MINISTRY OF CULTURE AND NATIONAL IDENTITY

NATIONAL HISTORY MUSEUM OF TRANSYLVANIA

ACTA MVSEI
NAPOCENSIS
53/I
PREHISTORY-ANCIENT HISTORY-ARCHAEOLOGY

CLUJ ‑ NAPOCA
2016
EDITORIAL BOARD:
Editorial Scientific Board: Ioan Piso, Eugenia Beu‑Dachin, Irina Nemeti, Florian Matei‑Popescu,
Felix Marcu, Viorica Rusu‑Bolindeţ.
Volume editors: Eugenia Beu‑Dachin, Irina Nemeti.
Image processing: Dana Gheorghe Șerban.
Cover: Török Károly.
Technical editing and printing: MEGA Print SRL, Cluj‑Napoca.

HONORARY SCIENTIFIC BOARD:

Alexandru Avram (Le Mans, France), Mircea Babeș (Bucharest, Romania), Mihai Bărbulescu
(Rome, Italy), Sorin Cociș (Cluj‑Napoca, Romania), Alexandru Diaconescu (Cluj‑Napoca,
Romania), Werner Eck (Köln, Germany), Nicolae Gudea (Cluj‑Napoca, Romania), Rudolf
Haensch (Munich, Germany), Manfred Hainzmann (Graz, Austria), William Hanson
(Glasgow, United Kingdom), Ian Haynes (London, United Kingdom), Marietta Horster
(Mainz, Germany), Kovács Péter (Piliscsaba, Hungary), Fritz Mitthof (Vienna, Austria),
György Németh (Budapest, Hungary), Coriolan H. Opreanu (Cluj‑Napoca, Romania),
Constantin C. Petolescu (Bucharest, Romania), C. Sebastian Sommer (Munich, Germany),
Tudor Soroceanu (Berlin, Germany), Rainer Wiegels (Osnabrück, Germany).

This volume was printed with the financial support of the Ministry of Culture.

Founder: Constantin Daicoviciu

ACTA MVSEI NAPOCENSIS ACTA MVSEI NAPOCENSIS

Publicaţia Muzeului Naţional Publication of the National History Museum
de Istorie a Transilvaniei of Transylvania
Orice corespondenţă se va adresa: All correspondence will be sent to the address:
Muzeului Naţional de Istorie National History Museum
a Transilvaniei of Transylvania
400020 Cluj‑Napoca 400020 Cluj‑Napoca
Str. Constantin Daicoviciu nr. 2 Constantin Daicoviciu St. no. 2
Tel: 0040 264 595677 Tel: 0040 264 595677
Fax: 0040 264 591718 Fax: 0040 264 591718
email: [email protected] email: [email protected]

Cover: Satue base from Porolissum (foto R. Zăgreanu).

ISSN 1454–1513

Copyright: © Muzeul Naţional de Istorie a Transilvaniei

 CONTENTS

ARTICLES AND STUDIES

Tibor-Tamás Daróczi
Early Minoan Domestic Architecture. A preliminary study of Cretan Early Bronze
Age domestic architecture, building materials and techniques 9

Mihai Rotea, Nicolae Har, Luminiţa Săsăran, Monica Bodea

Stone artifacts from the Coţofeni settlement in Bretea Mureşană. Geo‑archaeological
analyses 61

Viorica Crișan, Paul Pupeză

Dacian fortresses (almost) without weapons. Covasna – Fairies Fortress 73

Alin Henţ
Implements in “military context” from Orăștie Mountains 85

Péter Kovács
Kaiser Constans und Pannonien 93

Ádám Szabó
The seat of the Provincial Assembly and the Forum Provinciae of Pannonia Inferior
during Trajan’s Age 107

Juan Ramón Carbó García

STVDIA DACICA ET PARTHICA (III): Las campañas párticas de Trajano a
Galieno y la difusión de cultos de origen oriental en la Dacia romana 121

Sorin Nemeti
The Reliefs on Trajan’s Column and Dio’s text. The First Dacian War and Imperial
Propaganda 137

George Cupcea
On Police and Administrative Duties of the Roman Military: regionarii 151

Liviu Petculescu, Marius Barbu

Roman swords from Micia 177
Luciana Nedelea
Pontic sigillata at Potaissa. New data regarding the import of fine ware in Roman
Dacia at castra legionis V Macedonicae 185

Radu Iustinian Zăgreanu

Votive statue bases and votive altars from Porolissum 203

REVIEWS
Mihai Bărbulescu, Arheologia azi, în România / Archaeology today, in Romania,
Editura Idea Design & Print, Cluj 2016, 224 pages (Sorin Nemeti) 249

Juan Ramón Carbó García, Apropiaciones de la Antigüedad. De getas, godos, Reyes

Católicos, yugos y flechas, Anejos de la Revista de Historiografía N° 3, Universidad
Carlos III, Madrid 2015, 270 pages, 29 figures (Sorin Nemeti) 255

Andrei Oișteanu, Sexualitate și societate. Istorie, religie și literatură / Sexuality and

society. History, religion and literature, Editura Polirom, Iași 2016, 664 pages (Alin
Constantin) 259

Abbreviations 287
 Acta Musei Napocensis, 53/I, 2016, p. 151–176

ON POLICE AND ADMINISTRATIVE DUTIES

OF THE ROMAN MILITARY: REGIONARII*

GEORGE CUPCEA

Abstract: Administration and internal security is at least as important for the Roman Empire
as the defence from the external enemies. However, at least seemingly, the former is a much more
complex and encrypted system and much more difficult to analyse in our modern way of thinking.
One of the most important aspects of administration is internal security, a task best performed
by military or paramilitary units. One of the least understood such systems is the involvement of
professional military personnel in provincial administration, justice delivery and internal security.
Out of the immense variety of military cadre available to the governor or Emperor, for such a task,
the centurion seems to be the most versatile professional officer ever created by the Roman army.
But solely a particular status of the centurion is in discussion here, that of regionarius.
Keywords: internal security; regionarii; centurions; Roman army; administration.
Rezumat: Administraţia și securitatea internă sunt cel puţin la fel de importante pentru
Imperiul Roman ca apărarea sa de pericolele externe. Cu toate acestea, cel puţin aparent, pri‑
mul aspect este un sistem mult mai complex și criptat, în același timp mai dificil de analizat
cu sistemul modern de gândire. Una dintre cele mai importante ramuri ale administraţiei este
securitatea internă, o sarcină ce se potrivește optim structurilor militare și paramilitare. Unul
dintre cele mai puţin înţelese astfel de sisteme este implicarea activă a personalului militar
în administraţia provincială și centrală, precum și în aplicarea justiţiei și securităţii interne.
Din imensa varietate a cadrelor militare disponibile guvernatorului sau împăratului pentru o
asemenea misiune, centurionul pare să fie cel mai versatil ofiţer profesionist creat vreodată de
armata romană. Însă doar un statut particular al centurionului va fi în discuţie aici, regionarius.
Cuvinte cheie: securitate internă; regionarii; centurioni; armata romană; administraţie.

The matter of internal security in the provinces of the Empire has been for long
an interesting subject for the scholar of the Roman army, and not only. The gallery of
works on the subject is opened by the important studies of R. Cagnat and O. Hirschfeld,
both published more than a century ago, concerning the police forces of the Roman
Empire1. They are the first that discuss the role of the military in the internal security of
the provinces, which seems to be rather significant. There are few literary sources that
confirm this acceptance2, backed up by the increasing amount of epigraphic and papy‑
rological evidence nowadays. Even though that by the time of Hirschfeld, it seemed
obvious that the internal security of the provinces was also ensured by the military,
deployed, especially as beneficiarii consularis, in the system of stationes3, we now know
* This paper was supported by the Babes‑Bolyai University of Cluj‑Napoca, Romania, through the pro‑
gramme Grants for Young Researchers, contract no. 31786/2016.
1
Cagnat 1880; Hirschfeld 1891, 845–877.
2
Plin. Ep. 10.77–78; Tert. Apol. 2: latronibus investigandis per universas provincias militaris statio
sortitur; Hirschfeld 1891, 862, 864; Zwicky 1944, 83; Fuhrmann 2012, 222.
3
Hirschfeld 1891, 862.
152 George Cupcea

that things are not that simple and homogenous, plus it is obvious that the Roman sys‑
tem had to adapt to the Hellenistic one, in the East4.
This general opinion is consequently reduced in scale, as at the middle of the
20th century, scholars begin to separate the two branches of Roman administration5.
Therefore, we come to the point where we notice that for police and security reasons,
the military were used exclusively where other civilian institutions are missing and
the stationes system is typical to this phenomenon6. The main tool of the governor to
enforce his jurisdiction in the territory is his officium. Together with the ranking sol‑
diers, members of the officium consularis, the governor sometimes needed authority
to be expressed professionally in the field, thus calling on the legionary centurions of
his provincial army. One can assume a translation of subordination of such a centu‑
rion, from the legatus legionis to the provincial governor7. These officers usually have
their mission clearly stated in their title, e.g. praepositus. The origins of their usage
in provincial administration goes further back, to the time of Caesar and Augustus,
which dispatched Roman officers as commanders of auxiliary units and administrators
of newly subdued communities. They were first used as praefecti civitatium, especially
after the harsh lesson of the rebellion from Pannonia, when Augustus put the whole of
Illyricum under a very strict military administration system.
However, the multitude of tasks and missions a centurion could have been entrusted
with is not the subject of this discussion, but more precisely one – regionarius. The term
is clearly connected to the regio, which, in its primary sense, used in the municipal
language, is synonym to territorium, meaning the area of extension of a magistrate’s
jurisdiction8. As can be seen from epigraphic evidence, in some cases, regiones can be
considered also administrative subunits of a city’s territorium, in this case corresponding
to the pagi of the West or to the chora of the East9. Regio can also mean an uncharted
territory inhabited by Barbarians10 or an area of imperial estate/property. From the
2nd century onwards, the regiones in discussion in this paper have the significance of
marginal territories of the Empire, mostly rural, characterized by the lack of urban insti‑
tution or influence. It is the manner in which Roman Imperial authority is enforced in
areas with administrative and security deficiencies11, or the rural administrative districts
where the imperial special interests were predominant12. It is precisely these non‑urban,
militarized regions that need the military commissioners that are the centuriones regio-
narii13, as compensation for the lack of professional civil administrators14.

4
Hirschfeld 1891, 865–867; Hirschfeld 1913, 613–623.
5
Significant work on the matter by Alston 1999; Echols 1958, 377–385; Nippel 1984, 20–29; Nippel
1995; Baumann 1996; Brélaz 2005; Campbell 2002 etc.
6
Zwicky 1944, 82; MacMullen 1992, 259–260.
7
Mócsy 1953, 198.
8
Leveau 1993, 465.
9
Leveau 1993, 465.
10
Plin. HN. 3.4.33–37.
11
Faure 2013, 130.
12
Brélaz 2005, 264.
13
Ott 1995, 120.
14
Nelis‑Clément 2000, 237. The appointment could be done by gubernatorial decision or by request
from the community. Herz 2007, 307.
 On Police and Administrative Duties of the Roman Military: regionarii* 153

The phenomenon of regionarii is attested in different places of the Empire, at

such a level that it is tempting to say that it could have been a general tool at one time.
Situations in which the evidence occurs are almost similar, but there are no two alike,
making it difficult to draw definitive and unanimous conclusions.

The East
The situation of the Eastern half of the Empire is very specific, especially because
of the administrative background that the Romans encountered and in some extent
preserved. Somewhat opposite to the West, the East had a solid urban tradition at the
arrival of the Romans, which could not be overthrown by colonization. In most of the
cases the new administrators overlapped the already established system, altering its
contents exclusively through human resource.
Two pieces of important, while contradictory evidence, come from Asia Minor.
By 85–84 BC, Asia is divided into four regiones, which were meant to collect the
punitive tribute instated by Sulla to the communities that supported Mithridates.
Consequently, probably because most of the Anatolian communities were rural, not
organized as poleis, the Romans thought it easier to collect taxes and manage levies
in such administrative units. Therefore, the term regio is preserved in the provincial
terminology, altering its sense towards imperial estates or significant rural administra‑
tive units, not concentrated around an urban centre. This is the moment when also the
regionarii come into action15.
The only actual literary evidence connected to the title of the centuriones regiona-
rii in the East is the matter of a certain letter sent by Plinius to Trajan16. He is asking
for a centurio regionarius to be appointed from a legion in Lower Moesia to the city
of Juliopolis, at the border between Bythinia and Galatia, for public order issues. He
argues that there is a precedent to such an appointment in Byzantium, leading us
to the conclusion that even in this area of the Empire, such military administrators
and order enforcers were needed17. However, the emperor’s answer proves otherwise
and shows us the clear Imperial perspective on urban public order in the Greek East.
He refuses, arguing that, on one hand, the military cannot be involved in any urban
problem and therefore subject citizens to their will and on the other that Juliopolis is
not as important as Byzantium18.
However, the matter of centuriones regionarii in the East first came into atten‑
tion at the beginning of the 20th century, when a particular inscription of Antioch in
Pisidia was discussed19. Aurelius Dionysius, the centurion, transliterated into Greek
as regionarius (ἑκατόνταρχος ῥεγεωνάριος), honoured by the community of Antioch for
his work in the service of the citizens and ‘peace and justice keeping’, is considered as
15
Calder 1912, 82; Mitchell 1999, 29–30.
16
Plin. Ep. 10.77–78: praecepisti Calpurnio Macro clarissimo viro ut l<r>egionarium centurionem
Byzantium mitteret.
17
The centurion is called legionarius, but most authors think that this is a misspelling, as no such title
is attested: Calder 1912, 80–84; Merkelbach 1998, 114; Speidel 2009, 494.
18
Brélaz 2005, 265–266; Speidel 2009, 494.
19
IGRR III 301.
154 George Cupcea

the officer in charge with order and internal security in the city and its surroundings20.
The term used specifically in this instance reveals that the authority of the centurio
regionarius is extended over an entire regio, which had to have a specific significance
in Roman administrative practice. In this case, Mygnonia most likely extended south
of Phrygia and it had a police/internal security character, because of attestations of
stationarii, beneficiarii consularis, probably under the command of the centurion in
Antioch21. In fact, all of Asia Minor is an entirely particular area of the Empire in its
administrative evolution, Phrygia not acting as a province per se, but rather as a unity
of imperial estates, regiones and tractus, gathered in a wider district, under a freed‑
man imperial procurator, starting with Hadrian22. In this particular case, Aurelius
Dionysius is honoured by the local community for his kindness, the peace he helped
keep and the numerous lives he saved23.
The general assumption for the East is that the centuriones regionarii are in
charge with order/security maintenance and justice for entire regions, both rural and
urban24. Both literary and epigraphic sources indicate such prerogatives: Juv. Sat.
16.13–14 (a centurion acting as judge for a case between a soldier and a civilian), two
centurions of the XIth legion appointed judges by the governor25. However, they are
best attested in Egypt, where the role of centurions and other officers in the adminis‑
tration of justice is clearly visible, but apparently limited to common felonies26.
Numerous examples of papyri with petitions to security officers in the regiones
of Egypt are attested, regionarii, but also beneficiarii, decuriones. The centurions com‑
mand detachments of stationarii or beneficiarii and have larger power and competence
than their subordinates. Probably their authority over simple soldiers gave them a
larger flexibility than the other police forces27. The procedure was possibly the follow‑
ing: the victim would address the petition to the soldier/centurion, which most likely
lead the investigation, arrested the suspect and forwarded the matter to a superior,
civil authority, for judgement and sentence. Considering the number of such petitions,
more than eighty, we can assume that it was a quite efficient system28.
In a series of recent works on the matter29, all these petitions to military men were
centralized, leading to very interesting statistics. From all of them30, 41 are sent to cen‑
turions (four for centurions ὲπὶ τῶν τόπων and one for an Ἀρσινοείτῃ ἑκατοντάρχῃ), 13 for
beneficiarii (five for beneficiarii ὲπὶ τῶν τόπων, one for a βενεφικιαρίῳ ἐν τῳ Ὀξυρυγχίτῃ and

20
Regio Phrygia, according to Calder 1912, 80–84. The statue base has a couple of hexametric verses
on the side, describing the dedication from the community of Mygdonia (poetic/Homeric name of Phry‑
gia): Merkelbach, Stauber 2001, 403.
21
Hirschfeld 1891, 863–864; Calder 1912, 82–83; Fuhrmann 2012, 224; Faure 2013, 130.
22
Hirt 2010, 114.
23
Brélaz 2005, 266.
24
MacMullen 1963, 55–56.
25
CIL III 9832; according to Pollard 2000, 94.
26
MacMullen 1964, 315; Campbell 1984, 433–434; Fuhrmann 2012, 223.
27
Fuhrmann 2012, 223–224.
28
Davies 1989, 175–185. The two branches of Roman administration don’t exclude each other: Faure
2013, 136.
29
Alston 1995; Whitehorne 2004, 155–169; Gallazzi 2007, 98–100; Peachin 2007, 79–97.
30
By now, at least 81, according to Whitehorne 2004, 161–169.
 On Police and Administrative Duties of the Roman Military: regionarii* 155

another two for the same βενεφικιαρίῳ στατίζοντι ἐν Ἀρσινοείτῃ) and ten for decurions31.
The situations do not seem to indicate any clear relation between the competences of
the centurions and the administrative limits of the nomes, nor does it imply in any way
the existence of regiones in Roman Egypt. Therefore, the geographic extent of their
authority was vague32, leading to the conclusion that the denomination ὲπὶ τῶν τόπων
must have been a popular attribute of the military officer closest in the field (of this
place), rather than a Greek‑Ptolemaic variant of centurio regionarius, both expressions
intensively used in the East and West33. However, in most of the literature, this equiva‑
lence between ὲπὶ τῶν τόπων and regionarius is generally accepted34. In regard to the
contents and significance of these petitions, evidence is mixed. On one hand, a part of
them seem only to draw attention to the military in the victim’s closest vicinity (thus
the personalisation of state authority) and to demand for an inquiry, but a large part
of them actually demand the act of justice to be pursued by the officer and reparations
of all kinds35.
It was thought until recently that these Egyptian centurions have no clearly
defined area of competence, that they attend only to small matters and petty justice
and that their authority is not official, but rather given by their military reputation. At
the same time, we have at least three examples, in which the officer is denominated
along with the locality he is active in (Ἀρσινοείτης, Ὀξυρυγχίτης). However, in the north‑
ern part of Fayoum, where most of this evidence comes from36, there is no other form
of Roman authority present, and they may be the only way in which Roman law gets
to this rural, outskirt environment. Plus, the strategos of Arsinoe must have been with
duties in such an economically active place37. Therefore, even with no formal legal
training they are the only images of authority available to the simple peasants in any
marginal, scarcely Romanized area38.
The authority of the centurion and his command over a corps of soldiers in
charge with police duties in Egypt is also confirmed by the numerous examples of
ostraka from Mons Claudianus, dating from the time of Trajan, mentioning a group
of stationarii receiving furlough from their commander, the centurion. Moreover, a
centurion delegates a stationarius for the arrest of a city official, at Oxyrinchos, in AD
24239.
The situation is slightly different in Syria and Mesopotamia. In these provinces,
centurions and other soldiers, beneficiarii, stationarii, are mentioned in relation to

31
Alston 1995, 88–90. Updated by Whitehorne 2004, 161–169.
32
However, noticeable for some beneficiarii in CBFIR 647 (Montana), P.Cair.isid. 63 and 139
(Arsinoe), P.Mich.inv, 1960 (Oxyrinchos) and a centurion in P.Mich 6.425 (Arsinoe).
33
Contra Alston 1995, 93.
34
See also MacMullen 1964, 315; Campbell 1984, 432.
35
Peachin 2007, 89–91. Peachin debates the particular case of P.Sijp 15, dated AD 50–51, an extensive
petition for violence and theft, to a centurion that is in office since AD 46 (P.Thomas 5).
36
There are only 10 examples coming from the Oxyrhynchite (urban), but more than 64 coming from
the Arsinoite (predominantly rural). Whitehorne 2004, 158.
37
Whitehorne 2004, 160–161.
38
Peachin 2007, 83–84, 95–96.
39
OClaud 53–71, 108–117, between September 17 and December 11 and P.Oxy. 62, January 6. Luce‑
roni 2001, 56–60, 70.
156 George Cupcea

police duties, public order and objective surveillance or sentence enforcement40. For
example, Iulius Marinus is in charge with public order in Sphoracene, an unknown
administrative region (ἐπὶ τῆς εὐταξίας), and from that position, is called upon by a local
woman, who demands his authentication on some legal depositions that are later to be
sustained in court41. Other centurions, of III Gallica and XIV Flavia firma42, are bene‑
factors of the local communities, as they contributed to several infrastructure projects
of the city, and responsible for road security in Trachonitis43. They are most likely
regionarii, honoured by the local communities in a similar way to Aurelius Dionysius
from Antioch44. In another case, a series of centurions of IIII Scythica, from Henu,
a small Nabataean sanctuary on the road from Damascus to Bostra, are probably in
charge with road surveillance and security in the entire region, even if they are not
styled as regionarii, but they most likely are45. A certain denomination seems to be
revealed in the title of a legionnaire of VIII Augusta, a κούστως Σεία, which can very
well be the equivalent of an agens regionis ...46. In the same way, a papyrus of Azeizos,
in the territory of Bostra, Arabia, is a petition for a beneficiarius κατὰ τόπους47. To this
we can add the numerous attestations of the involvement of centurions and other
military in the police duties of Palestine, in the Gospels, recently argued in a very
comprehensive publication48.
In any case, there is no evidence for police duties of centurions or other soldiers
in the great cities of the area, with the exception of Dionysius and another few, but
those we cannot connect them particularly to the urban. The areas of competence and
expertise are almost exclusively rural, with no specific institutions, the Romans prefer‑
ring military police only where the civil one was not available49.
The East has thus its particularities even in the matter of military administra‑
tion. This is expected, as in this part of the Empire, the Roman administrative units
are overlapping the Hellenistic ones (chora) or are established immediately after the
conquest for taxation and military recruitment purposes. The language differences
and title denomination fashion excluded in most of the cases the usage of the Latin
term regionarius for the styling of the centurions in charge. However, the people and
administration of the East found some other titles for these soldiers available to them
in the field (as ἐπὶ τῶν τόπων).

40
P.Euphr. 2: κατὰ τόπους ἑκατοντάρχῳ; P.Euphr 5: Ἰουλ(ίῳ) Μαρείνῳ (ἑκατοντάρχῳ) τῷ ἐπὶ τῆς εὐταξίας
Σφωρακηνῆς …
41
P. Euphr 5, Peachin 2007, 92, dated May 27th, AD 243.
42
CIG III 4542 = IGR III 1120 and CIG III 4543 = IGR III 1121, 1122, Phaena.
43
Pollard 2000, 96; Stoll 2001, 73.
44
Stoll 2001, 73.
45
Speidel 1998, 185–186.
46
Pollard 2000, 96–97.
47
P.Bostra 1, according to Brélaz 2005, 264, n. 198 (calls him a centurion); Gascou 1999, 61–74.
48
Kyrychenko 2014.
49
Pollard 2000, 97.
 On Police and Administrative Duties of the Roman Military: regionarii* 157

Britannia
One of the best‑represented provinces of the Empire in the matter of the cen-
turiones regionarii and, at the same time having the earliest attestations, is Britain.
Scholars’ interest in the matter is rather old, and mostly stimulated by a couple of
inscriptions discovered in Ribchester – Bremetennacum Veteranorum50. The site was
the garrison of numerus equitum Sarmatarum Bremetennacensium, one of the units
raised from the bulk of Sarmatians relocated by M. Aurelius after their defeat (Cass.
Dio 71.16)51.
The first step was the recognition of the centurial sign, very schematically rep‑
resented, leading thus the way towards title reconstruction: > (centurio) leg(ionis)
praep(ositus) n(umeri) et reg(ionis), which, adjacent to revealing us the command‑
ing officer of this irregular unit, is also telling us who was the administrator of the
region52. The matter in discussion is: what was the nature of this region, so that it
needed such a military administrator. Most of the opinions orbit around the possibility
that this was the centre of an imperial estate, specifically a horse‑breeding farm, thus
needing an official, military man, in charge, appointed by the governor of York53.
An alternative solution is proposed very early by I. A. Richmond, and supported
by more recent evidence interpreted by A. R. Birley, both connecting the issue to more
social and civilian aspects of administration. Richmond proposes that the presence of
a regio here can be explained through the place’s name – Bremetennacum Veteranorum
– revealing implicitly its status, a veteran settlement. Unlike the veterans from the
colonies, the ones in rural areas received land properties inside already established
communities, along with tax exemption. They could gather in associations (consis-
tentes), led by a curator, former legionary officer54.
Such groups are known from Africa55 and also Diana Veteranorum (Upper
Moesia), Deultum Veteranorum (Thrace), both districts inhabited mostly by veterans,
inside and outside the municipal centre56. The particularity of Ribchester is that it is
probably the site where all the veterans of the 5.500 Sarmatians brought here to enlist
in the provincial army were settled. The difference however is that it never produced
an urban settlement57.
This is explainable through the initial status of the community. The Sarmatians
were brought as dediticii, and settled in the swampy, lush area that they were accus‑
tomed to. After they served in the army, the Romans continued to make use of them,
probably as peregrini58. In this regard, the more recent arguments of A. R. Birley come
50
CIL VII 218 = RIB 583; CIL VII 222 = RIB 587. First major study, Richmond 1945.
51
Richmond 1945, 15–19.
52
Richmond 1945, 20; Davies 1976, 137; Holder 1982, 70, 76; Birley 2007, 322. They both probably
come from VI Victrix, according to Holder 1982, 76.
53
Richmond 1945, 22; Davies 1976, 137.
54
Richmond 1945, 21.
55
ILS 6803; ILS 6885; ILS 9400.
56
Richmond 1945, 21–22.
57
Richmond 1945, 22.
58
Richmond 1945, 23, even though honorable service in the auxiliary units would have granted them
citizenship.
158 George Cupcea

to assistance. In the first decades after the conquest, some districts were left in the
administration of local chieftains, afterwards being transferred under military rulers.
In this category fall all the examples of centuriones regionarii from Britain, including
the two from Ribchester59.
More light is shed on the matter by the recent attestations of such regionarii
in the Vindolanda tablets60. Three centuriones regionarii are known from these tab‑
lets, all dated under Trajan61: Annius Quaestor > regionarius Luguvalio – ultimate
recipient of a recommendation letter intermediated by the prefect62; Clodius Super
> reg(ionarius) – in private correspondence with Cerealis63 and Valerius Maxim(?) >
reg(ionarius)64. Especially the first case is relevant for the discussion, as it reveals the
name of the administrative unit of the centurion – a region around Luguvalium. This
was a native settlement in the vicinity of Vindolanda, becoming in the 3rd century the
caput civitatis of a people called the Carvetii65. Their territory was probably managed
initially by a centurion, under the form of a regio, and received the right to self‑admin‑
istration only beginning with Severus66.
Therefore, soldiers and officers could play important roles as civil administrators
also, but not exclusively, in frontier regions, where it is vital not to drastically discern
between military and civil management. In this sense, the presence of the centuriones
regionarii in the area of Hadrian’s Wall is relevant, as they could be in charge with
operations of census and levy, even beyond the frontier67.
Another seemingly isolated such centurion is attested at Bath‑Aquae Sulis, ensur‑
ing the purification and restoration of a destroyed sanctuary68. The name or nature of
the region mentioned here is not known, but it may be connected to the lead mining
district of Mendip69. In any case, he is amongst the few Roman officers that attend
to architectural munificence on their own initiative, in Britain, revealing once again
a close relation to the local community70. Finally, a different regio of Britain is men‑
tioned on engravings on two brooches – fibula ex reg(ione) Lagitiense71.
To sum up, in Britain, centuriones regionarii acted as district commanders, in
charge with the administration and police of regions where civil management was not
suitable or possible, conveniently connected to the lack of urban development. The
revealing title of praepositus numeri et reg(ionis) indicated precisely that the officer was

59
Birley 2005, 14.
60
TVin II 250+add., 255+add., III 653.
61
Birley 2005, 14. They are the earliest attestations of the function, and the only form of military police
well attested in Roman Britain.
62
TVin II 250+add.
63
TVin II 255+add. Indicating the close relations between the two officers, also from the hierarchical
point of view. Faure 2013, 338.
64
TVin III 653.
65
RIB 933; Birley 2007, 323.
66
Birley 2007, 324.
67
Bowman 2006, 79.
68
CIL VII 45 = RIB 152. Probably from II Augusta, according to Holder 1982, 76.
69
Birley 2005, 14; Birley 2007, 322.
70
Blagg 1990, 20.
71
Birley 2007, 323.
 On Police and Administrative Duties of the Roman Military: regionarii* 159

the full chief of the administrative unit: the fort, the vicus and its territorium72. This
extension of title leads probably to the authority assignment in land rent, entrusted to
centurions from the time of Severus. The only problem of debate is that even though
the two centurions of Ribchester are not styled as regionarii, are they are precisely
that?73 The fact is that we can’t know exactly how they are called, as they could just as
well be >(centurio) leg(ionis) praep(ositus) n(umeri) et reg(ionarius), as the abbrevia‑
tion stands equally for both options74.

Lower Moesia
More than half of the regionarii and the centuriones regionarii of the Empire are
attested in Lower Moesia, concentrated on an area located between the Danube and
the Haemus Mts. The area of Montana has a special administrative status under Roman
rule that will be changing all throughout the 1st to the 3rd centuries AD. From the first
decades of the 1st century, we already have the garrison of cohors Sugambrorum here,
along with cohors I Montanorum and cohors Cilicum. Sometime before AD 13475, the
settlement was transferred from the province of Thracia to Lower Moesia. From about
that time we have the evidence of the garrison of cohors Sugambrorum, in a praesidium
Montanensium, and also of its dispatch to the East, where it will remain permanently76.
There are clues to the significance of the region, more precisely its overlap on
major Gold and Silver deposits, but only circumstantial, therefore leaving us with the
problem of explaining the important military presence here77. The region is not fight‑
ing Romanization, it seems to be urbanizing sometime at the middle of the 2nd century
AD and even its important position on the main route from the North (Dacia) to
Dalmatia and Thrace would not explain such a military presence. Moreover, in the 2nd
century we find an important sanctuary of Diana and Apollo here, attracting pilgrims
even from Rome, which can be related in the Balkans to precious metal extractions.
It is only such an important exploitation that would necessitate the surveillance and
escort of a mounted cohort78. In this sense, the inscription attesting a dispensator
vikarius79, imperial clerk present in several officia in Rome is the single piece of evi‑
dence for a mining district in Montana area80.
Another question is the presumed urbanization of the area. Between the two
Moesian colonies, Ratiaria and Oescus, an independent territory, with no urban

72
Richmond 1945, 24–25.
73
Birley 2007, 322–323.
74
See the above‑mentioned RIB 152 and TVin III 653, but also CIL III 12385 = AE 1895, 61; AE
1980, 828 = ISM V 239; AE 1974, 574 (Lower Moesia); CIL VIII 3029 (Africa); AE 1950, 105 = RIU 663
(Upper Pannonia); CIL III 7625 = Piso, Cupcea 2014, 115–124 (Dacia).
75
Or AD 129, according to Speidel 1984, 185. A recent work on the matter of the concerned military
units is Matei‑Popescu 2010.
76
Rankov 1983, 40–42.
77
Rankov 1983, 45.
78
Rankov 1983, 43–46. We have also some other epigraphic circumstantial evidence: argentaria, pri-
miscrinius officinae (CIL III 14209).
79
CIL III 1420739.
80
Velkov 1970 (1980); Vittinghoff 1977, 164; Rankov 1983, 47; Speidel 1984, 185; Hirt 2010, 70.
160 George Cupcea

settlement, was coagulated under the name of regio Montanensis/Montanensium.

Initially called Montanense praesidium81, military were stationed here continuously
from the creation of the province until the time of Gallienus. Adding up the departure
of legio V Macedonica from Oescus, we are left with Montana as the most important
military centre in Western Lower Moesia, mostly because its position on strategic
routes and precious metal deposits, probably in exploitation since before the Roman
conquest82. At one time, the epigraphic attestation of two decuriones83 seems to indi‑
cate the development of a municipium in the area, which can coexist with a regio, as
a city’s territory can have such subdivisions, especially in the Balkans84. At the same
time, other Roman settlements than cities (vici, oppida, regiones) could have also decu-
riones, this also being the case, as the development of DEC M of CIL III 7451 must be
dec(urio) M(ontanensium), excluding thus the municipium, as in the case of dec(urio)
Mo(ntanensium) of AE 1939, 24885. In any case, the matter remains unsolved, in the
lack of further evidence86.
The most important feature of Montana that falls into general attention is the
largest concentration of regionarii attestations in the Empire. By the half of the 2nd
century, the auxiliary garrison in Montana is replaced with a squadron of legionnaires,
probably around a centuria, mostly attested as regionarii, led by a centurio regiona-
rius87, revealing a not so common form of military administration in the Empire.
There must be two opposing motivations for this switch: the special situation
in the area, detailed above, required along with an auxiliary garrison also a corps of
legionnaires, acting as military police88, or the reduction of military presence here
can be viewed through the diminish of external threats and the pacification of inner
Moesia89. In fact, the explanation could also be rather different, revealing the need
for security and central surveillance of an Imperial estate. The fact that it stretched
until the Danube tells us that it must have covered also the farms in the area, there‑
fore requiring the presence and dispatch of these legionnaires90. Analogies are met
in Dalmatia, Dacia, Africa91, but most of them come from the silver mining area of

81
AE 1927, 95 (Phrygia).
82
Gerov 1988, 101–102.
83
CIL III 7451; AE 1939, 248.
84
Velkov 1970 (1980); Gerov 1988, 87, 105.
85
Vittinghoff 1977, 164, 185. Other civilian settlements in the vicinity of forts are led by decurions:
CIL III 1093, 1100 (Apulum) – decurio canabensium; AE 1957, 266 (Troesmis) – quinquennalis canaben-
sium. At Brigetio, it is expressed identically as at Montana – decurio Brigetionis – CIL III 4298; CIL III
4309; CIL III 4355.
86
This is not something definitive, as urban settlement and regiones so not exclude themselves: in the
cases of the Pontic shore Greek colonies, the regio seems to coincide with the former chora (see below regio
Histriae). Gerov 1988, 87.
87
Rankov 1983, 45, 58; Speidel 1984, 185; Gerov 1988, 103; Hirt 2010, 71.
88
Gerov 1988, 103.
89
Rankov 1983, 53.
90
Rankov 1983, 57–58. As a coincidence, slaves in charge with imperial estates from Italy are also
called regionarii. This interpretation reduces drastically the chances for Montana to develop into an urban
settlement (in spite of the decurions, see above, Gerov 1988.
91
CIL VIII 270 = 11451 = 23246 = AE 2008, 1606 (Casae, Africa): regione Beguensi territorio
Musulamiorum.
 On Police and Administrative Duties of the Roman Military: regionarii* 161

Dardania, in Upper Moesia, where several stationes are attested, manned by legionary
principales92.
As for the duties of the regionarii, we can only be sure of a particular interest of
the governor in the area of Montana. This must be clearly separated from the dispatch
of an entire vexillation from the legion XI Claudia, AD 155, formed from six immunes
and principales, one decurion, ex legionary horseman and 67 soldiers, all under the
command of a legionary centurion93. Consequently, the squad will become perma‑
nent and will stretch its personnel all throughout the region, in the several stationes
attested. The stationes were manned by legionnaires or legionary principales, thus the
five beneficiarii consularis in the statio of Montana, one of them entitled agens territorio
Montanensium, and the chances are slim that a centurio regionarius must have com‑
manded all of them94, as he seems to stand as a solitary form of authority in the field.
Attestations of such officers in the region are several, most of them in Montana
(3) or in the very close vicinity, at Gromšin, possibly the location of the Apollo and
95

Diana sanctuary, restored by the entire group – per reg(ionarios) Mont(anenses)96 and
a few in a more remote location to the north, on the Danube southern bank, at Almus
(2)97. Most of them come from the legion I Italica, garrisoned at Novae, the closest
one (two centurions and a vexillarius equitum legionis), with an optio from XI Claudia,
of Durostorum and a centurio regionarius, attested twice, with no legion mentioned
(probably I Italica?). Along with these, but surely later, there are three other legionary
centurions, one of I Italica98, one of XI Claudia99 and one of II Augusta100, all three
acting as commanders, praepositi, of a peculiar auxiliary unit developed apparently
from the legionary vexillation, in the 3rd century101.
Trying to reveal the meaning of the presence of these legionnaires and officers
here, we can only presume that the interest of the governor in the region was so, that
he decided this special dispatch for security reasons, at least from the middle of the 2nd
century until the reign of Severus Alexander102. However, it is still unclear as what sort
92
Rankov 1983, 49, 58.
93
CIL III 7449 = AE 2010, 1449. The optio is missing, but it seems to be replaced by the beneficiarius
consularis. However, another optio agens regione Montanensium is attested at Almus, by the Danube.
Rankov 1983, 54. At the same time, this could be an ad-hoc detachment with various logistic duties (such
as the venatores in Germany).
94
Rankov 1983, 48, 51–52; Gerov 1988, 103–104 (the centurion is replaceable by optio/beneficiarius
agens regione?); Hirt 2010, 70–71 (territorium is to be equated with regio?).
95
CIL III 12380; AE 1975, 745 = 1985, 738; AE 1957, 341.
96
CIL III 12371 = AE 1891, 80. Speidel 1984, 187; Sarnowski 1988, 100. See also CIL III 12385.
97
CIL III 7420; AE 1969–1970, 577. This confirms the extension of regio Montanesium north, until
the Danube. Rankov 1983, 54. On the east‑west axis, it seems to stretch from the western border with
Upper Moesia until approximately 30–35 km east of Montana, according to Gerov 1988, 104.
98
AE 1979, 548; AE 1987, 884.
99
AE 1985, 746.
100
AE 1979, 550.
101
N C R: numerus civium Romanorum (Rankov 1983, 58; Sarnowski 1988, 100); numerus collectum
regionariorum later transformed into cohors III Collecta (Speidel 1984, 188; identification with the police
forces of kolletiones in Lydia and Egypt, according to Urano 2011, 187–188; Fuhrmann 2012, 218–20.
Contra, Haensch 2010, 503–507).
102
Rankov 1983, 50–51, 55, 59–61, presumes also the surveillance of the mining area by imperial
procurators.
162 George Cupcea

of administration would these regionarii impose, as there is no actual proof of their

activities in imperial estates103, only presumed or circumstantial. Together with the
lack of evidence for a procurator office or any imperial mines in Montana, one could
argue that their single mission is to survey the important trade routes in the area and
traffic on them104. To sum up, it is precisely because of the special and complex interest
of the governor in the area, difficult to explain exhaustively, that it was organized as a
regio and put under military command and administration.
This can be explainable at some level when considering that this is not the only
instance where such officers and such an administration are attested in Lower Moesia.
The development, by M. P. Speidel of the abbreviation RE, as a ligature, in the title
regionarius of some centurions105, led to the discovery of another series of such centuri‑
ons in Montana, Lower Moesia and elsewhere. This evolution revealed us at least four
other cases of regionarii/centuriones regionarii in Lower Moesia.
One, coming from XI Claudia is attested 20 km south of Sexaginta Prista as
restoring the temple of Diana Plestrensis, probably commander of a regio Plestrensis106.
Another piece of evidence near the Pontic shore is the one of southern Dobruja, attest‑
ing a centurion of V Macedonica, garrisoned at Troesmis, as r(egionarius) r(egionis)
Au(gustensis/gustensium)107. Again from V Macedonica comes another centurio
regionarius, attested closer to the legionary fortress of Troesmis, raising an altar108.
Finally, in the extensive territory of Histria, several references to regio and regionarii
are attested: two of them to regio Histriae, an administrative unit whose meaning is
unclear, possibly synonym to territorium, led either by two magistri or by two archon-
tes regionis109; and another mentioning regionarii on a copy of the decision of border
establishment of Histria, dating October 25, AD 100110. These are all examples of a
strategic appointment fashion, of military in the administration of extensive, non‑
urban areas, especially popular in the 2nd century Lower Moesia.

Other provinces/The Upper Danube

A funerary inscription from Lambaesis, Numidia111, is dedicated to a soldier
of the legion III Augusta, dead at 35, by his father, C. Iulius Rullius reg(ionarius),
at the end of the 2nd century, beginning of the 3rd. A fragmentary inscription from
Lugdunensis mentions a regionarius dedicating the funerary monument to his freed‑
man, but we cannot know for sure if this is a military, much less an officer112.

103
Sarnowski 1988, 101.
104
Hirt 2010, 71.
105
Speidel 1984, 185; acknowledged by Sarnowski 1988, 99.
106
AE 1974, 574, Bali/Košov. Sarnowski 1988, 101. The capital of this presumed regio should be Sex‑
aginta Prista, where another attestation of the deity is present, AE 1954, 35.
107
CIL III 1421110 = AE 1985, 100, Sirakovo. Sarnowski 1988, 102.
108
AE 1980, 828 = ISM V 239, Horia, with the same ligature RE. Speidel 1984, 186.
109
AE 1984, 803 = ISM I 329, Histria and AE 1960, 367 = ISM V 123, near Troesmis.
110
ISM 1 67, Histria. Sarnowski 1988, 101–102.
111
CIL VIII 3029, unrecognized as such by Le Bohec 1989, 274.
112
CIL XIII 2958, Agedincum.
 On Police and Administrative Duties of the Roman Military: regionarii* 163

In the principia of the legionary fortress of Lauriacum, Noricum, a partial inscrip‑

tion of an honorary monument dedicated to Emperor Aurelian was discovered. Few
important things can be said on the text. First of all, it can be dated between AD 271
and 273 and based on the presence of the title of proconsul of the Emperor one can
assume that he was not in Rome at the time of the dedication, maybe even on visit in
Lauriacum (?). Second, there is no way of knowing for sure the unit of the centurion
Ingenuus, who dedicated the monument. The three letters VIN in the lower row were
developed in two options: a. [> (centurio) coh(ortis) - - - pra(etoriae)] / [piae] vin(dicis)
regi[onarius]; b. [> (centurio) leg(ionis) III It(alicae)] / [Aug(ustae)] Vin(delicorum)
regi[onarius]. With no evidence of a praetorian centurion acting as a regionarius, it
is tempting to accept the second option113, even if the placement of origin is rather
peculiar.
Brigetio, of Upper Pannonia, has two examples of regionarii, from which one is a
centurion. In the first case, Iulius Nigellio, originary from Septimia Flavia Siscia, was
a beneficiarius tribuni militum legionis I Adiutricis, dead at 40, with 18 years of service.
His monument is erected by his coregionarius114. The sense of coregionarius is unclear;
it could mean that the two were acting as regionarii in the same administrative unit
of Pannonia115 or that they were both coming from Siscia. I tend to support the first
opinion, because we already know of legionary principales acting as regionarii from dif‑
ferent places of the Empire, the two being therefore comrades, probably both on the
same rank or on similar ones, active in an unknown regio. This view is supported also
by an earlier piece of evidence from Brigetio, a monument dedicated to Iupiter optimus
maximus and the genius of the place, dated October 15, AD 210, by a centurion of I
Adiutrix, regionarius116. This is an important person, as he erects an honorary monu‑
ment in the health of the emperors and under the supervision of the consular governor,
therefore an official act. Such privileges are rarely given to regular centurions, except
for the primipili. This is probably the chief centurion of the regio117 also attested in the
previous inscription, an administrative unit of Pannonia still unknown by now.

Dacia
The other single province that offers substantial evidence in the matter of the
regionarii is Dacia. It is the location with the largest number of beneficiarii consularis
attested, the well‑known statio of Cășei‑Samum that offers an important amount
of information in this regard118. This military installation is changing sometime at

113
Proposed by the authors of AE 1953, 129.
114
AE 2008, 1086.
115
Supported also by Borhy 2010, 70–73.
116
AE 1950, 105 = RIU 663.
117
Mócsy 1953, 198.
118
XIII Gemina has at least three such NCO’s attested here and another in Napoca, and V Macedonica
no less than eight. See the discussion in the context of the Dacian officium consularis in Cupcea 2012. The
aedilis in Napoca (CIL III 827 = 7633) is in service at Samum, but highly honored by the municipal com‑
munity with a civilian function in absence. See Ardevan 1994, 199–204 and Nelis‑Clément 2000, 237. In
no circumstances this can indicate that the regio included also the city.
164 George Cupcea

the middle of the 3rd century, revealing the popular regio Ans. during the reign of
Gordian III119.
We have at least two stages of the military installations in the area of the auxil‑
iary fort of Cășei. The first dates from the time of Severus Alexander and marks the
existence of a statio, attested through ten of the fourteen monuments discovered in
the fort120. Only in four of them the concrete mention of a statio appears, in different
forms: agens in munere stationis121, agens curam stationis122 or iterato agens statione123.
At this stage, the beneficiarii are acting commanders of the statio that bears no actual
name nor the mention of any special mission124.
The second stage of the military installations in this area dates from the time
of Gordian III. In the four monuments datable at this time no mention of a statio
appears, but that of a regio, namely regio Ans(?). In this regio, the acting regionarii are
legionary principales, beneficiarii consularis. The nature of their activity here is men‑
tioned under the form of agens sub signis Samum cum regione Ans.125, agens sub signis
regione Ans.126 or agens Samo cum regione Ans. sub segnis127.
First of all, we cannot tell if the beneficiarii of this time still command the installa‑
tion that they man. This is somewhat normal, because this time it is not a simple statio,
but of an administrative unit under military control, regio, which, after all analogies,
should have been under the command of a centurio regionarius. The beneficiarii are
agentes sub signis, meaning members of a military unit, which may have its own sig-
num128. As far as the territorial limits of their activity, it is also mentioned, as Samum
cum regione Ans., therefore the fort and vicus Samum plus a regio in the surrounding
area129. The nature of this regio is basically unknown, because the abbreviation Ans.
doesn’t offer us the necessary detail130.
It’s equally peculiar how the regio overlapped the territory of an auxiliary fort,
even if the places of discovery of the monuments do not necessarily imply that. In this

119
It was consequently associated to a local population of northern Dacia, which would have been under
the control of the military, in a statio, and eventually annexed in the form of a regio to an area of an Imperial
estate, which would include the salt mines of Dej to a trade tax – ansarium or to a meander – ansa of the river
Someş. However, after almost a century, during which the evidence was basically the same, no final solution
has been produced. See Isac 2003, 48–52, 57–58; Opreanu 1994, 71–74, also for the history of the subject.
120
CIL III 826; CIL III 823; CIL III 825; CIL III 7632; CBFIR 527; ILD 771; ILD 772; ILD 773; ILD
774; ILD 775. The place of discovery for all of them is the auxiliary fort.
121
CIL III 825.
122
ILD 771; ILD 772.
123
ILD 775.
124
One can only assume the number of men in a statio, but military hierarchy would act here as in any
other unit. Zwicky 1944, 84. From this stage, one more such an altar was recently discovered in the vicin‑
ity of the fort, unpublished, a dedication to Liber and Libera made by a Valentinus, b(ene)f(iciarius) co(n)
s(ularis) leg(ionis) XIII Gem(inae) Severianae (information Felix Marcu).
125
CIL III 827 = 7633.
126
CIL III 822.
127
AE 1957, 326.
128
Or are simply depicted as bearing their over dimensioned spear. Ott 1995, 106.
129
Zwicky 1944, 85–86.
130
However, the option of naming a local population after the name of the river Samus, Ansamenses,
and the naming of the whole regio after it, or the hypothetical annexation of a civitas transformed into a
regio, seem to be the least plausible.
 On Police and Administrative Duties of the Roman Military: regionarii* 165

sense, the presence of legionnaires here, controlling a territory under the supervi‑
sion of an auxiliary unit would be as peculiar, even if such situations are not without
precedent, as we can see in Montana. In that case, as discussed above, these regionarii
seem to take over the control of regio Montanensium, after the auxiliary unit has left.
The situation seems very similar to that from Cășei. Also here there is a regio named
probably after the most important settlement in its territory – Samum, and also region-
arii attested as principales of the legions in Dacia – beneficiarii consularis, which are
detached specifically with military duties, and, apparently in some kind of an ad-hoc
unit, a fact that can be deduced from the formula sub signis. Who commanded these
regionarii remains to be found out, probably a centurion131. The presence of a centurion
at the command of a statio is not regular, but we can find them in the administrative
structure of military installations and surely at the head of an entire regio132.
As for their role here, we can only assume. The analogy with Montana, which
is not the only one, could lead us to the assumption that the auxiliary unit is missing
from the fort, even if only temporary, in a time not too calm for the Empire and Dacia,
and it is replaced with a unit of regionarii. However, such assumptions should be veri‑
fied. More likely, this area, profoundly rural and fairly wild and forested needed a force
of military to ensure the public order and safety of traffic.
The area of the northern Roman frontier in Dacia is not without other references
to regiones or regionarii. Very recently, an inscription in Domnești, Bistriţa, attesting
a centurion of X Fretensis dedicating an altar to Iupiter optimus maximus Dolichenus,
was revisited. The sequence of letters following his title was not readable, leading
to assumption of a second dedicator bearing a peculiar (Dacian?) name. However,
after the revision, the inscription attests a P. Caius Valerianus > (centurio) leg(ionis) X
Fretensis reg(ionarius) r(egionis) Neridonis(- - -?)133.
This is a premiere attestation in Dacia, in all regards. First, no other centurion
regionarius is known in this region of the Empire, even though we know of more
than 120 legionary centurions in Dacia overall134. Second, we know of at least another
regio and two territoria in the Danubian province, but not of this one135. In fact, the
entire name and location of this regio Neridonis? is peculiar, because we don’t have any
resembling toponym in Dacia or around136. The only clue that we have on the matter is
the attestation of salt mining at the site of discovery137. The place is in the close vicinity
of the auxiliary fort of Orheiul Bistriţei, garrisoned by coh. I Hispanorum milliaria,

131
However, their dispatch here, with no centurion in command would not be a premiere. Ott 1995,
107. All other evidence indicates that a group of regionarii were subordinated to a centurion, including
Plin. Ep., Nelis‑Clément 2000, 69; Fuhrmann 2012, 223.
132
Faure 2013, 130, 132.
133
See Piso, Cupcea, Regionarius, 117.
134
However, in Dacia there is also the centurion C. Titius Ianuarius (AE 1959, 314 = IDR II 35, Dro‑
beta), > (centurio) leg(ionis) IIII F(laviae) f(elicis) r(egionarius). See G. Cupcea, Centurions of the IIII
Flavia legion in Dacia, in D. Micle et al (eds.), Arheovest I. In memoriam Liviu Maruia, Szeged, 2013, 349–
50; G, Cupcea, Professional Ranks in the Roman Army of Dacia, Oxford, 2014, esp. 93–112; and below.
135
Regio Ans., see above and territorium Arcobadarense (AE 2010, 1359, Ilisua), territorium Sucidaven-
sis (IDR II 190, Sucidava).
136
See Piso, Cupcea 2014, 123.
137
Also the Austrian toponym is Salzbrunn.
166 George Cupcea

revealing also one of the attestations of a conductor pascui et salinarum138. This already
known, it was thought to have been supervised by the regionarii in Samum139, but the
distance is however much too long (almost 70 km). As for the legion of the centurion,
this is X Fretensis, of Jerusalem. His presence here can only be explained through
the movements of units during the civil wars of S. Severus, when this inscription is
datable140.
To sum up, we can only assume that the centurion came along with an entire cen-
turia from Palestine during the years of Severus and remained in Dacia for a time. In
this period, he must have been appointed by the governor as administrator and chief‑
police of a regio established at the northern edge of the province. The purpose of this
appointment as well as the reason for the appointment of a centurion from another
provincial army is unclear. However, we must assume that once in Dacia, the legionary
squad of X Fretensis was under the command of the Dacian governor and therefore at
his disposal. The regio Neridonis’ connection to the presumed salt mines in the area is
as relative as the similar connection in the situation at Montana.
The second case of a centurio regionarius attested in Dacia was in plain sight
for a long time. C. Titius Ianuarius, native of Camulodunum (Britain) or Philippi
(Macedonia) dies at 56 and is burried in Drobeta141. He is attested as > LEG F F
R, letter sequence previously developed into (centurio) leg(ionis) IIII F(laviae)
fr(umentarius) / IIII F(laviae) f(elicis) (f)r(umentarius)142. This doesn’t seem to be
accurate, and the epithet felix, appearing for the IIII Flavia legion after the reign of
Trajan, should not be excluded. Indeed a look upon the inscription reveals no pause
mark between the two F’s, and moreover, a look on a similar inscription, of another
centurion of the same legion, indicates the abbreviation IIII Fl(aviae), when miss‑
ing the epithet143. In this case I would incline towards the reconstruction (centurioni)
leg(ionis) IIII F(laviae) f(elicis) / r(egionario), regarded as possible by M. P. Speidel,
however not adopted since144.
The remaining problems are the missing of the region’s name or its topographic
placement. As regiones under military supervision are placed at key points in the
Empire, Drobeta would correspond to such conditions, being the most important pas‑
sage over the Lower Danube. In such a case, a regio under military supervision in
regard to public order and traffic control is not to be excluded145, even if there is no
way of knowing if this is an administrative unit of Dacia or Upper Moesia, especially
at this moment in time when IIII Flavia is switching provinces146.

138
AE 1967, 388. Also known from IDR III/3, 119 (Micia), IDR III/1, 145 (Tibiscum) and AE 2013,
1281 (Porolissum).
139
Rankov 1983, 49.
140
Piso, Cupcea 2014, 122–123.
141
AE 1959, 314 = IDR II 35.
142
IDR II 35 and ILD 60.
143
CIL III 14484 = IDR II 34, Drobeta.
144
Speidel 1984, 186, n. 8. Confirmed also by Matei‑Popescu 2015, 297–300.
145
The case would then be very similar to the centurion dispatched from Lower Moesia to Byzantium,
described in Plin. Ep. 10.77–78.
146
Cupcea 2013, 349–350.
 On Police and Administrative Duties of the Roman Military: regionarii* 167

Gathering all the evidence, a few analyses and classifications are necessary. The
criteria that can be established are of different categories, according to geography,
utility or specific of activities.
The first fact is that the evidence is somehow equally shared between the Eastern
and Western halves of the Empire. In this sense, the East has more attestations of
centurions involved in civil administration, police duties and jurisdiction, but fewer
actually styled regionarii, because of the translation / transliteration into Greek. The
West is statistically superior in the matter of individually attested regionarii and centu-
riones regionarii, exclusively in inscriptions. In regard to the provinces where evidence
is present, these again are equally divided between the two parts of the Empire. The
East is presenting significant evidence for Egypt and Syria and also a few individual
examples for different provinces of Asia Minor. Specific to the West are a series of
provincial concentrations, as Britannia, Lower Moesia147 or Dacia, and a few indi‑
vidual attestations, in Africa, Gaul, Noricum and Pannonia. A striking fact noticeable
after this is that evidence is concentrated in a couple of critical spots on the map of the
Empire, which might lead us to the conclusion that this was not a general approach
towards administration.
Another significant topographic differentiation divides the attestations accord‑
ing to where are they located in relation to the Roman frontier, as this can be relevant
in order to establish their role and functionality. From this perspective, we can notice
that inside the same province, evidence is placed in different spots, not necessarily in
relation to the frontier. E.g. in Britain, only the attestations of Vindolanda are pre‑
cisely on the frontier, the other, significant ones, seem to indicate regiones more to
the inside of the province. The much‑debated case of Lower Moesia presents also a
double feature, as Montana is rather to the inside of the province and the evidence in
Dobruja or Sexaginta Prista seem to be connected to the frontier. The other individual
attestations on the Danube are precisely on the frontier, in Lauriacum or Brigetio,
and the other two unsure cases from the West (in Lugdunensis and Africa) seem to
be related to the interior, even if one of them is evidently connected to the military.
Finally, Dacia has most of its evidence placed on the northern frontier, but, like in the
cases of Brigetio and Lauriacum, this seems to be simply a coincidence, as these are
the key‑regions in the provinces in discussion.
As far as the East is concerned, here such classifications are not easy to make or
even relevant. If for Egypt it is evident that the centurions are tightly connected to
internal security and jurisdiction, for Syria the situation is different, as the Eastern
frontier was never a continuous line, like the European one. Here, most of the centu‑
rions are surveying roads and traffic, or isolated settlements, but these are precisely
the features of the Eastern, desert frontier. Finally, Asia Minor was a special zone to
begin with, the Roman authority preferring to induce their administrative units only
in areas where Hellenistic urbanism was not present. In this case no piece of evidence
can be regarded as being on the frontier.
147
Even though Lower Moesia is practically at the border of the two dominant cultures of the Roman
Empire, I preferred to place it in the West, because of its belonging to the European Danube frontier
system and because evidence is exclusively in Latin and of Latin origin.
168 George Cupcea

In a similar, more theoretical perspective, we could ask ourselves, depending

again on the spatial distribution of the evidence, what role did this practice have in
Roman imperialism and colonization? Applying the concepts of centre and periphery
for the Roman history, one can analyse the distribution of evidence and attempt to
draw conclusions from it. In our case, with few exceptions, almost all the attestations
are found in periphery areas, even those from urban centres being connected mostly
with the process of the integration of the hinterland.
But perhaps the most relevant of the criteria is that of functionality. From this
perspective one can attempt to decipher the role and function of the administrative
units and of their personnel in each of the cases. Even if in more than one such case we
cannot establish a definitive functionality, reasonable suppositions allow us to at least
attempt such an analysis. However, the cases described below are very dual in their
nature, a fact which makes it very difficult to pinpoint one or another functionality.
One of the first functionalities that comes in mind is the public security on areas
in imperial property. This seems to be the case for at least four of the provinces where
evidence is known. E.g. in Britain, the regio in the vicinity of Bremetennacum is
thought to have included an imperial horse breeding estate, but, at the same time it
could stand as evidence for a rural administrative unit dedicated to the integration of
the colonized natives into Roman civilization. Another case in Britain, of Bath‑Aquae
Sulis, could also be connected to the Lead mines attested in the area. The most trou‑
bling such case is that of Montana, where evidence for an imperial Gold and Silver
mining estate is doubtful, at most circumstantial. Still, it is impossible to deny the
possibility, even if a clear separation must be made between the actual administration
of the mines and the police and security concerns in the area. Dacia is again relevant
from this point of view, with both of its two regiones being attested on the northern
frontier, but also in areas where salt mines are presumed or even attested in Roman
times. This is again a duality that can lead to vicious assumptions. As far as the East is
concerned, the only situation where such a connection could be established is at Mons
Claudianus, in Egypt.
The second most important functionality of the regiones and regionarii that we
have to take into account is community administration, directed especially to those
who are less than a proper urban Roman establishment, with all its civil administrative
features. In this category fall the already mentioned example of Bremetennacum and
the other attestations from Hadrian’s Wall. Already on the Danube, the examples of
Lauriacum and Brigetio could be included in this category, as well as the ones from the
eastern part of Lower Moesia and the Pontic shore. In all these cases, evidence for their
inclusion in this category of functionality is circumstantial, but it falls into the broader
approach towards rural, isolated, native communities, unable to self‑govern and on
their way to Romanization. It is not necessary to assume that the army had legal control
over civilians in their settlements, only police, public order and investigating tasks148.
The East is again different from this perspective, gathering almost exclusively
the evidence for the police and jurisdiction functionalities. The vast majority of the

148
Salway 1969, 273–274.
 On Police and Administrative Duties of the Roman Military: regionarii* 169

attestations in Egypt look in this direction. They are accompanied by the security
missions of the centurions on Syria and Palestine, by the individual and very relevant
case of Aurelius Dionysius of Antioch in Pisidia, and, of course by the confirma‑
tion for such interests in the correspondence between Younger Pliny and Emperor
Trajan.
From many perspectives, the papyrologic evidence of Egypt is the most relevant.
Here, and perhaps everywhere in the Roman world, the best known point of contact
between rural civilians and the military is the district centurion. His power rested in
two factors: their ability to call on military force and their political power as represen‑
tatives of the governor and of the Roman authorities. In Egypt, they seem to serve in
civilian settlements for a brief period of time, and are responsible to the epistrategoi
and prefect149. They are regularly called back to the capital, not only to issue reports
and receive special missions, but also to participate in more informal manifestations,
as the celebration of the Imperial birthday150. It is in this way that the centurion culti‑
vates his connection to the central authority and is better seen in the territory as the
expression of that authority. He is, in this case, the ‘tie that binds’ the higher civilian
authorities to the villages with no proper political organization. Through this vital
agent, the regular rural citizen transfers his problems into the official Roman sys‑
tem151. Therefore, even if these centurions remain political figure, they are also agents
of the local communities.
There is no particular reason why we cannot apply this principle at the entire
scale of the evidence. The model is practically applicable in all other provinces and
particular situation where regionarii are attested. The only slightly different situation
is that of cities, where, at least in theory, the military would prefer not to interfere
with the civilian administration and public order institutions. This however, with a
few exceptions, out of which the case of Dionysius of Antioch in Pisidia is the most
resounding. But he is not the only one in such a situation. Aulus Instuleius Tenax,
centurion of X Fretensis, is highly honoured by the boule and demos of the city of
Ashkelon, in Palestine, on account of his goodwill towards the city152. The honorific
inscription of Ashkelon is set on a statue basis, precisely in the civil centre of the city
(the basilica and bouleuterion), together only with one other person, an important
local citizen153. His role and relation to the community must have been highly impor‑
tant to the city, if they decided to honour him in such an official manner, practically
identical to the case of Antioch. In other urban situations, centurions act as iudices
dati, and their special task is mentioned in similar honorary inscriptions154. The active
involvement of officers, especially centurions, in the process of police and justice inqui‑

149
Alston 1999, 187.
150
P.Oxy IX. 1185, a letter sent to the strategoi, in which the prefect asks that the centurions be
reminded to return to Alexandria to celebrate the Imperial birthday. Alston 1999, 188.
151
Alston 1999, 188–189.
152
AE 1923, 83, also known from CIL III 30, dated AD 65, when he became a primus pilus of the legion
XII Fulminata. On his story see Eck 2015, 145–160.
153
Boehm, Master, Le Blanc 2016, 271–324.
154
CIL V 923 – a praetorian centurion is iudex in Aquileia and CIL II 1183 – a primus pilus is a highly
appreciated iudex in Romula, Baetica, honoured by the consistentes. See also Peachin 2007, 93.
170 George Cupcea

ries is confirmed also by juridical sources155, their competence being extended even to
those of acting judge156.
As a detail, the regionarii have a lot in common with the stationarii, in title
and function, acting as military police detached in the provinces to maintain order
and security in a designed area of control. They are not however equal, as the former
are mainly legionary centurions, and the latter are merely soldiers, the former are
in charge of a specific post, the latter of an entire regio. This kind of assignments is
just a part of the numerous functions that centurions can fulfil in the service of the
provincial governor. They are, in this case, detached in civil environment, rural or
seldom urban, where they assume great responsibilities in security administration in
their regio. The title itself implied greater responsibilities than those of a regularly
serving centurion, otherwise not being necessary157. All that true, we cannot argue
that they were part of a regular omnipresent system, with well‑defined police stations
or clearly limited competences, not that they are acting as vexillation commanders, as
that would be a completely different appointment.

To sum up, this practice in Roman military police and administration seems
to be in use as early as Trajan and as late as the second half of the 3rd century AD158.
Legionary centurions were one of the best tools at the disposal of the governors, their
versatility and implicit authority in both military and civilian environments insuring
them the special position in the gubernatorial staff. The variety of their task reveals
exactly this, that they were pretty much used whenever, wherever and however was
needed. The single common point that we can establish in their functionality and their
practice is that they were always acting on behalf of the governor that dispatched
them159. The spatial and temporal distribution would not point to anything else but
official, central interest of the governor (or of the Emperor, through the governor) in
an area, community or resource. Whether this interest occurred intentionally or was
provoked by the lack of Roman authority in an area are merely matters of coincidence,
but at the same time it is the proof that the Romans preferred to administrate as
simple as possible but to enforce their power everywhere160. The centurions could act
just as well as police officers, community leaders or administrators, tax collectors or
levy officers. From all these missions, one seemed especially attractive to the Roman
military, that of administrating public order and justice, as it is revealed by this cen‑
turion’s versified inscription161: [O]ptavi Dacos tenere caesos tenui / [opt]avi in sella
155
Modestinus, in Dig. 47.2.73: Sempronia libellos composuit quasi datura centurioni, ut ad officium
transmitterentur, sed non dedit: Lucius pro tribunali eos recitavit quasi officio traditos: non sunt inventi in
officio neque centurioni traditi ...
156
Euseb. Hist. eccl. 6.41.21 and Dig. 5.1.61.1.
157
Fuhrmann 2012, 222, 225. They can also handle the recruitment of burgarii for the interior watch‑
towers (CIL III 13795 = ILS 8909 = IDR II 587, Rakovitza, Upper Moesia).
158
Faure 2013, 131, denying that this is a Severan practice.
159
In this sense, the centurion requested by Plinius would have reported to him, once dispatched from
the army of Moesia, in the same way, the centurion regionarius of Domnești, Dacia, even if from X Freten-
sis, would report to the Dacian governor.
160
Peachin 2007, 97.
161
AE 1928, 37 = IDRE II 456, Aquae Flavianae, Numidia.
 On Police and Administrative Duties of the Roman Military: regionarii* 171

pacis residere sedi / [o]ptavi claros sequi triumphos factum / optavi primi commoda
plena pili hab[ui] / optavi nudas videre Nymphas vidi. He considers the seat of judge
(sella pacis sedere)162 one of his greatest achievements, worth to be mentioned along
with the primipilate and war triumph.

Bilbiography
Alston 1995 R. Alston, Soldier and Society in Roman Egypt. A Social History,
London 1995.
Alston 1999 R. Alston, The Ties that bind: soldiers and societies. In: A. Goldsworthy,
I. Haynes (eds.), The Roman Army as a Community, JRA, Suppl.
34, 1999, 175–195.
Ardevan 1994 R. Ardevan, Die Beneficiarier im Zivilleben der Provinz Dakien. In
E. Schallmayer (ed.), Der römische Weihebezirk von Osterburken
II, Stuttgart 1994, 199–204.
Baumann 1996 R. Baumann, Crime and punishment in Ancient Rome, London –
New York 1996.
Birley 2005 A. R. Birley, The Roman Government of Britain, Oxford 2005.
Birley 2007 A. R. Birley, Two types of administration attested by the Vindolanda
tablets. In: R. Haensch, J. Heinrichs (eds.), Herrschen und
Verwalten. Der Alltag der römischen Administration in den Hohen
Kaiserzeit, Böhlau, Wien 2007, 306–324.
Blagg 1990 T. F. C. Blagg, Architectural Munificence in Britain: The Evidence of
Inscriptions, Britannia, 21, 1990, 13–31.
Le Bohec 1989 Y. Le Bohec, La Troisième légion Auguste, Paris 1989.
Boehm, Master, Le Blanc R. Boehm, D. M. Master, R. Le Blanc, The basilica, bouleuterion
2016 and civic center of Ashkelon, AJA, 120, 2, 2016, 271–324.
Borhy 2010 L. Borhy, COREG, Legio VII Claudia, Ala I Contariorum milli-
aria civium Romanorum – Neue Angaben zur Militärgeschichte von
Brigetio: Spolien eines Steinkistengrabs aus dem Gerhát–Gräberfeld.
In: L. Borhy (ed.), Studia Celtica Classica Et Romana Nicolae
Szabo Septuagesimo Dedicata, Budapest 2010, 65–77.
Bowman 2006 A. K. Bowman, Outposts of empire: Vindolanda, Egypt and the
empire of Rome, JRA, 19, 2006, 75–93.
Brélaz 2005 C. Brélaz, La sécurité publique en Asie Mineure sous le Principat
(Ier‑IIIème s. ap. J.‑C.). Institutions municipals et institutions impéri‑
ales dans l’Orient romain, SBA 32, Basel 2005.
Cagnat 1880 R. Cagnat, De municipalibus et provincialibus militiis in imperio
Romano, Paris 1880.
Calder 1984 W. M. Calder, Colonia Caesareia Antiocheia, JRS, 2, 1912, 78–109.
Campbell 1984 B. Campbell, The Emperor and the Roman Army, Oxford 1984.
Campbell 2002 B. Campbell, War and Society in Imperial Rome, London – New
York 2002.
Cupcea 2012 G. Cupcea, Officium consularis. The Evidence of Dacia, Transylvanian
Review, 3, 2012, 243–254.

162
Equated with the position of centurio regionarius by Speidel 2010, 182–184.
172 George Cupcea

Cupcea 2013 G. Cupcea, Centurions of the IIII Flavia legion in Dacia. In:
A. Stavilă, D. Micle, A. Cîntar (eds.), Arheovest I. In memoriam
Liviu Măruia, Szeged 2013, 343–355.
Davies 1976 R. W. Davies, ‘Singulares’ and Roman Britain, Britannia, 7, 1976,
134–144.
Davies 1989 R. W. Davies, The Investigation of Some Crimes in Roman Egypt.
In: D. Breeze, V. A. Maxfield (eds.), Service in the Roman Army,
Edinburgh 1989, 175–185.
Echols 1958 E. Echols, The Roman City Police, ClJ, 53, 1958, 377–385.
Eck 2015 W. Eck, Statuenehrungen als Zeugnis für den Einfluss römischer
Amtsträger im Leben einer Provinz. In: L. Bryce, D. Slootjes (eds.),
Aspects of Ancient Institutions and Geography: Studies in Honor of
Richard A. Talbert, Leiden 2015, 145–160.
Faure 2013 P. Faure, L’aigle et le cep. Les centurions légionnaires dans l’Empire
des Sévères, Bordeaux 2013.
Fuhrmann 2012 Ch. Fuhrmann, Policing the Roman Empire, Oxford 2012.
Gallazzi 2007 C. Gallazzi, Petizione a un beneficiaries. In: A. Sriks, K. A. Worp
(eds.), Papyri in memory of P. J. Sijpesteijn, American Society of
Papyrologists, Chippenham 2007, 98–100.
Gascou 1999 J. Gascou, Unités administratives locales et fonctionnaires romains.
Les données des nouveau papyrus du Moyen Euphrate et d’Arabie.
In: W. Eck, E. Muller‑Luckner (eds.), Lokale Autonomie und
römische Ordnungsmacht in der kaiserzeitlichen Provinzen von 1.
bis 3. Jahrhundert, München 1999, 61–74.
Gerov 1988 B. Gerov, Landownership in Roman Thracia and Moesia (1st–3rd
century), Amsterdam 1988.
Haensch 2012 R. Haensch, Kolletiones et canalicularii. In: C. Wollf (ed.), Le
métier de soldat dans le monde romain: actes du cinquième congres
de Lyon (23–25 septembre 2010), Lyon 2012, 503–511.
Herz 2007 P. Herz, Finances and Costs of the Roman Army. In: P. Erdkamp
(ed.), A Companion to the Roman Army, Oxford 2007, 306–322.
Hirschfeld 1891 O. Hirschfeld, Die Sichercheitspolizei im römischen Kaiserreich,
Sitzungsberichte der Königlich Preussischen Akademie der
Wissenschaften zu Berlin, Berlin 1891, 845–877.
Hirschfeld 1913 O. Hirschfeld, Die ägyptische Polizei der römischen Kaiserzeit nach
Papyrusurkunden, Kleine Schriften, Berlin 1913, 613–623.
Hirt 2010 A. M. Hirt, Imperial Mines and Quarries in the Roman World
(Organizational Aspects 27 BC – AD 235), Oxford 2010.
Holder 1982 P. A. Holder, The Roman Army in Britain, London 1982.
Isac 2003 D. Isac, The Roman auxiliary fort Samum‑Cășeiu, Cluj‑Napoca
2003.
Kyrychenko 2014 A. Kyrychenko, The Roman Army and the Expansion of the Gospel.
The Role of the Centurion in Luke‑Acts, Berlin – Boston 2014.
Leveau 1993 Ph. Leveau, Territorium urbis. Le territoire de la cité romaine et ses
divisions: du vocabulaire aux réalités administratives, REA, 95, 3–4,
1993, 459–471.
Luceroni 2001 M. F. P. Luceroni, Gli stationarii in età Imperiale, Serta Antiqua et
Mediaevalia III, Roma 2001.
MacMullen 1963 R. MacMullen, Soldier and Civilian in the Later Roman Empire,
Cambridge 1963.
 On Police and Administrative Duties of the Roman Military: regionarii* 173

MacMullen 1964 R. MacMullen, Imperial Bureaucrats in Roman Provinces, Harvard

Studies in Classical Philology 68, 1964.
MacMullen 1992 R. MacMullen, Enemies of the Roman Order. Treason, Unrest and
Alienation in the Empire, London 19922.
Matei‑Popescu 2010 F. Matei‑Popescu, The Roman Army in Moesia Inferior, Bucharest
2010.
Matei‑Popescu 2015 F. Matei‑Popescu, Note epigrafice (VI), SCIVA, 66, 3–4, 2015,
297–306.
Merkelbach 1998 R. Merkelbach, Centurio Regionarius (zu Plinius Epist. X 77/8),
EA, 30, 1998, 114.
Merkelbach 2001 R. Merkelbach, J. Stauber (eds.), Steinepigramme aus dem
griechischen Osten Band 3: Der “Ferne Osten” und das
Landesinnere bis zum Tauros, München 2001.
Mitchell 1999 S. Mitchell, The Administration of Roman Asia from 133 BC
to AD 250. In: W. Eck (ed.), Lokale Autonomie und römische
Ordnungsmacht in der kaiserzeitlichen Provinzen von 1. bis 3.
Jahrhundert, München 1999, 17–46.
Mócsy 1953 A. Mócsy, Das territorium legionis und die canabae in Pannonien,
AArchHung, 3, 1953, 179–200.
Nelis‑Clément 2000 J. Nelis‑Clément, Les Beneficiarii: militaires et administrateurs au
service de l’Empire (Ier s. a.C. – VIe s. p.C.), Bordeaux 2000.
Nippel 1984 W. Nippel, Policing Rome, JRS, 74, 1984, 20–29.
Opreanu 1994 C. H. Opreanu, Misiunile benficiarilor consulari pe limes-ul de nord
al Daciei in secolul al III-lea, ActaMN, 31, 1994, 69–78.
Ott 1995 J. Ott, Die Beneficiarier. Untersuchungen zu ihrer Stellung inner‑
halb der Rangordnung des römischen Heeres und zu ihrer Funktion,
Historia Einzelschriften 92, Stuttgart 1995.
Peachin 2007 M. Peachin, Petition to a centurion from the NYU papyrus collec-
tion and the question of informal adjudication performed by soldiers
(P.Sijp.15). In: A. Sriks, K. A. Worp (eds.), Papyri in memory of
P.J. Sijpesteijn, American Society of Papyrologists, Chippenham
2007, 79–98.
Piso, Cupcea 2014 I. Piso, G. Cupcea, Ein centurio regionarius aus der legio X Fretensis
in Dakien, Tyche, 29, 2014, 115–124.
Pollard 2000 N. Pollard, Soldiers, Cities and Civilians in Roman Syria, Ann
Arbour 2000.
Rankov 1983 N. B. Rankov, A contribution to the military and administrative his-
tory of Montana. In: A. G. Poulter (ed.), Ancient Bulgaria. Papers
Presented to the International Symposium on the Ancient History
and Archaeology of Bulgaria, University of Nottingham, 1981, Vol.
2, 1983, 40–73.
Richmond 1945 I. A. Richmond, The Sarmatae, Bremetennacvm Veteranorvm and
the Regio Bremetennacensis, JRS, 35, 1945, 15–29.
Salway 1969 P. Salway, The Position of Civilians in the Frontier areas of the Roman
Empire. A note on O.G.I.S. 519, II.15–16, CR, 19, 3, 1969, 273–274.
Sarnowski 1988 T. Sarnowski, Quellenkritische Bemerkungen zu den Polizeikräften
in Niedermoesien, Eos, 66, 1988, 99–104.
Speidel 1984 M. P. Speidel, Regionarii in Lower Moesia, ZPE, 57, 1984, 185–188.
174 George Cupcea

Speidel 1998 M. A. Speidel, Legio IIII Scythica, its movements and men. In:
D. L. Kennedy (ed.), The Twin Towns of Zeugma on the Euphrates.
Rescue Work and Historical Studies, JRA, Suppl. 27, 1998,
163–204.
Speidel 2009 M. A. Speidel, Soldaten und Zivilisten im römischen Reich. Zu mod-
ernen Konstruktionen antiker Verhältnisse. In: M. A. Speidel (ed.),
Heer und Herrschaft im römischen Reich der Hohen Kaiserzeit,
MAVORS, 16, 2009, 473–500.
Speidel 2012 M. A. Speidel, Being a Soldier in the Rornan Imperial Army –
Expectations and Responses. In: C. Wollf (ed.), Le métier de soldat
dans le monde romain: actes du cinquième congres de Lyon (23–25
septembre 2010), Lyon 2012, 175–191.
Stoll 2001 O. Stoll, Garnison und Stadt im römischen Syrien und der Arabia:
Eine Symbiose im Spiegel städtischer Münzprägungen und der
Epigraphik. In: O. Stoll (ed.), Römisches Heer und Gesellschaft,
MAVORS 13, 2001, 59–78.
Urano 2011 S. Urano, Kolletiones and Frumentarii: New Readings of Tam V
3, 1417–1418, two Petitionary Inscriptions from Ağabey Köy And
Mendechora, ZPE, 176, 2011, 179–188.
Velkov 1970 (1980) V. Velkov, Montana (The Present-Day Mihailovgrad). In: V. Velkov
(ed.), Roman Cities in Bulgaria. Collected Studies, Amsterdam
1970 (1980).
Vittinghoff 1977 F. Vittinghoff, Zur römischen Municipalisierung des lateinischen
Donau-Balkanraumes. Methodische Bemerkungen, ANRW, II, 6,
1977, 3–51.
Zwicky 1944 H. Zwicky, Zur Verwendung des Militärs in der Verwaltung der
römischen Kaiserzeit, Zürich 1944.
Whitehorne 2004 J. Whitehorne, Petitions to the Centurion: a Question of Locality?,
BASP, 41, 2004, 155–169.

George Cupcea
Babeș‑Bolyai University, Cluj‑Napoca
[email protected]
 Annex
No Name Legion Title/position Province Place Date Source
CIL III 12371 = AE 1891,
1 Artemidorus I Italica r(egionarius) Moesia Inf. Gromšin‑Montana 160 80
2 L. Messius Primus I Italica r(egionarius) Moesia Inf. Almus 157 CIL III 6125 = 7420

On Police and Administrative Duties of the Roman Military: regionarii*

3 Saturninus regionarius Moesia Inf. Montana CIL III 12380
C. Iulius
4 Saturninus regionarius Moesia Inf. Montana AE 1985, 738
CIL III 12385 = AE 1895,
6 Collective regionarii Montanenses Moesia Inf. Gromšin‑Montana 161–169 61
7 Aurelius Titus I Italica vexillarius agens reg(ione) Moesia Inf. Montana AE 1957, 341
8 C. Valerius Valens XI Claudia optio agens re(gione) Moesia Inf. Almus AE 1969–1970, 577
9 Annaeus Pulcher V Macedonica re(gionarius) Moesia Inf. Horia – RO before 168 AE 1980, 828
10 Collective regionarii V Moesia Inf. Histria ISM I 67
11 Iulius XI Claudia re(gionarius) Moesia Inf. Bali/Kosov AE 1974, 574
D. Mussidius
12 Proculus V Macedonica r(egionarius) Moesia Inf. Sirakovo AE 1895, 100
C. Severius
13 Emeritus II Augusta? reg(ionarius) Britannia Aquae Sulis CIL VII 45 = RIB 152
14 Aelius Antoninus VI Victrix praep(ositus) regi[onis] Britannia Bremetennacum 241 CIL VII 218 = RIB 583
15 T. Floridius Natalis VI Victrix? praep(ositus) regi[onis] Britannia Bremetennacum 222–235 CIL III 222 = RIB 587
16 Annius Equester regionarius Britannia Vindolanda Trajan TVind II 250+add.
17 Valerius Maximus reg(ionarius) Britannia Vindolanda Trajan TVind III 653
18 C. Iulius Rullius III Augusta? reg(ionarius) Numidia Lambaesis CIL VIII 3029
19 … regionarius Lugdunensis Agedincum CIL XIII 2958
20 Ingenuus III Italica regionarius Noricum Lauriacum AE 1953, 129
21 Aelius Paternianus I Adiutrix? coreg(ionarius) Pannonia Sup. Brigetio AE 2008, 1086
M. Aelius
22 Honoratus I Adiutrix reg(ionarius) Pannonia Sup. Brigetio 210 AE 1950, 105 = RIU 663
M. Aurelius

175
23 Moenenus V Macedonica bf cos agens regione Dacia Samum 238 CIL III 822
 176
No Name Legion Title/position Province Place Date Source
M. Valerius
24 Valentinus XIII Gemina bf cos agens regione Dacia Samum 238 CIL III 827 = 7633
P. Aelius
25 Marcellinus V Macedonica bf cos agens regione Dacia Samum 238 AE 1957, 326 = ILD 765
26 P. Gaius Valerianus X Fretensis reg(ionarius) Dacia Domnești 3rd c. CIL III 7625
27 C. Titius Ianuarius IIII Flavia r(egionarius) Dacia Drobeta 2nd c. AE 1959, 314 = IDR II 35
28 Aurelius Dionysios ἐκατόνταρχος ρεγεωνάριος Pisidia Antiocheia after 212 IGRR III 301
29 … βενεφικιαρίος ὲπὶ τῶν τόπων Egypt Tebtynis 3 c.
rd
P.Mil.Vogl. IV 234
30 … ἐπὶ τῶ̣ν̣ τ̣όπων ἑκατοντάρχῃ Egypt Tebtynis 3rd c. P.Mil.Vogl. IV 233
31 Valerius Maximus ἐκατόνταρχος ὲπὶ τῶν τόπων Egypt Soknopaiou Nesos 167 BGU II 522
32 … βενεφικιαρίος ὲπὶ τῶν τόπων Egypt Soknopaiou Nesos 139 P.Amh. II 77
33 Heron βενεφικιαρίος ὲπὶ τῶν τόπων Egypt Soknopaiou Nesos 167 Stud.Pal.Pap. XXII 55

George Cupcea
34 … βενεφικιαρίος ὲπὶ τῶν τόπων Egypt Soknopaiou Nesos 185 P.Lond. II 342
35 Klotios (Claudius) ἐπὶ τῶν τόπων ἑκατοντάρχῃ Egypt Philadelphia 50 P.Mich 10.582
36 … Ἀρσινοείτῃ ἑκατοντάρχῃ Egypt Karanis 198 P.Mich 6.425
37 … ἐπὶ τῶν τόπων ἑκατοντάρχῳ Egypt Theadelphia 193 SB 4.7469
38 … ἐ̣πὶ τῶν τόπ̣ων βενεφικιαρίῳ Egypt Narmuthis 155 P.Sijp. 16
βενεφικιαρίῳ ἐν τω
39 Aurelius Dioskoros Ὀξυρυγχίτη Egypt Oxyrhynchos 291 P.Mich.inv, 1960
βενεφικιαρίῳ στατίζοντι ἐν
40 Aurelius Gordianus Ἀρσινοείτῃ Egypt Karanis 296 P.Cair.isid. 139
Aurelius Gordianus βενεφικιαρίῳ στατιζοντω̣ Egypt Karanis 296 P.Cair.isid. 63
41 … στατίζοντος βενεφικιαρίου Egypt Oxyrhynchos 301 P.Oxy. 46 3304
42 … βενεφικιαρίος κατὰ τόπος Arabia Bostra 260 P.Bostra 1
43 Iulius Marinus ἐκατόνταρχος ἐπὶ τῆς εὐταξίας Syria Sphoracene 243 P.Euphr. 5
44 … κατὰ τόπους ἑκατοντάρχῳ Syria Birtha Okbanon 244–250 P.Euphr. 2