This page created 27 December 2002, and last modified: 10 December 2015 (entry 102/5.44 link added)
The following units, detachments of units, and prefects and tribunes with their associated units, are listed as being under the command of the Duke of second riverine Pannonia and Savia (i.e. central Serbia; the numbers beside the names refer to Ingo Maier's numbering scheme):
Above: Frontpiece from the Bodleian manuscript (O).
The stations depicted are:
Cornacu, Teutiborgio, Burgenas,
Cuccis, Acimici, Secundarum [sic], Novas, Albano,
Teutibarcio, Cornaco, Cuccis, Bonoria, Cusi,
Acimirci, Ricti, Burgentas, Taurano, Ad Hercules.
141.2 Cuneus equitum scutariorum, at Cornacii
Above: Frontpiece from the Froben edition (B).
The stations depicted are:
Cornacu, Teutiborgus, Burgenae,
Cuccis, Acimincum, Secundae, Novae, Albano,
Teutiborgus, Cornaco, Cuccis, Bononia, Cusi,
Acimimcum, Rictum, Burgennae, Taurano, Ad Herculem.
These names are much "better" than those found in (O).
This has been taken as evidence of editorial intervention,
but it might just as well be evidence for a superior
Note that the manuscripts actually give the title of the Duke as the "Dux Pannoniae secundae [ri]pariensis siue Saviae", i.e. the Duke of second [ri]verine Pannonia or Savia.
Entry 141.7, the Cuneus equitum Italicianorum Secundarum, is obviously a detachment of cavalry that originated with Legio II Italica, but is missing its station, unless "secundarum" is interpreted as being the station name, which it is in the frontpiece illustration. This is similar to e.g. entry 154.2, the Praefectus legionis sextae, under the Dux Britanniarum.
All the units listed are limitanei units. However, it appears that some of these units might correspond to units listed in the Magister Peditum's infantry roster, but unassigned to any field commands. For example, the Auxilia ascarii (141.7), stationed at Tauruno (Taurunum, modern Zemun in Belgrade, Serbia) or Marsonia (modern Slavonski Brod, Croatia), might well be the Taurunenses, listed (98/9.135) as a pseudocomitatenses unit. The also unassigned pseudocomitatenses unit called the Antianenses (98/9.136) was thought by Jones to be the Auxilia Novensia (141.20), although it is stationed at "Arsaciana" in the Notitia (according to Seeck given as Arsatiana in the Vatican manuscript, which I have not seen), rather than at Antiana (modern Popovac in Croatia); Arsaciana is otherwise unknown. The Auxilia Augusten[s]ia (141.21), stationed not in a town, but in a castello (fort) in barbarian territory called Onagrino (Onagrinum, modern Bege&ccaron in Serbia), might possibly be the also-unassigned Augustei (98/9.58), but as this unit is classified as an auxilia palatina unit in the Magister Peditum's list, if this correspondence is correct, it must have been transferred some time before the others for it to have eventually been promoted. Furthermore, the men under the Tribunus cohortis primae Thracum civium Romanorum (141.39), with a relic of a name dating back over two centuries to the days when auxiliary units could be awarded with citizenship, might be the Romanenses (98/9.158), a pseudocomitatenses unit in the Magister Equitum's Gallic command. Although many many units were awarded the title civium Romanorum in the first two centuries AD, the only others is so-listed in the Notitia are the Cohors Apuleia civium Romanorum (71.26) and the Cohors scutata civium Romanorum (56/7.38), in the commands of the far-off Dux Armeniae and Dux Thebaidos, respectively.
Similarly, the Cuneus equitum promotorum (141.5) would appear to correspond to the Cuneus equitum promotorum (102/5.44) of the Magister Equitum's cavalry roster.
Legiones V Iovia et VI Herculia are a pair of legions dating back 100-odd years before the compilation of the Notitia, to the Tetrarchy - rare inscriptional evidence (AE 1964, 226) coming from Mursa (modern Osijek in eastern Croatia) and dated to ca. 306 mentions the LEG VI HERC (image here). They do not appear to have contributed any detachments to the field armies mentioned in the Notitia, at least under their own names. Since it would be highly unusual for a legion not to have contributed any detachments at all, some detachments are probably listed somewhere in the Notitia, but under names that give little or no clue as to their origins (the Pannoniciani seniores (98/9.25) and Pannoniciani iuniores (18.26) obviously most likely derive from a Pannonia-based legion, but which is hard to identify).
Perhaps at least as interesting as the units listed above, are those that are not listed. Like some other Danubian provinces, the legions in Pannonia II are split between up-river ("superioris") and down-river ("inferioris") sections; however, unlike those in neighbouring Valeria, the inferioris portions are missing; they may have been destroyed in the late 370s during the Gothic invasion which led to the battle of Adrianople.
The following shield patterns may thus be connected to units under the Dux Pannoniae secundae ripariensis et Saviae:
Those under O come from the Bodleian manuscript in Oxford, those under P from the Paris manuscript, those under M from the first portion of the Munich manuscript, those under W from the second portion of the Munich manuscript, those under B from the Froben edition, and those under Ff from the Frankfurt fragment. None of these is likely to have been a pattern born by the detachments still in Pannonia II and/or Savia, however, as units transferred to a field army from a garrison station seem to have been given new shield patterns. Units whose patterns are presumed to be mislabelled have both the labelled pattern (with the label in quote marks) and the pattern I believe is most likely the correct pattern illustrated (with a question mark beside the supposed label).
Below are the frontpieces from the second half of the Munich manuscript (W), the first half of the Munich manuscript (M), and from the Parisian manuscript (P).
The pictures from M, like the pictures from B, show the hexagonal style that is believed to have been used for the fort illustrations in the lost Codex Spirensis from which all the extent manuscript copies are ultimately derived. Those of B show clear 16th-century renaissance embellishments to the styling, while those of W are clear of such anachronisms. The M pictures bear very little resemblance to those of W, and display imagery typical of the mid-16th century Germany. The P pictures also bear very little resemblance to those of W, but are very similar in style, if not in details, to those of O. That the details are executed with a little less care in P is evidence that the artists were not one and the same, even if they did belong the same "school". The style of P and O is 15th-century Italian, or Savoyard to be more exact.
1. Maier, Ingo; "Appendix 4: Numeration of the new edition of the compilation 'notitia dignitatum' (Cnd)"; last accessed 7 December 2015. See also for here for numbering examples. Return
2. Jones, A.H.M.; "The Later Roman Empire, 284-602; A Social, Economic, and Administrative Survey"; Blackwell, Oxford, 1964 (3 volumes); at p 365 of vol. 3. Return
3. Otto Seeck (Ed.); "Notitia Dignitatum accedunt Notitia urbis Constantinopolitanae et Latercula prouinciarum", Weidmann, Berlin, 1876; at p 189, available here (last accessed 26 October 2015). Return
4. Kovács, Péter; "The late Roman army in Pannonia"; Acta Ant. Hung. 44 (2004), pp 115-122; available here (last accessed 12 December 2015). Return
5. Maier, I.G.; "The Barberinus and Munich codices of the 'Notitia Dignitatum omnium'"; Latomus 28.4 (1969) pp. 960-1035; at p 1022 in particular, available here (last accessed 12 December 2015). Return
Return to the Notitia index page.