most such processional scenes is controversial. Winged horses sometimes
seem to indicate a mythological scene, sometimes not.
44. No less fragile are the constructions based on the puzzling iconography of
the famous cista Praenestina. This has been seen as a representation of
some form of triumph (e.g., Bonfante Warren [1964]); but a variety of
other interpretations, mythical and theatrical, have been proposed (e.g.
Adam [1989], with review of earlier literature). I am likewise unconvinced
by other attempts to see triumphs in early Roman tomb painting
(Holliday [2002] 33–43).
45. Ryberg (1955) 16–7; Holliday (1990) 86–90. In fact Vel Saties too may be
Notes to Pages 312–321
392
of Roman date. The tomb was built in the fifth century bce, but—as
Bonfante Warren (1970a) 65 briefly discusses—the paintings have been
variously dated between the fourth and first centuries bce.
46. This would be taken as self-evident in the case of poetic or obviously
mythic aetiologies of rituals, such as we find in Ovid’s Fasti (Calendar
Poem) and elsewhere. Convenient summary: Graf (2002) 115–21.
47. Africa: Servius (auct.), Aen. 4, 37 (in the context of Virgil’s description of Africa as “rich in triumphs”). Tripartite honor: Isidore, Orig. 18, 2, 3.
48. Varro, LL 6, 33; Cicero, Leg. 2, 54.
49. An idea echoed in Plutarch, Rom. 16; Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Ant. 2, 34.
50. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Ant. 5, 47; Festus (Paulus) p. 213L.
51. Plutarch, Marc. 22, 4.
52. Servius, Aen 4, 543.
53. Pliny Nat. 7, 191.
54. Euripides, Ba. 13–19.
55. Nock (1928) 21–30; Bowersock (1994) 157.
56. Curtius 3, 12, 18.
57. In addition to that illustrated, Matz (1968) 271–3, pl. 156–9 (prisoners and
spoils); 263–7, pl. 144, 152–6 (procession and Dionysiac “general”).
58. Pliny, Nat. 8, 4.
59. Another case of an originary story being reinscribed in the ritual as per-
formed is hinted at by Appian ( Pun. 66). He refers to lyre players and pipers “acting out” an Etruscan procession, as if they were putting on a show
of imitating Etruscan origins.
60. Celebration: Procopius, Vand. 2 ( Bella 4), 9, with McCormick (1986) 65–
6, 125–9. Mosaic: Aed. 1, 10, 16–18, with MacCormack (1981) 74–5.
61. Graves (1954) foreword; Cameron (1976) 119.
62. “Post-Roman” victory celebrations in Constantinople and elsewhere:
McCormick (1986) esp. 36–78 (for developments from the fourth to
eighth centuries).
63. John Lydus, De Magistratibus 2, 2 (triumphal vocabulary, but focused on Justinian); Jordanes, Getica 171–2 ( MGH AA 5.1, 102–3); John Malalas 18, 81; Marcellinus Comes, year 534.
64. Barini (1952) 161–200; some celebrations may have fallen out of the re-
cord.
65. SHA Aurelian 33–4; Tyranni XXX (Thirty Pretenders) 30, 4–11, 24–6.
66. Merten (1968) 101–40; Paschoud (1996) 160–9. A particular target has
been the stags pulling the chariot, often thought to be the author’s confu-
Notes to Pages 322–329
393
sion of a Greek source referring to elephants (Greek elaphos = stag;
elephas = elephant); though stags are defended by A. Alföldi (1964) 6–8
and Alföldi-Rosenbaum (1994).
67. SHA, Severus Alexander 56.
68. Dio 76, 1; Herodian 3, 10, 1–2; SHA, Severus 16, 6–7.
69. MacCormack (1981) 17–61.
70. Ammianus Marcellinus 16, 10, 10 and 1.
71. Ammianus Marcellinus 16, 10, 2.
72. MacCormack (1981) 51.
73. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Ant. 2, 34, 2; 5, 17, 1–2; Livy 3, 29, 4–5. Ando (2000) 257.
74. Panegyrici Latini 11, 4; Eutropius 9, 27, 2; Chrongraphus anni 354 =
MGH AA 9, 148; Cassiodorus, Chronica = MGH AA 11, 150; with Nixon (1981).
75. Panegyrici Latini 4, 30, 4–32, 3 (quotation 31, 1), Lactantius, De Mortibus Persecutorum 44, 10; Zosimus 2, 17, 1; Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiastica 9, 9, 9; Vita Constantini 1, 39. Omission of sacrifice: Straub (1955), with criticism of McCormick (1986) 101; Nixon and Rodgers (1994) 323–4;
Fraschetti (1999).
76. Claudian, Panegyricus de VI Consulatu Honorii 369–70, 404–6, 393.
77. Currus: McCormick (1986) 87. Ioci: Panegyrici Latini 12, 18, 3. Early Roman precedents: Procopius, Vand. 2 ( Bella 4), 9, 2; Priscian, De laude Anastasii 174–7.
78. Thesiger (1987) 54–6; Maitland (2006) 44–5.
Bibliography
A number of fundamental works on the Roman triumph stand behind most of what I say in this book. The annotated chronology of republican Roman ceremonies in A. Degrassi, Inscriptiones Italiae XIII.1 (Rome, 1947), and on the CD accompanying T. Itgenshorst, Tota illa pompa: der Triumph in der römischen Republik (Göttingen, 2005), can be taken as the first port of call for the basic information on any individual ceremony. I have not normally referenced these in the endnotes. Throughout my research I have had at my side W. Ehlers’ entry, “Triumphus,” in Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encyclopädie (RE) 2. VIIA, 1, 493–511; H. S. Versnel, Triumphus: an inquiry into the origin, development and meaning of the Roman triumph (Leiden, 1970); E. Künzl, Der römische Triumph: Siegesfeiern im antiken Rom (Munich, 1988); and in the later stages Itgenshorst’s Tota illa pompa and I. Östenberg, Staging the world: Rome and the other in the triumphal procession (diss.
Lund, 2003; rev. ed. Oxford, forthcoming). These are usually referenced only in the case of particular disagreement, to highlight a discussion that might otherwise be hard to locate, or—especially in the case of Versnel—where his treatment of the topic has become the starting point of modern debate.
Abaecherli, A. L. 1935–6. “Fercula, carpenta, and tensae in the Roman procession.” Bollettino dell’Associazione Internazionale degli Studi Mediterranei 6, 1–20.
Aberson, M. 1994. Temples votifs et butin de guerre dans la Rome républicaine.
Rome.
Adam, R. 1989. “Faux triomphe et préjugés tenaces: la ciste Berlin misc. 3238.”
MEFRA 101, 597–641.
Adamo Muscettola, S. 1992. “Per una riedizione dell’arco di Traiano a
Benevento: appunti sul fregio trionfale.” Prospettiva 67, 2–16.
Agnoli, N. 2002. Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Palestrina: le sculture. Rome.
Bibliography
395
Alföldi, A. 1934. “Die Ausgestaltung des monarchischen Zeremoniells.”
MDAI(R) 49, 1–118.
——— 1935. “Insignien und Tracht der römischen Kaiser.” MDAI(R) 50, 1–