed in spite of Theodosius’ intervention (which perhaps suggests rivalry between Maximinus and the general); the two military tribunes were banished but pardoned under Gratian. Maximinus could have hardly endeared himself to the military by such activity. CTh 9.1.13: spectatorum maxime virorum iudicium quinquevirale… de praesentibus et administratorum honore functis…sorte ductos, non sponte delectos. Under the title, ubi senatores vel clarissimi civiliter vel criminaliter conveniantur, the law says: senatores in pecuniariis causis, sive in hac (alma) urbe sive in suburbanis degunt, in iudicio tam praetorianae quam urbicariae praefecturae nec non magistri officiorum (quotiens tamen ad eum nostrae pietatis emanaverit iussio), in provinciis vero ubi larem fovent aut ubi maiorum bonorum partem possident et adsidue versantur respondebunt. The appointment of Siburius, Leo’s successor, is then to be dated to early 376 (pace K.F.Stroheker, Der senatorische Adel im Spätantiken Gallien (Tübingen 1948), 216 no. 356) rather than late 375 (pace M. Clauss, Der Magister Officiorum in der Spätantike (Munich 1980), 140, although placing it under Gratian). Y.Janvier, La legislation impériale sur les edifices publics (Aix-enProvence 1977). B.Ward-Perkins, From Classical Antiquity to the Middle Ages. Urban Public Buildings in Northern and Central Italy AD 300–850 (Oxford 1984), for a brief overview. S.Mrozek, ‘Munificentia privata in den Städten Italiens der spätrömische Zeit’, Historia 27 (1978), 355–68, in general, and the monumental Roma Christiana of C.Pietri (Rome 1976) for a detailed account of pious private enterprises at Rome. Amm. 30.5.5–10. Symm. Ep. I.13 (to Ausonius). Novi saeculi spes sperata, Or. 3.2, words prophetically uttered in 370. P. Bruggisser, ‘Gloria novi saeculi. Symmaque et le siècle de Gratien, Ep. I.13’, MH 44 (1987), 134–49, for literary influences and as a message to Ausonius concerning senatorial aspirations. Symm. Ep. I.13.2: forte rumor adlatus est sermonem desiderati principis multa nocte venisse. It is not known whether Gratian actually visited Rome in 376. See Seeck, Regesten s.a., 248 and T.D.Barnes, ‘Constans and Gratian in Rome’, HSCP 79 (1975), 325–33, for arguments supporting a visit, and Alan Cameron, ‘Theodosius and the Regency of Stilicho’, HSCP 73 (1968), 262 n. 28, who argues against such a possibility. Whether he was present or not Gratian’s Greek must have been quite good. Symm. Ep. 1.13.3: Dic mihi, quid nostri patres super ea oratione senserunt? It is almost possible to sense Ausonius’ anxiety to learn of their reaction as soon as possible. Praefecturam annonae cedere volumus dignitatis fastio…praefectura autem urbis

210


45 46 47

48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55

56 57

58

59 60 61 62 63

64

65

cunctis, quae intra urbem sunt, antecellat potestatibus. On Rufinus, the last of the Aradii to feature on the fasti of the late empire, PLRE I. 775. W.Kuhoff, Studien zur zivilen senatorischen Laufbahn in 4 J. n. Ch, Ämter und Amtsinhaber in Clarissimat und Spektabilitat (Frankfurt 1983), 127. He is the addressee of CTh 14.3.15 of February 377, and the dedicatee of Ausonius’ Fasti, Cupido and of one epigram, (no. 35, Schenkl). CIL XIV 137=ILS 5694 for cursus, with Kuhoff, Studien, 48, on Gallic and not Spanish origin. Ausonius, Fasti 4.5–6: fors erit, ut, lustrum cum se cumulaverit istis, confectam Proculus signet Olympiadam, namely, the consulship in 384. PLRE I. 186 (C 2) for connection through Ausonius’ aunt, Iulia Cataphronia. Amm. 28.1, with Alföldi, Conflict, for a comprehensive account. C.Lepelley, Les cités de l’Afrique romaine au Bas-Empire I (Paris 1979), 304– 14, for a list of types of public munificence in late Roman Africa. Above, Ch. 6, p. 117, for the beginning of the affair. Amm. 28.6. Amm. 28.6.29–30; 30.2.10. Amm. 30.2.11 for the rivalry between Remigius and Maximinus. Amm. 28.6.29; 30.2.10–12. PLRE I. 768 for acquittal. The issue remains unclear, particularly because of Ammianus’ silence. B.H. Warmington, ‘The Career of Romanus, Comes Africae’, Byzantinische Zeitschrift 49 (1956), 55–64. He was still alive in 384, Symm. Rel. 32. Simplicius was beheaded in Illyricum, possibly on the way home after his tenure as the vicarius urbis Romae (Amm. 21.1.57). Doryphorianus was at first arrested and later condemned to death at the instigation of Gratian’s mother (Amm. 28.1.53–7). The lady, who had been banished from court years before, may have staged a come-back with the accession of her son. Honoré, ‘The Making of the Theodosian Code’, 208; idem, ‘Ausonius and Vulgar Law’, Iura 35 (198 3, pub. 1987), 75–85, on this constitution. Harries, ‘Quaestor’, 167. CTh 9.20.1, January 378, with Honoré, ‘Vulgar’, 83–4. Or. 4.10–12. Amm. 29.6.3–4. Symm. Ep. I.89; Ambrose, Ep. I.90; W.Kuhoff, Studien, 224; R.von Haehling, Die Religionszugehörigkeit der hohen Amsträger des römis-chen Reiches (Bonn 1978), 298, does not give any provenance. Antonius’ sister married Honorius, Theodosius’ brother, PLRE I. 77 (A 3). Alföldi, Conflict, 92 f.; Matthews, Aristoaracies, 65 f.; 94 f. In spite of his Theodosian connection Antonius’ Spanish origins remain hypothetical. H.Sivan, ‘Ausone et la legislation impériale. L’exemple de CTh 13.3.11’, Revue des études anciennes 91 (1989), 47–53, for detailed discussion.

211


66 Amm. 22.4.9 for an instructive parallel—Julian’s barber who earned twenty annonae. A.Chastagnol, ‘Remarques sur les salaires et rémunérations au IVe siècle’, in Les devaluations a Rome (Paris-Rome 1980), 215–33. 67 Amm. 21.16.1 f.; 27.9.4. 68 Honoré, ‘The Making of the Theodosian Code’, 207. 69 A.Chastagnol, ‘Les espagnols dans l’aristocratie gouvernementale à l’époque de Théodose’, in Les empereurs romains de l’Espagne (Paris 1965), 288 n. 2; Kuhoff, Studien, 431 no. 36, for full bibliography on Eucherius. 70 Protrepticon 86 or: ‘I presided over power itself’ (Green, in a letter). For career summaries, Protrepticon 90–1; Ausonius lectori (Praef. 1), 35–8; Parentalia 4.28. 71 Epicedion in patrem 41 f. 72 CIL VIII 1219=14398, 14346 with PLRE I. 427–8 for complete list; Seeck, Symmachus MGH AA VI.1, CVII. Above, Ch. 4 n. 77 for previous Bordelais presence in Africa. 73 Parentalia 30 (genus clarum). Cf. Symm. Ep. I.25 praising Thalassius, vir honorabilis. 74 T.D.Barnes, ‘Proconsuls of Africa 337–392’, Phoenix 39 (1985), 150. 75 The dates of the two Gratianic prefects, Iulius Ausonius and Olybrius, are unclear. Von Haehling, Religionszugehörigkeit, 95, for 377 and 378 respectively. 76 Symm. Ep. 1.58 refers to Probus’ complaining of the interruption of his retirement: possibly a topos along the lines of ‘a general summoned from the plough to save the Roman people’. Matthews, Aristocracies, 174, on the date of the letter. Probus is last attested as PP of Italy, Africa and Illyricum in November 375 and was out of office between this date and 383 (PLRE I. 739). 77 The quest for the precise cursus of each of the Syagrii has been admirably summarised by Kuhoff, Studien, 390–2. I follow here the Anglo-Saxon reconstruction of J. Martindale, ‘Note on the Consuls of 381 and 382’, Historia 16 (1967), 254–6, and adopted in PLRE I. 862. Indeed, for five years (376–81), the African vicariate seems to have been at the centre of an Ausonian-Anician sword-play: no sooner had Nicomachus Flavianus returned to Rome than Faltonius Probus Alypius, Olybrius’ brother and a relation of the Anicii as his name indicates, arrived in Africa. Once Alypius left, Titianus came, to be followed by the rich and noble pagan Kamenius of the Ceionii, possibly another Ausonian bid in the direction of the Roman senatorial aristocracy. 78 J.F.Drinkwater, ‘Gallic Attitudes to the Roman Empire in the Fourth Century. Continuity or Change?’, in H.E.Herzig and R.Frei-Stolba, eds, Labor omnibus unus (Stuttgart 1989), 151. 79 Ausonius lectori 5 (Autun); Parent. 4.3–6 (Lugdunensis and Vienne). 80 Sidonius Apollinaris, Ep. 8.8; Greg. Tur. 2.18. 81 Above, Ch. 7, p. 126. 82 Marcellus, de. med. praef. 2 (Corp. Med. Lat. V, ed. Niedermann). 212


83 Kuhoff, Studien, 290 n. 111, with bibliography on the topic of suffect consuls. It is unclear if Paulinus was proconsul or consularis of Campania, PLRE I. 682; Kuhoff, Studien, 73–4. His appointment may be connected with the upgrading of the province which became the most prestigious of the consular regions, Alan Cameron, ‘Anicius Claudius’, ZPE 57 (1984), 148. 84 Parentalia 15; Stroheker, Adel, 147 no. 28; von Haehling, Religionszugehörigkeit, 386; M.Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, Francia 10 (1982), 558 (A 4), prefers Aemilius Magnus Arborius as the prefect’s father, but Ausonius’ silence on his famed uncle’s issue makes this unlikely. Arborius’ spell at the treasury was as comes rerum privatarum, in charge of the finances of imperial properties and not as comes sacrarum largitionum (R.Delmaire, Les responsables des finances impériales du Bas-Empire (Coll. Latomus 203) (Bruxelles 1989), 74–5 no. 31). 85 Ep. 8.69 with von Haehling, Religionszugehörigkeit, 387. Not to be identified with the homonym vicar of Spain in 365/6, Kuhoff, Studien, 116, 355 no. 16 for the latter. 86 CTh 15.7.6, 7.8; 10.2 about horse races, charioteers and actresses turning pious. CTh 6.10.2, 22.5, 26.2 on office and rank. 87 Kuhoff, Studien, 209. 88 PLRE I. 678 (P 12), 380; I.158 (B 20), 379/83. 89 PLRE I. 526 (M 3). 90 Symmachus, Relatio 36. 91 P.Veyne, ‘Clientèle et corruption du service de l’état. La vénalité des offices dans le Bas-Empire’, Annales 36 (1981), 339–60. 92 Praefatio Ad Lectorem 36; Epicedion 41–2, on combining the Gallic and the Italian prefectures. Grat, Actio 7 on the association of father and son in the same office. A.H.M.Jones, ‘Collegiate Prefectures’, JRS 54 (1964), 78–89. 93 H.Heinen, ‘Der römische Westen und die Prätorianerpräfektur Gallien. Historischer Raum und politische Entwicklung’, in H.E. Herzig and R.Frei-Stolba, Labor omnibus unus (Stuttgart 1989), 186–205, for an overview of physical boundaries of prefecture and the meaning of office; p. 196 on aristocrats in post. The basic study is still H. Nesselhauf, Die spätrömische Verwaltung der gallischgermanischen Länder (Berlin 1938). 94 Ep. I.15, PLRE I. 660. In general, J.F.Matthews, The Letters of Symmachus’, in J.W.Binns, ed., Latin Literature of the Fourth Century (London 1974), 58–99. 95 Symm. Ep. 3.50, I.94. 96 But see the doubts cast by Kuhoff, Studien, 351 no. 221, on this cursus. He thinks it unlikely that an emperor would appoint an unfamiliar Athenian rhetor teaching at Rome to such an office without previous experience in the imperial hierarchy. Delmaire, Les responsables, 84 no. 37, claiming for Palladius the office of magister scrinii at the court of Gratian bef ore f ollowing Theodosius to the east to become CSL and MO. 97 Ep. I.17. 98 Ep. I.19.

213


99 A.Chastagnol, La préfecture urbaine à Rome sous le Bas Empire (Paris 1960), 108, 464 no. 24. W.G.Sinnigen, The Vicarius Urbis Romae and the Urban Prefecture’, Historia 8 (1959), 106. 100 Patruinus, Ep. 1.22, perhaps the same as the CSL c. 400 whose brother Petronius was PPG in 407 and both correspondents of Symmachus, Eps. 7. 102–4 (PLRE I. 674 (P 2), PLRE II. 843 f., Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 665). Delmaire, Les responsables, 302 no. 83, grants Patruinus an unusual tenure of eight years, 401 to 408. Another possibility is the homonym Consularis Piceni in 355 (Heinzelmann, ibid.). Both identifications remain hypothetical. Claudius has been identified with Cl. Lachanius (Symm. Ep. 1.28), a Gaul who is attested as consularis Tusciae in 389, CSL between 390 and 394 (Delmaire, Les responsables, 302), later PUR, and the father of Rutilius Namatianus; PLRE I. 200 (C 1 and C 2= Lachanius). Rusticus, Symm. Ep. 30, is surely not Sextius Rusticus Iulianus, an influential favourite of Valentinian I, nor is he likely to be the Iulianus, familiaris domus vestrae (Ep. I.32.6). Symmachus’ language is inappropriate. Gorgonius, another Symmachean protégé referred to Ausonius (I, 39) is, on the other hand, quite possibly the CRP of 386. 101 Ep. I.40, Kuhoff, Studien, 307–8 no. 21, on problems in the historian’s biography. H.W.Bird, Sextus Aurelius Victor. A Historiographical Study (Liverpool 1984), in general. 102 PLRE I. 959 (V 5), an agens in rebus in 384; (V 6) count in Gaul under Magnus Maximus. Nothing else is known of either. 103 Ep. I, 40: fortunae licentia, quae interdum optimos decolorat, spes eius paulisper infregerat. 104 Amm. 21.10.6. 105 CIL VI 1186=ILS 2945, not mentioned by Ammianus. 106 Amm. 21.10.6. 107 H.Sivan, ‘The Historian Eusebius (of Nantes)’, JHS 1992. 108 PLRE I. 900 (T 27); Claudian, consul. Man. Theod. 109 Alan Cameron, Claudian (Oxford 1970), 125, on the surprise choice of Theodorus as consul in 399 with Eutropius. Perhaps the surprise lies rather in Theodorus’ recall from philosophical retirement in 397 to assume the prefecture of Italy. 110 Eps. I.20, 101. 111 Eps. I.75–88. 112 Caesarius, Ep. I.75; Sabiniabus, I.77; Vitalianus, I.81, Priscianus, I.79. 113 Ep. I.79: super eius annonis dicitur orta dnbitatio…quaeso igitur ne hac inquietudine aut illius minuatur utilitas aut amplissimo ordini censendi auctoritas derogetur. 114 In 378/9 the court alternated between Trier, Sirmium and Aquileia. The last Gratianic law from Trier is CTh 9.30.39 with Seeck, Regesten s.a.; M.Bonfioli, ‘Soggiorni imperiali a Milano e ad Aquileia da Diocleziano a Valentiniano III’, in Aquileia e Milano. Antichi Altoadriatiche 4 (Udine 1973), 125–9, esp. 129 f. 115 Ordo 7. 116 Delmaire, Les responsables, 88 no. 39, following a suggestion by J.J. 214


117

118 119

120

121 122

123 124

125 126 127

O’Donnell, ‘The Career of Virius Nicomachus Flavianus’, Phoenix 32 (1978), 134–5 and n. 35. Symmachus, Relatio 23, designating Hesperius as comes with G.W. Bowersock, ‘Symmachus and Ausonius’, in F.Paschoud, ed., Colloque genevois sur Symmaque (Paris 1986), 1–14. Delmaire, Les responsables, 92 f. no. 41, not to be confused with the homonym proconsul of Achaea. On his provenance, Zos. 5.40.2. On their careers, Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 610 (Florentinus 1); 653 (Minervius 4), and 676 (Protadius 1). Florentinus and Protadius were PU R in 395–7 and 400/1 respectively; their brother was CSL in 399. Rutilius Namatianus, De Reditu Suo, 47 f.; on the date, H.Sivan, ‘Rutilius Namatianus, Constantius III and the Return to Gaul’, Mediaeval Studies 48 (1986), 522–32. On Lachanius’ career, PLRE I. 491. Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie’, 605 (E 1); PLRE I. 297 (E 2); Von Haehling, Religionszugehörigkeit, 343 f. P.Nautin, ‘Les premières relations d’Ambroise avec l’empereur Gratien’, in Y.-M.Duval, ed., Ambroise de Milan (Paris 1974), 229–44, esp. 236–7, dating the first contacts to October 378, followed by the sending of De Fide in Dec. 378/Jan. 379. Amm. 27.11.6. The majority of Symmachus’ letters to Ausonius were written between 376 and 380. None seem to be of a later date, J.P.Callu, Symmaque, I (Paris 1972) and above, Ch. 6, p. 111. Ausonius, Ep. 20 (Peiper), lemma. Bowersock, ‘Symmachus’, 9–10. This is where Ammianus’ opinion of Gratian seems to make most sense, 31.10.18–19. The emphasis is on the tremendous potential of the young emperor who was led astray by ‘those around him’, a term that implies perhaps civilians at court, particularly those with little understanding of military affairs and possibly little sympathy with the men who tried to defend the empire against crushing odds.

8 CONCLUSION 1 Above, Ch. 4, p. 72 f., on life in leisurely retirement. 2 J.R.Palanque, ‘L’empereur Maxime’, in Les empereurs romains d’Espagne (Coll. intern. du CNRS, Madrid-Italica 1964) (Paris 1965), 255–63; D.Vera, ‘I rapporti fra Magno Massimo, Teodosio e Valentiniano II nel 383–4’, Athenaeum 53 (1975), 267–310; B.Saylor Rodgers, ‘Merobaudes and Maximus in Gaul’, Historia 30 (1981), 82–105, for Maximus’ role in the death of Gratian’s general; E.M.Wightman, Gallia Belgica (London 1985), 216, on absence of Gratian as a contributing factor to Maximus’ success; A.R.Birley, ‘Magnus Maximus and the Persecution of Heresy’, Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 66 (1983), 13–43. 3 Sulpicius Severus, Chron. 2.50.7, Dial. 3.11.2, on bishops influencing Maximus to perform unocceptable deeds. 215


4 Sulp. Seu., Dial. 2.6.2; 3.11.11, where Maximus is an imperator. 5 Ausonius, Ordo (Aquileia); note Maximus’ nickname, the British brigand (Rutupinus latro). Pan. Lat. 12.23 f. where Maximus is a tyrannus. 6 Amm. 27.6.2; K.F.Stroheker, Der Senatorische Adel im spätantiken Gallien (Tübingen 1948), 210 no. 330. 7 Symmachus, Eps. 3.1–9; Oratio 7. 8 He is not, therefore, the father of Heraclius from Raetia Secunda, pace H.Heinzelmann, ‘Gallische Prosopographie 260–527’, Francia 10 (1982), 641. 9 Perhaps he is to be identified with the honoratus of an estate in Poitou, Sulp. Severus, VM 8.1. J.Fontaine, Vie de St. Martin, II.634, prefers the family of the consul of 367, Flavius Lupicinus. 10 PLRE I. 362 (Florentinus); 603 (Minervius); 751 (Protadius). 11 Protadius eventually left Gaul after his northern estates had been devastated by the Franks. He settled in Italy where he was visited by Rutilius Namatianus in 417, De Reditu Suo I.542. 12 PLRE I. 595 (Lachanius) opting for PUR v. Kuhoff, Studien zur zivilen senatorischen Laufbahn im 4 J. n. Ch. Ämter und Amtsinhaber in Clarissimat und Spektabilitat (Frankfurt 1983), 69 for PPG; PLRE II. 770–1 (Rutilius Namatianus) with H.Sivan, ‘Rutilius Namatianus, Constantius III and the Return to Gaul in the Light of New Evidence’, Mediaeval Studies 48 (1986), 522–32. 13 R.W.Mathisen, ‘Resistance and Reconciliation. Majorian and the Gallic Aristocracy after the Fall of Avitus’, Francia 7 (1979), 597–627, on a deliberate effort to appease the nobles after the failures of Avitus and Marcellinus by appointing Gauls to key government positions like the QS P and CS L. This is an exception that proves the rule. For preJulianic attitudes see above, Ch. 2, p. 20. 14 R.W.Mathisen, ‘Emigrants, Exiles and Survivors. Aristocratic Options in Visigothic Aquitania’, Phoenix 38 (1984), 159–70, on voluntary migration in the wake of the establishment of the Visigothic kingdom. 15 C.E.Stevens, Sidonius Apollinaris and his Age (Oxford 1933), for the most outstanding example; M.Bonjour, ‘Sidoine Apollinaire et l’em-pire’, in La patrie gauloise (Actes du coll. Lyon 1981) (Lyon 1983), 203 f.

APPENDIX 1 M.D.Reeve, ‘Ausonius’, in L.D.Reynolds, ed., Texts and Transmission (Oxford 1983), 26–8, for a brief summary. M.J.Byrne, Prolegomena to an Edition of the Works of Ausonius (New York 1916) for a highly readable introduction. Also, the introductions to the various critical editions of Ausonius. I found Pastorino’s remarks particularly helpful. 2 R.Weiss, ‘Ausonius in the Fourteenth Century’, in R.R.Bolgar, ed., Classical Influences on European Culture (Cambridge 1971), 67–72. 3 H.de la Ville de Mirmont, Le manuscript de l’Ile Barbe, 3 vols (BordeauxParis 1917–19). A comprehensible list of printed editions is

216


4 5 6 7

8

9 10

11 12 13 14

15 16 17 18

given by L. Desgraves, ‘Répertoire des éditions imprimées des oeuvres d’Ausone (1472–1785)’, in Ausone. Humaniste aquitain (Bordeaux 1986), 153–232. M.D.Reeve, ‘The Tilianus of Ausonius’, RM 121 (1978), 350–66. Idem, ‘Some Manuscripts of Ausonius’, Prometheus 3 (1977), 112–20. O.Seeck (Review of Peiper’s edition), Göttingische gelehrte Anzeigen 13 (1887), 497–520. G.Jachmann, ‘Das Problem der Urvariante in der Antike und die Grundlagen der Ausoniuskritik’, Festschrift der Universität Köln zum 10 J.Bestehen des Deutsch-Italienischen Kulturinstitut Petrarcahaus (Cologne 1941), 47–104. P.White, ‘The Presentation and Dedication of the Silvae and the Epigrams’, JRS 64 (1974), 40–61. See now, H.Sivan, ‘The Dedicatory Presentation in Late Antiquity. The Example of Ausonius’, Illinois Classical Studies 17 (1992), 83–101. R.P.H.Green, The Works of Ausonius (Oxford 1991), 233, for a collection of opera omnia. Libellus (Ep. 1, 12, 22, Peiper; Epig. 1, Peiper; Parent., Ecl. 1, Biss., Tech., Griphus). Often it equals opusculum (Parent., Epitap., Tech.). Note that Symmachus calls the Mosella both libellus and liber (Ep. 1.14, Callu). Other Ausonian terms describing his output include charta (Epig. 1.1, Peiper); carmina, scripta, poematia, ecloga, the last applied to the Cupid cruciatus. Green, Works of Ausonius, 238, regards this as a second dedication of Ausonius’ opera omnia. Epistolas prosaicas ad Theodosium imperatorem (et ad Symmachum patricium), not to be identified with the surviving verse letter here. Green, Works of Ausonius, 240, sees in Ausonius’ reply a recusatio which was added to enhance the prestige of the collection. The dispatch of an edited collection of Ausonius’ poems fits into a contemporary fluny of Bordelais literary efforts aimed to catch imperial attention. In 389 Pacatus, a school colleague of Ausonius, travelled to Italy to deliver a panegyric celebrating Theodosius’ victory over Magnus Maximus in 388. At the same time, or perhaps around 394/5, Ausonius’ pupil composed (but did not deliver) another imperial panegyric. Pacatus’ work forms the last of the Gallic panegyrics; Paulinus’ work is lost. On its contents, Jerome, Ep. 58; Paulinus, Ep. 28.6; H.Sivan, The Last Gallic Prose Panegyric’, Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History (1993). Lucaniano stylo V. Evelyn White, Loeb I, XXXVI. Cf. Ep. 20 to Hesperius. Weiss, ‘Ausonius’; paschales versus stilo heroico; de ludo septem sapientum versu trimetro iambico; de gripho numeri ternarii versu heroico, etc. G.W.Bowersock, ‘Symmachus and Ausonius’, in F.Paschoud, ed., Colloque genevois sur Symmaque (Paris 1986), 7–8. Green, Works of Ausonius, 274, prefers scribal corruptions.

217


19 Ausonius says in the verse preface that he intended to follow the dates of death and degrees of relationship. Yet the last six poems do not confirm with either principle (Green, Works of Ausonius, 298). Even within each grouping of relatives their dates of death do not follow a clear chronological progression. 20 Green, Works of Ausonius, 363, on coronis and poeta as two parts of the same poem. 21 Green, Works of Ausonius, 363, on his editorial decision to remove the last epitaphs from this collection to the Epigrams. 22 Green, Works of Ausonius, 363–4, states that the Epitaphia may have been started much earlier than the parental and professorial poems, possibly after Ausonius left school and was learning Greek by himself. 23 Schenkl and Peiper differ considerably in their reconstruction of the Eclogae. Peiper assembled twenty-six poems of which twenty deal with the calendar (8–23; 25–6=Schenkl V. l–18). He added to these three poems with philosophical content (2–4=Schenkl XXVIIIXXXI), one poem based on Hesiod (5=Schenkl XXXI I), one on weights (6=Schenkl XXX), one on the toils of Hercules (24= Schenkl XXXIII), and one on childbirth (7=Schenkl XXXV). The dedicatory poem which Peiper and Evelyn White put at the head of the collection, Schenkl edited separately (XXIII). I tend to agree with the first two in their reconstruction, as did Pastorino. Green, Works of Ausonius, 420 f., 723. Above, Ch. 5, p. 76 f. on the poems as a school subject. 24 Evelyn White I, XXXV. 25 On a school context, above, Ch. 5, p. 76 f. 26 Green, Works of Ausonius, 584: its origins are due to the schoolroom but as it stands it is a product of Ausonius’ dotage. He is against two authorial versions. 27 Ibid., 183, prints the last three verses as a separate poem. 28 Terence, Eun. 42; Heaut. 218, Green, Works of Ausonius, 598. 29 Green, Works of Ausonius, 558, notes that the work does not contain any allusion to topics of contemporary history. This may point to a schoolroom origin. The work was popular and was transmitted with manuscripts of Suetonius and Sidonius, as well as with many Ausonian MSS. (ibid., 559). In this connection, one may recall that a schoolroom use has always been a guarantee of preservation and wide circulation. 30 Reeve, ‘Manuscripts’, 117, no. 9. 31 Green, Works of Ausonius, 555 on sending the work to both men with all the surviving dedications. 32 Green, Works of Ausonius, 445, on a date of composition in the late 360s, then circulation among friends, and finally dedication to Symmachus in the early 370s. Any date which overlaps with the correspondence of the two (early 370s to the early 380s) appears feasible. 33 Green, Works of Ausonius, 518, for a connection with Gratian’s wedding in 374. This would have been a rather unlikely epithalamium for a pious young man. On the context, above, Ch. 6, pp. 105–6.

218


34 opuscula mea quae promi studueras. 35 Green, Works of Ausonius, 619, regards both as ‘a double letter’. 36 Seeck, ‘Review’. Green, Works of Ausonius, 250, argues against more than one version, and attributes the excisions to a ‘theologically sensitive editor in Arian Gaul’. 37 Above, Ch. 5, p. 76 f. 38 Green, Works of Ausonius, 597, on possible classroom conventions behind the Ludus since it was devised for a schoolroom purpose; ibid., 421, groups the Eclogues with the Mosella and the Griphus as court compositions. 39 Green, Works of Ausonius, 558, prefers to regard the Caesares as entertainment. 40 L.A.A.Jouai, De magistraat Ausonius (Nijmegen 1938), 49–50, excepts Milan, but Ausonius had many chances of adding or revising his Milanese data through contacts at court, and not least through his own son who was praetorian prefect of Italy. 41 Green, Works of Ausonius, 570, on including cities with the greatest claim to fame, either past or present. 42 Ibid., 269, states that no solution is possible. 43 H.Sivan, ‘Redating Ausonius’ Mosella’, AJP 112 (1990), 383–94. 44 Green includes in his edition three prayers, and excludes the Oratio Consulis Ausonii Versibus Rhopalicis (App. 667). 45 J.Desmulliez, ‘Paulin de Nole. Etudes chronologiques’, Recherches augustiniennes 20 (1985), 35–64. 46 Like the intriguing work on usurpers from Decius to Diocletian (Weiss, ‘Ausonius’, Green, Works of Ausonius, 720), H.Sivan, The Historian Eusebius (of Nantes)’, JHS (1992).

219

BIBLIOGRAPHY

SELECT PRIMARY SOURCES Acta Sanctorum. Ambrosius, Letters, Patrologia Latina (PL) 16; Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum (CSEL) 73+, 1968+, O.Faller. Ammianus Marcellinus, Berlin 1910–15, C.U.Clark; Budé, 1968+. Anthologia Latina, Teubner, 1894, A.Riese. Augustinus, Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum 1891+. Aurelius Victor, Teubner 1966, F.Pichlmayr/R.Gruendel. Ausonius, MGH AA V.2, Berlin 1883, repr. 1961, Schenkl; Teubner, Stuttgart 1886, repr. 1976, Peiper; Turin 1971, Pastorino; Teubner, Leipzig 1978, Prete; Oxford 1991, Green. English translation: Loeb 1919–21, Evelyn White. Bibliotheca Hagiographica Latina Antique et Mediae Antiquitatis, Brussels 1898–1911, with supplements. Carmina Epigraphica, C.Buecheler. Chronica Minora I–III, Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Auctores Antiquissimi IX–XIII, T.Mommsen. Claudianus, MGH AA X, 1982, T.Birt. Codex Justinianus, P.Krüger. Codex Theodosianus, Berlin 1905, T.Mommsen/Meyer. English translation by C.Pharr, 1952 repr. 1969. Concilia Galliae, Corpus Christianorum Series Latina 148, 1963, C.Munier. Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, Berlin 1863+. Corpus Legum, Leipzig 1957, G.Haenel. Epitome de Caesaribus, see under Aurelius Victor. Eunapius, Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum IV, C.Müller. Eutropius, MGH AA 2.2, 1879, H.Droysen. Expositio totius mundi, Sources Chrétiennes 124, 1966, J.Rougé. Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae, Berlin 1892–1916, H.Dessau. Jerome, Chronicle, Die Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten Jahrhunderte 2nd ed, 1956, R.Helm; Opera, PL 22–30; Letters, CSEL 14–16. Julian, Orationes, Loeb, 1913–23, W.C.Wright. Laterculus Veronensis, see Notitia Dignitatum.

220

B I B LIO GRAPHY

Marcellus, De Medicamentis, Corpus Medicorum Latinorum V, 1916, N.Niedermann. Notitia Dignitatum, Berlin 1876, O.Seeck. Olympiodorus, FHG IV, C.Müller. Orosius, CSEL 5, 1882, C.Zangmeister. Panegyrici Latini, Oxford Classical Texts, 1964, R.A.B.Mynors (OCT); Budé, 1949–55, E.Galletier. Paulinus of Nola, CSEL 29–30, 1894, G.de Hartel. Philostorgius, GCS, 19722, J.Bidez/F.Winkelmann. Rutilius Namatianus, Heidelberg 1972–7, E.Doblhofer. Scriptores Historiae Augustae, Teubner, 1884, H.Peter; 1971, E.Hohl. Sidonius Apollinaris, MGH AA VIII, C.Luetjohann; Budé, 1960–70, A. Loyen; Loeb, W.B.Anderson. Sulpicius Severus, Vita Martini, SCh 133–5, 1967–9, J.Fontaine; Chronicle, CSEL 1; Dialogus. Symmachus, MGHAA 6.1, 1883, O.Seeck; Budé, 1972, J.P.Callu; and the various Italian editions for each book of the letters by Roda, Vera et al. Themistius, Teubner, 1965, G.Downey. Venantius Fortunatus, MGH AA IV, 1881–5, F.Leo/B.Krusch. Vie de Sainte Mélaniae, SCh 90, 1962, D.Gorce. Zosimus, Budé, 1971+, F.Paschoud.

MODERN WORKS A l’aube de la France: La Gaule de Constantin a Childeric (Paris 1981). Alföldi, A., A Conflict of Ideas in the Late Roman Empire, trans. H. Mattingly (Oxford 1952). Ampolo, C., La città antica (Bari 1980). Aragon-Launet, P. and Balmelle, C., ‘Les structures ornementales en acanthe dans les mosaïques de la villa de Séviac, près de Montreal (Gers)’, Gallia 46 (1987–8), 189–208. Arce, J., ‘El missorium de Teodosio I, precisiones y observaciones’, Archivio Espagñol de Arquéologia 49 (1976), 119–40. Archéologie urbaine. (Colloque de Tours 1980) (Paris 1982). Arnheim, M.T.W., The Senatorial Aristocracy in the Later Roman Empire (Oxford 1972). Arsac, P., ‘La dignité sénatoriale au Bas Empire’, Revue historique de droit français et étranger 47 (1969), 198–243. Autun, Augustodunum, capitale des Eduens (Autun 1987). Avotins, I., ‘The Holders of the Chairs of Rhetoric at Athens’, Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 79 (1975), 313–24. Bagnall, R.S. et al., Consuls of the Later Roman Empire (Atlanta 1987). Balmelle, C., Recueil général des mosaïques de la Gaule romaine (Supp. X a Gallia) IV (Aquitaine), fasc. 1 and fasc. 2 (Paris 1980 and 1987). ——‘A propos d’une mosaïque tardive de Bordeaux’, in Mosaïque. Recueil d’hommage a H.Stern (Paris 1982), 21–32.

221


——Gauthier, M. and Monturet, R., ‘Mosaïques de la villa du Palat a Saint Emilion (Gironde)’, Gallia 38 (1980), 59–96. Baratte, F., ‘La vaisselle d’argent en Gaule’, Les dossiers. Histoire et archéologie 54 (juin 1981), 38–51. Barbet, A., ‘Peinture murale romaine a Bordeaux’, in A. Barbet, ed., Peinture murale en Gaule (BAR. IS 240) (1984), 103–12. Barnes, T.D., ‘Who Were the Nobility of the Roman Empire?’ Phoenix 28 (1974), 444–9. ——‘Constans and Gratian in Rome’, Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 79 (1975), 325–33. ——The New Empire of Diocletian and Constantine (Cambridge, Mass. 1982). ——‘Proconsuls of Africa 337–392’, Phoenix 39 (1985), 144–53. ——‘Christians and Pagans in the Reign of Constantius’, in L’église et l’empire au IVe siècle (Fondation Hardt) (Vandoeuvres-Genève 1987), 301 f. Barraud, D., ‘Chronique d’archéologie bordelaise 1984’, Bulletin et mémoires de la société arcbéologiqne de Bordeaux 75 (1984), 3–7. ——‘Bordeaux retrouve son passé’, Archéologia 192–3 (juillet-aout 1984), 59–72. Barthelemy, S. and Gourevitch, D., Les loisirs des romains (Paris 1975). Bayard, D. and Massy, J.-L., Amiens romain (Amiens 1983). Beck, R., Die ‘Tres Galliae’ und das ‘Imperium’ im 4 J.Studien zum Ordo Urbium Nobilium des Ausonius (Zurich 1969). Beck, R., ‘Cautes and Cautopates’, Journal of Mithraic Studies 2 (1977), 1–17. ——‘Mithraism since Franz Cumont’, in H.Temporini, ed., Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt 2.17.4 (1984), 2001–115. Bedon, R., Chevallier, R. and Pinon, P., Architecture et urbanisme en Gaule romaine, 2 vols (Paris 1988). Benoit, F., Les cimetières suburbains d’Arles dans l’antiquite chrétienne et au Moyen Age (Rome-Paris 1935). ——Sarcophages paléochrétiens d’Arles et de Marseille (Paris 1954). Bird, H.W., Sextus Aurelius Victor. A Historiographical Study (Liverpool 1984). ——‘Eutropius. His Life and Career’, Echos du monde classique 32 (1988), 51–60. Birley, A.R., ‘Magnus Maximus and the Persecution of Heresy’, Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 66 (1983), 13–43. Bistaudeau, P., ‘A la recherche des villas d’Ausone’, Caesarodunum XV bis (1978) (Paris 1980), 477–87. Blanc, N. and Gury, G., ‘Schémas italiens, schémas locaux. La representation des amours dans la peinture provinciale’, Documents d’archéologie française 10: La peinture murale antique (ed. A.Barbet) (Paris 1987), 330–45. Blanchet, A., Les enceintes romaines de la Gaule (Paris 1907). Bogli, M., ‘Aventicum, la ville romaine et son musée’, Guide archéologique de la Suisse 19 (Avenches 1984). Bonfils, G.de, Il comes et quaestor (Napoli 1981). Bonfioli, M., ‘Soggiorni imperiali a Milano e ad Aquileia da Diocleziano a

222

B I B LIO GRAPHY

Valenriniano III’, in Aquileia e Milano. Antichi Altoadriatiche 4 (Udine 1973), 125–49. Bonner, S.F., ‘The Edict of Gratian on the Remuneration of Teachers’, American Journal of Philology 86 (1965), 113–37. ——Education in Ancient Rome (Berkeley 1971). Booth, A.D., ‘Notes on Ausonius’ Professores’, Phoenix 32 (1978), 235–49. ——‘Elementary and Secondary Education in the Roman Empire’, Florilegium 9 (1979), 1–14. ——‘Sur la date de naissance de Saint Paulin de Nole’, Echos du monde classique 26, NS 1 (1982), 56–64. ——‘The Academic Career of Ausonius’, Phoenix 36 (1982), 329–43. Bordeaux, Saint Christoly. Sauvetage arcbéologique et histoire urbaine. Catalogue (Bordeaux 1982). Bordeaux. 2000 ans d’histoire. Catalogue (Bordeaux 1973). Bowersock, G.W., ‘Symmachus and Ausonius’, in F.Paschoud, ed., Colloque genevois sur Symmaque a l’occasion du XVI centenaire de I’anniversaire de l’autel de la Victoire (Paris 1986), 1–14. ——‘(Review of Matthews’ Roman Empire)’, Journal of Roman Studies 80 (1990), 244–50. Boyd, W.J.P., ‘Galilaea. A Difference of Opinion between Augustine and Jerome’s “Onomastica Sacra”’, Studia Patristica 15 (1984), 136–9. Braemer, F., Les stèles funéraires a personnages de Bordeaux, I-III siècles (Paris 1959). ——‘L’ornementation des établissements ruraux de l’Aquitaine pendant le Haut Empire et la basse antiquite’, Congrès national des sociétés savantes, Bordeaux 1979, I Archéologie (Paris 1982), 139–41. Bright, D.F., ‘Theory and Practice in the Vergilian Cento’, Illinois Classical Studies 9 (1984), 79–90. Brok, M.F.A., ‘Majestatsfrevel durch Missbrauch des Purpurs (Amm. 16.8.8)’, Latomus 41 (1982), 356–61. Brown, P., ‘Aspects of the Christianization of the Roman Aristocracy’, Journal of Roman Studies 11 (1961), 1–11. ——Augustine of Hippo (Berkeley 1967). ——The Body and Society. Men, Women, and Sexual Renuinciation in Early Christianity (New York 1988). Bruggisser, P., ‘Gloria novi saeculi. Symmaque et le siècle de Gratien, Ep. I.13’, Museum Helveticum 44 (1987), 134–49. ——‘Orator disserrissimus’, Hermes 115 (1987), 106–15. Bulletin de liaison et l’information. Direction des antiquites historiques d’Aquitaine 1982. Burnand, Y., ‘Senatores romani ex provinciis Galliarum orti’, Tituli 5 (1982), 387–437 (=Epigrafia e ordine senatorio II). Cahn H.A. et al., eds, Der spätrömische Silberschatz von Kaiseraugust (Derendingen 1984). Cameron, Alan, ‘Roman School Fees’, Classical Review 15 (1965), 257–8. ——‘Wandering Poets. A Literary Movement in Byzantine Egypt’, Historia 14 (1965), 470–509.

223


——‘Gratian’s Repudiation of the Pontifical Robe’, Journal of Roman Studies 58 (1968), 96–102. ——Theodosius and the Regency of Stilicho’, Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 73 (1968), 247–80. ——Claudian (Oxford 1970). ——‘The Latin Revival of the Fourth Century’, in W.Treadgold, ed., Renaissances before the Renaissance (Stanford 1984), 42–58. ——‘Polyonomy in the Late Roman Aristocracy. The Case of Petronius Probus’, Journal of Roman Studies 75 (1985), 164–82. Caputo, G., ‘Flavius Nepotianus. Comes et Praeses Provinciae Tripolitaniae’, Revue des études anciennes 53 (1951), 234–47. Castorina, E., ‘Lo spirito de cristianesimo in Ausonio’, Siculorum Gymnasium 29 (1976), 85–91. Cesa M. and Sivan H., ‘Alarico in Italia’, Historia 39 (1990), 361–74. Chadwick, H., Priscillian of Avila (Oxford 1976). Chadwick, N.K., Poetry and Letters in Early Christian Gaul (London 1955). Charlet, J.-L., ‘Théologie, politique et rhétorique. La celebration poétique de Pâques a la cour de Valentinien et d’Honorius d’après Ausone et Claudien’, in La poesia tardoantica (Messina 1984), 259–87. ——‘L’inspiration et la forme biblique dans la poésie latine du IIIe au VIe siècles’, in J.Fontaine and C.Pietri, eds, Le monde latin antique et la Bible. Bible de tous les temps 2 (Paris 1985), 613–43. Chastagnol, A., La préfecture urbaine a Rome sous le Bas Empire (Paris 1960). ——Fastes de la préfecture de Rome au Bas Empire (Paris 1962). ——‘Les espagnols dans l’aristocratie gouvernementale a l’époque de Théodose’, in Les empereurs romains de l’Espagne (Paris 1965), 269–307. ——‘Les modes de recrutement du sénat au IVe siècle après J.-C.’, in Recherches sur les structures sociales dans l’antiqmte classique (colloque de Caen 1969) (Paris 1970), 187–211. ——‘L’évolution du l’ordre senatorial aux IIIe et IVe siècles de notre ère’, Revue historique 244 (1970), 305–14. ——‘Le diocèse civil d’Aquitaine au Bas Empire’, Bulletin de la société nationale des antiquaires de France (1970), 272–90. ——‘(Introduction)’, in Transformations et conflits au IVe siècle (Colloque de Bordeaux 1970) (Bonn 1978), 1–13. —‘La patrie de Carus’, Bonner Historia Augusta Colloquium 1977/78 (Bonn 1980), 50–60. ——‘Remarques sur les salaires et rémunérations au IVe siècle’, in Les devaluations a Rome (Paris-Rome 1980), 215–33. ——‘La carrière sénatoriale du Bas Empire’, Tituli 4 (1982), (= Epigrafia e ordine senatorio), 167–94. ——‘Le sénat dans l’oeuvre de Symmaque’, in F.Paschoud, ed., Colloque genevois sur Symmaque (Paris 1986), 73–96. Chevallier, R., Autun gallo-romaine Supp. 9 à Caesarodunum (Tours 1962).

224

B I B LIO GRAPHY

Chronique d’archéologie bordelaise. Bulletin et mémoires de la société arcbéologique de Bordeaux et d’Aquitaine (1973). Clarke, M.L., Higher Education in the Ancient World (London 1971). Clauss, M., Der Magister Officiorum in der Spätantike (Munich 1980). Clavel-Lévèque, M., ‘Religion et société en Gaule. Tradition et identité’, in Sept siècles de civilisation gallo-romaine. Vus d’Autun (Autun 1985), 19–65. Colin, M.-G., Feugère, M. and Laurens, A.-F., ‘Un trésor d’argenterie antique’, Archéologia 210 (1986), 26–34. Consolino, F.E., ‘Da Osidio Geta ad Ausonio e Proba. Le molte possibilità del centone’, Atene e Roma 28 (1983), 133–51. Constans, L.A., Arles antique (Paris 1921). Courtney E., ‘The Roman Months in Art and Literature’, Museum Helveticum 45 (1988), 33–57. Crochet, H. and Nony, D., ‘Le sanctuaire paléo-chrétien de la rue Arnaud Miqueu a Bordeaux’, Revue des musées de Bordeaux 3 (1969), 14–18. Cumont, F., Textes et monuments figures relatifs aux mystères de Mithras, 2 vols (Brussels 1896–9). Cüppers, H., ‘Die Stadtmauer des römischen Trier und das Graberfeld an der Porta Nigra’, Trierer Zeitschrift 36 (1973), 133–222. Cüppers, H. and Neyses, A., ‘Untersuchungen und Beobachtungen im südlichen Langmauerbezirk’, Trierer Zeitschrift 34 (1971), 227 f. Dagron, G., L’empire romain d’orient au IVe siècle et les traditions politiques d’hellénisme. Le témoignage de Thémistios (Travaux et Mémoires III) (Paris 1968). Dan, Y., The City in Eretz-Israel in the Late Roman and Byzantine Periods (Jerusalem 1984), in Hebrew. Debord, P. and Doreau, J., ‘Le port antique de Bordeaux’, Revue historique de Bordeaux et du département de la Gironde 24 (1975), 5–18. Debord, P., Etienne, R., Gauthier, M. and Mayet, F. ‘Du nouveau sur Bordeaux antique’, in Actes du 104e congrès national des sociétés savantes (Bordeaux 1979), 165–78. Découvertes archéologiques sur le site de Parunis (Catalogue of an exhibition, Bordeaux, Musée d’Aquitaine, Feb.-May 1988). Del Chicca, F., Q. Aurelii Symmachi. Laudatio in Valentinianum seniorem (Rome 1984). ——‘Per la datazione dell’oratio 3 di Simmaco’, Athenaeum 65 (1987), 534–41. Delmaire, R., Les responsables des finances impériales au Bas-Empire (Coll. Latomus 203) (Brussels 1989). Demandt, A., ‘Der Tod des älteren Theodosius’, Historia 18 (1969), 598–626. ——‘Magister Militum’, PW Supp. XII (1970), 580 f. ——‘Der spätrömische Militaradel’, Chiron 10 (1980), 609–36. Demougeot, E., La formation de l’Europe et les invasions barbares II. 1 (Paris 1979). Den Boer, W., Some Minor Roman Historians (Leiden 1972). Der Trierer Dom (Rheinisches Verein für Denkmalpflege und Landschaftsshutz, Jahrbuch 1978/9) (Neuss 1980).

225


Desgraves, L., ‘Repertoire des éditions imprimées des oeuvres d’Ausone (1472– 1785)’, in Ausone. Humaniste aquitain (Bordeaux 1986), 153–232. Desmulliez, J., ‘Paulin de Nole. Etudes chronologiques’, Recherches augustiniennes 20 (1985), 35–64. Die Römer an Mosel und Saar (Mainz 1983). Dionisotti, C., ‘From Ausonius’ School Days? A Schoolbook and its Relatives’, Journal of Roman Studies 72 (1982), 83 f. Doignon, J., ‘Le titre de Nobilissimus Puer porté par Gratien et la mystique littéraire des origines de Rome a 1’avènement de Valentinien’, in R. Chevallier, ed., Mélanges A.Piganiol (Paris 1966), 1693–709. ——Hilaire de Poitiers avant l’exile (Paris 1971). Drijvers, J.W., ‘Virginity and Asceticism in Late Roman Western Elites’, in J.Blok and P.Mason, eds, Sexual Asymmetry. Studies in Ancient Society (Amsterdam 1987), 241–73. Drinkwater, J.F., Roman Gaul (London/Canberra 1983). ——‘The “Pagan Underground”, Constantius II’s “Secret Service”, and the Survival and the Usurpation of Julian the Apostate’, in C.Deroux, ed., Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History 3 (Brussels 1983), 348–87. ——The Gallic Empire (Historia Einzelschriften 52) (Stuttgart 1987). ——‘Gallic Attitudes to the Roman Empire in the Fourth Century. Continuity or Change?’ in H.E.Herzig and R.Frei-Stolba, eds, Labor omnibus unus. Festschrift G.Walser (Stuttgart 1989), 136–53. Dunbabin, K.M.D., The Mosaics of Roman North Africa (Oxford 1978). Du nouveau sur Arles antique. Revue d’Arles 1 (1987). Duru, R., ‘Lacrypte de l’église Saint Seurin de Bordeaux’, La sauvegarde de l’art français 2 (1982), 79 f. Ehrensperger-Katz, I., ‘Les representations des villes fortifiées dans l’art paléochrétien et leur derivées byzantines’, Cahiers arcbéologiques 19 (1969), 1– 27. Eiden, H., ‘Untersuchungen an den spätrömischen Horrea von St. Irminen in Trier’, Trierer Zeitschrift 24/6 (1956/8), 629–36. Espérandieu, E., Recueil général des bas-reliefs de la Gaule romaine, II Aquitaine (Paris 1908, repr. Ridgewood, NJ 1965). Etienne, R., Bordeaux antique (Histoire de Bordeaux I) (Bordeaux 1962). ——‘La démographie de la famille d’Ausone’, in Etudes et chronique de démographie historique (Rennes 1964), 15–25. ——‘Ausone ou les ambitions d’un notable aquitain’, in Ausone. Humaniste aquitain (Bordeaux 1986), 1–90. Fabre, P., Essai sur la chronologie de l’oeuvre de Saint Paulin de Nole (Paris 1948). ——Saint Paulin de Nole et l’amitié chrétienne (Paris 1949). Fauth, W., ‘Cupido Cruciatus’, Gräzer Beiträge 2 (1974), 39–60. Favez, C. ‘Une famille gallo-romaine au 4e siècle’, Museum Helveticum 3 (1946), 118–31. ——‘Une école gallo-romaine au IV siècle’, Latomus 7 (1948), 223–33.

226

B I B LIO GRAPHY

Février, P.-A., ‘Arles aux IV et V siècles, ville impériale et capitale régio-nale’, XXVI Corso di cultura sull’arte ravennate (Ravenna 1978), 127–58. ——‘Sarcophages d’Arles’, Congrès archéologique de France, 184e session, 1976, Pays d’Arles (Paris 1979), 317–59. Fontaine, J., Sulpicius Severus. Vie de St. Martin, 3 vols (SCh 135–7) (1967–9). ——‘La poésie chrétienne “mondaine” du centon de Proba aux petits vers d’Ausone’, in Naissance de la poésie dans l’ocddent chrétien (Paris 1981), 95–110. Fouet, G., La villa gatto-romaine de Montmaurin (Hte. Garonne) (XX Supp. à Gallia) (Paris 1969). ——‘Le sanctuaire des eaux de La Hillère a Montmaurin (Hte. Garonne)’, Gallia 30 (1972), 83–124. ——‘Exemples d’exploitation des eaux par des grands propriétaires terriens dans le sud-ouest au IV siècle’, Caesarodunum 10 (1975), 128–35. ——‘La villa gallo-romaine de Valentine (Hte. Garonne)’, Revue de Comminges 91 (1978), 145–57. Fremesdorf, F., Die Denkmäler des römischen Köln I-VIII (Cologne 1958– 67). Frézouls, E., ‘Evergétisme et constructions urbaines dans les Trois Gaules et les Germanies’, in Revue du Nord (Mélanges E. Will) 260 (1984), 27–54. Frier, B., ‘Roman Life Expectancy. The Pannonian Evidence’, Phoenix 37 (1983), 328–4. Garnsey, P.D., ‘Aspects of the Decline of the Urban Aristocracy in the Empire’, Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt II. 1 (1974), 229–52. Gauthier, M., ‘La céramique estampée tardive d’Aquitaine. Un siècle de trouvailles bordelaises’, Revue historique de Bordeaux 24 (1975), 19–45. ——‘La villa gallo-romaine du Palat a Saint Emilion (Gironde)’, Bulletin de la société historique et archéologique de Saint Emilion 17 (1975), 45–58. ——‘Quinze ans de sauvetages archéologiques a Bordeaux’, in Archéologie urbaine (Colloque de Tours 1980) (Tours 1982), 86 f. Gauthier, N., L’évangélisation des pays de la Moselle, IIIe-VIIIe siècles (Paris 1980). Gayraud, M., ‘Narbonne aux trois premiers siècles ap. J.-C.’, Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt II.3 (1975), 829–59. ——Narbonne antique des origines a la fin du IIIe siècle, Supp. 8 de la Revue archéologique de Narbonnaise (Paris 1981). Goethert-Polaschek, K., Römische Gläser im Rheinischen Landesmuseum Trier (Trier 1980). Gordon, R.L., ‘Mithraism and Roman Society. Social Factors in the Explanation of Religious Change in the Roman Empire’, Religion 2 (1972), 92–121. Gose, E., Der gallo-römische Tempelbezirk im Altbachtal zu Trier (Mainz 1972). Gourevitch, D., ‘Presence de la médecine rationelle en Gaule romaine’, in Sept siècles de civilisation gallo-romaine. Vus d’Autun (Autun 1985), 153–67. Granucci, F., ‘Appunti di lessicologia gallica. Ausonio e il Grammaticomastix’, Romanobarbarica 9 (1986–7), 115–51. Green, R.P.H., ‘Ausonius’ Use of the Classical Latin Poets. Some New Examples and Observations’, Classical Quarterly 27 (1977), 441–52.

227


——‘Prosopographical Notes on the Family and Friends of Ausonius’, Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies (London University) 25 (1978), 19–27. ——‘The Correspondence of Ausonius’, L’Antiquité classique 49 (1980), 191–211. ——‘Marius Maximus and Ausonius’ Caesares’, Classical Quarterly 31 (1981), 226– 36. ——‘Still Waters Run Deep. A New Study of the Professores of Bordeaux’, Classical Quarterly 35 (1985), 491–506. ——‘Man and Nature in Ausonius’ Moselle’, Illinois Classical Studies 14 (1989), 303– 15. ——‘Greek in Late Roman Gaul. The Evidence of Ausonius’, in E.M. Craik, ed., Owls to Athens. Essays to Sir K.Dover (Oxford 1990), 311–19. ——The Works of Ausonius (Oxford 1991). Griffe, E., La Gaule chrétienne a l’époque romaine, 3 vols (Paris 1964–6). Grimal, P., ‘Les villas d’Ausone’, Revue des études anciennes 55 (1953), 113–25. Haarhof, T.J., Schools of Gaul (Oxford 1920, repr. Johannesburg 1958). Haehling, R. von, Die Religionszugehörigkeit der hohen Amtsträger des Römischen Reiches seit Constantins I Alleinherschaft bis zum Ende der Theodosianischen Dynastie (Bonn 1978). Hardy, B.C., ‘The Emperor Julian and his School Law’, Church History 38 (1968), 131–43. Harries, J., ‘Church and State in the Notitia Galliarum’, Journal of Roman Studies 68 (1978), 26–43. ——‘Treasure in Heaven. Property and Inheritance among Senators of Late Rome’, in E.M.Craik, ed., Marriage and Property (Aberdeen 1984), 54–70. ——‘The Roman Imperial Quaestor from Constantine to Theodosius IF, Journal of Roman Studies 78 (1988), 148–72. Harris, W.V., Ancient Literacy (Cambridge, Mass. 1989). Hastinguas, J., ‘Vertus universitaires selon Ausone’, Revue des études anciennes 55 (1952), 379–87. Hatt, J.J., Histoire de la Gaule romaine (Paris 1959). Haverling, G., Studies in Symmachus’ Language and Style (Göteborg 1988). Heinen, H., Trier und das Treverland in römischer Zeit (Trier 1985). ——‘Der römische Westen und die Prätorianerpräfektur Gallien. Historischer Raum und politische Entwicklung’, in H.E.Herzig and R. Frei-Stolba, eds, Labor omnibus unus. Festschrift G.Walser (Stuttgart 1989) 186–205. Heinzelmann, M., ‘Gallische Prosopographie 260–527’, Francia 10 (1982), 531– 718. Held, W., ‘Die gallische Aristokratie im 4 J. hinsichtlich ihrer Siedlungsstandorte und ihrer zentralen Stellung zur römischen Provinzial bzw. Zentraladministration’, Klio 58 (1974), 121–40. Herzog, R., Die Bibelepik der lateinischen Spätantike I (Munich 1975).——ed., Handbuch der lateinischen Literatur, 5 (1989). Hinnel, J.R., ‘The Iconography of Cautes and Cautopates. I. The Data’, Journal of Mithraic Studies 1 (1976), 36–67.

228

B I B LIO GRAPHY

Histoire de la France urbaine (Paris 1980). Holtz, L., ‘Grammairiens et rhéteurs romains en concurrence pour l’enseignement des figures de rhétorique’, Caesarodunum XVI bis (1979), 207–20. Honoré, T., ‘Ausonius and Vulgar Law’, Iura 35 (1983, pub. 1987), 75–85. ——‘The Making of the Theodosian Code’, Zeitschrift der Savigny Stiftung für Rechtgeschichte 103 (1986), 133–222. Hopkins, M.K., ‘Social Mobility in the Later Roman Empire. The Evidence of Ausonius’, Classical Quarterly 11 (1961), 239–49. Hunt, E.D., Holy Land Pilgrimage in the Later Roman Empire (Oxford 1982). Hussong, L. and Cüppers, H., Die Trierer Kaiserthermen (Mainz 1972). Isbell, H., ‘Decimus Magnus Ausonius’, in J.W. Binns, ed., Latin Literature of the Fourth Century (London 1974), 22–57. Jachmann, ‘Das Problem der Urvariante in der Antike und die Grundlagen der Ausoniuskritik’, Festschrift der Universität Köln zum 10 J. Bestehen des DeutschItalienischen Kulturinstitut Patrarcahaus (Cologne 1941), 47–104. Jacques, F., ‘L’ordine senatorio attraverso la crisi del III secolo’, in A. Giardina, ed., Società romana e impero tardoantico I (Rome 1986), 106 f. Janvier, Y., La legislation impériale sur les edifices publics (Aix-en-Provence 1977). Johnson, S., Late Roman Fortifications (London 1983). Jones, A.H.M., ‘The Social Background of the Struggle between Paganism and Christianity’, in A.Momigliano, ed., The Conflict between Paganism and Christianity in the Fourth Century (Oxford 1963), 17–37. ——‘Collegiate Prefectures’; Journal of Roman Studies 54 (1964), 78–89. ——The Later Roman Empire (Oxford 1964, repr. in 2 vols Norman, Oklahoma 1973). ——‘The Caste System of the Later Roman Empire’, Eirene 8 (1970), 79–96=idem, The Roman Economy (Oxford 1974), 396–418. Jones, A.H.M., Martindale, J.R. and Morris, J., eds, Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire 1 (Cambridge 1971). Jones, A.H.M. and Martindale, J.R., eds, Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire 2 (Cambridge 1980). Jouai, L.A.A., De magistraat Ausonius (Nijmegen 1938). Jullian, C., Inscriptions romaines de Bordeaux, 2 vols (Bordeaux 1887–90). ‘Ausone et son temps’, Revue historique 47 (1891), 241–66; 48 (1892), 1–38. ——‘Ausone et Bordeaux (Bordeaux 1893). ——Histoire de Bordeaux, 8 vols (Bordeaux 1895, repr. Marseille 1975). ——Histoire de la Gaule romaine, 8 vols (Paris 1920–6). Kajanto, I., The Latin Cognomina (Helsinki 1965). Kaster, R.A., ‘Notes on Primary and Secondary Schools in Late Antiquity’, Transactions of the American Philological Association 113 (1983), 323–46. ——‘The Salaries of Libanius’, Chiron 13 (1983), 37 f. ——‘A Reconsideration of Gratian’s School Law’, Hermes 112 (1984), 100–14. ——Guardians of Language. The Grammarian and Society in Late Antiquity (Berkeley 1988).

229


Kenney, E.J., ‘The Mosella of Ausonius’, Greece and Rome 36 (1984), 190–202. Klein, R., ‘Das Südliche Gallien in spätantiker Zeit’, Gymnasium 98 (1991), 32– 80. Krause, J.-U., ‘Das spätantike Städtepatronat’, Chiron 17 (1987), 1–80. Spätantike Patronatsformen im Westen des römischen Reiches (Munich 1987). Kudlien, F., Die Stellung des Ärztes in der römischen Gesellschaft (Forschungen zum antiken Sklaverei 18) (Stuttgart 1986). Kuhoff, W., Studien zur zivilen senatorischen Laufbahn im 4], n. Ch. Ämter und Amtsinhaber in Clarissimat und Spektabilitat (Frankfurt 1983). Kunderewicz, C., ‘Le gouvernement et les étudiants dans le Code Théodosien’, Revue historique de droit français et étranger 50 (1972), 575–88. Lambrecht, R., ‘Le commerce des “Syriens” en Gaule de haut empire a l’époque mérovingienne’, L’antiquité classtque 6 (1937), 35–61. Langlois, P., ‘Les poèmes chrétiens et le christianisme d’Ausone’, Revue de philologie 43 (1969), 39–58. Lauffray, J., Schreyeck, J. and Dupre, N., ‘Les établissements et les villas galloromaines de Lalonquette’, Gallia 21 (1973), 123–57. Le Gentilhomme, P., ‘Le désastre d’Autun en 269', Revue des études anciennes 45 (1943), 233–40. Leclercq, H., ‘Colonies d’orientaux en Occident’, Dictionnaire d’arcbéolo-gie chrétienne et de la liturgie (DACL) 3.2.2273–5. Lepelley, C., Les cités de I’Afrique romaine au Bas-Empire, 2 vols (Paris 1979–81). Levi, A. and M., Itineraria picta (Rome 1967). Levi, D., ‘The Allegories of the Months’, Art Bulletin 23 (1941), 241–91. Lewit, T., Agricultural Production in the Roman Economy AD 200–400 (BAR. IS 568) (Oxford 1991). Liebeschuetz, J.H.W.G., Barbarians and Bishops: Army, Church and State in the Age of Arcadius and Chrysostom (Oxford 1990). ——‘Epigraphic Evidence on the Christianisation of Syria’, in idem, From Diocletian to the Arab Conquest (Variorum repr.) (London 1990), 485–508. Lienhard, J.T., Paulinus of Nola and Early Western Monasticism (Cologne-Bonn 1977). Livet, G. and Rapp, F., Histoire de Strasbourg (Strasbourg 1980). Loyen, A., Sidoine Apollinaire et l’esprit précieux en Gaule aux dernièrs jours de l’empire (Paris 1943). ——‘Bourg-sur-Gironde et les villas d’Ausone’, Revue des études anciennes 57 (1960), 113–26. MacCormack, S.G., ‘Latin Prose Panegyrics’, in T.A.Dorey, ed., Empire and Aftermath. Silver Latin II (London 1975), 143–205. ——‘Latin Prose Paneyrics. Tradition and Discontinuity in the Later Roman Empire’, Revue des études augustiniennes 22 (1976), 29–77. ——Art and Ceremony in Late Antiquity (Berkeley 1981). McCormick, M., Eternal Victory (Cambridge 1986). MacMullen, R., ‘Social Mobility in the Theodosian Code’, Journal of Roman Studies 54 (1964), 49–53.

230

B I B LIO GRAPHY

——Corruption and the Decline of Rome (New Haven/London 1988). Maille, de M., Recherches sur les origines chrétiennes de Bordeaux (Paris 1959). Markus, R.A., ‘Paganism, Christianity and the Latin Classics in the Fourth Century’, in J.W.Binns, ed., Latin Literature of the Fourth Century (London 1974), 1–21. Marmion, C., La sigillée tardive d’Aquitaine (unpublished TER, Université de Bordeaux III, 1984–5). Marrou, H.-I., Saint Augustin et la fin de la culture antique (Paris 1938). ——Histoire de l’éducation dans l’antiquite (Paris 1964). Martin, R., ‘La Moselle d’Ausone, est-elle un poème politique?’ Revue des études latines 63 (1985), 237 f. Marx, F., ‘Ausonius Lied von der Mosel’, Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 80 (1931), 368–92. Massow, W.von, ‘Der Circus des römischen Trier’, Trierer Zeitschrift 18 (1949), 149–69. Mathisen, R.W., ‘Resistance and Reconciliation. Majorian and the Gallic Aristocracy after the Fall of Avitus’, Francia 7 (1979), 597–627. ——PLRE II. Suggested Addenda and Corrigenda’, Historia 31 (1982), 364–86. ——‘Emigrants, Exiles and Survivors. Aristocratic Options in Visigothic Aquitania’, Phoenix 38 (1984), 157–70. Matthews, J.F., ‘Gallic Supporters of Theodosius’, Latomus 30 (1971), 1073–99. ——‘The Letters of Symmachus’, in J.W.Binns, ed., Latin Literature of the Fourth Century (London 1974), 58–99. ——Western Aristocracies and Imperial Court AD 364–425 (Oxford 1975). ——The Roman Empire of Ammianus (Baltimore 1989). Maurin, L., ‘CIL VIII 1251 et l’enceinte romaine de Bordeaux’, Aquitania 5 (1987), 123–32. Menendez, M.C., Structures, modes et procédés de construction des remparts du BasEmpire dans le sud-ouest de la Gaule (unpublished TER, Université de Bordeaux III, 1986–7). Merkelbach, M.J., Mithras (Königstein 1984). Monturet, R. and Rivière, H., Les thermes sud de la villa gallo-romaine de Séviac, Gers, Supp. 2 à Aquitania (Bordeaux 1986). Mosaïques romaines et paléochrétiennes du Musée du Louvre (Paris 1978). Móscy, A., ‘Lateinische Cognomina als Geschichtsquelle. Zwei Typen der Provinzialsrömischen Kultur’, Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 36 (1984), 197–222. Mrozek, S., ‘Munificentia privata in der Städten Italiens des spätrömische Zeit’, Historia 27 (1978), 355–68. Naudé, C.P.T., ‘Flavius Merobaudes and the Death of the Elder Theodosius’, in Varia Studia in honorem W.J.Richards (Bloemfontein 1987), 388–99. Nautin, P., ‘Les premières relations d’Ambroise avec l’empereur Gratien (Le De Fide, livres I et II)’, in Y.-M.Duval, ed., Ambroise de Milan. XVIe centenaire de son élection episcopale (Paris 1974), 229–44.

231


Nellen, D., Viri Litterati. Gebildetes Beamtentum und spätrömisches Reich im Westen zwischen 284 und 395 n. Ch (Bochum 1981). Nesselhauf, H., Dis spätrömische Verwaltung der gallisch-germanischen Länder (Berlin 1938). Newlands, C., ‘Naturae mirabor opus: Ausonius’ Challenge to Statius in the Moselle’, Transactions of the American Philological Association 118 (1988), 403–19. Novak, D.M., ‘Constantine and the Senate. An Early Phase of the Christianization of the Roman Aristocracy’, Ancient Society 10 (1979), 271– 310. ——‘Anicianae domus culmen. nobilitatis culmen’, Kiio 62 (1980), 473–93. Nutton, V., ‘Archiatri and the Medical Profession in Antiquity’, Publications of the British School at Rome 45 (1977), 191–226. O’Donnell, J.J., ‘The Career of Virius Nicomachus Flavianus’, Phoenix 32 (1978), 129–43. Oliver, R.P., ‘Tacitean Nobilitas’, Illinois Classical Studies 3 (1978), 238–61. Pabst, A., Divisio Regni (Bonn 1986). Pack, E., Städte und Steuern in der Politik Julians (Coll. Latomus 194) (Brussels 1986). Pailler, J.-M., ‘L’énigme Nymfius’, Gallia 44 (1986), 151–65. Palanque, J.-R., Essai sur la préfecture du prétoire du Bas Empire (Paris 1933). ——‘L’empereur Maxime’, in Les empereurs romains d’Espagne (Coll. intern du CNRS, Madrid-Italica 1964) (Paris 1965), 255–63. Pallu de Lessert, A., Fastes des provinces africaines (Paris 1901, repr. Rome 1969). Parlasca, K., Die römischen Mosaiken in Deutschland (Berlin 1959). Paschoud, F., Roman Aeterna (Rome 1967). Pastorino, A., ‘A proposito della tradizione del testo di Ausonio’, Maia (1962), 41–68, 212–43. Pattist, M.J., Ausonius als Christen (Amsterdam-Paris 1925). Pelletier, A., L’urbanisme romain sous l’Empire (Paris 1982). Petrikovitz, H. von, ‘Fortifications in the North-Western Roman Empire from the Third to the Fifth Centuries’, Journal of Roman Studies 61 (1971), 178–218. Pichon, R., Les dernièrs écrivains profanes (Paris 1906). Pietri, C., Roma Christiana 2 vols (Rome 1976). Pietri, L., ‘La conversion en Belgique seconde d’un ancien officier de l’armée de Julien: Jovin’, Revue du Nord 52 (1970), 443–53. ——La ville de Tours du IV au VI siècles (Rome 1983). Piganiol, A., L’empire chrétien 325–395 (2nd edn, ed. A.Chastagnol) (Paris 1972). Premiers temps chrétiens en Gaule méridionale. Antiquité tardive et haut Moyen Age, Catalogue (Lyon 1986). Raguy, D., Les villas rurales dans l’Aquitaine augustéenne, 2 vols (unpublished TER, Université de Bordeaux III, 1978–9). Recueil général des mosaïques de la Gaule, H.Stern, ed. (X Supp. a Gallia). Reeve, M.D., ‘Some Manuscripts of Ausonius’, Prometheus 3 (1977), 112–20. ——‘The Tilianus of Ausonius’, Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 121 (1978), 350– 66.

232

B I B LIO GRAPHY

‘Ausonius’, in L.D.Reynolds, ed., Texts and Transmission (Oxford 1983), 26–8. Rigoir, J. and Y. and Meffre, J.-F., ‘Les derivées des sigillées paléochré-tiennes du groupe atlantique’, Gallia 31 (1973), 207–63. Roberts, M.J., ‘The Mosella of Ausonius. An Interpretation’, Transactions of the American Philological Association 114 (1984), 343–54. Biblical Epic and Rhetorical Paraphrase in Late Antiquity (ARCA 16) (Liverpool 1985). Roda, S., Commento storico ad libro IX dell’epistolario di Q.Aurelio Simmaco (Pisa 1981). ‘Una nuova lettera di Simmaco ad Ausonio? a proposito di Simm. Ep. IX.88’, Revue des études anciennes 83 (1981), 273–80. Rouche, A., L’Aquitaine des wisigoths aux arabes (Paris 1979). Rousselle, A., ‘From Sanctuary to Miracle Worker. Healing in Fourth Century Gaul’, in E.Forster, trans., R.Forster and O.Ranum, eds, Ritual, Religion and the Sacred (Baltimore 1982), 95–127. ‘La sage-femme et le thaumaturge’, in A.Pelletier, ed., La médecine en Gaule (Paris 1985), 241–51. Saller, R.P., Personal Patronage under the Early Empire (Cambridge 1982). ‘Familia, Domus and the Roman Conception of the Family’, Phoenix 38 (1984), 336–55. ‘Men’s Age at Marriage and its Consequences in the Roman Family’, Classical Philology 82 (1987), 21–34. Sanders, G., ‘Les chrétiens face a l’épigraphie funéraire latine’, in D.M. Pippidi, ed., Assimilation et resistance a la culture gréco-romaine dans le monde ancien, Travaux du VIe congrès international d’études classiques, Madrid 1974 (Bucarest-Paris 1976), 283–321. Saradi-Mendelovici, H., ‘The Demise of the Ancient City and the emergence of the Mediaeval City in the Eastern Roman Empire’, Echos du monde classique 32 (1988), 365–401. Saylor Rodgers, B., ‘Merobaudes and Maximus in Gaul’, Historia 30 (1981), 82–105. Schlumberger, J.A., ‘Potentes and Potentia in the Social Thought of Late Antiquity’, in F.M.Clover and R.S.Humphreys, eds, Tradition and Innovation in Late Antiquity (Madison 1989), 89–104. Seeck, O. (Review of Peiper’s edition of Ausonius’ works), Göttingische gelehrte Anzeigen 13 (1887), 497–520. Regesten der Kaiser und Päpste s.a. (Stuttgart 1919). Seston, W., Dioclétien et la Tétrarchie (Paris 1946). Shaw, B.D., ‘Latin Funerary Epigraphy and Family Life in the Later Roman Empire’, Historia 33 (1984), 457–97. ‘The Family in Late Antiquity. The Experience of Augustine’, Past and Present 115 (1987), 3–51. Sinnigen, W.G., ‘The Vicarius Urbis Romae and the Urban Prefecture’, Historia 8 (1959), 97–112. Sivan, H., ‘Rutilius Namatianus, Constantius III and the Return to Gaul in the Light of New Evidence’, Mediaeval Studies 48 (1986), 522–32.

233


‘A Forerunner of Ausonius. Notes on Aemilius Magnus Arborius, Ausonius’ Uncle’, Ancient History Bulletin 2 (1988), 145–9. —‘Holy Land Pilgrimage and Western Audience. Notes on Egeria and her Circle’, Classical Quarterly 38 (1988), 528–35. —‘Not a civis? A Note on Ausonius’ Parentalia 8 (Schenkl 10.6)’, Latomus 48 (1989), 879–80. —‘Sidonius Apollinaris, Theodoric II and Gothic-Roman Politics from Avitus to Majorian’, Hermes 117 (1989), 85–94. —‘Ausone et la legislation impériale. L’exemple de CTh 13.3.11, Revue des études anciennes 91 (1989), 47–53. —‘Town, County and Province in Late Roman Gaul. The Example of CIL XIII 128’, ZPE 79 (1989), 103–13. —‘Redating Ausonius’ Mosella’, American Journal of Philology 111 (1990), 383–94. —‘A Late Gallic Branch of the Acilii Glabriones?’ Mnemosyne 44 (1991), 435–9. —‘Numerian the Intellectual. A Dynastic Survivor in Fourth Century Gaul’ (forthcoming). —‘The Historian Eusebius (of Nantes)’, Journal of Hellenic Studies (1992). —‘The Dedicatory Presentation in Late Antiquity. The Example of Ausonius’, Illinois Classical Studies 17 (1992), 83–101. ‘The Last Gallic Prose Panegyric. Paulinus (of Nola) on Theodosius I’, Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History (1993). Solier, Y., Narbonne, monuments et musées (Guides archéologiques de la France 8) (Paris 1986). Sontheimer, W., ‘Der Exkurs über Gallien bei Ammianus Marcellinus’, Klio 20 (1926), 19 f. Stahl, F., De Ausoniis studiis poetarum Graecorum (Kiel 1886). Stancliffe, C., Saint Martin and his Hagiographer (Cambridge 1983). Ste Croix, G.E.M.de, The Class Struggle in the Ancient Greek World (Ithaca, NY 1981). Stein, E., Histoire du Bas-Empire (2nd edn, ed. J.R.Palanque) (Paris 1959). Steinhausen, J., ‘Hieronymus und Lacktanz in Trier’, Trierer Zeitschrift 20 (1951), 126–54. Stern, H., Le calendrier de 354 (Paris 1953). ‘Les calendriers romains illustrés’, Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt II. 12.2 (Berlin 1981), 431–75. Stoob, B., ed., Die Stadt. Gestalt und Wandel (Vienna 1980). Stroheker, K.F., Der Senatorische Adel im spätantiken Gallien (Tübingen 1948). Syme, R., Tacitus 2 vols (Oxford 1958). Szelest, H., ‘Die Sammlung ‘Ordo Urbium Nobilium” des Ausonius und ihre literarische Tradition’, Eos 61 (1973), 109–22. Taegert, W., Claudius Claudianus Panegyricus dictus Olybrio et Probino consulibus (Zetemata 85) (Munich 1988). Ternes, C.-M., ‘Ausone. Bibliographie objective et subjective’, Bulletin des antiquites luxembourgeoises 14 (1983), 3–126. ‘La notion de “verus limes” dans la “Mosella” d’Ausone’, in La patrie gauloise d’Agrippa au VI siècle, Actes du colloque de Lyon 1981 (Lyon 1984), 355–74.

234

B I B LIO GRAPHY

Ternes, C.-M. and Faber, F., ‘Trèves, capitale d’empire’, Les dossiers. Histoire et archéologie 85 (juillet 1984). Thompson, E.A., The Historical Work of Ammianus Marcellinus (Oxford 1947). Thraede, K., ‘Zu Ausonius Ep. 16.2 (Sch.)’, Hermes 96 (1968), 608–28. Topographie chrétienne des cités de la Gaule, N.Gauthier and J.-C.Picard, eds (Paris). Trésors d’orfèvrerie gallo-romaine, Catalogue of an exhibition at the Musée du Luxembourg, Paris 1989 (Paris 1989). Trier: Kaiserresidenz und Bischofssitz. Die Stadt in spätantiker und frühch-ristlicher Zeit (Mainz 1984). Van Dam, R., Leadership and Community in Late Antique Gaul (Berkeley 1985). Vellman, T., ‘La fontaine de vie’, Cahiers arcbéologiques 19 (1959), 29–43. Vera, D., ‘I rapporti fra Magno Massimo, Teodosio e Valentiniano II nel 383– 4’, Athenaeum 53 (1975), 267–310. ‘La polemica contro l’abuso imperiale del trionfo. Rapporti tra ideologia, economia e propaganda nel basso imperio’, Rivista storica dell’anti-chità 10 (1980), 89–132. Vermasseren, M.J., Corpus Inscriptionum et Monumentorum Religionis Mithriaciae (The Hague 1956, 1980). Veyne, P., ‘Clientèle et corruption du service de l’état. La vénalité des offices dans le Bas-Empire’, Annales 36 (1981), 339–60. Walters, V.-J., The Cult of Mithras in the Roman Provinces of Gaul (Leiden 1974). Ward-Perkins, B., From Classical Antiquity to the Middle Ages. Urban Public Buildings in Northem and Central Italy AD 300–850 (Oxford 1984). Warmington, B.H., ‘The Career of Romanus, Comes Africae’, Byzantinische Zeitschrift 49 (1956), 55–64. Wattier, B., ‘Dax. Les vestiges monumentaux d’un temple romain’, Archéologia 158 (Sept. 1981), 28–35. Weiss, R., ‘Ausonius in the Fourteenth Century’, in R.R.Bolgar, ed., Classical Influences on European Culture AD 500–1500 (Cambridge 1971), 67–72. White, P., ‘The Presentation and Dedication of the Silvae and the Epigrams’, Journal of Roman Studies 64 (1974), 40–61. Wightman, E.M., Roman Trier and the Treveri (London 1970). ‘Peasants and Potentates’, Americal Journal of Ancient History 3 (1978), 97–128. Gallia Belgica (London 1985). Witke, C., Numen Litterarum (Leiden 1971). Wolfram, H., Geschichte der Goten (Munich 1979). Wormald, P., ‘The Decline of the Western Empire and the Survival of its Aristocracy’, Journal of Roman Studies 66 (1976), 217–26. Wrede, H., Die spätantike Hermengalerie von Welschbillig (Berlin 1972). Wuilleumier, P. and Audin, A., Les médaillons d’appliqué gallo-romains de la vallée du Rhone (Paris 1952). Yarbrough, A., ‘Christianization in the Fourth Century. The Example of Roman Women’, Church History 45 (1976), 149–65.

235

INDEX

Adrianople: battle of 121 Aeonia, Aemilia (Ausonius’ mother) 52–3, 54–5 Aequitius (cos. 374) 120, 129 Agricius, Censorius Atticus (rhetor), 81 84, 86 Alcimus see Alethius, Latinus Alcimus Alethius, Latinus Alcimus 89 Ambrose see St Ambrose amicitia 111–15, 136–8 Amiens: decline of 33–4; and Rusticus, Sextius Iulianus 100; Valentinian I in 34, 97, 99–101 Ammianus: on the aristocracy 8, 24, 127, 140; description of aul 33–4, 35, 99; on Gratian 100; on Valentinian I 106, 113 Anicii, the 6–7, 11–12, 114, 119, 122, 123, 125, 133, 135, 144; and Christianity 11–12 Antonius, Claudius (cos. 382) 129–30, 135, 136, 138, 139 Aprunculus (rhetor) 21 Aquitania 12, 22–3, 24–5, 26, 31–93, 97, 107; rural estates in 24–5, 69–73; and wealth 24–5, 66–7, 71, 88–9 Arborius, Aemilius Magnus (Ausonius’ uncle): academic career of 53–4, 58, 63, 83, 84, 85; influence on Ausonius 80–1; nobility of 86 Arborius, Caecilius Argicius

(Ausonius’ grandfather) 52 Arborius, Magnus (Ausonius’ nephew) 63, 135 aristocracy 6–27; definition of 6–12; of teachers 86–7, 88 aristocracy, the 6–27; and Christianity 11–12, 22–3, 25, 46, 110–11; legislation regarding 11, 124–7, 131; and leisure 6, 24–5, 72–3, 103, 105, 140; and lineage 10, 12, 22–3; and patronage 112–15, 129, 134–5, 136–8; and property 23–4, 69–71, 103–4, 107, 123, 124–5; relation to imperial court 14, 16–22, 23, 49–50, 65, 113, 125–6, 140, 141; relation to office 6–9, 11, 12, 14–18, 20, 23, 45, 63–4, 134, 136, 141, 146–7; and wealth 8, 10–11, 12, 22–7, 34, 37, 58, 69–73, 141, 142 Arles 16, 25–6, 27, 35–6, 37; Constantius II in 35, 97; in Ordo 34 Asterius (provincial govenor) 16 Augustine see St Augustine Ausonius, Decimius Magnus: academic career of 59, 76–9, 80–1, 84, 104; achieves senatorial rank 108; and Antonius, Claudius 129–30, 139; and Christianity 90, 108–9, 110–11, 140–1; as consul (379) 49–50, 119, 140; court network of 111–15, 122, 236

I N DEX

123; estates of 66–9; family of 17, 49–65, 90, 101, 115, 123, 126–8, 129, 131–3, 136, 138, 143, 144; friendship with Paulinus of Nola 72, 73, 83, 104, 134; friendship with Symmachus 111–14, 115, 136–8, 140; and Gratian 104, 108–9, 110, 118, 119–31, 138, 140, 143, 144; imperial tutor 90–1, 101, 104, 108–9, 111, 112, 114, 115, 143; importance of education for 58, 59, 59, 90, 101, 115, 118; and the military 10, 122, 130, 140–1, 143–4; and patronage 111–15, 123, 126–8, 129, 130, 131–5, 136–41, 143, 144; and Probus, Sextus Petronius 114–15, 132–3; as quaestor 81, 116–18, 123–31, 138, 143; requirements for consulship 10; retirement of 144; and the Roman senate 111–15, 119, 124–7, 131, 132–3, 143–4, 146; and Valentinian I 106–11, 143; wealth of 66, 89, 101; works of see individual titles Ausonius, Iulius (father of Ausonius): description of character and career of 49, 54–5, 56–7, 58, 132–3, 134; of Druidic descent? 55–6, 57 Autun 17, 18, 33, 51; Ammianus’ description of 35; city of origin of the Arborii 50–1; education in 17, 75, 77; ramparts of 35; role in the Gallic empire 51 Avitianus, Claudius (vicar of Africa) 21

44; immigration to 44, 53, 56, 82–3, 90, 142–3; Mithraeum in 47–8; and mosaics 43; in Ordo 34, 38, 79; origins of city 31–2; Palais Galien 32, 39, Map 2; Piliers du Tutelle 32, 39, Map 2; and pottery 42–3; and rise of aristocracy 56, 58, 59, 61, 64; Saint Christoly 40–4, Map 2; Saint Seurin 42, 45–6, Map 2; street layout 32, 38, 46; topography of 31–2, 40, Map 2

Bazas: and Ausonius, Iulius 55, 56; and Megentira 56, 62 Bissula 105 Bordeaux 31–93; and Christianity 42, 44–7, 48; city walls of 31, 32, 38, 39–40, 42, 43–4; economy of 31, 38, 40–4, 91, 142; and education 54, 74, 76–93; fountain of Divona 38–9; harbour 31, 32, 38, 40–2,

Callipio, Iulius (Ausonius’ uncle): Greek root of name 55 Cataphronia, Iulia (Ausonius’ aunt) 57, 66; Greek root of name 55; virgo devota 57 Cataphronius (vicar of Italy) 126–7 Celsa, Marcia Romana 25 Cento Nuptialis 106, 109; praise of Valentinian I and Gratian 106, 107, 108 Cerealis 120 Chilo (proconsul of Africa) 117 Christianity: Arianism 110; and the aristocracy 11–12, 22–3, 25, 46, 110–11; and asceticism 11–12, 45; the Bible and Vergil 106; in Bordeaux 42, 44–7, 48, 92–3; and education 90, 108–9; and gens ausoniana 53, 57, 90, 108–9, 110–11, 140–1; impact on cities 36, 44–7, 48; imperial impact on 45, 90, 108–9, 111; and pilgrimage 45; Priscillianism see Priscillian; its spread in Gaul 53; the Trinity and the three Augusti 109–10 Citarius (grammarian) 84, 88 Claudius 110 Constantine I 23, 106; and Gallic appointments 23 Constantuis II (emperor 337–61) 9, 19, 24, 97 consulship, the: attainment of 9, 10; and power 6; and prestige 6 Cupido Crutiatus 103

237

I N DEX

Cupitus 18 Dax (Novempopulana): the Arborii and 51 Delphidius, Attius Tiro (rhetor) 21, 80, 85, 87, 89, 91–2, 93, 98, 99 Demetrias: and virginity 12 Diocletian (emperor 284–305) 14–16; and Gaul 14–16 Domitia 44, 53 Dryadia, Aemilia (Ausonius’ aunt) 52–3, 58, 59; root of name 55–6 Dynamius 84, 88 education 74–93; and Arborius, Aemilius Magnus 53–4; in Bordeaux 54, 76–93; chairs of grammar and rhetoric 81–2, 84–5, 86; Druidic 74–5; of Gratian 101, 104, 108–9; and imperial appointments 17, 74, 83, 85–6, 88, 89, 90, 143; imperial court and 74, 75, 82, 90 101, 108–9, 129; importance of 17, 19–20, 58, 74, 75, 83, 99, 101, 115, 143; importance of religion in 90, 108–9; and law 54, 77, 78, 85, 89, 91–2; legislation regarding 64, 75, 81–3, 84, 88, 90, 117–18, 129–30, 138; and physical mobility 53–4, 64, 83–5, 86, 93; privileges and advantages to teachers 64, 75, 88, 117–18; school curricula 76–9; schools and universities 79–83; social background of teachers 86–8, 89, 143; and social mobility 64, 75–6, 85–93, 143; teaching of Greek 76–7, 84; teaching of History 77–8, 104 emperors: and Christianity 108–9; and the consulship 6, 110; importance of succession 99– 101, 108, 109–10, 113, 120–2; and the military 9–10, 20, 97– 100, 101, 104–5, 106, 120, 121–2, 130, 140, 144; and taxes 98, 117, 122; willingness to employ Gauls 14–22, 65, 100,

142, 146; for individual emperors see under name Epigrammata on the Danube 104–5; and imperial unity 105 Eucherius, Flavius (cos. 381) 130–1, 135, 139 Euchrotia (wife of Delphidius) 90, 92–3 Eumenius (rhetor and MM) 17, 75, 99 Euodius, Flavius (cos. 386) 139–40 Euphrasius: supporter of Procopius 98–9 Eupraxius, Flavius (PUR) 128 Euromius, Valerius Latinus (Ausonius’ son-in-law) 61, 63-4 Euticius (provincial govenor) 16 Eutropius 19–20, 136 Exsuperius (rhetor) 20, 63, 83, 86, 88,89 Flavianus, Virius Nicomachus (vicar of Africa) 127–8 Fortunatus, Venantius 22, 86 Glabrio, Acilius (grammarian) 23, 80, 81, 87, 88 Grammaticomastix 78 Gratian (emperor 375–83) 119–41; and Ausonius 104, 108–9, 110, 118, 119–31, 138, 140, 143, 144; and Christianity 108–9, 110; education of 110, 104, 108–9; and the military 10, 120–2, 123, 141; move to Milan 138–141; murder of 144; nomination as Augustus 99, 100–1, 106, 113; promotions of Gauls 131–8, 143, 144; school law of 81–3, 84, 88, 129–30, 138; and the senatorial aristocracy 125–6, 127, 140, 141; Symmachus’ panegyric in honour of 113; and Theodosius I 121–2; in Trierll 119–38; and Valentinian II 120 Gratiarum Actio 119–23; and choice of consuls 119; description of Ausonius’ family backgound 49–50; and Gratian’s

238

I N DEX

Christianity 110; and Gratian’s reign 119–20; requirement for consulship 10; and Theodosius I 121–2,; and Valentinian I 120; and Valentinian II 120 Gregorius, Proculus 129, 131, 136, 140; career of 126, 131, 134, 136, 140 Griphus 105, 110 hagiography 13, 22–3 Helena (Constantine’s mother): pilgrimage to Holy Land 45 Herculanus, Pomponius Maximus (Ausonius’ nephew) 63, 80, 86 Herediolum: poem describing one of Ausonius’ estates 67–8, 69 Hesperius, Decimius Hilarianus (Ausonius’ son): career of 62, 123, 135; investigation of Romanus 117, 127–8; and Symmachus 138, 139 Hilaria, Aemilia (Ausonius’ aunt) 53; and Christianity 53; and medicine 55 Hilary of Poitiers 22 imperial court, the 97–141; Ausonius’ at 97–138; and Christianity 45, 90, 108–9; and education 74, 75, 81–3, 90, 101, 104, 108–9; of Gratian 119–41; and imperial office 9, 14, 16– 22, 23, 108, 112, 115, 116, 127; importance of location 14, 23, 49–50, 85, 88, 89, 100, 123, 139–41; and legislation of 11, 64, 75, 84, 88, 90, 116–18, 122, 123–31, 135, 138; life at 102–3, 105–6; at Milan 138–41; and propaganda 97–8, 100–1, 102, 104–5, 106–8, 109–11, 112–13, 119–21, 122; Symmachus at 111–13; and taxes 98, 117, 122, 124–5; at Trier 97–138; of Valentinian I 97–118 Iovinus, Flavius (cos. 367) 21, 23 Iulianus: protégé of Symmachus 114

Iulianus see Rusticus, Sextius Iulainus Jerome see St Jerome Julian (emperor 361–3) 19, 20–2, 26, 85, 92, 97; and education 74, 90; and Gallic appointments 20–2, 65, 98–9, 142; programme of pacification and restoration 97–8 Libanius (academic) 74, 83; estates of 69 lineage: and Ausonius 49–65; importance of 10, 12, 22–3, 112, 114,119 Lucaniacum: one of Ausonius’ estates 68, 72, 73 Luciolus (rhetor) 80, 81, 88 Ludus Septem Sapienum 77 Lupicinus, Claudius 145 Lupicinus, Flavius 21 Macedonius 135–6 Magnentius (usurper) 18, 92, 97 Mamertinus, Claudius (cos. 362) 20–2, 26, 65, 89 Marcellinus (MO of Magnentius) 18–19 Marcellinus (son of Maximinus) 129 Marcellus (grammarian) 84, 86–7, 88 marriage: importance of 50, 52, 54, 58, 59–61, 62, 63, 64, 66, 88, 89, 93, 143 Maura, Aemilia Corinthia (Ausonius’ grandmother) 52, 57 Maximinus, Falvius (PPG) 124, 125, 127; career of 126, 128–9; and Remigius 117, 128 Maximus, Magnus (usurper) 137, 139, 144, 145–6 Maximus, Pomponius (Ausonius’ brother-in-law) 58, 62, 86, 135 medicine: dominance of Greeks in 56; practised by Ausonius, Iulius 55; practised by Hilaria, Aemilia

239

I N DEX

55; practised by Siburius 134; privileges of practising 64, 65 Megentira (Ausonius’ niece) 56, 62 Melania (the elder): and asceticism 11, 12 Merobaudes (magister militum) 120, 128, 129; and Gratian 119, 123, 140–1; and Valentinian II 120 Milan: imperial capital 138–41 military, the: against the barbarians 97–9, 104, 108, 138–9; and civil office 8, 9, 21, 99–100, and the imperial heirarchy 9–10, 20, 101, 106, 120, 121, 121–2, 123, 140, 144; importance of 9–10, 20, 99–100, 120, 121–2, 128, 140, 143; legislation regarding 130; and Maximus, Magnus 145 Minervius, Alethius (rhetor) 80 87, 88, 92, 93 Minervius, Tiberius Victor (rhetor) 80, 81, 83, 84, 88, 92 mobility, physical 7, 50, 55, 61, 63, 64–5, 146; and Arborius, Aemilius Magnus 53–4, 64, 83; importance of 17, 19–20, 53–4, 84, 85, 93, 139, 143, 146; and teachers 53–4, 64, 83–5, 86, 93, 143 mobility, social 7, 49, 50, 64, 65; and teaching 64, 75–6, 85–93, 143 Montmaurin (Hte. Garonne): site of a late Roman villa 25, 68, Map 3; water sanctuary of 71 mosaics: as artisic evidence 13, 24, 43, 46–7, 69; in Bordeaux 43, 46–7; depiction of cities 34; relation to pottery 42; and rural estates 24, 47, 69, 70; in Trier 103 Mosella 103, 106–8, 113, 122 Narbonne 34, 36, 37; Capitol of 36; migration of teachers to 83, 84; in Ordo 34 Nepotianus (rhetor) 25, 80, 85, 86, 88,89

Numerian (provincial governor) 21,92 Nymphius (parens provinciae) 26, 71; owner of Valentine 71 Olybrius, Quintus Clodius Hemogenianus (cos. 379) 49, 119, 122, 133 Ordo Urbium Nobilium 78–9; and Gallic cities 34, 35, 36, 37, 78–9 Orientalis (bishop of Bordeaux) 44, 53 Pacatus (rhetor): description of Maximus, Magnus 145 Palais Galien 32, 39, Map 4 Palladius (CSL) 136 Parentalia: and the gens ausoniana 50 Patera, Attius (rhetor) 80, 81, 84, 86, 87, 90, 91, 92, 93, 99; Druidic connections of 55, 91 Paulinus (bishop of Trier) 22 Paulinus (husband of Ausonius’ niece) 62–4, 68 Paulinus of Nola: ascetic 45, 110; friendship with Ausonius 72, 73, 83, 104, 134; wealth of family 46, 73, 134 Phoebicius (grammarian) 80, 91, 92 Phronimius (PUC of Procopius) 98–9 Piliers du Tutelle 32, 39, Map 2 Potitus 136 pottery: in Bordeaux 42–3; and Christian symbols 42; in Trier 103 praetorian prefecture, the: and influence 6–7 Priscianus 138 Priscillian: ecclesiastical impact of 44–6; individual supporters of 86, 92–3; wealth of followers 45, 46 Probus, Sextus Petronius (cos. 371) 6–7, 122, 125, 132–3, 135, 140; and Ausonius 114–15, 132–3 Procopius (usurper) 92, 98, 99, 110; Gallic supporters of 98

240

I N DEX

Professores 87, 92; and education in Bordeaux 74, 79 Protrepticon 104 Pudentilla, Namia (Ausonius’ sister-in-law) 59 quaestorship, the 115–16, 131 ramparts: of Autun 35; of Bordeaux 31, 32, 38, 39–40, 42, 43–4; as essence of urbanism 34; in late Roman Gaul 34–5; or Toulouse 35; of Trier 35, 102 religion: and Ausonius 110; Christianity see Christianity; cult of Mithras 47–8; Druidism 55, 74–5, 91–2, 93; and education 74–5, 90, 91, 108–9; imperial cult in Narbonne 36; and urbanism 36, 46, 48; water sanctuaries 71 Remigius 19, 23, 115, 141; supporter of Romanus 117, 128; supporter of Rusticus 100, supporter of Silvanus 19; and Valentinian I 19, 100 Richomeres (comes omesticorum): and Theodosius I 121 Roman senators 7, 9, 10, 111, 112, 124–7; and Ausonius 111–15, 119, 124–7, 131, 132–3, 143–4, 146; and Gratian 125–6, 127, 140, 141; legislation regarding 124–6, 127; and lineage 10, and Valentinian I 111, 113, 125, 127, 131; and wealth 10 Romanus (comes Africae) 116–17, 127–8, 141 Rufinus, Aradius 126, 127 Rufinus, Flavius 139, 144, 146 Rusticus, Sextius Iulianus 99–100, 115, 145; imperial candidate 99–100 Sabina, Attusia Lucana (Ausonius’ wife) 58, 68 St Ambrose: influence on Gratian 109, 140 St Augustine: as teacher 85, 88

Saint Christoly: excavation site in Bordeaux 40–4, Map 2 St Jerome 87, 91, 93 Saint Seurin: church of 42, 45–6; excavation site in Bordeaux 42, Map 2 St Victor 23 Saiutius, Saturninus Secundus: career of 19, 20–1, 61–2, 63–4, 65, 99, 116; torturing pagans and Christians 111 Sanctus, Flavius (governor and Ausonius’ brother-in-law) 18, 59, 63–4 sarcophagi: as artistic evidence 13, 32 Saturninus (magister equitum): and Theodosius I 121 schools see education Secundus see Salutius, Saturninus Secundus Sedatus (rhetor) 80, 83, 84, 87 Severus (magister peditum): imperial candidate 99 Severus, Sulpicius: ascetic 45, 110; praise of Maximus, Magnus 145 Siburius (MO) 134, 136, 140 Silvanus (usurper) 19, 97 Simplicius (vicarius urbis Romae) 126, 128 Staphylius (rhetor) 80, 84 Syagrii, Flavius and Flavius Afranius, 115, 133–4, 135–6, 138, 140 Symmachus: description of Roman senate 7–8; estates of 69; friendship with Ausonius 111–14, 115, 136–8, 140; Griphus dedicated to 110; and the Mosella 107, 108; panegyrics of 112–13; and patronage 113–14, 115, 136–8, 139, 145; praise of Gratian 113, 125–6, 129 Talisus, Attusius Lucanus (Ausonius’ father-in-law) 58, 68 Tetrarchy, the 14–18; and officeholders 16–18

241

I N DEX

Thalassius (Ausonius’ son-in-law) 62, 132 Themistius 89 Theodorus, Manlius 138 Theodosius (comes) 120, 144 Theodosius I (emperor 379–395) 89–90, 121–2, 130, 136, 137, 144, 146; accession of 121, 123; missorium of 109 Toulouse 34, 35; and Arborius, Aemilius Magnus 54; migration of teachers to 83; in Ordo 34; ramparts of 35 Tours 34 Trier 16, 36, 37, 97–138; Ausonius in 97–138; choice as imperial capital 97–8; city walls 35, 102; description of city 101–3; and education 82; Gratian in 119– 38; military function of 36, 102; in Ordo 34; Symmachus in 111–13; Valentian I in 97–118 urbanism: and Christianity 36, 46, 48; and decline of 25, 33–4; in late Roman Gaul 25, 33–7; military aspects of 36; and rise of aristocracy 34, 37, 44, 48, 50, 59, 65, 74, 142; walls as essence of 34 Urbica, Pomponia 62, 132 Urbicus (grammarian) 86 Valens (emperor 364–379): co-ruler with Valentinian I 98, 100, 105, 109–10, 120, 144; and Procopius 92,98 Valentine (Hte. Garonne): site of a late Roman villa 68, 70, Map 3; thermal complex at 71 Valentinian I (emperor 364–75) 97–118; at Amiens 34, 97, 99–101; appointment of

Ausonius as quaestor 116; and the barbarians 98, 99, 104–5, 107–8; choice of Ausonius as imperial tutor 90–1, 101, 143; and Christianity 109; co-ruler with Valens 98, 100, 105, 109– 10; death of 120, 122, 144; illness of 34, 99, 100; nomination of Gratian as Augustus 99, 100–1, 106, 109, 113; relationship with Ausonius 106–11, 116; and the senatorial aristocracy 111, 113, 125, 127, 131; Symmachus’ panegyric in honour of 112–13; in Trier 97–118 Valentinian II (emperor 375–392) 109, 120, 140, 144; elevation to Augustus 120 Valerianus (PUR) 135 Veneria, Iulia (Ausonius’ aunt) 57 Vergil: popularity of 105–6 Versus Paschales 108, 109, 112–13; and Christianity 109, 110, 111; unity of three Augusti 109–10 Victor: and Theodosius I 121 Victor see St Victor Victor, Sextus Aurelius 137 villa Palat (Gironde) 70 walls, city see ramparts wealth: acquisition of 10, 88; in Aquitania 24–5, 66–73; of Ausonius 66; and munificence 11, 26, 71, 127; and property 23–5, 69–71; and rank 8, 10, 12, 22–7, 61–2, 100,112, 114, 115, 119, 141, 142; of teachers 86, 88, 89, 93, 129; in Trier 102–3; urban 25–6, 33, 34, 142 Welschbillig: rural villa near Trier 103–4

242

Ausonius of Bordeaux: Genesis of a Gallic Aristocracy

The Works of Ausonius

Caesars Gallic Wars

Chaldean account of genesis

the Covenant Of Genesis

Redaction of Genesis

Keeper of Genesis

The Covenant of Genesis

The genesis of Methodism

The Covenant of Genesis

The Genesis of Values

the Covenant Of Genesis

Genesis Five - A Novel of the Future

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis of the Media Concept

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Ausonius of Bordeaux: Genesis of a Gallic Aristocracy

The Works of Ausonius

Caesars Gallic Wars

Chaldean account of genesis

the Covenant Of Genesis

Redaction of Genesis

Keeper of Genesis

The Covenant of Genesis

The genesis of Methodism

The Covenant of Genesis

The Genesis of Values

the Covenant Of Genesis

Genesis Five - A Novel of the Future

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis of the Media Concept

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Genesis

Recommend Documents