Late Roman Army Grade/Rank List under Anastasius

[Nathan Ross]

Slab C is so far removed from being a legion. Just look at the number of cornicines....

And yet this unit is clearly identified as both a legion and a numerus. This is unequivocal evidence, and rather than questioning it we should build our theories around it.

Many of those listed in Slab C are outside the legion’s organisation.

However do you know this? Only the clerici et deputati would seem plausibly to be supernumeraries - we have to assume that the others fit into the organisation somewhow.

The Augustales and Flaviales in the Perge document work by dividing them by 10.

Yep. That's been my working theory for some time now.

Perhaps the single Ordinarius has two senior Augustales supporting him, the three senior Augustales Alii each have two senior Flaviales supporting them, and the seven junior Augustales Alii each have two junior Flaviales supporting them?...

Or maybe the numbers work some other way (my suggestion above somewhere does this, but it's far from perfect as there are no file closers). But clearly the different grades are articulated in some way within the ordo. The semissales and duplares are another matter - although their collected totals break down by 4, 8 and 16...

Looks like it’s time to retire two of the three groups of Augustales.

I wouldn't be too hasty! The document you quoted appears to be addressing a problem with higher-grade soldiers lingering in the army beyond their enlistment time in order to claim pay  - it surely doesn't mean that anyone earning 5 annonae or more should be immediately discharged. That way there would be no Ordinarii, or senior ranking soldiers at all.

If the Ordinarii could remain indefinitely in the army - as the old centurions apparently could do - then perhaps Augustales were trying to bend the rules by claiming this privilege as well?

Does the Perge slabs actually state this, or is it Onur’s conclusion?

This is Onur's conclusion, as stated in his paper. Although I think it's more probably just a fault in expression.

Could it be that he meant "The 10 signiferi given in the list in the Perge inscription were each in charge of  [one of the] 10 centuriae of the unit" ? Since he seems to support ten centuriae of infantry elsewhere this would seem the most logical interpretation. Although 'in charge' seems a little strange as well.