09-24-2006, 08:52 PM
Robert: Thank you for your continued help.
Yes, "upper regions" could work if "Raetia secunda" (i.e., northern Raetia, previously "Vindelicia") was called "Raetia superior". Still some uncertainty here.
The provinces of Egypt, Germania, Moesia & Pannonia were divided into "superior" & "inferior". Superior was the higher, uprivers part of these provinces; "inferior" was the lower, downriver part.
Northern Raetia is mostly lower and downriver from southern Raetia. Therefore, using the Roman geographic naming convention, would northern Raetia have been "Raetia inferior"?
However, maybe "superior" was used here in the sense of "upper" Prefecture of Italy or "upper" Diocese of Italy?
In any case, Notitia Dignitatum shows: Praefectus legionis tertiae Italicae partis superioris, Castra Regina..."
So maybe "upper regions" refers to the upper regions of LEG III ITAL's area of responsibility?
Yes, "upper regions" could work if "Raetia secunda" (i.e., northern Raetia, previously "Vindelicia") was called "Raetia superior". Still some uncertainty here.
The provinces of Egypt, Germania, Moesia & Pannonia were divided into "superior" & "inferior". Superior was the higher, uprivers part of these provinces; "inferior" was the lower, downriver part.
Northern Raetia is mostly lower and downriver from southern Raetia. Therefore, using the Roman geographic naming convention, would northern Raetia have been "Raetia inferior"?
However, maybe "superior" was used here in the sense of "upper" Prefecture of Italy or "upper" Diocese of Italy?
In any case, Notitia Dignitatum shows: Praefectus legionis tertiae Italicae partis superioris, Castra Regina..."
So maybe "upper regions" refers to the upper regions of LEG III ITAL's area of responsibility?
AMDG
Wm. / *r
Wm. / *r
