The economic types of privilegia (exemption from munera and tax benefits) were one of the major aspirations for in-service or discharged service personnel. The emperor Constantine, concerned about veterans being reintegrated into civilian life, was willing to accept requests for beneficia from a few of them who had banded together in principia of civitas Velovocorum (Cth 7, 20, 2 a. 326?). Should institutions be disputed, the people concerned had to produce evidence of acquired privileges, and Constantine (ideally referring to the Brigetio norm ordering the dux to issue each veteran with a certificate of honesta missio at the time of discharge) authorized veterans to make, on whitened wooden tablets, a copy of the edict containing the imperial indulgentia (Cth 7, 20, 1); this authorization, facilitating the military to acquire the documentation, denounces the inefficiency of the offices to acknowledge and implement the imperial measures.

The comparative analysis of the sources, in particular the correspondence of Augustine, allows to specify some aspects about the life of Bonifatius, personage of African origin, who arrived the top of the military career, thanks to fortunate and prestigious political friendships. He distinguished himself commanding Berber foederati along the limes of Tubunae and became comes Africae perhaps around 419-420 AD, he was later involved in the preparations of the ill-fated expedition of Castinus against the Vandals in Baetica. He remained tied to Galla Placidia and married Pelagia, a woman of her entourage, in 425-426 AD; then he disgraced and squeezed probably an agreement with the Vandals, which inadvertently caused the end of dioecesis Africae. Si trova nel volume Fra Costantino e i Vandali. Atti del Convegno Internazionale di Studi per Enzo Aiello (1957-2013), Messina, 20-30 ottobre 2014, a cura di Letteria De Salvo, Elena Caliri, Marilena Casella, Bari 2016, ISBN 978-88-7228-785-9, pp. 525-543

The comitatus of the period 284-305 AD were moving structures. Diocletian and Maximian Herculius daily dumped heavy checks on dignitaries and palatine officers who followed them in their respective comitatus. The Caesares (293-305 AD) had a reduced comitatus compared to that of the Augusti, without the praetorian prefect and the chefs of the financial departments, but endowed with an officium a memoria and the offices for the correspondence. The ‘bureaucrats’ flanking the Caesares seem to have been nominated by the Augusti. The comitatus of the two Augusti appears similar to that of the Severan age, with the new magistri at the head of the palatine offices (perhaps already called scrinia). Few holders of palatine functions are known in the period 284-305. Only the two Augusti had a complete ‘central government organization chart’: one praetorian prefect each, still at the top of the civil and military administration; a ‘two-headed’ financial section (rationalis summae rei, rationalis rei privatae). At court the ‘bureaucratic’ officia were complete: memoriae, censum, a commentariis, epistularum; in the ‘judicial’ sector: libellorum; studiorum; sacrarum cognitionum. New is the a consiliis sacris. The only cursus honorum of an dignitary, who has played a palatine career during the age of Diocletian and the Tetrarchs, is C. Caelius Saturninus signo Dogmatius (CIL VI, 1704, re-examined). Some important jurists working in Diocletian's palace (Gregorius, author of the major Codex of the time, Aurelius Arcadius Charisius, magister libellorum of Diocletian, Aurelius Hermogenianus, also perhaps magister libellorum, probably praetorian prefect of Diocletian around 297-304 AD). The comitatus of the period 284-305 AD seem to represent the last, extreme facies of the palatium of the High Empire. However, the introduction of the new ritual of the adoratio, or proskýnesis, marks an irreversible change in the relationship with the prince. About the relationship between this new and fortunate ceremonial apparatus and the evolution of the consilium principis in the late consistorium, Diocletian surely has innovated in the ceremonial apparatus, but probably he didn’t create the late consistorium, a structure dated from the reorganization operated by Constantine in the years 326-330 AD.

This paper re-examines the administrative evolution of the province of Tripolitania from its creation under the tetrarchy to the latest evidence relating to Roman rule . The case of Tripolitania is , despite its inevitable specificity, emblematic; its study can be useful in order to explore, more generally, issues such as the way central government dealt with border districts in the later Roman empire, the problems of attribution of civil and military powers , the competition between the holders of such powers, and the possible interferences between the provincial authorities and the authorities operating at an interprovincial level . The author tries to make order in the scattered evidence related to Tripolitania and others north African provinces, which often has not been sufficiently explored or properly interpreted; new data obtained from a re-reading or re-assembling of some inscriptions from Sabratha and Leptis add further elements to the discussion. The evolution of Tripolitania is framed within the political and administrative history of north Africa: in fact , this specific case can not be properly understood without examining in parallel the interrelated evolutions of the other provinces and how they were affected by the reorganization by Diocletian , the establishment of the comitiva Africae, the introduction of frontier duces ... This paper also explores the network of relations between the various authorities in the province - the governor, the local elites , the individual cities and the provincial assembly – and the powers external to the province, from the vicars to the imperial court .