Late Roman Names / Practices

[chukissaki]

Hi, I need help with names in the later empire, 5th century, for the Western empire.
Looking for documented names that could have been used around Gaul or Brittania.
I understand that the names were shortened to two names ?
I have looked at Flavius Aetius as an example and I'm trying to understand the structure. He is usually called Aetius, but when Googled, I get Flavius as a 1st? Name ?
Same for Flavius Stilicho.
I have tried several searches but I keep getting earlier 3name systems, or a reference to 6-7th century names.
Thanks

[John Conyard]

Warfare in Roman Europe, AD 350-425 (Oxford Classical Monographs) by Hugh Elton has an excellent summary of names and their likely barbarian or Roman origin.

[Robert Vermaat]

The best publications are of course:
Jones, Martindale, Morris; The prosopography of the later Roman Empire: A.D. 260-395, Volume 1
Martindale; The prosopography of the later Roman Empire: A.D. 395-527, Volume 2
Available between a 'mere' $200-500 but the pdf files can be traced .. :?

This one would be helpful:
Dietrich Hoffmann: Die spätrömischen Soldatengrabschriften von Concordia. In: Museum Helveticum 20 (1963).

You can find some here:
Ralph Mathisen: Peregrini, Barbari, and Cives Romani. Concepts of Citizenship and the Legal Identity of Barbarians in the Late Roman Empire. In: American Historical Review 111, 2006, S. 1011–1040.
http://www.historycooperative.org/journa...r111.4.pdf

[John Conyard]

Nice references Robert. But Elton's appendices looks at over 130 named other ranks, he works at a university near Rhiothamus and his book retails at under $20. Your call :lol:

[Robert Vermaat]

his book retails at under $20. Your call :lol:

the pdf's can be found for free. They cover hundreds and hundreds of names. Easy.

Having said that, I can remommed Elton's book anyway, it's a great read. I'd have him sign it as he works around the corner. :wink:

[chukissaki]

his book retails at under $20. Your call :lol:

the pdf's can be found for free. They cover hundreds and hundreds of names. Easy.

Having said that, I can remommed Elton's book anyway, it's a great read. I'd have him sign it as he works around the corner. :wink:

This is why I love this forum. I will buy the book, and hit the online sources.
thanks so much.

[chukissaki]

Lt me ask a question. Suppose I wanted to create a name from this list...
http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/names/byz...names.html

what do I do ? just pick 2 ?
lets use faustus as a name to be called, and aquila as a family or other name .....
would it be written in the style of Flavius Aetius?, so Aquila Faustus ?or I just WAY off base here?

was the name Caius in use this late ?

[Nathan Ross]

This is an interesting question. As I understand it (vaguely), the later Roman convention for names went something like this (and I'd appreciate correction!:

The traditional Roman three part name (praenomen, e.g Gaius, nomen, or family name, e.g. Julius, cognomen or personal name, e.g. Rufinus) broke down somewhat in the third century. Everyone enfranchised under Caracalla took the nomen Aurelius for a start. At around the same time, the praenomen started to disappear (or at least fall out of common use - it's used less frequently on inscriptions anyway).

*(Edit) adding to the confusion here, the old praenomen seems to have adopted by some as a cognomen! Meaning we have individuals called Aurelius Gaius, for example...

In the fourth century, the Constantinian dynasty adopted the nomen Flavius. So large numbers of people (barbarians from outside the empire?), on gaining citizenship, took the name Flavius without a praenomen. They added to this either a suitably Roman-sounding cognomen (Aquila, Faustus, or Martius, for example), effectively disguising their roots, or just used their original name with the 'imperial' nomen (so, for example, Flavius Dagalaifus). The frequency of Aurelius or Flavius as a nomen in the fourth century made it effectively useless as an identifier, so increasingly people just went by their cognomen, whether Roman or 'barbarian'.

Another fourth-century addition was the signum, or supernomen - a kind of nickname or alias adopted by the individual and used alongside the 'official' name. So my avatar image, for example, show Caius Caelius Saturninus (good traditional Roman name!), a Constantinian high official who had the signum Dogmatius (whether for religious, philosophical or oratorical reasons I don't know!).

I think the signum was similar to the 'Christian name' adopted by many Christians - a kind of additional or alternative name, reflecting their religion, which came to replace the 'official' one over time. I might be wrong about this - naming conventions in the early Christian world are a bit of a mystery to me!

So - an individual in the late fourth or fifth century may have had two types of name, an 'official' roman name, consisting of a nomen (often 'imperial': Aurelius or Flavius) and cognomen (either traditional latin or imported Germanic), plus perhaps a signum or 'Christian name' that they used in everyday life. The sources could record either of these, which makes things confusing...

[Marcus Julius]

Lt me ask a question. Suppose I wanted to create a name from this list...
http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/names/byz...names.html

what do I do ? just pick 2 ?

The answer depends on what you want the name for.

Since you used that link from the SCA, I'll assume it is for that use. If so, then yes. Pick two and then make sure that it isn't the real name of a significant historical figure.
The SCA is particularly unpicky about which family names used which given names, etc. but is extremely paranoid about not allowing presumption of grandeur by using real historical names of significance.

In contrast, most true reenactment organizations want you to use a name that actually existed, as opposed to the SCA standard of "might have been".

[D B Campbell]

(and I'd appreciate correction!)

None needed! Only some comments added.

At around the same time, the praenomen started to disappear (or at least fall out of common use - it's used less frequently on inscriptions anyway).

The praenomen was already dying in the first century. Consider Vespasian's family, who are all called Titus Flavius! It had become something like a tradition to take the two-name deal. Think of all the Marci Ulpii you come across!

Everyone enfranchised under Caracalla took the nomen Aurelius for a start.

It's probably worth noting that every freeborn subject of the empire was automatically enfranchised and became Marcus Aurelius + own-name overnight. (Existing citizens obviously kept their own names. Think of all the Gaius Juliuses and Tiberius Claudiuses there must've been!)

In the fourth century, the Constantinian dynasty adopted the nomen Flavius.

Well, they were already called Flavius, so their family/-ies weren't affected by Caracalla's universal grant.

So large numbers of people (barbarians from outside the empire?), on gaining citizenship, took the name Flavius without a praenomen. They added to this either a suitably Roman-sounding cognomen (Aquila, Faustus, or Martius, for example), effectively disguising their roots, or just used their original name with the 'imperial' nomen (so, for example, Flavius Dagalaifus).

Interestingly, it seems that, because every Tom, Dick and Harry was now called Marcus Aurelius, the names Flavius (from Constantine) and Valerius (from Diocletian) were used as a high-status marker for soldiers and officials.

I think the signum was similar to the 'Christian name' adopted by many Christians - a kind of additional or alternative name, reflecting their religion, which came to replace the 'official' one over time. I might be wrong about this - naming conventions in the early Christian world are a bit of a mystery to me!

I don't know about this signum -- you're probably right -- but people certainly started to take "Christian"-sounding names. Think how many late Romans you know called John/Johannes! And what about Theodorus and Theodosius?

In the late period, you finally arrive at bizarre names like Georgius Florentius Gregorius (Gregory of Tours). And have you seen Narses' real name?! hock:

[D B Campbell]

lets use faustus as a name to be called, and aquila as a family or other name ..... would it be written in the style of Flavius Aetius?, so Aquila Faustus ?or I just WAY off base here?

If you're upper class, you're going to be a Flavius. If not, you're an Aurelius. Think of Flavius Merobaudes, Flavius Richomer, Flavius Stilicho and Flavius Aetius (you already mentioned), Flavius Ricimer, Flavius Areobindus, ... do you want to join this company, Flavius Faustus? hock: Or are you just an Aurelius Aquila? :wink:

[Nathan Ross]

Here's a rather in-depth survey of late Roman naming practices:

The Means of Naming - Chapter Four

It also covers the emergence of identifiable 'Christian' names. Theodorus, for example, was not originally Christian at all, just pious Greek, but the 'god' (Theo) part became Christianised from usage. Genuine Christian names appeared, says Wilson (above) in the fourth century, as agnomeni or signa - Cyriacus ('belonging to the Lord (Kyrios)') could have been originally pagan, Gregorius ('awakened' i.e. from death), Redemptus, Innocentius and Paschasius (born at Pascal) were not. Oddly, the only Paschasius I can think of was the Sicilian ultra-persecutor in the martyr story of St Lucia... :-?

Wilson also covers the disappearance of the praenomen (beginning in the 1st c, as Duncan says), and the metamorphosis of the 'imperial' Nomen into a new praenomen (Flavius ended up as a first name, abbreviated Fl like the old praenomen), and the old praenomen into a cognomen (eg Aurelius Gaius mentioned above) - to which I :roll: ...

[chukissaki]

lets use faustus as a name to be called, and aquila as a family or other name ..... would it be written in the style of Flavius Aetius?, so Aquila Faustus ?or I just WAY off base here?

If you're upper class, you're going to be a Flavius. If not, you're an Aurelius. Think of Flavius Merobaudes, Flavius Richomer, Flavius Stilicho and Flavius Aetius (you already mentioned), Flavius Ricimer, Flavius Areobindus, ... do you want to join this company, Flavius Faustus? hock: Or are you just an Aurelius Aquila? :wink:

I think am beginning to make some sense of it. Just so I am sure, In the case of the name aurelius aquila, the name I would be reffered to would be aquila ?

[D B Campbell]

Just so I am sure, In the case of the name aurelius aquila, the name I would be reffered to would be aquila ?

I guess so, since most of your colleagues would also be called Aurelius! :lol:

[Paul Elliott]

I guess my third century name would then be 'Gaius Aurelius Fortunatus'.