Notitia Dignitatum

[Logarythmus]

Ave,

I start this new thread for all problems related to the Notitia Dignitatum. I don't know or another thread of the same type exists here ? In this case please feel free to just add my comment at the right place.

I'm focused on line 61.20 / Or XXXVII 32 / Or XXX §I B 8 of the Notitia and made research on the location ASABAIA which i've placed previously in Palæstinæ. I made wrong because all 61.12 to 61.23 section is related to Arabia province.

I've found on internet an article : Les garnisons romaines de la province d'Arabie In: Échos d'Orient, tome 2, N°3, 1898. pp. 89-95. by Siméon Vailhé (http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/pre...m_2_3_3196), who list all garrisons of the Arabian province.

Vailhé rely Asabia to Asabara (right orthograph ?) at the east of Hesbân more precisely at Khirbet ez Zebarat.

There is another reference talking about Castra Samaritanorum : https://books.google.fr/books?id=oQVm9Q_...um&f=false
but I can't rely the names cited in the article with those from the french article, but it seems to be localized in the same area...

another problem arise on lines :

63.10 Or XXXII 11 / Or XXXII 26 - Or XXXI k / Or XXXI §I A 9
59.26 Or XXXIV 43 / Or XXIX §I B 12

the first reference is dedicated to the Uiri spectabilis ducis Fœnicis (if no mistake from me)
the second line is dedicated to Uiri spectabilis ducis Palæstinæ

but the location is for the two units at Calamona which is Castra Samaritanorum. One must be wrong ! Two "duces" couldn't share one fortress where two differents units are stationed. For me the location is in Palæstina I so far...

Until I didn't find two different Calamona, I suppose that only one existed :whistle: . I'm I right ?, your comment are welcomed because I don't have any idea how to solve this apparent "contradiction"….

Thank you.

[Simplex]

Hi,
....my deepest respect for opening this "Can of Worms" -- understanding the ND.
My attempts at this have already been very time-consuming.
The results ....well ..... :unsure: :whistle: :oops:
As far as your problem is concerned -- the only trace in this direction I could spot immediately was:
http://mushecht.haifa.ac.il/abstract/15e/Abstracts.pdf
The whole paper, as far as I understood this abstract, seems to deal with locating and discerning the antique-day places in this area -- albeit somewhat
"off-handed" as it mainly deals with "Two Tombstones from Zoar in the Hecht Museum Collection -- The Aramaic Inscriptions".
Hope this helps & best wishes

Simplex

[Logarythmus]

Thank You Simplex for the help.

[Logarythmus]

I've got another question about Orientis part of the Notitia.
It concern Diocesis Oriens. Section XXII appears one "Comes orientis"

Sub dispositione viri spectabilis comitis Orientis provinciae infrascriptae :
Palestina
Foenice.
Syria.
Cyprus.
Cilicia.
Palestina secunda.
Palestina salutaris.
Foenice Libani.
Eufratensis.
Syria salutaris.
Osrhoena.
Mesopotamia.
Cilicia secunda.
Isauria.
Arabia.

On the other hand there are also

section XXII one dux Fœnicis
section XXIII one dux Syriæ
section XXXIV one dux Palæstinæ
section XXXV one dux Oshrœnæ
section XXXVI one dux Mesopotamiæ

My question is, does the "Ducis" are subordinated to the "Comes" until the Comes appears section XXII far above sections concerning the "Ducis" or does the "Comes" position is more a civil authority that is not involved into military affairs, and in this case, to what authority the "ducis" have to report ?

The Comes and Ducis are both spectabilis !

Same kind of problem occurs between the "Uiri illustris magistris officiorum (XI)" & the "Uiri spectabilis vicarii dioceseos Thraciarum (XXVI)" they are both in charge of province Europe… Who prevail on the other ? Does they have the same area of competence ? I guess the "magistris officiorum" is in charge military affairs while the other is in charge of civil administration, but for all the other provinces (Scythia, Mœsia II, Rhodopa, Thracia), does the "ducis" are under the "vicarii" or are they independents ?


thank you

[Robert Vermaat]

Duces and comites usually do not have the same command. Although this is not written in stone, most of the time a dux commands a frontier section, while a comes commands the mobile forces in a certain area. Sometimes their commands overlap.

[Condottiero Magno]

Duces and comites usually do not have the same command. Although this is not written in stone, most of the time a dux commands a frontier section, while a comes commands the mobile forces in a certain area. Sometimes their commands overlap.

With overlapping commands, who would have seniority?

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Presumably whichever one was of a higher order (Count 1st/2nd/3rd class?)

[Robert Vermaat]

With overlapping commands, who would have seniority?

I was thinking of regional overlapping. Essentially, the dux would be in command of the border, the comes in command of defense against enemies that had broken into the hinterland. Different jobs. they would most likely both answer directly to the local magister militum who commanded the province or diocese.

One could argue that a comes was in command of troops that were higher on the payscale, therefore he had a higher rank than a dux, but I'm afraid that mostly modern convenience, I think there is no evidence for us to base that on.

[Logarythmus]

Ok I've completed my table, everything is in order unless with the comites.

I think the comites are preeminent until they appear section XXII while the ducis are far below in the ND.

The "comites" are not transverse authorities because one comes is designated for one province as it is presented on the ND : Uiri spectabilis comites Orientis !

Do I understand it in the right way ?

[Robert Vermaat]

The "comites" are not transverse authorities because one comes is designated for one province as it is presented on the ND : Uiri spectabilis comites Orientis !
Do I understand it in the right way ?

Ah, I see the problem.

"Sub dispositione viri spectabilis comitis Orientis provinciae infrascriptae"
I don't read this as multiple comites, one for each province, but 'under the honorable count of the East are listed the following", followed by the provinces . The comes mentioned here is not a 'military count' but the governor of the diocese. He did not command any troops directly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diocese_of_the_East

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Robert is correct in his translation. This man is one of the count three classes, (Primi, Secundi, et Tertii Ordines) and the term Comes is referring to him as such, and not in the military use of the term.

[Logarythmus]

Ok, thank you all for precisions about the comes.

I've completed my table, revised the effectif's units and corrected the commandment issues. This part should be all right now.

[Renatus]

"Sub dispositione viri spectabilis comitis Orientis provinciae infrascriptae"
I don't read this as multiple comites, one for each province, but 'under the honorable count of the East are listed the following", followed by the provinces .

This comment may be superfluous in the light of subsequent posts but I will make it anyway. Viri, spectabilis and comitis are genitive singulars, so a literal translation would be 'Under the direction of the admirable man the Count of the East, the provinces written below'.