Help with a translation

[drsrob]

Oh, while we're here we may as well do:
[...]
Equites Promoti Indigenae - IIRC equites promoti were originally the legionary cavalry, you were promoted to them and that is what "promoti" should be taken to mean.
[...]

This makes me wonder...

If the "promoti" in equites promoti means what you say it means, they need not have been former legionary cavalry. AFAIK the equites of the cohortes equitatae were also promoted from the infantry ranks. So the equites promoti could also have been formed from these. This would square better with additional titles like Indigenae.

[Mitra]

Oh, while we're here we may as well do:

Equites Promoti Indigenae - IIRC equites promoti were originally the legionary cavalry, you were promoted to them and that is what "promoti" should be taken to mean.

Illyricani - probably more difficult as they are combined with other names, IMO they are units that were based in Illyricum at some time during the crisis period in the C3rd but to be honest I don't think there is a definitive answer.

Yes Illyriciani are probably danubian units transferred maybe during the Aurelian reign or in Tetrarchic period.

The promoti are probably of 4 type:

equites promoti in regional armies are ex-legionary cavalry, but they maintain a link with the mother legion, as appears in some IV century papyri.

equites promoti indigenes - probably indigenes cavalry unit with onorific title

equites promoti Illyriciani - see above

equites promoti in field army - Speidel suggest ex-praetorian cavalry

[D B Campbell]

Equites Promoti Indigenae - IIRC equites promoti were originally the legionary cavalry, you were promoted to them and that is what "promoti" should be taken to mean.

I must admit that I always took promoti to indicate that the unit had been displaced from its parent legion. (The verb promoveo has this meaning besides the more obvious one of advancement, figurative or literal.)

The equites promoti indigenae would then be the cavalry displaced from a local (indigenous) legion. This meaning seems guaranteed by the ND entry for Egypt, where one unit is named equites promoti indigenae legionis tertiae Diocletiano; i.e., the cavalry displaced from the local legion III Diocletiana.

The fact that no unit is ever designated indigenae and Illyriciani gives further weight to this interpretation. Cavalry units seem to be promoti (or sagittarii or scutarii) either from the local legion (i.e. indigenae) or from the Illyrican regional grouping (i.e. Illyriciani).

[Mitra]

The equites promoti indigenae would then be the cavalry displaced from a local (indigenous) legion. This meaning seems guaranteed by the ND entry for Egypt, where one unit is named equites promoti indigenae legionis tertiae Diocletiano; i.e., the cavalry displaced from the local legion III Diocletiana.

But it isn't sure that the promoti indigenae sub thebaidos are linked to III diocletiana in ND. Seeck vs Brennan

The fact that no unit is ever designated indigenae and Illyriciani gives further weight to this interpretation. Cavalry units seem to be promoti (or sagittarii or scutarii) either from the local legion (i.e. indigenae) or from the Illyrican regional grouping (i.e. Illyriciani).

Lewin (also if in addenda reports Brennan ND intepretation) examining the papyris and a inscription from diocletianic era, observes that probably indigenae are a title used from the start of IV century and that no link appears between the promoti indig. and a legion, but appears for the normal promoti.

http://198.62.75.1/www1/ofm/sbf/Books/L ... romoti.pdf

[D B Campbell]

Lewin observes that probably indigenae are a title used from the start of IV century and that no link appears between the promoti indig. and a legion, but appears for the normal promoti.

http://198.62.75.1/www1/ofm/sbf/Books/L ... romoti.pdf

Thanks for the link, Davide. Otherwise I'd have missed that paper. (Laudes + 1! )

[D B Campbell]

But it isn't sure that the promoti indigenae sub thebaidos are linked to III diocletiana in ND.

Seeck's reading can be found (e.g.) in the internet versions of the ND, such as Intratext. As you say, it's the section on the Dux Thebaidos in Egypt.

But if you check Seeck's apparatus criticus, you'll see that he split a perfectly good entry into two:
Equites promoti indigenae | legionis tertiae diocletianoambos
To do this, he had to alter the second part to read: Legio tertia Diocletiana, Ombos
(Ambos or Ombos is the location of the unit.)

Lewin (also in addenda reports Brennan ND intepretation) examining the papyris and a inscription from diocletianic era, observes that probably indigenae are a title used from the start of IV century and that no link appears between the promoti indig. and a legion, but appears for the normal promoti.

Lewin's argument seems to be this: he cites an inscription from Bkhara which mentions equites promoti indigenae; he notes that they might have been detached from the nearby legio I Illyricorum (the "indigenous" legion); but concludes that, because the inscription doesn't say so, they couldn't have been.
This doesn't seem (imho) to be a very secure argument.