Zur tribunicia potestas von Kaiser Decius und seinen Söhnen

Abstract

Scholars have long assumed that 3^rd century emperors from Philippus Arabs onwards moved the customary date on which their tribunicia potestas was renewed from December 10^th to January 1st. This had consequences for the dates assigned to a wealth of documents. The foundation of this view was the phenomenon that imperial constitutions on occasion show a discrepancy between the date suggested by the tribunicia potestas and that indicated by the consuls named. In fact, however, this is simply due to the administrative process that produced the documents: the emperors approved the constitutions some time before they were published. During publication, the tribunicia potestas was not adjusted even if it had changed since. This implies that these discrepancies do not indicate that the beginning of tribunicia potestas was moved. This insight is further applied to the rule of Decius and his sons, since it removes any reason to assume a tribunicia potestas IV for this emperor. The isolated milestone from Barcino bearing this number does not provide a good counter-argument since substantial confusion regarding imperial titulature is particularly common on milestones from the Iberian peninsula.