career of three gauls

8/7/2019 career of three gauls

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/career-of-three-gauls 1/13

A Note on Local Careers in the Three Gauls under the Early Empire

Author(s): J. F. DrinkwaterSource: Britannia, Vol. 10 (1979), pp. 89-100Published by: Society for the Promotion of Roman StudiesStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/526046 .

Accessed: 07/04/2011 16:26

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sprs. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend

access to Britannia.

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sprs

http://www.jstor.org/stable/526046?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp



http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/526046?origin=JSTOR-pdf




A N o t e o n

L o c a l C a r e e r si n t h e T h r e e

G a u l s *U n d e r t h e E a r l y E m p i r e

By J. F. DRINKWATER

HEstandardpatternof Galliclocalmagistracies,so familarto all studentsof the Romanwest, is apparently very straightforward. The progression of the tribal decurion from

quaestorship (dealing with finance) to aedileship (dealing with administration) toduumvirate(the chief magisterialoffice, dealing especially with justice) is repeated by modern

authorities time and again more or less as an absolute fact of civitas-life.' In such circumstancesone would be perfectlyjustified in assuming that the existence of this system was supportedby a strong body of indigenous evidence; however, any close examination soon reveals thatthe theory as postulated is not derived from information available from the Three Gauls. Acareful reading of Jullian's influential account of the Gallo-Roman magistracies shows thatthe greaterpart of his examples were drawn, not from Gaul as a whole, but from the grosslyatypical province of Narbonensis, with its mass of colonies. Moreover, when even Narboneseevidence was lacking, such emphasis on highly-Romanized administrative practices allowedhim to introduce the results of the vast amount of work done on the coloniae and municipiaof Italy and Spain.2In short, as far as the civitates of the Three Gauls are concerned, the

prevailing orthodoxy as to the local career-patterns supposedly followed by their rulingaristocracies is derived not

from peregrine Gallic communities but from Roman and Latinsettlements clustered around the western Mediterranean.3Yet it must be conceded that this approach is not as perverseas it first may seem. Roman-

style municipalconstitutions would soon have become familiar to Gauls through the establish-ment of full citizen-colonies on their soil, and increasingly through the promotion of certainof their own communities to 'colonial' (that is to say, municipal) status.4 It is legitimate to

* ThroughoutI haveemployedthe term'ThreeGauls'in theCaesariansense,i.e. comprisingthe Celticareasof theGermanies,as wellas Aquitania,BelgicaandLugdunensis.(Referencesto individualprovinces,of course,assume the imperialboundaries.)

1 e.g. C. Jullian, Histoire de la Gaule (Paris, 1920-26) iv, 332-41; P.-M. Duval, La vie quotidienne en Gaule

(Paris, 1952 (rev. 1976)), 208; E. Th'venot, Les gallo-romains,4 (Paris, 1972), 2o; and C.-M. Ternes, La viequotidienne en Rhinanie romaine (Paris, 1972), 97 f.

2 Jullian, loc. cit.3 This conclusionmust result from Jullian'sown referencesand from any readingof the standard works

on this subject,e.g. T. Mommsenand J. Marquardt,Manueldes antiquitisromainesi, Paris, 1889, 2oo-68;F. Abbott and A. C. Johnson, Municipal administration in the Roman empire (Princeton, 1926), 57 ff.; G. H.

Stevenson, Romanprovincial administration2(Oxford, 1948), 170 ff. (Cf. R. G. Collingwood and J. N. L. Myres,Roman Britain and the English settlements2 (Oxford, 1937), 165, and S. S. Frere, Britannia (London, 1967),206 f., for the similar influence of the Mediterranean model on Romano-British studies.)

4 Full colonies: Lyon, Nyon, Augst, Cologne, Xanten; promoted civitates: Convenae, Elusates, Lingones,Mediomatrici(?), Morini, Nemetes, Segusiavi, Sequani, Treveri, Vellavi, Viducasses (see F. Vittinghoff.'R6mische Stadtrechtsformen der Kaiserzeit', Zeitschrift flir Savigny-Stiftung, romanistische Abteilung 68

(1951), 480-85; H. Wolff, 'Kriterien fir latinische und rimische Stadte in Gallien und Germanien.. .', BJ 176

89



90 J. F. DRINKWATER

argue that those peregrine civitates which aspired to a reputation for Romanization, and to

recognition of their progress by being advanced in their turn to the rank of coloniae, wouldhave been preparedto reform the structureof their local government in hopeful anticipationof leges municipalesto follow. Thus Gallic 'vergobrets' and their like generally gave way to

duoviri,aediles and quaestores.5However, such reasoning, compelling though it is, places a

frustratingbarrierbetween the historian of the ThreeGauls and his subject.It tells him nothingof the actual state of the evidence; it makes no allowance for changing conditions within the

Empire, which may well have affected and altered the responsibilities of local officials; it

neglects other posts which were almost certainly considered to be integral parts of a local

career; and, above all, it ignores the wider opportunities which a successful local magistratecould expect to come his way. The well-known absence of leading Gauls from senatorial and

equestrianpositions under the Principatemust suggest a fair degree of domestic interest andinvolvement on their part. The synthetic blandness of the 'standard' Gallic cursusgives littleidea of the complexity and attractivenessof this alternative.The aim of this note is to attemptin some way to redress the balance.

Before the discussion can concern itself with details, however, certain general assumptionshave to be made and

explained. Researchon

the constitutional position ofthe

Galliccolonies

has quite rightly raised the question of the precise application of the term coloniain the Celticcontext: was colonial status afforded to the whole of a civitas, or only that part which com-

prised the 'civitas-capital'?If the latter, then what was the nature of the relationship betweenthe 'colonial' and 'non-colonial' parts of the community: were two separate forms of govern-ment established, and were there therefore two quite different career structures open to an

aristocrat, depending on his place of birth within his tribal territory?6This problem becomeseven more important if we arepreparedto accept a recent idea that Gaul contained many morecoloniae than has previously been considered. According to Wolff, the main criteria for

determiningthe possession of Latin status in these lands should not be just the arbitraryandaccidental survival of an explicit reference to a community as a colonia, but also evidence

showing simply its employment of magistrates with municipal-style titles - a privilege not

to be assumed without Roman legal sanction, i.e. through a lex municipalis.In other wordsthe notion of simple copying of municipal forms by peregrinecommunities, as outlined above,is mistaken.' Related to the issue of the Celtic colonia is, of course, the debate as to the verynature of the Celtic civitas. Can we distinguish anyway between civitas (sovereign tribal

territory) and 'civitas-capital' (administrativecentre of that territory,but with no exceptionalstatus of its own) if in strict legal terms civitas can only be used to describe the latter (as

(1976),45, 55). The Helvetiantown of Avenches is sometimesseen as a full settlementcolony (so Wolff, loc.cit.), but this seems disputableand the Helvetii are betteradded to the second list (see J. Reynolds, 'Legaland constitutionalproblems',in The civitas-capitalsof RomanBritain(ed. J. S. Wacher, Leicester, 1966),70 and n.; also the remarks of A. N. Sherwin-White, The Roman citizenship2(Oxford, 1973), 370). The Gallic

colonies are now generallyregardedas 'Latin'colonies,the equivalentof the Latinmunicipiafound elsewherein the westernEmpireunderthe earlyprincipate;their colonial status was a 'local archaism',but this did notaffect the way in whichthey were run (Vittinghoff,art. cit., 449-54, 476; Sherwin-White,op. cit., 369).

5A possible referenceto such a 'unilateral'adoptionof Roman ways is Strabo,iv. 4. 3: AploT-rKpatKai 6'Tioavat rhEious-rTJvrroXt-re(v.... vuvi &8 rpoo~Xovou-rolsTrv 'Pcpaicyv -rrpoorya'ri TO,-rrov (discussed further

below, p. 91 and note II). Vittinghoff,art. cit. (note4), 18, Reynolds,art. cit. (note 4), 70, and Sherwin-White,op. cit. (note4), 364,all seemto assume theworkingof thisprocess;also Stevenson,op. cit. (note 3), 161.

6 Citizenshipwas derivedfrom origo (Vittinghoff,art. cit. (note 4), 438 f.). For the assumptionof such adual form of governmentsee ibid. 481 (among the Treveri);cf. Sherwin-White,op. cit. (note 4), 368-71.

7 Wolff,art. cit. (note 4), 49-54; cf. Vittinghoff,art. cit. (note 4), 484- the evidencefor the colonial statusof the Sequani.



LOCAL CAREERS IN THE THREE GAULS 91

sovereign city-state, with the tribal lands merely as its territorium)? Obviously much morework is necessary before these questions, and the others which follow in their train, can be

fully resolved. However, I believe that the theoretical complexities of the Gallic municipalsituation should not be allowed to stand in the way of immediate consideration of the practicalways by which individual aristocrats won prestige and influence within Gaul. Enough has

been done for a reasonable 'framework'of Gallic local governmentpractice to be establishedas a working tool. If later researches prove the model wrong, then the suggestions whichderived from its use will have to be changed, but at least a start will have been made.

Accordingly, I have based what follows on the following assumptions: (i) that the termcivitas refers to a complete tribal area, not simply to a central urban agglomeration;9 (ii)similarly,that the granting of colonial status did not lead to a sharp division in administrativestructure between the civitas-capital(the new colonia)and the remainderof the tribal territory,but rather to the creation of a single hybrid;1o and (iii) that the occurrenceof duoviri,aedilesetc. in some civitates may indeed indicate colonial status, but that this should not be takenas an absolute and completely-generalizablerule." From this it will be realized that I intendto cut through the Gordian knot of constitutional niceties by treating 'Latin' and 'peregrine'

communities in Gaul as being virtually the same in the way in which they were administered.On the one hand a system of government devised for a small Italian city-state would havehad to be altered to meet the demands of the huge northern civitates; on the other, native

magistracieswhich had evolved to control the tribal territories were restructuredand renamedto suit Romanized tastes. The end-productsin both cases could not have been vastly different.

One of the first results to be derived from a more objective examination of the evidence isthat it can be seen that possession of decurial rank is curiously little advertised among thecommunities of the Three Gauls. In fact I have found only two decuriones from what might

8 See J. C. Mann, 'Civitas, another myth', Antiquity xxxiv (I96O), 222 f.; idem, 'Civitas - a further comment',

Antiquityxxxv (I961), 142f.; idem, 'Cityfoundationsin Gauland Britain',in M. Jarrettand B. Dobson edd.,Britain and Rome (Kendal, 1965), 109-13.

9 I follow here the arguments of S. S. Frere, 'Civitas - a myth ?', Antiquity xxxv (1961), 29-37.10e.g. I envisagethat civitas- decurionswho had theirprincipalcountryresidencesfar away from the new

coloniawould still rank as colonial decurions and would still be expectedto undertakemagistracieswhichinvolvedthe administrationof the formercivitas-capitalas well as that of the tribal lands. In coming to thisconclusionI have beenespeciallyimpressedby the argumentsof Wolff,art.cit. (note4), 103-I6, idem,'Civitasund Colonia Treverorum', Historia 26 (1977), 213-40. However, I have not followed him in his view that a

completecivitascould be officially regardedas a colonia;Roman traditionwould have demandedat least the'cosmetic'applicationof the term to a specificurbancentre,even if in practicethe rest of the civitas was not

therebyreducedto the level of a subjectterritorium.(See below, p. 93, for a praefectuscoloniaewhosejuniorposition must indicatehis authoritywithina town, not a complete civitas.)

11It seemsto me that the greatestweaknessin Wolff'scase is his interpretationof Straboiv. 4. 3 (abovenote 5; Wolff,art. cit. (note4), 5I f., 56-61). It is farfromcertainthatStrabowasremarkingon constitutionalchanges, as opposed to the stark realities of military conquest (cf. iv. 4. 2: vvvl giv o v V

Eipfiv rTTdvTrEElai EBOVAXco-

wpvoIKai ~CSVTESKT-r Trxrrpoa-rTyp~aT-r -rCvXOA6vrovaOTroos'Pcoaicv ...) Further,evenassumingthat Strabowashere describingthe introductionof Roman-stylemagistraciesinto Gallic local government,the notion that

such a reformcould not have takenplace withoutsome form of imperialapprovalimpliesthe occurrenceofa far-reachingofficialpromotionof most, if not all, civitatesunder Augustus or Tiberius.Unfortunately,however,there is no record of such an outstandingact of generosityin our other sources,and moreoverepigraphicevidencerevealsthe continuingsurvivalof certainindigenoustitles (vergobret,princepsetc.) whichcould not have fittedinto any strictly'municipal'structure.The only way roundthe problemwas to developvon Braunert'stheory('Ius Latii', CorollamemoriaeE. Swoboda(Graz, 1966),68-83), also recently adoptedby B. Galsterer-Kroll, 'Zum ius Latii in den keltischen Provinzen .. .', Chiron 3 (1973), 277-306, and to assumethat all that was allowed to the Gallic tribes wasgeneralpermissionto take on Latinrights,and hence a Latinconstitution,but withno obligationso to do, and evenwith no obligation,havingdone so, to changethe titleof the communityto colonia.This much looser grant of Latin privilegeswent unnoticedby the historians,andallowed a certainvariationin theconstitutionaldevelopmentof the Gauls,someprogressingmorespeedilythan others. The whole notion of personalcitizenshipbeing distinct from communal status has, however,alreadybeenseverelycriticizedby Sherwin-White,op. cit. (note4), 360-67.



92 J. F. DRINKWATER

be called the 'central'tribes.12This is not to say that such references are rare in the epigraphicrecord; but the great majority of them derive from full colonies, such as Lyon and Cologne,from tribes in Belgica and the Germanies in close proximity to the Rhine frontier such asthe Treveri, Vangiones and Nemetes, or from 'artificial' civitates in the Agri Decumates, for

example the Taunenses.13On the face of it, the desire to call oneself a decurio was a function

of the degree of one's contact with Rome.Next, although the literarysources and the inscriptions give us the names of a large number

of leading Gauls from the first three centuries following the Conquest, investigation soonshows that we command surprisinglyfew details of their individualcareers. This is not merelya matter of the survival of the evidence, as will be seen below.14Indeed, to the best of myknowledge, we have only four inscriptions which give details of local careers in any usableform. These are probably best considered in two categories.

The firstcomprises the two inscriptions CILxiii 1048and 412.15 From its content the former,the tombstone of the Santonian C. lulius Marinus, is probably the earlier; it shows that heheld the office of quaestorthen vergobret(the Celtic term for duumvir)among his people.16The latter inscription records, obviously in descending order of importance, the appointments

to date of one Verus, probably of the tribe of the Tarbelli; by reversingthe list we can see himproceeding from the magistracyof a pagus to the quaestorship and then to the duumvirate.17The second category consists of C1Lxiii 1684 and 2949. The former, dated fairly explicitly

to the middle of the second centuryA.D.,gives us the local career of the Senonian C. Iulius ...,frompraefectuscoloniaeto actorpublicus,duumvirab aerario,and finally duumviriuredicundo.In A.D. 250, almost a century later, so the second stone shows, a fellow-countryman, C.Amatius Paterninus, had his flourishing career in local service cut short by an early death.

He had gone from aedilis vicanorumAgiedincensiumto aedilis civitatisSenonum,actorpublicuspagi Tout(iaci?), actor publicus quinquennaliscivitatis, duumvir ab aerario munerario, and

finally praefectus annonaedesignatus.Obviously the range of evidence is not wide, but I feel that some valid inferences may be

drawn from it. Most apparent is the fact that nowhere do we have the 'standard' local career

neatly laid out for us. The first two inscriptions come the nearer to the supposed norm. Tothese might be added other more scattered references which likewise seem to approximate tothis model, such as the careers of Hannarus, son of Dannorix, and an anonymous Burdigalan,both of whom held magistracies of pagi before becoming quaestors (CIL xiii 5, 604), andthat of M. Claudius Severus, recorded as aedile among the Nitiobriges (CIL xiii 916).18

12 CIL xiii 1390 (Lemovices), 2899 (Senones).13 e.g. CIL xiii I9Io, 1911, 1920, 1922, 1925, 3693, 6225, 6244, 6339, 6384, 6404, 6462, 6467, 6482, 6705, 6733,

6769, 7062, 7062(a), 7063, 7064, 7266, 7321, 7352, 7386, 8853, 11690, 11696, 11810, 12013; Finke 3, 183, 306;Nesselhauf io6." P. 95. A complete collection of the available material is now to hand in G. Rupprecht, Untersuchungenzum Dekurionstand in den nordwestlichen Provinzendes romischen Reiches (= Frankfurteralthistorischen Studien

8), Kallmijnz, 1975.15 Two further examples would be provided by CIL xiii 548, and 2585, if IIVIR.Qcould safely be read as Ilvir,

q(uaestor).16 The duality of the office of vergobret is disputed - see Wolff, art. cit. (note 4), 51 and n. 12. It seems to

me, however, that whatever else can be made of Strabo iv. 4. 3 (above, notes 5 and I1), he at least impliesthe demise of 'dictatorial' magistracies under the Romans: 'va 8'TIyE~6va1Tpov-ro KaTr'bv-raTOv T

r6-rraAat•v ...

vv.v

U .... Cf. Jullian, op. cit. (note I), 337 and n. 4.

, The interpretation of this inscription is not helped by the fact that it is written in verse - see below,note 29.

18 Single references to quaestors and aediles are also found in CILxiii 4291, 5415, 5682, 7370, 11553, Nesselhauf

77, AE 1953, 56. The pronounced eastern disposition of these inscriptions (Mediomatrici, Sequani, Lingones,

Taunenses, Vangiones, Tricasses) is very striking, perhaps suggesting the influence of the highly Romanized

Rhineland - cf the case of the decurions, discussed above.




Nowhere, however, is the correspondence complete or exact; there appears to have been awide range of local official titles; and the conspicuous scarcity of aediles, quite contrary tothe Mediterraneanexperience, is to be noted.'9 For the future the unqualifiedproposition ofthe 'duumvir,aedile, quaestor' structure must be strictly avoided."2

However, given the conditions of the ancient world, it should be unnecessary, even trite,

to warn against the over-enthusiasticassumption of any great degree of uniformity in mattersof administration.Common sense alone should tell us that there must have been great variationin local practices from place to place. With regard to the Three Gauls, Camille Jullian was

careful to mention this qualification, although he has since been often ignored.21 More

important, however, because less considered, is the possibility of variation from time to time,and this is where I feel that the second two inscriptions are extremely interesting. Indeed, in

my opinion the time factor is probably the most significantelement in interpretingthe ostensi-

ble differences between the two categories defined above.From the first century B.C. to the third century A.D. the Imperial government underwent a

number of important changes; there is every reason to expect that local government had toalter to accommodate the resulting new demands made upon it. Most immediate, so far as

civilians were concerned, there was growing central control over public finances in an attemptto bolster the town-based local services on which the running of the Imperial administrationso closely depended.22Is it therefore so surprisingthat by the middle of the second centuryA.D. we should find C. Iulius ... holding an obvious financial post, duumvirab aerario,which

ranked only just below the duumviriuredicundo?23 Moreover I am sure that the career of C.Amatius Paterninus, followed a century or so later in the same community as the preceding,reveals a continued development along these same lines. It is significant that his last three

appointments before his death were probably all to do with finance- actor publicus quin-

quennalis(surely connected with the census?), duumvirab aerario, and finally- in a municipalcontext very much part of third-century conditions - praefectus annonae. The local magis-tracies of Gallia Comatawere not frozen in time; they had to adapt to the changing conditionsof the day.

The third point to be made about the 'orthodox' cursushas to do with the administrationof the pagi, and junior posts in general. Rather oddly the former activity is usually omittedfrom the standard model of Gallic local government careers.24It is curious, however, that, inthree of the five inscriptions cited above as approximating most closely to 'the standard', theoffice of magister pagi occurs as an apparently integral part of each individual's cursus.25This impression of the importance of junior office is reinforced by the two later inscriptions.Thus C. Iulius ... began his career as praefectus coloniae,a post which no doubt involved his

19 TheMediterraneanevidencerevealsthat thequaestorshipwasproneto a somewhathaphazardoccurrence,but certainlynot the aedileship- Mommsen and Marquardt,op. cit. (note 3), 234.

20 Except, of course, in the case of the full Roman colonies- see, for example, the magistratesof Lyon.Galsterer-Kroll,art. cit. (note II), 283-305,hasarguedthat thepatchyandincompletelocal cursusof theCeltic

west reflect the existence of widespreadand hithertounrecognizedLatincoloniae,in that the ius Latium,byautomaticallymakingRomancitizensof all who heldanysort of post in a municipality,encouragedtheunder-takingof shortcareers:peregrinearistocratswould hold a position or two, receivetheircitizenship,andleave.The faults in this argumentationhavebeenpointedout by Wolff, art. cit. (note 4), 62-76. As he says, and aswillbediscussedbelow,the commonphraseomnibushonoribusapudsuosfunctusclearlyshowsthatmen followedlonger careers,detailsof which have been subsumedin a characterlessform of words. In any case, the non-hierarchicalsystemwhich Galsterer-Krollpostulateswould be no way to run a civitas.

21 op. cit. (note 1), 341 f.22 Reflectedmost directlyas far as local communitieswere concernedin the developmentof the office of

curator - see A. H. M. Jones, The Later Roman Empire (Oxford, 1964), i, II ff.; and below, p. 97.23 cf. Jullian, op. cit. (note I), 342 and n.24 ibid., 352 and n., dismisses the position of magister pagi as a 'nominationsurplace'.25 i.e. in the careers of Verus, Hannarusand the anonymousBurdigalan- above p. 92.



94 J. F. DRINKWATER

supervisingtheday-to-dayrunningof thecivitas-capital,a necessaryresponsibilityasthetown-

ship grewin size. Thepurelylocal duties which this entailed(as opposedto the civitas-wide

jurisdictionof the municipalaedile)wouldmakethe post verysimilarto that of a magisterpagi.26Withthis in mindthe careerof C. AmatiusPaterninusbecomeseven moreinteresting.As aedilisvicanorumAgiedincensiumhe probablyhad the samejuniorduties as C. Iulius...(the lackof uniformityof title has to be acceptedalongwiththe apparentlyerraticstatusofAgedincum).27The experiencegainedhere fittedhim for his nextpost, the aedileshipproper(nowI wouldguessa relativelylow civitaspost, inferiorto the newerfinancialmagistracies).He then took up his firstreal position of independentauthorityaway from Sens as actor

publicuspagi Tout(iaci),surelythe equivalentof magisterpagi? Havingprovedhimselfas anadministratorPaterninuswas thenreadyto take on the responsibilityof the financialaffairsof his civitas.28

If it is accepted that the office of magisterpagi and its later equivalents was a real part ofthe Gallic cursus then some interesting conclusions result. Primarily, the inclusion of suchoffices (together with the notion of the growing elaboration of local responsibilities as time

progressed) should allow us a better appreciation of the variety and demanding nature of

local careers than that suggested by the bare structureof quaestorship, aedileship and duum-virate. Certainly from the mid-second century A.D. onwards the aspiring Gallic politicianseems to have had to prove himself capable of handling affairs at both local and civitas-level.

Indeed, like C. Amatius Paterninus, he may have been obliged to renew his links with thesubordinate communities between civitas-magistracies.29Perhaps the religious dedicationsin honour of the gods of the variouspagi which seem to have been expected of civitaspoliticianswho had reached the top of the local cursus also reflect the close and serious interest which aGallic noble was expected to take in the purely parochial affairs of his tribe.30

Since the question has been raised it may at this stage be worthwhile to consider whatconstituted the peak of a Gallic career. By implication the 'standard' career would have the

duumvirate, particularly the quinquennial duumvirate, or its like as the summit of localambition. In fact close scrutiny of the available evidence tends to suggest that a religious

appointment, to the imperial priesthood (flamen Augustalis,flamenRomaeet Augusti,sacerdosRomae et Augusti)was held superior to all secular advancement.31 This may be deduced from

2" Despite the similarity of title I would argue (I hope not too perversely) that C. Iulius ...'s prefecturecannot be equated with the post of praefectus municipii, 'deputy duumvir', as laid down, for example, in theLex municipii Salpensani (FIRA 24, xxv; cf. 21, xciiii). I base my reasoning upon the obviously junior natureof his appointment, and on analogy with the first office held by Amatius Paterninus. Cf. Galsterer-Kroll, art.cit. (note II1) 283 (for the normal high standing of praefecti pro Ilviris); also Jullian, op, cit. (note I), 352 andnote.

27 On the disappearance of the title of colonia in the later period see Frere, art. cit. (note 9), 30 f.28 C. Amatius Paterninus's career has aroused a good deal of discussion in the controversy over the definition

of civitas - above, p. 90oand note 8.29 The mention of the multiple magistracies of pagi to be found in at least one (CIL xiii 5) of the earlier

inscriptions possibly hints at a similar practice in the first century, i.e. that an individual was not magister pagiin successive years, but in the intervals between his civitas-appointments. (I would myself be inclined to read

Qas quater or some such, in line 3 of CIL xiii 412, were it not for the fact that this would cause difficulties withthe supposed metre.)

30 See below (the case of L. Campanius Priscus and T. Flavius Postuminius).31 There seems to have been no set title for this office. Strictly speaking, all local imperial priests should have

called themselves flamines, the title of sacerdos being reserved for the high priest of the federal Altar. It could

be, however, such was the prestige attached to the latter office that its name was 'poached' by local dignitaries.This has led to some confusion between priests and high priests, but it can safely be said that unless the context

makes their position perfectly plain, e.g. a dedication at Condate itself, the latter can be easily distinguished

by their overwhelming desire to demonstrate the interprovincial nature of their office - sacerdotes ad Aram,

Arenses, inter Confluentes, ad Templumetc. The vast majority of 'plain' sacerdotes must be local. (For a generallack of uniformity throughout the empire see D. Ladage, Stiidtische Priester- und Kultamter in lateinischen




the fact that in no case where a man's career is given in any detail does the imperial priesthoodoccur held by anyone below the rank of duumvir,and in numerous instances it is plain thatthe priesthood was attained after the duumvirate. In the first of these categories falls, for

example, CIL xiii 1048 (C. Iulius Marinus) and 548 (an anonymous Elusatian); and in thesecond CIL xiii 412 ('Verus', the probable Tarbellian); 1376/7 (L. Iulius Equester, the

Biturigan); 1632 (S. Iulius Lucanus, the Segusiavian); 1674 (Q. Adginnius Martinus, the

Sequanian); 1684 (C. Julius ..., the Senonian); and 2585 (C. Sulpicius Gallus, the Aeduan).32The pagus dedications already referredto above also serve to underline the importance of the

office. At Rennes L. Campanius Priscus and his son Virilis set up their statues as priests ofRome and Augustus (CIL xiii 3148); in the same civitas and probably at much the same time

(c. A.D. 135) T. Flavius Postuminius, bis duovir, omnibus honoribusapudsuosfunctus, made

similar offeringsto celebrate his perpetual flaminate of Mars Mullo, but in every instance he

was careful to give pride of place to his imperial priesthood.33The explanation for the primacy of this apparentlyessentially religious office requiressome

careful thought; to talk of 'honour' and 'prestige' is merely to beg the question. We can only

surmise, but I am preparedto suggest that the imperialpriesthood may have been considered

important by the leading men of Gaul because only men who had held the flaminate wereentitled to serve as legati to the great annual religious gathering at the Confluence of the

Rh ne and the Saine, there possibly to be chosen as imperialhigh priest of the Three Gauls.34

From the career of T. Sennius Sollemnis (CIL xiii 3162) we know the sort of influence which

such legati and sacerdotes might wield.35

It is rathercurious how influential Gauls, once they had begun to operate on a wider stage,ceased to record their early careers in any detail. Omnibus honoribusapudsuosfuncti served

as the sole reminder of their activity in pagi andcivitates,"

this is why the Gallic evidence is

frequently so disappointing, quite as much as the ravages of time.36Certainly the most dis-

Westen des Imperium Romanum zur Kaiserzeit (Cologne diss., 1971), 41 ff.; (H. Wolff, art. cit. (note Io), 207,

may have a point in distinguishing a provincial sacerdos Romae et Augusti from the usual flamines of the

Treveri, but in view of the above I remain not wholly convinced by this). I plan to publish a more detaileddiscussion of this question in due course. The office of flamen brings us back to the problem of status since,

as in the case of quaestors, aediles and duumvirs, it may be argued that this position could only be held in

coloniae or municipia, or in communities granted colonial or municipal privileges (see above, p. 90oand note

7). In fact there is about as much firm evidence for flamines in civitates which are not known for sure to have

had colonial status (Aedui: CIL xiii 2585; Bituriges Cubi: 1376/7; ?Meldi: 3024; Senones: ?1684, 2940;

?Sequani: 1674) as there is for them in those which are (Convenae: CIL xiii 548; Helvetii: 5009, 5010, 5063,

5012; Segusiavi: 1629; Treveri: 4030). Once again it could be argued that here we have evidence either for

hidden grants of municipal status, wholesale or piecemeal, or for plain copying of Roman ways; but once

more, whatever the explanation, the final outcome seems to have been some sort of uniformity in local

institutions.

32 A possible exception to the rule is provided by CIL xiii 1376/7, which have been restored to show the two

sons of L. Julius Equester as flamines Romae et Augusti with no indication of their having been duumviri.

Either the restoration is wrong, or one must accept a certain degree of flexibility in the system - their fatherhad twice been duumvirand so might well have expected a certain amount of leeway in the premature promotionof his sons.

33AE 1969/70, 405.

34 For the title see above, note 31. If I am correct, then the Gallic situation would provide a remarkable

contrast with the Spanish where, according to Etienne, it was extremely unusual for provincial priests to have

been municipal flamines or even sacerdotes of conventus. Indeed, there was a sizeable majority of Iberian pro-vincial priests who had held no local offices at all - 'qui ne devaient qu'a leurs qualit6s personelles et B leur

position sociale d'6tre d6l6gu6s a Merida, Cordoue et Tarragone, et surtout d'6tre 61us' (R. Etienne, Le culte

impdriale dans la peninsule lberique (Paris, 1958), 158; I owe this reference to Professor S. S. Frere).

35 Sollemnis's career has been examined in detail by H.-G. Pflaum, Le marbre de Thorigny (Paris, 1948),passim.

36 cf. Jullian, op. cit. (note I), 364 and n.



96 J. F. DRINKWATER

cussed of the pan-Gallic posts has been that of the priesthood of the Three Gauls, as illumin-

nated by the activity of Sollemnis. Strangelyneglected, however, are the officers of the Gallic

Council - iudex arcae Galliarum,allectus arcae Galliarum,inquisitorGalliarum- who super-vised the gatheringsat the Confluence. There has been a good deal of debate as to what these

men actually did, but apparentlycommon tacit agreement that all were in some way inferior

in status to the high-priests."3 This must in general terms be correct; the multitude of statueserected to sacerdotes and their families compared with the relatively scarce dedications to

officers of the Council, gives a fair idea of what contemporaries thought of their respective

positions. However, if the remaining inscriptions are examined closely one or two points

emerge which may suggest that the situation is not as simple as it seems.In the first place there seems to have been no career-structurelinking these inter-provincial

posts. In other words there is no record of any Council officer's having progressed from

inquisitorto allectus to iudex and finally to sacerdos. Sennius Sollemnis is the only high priestwe know to have held a Council post, and this was well after his priesthood. Additionally,

priests and officers seem to have had rather different practical backgrounds. Relatively few

high priests seem to have had more than local civitas experience before taking office. The

anonymous Senonian (CIL xiii 1684) leads the field with a procuratorship of Hadrumetum;Sennius Sollemnis, of course, had minor military experience in Africa; and an anonymousTuronian and an equally anonymous Coriosolitan may have been connected with the shippersof the Rhane and the Sa6ne (CIL xiii 1716, 3144), but these inscriptions are very uncertain.

Against this eight of the twelve known officers of the Council had wider experience in Gaul or

the empire. Tib. Pompeius Priscus (CIL xiii 1686) was a military tribune; L. Besius Superior

(1688) had connexions with two trading corporations, and was patron of Condate; Q. IuliusSeverinus(1695) was patron of the shippers of the Rh6ne and Sa6ne; L. Lentulus Censorinus

(1697) had acted as curatorto the BiturigesVivisci; L. TauriciusFlorens (1709) was connected

to two river associations; C. Suiccius La(tinus?) (3528) had been praefectus legionis and

curator of the Suessiones; T. Tertius Severus was curatorcolonorumat Avenches (5072); and

Q. Otacilius Pollinus was patron of the Cisalpine and Transalpine carriers, as well as of the

Sa6ne and Rh6ne shippers (I 480).38 All this leads me to wonder whether the existing con-ceptions of the status and and roles of the men at the Confluence are in need of some slightbut important revision. The honour, glory and expense of the chief priesthood went for the

most part to men of essentially Gallic outlook. These could and did involve themselves in

Gallic affairs at the Ara, but their period of office was short and, most important, their ex-

ecutive powers were restricted to religious observances and the chairing of debates. The

responsibility of actually running the organization of the Council of the Three Gauls - col-

lecting its dues, administering its lands etc. - was given to men of proved ability in wide-

scale administrativeand commercial affairs, who would be less likely to let the thing go bank-

rupt. (Perhaps such officials were appointed for longer than the single year of a high priest,i.e. they were more professional - which would go some way in explaining the rarity of their

inscriptions?) The officers of the Council may havehad less status but more

practicalim-

portance than the high priests in the runningof the affairsof the TresGalliae; added to which,

they would have had greater opportunities for financial gain in the fulfilment of their duties.

This might well explain the otherwise rather odd acceptance by the ex-high priest Sollemnis

of the 'inferior' rank of iudex arcaeferrariarum.It has already been observed that two officers of the Gallic Council had previously acted

37See J. Deininger, Die Provinziallandtage der romischen Kaiserzeit (= Vestigia 6) (Munich, 1965), 102 ff.

31 CIL's designation of L. Besius Superior as an eques has since been refuted by Rouge, 'Les rapports de

Lyon avec l'ouest-nord-ouest Gaulois', Revue archedologiquiede l'Est 25 (1974), 139; details of the career of

Q. Otacilius Pollinus are based on the new reading of AE 1972, 352.




as curatores for Gallic communities. Two other such officials are known, both Senonians:C. Decimius Sabinianus among the Veneti (CIL xiii 2950) - a man careful to advertise thefact that this was an imperialappointment; and ... elius Magnus, son of Atepomarus, amongthe Carnutes (CIL xiii 3o67).39 The insidious growth of the institution of the curatorshipfrom the early second century has received much attention from historians of the Empire,concerned with its implications for the vitality of municipal life throughout the provinces.40

Strangely,however, this phenomenon has apparentlybeen neglectedas a potentially importantstep in the career of a local politician, with its obvious opportunities to build up wealth and

prestige. In all the known Gallic cases the curatorshipwas awardedafter the person concernedhad fulfilled his obligationsto hiscommunity(and in one of them, afterhe had becomepraefectuslegionis); and in two instances, as has been noted, the curatorshipwas followed by an appoint-ment to the Gallic Council. Once more the impression is that here we have Gallic politicianswho wanted to move beyond the boundariesof their own civitatesbeing given the opportunityto exercise their skills in the administration of the Three Gauls. It is still noticeable, however,that none of the known Gallic curators move very far - in no case venturing beyond the pro-vincial boundary, and in one instance simply crossing the tribal border.

Another neglected curatorship, through which a leading Gaul might exercise some influencein his own community and beyond, is that of curator civium Romanorumconsistentiumi.e.

patron of Roman citizens domiciled in but not natives of a civitas.41C. Iulius Bassusand T. Ligurius Masculus held this office among the Petrucorii (CIL xiii 950/1, 965), as didC. Iulius Marinus among the Santones (1048) and C. Agileius Primus among the BiturigesCubi (1194). The post would obviously have held some local prestige in the early days of the

Empire, but as citizenship spread it might reasonably be conjectured that it would graduallyhave declined in significance. That such a view is in fact erroneous has only recently beenshown by an inscription from Lyon (ILTG221) which reveals that not only were associationsof Roman citizens active in Gaul well after the Caracallan edict but also that their curatorshad a provincial and inter-provincial organization centred on Lugdunum. Whatever theofficial activity of these men was supposed to have been (even if basically only religious) it

is not impossible that here too was an avenue to some sort of rank and influence within theThree Gauls. The summus curator of Lugdunensis (senior to his colleagues of Belgica and

Aquitania), performing his duties at Lyon, would presumably have some means of accessto the residentgovernor and perhaps even to the Gallic Council. It may be noted that in noneof the first four cases cited is there an individual whose career otherwiseextended beyond his

civitas, and indeed two of them have no other recorded offices at all - possibly a hint that this

curatorship was more of an alternative than an additional means of participating in publiclife (and one open also, it may be noted, to a sevir- Agileius Primus).

Finally, no study of the wider ramifications of Comatan local careers would be completewithout some mention of aristocraticinvolvement in militaryservice. As is well enough known,in the Julio-Claudian period there was a large number of locally-raised auxiliary regimentsstationed in

Gaul and the Germanies,for the most part under Gallic and German commandingofficers.42These praefecti are found in charge of either units raised from their own tribes

3" Despite Magnus's curiously archaic filiation the latter inscription must date to the third century, whenthe Cenabenses were divided off from the Carnutes proper - see J. Moreau, Dictionnaire de geographie historique(Paris, 1972), ad. loc.

40 For the emergence of curators see Mommsen and Marquardt, op. cit. (note 3), 225 f.; E. de Ruggiero,Dizionario epigrafico (Spoleto, i9Io) (s.v. curator reipublicae); Abbott and Johnson, op. cit. (note 3), 90 f.

41 The technicalities of the post are discussed in A. Audin, J. Guey, P. Wuilleumier, 'Inscriptions latinesd6couvertes a Lyon', REA 56 (1954), which examines the inscription mentioned below.

42 See G. AlfBldy, Die Hilfstruppen der rimischen Provinz Germania Inferior (= Epigraphische Studien 6)(Dusseldorf, 1968), 81 ff., II5 f. cf. my article, Latomus 37 (1978), 817-50.



98 J. F. DRINKWATER

or 'composite' regiments, consisting of men from a number of civitates. In the first instancecommand was probably the result of tribal status and influence, and in the second it couldwell have been owed to personal influence with a Roman governor or general.43 Either way,it is generally agreed that such appointments did not form part of an intended career in the

imperialadministration, i.e. the nativepraefecti cannot be seen as aspirants to an 'equestrian'

cursus, however flexible and unformed that cursus may have been in this period.44 Thesecommands are best seen as elements in a local career pattern, part of the warrior-traditionwhich had its roots in the pre-Roman and even the Caesarian periods, by which a Gallic

nobleman was expected to take an active part in war.45Being stationed on the Rhine or in

Gaul, auxiliary commanders remained physically close to their own civitates and so could

hold their military appointments between, and even together with, the civil magistracies of

their tribe. Such must have been the careers of the Santonian C. Iulius Victor, praefectusfabrum, tribunus militum cohort. (?I Belg)arum, sacerdos Romae et Augusti ad Confluentem(CIL xiii o1042-45);the Treveran (?Se)cundus Priscus, flamen, sacerdos Romae et Augusti,

magister, q(uaestor?), praefectus cohort. I Aresacum (Finke 322); and another Treveran,Tiberius Claudius .. ., sacerdos Romae et Augusti, praefectusad ripam (? et alae Trevero)rum,

quaestor(AE 1968, 321).46The locus classicus,of course, is provided bythe Treverannobleman

lulius Indus, who raisedhis own cavalry regimentfor Rome in the troubles of A.D.21 (Tacitus,Ann. iii. 42).

The events of A.D. 70 in Gaul, which culminated in the proclamation of a free 'Gallic

Empire', warned Rome of the great dangers involved in allowing tribal and military affairs

to become too closely inter-twined. The following years saw the disappearance of many of

the old Gallic regiments, the introduction of Italian and other outsiders as commanders for

auxiliary regiments stationed in Gaul and the Germanies, and the insistence on the followingof the formal equestrian tres militiae for all non-senatorial aspirants to military command.47

Such conditions, as was intended, were not conducive to the mixing of local civil and militaryduties by the Gallic aristocracy; the Gauls made their choice, and henceforth Gallic auxiliary

praefecti, and indeed Gallic equestriansgenerally, become very rare. It should be noted, how-

ever, that every rule has its exceptions, and in this case we have evidence for an, unfortunatelyanonymous, Treveran's career which shows him to have held the posts of flamen Augusti,

flamen Leni Martis quinquennalis,praefectus cohort. Hispanorumequitatae, tribunusmilitum

leg. VIIII Hispanae, praefectus equitumalae Augustae Vocontiorum,at some date in the earlysecond century (CIL xiii 4030). However, recent research has suggested that this man could

well have held all his military posts in Lower Germany (and not, as the traditional view would

have it, in Britain).48If this is true we then have evidence for a relaxation of the policy of

preventing leading Gauls from holding local auxiliary commands a couple or so generationsafter the ImperiumGalliarum;more interesting however, is the light which this new inter-

pretation throws on the Gallic aristocratic mentality. Despite the apparent acceptance of

Roman 'terms of employment' it seems as if the old feelings still prevailed: a Gallic nobleman

would endure even the tres militiae, if it did not mean his moving far from home; and havingonce served his time with the colours he did not bother to proceed to a career in the imperial

43 Alftldy, op. cit. (note 42), 1oo, 121; E. Birley, Roman Britain and the Roman Army (Kendal, I96I), 142.

44 Alf61ldy,op. cit. (note 42), 121.

45For the Gallic warrior tradition see Caesar,BG vi, 15. I: ... omnes in bello versantur; the necessary

qualificationof omnesfollows shortlyafter(vi. 31. 5) with the observationthat Catuvolcus,joint-kingof the

Eburones,committedsuicide becausehis age preventedhim from fighting.46 For a somewhatdifferentreadingof the last inscriptionsee Wolff,art. cit. (note Io), 206 f.

47 Alfoldy, op. cit. (note 42), 00ooff., I6, 121, 129.48 See J. Krier and L. Schwinden,'Die MerscherInschrift',TZ 37 (1974), 123-47 and hereespecially139 f.




administration:unlike most of his peers our Treveran did not go to a lucrativeprocuratorshipbut became a leading figure among his own tribe.49

Discussion so far has been restricted to Gauls in auxiliary commands; there exists, in

addition, a small group of men whose military careers were essentially legionary. Thus theCadurcanTiberius Pompeius Priscus appears as omnibushonoribusapudsuosfunctus, tribunus

leg. VMacedonicae,iudexarcae Galliarum(CILxiii 1686);C. SuicciusLatinus,a Viromanduan,announced himself as sacerdos Romae et Augusti, praefectus leg. VIII, curator civitatis

Suessionum,inquisitorGalliarum(CIL xiii 3528); the Helvetian C. Iulius Camillus was sacerdos

Augusti magnus, tribunusmilitum leg. IIII Macedonicae (CIL xiii 5093); and A. Pompeius

Dumnom(otulus?), of the Petrucorii, was praefectus fabrum, and tribune of an unknown

legion (CIL xiii 1Io45). Despite a superficial dissimilarity with the careers we have been

examining, three at least of the above cases are fairly straightforwardto explain.As E. Birley has shown, the direct appointment of leading provincials, mature in age and

experienced in municipal administration, to the equestrian legionary tribunate was not

unusual in the High Empire, especially during the first century. In addition, it was not un-

common for these men, having served their time, to return to civilian life.50 Such seems to

have happened with both Pompeius Priscus and lulius Camillus. The latter's service is infact specifically dated to the reign of Claudius; the former's nomen, deriving from pre-Caesarian enfranchisement in Aquitania, similarly suggests a fairly early date. Pompeius

Dumnom(otulus?), by analogy, was probably also a contemporary of these two. What weseem to have here, therefore, in the still-flexible army system of the Julio-Claudian period,is an alternative to the auxiliary service outlined above. The gaining of a legionary tribunate

possibly required more influential patrons than did that of an auxiliary prefecture;51 and it

may have demanded a greater degree of mobility from those who wanted it: V. Macedonicawas a Danubian legion (although IIII Macedonica was on the Rhine at the time when lulius

Camillus must have served in it.)52 However, its prestige must have been commensuratelygreater, and it involved no further commitment to imperial service outside Gaul. It is not

surprisingthat on their return holders of the post seem to have been leading contenders for

high office at the federal Altar.53The fourth case, that of Suiccius Latinus, is more difficult to explain. The structure of his

career is superficially very much like that of Pompeius Priscus, except that his legionaryappointment was not as tribune, but as praefectus legionis, which immediately dates it to theSeveranperiod, or later. This is so unusual that I can for the moment offerno firmexplanation,

49KrierandSchwinden,art. cit. (note48), 146f., isolate sevenmenwithcareerssimilarto thatof theTreveran;five of thesewent on to higherequestrianposts. (Of the remaining,one becameflamenof Hispania Citerior;the subsequentcareer of the other is unknown).An even odder career is that of C. Iulius Serenusof theConvenae -quattuorvir, sacerdos Romae et Augusti, praefectus alae VII Phrygum, c. A.D. Ioo (ILTG 76-80).Serenus'scommandof an auxiliarycavalry regimentapparentlyfollowed a seriesof local appointments,butwas not precededby a postingto the prefectureof a cohort,nor (so far as we know)was it succeededby any

furtherequestrianoffice. The positively'Julio-Claudian'neglectof the tresmilitiae,coupledwith the fact thatthe VII Phrygumwas a Syrianala, (involvementin which would have taken Serenusfar from home), makeSerenus'spublic life very difficultto explain in a second-centurycontext. (B. Sapene, 'Caius Julius Serenus,personnage de Lugdunum Convenarum vers l'an Ioo', Revue de Comminges 64 (195I), which may well explainthese anomalies,was unfortunatelyunavailableto me in the preparationof this paper.)

60 E. Birley,op. cit. (note 43), 138 ff.51 ibid. 141.62 RE xii 1572-86; I55I.53 cf. above, p. 96. In the early (Julio-Claudian)period of the Altar'shistoryit may well have been that

suchmenwere the mainrecruitsas federalofficials- beforecuratoresand thosewithmore commercialinterestscame on the scene.Acceptanceof the existence of such tribunesas a matter of coursewouldexplainTacitus'scasual reference to tribuni in Gallia geniti (Hist. iv. 61) in the context of A.D. 70. Cf. P. Fabia, 'Officiers gauloisdans les e1gions romaines', REA 14 (1912), 285 f.



I00 J. F. DRINKWATER

but merely two suggestions. If Latinus held office before the middle years of the third century,when the term praefectus legionis was still a synonym for the old praefectus castrorum,thenhis career could hint at a development of the sort of direct, short-term legionary appoint-ments previouslyoutlined in the context of the tribunate.54The duties of the legionarypraefecti,of whatever style, were mainly administrative, although they could on occasions involve

tactical command: in fact exactly like those of the tribunes.55We know that the practice ofcreating short-service tribunes continued, if more sporadically, from the first even into the

third century;56is it possible that it was extended to take in another legionary post? It is

perhaps significant that the VIII Augusta was stationed locally, at Strasbourg. On the other

hand, if Latinus's appointment fell in the period of the reign of Gallienus, when as praefectuslegionishe would have had the substantiverank of the formerlegionary legate, then his career,with its odd mixture of civil and military posts, becomes very curious - perhaps only to be

explained by reference to the disruption of normal career patterns which must have resultedfrom the formation of the second Gallic Empire under Postumus and his successors.'7

Universityof Sheffield

54For the development of the office see RE xxii 1323-26.

-5cf. RE xxii 1289.56 E. Birley, op. cit. (note 43), 138.

57cf. CIL vi 1641, with H.-G. Pflaum, 'La monnaie de Treves a l'epoque des empereurs gallo-romains',

CongrIs internationale de numismatique (Paris, 1953), Actes (1957), 273-80 (concerning the unorthodox career

of a postmaster and mintmaster, apparently under the Gallic Empire).I am grateful to the Sheffield University Research Fund for financial help towards the preparation of this paper.

career of three gauls

Documents