Flavius Athanasius, Dux Et Augustalis Thebaidis – a Case Study on Landholding and Power in Late Antique Egypt

Home , Dux, Ius, Magister militum, Officium (ancient Rome)

Imperium and Officium Working Papers (IOWP)

Flavius Athanasius, dux et Augustalis Thebaidis – A case study on landholding and power in Late Antique Egypt

Version 01

March 2013

Anna Maria Kaiser (University of Vienna, Department of Ancient History, Papyrology and Epigraphy)

Abstract: From 565 to 567/568 CE Flavius Triadius Marianus Michaelius Gabrielius Constantinus Theodorus Martyrius Iulianus Athanasius was dux et Augustalis Thebaidis. Papyri mention him explicitly in this function, as the highest civil and military authority in the Thebaid, the southernmost province of the Eastern Roman Empire. Flavius Athanasius might be not the most typical dux et Augustalis Thebaidis concerning his career, but most typical concerning his powerful standing in society. And he has the benefit of being one of the better- known duces et Augustales Thebaidis in the second half of the 6th century. This article will focus first on his official competence as dux et Augustalis: The geographic area(s) of responsibility, the civil and military branches of power will be treated. Second will be his civil branch of power; documents show his own domus gloriosa and prove his involvement with the domus divina, the estates of members of the imperial family itself. We will end with a look at his integration in the network of power – both in the Egyptian provinces and beyond.

Flavius Athanasius, dux et Augustalis Thebaidis – A case study on landholding and power in Late Antique Egypt* Anna Maria Kaiser

From 565 to 567/568 CE Flavius Triadius Marianus Michaelius Gabrielius Constantinus Theodorus Martyrius Iulianus Athanasius was dux et Augustalis Thebaidis. Papyri mention him explicitly in this function, as the highest civil and military authority in the Thebaid, the southernmost province of the Eastern Roman Empire.11 Flavius Athanasius might be not the most typical dux et Augustalis Thebaidis concerning his career, but most typical concerning his powerful standing in society. And he has the benefit of being one of the better-known duces et Augustales Thebaidis in the second half of the 6th century. This article will focus first on his official competence as dux et Augustalis: The geographic area(s) of responsibility, the civil and military branches of power will be treated. Second will be his civil branch of power; documents show his own domus gloriosa and prove his involvement with the domus divina, the estates of members of the imperial family itself. We will end with a look at his integration in the network of power – both in the Egyptian provinces and beyond.

Life and family connections

It is especially the archive of Dioscoros, the famous notary-poet from Aphrodite, which illuminates our knowledge of Flavius Athanasius. In his fundamental work Héllenisme dans l’Égypte du VIe siècle. La bibliothèque et l’oevre de Dioscore d’Aphrodité, Jean-Luc Fournet traced the person Flavius Athanasius as detailed as the papyri from the archive of Dioscoros allow. We will therefore give the personal information on Flavius Athanasius just a quick glance before we have a look at the fundaments his power as dux et Augustalis Thebaidis was based on. With his famous Edict XIII the emperor Justinian reunited in 539 the previously separated civil and military authorities in the provinces again – in the persons of the duces et Augustales.2 These duces et Augustales had a subordinated praeses each, but the praeses, who

* This article developed as part of the project “The Framework of Imperial Power in Late Antique Egypt (284-641 AD)” conducted in the National Research Network (NFN) “Imperium and Officium – Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom“ (S10805–G18), funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF).1 Papyri are cited according to the “Checklist of Greek, Latin, Demotic and Coptic Papyri, Ostraca and Tablets“, http://scriptorium.lib.duke.edu/papyrus/texts/clist.html, June 2011. Place and date of papyri and ostraca are taken from the Heidelberger Gesamtverzeichnis (http://www.rzuser.uni-heidelberg.de/~gv0/, April 2008), if not declared otherwise. All dates mentioned are CE, if not indicated. The abbreviation BL refers to the Berichtigungsliste der Griechischen Papyrusurkunden aus Ägypten, Vol. I- XII (1913-1922 to 2009).

2 Iust.Ed. XIII; see also P.Oxy. LXIII 4400 (Oxyrhynchos, 6th c.). Germaine Rouillard, L’administration civile de l’Égypte byzantine (Paris: Geuthner, 19282); Roger Rémondon, “L’Édit XIII de Justinien a-t-il été promulgé en 539?,” CdÉ 30 (1955): 112-121; Arnold H.M. Jones, The later Roman Empire

Imperium & Officium: Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom Flavius Athanasius, dux et Augustalis Thebaidis 2 was the civil governor of a province before Justinian’s Edict XIII and still was concerned with civil matters afterwards, seems to have been almost entirely eclipsed by the dux et Augustalis. That is the case in the archive of Dioscoros at least. In these documents the duces et Augustales are the omnipotent and most important persons in the province.3 Their birthday anniversaries and weddings are celebrated by the public in quite the same way as the birthdays of the emperors themselves, on a smaller scale of course.4 The duces et Augustales received encomia and epithalamia celebrating special occasions. These poems relate information we usually do not come across in documentary papyri.5 It is therefore the literary papyri from the Dioscoros-archive that supply the private background of Flavius Athanasius. Athanasius seems to have been a native Egyptian. It is likely that he even came from the Thebaid itself.6 His birthday seems to have been between September 28th and October 27th, in the month Phaophi.7 Among his ancestors were a certain Eustochius, Kyrillos and Kometas.8 His genealogy is said to be worth of a dux.9 That will not only have been pure flattery of Dioscoros. His ancestors might have been governors of neighbour provinces themselves, maybe in the province Arcadia, immediately to the north of the Thebaid.10

284-602. A social economic and administrative survey. Vol. I-III (Oxford: Blackwell, 1964), 281 (LRE); Anna M. Demicheli, L’Editto XIII di Giustiniano. In terma di amministrazione e fiscalità dell’Egitto bizantino (Torino: Giappichelli, 2000); James G. Keenan, “Egypt,” in The Cambridge Ancient History. Second Edition. Vol. XIV. Late Antiquity: Empire and Successors, A.D. 425-600, ed. Averil Cameron et al. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 613; Wolfram Brandes, “Die τράπεζα/arca der praefectura praetorio per Orientem und die Datierung von Justinians Edikt 13,” Fontes Minores 11 (2005): 229-234; Bernhard Palme, “The Imperial Presence: Government and Army,” in Egypt in the Byzantine World, 300-700, ed. Roger S. Bagnall (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 248. Constantin Zuckerman (Du village à l’empire. Autour du registre fiscal d’Aphroditô [525/526] [Paris: Association des Amis du Centre d’Histoire et Civilisation de Byzance, 2004], 52) opts for dating the edict to fall 538. 3 Jean-Luc Fournet, Hellénisme dans l’Égypte du VIe siècle. La bibliothèque et l’oeuvre de Dioscore d’Aphrodité. Vol. I-II (Le Caire: Institut français d’archéologie orientale, 1999), 326. 4 Fournet, Hellénisme, 326-327; Bernhard Palme, “Dioskoros und die staatlichen Autoritäten,” in Les archives de Dioscore d’Aphrodité cent ans après leur découverte. Histoire et culture dans l’Égypte byzantine. Actes du colloque de Strasbourg (8-10 décembre 2005), ed. Jean-Luc Fournet (Paris: De Boccard, 2008), 214. 5 Fournet, Hellénisme, 327; Palme, “Dioskoros,” 214. 6 P.Aphrod.Lit. 10,5 = P.Cair.Masp. I 67097 V, E and B-C (end 565/beginning 566, date: Fournet, Hellénisme): “en effet, voilà le stratège, et ce n’est pas un étranger” (transl.: Fournet, Hellénisme). Fournet, Hellénisme, 327, followed by Palme, “Dioskoros,” 214. This information can be understood in two ways: Either it’s not a stranger coming, but the strategos, who already had had a military appointment in the Thebais (cf. P.Oxy. XVI 1920 = P.Oxy. I 154 R [introd.] = Sel.Pap. II 408 [Oxyrhynchos, after 563]) or it’s not a stranger coming, but the dux (strategos as denomination), who is no stranger at all, but originating from the Thebaid. It is the second possibility that seems most likely to Fournet (Hellénisme, 513-514). 7 P.Aphrod.Lit. IV 24 = P.Cair.Masp. II 67178 V (566, date: Fournet, Hellénisme). Fournet, Hellénisme, 602- 603. Athanasius is not mentioned by name in this encomion, but he can be identified through Kallinikos and Dorotheos, who both worked in his officium. 8 Fournet, Hellénisme, 329. P.Aphrod.Lit. 10,34 = P.Cair.Masp. I 67097 V, E and B-C (end 565/beginning 566, date: Fournet, Hellénisme). 9 Fournet, Hellénisme, 329. P.Aphrod.Lit. 10,8-9 = P.Cair.Masp. I 67097 V, E and B-C (end 565/beginning 566, date: Fournet, Hellénisme). 10 P.Aphrod.Lit. 10,9 = P.Cair.Masp. I 67097 V, E and B-C (end 565/beginning 566, date: Fournet, Hellénisme). Fournet, Hellénisme, 327; followed by Palme, “Dioskoros,” 214. The unsecure identification of the named Eustochius, Kyrillas and Kometas is discussed by Fournet as well (Hellénisme, 519-520).

Imperium & Officium: Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom Anna Kaiser 3

Long names like Flavius Triadius Marianus Michaelius Gabrielius Constantinus Theodorus Martyrius Iulianus Athanasius are characteristic for high-ranking persons in Late Antiquity and appear regularly from the second half of the 6th century onwards. The last name is the actual first name, Athanasius in this case, the second to last is the name of the father, Iulianus. The other names might be connected to famous ancestors or might be seen as homage to prominent people adored by the bearer of the name.11 Giovanni R. Ruffini states that in an unpublished register of receipts dating to 564-566/567 Athanasius is styled as the son of an Iulianus.12 There are at least three Iuliani in the Dioscoros-archive that could be identified as the father of Athanasius. Iulianus 1 of Ruffini’s Prosopography is endoxotatos apo eparchôn; he might have been praeses.13 Iulianus 2 is pagarch, a high financial authority, and decorated with the high-ranking epithets lamprotatos, illustrios, and megaloprepestatos.14 And there is an Iulianus 4, who was endoxotatos and paneuphemos stratelates. Paneuphemos especially is one of the highest designations of rank.15 Ruffini states that Iulianus 1 and 2 could be identical and that 1 and 4 (and therefore also 1 and 2 and 4) could be identical as well. He would have either 1 or 2 as father of the dux Athanasius. Constantin Zuckerman identifies the paneuphemos stratelates with the pagarch Iulianus, who held the pagarchy in the 540s and 550s. In his view the Iuliani 2 and 4 would be the same person.16 Since we cannot divide or combine these Iuliani any further at the moment, it is best to classify Athanasius as the son of one of these Iuliani (1, 2 and 4), or even all of them, in case they are identical, which seems not unlikely. This potential identification of Athanasius’ father would allow the reconstruction of an important large-estate-owning family in the Thebais.

11 Jean Gascou, “Décision de Caesarius, gouverneur militaire de Thébaïde,” TravMém 14 (2002): 270 with note 5. 12 Giovanni R. Ruffini, A Prosopography of Byzantine Aphrodito (Durham, North Carolina: The American Society of Papyrologists, 2011), 91, s.v. Athanasius 4. P.Berol. 25931 A-C (564-566/567, date: Ruffini). 13 In P.Lond. V 1674 (Antinoupolis, 567-568, date: Jean-Luc Fournet, “Liste des papyrus édités de l’Aphrodité byzantine“, in Les archives de Dioscore d’Aphrodité cent ans après leur découverte. Histoire et culture dans l’Égypte byzantine. Actes du Colloque de Strasbourg (8- 10 décembre 2005, ed. Jean-Luc Fournet [Paris: De Boccard, 2008]) the completion of a lacuna restores ex eparch and pagarch. 14 P.Cair.Masp. III 67283 (Aphrodite, before 547); P.Cair.Masp. III 67354 (Aphrodite, ca. 547); P.Cair.Masp. I 67019v (Antinoupolis?, 548/549 or 551, date: Fournet, “liste”); PSI IV 283 (Aphrodite, 550); P.Cair.Masp. I 67046 (Antaiopolis, 550/551); P.Cair.Masp. I 67024r = Sel.Pap. II 218 (Aphrodite?, ca. 551); P.Cair.Masp. I 67026 (Aphrodite?, ca. 551); P.Gen. IV 193 = SB XVI 12510 (Aphrodite, 551/552); SB XX 15015 (Phthla, Antaiopolites, 550/551); SB XX 15013 (Phthla, Antaiopolites, 552/553); P.Cair.Masp. I 67094 (Aphrodite, 553, date: Fournet, “liste”); P.Lond. V 1661 (Aphrodite, 553); P.Lond. V 1660 (Antaiopolites, ca. 553); SB XVI 12370 (Aphrodite, 559/560, date: Fournet, “liste”). Lamprotatos equals clarissimus, illustrios is no designation of rank, but a designation of dignity, a honor that could be awarded women as well as men, megaloprepestatos equals the latin magnificentissimus. (Paul Koch, Die Byzantinischen Beamtentitel von 400 bis 700 [Jena: Universitäts-Buchdruckerei G. Neuenhahn, 1903], 10-22; 34-45; 45-58; Otto Hornickel, Ehren- und Rangprädikate in den Papryusurkunden. Ein Beitrag zum römischen und byzantinischen Titelwesen [Universitätsverlag von Robert Noske in Borna-Leipzig, 1930], 22- 27; 17; 28-29.) 15 P.Cair.Masp. I 67008 (Antinoupolis?, ca. 567, date: Fournet, “liste”). He is the intermediary in a request from a certain Ischyrion to dux Athanasius. Hornickel, Ehren- und Rangprädikate, 30-31. 16 Zuckerman, village, 221-222.

Imperium & Officium: Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom Flavius Athanasius, dux et Augustalis Thebaidis 4

Athanasius had at least one brother, Phoibammon, who himself held the office of pagarch at the same time as his brother was dux.17 Since the 5th century the pagarchs were the highest financial and fiscal authorities in the civitates, the former nomes.18 In 566 or 567, when Athanasius was already dux et Augustalis Thebaidis, he seems to have married.19 That leads Bernhard Palme to the assumption that Athanasius became dux et Augustalis as a young man, his hair not yet turned grey with long experience in the service of the Roman Empire.20 By 566/567 he had at least two children.21 One of them might be the Iulianus (3A in Ruffini’s Prosopography) who received a birthday-encomion from Dioscoros in 566/567.22 He would then have been named after his grandfather and therefore might have been the oldest son of Athanasius. In a receipt Athanasius is styled as paneuphemos patricius, possessing a domus gloriosa. That marks him as a holder of a large estate.23 Paneuphemos is one of the highest designations of rank and will be explored in detail later on, as well as the domus gloriosa, Athanasius’ senatorial household.24 In short – Athanasius had the best requirements for the ducal office. The archive of Dioscoros already hints that the duces et Augustales were recruited locally in their native provinces. Even before the emperor Justin II decreed in his Novella 149 in the year 569 that the provincial governors should be nominated by the provincial elites themselves, they were earmarked by the local aristocracy, but had to be appointed in Constantinople. The career of the governors was no longer marked by a high geographic

17 In P.Aphrod.Lit. 13,28 = P.Lond.Lit. 100 E (end 565/beginning 566-567, date: Fournet, Hellénisme) Phoibammon has the same ancestorial line as Athanasius in P.Aphrod.Lit. 10,34 = P.Cair.Masp. I 67097 V, E and B-C (end 565/beginning 566, date: Fournet, Hellénisme). Fournet, Hellénisme, 329; Palme, “Dioskoros,” 215. 18 On the pagarch see for example Roberta Mazza, “Ricerche sul pagarca nell’Egitto tardo-antico e bizantino,” Aegyptus 75 (1995): 169-242. There is also work in progress within the NFN Imperium and Officium: Matthias Stern, Der Pagarch und die Organisation des öffentlichen Sicherheitswesens im spätantiken Ägypten (Wien: Universität Wien, in preparation). 19 P.Aphrod.Lit. 36 = P.Lond.Lit. 100 D (566-567, date: Fournet, Hellénisme) is an epithala-mium celebrating a marriage. And since the only names that appear in Dioscoros’ marriage epithalamia are the names of the happy couple, Fournet assigns the epithalamium to the groom Athanasius, since his name is the only one to show up in the, admittedly fragmentary, poem. (Fournet, Hellénisme, 638.) Lines 7-17 of P.Aphrod.Lit 24 = P.Cair.Masp. II 67178 V (566, date: Fournet, Hellénisme) might refer to this marriage, undertaken shortly before the birthday encomion was written. (Fournet, Hellénisme, 606.) If this is correct, then Athanasius might have already had at least two children before marrying (this wife). But there is also the possibility, of a somewhat insecure dating of these literary documents of Dioscoros. 20 Palme, “Dioskoros,” 215. 21 P.Aphrod.Lit. 24,10 = P.Cair.Masp. II 67178 V (566, date: Fournet, Hellénisme); P.Cair.Masp. I 67002 III,21 (Antinoupolis?, 567). Bernhard Palme, “Emotional strategies in Petitions of Dioscorus of Aphroditê,” in xxx, 10. 22 P.Aphrod.Lit. IV 31 (566-567, date: Fournet, Hellénisme). Fournet (Hellénisme, 617) men-tions the pagarch Iulianus, who was in office from 535/536 to 553; but he would not have been in office in 566/567, the date of the encomion, therefore not likely to have been addressed to him. 23 P.Cair.Masp. II 67166 (Antinooplis, 568); Fournet, Hellénisme, 327, followed by Palme, “Dioskoros,” 215. 24 See note 15 above.

Imperium & Officium: Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom Anna Kaiser 5

mobility, but by some kind of career pattern in the provinces.25 It seems that the important families distributed the major offices amongst themselves and that offices even passed on from father to son. In Fournet’s own words one should think “de grandes dynasties locales chez lesquelles les hautes responsabilités administratives sont à la fois acquises et garanties 26 par la notabilité et l’assise que confère la grande propriété.“

1. Official competence as dux et Augustalis Thebaidis

The documents stemming from the archive of Dioscoros address Flavius Athanasius with his full names and titles: Φλαυΐῳ Τριαδίῳ Μαριανῷ Μιχαη[λ]ίῳ [Γ]αβριηλίῳ Κωνσταντίνῳ Θεο[δ]ώ̣ρῳ Μαρτυρίῳ Ἰουλ[ιαν]ῷ Ἀθανασίῳ τῷ [ἐνδ]οξοτά(τῳ) στρατηλάτῃ [ἀπὸ] ὑπάτων καὶ ὑπ(ερ)φ[υε]στά(τῳ) πατρικίῳ πραιφέκτο(υ) Ἰουστίνο(υ) δ[ου]κὶ καὶ α[ὐγ]ουσταλίῳ τῆς Θηβαίων χώρας τὸ β.27 His titles bear reference to his high social and political standing. To which military command the title of stratelates or magister militum referred is not sure, but the duces themselves were the highest military authority in their sphere of responsibility; that is exactly what stratelates might refer to in this case, or it might be a purely honorific title. Endoxotatos is a very high designation of rank.28 Flavius Athanasius held the honorary consulship, meaning that no year was counted after his name.29 As excellentissimus patricius he is also designated as person of very high rank. Patricius was a title conferred by the emperor himself and not hereditary. The patricii of the East Roman Empire ranked directly beneath the imperial family. In short: Patricius was the highest possible honour to achieve in the East Roman Empire.30 Jitse H.F. Dijkstra amongst others follows Matthias Gelzer concerning his interpretation of the patricius

25 Fournet, Hellénisme, 328, with note 489; Palme, “Dioskoros,” 215. 26 Fournet, Hellénisme, 329. Similarly Palme, “Dioskoros,” 215: The archive of Dioscoros and the documents of the Apiones together show that a few very powerful aristocratic and landowning families dominated the local politics. „Ein gleichermaßen dichtes wie provinzielles Geflecht von persönlichen Beziehungen hat sich über den staatlichen Verwaltungsapparat gelegt.“ 27 P.Cair.Masp. 67002 (Antinoupolis?, 567); 67003 (Antinoupolis?, ca. 567); 67005 (Anti-noupolis?, 567 or 568, date: Fournet, “liste”); 67008 (Antinoupolis?, ca. 567, date: Fournet, “liste”). In 67004 (Antinoupolis?, 567, date: Fournet, “liste”) Theodorus comes before Constantinus; 67007 (Antinoupolis?, ca. 567–568) is fragmentary, but Theodorus and Constantinus are inverted too, as well as Iulianus and Martyrius. 67017 (Antinoupolis?, 566- 567, date: Fournet, “liste”) is fragmentary as well and mentions only Gabrielius and Theodorus, therefore missing the Constantius between. 28 Hornickel, Ehren- und Rangprädikate, 8-11. 29 See already Jean Maspero, “Études sur les papyrus d’Aphrodité II,“ BIFAO 7 (1910): 100. The honorary consulat was introduced by emperor Zeno (474-491) in the East Roman Empire only. Honorary consuls paid the substantial sum of one hundred pounds of gold to be allowed to bear the title consularis. Ordinary consuls gave their names to the year they were in function, honorary consuls did not and they ranked beneath the consules ordinarii. (Roger S. Bagnall et al., Consuls of the Later Roman Empire [Atlanta, Georgia: Scholars Press, 1987], 7-12). Jones, LRE II, 533. Bernhard Palme, “Die domus gloriosa des Flavius Strategius

Paneuphemos,” Chiron 27 (1997): 101 with note 22: From the mid of the 6th century onwards hypatos means simply consularis. The last consul who was not a member of the imperial family was Flavius Basilius in 541. 30 Hornickel, Ehren- und Rangprädikate, 32; Jones, LRE II, 528; Wilhem Heil, Der konstantinische Patriziat (Basel, Stuttgart: Helbing & Lichtenhahn, 1966), 61-67.

Imperium & Officium: Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom Flavius Athanasius, dux et Augustalis Thebaidis 6

praefecti Iustini: Athanasius would have been patricius since the emperor Justin II, who ascended the throne in 565, had the cura palatii and therefore would have been praepositus sacri palatii.31 In the early 550s Athanasius was dux et Augustalis Alexandriae (see infra); since the title patricius seems to have been a requirement for the ducal office, he must have been accorded the title before that posting.32 As dux et Augustalis Thebaidis he is finally addressed.

Geographic areas of responsibility

Thebais

When exactly Flavius Athanasius took office as dux et Augustalis Thebaidis is not known for sure. There are nevertheless some clues that allow to date his taking of office to the end of 565 or the beginning of 566: In May 567 he was in his second year as dux et Augustalis Thebaidis. What we do not know is the starting date for the counting of the ducal years.33 From the arrangement of some literary pieces of Dioscoros on one sheet of papyrus, Fournet deduces that Athanasius took his office at the end of 565 or the beginning of 566. Maybe the newly appointed dux Thebaidis Athanasius is even to be seen in connection with the accession to the throne of Justin II in late 565.34 Sometime between May 567 and March 15th 35 568 his successor (more likely Johannes than Kallinikos) was appointed to the ducal office.

31 Jitse H.F. Dijkstra, “A Cult of Isis at Philae after Justinian? Reconsidering P. Cair. Masp. I 67004,” ZPE 146 (2004): 144, comm. 1. Mattias Gelzer, “Altes und Neues aus der byzantinisch-ägyptischen Verwaltungsmisere, vornehmlich im Zeitalter Justinians. Archiv für Papyrusforschung und verwandte Gebiete 5 (1913): 360, n. 5. 32 Federico Morelli, “SB XXIV 16222: due patrizi e un Liciniano,” Tyche 23 (2008): 148. 33 P.Cair.Masp. 67002, I, 10 (Antinoupolis?, 567). Fournet, Hellénisme, 330. Fournet answers the question whether Athanasius was dux for the first time in 565/566 positively. The other idea cemented in scholarship since Maspero (“Études“, 117-118), is that Athanasius was already dux before he started his second term in 567. This argument is based on P.Cair.Masp. I 67002, I, 10 (Antinoupolis?, 567), marking Athanasius as dux for the second time and mentioning his first government, and P.Oxy. XVI 1920 = P.Oxy. I 154 R (introd.) = Sel.Pap. II 408 (Oxyrhynchos, after 563), in which he leads soldiers from the Thebais based at that moment in the Oxyrhynchite. As commander of these soldiers he is however not styled dux but excellentissimus patricius Athanasius. The same goes for a document dating to the time after his office as dux: In P.Cair.Masp. II 67166 (Antinoupolis, 568) he is as well styled patricius only. His first government, mentioned in P.Cair.Masp. I 67002, I, 10 (Antinoupolis?, 567) would then relate to his first year in office. Therefore the function of dux et Augustalis would have been renewed every year. It is also striking that Dioscoros does not mention any deeds Athanasius had already accomplished during his first time in the ducal office – a thing that would be an obvious advantage in praising the dux. (Fournet, Hellénisme, 331, with note 522, citing Carrié, who comes to the same conclusion, in a slightly different way though.) 34 Fournet, Hellénisme, 330-331, with note 515. The literary papyri giving the clue for the dating are P.Aphrod.Lit. IV 39 = P.Cair.Masp. II 67097v, F 1-16 (end 565/beginning 566, date: Fournet, Hellénisme) addressed to the new dux, written on the right-hand margins of P.Aphrod.Lit. IV 10 = P.Cair.Masp. I 67097 V, E and B-C (end 565/beginning 566, date: Fournet, Hellénisme). Beneath those is written a chairetismos to the emperor (P.Aphrod.Lat. 40) which Fournet links to P.Aphrod.Lit. 17 = P.Cair.Masp. II 67183 (end 565/beginning 566, date: Fournet, Hellénisme), celebrating the adventus of (the images of) the new emperor in the province. That might also explain, why it is only Flavius Athanasius who denotes especially that it was under the prefect-ship of Justin II that he was honoured with the title patricius. No other dux et Augustalis is known

Imperium & Officium: Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom Anna Kaiser 7

Arcadia

While he was dux et Augustalis Thebaidis, Athanasius was also in charge of the province Arcadia to the north. Although there are almost no papyri indicating the area of government and influence of the duces et Augustales Thebaidis, it seems quite clear that they also managed the province Arcadia.36 Arcadia seems to have received its own dux et Augustalis Arcadiae only after the Sasanian occupation of Egypt (619-629).37 In the 560s we find soldiers from the Thebaid stationed in the Oxyrhynchites, in the Arcadia. P.Oxy. XVI 1920, dating to the year 563, mentions them together with other military personal under the command of the patricius Athanasius – the soon to be dux et Augustalis Thebaidis.38 The other document, P.Oxy. XVI 2046, dates to 564 and mentions Scythae as well. They seem to have come to the Oxyrhynchites to restore public order.39 The unit of the Scythae Iustiniani was constituted under emperor Justinian and came to Egypt in the years 536/537, together with two further crack units, the Bis Electi Iustiniani and the Numidae Iustiniani. The Bis Electi and the Numidae were withdrawn about ten years later, whereas the Scythae Iustiniani formed the – widely dispersed – crack unit of the duces et Augustales Thebaidis. They might have stayed in Egypt until the eve of the Persian occupation.40 The presence of soldiers from the Thebaid in the Arcadia hints at the responsibility of the dux Thebaidis over the province Arcadia is well.41 So when Athanasius became dux in 565/566 he was also in charge of the

who so explicitly links the high honour of this rank to a member of the imperial family or the emperor himself. 35 Fournet, Hellénisme, 332-336. Mai 567 is the earliest date for his receiving P.Cair.Masp. I 67002 (Antinoupolis?, 567) and P.Cair.Masp. II 67166,6-7 (Antinoupolis, 568) proves that he no longer is dux et Augustalis Thebaidis. 36 Federico Morelli, “Zwischen Poesie und Geschichte: Die „Flagornerie“ des Dioskoros und der dreifache Dux Athanasios,” in Les archives de Dioscore d’Aphrodité cent ans après leur découverte. Histoire et culture dans l’Égypte byzantine. Actes du colloque de Strasbourg [8- 10 décembre 2005], ed. by Jean-Luc Fournet (Paris: De Boccard, 2008), 225. The encomion P.Aphrod.Lit. IV 10 = P.Cair.Masp. I 67097 V, E and B-C (end 565/beginning 566, date: Fournet, Hellénisme) is one of the papyri indicating the area of responsibility of the dux Thebaidis. 37 P.Prag. I 64 (Arsinoiton Polis, 636) is the hitherto first papyrus mentioning a dux et Augustalis Arcadiae. Morelli, “Flagornerie”, 231, with note 28. Rémondon was the first to argue that the dux et Augustalis Thebaidis might also have been in charge of the Arcadia. (Roger Rémondon, “Soldats de Byzance d’après un papyrus trouvé à Edfou,” RecPap 1 [1961]: 73; Morelli, “Flagornerie”, 228.) 38 P.Oxy. XVI 1920 = P.Oxy. I 154 R (introd.) = Sel.Pap. II 408 (Oxyrhynchos, after 563). 154 men are mentioned who stay for ca. two weeks, presumably on land belonging to the Apiones. (Federico Morelli, Olio e retribuzioni nell’Egitto tardo [V-VIII d.C.] [Firenze: Istituto Papirologico “G. Vitelli”, 1996], 66- 78; “Flagornerie”, 228.) Following the other line of scholarly assumption Athanasius was already dux Thebaidis at that time, see note 33 above and also Fritz Mitthof, “Das Dioskoros-Archiv und die militärischen Reformen Justinians in der Thebais,” in Les archives de Dioscore d’Aphrodité cent ans après leur découverte. Histoire et culture dans l’Égypte byzantine. Actes du colloque de Strasbourg [8-10 décembre 2005], ed. by Jean-Luc Fournet (Paris: De Boccard, 2008), 251, note 23. 39 P.Oxy. XVI 2046 (Oxyrhynchos, 564). Buccellarii are mentioned together with Scythae. (Morelli, Olio, 66-78; “Flagornerie”, 228.) Morelli, “Flagornerie”, 229. 40 Anna M. Kaiser, “Militärorganisation im spätantiken Ägypten (284-641 n. Chr.)” (PhD diss., Universität Wien, 2012), 258-259; 519. Morelli, “Flagornerie”, 228: „... und bekanntlich nur in der Thebais, und zwar in Antaeopolis und Apollonopolis Magna, waren die στρατιῶται τῶν Σκυθῶ” ... stationiert.” 41 Morelli, “Flagornerie”, 229; Rémondon, “Soldats”, 73.

Imperium & Officium: Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom Flavius Athanasius, dux et Augustalis Thebaidis 8

province Arcadia, which he had already visited as high military commander in 563 – just a 42 few years before he was appointed dux et Augustalis Thebaidis.

Aegyptus

And while the duces et Augustales Thebaidis usually seem to have been in charge of the Arcadia as well,43 Flavius Athanasius could even boast of having been in charge of yet another province. In P.Aphrod.Lit. IV 10 Dioscoros praises Athanasius: Θάλλε µοι, εἰσέτι θάλλεις ἕως ὅτε ψαύσῃς Ὀλύµπου, γῆς Φαρίης κρατέων ἠδ’ Ἀρκαδίης µετὰ Θήβης, σὺν πόθῳ ἤτε φόβῳ τὰ θεµίστια πάντα νοµεύων.44 Federico Morelli was able to prove that this praising of Athanasius as master of the provinces Aegyptus (the lighthouse Pharos as the symbol for Alexandria) and Thebais as well as Arcadia, is not just a toadyism of Dioscoros, but simply a fact.45 He was able to identify a certain Athanasius, (maybe former) dux et Augustalis Aegypti and administrator of the domus divina in the Thebaid, with the later dux et Augustalis Thebaidis Athanasius, who figured also as administrator of the domus divina in the Thebaid:46 Φλαουίῳ Ἀθ]αν̣ασίῳ τῷ ὑ̣π̣ερφυ̣εσ̣τά̣[τῳ δουκὶ καὶ αὐγουσταλίῳ τ]ῆς µεγαλοπόλεως̱ Ἀλ̣ε̣ξ̣αν̣[δρείας φροντιστῇ/φροντίζοντι τῶ]ν ἀνηκόντων τῇ θειοτ̣[άτῃ οἰκίᾳ κτηµάτων | τῶν] 47 δ̣ιακει[µ]ένων κατὰ τ̣[ὴν Θηβαίων χώραν.

42 Fournet (Hellénisme, 327) points out that Athanasius must have held a high military position in the Thebaid before being appointed dux et Augustalis Thebaidis. Compare as well note 38 above. 43 Since the duces of the Thebaid in the time of Dioscoros were most likely automatically the governors of the Arcadia as well, it was not necessary to point out this dualism of governorships specifically. When Dioscoros does so in his poems, it is to emphasise how much power the governor of the Thebais had indeed. (Morelli, “Flagornerie”, 240.) Palme (“Emotional Strategies”, 9) on the contrary is not completely sure, whether the Arcadia belonged to the territory of every dux et Augustalis Thebaidis: “It is not yet clear, however, if Arcadia was usually attached to the Thebais, or if just Athanasius hold (sic) different positions in personal union.” 44 Fournet, Hellénisme, 393. P.Aphrod.Lit. IV 10, 41-43 = P.Cair.Masp. I 67097 V, E and B- C (end 565/ beginning 566, date: Fournet, Hellénisme). “Prospère, puisses-tu encore prospérer jusqu’à ce que tu atteignes l’Olympe, en souverain de la terre de Pharos, de l’Arcadie en meme temps que de Thèbes, administrant toute la justice dans l’affection et dans la crainte de tes sujets.” (transl.: Fournet, Hellénisme). 45 Morelli, “Flagornerie”, 233-237. Rémondon (“Soldats”, 73) had already championed the threefold dux Athanasius, but his argument was not followed until Morelli picked up on it and proved it correct. 46 Morelli, “Flagornerie”, 233-237. P.Vindob. G 16334 (Constantinople, ca. 552-553, not edited). From P.Cair.Masp. I 67002 (Antinoupolis?, 567) Morelli deduces – on a primarily grammatical basis – that Athanasius, dux et Augustalis Thebaidis, was also in charge of the domus divina in this province, since in Dioscoros’ petition the villagers are ἄνθρωποι of the domus divina as well as ἄνθρωποι of Athanasius – not in his function as dux et Augustalis. 47 P.Vindob. G 16334,1-3 (Constantinople, ca. 552-553 [date: Azzarello]) together with Giuseppina Azzarello, Il dossier della domus divina in Egitto (Berlin, Boston: Walter de Gruyter GmbH, 2012), 97, n. 45 who states that Athanasius should be phrontistes domus divinae. Since the word dux et Augustalis in the papyrus are lost, it could be possible, that Athanasius held some other high office in Alexandria (Morelli, edition of P.Vindob. G 16334, in preparation). That might also account for the rather strange sequence of the offices dux et Augustalis Aegypti and dux et Augustalis Thebaidis, since the former is higher ranking than the latter.

Imperium & Officium: Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom Anna Kaiser 9

The Vienna papyrus mentioning the (former) dux et Augustalis Aegypti Athanasius dates to the early 50s of the 6th century. It would be most unlikely to assume that Athanasius was still dux et Augustalis Aegypti in the years 565/566-567 when he was active as dux Thebaidis. He therefore was first dux et Augustalis Aegypti before becoming dux et Augustalis Thebaidis 48 some fifteen years later.

The civil branch of power

As highest civil authority in the Thebaid, Athanasius received numerous petitions. Most of the ones known today derive from the archive of Dioscoros. But since Aphrodite had placed itself under the protection of the empress Theodora and parts of the village might even have belonged to the domus divina,49 one has to keep in mind that Athanasius was also administrator of the domus divina in the Thebais in the 560s – therefore some petitions might also affect his high standing in the administration of the domus divina.50 But papyri that explicitly address him as dux et Augustalis are quite sure to relate to his function as dux. P.Aphrod.Lit. IV 10 is a petition styled as encomion against the actions of a certain Kallinikos (18) and Konon (4).51 P.Cair.Masp. III 67279 is a petition from Apollos (153), a misthotes, a lessee of land, from the village Pouchis in the Antaiopolites. He complains that Dios (19) and Helladios (1) forced him to pay charges for a land that was without charges before. Helladios figures in the 560s in P.Cair.Masp. II 67194 as topoteretes (deputy of the dux) of Antaiopolis,52 and later on (in 569) as lamprotatos scriniarius in the ducal office of the Thebaid.53 A highly fragmentary petition comes from the Apa Ieremias monastery in the Antaiopolites, from the monk Maximinus (1).54 P.Cair.Masp. II 67002 is a famous petition written by Dioscoros in which he brings quite some complaints before the dux. Land belonging to Dioscoros was handed over by the pagarch Menas (13) to the boethos of the village of Phthla, Kyros (26), and shepherds of

48 Morelli, “Flagornerie”, 238. He also mentions other cases in which duces seem to have been in office in different provinces (note 54 and 241). He also points out that Dioscoros did not use exactly the same praise for every one of the three duces he wrote for during his stay in Antinoupolis; even if he did of course use identical phrases that were simply convenient in his literary works (“Flagornerie”, 238-242). 49 Palme, “Emotional Strategies”, 3. 50 See note 46 above. 51 P.Aphrod.Lit. IV 10 = P.Cair.Masp. I 67097 V, E and B-C (end 565/beginning 566, date: Fournet, Hellénisme). The numbers in parentheses are those from Ruffini’s Prosopography of Byzantine Aphrodito. 52 P.Cair.Masp. III 67279 = P.Cair.Masp. I 67010 partially (Antinoupolis, ca. 567). P.Cair.Masp. II 67194 (Aphrodite, ca. 567). P.Cair.Masp. III 67279 = P.Cair.Masp. I 67010 partially (Antinoupolis, ca. 567); Gällnö, P.Gen. IV 167 introd., esp. 122-123 with note 9; Jean Gascou, “Deux inscriptions byzantines de Haute-Égypte. (Réédition de I.Thèbes-Syène 196 r° et v°),“ TravMém 12 (1994): 334-335; see also Cezary Kunderewicz, “Les topotérètes dans les Novelles de Justinien et dans l’Égypte byzantine“, JJurPap (1962): 33-50. A study on the topoteretai is in progress in the NFN as well (Alexandra Jesenko, “Die topoteretai im spätantiken und früharabischen Ägypten” [paper presented at the 27th International Congress of Papyrology, Warsaw, July 29–August 2, 2013]). 53 P.Coll.Youtie II 92 = P.Cair.Masp. I 67023 = FIRA III 12 = Jur. Pap. 12 (Antinoupolis, 569). 54 P.Cair.Masp. I 67007r (Antinoupolis?, 567, date: Fournet, “liste”).

Imperium & Officium: Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom Flavius Athanasius, dux et Augustalis Thebaidis 10

Phthla.55 Thirteen Aphroditan landowners visited the annual animal fair at Thinis and were hijacked by the dioiketai of the comes and scholasticus Serenus (10) and imprisoned. It seems that Menas had written letters to Serenus instigating this incident. Serenus and his meizoteros Victor (212) kept some animals and belongings of the imprisoned Aphroditans.56 The previous duces had given the order to free the Aphroditans, but Menas had not complied. The inhabitants of Aphrodite petition again to Athanasius some time after P.Cair.Masp. I 67002. Athanasius had remitted the taxation, but the current pagarch had violated that regulation again.57 P.Aphrod.Lit. IV 3 again concerns the wrongdoings of the pagarch Menas. The poem is to be seen parallel to the petition P.Cair.Masp. I 67002. It was composed after the petition and since it concerns the same case surely was addressed to Athanasius as well.58 The monks of Pharoou, from the monastery of the Christ-bearing apostles, addressed a petition to Athanasius and complain about Iezekiel (4), who contested land gifted by a widow to the monastery.59 A certain Sophia (17) from Aphrodite petitioned to the dux as well. Her first husband had died and left her with a young child; she did not get the inheritance due to her. Her second husband had been killed by a certain Senouthes (29), from Panopolis; he also had her tortured and imprisoned. Kollouthos (36), cancellarius and pagarch, had ordered him to release her, but he did not comply. Her child was taken away from her by the boethos Ieremias (29) who now refuses to give the boy back.60 The bouleutai of Ombos addressed a petition to the dux and complained about raiding Blemmyes, nomadic people living to the south and east of the Thebaid, and a high official or military spurring the Blemmyes on, levying taxes and spending the money himself, restoring the old cults on Philae and stealing from the military.61 A certain protokometes Ischyrion (4) addressed a request to Athanasius through the endoxotatos and paneuphemos stratelates Iulianus (4), who might have been the father of the dux himself.62 These petitions address quite every problem the local population would bring before the highest representative of the emperor in a province: taxation problems, murder, theft, hijacking, misuse of authority, conflicts about landownership, and military matters, as was the case in the petition from Ombos, concerning the Blemmyes. Athanasius was supposed to fix all kinds of problems; that he did not, or could not, will be discussed later on.

55 P.Cair.Masp. I 67002 (Antinoopolis?, 567). For the importance of shepherds in the Dioscoros-archive see Giovanni R. Ruffini, Social Networks in Byzantine Egypt (Cambridge, et al.: Cambrigde University Press, 2008). 56 Ruffini, Prosopography, sv. Biktor (212). 57 P.Lond. V 1674 (Antinoupolis, ca. 570). 58 P.Aphrod.Lit. IV 3 (mai-ca. july 567, date: Fournet, Hellénisme). Fournet, Hellénisme, 470-472. 59 P.Cair.Masp. I 67003 (Antinoupolis?, ca. 567). Pharoou is the same monastery as Pharatopos – BL IX, 40 (P.Michael. 40) and Apa Apollos (P.Cair.Masp. I 67096). (Ruffini, Prosopography, 224, note 42.) 60 P.Cair. I 67005 (Antinoupolis?, 567 or 568, date: Fournet, “liste”). 61 P.Cair.Masp. I 67004 (Antinoupolis?, ca. 567). 62 P.Cair.Masp. I 67008 (Antinoupolis?, ca. 567, date: Fournet, “liste”).

Imperium & Officium: Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom Anna Kaiser 11

The military branch of power

What we have seen so far concerned the civil side of Athanasius’ power. But he was also the highest military authority in the provinces Thebaid and Arcadia. In the documentary petitions to him his military authority plays no role. But in Dioscoros’ literary opus all the duces et Augustales of the Thebaid are celebrated as successful military commanders, who rescued all the cities and the province itself from diverse barbarians – the Blemmyes are the most popular enemy of the duces in these poems.63 Nevertheless these military successes are no real achievements of the duces, but simply convention – a dux as military commander simply has to triumph over barbarous enemies. Let us first have a look at the military units at Athanasius’ disposal before we return to the Blemmyes. The southernmost frontier of the East Roman Empire was the area of the 1st Cataract in Egypt, in the south of the Thebaid. This frontier was heavily guarded; as was the whole Upper Thebaid. As military commander of the Thebaid, Athanasius had at least fourteen garrisons under his command, which are proofed active in the second half of the 6th century.64 Four garrisons are active in the first half of the century and will still have been manned later on.65 And there might of course have been more garrisons and units that are simply not attested. Since he was military commander of the Arcadia as well, we have to add at least five garrisons,66 active in the second half of the century and four more, active in the first half of the century.67 If we take only the papyrologically secured 19 garrisons and take every garrison as counting a minimum of 200 soldiers, we end up with approximately 4000 men in arms under his direct control. We actually might guess at a higher number. And these soldiers did not stay put in their respective garrisons, but were detached to many different outposts and thereby widely dispersed over the country – the soldiers as signs of the ducal

63 Fournet, Hellénisme, 337; Palme, “Dioskoros,” 212. 64 There is the legio I Maximiana in Philae, the Milites Miliarenses in Syene, the cohors I Felix Theodosiana in Elephantine, a potential detachment of Scythae Iustiniani in Ombos, Latopolis, and Hermonthis, an unidentified unit in Ptolemais Hermeiu, maybe still the ala II Herculia Dromedariorum in Toeto-Psinabla, another unidentified unit in Pakerke, soldiers of the legio V Macedonica and the Scythae Iustiniani in Antaiopolis, two more detachments of the Scythae Iustiniani in Munptou and Hermoupolis Magna or Antinoupolis. For the different units and garrisons see Kaiser, “Militärorganisation,” sv. the respective names. 65 Soldiers (maybe Scythae Iustiniani) were stationed in Apollonopolis Magna, the legio III Diocletiana in Thebes, maybe the old equites sagittarii indigenae in Tentyra, and the Pharanitae in Bau. For the different units and garrisons see Kaiser, “Militärorganisation”, sv. the respective names. 66 An unidentified unit was garrisoned in Hipponon, a detachment of Scythae Iustiniani in Oxyrhynchos, an unidentified unit lay in Sintou in the Arsinoites, and the legio V Macedonica most likely had its garrison still in Memphis. For the different units and garrisons see Kaiser, “Militärorganisation”, sv. the respective names. 67 An unidentified unit lay in Spania; until 538 the Leontoclibanarii garrisoned in Alyi, it is not sure, whether they were relieved by a hitherto unknown unit or simply not replaced, the soldiers in Thmoinepsi most likely belonged still to the ala I Tingitana, and until at least 528/542 the Transtigritani garrisoned in Arsinoiton Polis, if they were relieved immediately after that date by another unit is not sure either. For the different units and garrisons see Kaiser, “Militärorganisation”, sv. the respective names.

Imperium & Officium: Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom Flavius Athanasius, dux et Augustalis Thebaidis 12

power were present everywhere. The southern border in the region of the 1st Cataract was especially well guarded of course. Amongst the units under the command of the dux et Augustalis Thebaidis was also the crack unit Scythae Iustiniani, the one unit we have already encountered in 563 in the Oxyrhynchites under the command of Athanasius, who then was not yet dux et Augustalis Thebaidis.68 The Scythae Iustiniani were established by emperor Justinian and sent, together with two further crack units, to Egypt to formally shut down the pagan temples on the island of Philae in 536/537. Since Athanasius stemmed from the Thebaid, this might have been a military event that he remembered prominently. The Scythae Iustiniani were the crack unit that stayed in Egypt and was placed under the command of the dux et Augustalis Thebaidis. The papyri show that the Scythae were deployed in small detachments all over the Thebais and the Arcadia as well – they very likely show up in nine different places, though it is not sure whether they manned all these places at exactly the same time.69 Since Athanasius was also in charge of the military based in the Arcadia there are no problems in the wide deployment and commandership of the Scythae, bridging the two provinces Thebais and Arcadia. That Egypt was not overstocked with military personnel is best seen by the recurring incursions and raids by Egypt’s neighbours to the south and east, the nomadic Blemmyes. The Blemmyes figure prominently in the poems and petitions of Dioscoros of Aphrodite – but more as a literary topos than as a reference to reality. The Blemmyes became the synonym for barbarians per se.70 The duces of the Thebaid simply had to prove their military virtue somehow – at least it had to be praised in coaxing poems – and the Blemmyes were the best enemy at hand.71 Therefore it is striking that Dioscoros did not praise Athanasius more for his victories against the Blemmyes than the other duces, since during his time in office there were real problems with the Blemmyes – there are some petitions in which the Blemmyes are not to be understood as the well liked and used literary topos.72 The bouleutai of Ombos addressed the already mentioned petition to dux Athanasius: Together with the Blemmyes a high official, or more likely a high military officer, had raided the area of Ombos, levied

68 P.Oxy. XVI 1920 = P.Oxy. I 154 R (introd.) = Sel.Pap. II 408 (Oxyrhynchos, after 563). 69 Detachments of the Scythae Iustiniani are proofed at Bau, Antaiopolis, Munptou and most likely in Antinoupolis or Hermoupolis Magna, Apollonopolis Magna, Latopolis, Panopolis, Hermonthis and Ombos as well. (Kaiser, “Militärorganisation”, 475-486.) 70 Fournet, P.Aphrod.Lit. 10, introd., 510-511. 71 Morelli, “Flagornerie”, 232; Fournet, Hellénisme, 337-338. 72 See Rémondon (“Soldats”, 67) for Egyptians in league with Blemmyes. Keenan, “Egypt”, 624; Dijkstra, “Cult”, 149; Jitse H.F. Dijkstra and Klaas A. Worp, “The administrative position of Omboi and Syene in Late Antiquity,” ZPE 155 (2006): 183-187. Strikingly, Dioscoros does not dwell any longer on the Blemmyes than he does with any other dux. In P.Aphrod.Lit. IV 10 = P.Cair.Masp. I 67097 V, E and B-C (end 565/beginning 566, date: Fournet, Hellénisme) he only characterises Athanasius as victor over the Blemmyes (1-4) and mentions that he saved the cities and that the Thebaid would never again see the Blemmyes nor the Saracens (21-25).

Imperium & Officium: Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom Anna Kaiser 13

taxes, only to use the money himself, and he even seems to have misused military property, e.g. gold and standards. The Blemmyes seem to have been bribed with money and – more importantly – the restoration of the old cult on Philae.73 So there definitely was a problem with the Blemmyes during Athanasius’ term in office, but to reconstruct a Blemmyan war (the 3rd in Roger Rémondon’s argument) out of this and a peace treaty out of an encomion praising Athanasius for having rid the province of the Blemmyes and Saracens forever, seems a little bit too far-fetched.74 The problem with the Blemmyes was more likely business as usual, since we see Blemmyan incursions and raids throughout Late Antiquity.75 But that does not mean that Athanasius did not fight the Blemmyes and put a – how ever long or short termed – end to their incursions. We therefore can conclude that Athanasius as dux et Augustalis Thebaidis had a) quite some soldiers under his direct command and b) that these soldiers were needed – the inhabitants of the province definitely would rely on them to counter strike any Blemmyan raids or at least to give avenge. Any success of course had to reflect on the highest military commander in the province – the dux et Augustalis Athanasius.

2. Social standing in the Thebais

Domus gloriosa

There are some papyri that do not address Athanasius as dux et Augustalis, but nevertheless show his high social standing very clearly. P.Oxy. XVI 1920 concerns the time shortly before his appointment as dux et Augustalis Thebaidis, as hyperphyestatos patricius he is the commander of a detachment of Scythae Iustiniani in the Arcadia: τοῖς ἀνθρ(ώποις) τοῦ ὑπερφυεστ(άτου) πατρικίου Ἀθανασίου.76 In P.Ant. III 206 he is known as patricius Athanasius,77 and in P.Lond. V 1674 he is styled paneuphemos patricius, as well as in P.Cair.Masp. II 67166.78 These documents add the already mentioned high honour of paneuphemos to his titles. Paneuphemos is one of the

73 P.Cair.Masp. I 67004 (Antinoupolis?, ca. 567). 74 Keenan, “Egypt”, 624 and Palme, “Imperial Presence”, 244; “Emotional Strategies”, 12 opt for the ending of a war. Anna M. Demicheli, Rapporti di pace e di guerra dell’Egitto romano con le popolazioni dei deserti Africani (Milano: A. Giuffrè, 1976), 194-195. For the Blemmyes and Saracens whom the Thebais will never see again – οὐ γὰρ ἔτι Βλεµύων γένος ὄψεαι, οὐ Σαρακηνῶν (V Z. 23) – as literary topos and not as evidence for a Blemmyan war followed by a peace treaty see Fournet, P.Aphrod.Lit. IV 10 introd., 510- 511 und P.Aphrod.Lit. IV 11, note line 82, 546-547. 75 What might have been not business as usual is the high official or military commander that sided with the Blemmyes. 76 P.Oxy. XVI 1920 = P.Oxy. I 154 R (introd.) = Sel.Pap. II 408 (Oxyrhynchos, after 563).

77 P.Ant. III 206 (Antinoupolis, 7th c.). The indiction dating could fit the years 555/556, 570/571 or 585/586 (BL XII, 6). 78 P.Lond. V 1674 (Antinoupolis, ca. 570); P.Cair.Masp. II 67166 (Antinoupolis, 568).

Imperium & Officium: Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom Flavius Athanasius, dux et Augustalis Thebaidis 14

highest designations of rank, most probably to be rendered as famosissimus in Latin.79 In combination with the already encountered patricius and the designations hyperphyestatos and consularis, Athanasius clearly belonged to the high aristocracy of the East Roman Empire. Such accumulations of high titles and epithets are encountered in the papyri so far only with the family of the Apiones and Flavius Strategius Paneuphemus.80 Even more important, some documents show Athanasius as holder of a domus gloriosa, an endoxos oikos in Greek.81 In Late Antiquity, there were three types of oikoi or domus: The domus divina, belonging to a member of the imperial family, the euageis oikoi, belonging to the church and monasteries, and the domus gloriosa, the houses of senators and other high ranking persons in the imperial administration.82 The denomination domus gloriosa was inspired by the name of the landholdings of a member of the imperial household, called domus divina.83 How much land belonged to Athanasius’ domus gloriosa, and where it was located, we do not know yet. But if his father Iulianus is to be identified with the owner of the large estate parts of Aphrodite belonged to – κοινότης τῶν ἀγρευτῶν τῶν καὶ διαφερόντων τῷ ἐνδόξῳ οἴκῳ | τῆς αὐτῆς κώµης Ἀφροδίτης84 – than we grasp at least a part of Athanasius’ domus gloriosa.85 Zuckerman established that Iulianus’ domus possessed about 3/5 of the arable land in Aphrodite. His position and wealth in the Thebais would be comparable to the influence and possessions of the Apiones in the Arcadia.86 Domus like the well-known domus gloriosa of the Apiones existed throughout Egypt, as Roberta Mazza points out. The problem is that these large estates are simply not very well known (with a few exceptions of course).87 Mazza states that as member of the high imperial aristocracy, Athanasius was likely to own land outside the Thebais as well. His landholding is most likely to equal in quantity and quality the landholdings of the Apiones.88 Fournet established that Athanasius, due to his family most likely, already had land before he took over the office of dux et Augustalis

79 See note 15. 80 Palme, “domus gloriosa”, 97. 81 P.Cair.Masp. II 67166,6-7 (Antinoupolis, 568); P.Lond. V 1709 (Antinoupolis, ca. 566-568). 82 Jean Gascou, “Les grands domaines, la cité et l’état en Égypte byzantine (Recherches d’histoire agraire, fiscale et administrative),” TravMém 9 (1985): 4. 83 Azzarello, domus divina, 15. 84 SB III 6704,4-5 = SB III 6266 (Aphrodite, 538). Zuckerman (village, 221-222) equalises the Iulianii 1 and 2 from Ruffini’s Prosopography. 85 Zuckerman, village, 221-222. He states that the domus does not belong to the comes Ammonius (as was thought earlier), who also owned land in Aphrodite, but on a much smaller scale. That large estates in the Thebais were as well developed as in the Oxyrhynchite, with the famous Apiones, is already stated by Jean Gascou and Klaas A. Worp, “Un dossier d’ostraca du VIe siècle: les archives des huiliers d’Aphroditô,” in Miscellanea Papyrologica in Occassione del Bicentenario dell’Edizione della Charta Borgiana. Vol. I, ed. Mario Capassi et al. (Firenze: Editioni Gonnelli, 1990), 224. 86 Zuckerman, village, 222-223, followed by Roberta Mazza, “Land and Power in Late Antiquity: The

Egyptian Point of View” (paper presented at the 3rd International Conference of the Research Network Imperium & Officium. Land and Power in the Ancient and Post- Ancient World, Wien, February 20–22, 2013). 87 Mazza, “land and power”. 88 Mazza, “land and power”.

Imperium & Officium: Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom Anna Kaiser 15

Thebaidis.89 What we do not know is, if he had property in Aegyptus as well, before being appointed dux et Augustalis Aegypti or whether he acquired land while being in office in Alexandria. But since he seems to have stemmed from a family serving in the highest ranks of provincial administration “land” might not have been the crucial factor in his becoming dux et Augustalis of either province. Though this would be a good question to put to his family’s rise to power. SB XXIV 16222 is a letter in which the paneuphemos patricius, whom Morelli identified with Athanasius through the mentioned comes Licinianus, contradicts a scribo, a high imperial official from Constantinople, on the topic of the requisition of ships.90 It is not clear, whether Athanasius was still dux et Augustalis Thebaidis at the time in question (the document is not dated precisely) but his behaviour (as dux or not) clearly points to his very influential standing. He seems to act on the same level as the scribo himself. To whom these ships belonged, is not known, but both the dux et Augustalis Thebaidis (maybe no longer Athanasius though) and the domus divina are possible options.91

Domus divina

Flavius Athanasius was also administrator of the domus divina in the Thebaid; before and while he held the office of dux et Augustalis Thebaidis, and, most likely, afterwards as well.92 In 2012 Guiseppina Azzarello dedicated a book to the dossier of the domus divina in Egypt.93 The land that belonged to a member of the imperial family was called domus divina. The respective domus divina served exclusively as revenue of its imperial owner. A phrontistes of the domus divina was the highest manager of that land in a single province. Above him stood only the curator domus divinae, responsible for the whole domus of one member of the imperial family.94 In 552/553, in the Vienna papyrus in which he is also mentioned as (former) dux et Augustalis Alexandriae, Athanasius is called administrator of the domus divina, most likely of emperor Justinian, in the Thebaid.95 Since the phrontistai were the ones responsible for the imperial landholding in one single province, the lacuna in the text, which

89 Fournet, Hellénisme, 329.

90 SB XXIV 16222 (Antinoupolis or Hermoupolis?, 2nd half 6th c.). 91 Morelli, “due patrizi”, 146-157. 92 P.Vindob. G 16334 (Constantinople, ca. 552-553) (Morelli, “Flagornerie”, 233); P.Cair.Masp. 67002 (Antinoupolis?, 567) (Azzarello, domus divina, 17; 97, n. 45. Morelli, “Flagornerie”, 233-237); SB XXIV 16222 (Antinoupolis or Hermoupolis?, 2nd half 6th c.) (Morelli, “due patrizi”, 146-157). 93 Azzarello, domus divina. 94 Jones, LRE I, 425-426; Azzarello, domus divina, 14-26. 95 P.Vindob. G 16334,1-3. Azzarello, domus divina, 37; 97, n. 45: The patricius mentioned as phrontistes of the domus of Justinian in the Thebaid might be identified with Athanasius, the later dux et Augustalis Thebaidis. Theodora held a domus divina in the Thebaid which after her death fell to her husband Justinian. Therefore Athanasius was most likely the phrontistes of the domus divina belonging to Justinian himself. (Azzarello, domus divina, 14; 97.) Other duces et Augustales Thebaidis are known to have been phrontistai of the domus divina as well. (Azzarello, domus divina, 71-115.)

Imperium & Officium: Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom Flavius Athanasius, dux et Augustalis Thebaidis 16

affects exactly this function, should be completed with phrontistes, Azzarello states.96 In the famous petition P.Cair.Masp. I 67002, dating to 567, Athanasius is still, if indirectly, styled as manager of the domus divina in the Thebaid. He had received a house in Aphrodite for his dioiketes Licinianus, who undertook the administration of the domus divina as subaltern of Athanasius.97 The dioiketai were the ones responsible for the area of the former nomoi/the civitates.98 Therefore Athanasius was phrontistes of the domus divina (most likely) of Justinian in the Thebaid from at least 552/553 to 567, for the minimum of fifteen years.99 It is purely hypothetical at the moment, whether the father or an ancestor of Athanasius was already phrontistes, or any lower kind of administrator, of the domus divina in Egypt. As phrontistes of the domus divina in the Thebaid Athanasius was (after the death of Theodora in 548) directly responsible for the united domus divinae of Justinian and Theodora. Attestations of the domus divina in the Thebaid refer most often to the area around Antaiopolis, but this might be due to the documents originating in the archive of Dioscoros. Both Theodora and Justinian held land in the vicinity of Aphrodite and the village put itself under the protection of the empress.100 In general, the imperial lands seem to have been located near rural settlements. The epoikion Pelaiuae and other land near the village Terythis in the Antaiopolites seem to have belonged to the domus divina as well.101 Admittedly, this is not much knowledge on the extent of the domus divina under the authority of Flavius Athanasius. Nevertheless he was the highest contact in the Thebaid for all the people working for or depending on the domus divina.102 And in addition he had good connection to the imperial household in Constantinople; one simply has to look to the better-known domus gloriosa of the Apiones in the Oxyrhynchites, some of whose members were administrators of the domus divina themselves and made fairly good careers both in Egypt and beyond. The Apiones

96 Azzarello, domus divina, 97. 97 P.Cair.Masp. 67002 (Antinoupolis?, 567). Azzarello, domus divina, 17; 97, n. 45. Morelli, “Flagornerie”, 233-237. 98 Azzarello, domus divina, 11-14; 17. 99 Gascou was the first to state that the duces Thebaidis seem to have automatically become the curatores (following now Azzarello [domus divina, 16-17] they should have been phrontistai rather than curatores) of the domus divina in the province (Gascou, “grands domains”, 35). There are quite a few duces Thebaidis that figure as administrators of the domus divina as well, but as Morelli stated (“Flagornerie”, 327, note 47), it is not to be deduced that all of the duces Thebaidis were curatores/phrontistai of the domus divina. Even if there seems to be a connection between the ducal office and the curatorship/the function of phrontistes of the domus divina (Azzarello, domus divina, 16-17; 50): „Del resto, una connessione tra l’officio del dux e quello di un amministratore imperiale a livello di una intera provincia, è stato già osservato da Jean Gascou e recentemente confermato da Federico Morelli anche in alcuni papiri riguardanti l’Antaiopolites ...” (16). 100 Azzarello, domus divina, 41-44. 101 Azzarello, domus divina, 40-42. For papyri mentioning the domus divina in the Thebaid: Azzarello, domus divina, schema 2 and 3, 30-31. 102 The phrontistes was responsible for the financial, fiscal and juridical concerns of the domus divina in “his” province. Petitions of people working for or depending on the domus divina were addressed to him. (Azzarello, domus divina, 14-20; 50.) His subordinated personal were the dioiketai and the pronoetai (Azzarello, domus divina, 11-14; 9-11).

Imperium & Officium: Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom Anna Kaiser 17

themselves started their career in the imperial service with their involvement in the domus divina.103 This illuminates the importance of the service with the domus divinae. In addition it might well be that as phrontistes of the domus divina Athanasius also received land, formerly belonging to exactly that domus, as a gift.104 So “land” played a significant role in Athanasius’ (and his family’s) rise to power; and later on as well.

A network of power – Conclusions

Athanasius, who was the son of a well-established family, most likely from the Thebaid, was well connected. Not only his ancestors seem to have held high positions in neighbouring provinces and the Thebaid itself; his brother Phoibammon held the office of pagarch at the same time as Athanasius was dux et Augustalis Thebaidis.105 Actually he would have held the pagarchal office for a longer time than his brother was dux Thebaidis. While the duces usually served for two to maybe three years, some pagarchs stayed in office for decades.106 Since the 5th century the pagarchs were the highest financial and fiscal authority in the civitates, the former nomes; they of course were subordinated to the dux, but the dux could only reprimand their actions, he could not strip them of their office – only the emperor himself could do that. That of course means that the pagarchs themselves held a really powerful position. Combined with the fact that they usually were from the same influential strata as the duces that might explain why the duces might not have intervened as strictly as Dioscoros or other inhabitants of the province would have wanted them to do, with their petitions against the actions of certain pagarchs for example.107 With his Edict XIII Justinian actually did enhance the power of the provincial governors, since the combined civil and military authorities of the duces et Augustales should have been powerful enough, compared to the might local potentates, like large-scale landowners, pagarchs and bishops, had. It nevertheless seems that this intention did not work out – in 569 Justin II decreed that the future governors should be chosen by the bishops, the landowners and city dwellers of the province. In other words, the choice of the

103 For the Apiones see esp. Roberta Mazza, L’archivio degli Apioni. Terra, lavoro e proprietà senatoria nell’Egitto tardoantico (Bari: Edipuglia, 2001); Bernhard Palme, “Flavius Paneuphemus und die Apionen,” ZSav 115 (1998): 289-322; Giuseppina Azzarello, “P. Oxy. XVI 2039 e la nascita della domus gloriosa degli Apioni,” ZPE 155 (2006): 207-228; Azzarello, domus divina, 29 (Strategius I as dioiketes in the Oxyrhynchites and later on phrontistes of the domus divina of Eudocia in Arcadia); Mazza, land and power; Ruffini, social networks, 149. 104 Azzarello, domus divina, 47. Jones (LRE I, 205) does not see it as unlikely, that the high administrators received land as gift for their services and loyalty. Gascou (“grands domains”, 35) states that one must not think that the administrators did not gain any profit from their services. He sees the function as phrontistes (he still calls him curator) in Egypt as special munus or privilege of the duces (note 213). That there was a tight cross-interlocking is quite clear. 105 Fournet, Hellénisme, 329. In P.Aphrod.Lit. 13,28 = P.Lond.Lit. 100 E (end 565/beginning 566-567, date: Fournet, Hellénisme) Phoibammon has the same ancestral line as Athanasius in P.Aphrod.Lit. 10,34 = P.Cair.Masp. I 67097 V, E and B-C (end 565/beginning 566, date: Fournet). Palme, “Dioskoros,” 215. 106 Palme, “Dioskoros,” 216. 107 Palme, “Dioskoros”, 215-216; Ruffini, social networks, 188; 192-13.

Imperium & Officium: Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom Flavius Athanasius, dux et Augustalis Thebaidis 18

governor was put in the hands of the local elites. Already years before we see this happening in the Thebaid: “The noble families of each province shared the (usually bi-annual) position of the governor between them even before Justin II,” as Palme puts it.108 Athanasius (and not only because his brother Phoibammon was one of his pagarchs) and his fellow duces either were part of their well-connected elite network in and outside their province or – which might be rather unrealistic – they were rather helpless against their pagarchs and the provincial elite, just because they were not part of the well- connected elite network.109 Even if we know nothing about a career outside Egypt, it is quite safe to guess that there was one. We have already encountered possible connections to the imperial and especially Constantinopolitan elite throughout this article – his high designations of rank, like paneuphemos and consularis as best example. Let us end this case study on the dux et Augustalis Thebaidis Flavius Athanasius with a very potent picture painted by Fournet. He calls Athanasius the “basileus de province”. For the people in the province the emperor was far away – too far away to be more than a mighty, but surreal, figure on the horizon. It was the dux et Augustalis who held the role as king in the province. Through the Dioscoros’ poems we see him doing exactly the same things the emperor himself did – he made his birthday, his marriage, and possibly other occasions of his private life public celebrations, and thereby he was the exact image of the emperor far away in Constantinople – on a smaller scale admittedly.110 Ingredients of Athanasius’ powerful standing as king of the province were the membership of one of the provinces most important families, his landholdings in the Thebaid as part of his domus gloriosa, his being phrontistes of the domus divina of Justinian in the Thebaid, important and most honourable offices of the East Roman Empire, the command of at least part of a military crack unit just before he became dux et Augustalis Thebaidis, soldiers as symbols of his military virtue all over the Thebaid and Arcadia, possibly victories over the ever-raiding Blemmyes and – not least – the office of dux et Augustalis Aegypti, before finally being appointed dux et Augustalis Thebaidis in 565/566.

Bibliography

Azzarello, Giuseppina. “P. Oxy. XVI 2039 e la nascita della domus gloriosa degli Apioni.” ZPE 155 (2006): 207-228.

108 Palme, “Emotional Strategies”, 9, note 48; Jean Gascou, “Les petitions privées,” in La petition à Byzance, ed. Denis Feissel et al. (Paris: Association des Amis du Centre d’Histoire et Civilisation de Byzance, 2004); Nov.Ius. 149. 109 Palme, “Emotional Strategies”, 3-4. 110 Fournet, Hellénisme, 339. Jean Maspero, “Un dernier poète grec d’Égypte: Dioscore, fils d’Aplloôs,” Revue des Études Grecques 24 (1911): 467.

Imperium & Officium: Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom Anna Kaiser 19

Azzarello, Giuseppina. Il dossier della domus divina in Egitto. Berlin, Boston: Walter de Gruyter GmbH, 2012.

Bagnall, Roger S., Cameron, Alan, Schwartz, Seth R., and Worp, Klaas A. Consuls of the Later Roman Empire. Atlanta, Georgia: Scholars Press, 1987.

Brandes, Wolfram. “Die τράπεζα/arca der praefectura praetorio per Orientem und die Datierung von Justinians Edikt 13.” Fontes Minores 11 (2005): 229-234.

Demicheli, Anna M. Rapporti di pace e di guerra dell’Egitto romano con le popolazioni dei deserti Africani. Milano: A. Giuffrè, 1976.

Demicheli, Anna M. L’Editto XIII di Giustiniano. In terma di amministrazione e fiscalità dell’Egitto bizantino. Torino: Giappichelli, 2000.

Dijkstra, Jitse H.F. “A Cult of Isis at Philae after Justinian? Reconsidering P. Cair. Masp. I 67004.” ZPE 146 (2004): 137-154.

Dijkstra, Jitse H.F. and Worp, Klaas A. “The administrative position of Omboi and Syene in Late Antiquity.“ ZPE 155 (2006): 183-187.

Fournet, Jean-Luc. Hellénisme dans l’Égypte du VIe siècle. La bibliothèque et l’oeuvre de Dioscore d’Aphrodité. Vol. I-II. Le Caire: Institut français d’archéologie orientale, 1999.

Fournet, Jean-Luc. “Liste des papyrus édités de l’Aphrodité byzantine.“ In Les archives de Dioscore d’Aphrodité cent ans après leur découverte. Histoire et culture dans l’Égypte byzantine. Actes du Colloque de Strasbourg (8-10 décembre 2005), edited by Jean-Luc Fournet, 307-343. Paris: De Boccard, 2008. Gascou, Jean. “Les grands domaines, la cité et l’état en Égypte byzantine (Recherches d’histoire agraire, fiscale et administrative).” TravMém 9 (1985): 1-90.

Gascou, Jean. “Deux inscriptions byzantines de Haute-Égypte. (Réédition de I.Thèbes-Syène 196 r° et v°)” TravMém 12 (1994): 323-342.

Gascou, Jean. “Décision de Caesarius, gouverneur militaire de Thébaïde.” TravMém 14 (2002): 269-277.

Imperium & Officium: Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom Flavius Athanasius, dux et Augustalis Thebaidis 20

Gascou, Jean. “Les petitions privées.” In La petition à Byzance, edited by Denis Feissel and Jean Gascou, 93-103. Paris: Association des Amis du Centre d’Histoire et Civilisation de Byzance, 2004.

Gascou, Jean and Worp, Klaas A. “Un dossier d’ostraca du VIe siècle: les archives des huiliers d’Aphroditô.” In Miscellanea Papyrologica in Occassione del Bicentenario dell’Edizione della Charta Borgiana. Vol. I, edited by Mario Capassi, Gabriella Messeri Savorelli and Rosario Pintaudi, 217-244. Firenze: Editioni Gonnelli, 1990.

Gelzer, Mattias. “Altes und Neues aus der byzantinisch-ägyptischen Verwaltungsmisere, vornehmlich im Zeitalter Justinians. Archiv für Papyrusforschung und verwandte Gebiete 5 (1913): 346-377.

Heil, Wilhelm. Der konstantinische Patriziat. Basel, Stuttgart: Helbing & Lichtenhahn, 1966.

Hornickel, Otto. Ehren- und Rangprädikate in den Papryusurkunden. Ein Beitrag zum römischen und byzantinischen Titelwesen. Gießen: Universitätsverlag von Robert Noske in Borna-Leipzig, 1930.

Jesenko, Alexandra. “Die topoteretai im spätantiken und früharabischen Ägypten.” Paper presented at the 27th International Congress of Papyrology, Warsaw, July 29–August 2, 2013.

Jones, Arnold H.M. The later Roman Empire 284-602. A social economic and administrative survey. Vol. I-III. Oxford: Blackwell, 1964. (LRE)

Kaiser, Anna M. “Militärorganisation im spätantiken Ägypten (284-641 n. Chr.).” PhD diss., Universität Wien, 2012.

Keenan, James G. “Egypt.” In The Cambridge Ancient History. Second Edition. Vol. XIV. Late Antiquity: Empire and Successors, A.D. 425-600, edited by Averil Cameron, Bryan Ward-Perkins, and Michael Whitby, 612-637. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Koch, Paul. Die Byzantinischen Beamtentitel von 400 bis 700. Jena: Universitäts- Buchdruckerei G. Neuenhahn, 1903.

Imperium & Officium: Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom Anna Kaiser 21

Kunderewicz, Cezary. “Les topotérètes dans les Novelles de Justinien et dans l’Égypte byzantine.” JJurPap 14 (1962): 33-50.

Maspero, Jean. “Études sur les papyrus d’Aphrodité II.“ BIFAO 7 (1910): 97-152.

Maspero, Jean. “Un dernier poète grec d’Égypte: Dioscore, fils d’Aplloôs.” Revue des Études Grecques 24 (1911): 421-481.

Mazza, Roberta. “Ricerche sul pagarca nell’Egitto tardoantico e bizantino.” Aegyptus 75 (1995): 169-242.

Mazza, Roberta. L’archivio degli Apioni. Terra, lavoro e proprietà senatoria nell’Egitto tardoantico. Bari: Edipuglia, 2001.

Mazza, Roberta. “Land and Power in Late Antiquity: The Egyptian Point of View.” Paper presented at the 3rd International Conference of the Research Network Imperium & Officium. Land and Power in the Ancient and Post-Ancient World, Wien, February 20–22, 2013.

Mitthof, Fritz. “Das Dioskoros-Archiv und die militärischen Reformen Justinians in der Thebais.” In Les archives de Dioscore d’Aphrodité cent ans après leur découverte. Histoire et culture dans l’Égypte byzantine. Actes du colloque de Strasbourg [8-10 décembre 2005], edited by Jean-Luc Fournet, 247-259. Paris: De Boccard, 2008.

Morelli, Federico. Olio e retribuzioni nell’Egitto tardo (V-VIII d.C.). Firenze: Istituto Papirologico “G. Vitelli”, 1996.

Morelli, Federico. “SB XXIV 16222: due patrizi e un Liciniano.” Tyche 23 (2008): 139-157.

Morelli, Federico. “Zwischen Poesie und Geschichte: Die „Flagornerie“ des Dioskoros und der dreifache Dux Athanasios.” In Les archives de Dioscore d’Aphrodité cent ans après leur découverte. Histoire et culture dans l’Égypte byzantine. Actes du colloque de Strasbourg (8- 10 décembre 2005), edited by Jean-Luc Fournet, 223-245. Paris: De Boccard, 2008.

Palme, Bernhard. “Die domus gloriosa des Flavius Strategius Paneuphemos.” Chiron 27 (1997): 95-125.

Imperium & Officium: Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom Flavius Athanasius, dux et Augustalis Thebaidis 22

Palme, Bernhard. “Flavius Paneuphemus und die Apionen.” ZSav 115 (1998): 289-322.

Palme, Bernhard. “The Imperial Presence: Government and Army.” In Egypt in the Byzantine World, 300-700, edited by Roger S. Bagnall, 244-270. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.

Palme, Bernhard. “Dioskoros und die staatlichen Autoritäten.” In Les archives de Dioscore d’Aphrodité cent ans après leur découverte. Histoire et culture dans l’Égypte byzantine. Actes du colloque de Strasbourg (8-10 décembre 2005), edited by Jean-Luc Fournet, 203-222. Paris: De Boccard, 2008.

Palme, Bernhard. “Emotional strategies in Petitions of Dioscorus of Aphroditê.”

Rémondon, Roger. “L’Édit XIII de Justinien a-t-il été promulgé en 539?.” CdÉ 30 (1955): 112-121.

Rémondon, Roger. “Soldats de Byzance d’après un papyrus trouvé à Edfou.” RecPap 1 (1961): 41-93.

Rouillard, Germaine. L’administration civile de l’Égypte byzantine. Paris: Geuthner, 19282. Ruffini, Giovanni R. Social Networks in Byzantine Egypt. Cambridge, et al.: Cambrigde University Press, 2008.

Ruffini, Giovanni R. A Prosopography of Byzantine Aphrodito. Durham, North Carolina: The American Society of Papyrologists, 2011.

Stern, Matthias. Der Pagarch und die Organisation des öffentlichen Sicherheitswesens im spätantiken Ägypten. Wien: Universität Wien, in preparation.

Zuckerman, Constantin. Du village à l’empire. Autour du registre fiscal d’Aphroditô (525/526). Paris: Association des Amis.

Imperium & Officium: Comparative Studies in Ancient Bureaucracy and Officialdom