DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4679#0315
4. ANN I A FAUSTINA. 289
of the two inscriptions we may further conclude that the children of
Pomponia and Antiochianus became on her death the heirs to her pro-
perty, and hence they appear so prominently at the head of this inscrip-
tion. Pomponia Ummidia must therefore have been mistress in her
own right of the Pisidian estates, having succeeded to them in virtue
of her descent from Faustina Ummidia Comificia, who owned them in
the last decades of the second century. Her name proves that she
was the fruit of an alliance between a member of the gens Pomponia
and a descendant of Faustina Ummidia. Again she must have suc-
ceeded in virtue of her mother's right, not of her father's ; for if her
father had been a descendant of the noble house of Ummidia Corni-
ficia, and had married a Pomponia, the child would not have taken
the name Pomponia as her gentile name. Pomponia Ummidia there-
fore was daughter of a Pomponius, married to a wife who was heir (and
doubtless descendant) of Faustina Ummidia Cornificia. Now a noble
lady well known in history named Annia Faustina 1 was married to
Pomponius Bassus some time before 321, when she was married for
the second time to the Emperor Elagabalus; and the following
inscription shows that in a.d. 217-8 a person named Annia Aurelia
Faustina was the owner of these Pisidian estates, and our conjecture
is that she was the historical wife of Elagabalus2, and mother of
Pomponia Ummidia by a husband named Pomponius.
126. (R. 1886: published by Sterrett no. 43). ' Ay[a6r] Tvyjj ■ 'irovs]
t^ [. ... iiTTCp] (TCtiTvpias 'Avici's AvprjXias navcrrpivqs rfjs Kpap'uTTws
knl eTTLrpoTTov [.....]os Ke TrpayfiarevTOv /ce virep crcoTijpias tov Stjuov
'OpfirjXecoy Avp. Kparepbs KXavSiOv 7Tp(o)dycov eaTrjaev tov fiuipibv e/c
tcov etSicov dvaXcopLciTcov, then follows list of names (none of which
have praenomen Aur.). The engraver has misspelt the name An(n)ia
and omitted that of the negotiator. It is therefore highly probable
that he has erred in writing P for E in the name Uavo-Tpiv^ (where
I! for 0 is due to a local pronunciation3). The date here, evidently,
is reckoned according to the Sullan era, and is equivalent to 33 7-8 A.D.
No other period and era suit the conditions, and we must therefore
conclude that this era was in use on the estates. See p. 31 o.
We were led to the hypothesis that Annia Faustina the empress
had been owner of these estates ; and we now find that An(n)ia
1 Her full name may have been longer: 2e/3aoTrjs in one case is incorrect.
she is alluded to in history but never ;1 Xvyoorponos St. 47 C 10, Tpdn t/xos 43,
named: coins struck in 221 a.d. are 15, ioTHTravuxruv 52, 12, 'Vovnwas 43, 19,
the only authorities for her name. dSeXnvs no 133, Pylakaion or Phylakaion
2 MM. Duchesne and Collignon made in Ch. VIII. Also imoKapfio-ei p. 287,
this identification ; but their restoration K.ap[ir]av p. 312, Neapxou St. 43, 26.
VOL. I. U
of the two inscriptions we may further conclude that the children of
Pomponia and Antiochianus became on her death the heirs to her pro-
perty, and hence they appear so prominently at the head of this inscrip-
tion. Pomponia Ummidia must therefore have been mistress in her
own right of the Pisidian estates, having succeeded to them in virtue
of her descent from Faustina Ummidia Comificia, who owned them in
the last decades of the second century. Her name proves that she
was the fruit of an alliance between a member of the gens Pomponia
and a descendant of Faustina Ummidia. Again she must have suc-
ceeded in virtue of her mother's right, not of her father's ; for if her
father had been a descendant of the noble house of Ummidia Corni-
ficia, and had married a Pomponia, the child would not have taken
the name Pomponia as her gentile name. Pomponia Ummidia there-
fore was daughter of a Pomponius, married to a wife who was heir (and
doubtless descendant) of Faustina Ummidia Cornificia. Now a noble
lady well known in history named Annia Faustina 1 was married to
Pomponius Bassus some time before 321, when she was married for
the second time to the Emperor Elagabalus; and the following
inscription shows that in a.d. 217-8 a person named Annia Aurelia
Faustina was the owner of these Pisidian estates, and our conjecture
is that she was the historical wife of Elagabalus2, and mother of
Pomponia Ummidia by a husband named Pomponius.
126. (R. 1886: published by Sterrett no. 43). ' Ay[a6r] Tvyjj ■ 'irovs]
t^ [. ... iiTTCp] (TCtiTvpias 'Avici's AvprjXias navcrrpivqs rfjs Kpap'uTTws
knl eTTLrpoTTov [.....]os Ke TrpayfiarevTOv /ce virep crcoTijpias tov Stjuov
'OpfirjXecoy Avp. Kparepbs KXavSiOv 7Tp(o)dycov eaTrjaev tov fiuipibv e/c
tcov etSicov dvaXcopLciTcov, then follows list of names (none of which
have praenomen Aur.). The engraver has misspelt the name An(n)ia
and omitted that of the negotiator. It is therefore highly probable
that he has erred in writing P for E in the name Uavo-Tpiv^ (where
I! for 0 is due to a local pronunciation3). The date here, evidently,
is reckoned according to the Sullan era, and is equivalent to 33 7-8 A.D.
No other period and era suit the conditions, and we must therefore
conclude that this era was in use on the estates. See p. 31 o.
We were led to the hypothesis that Annia Faustina the empress
had been owner of these estates ; and we now find that An(n)ia
1 Her full name may have been longer: 2e/3aoTrjs in one case is incorrect.
she is alluded to in history but never ;1 Xvyoorponos St. 47 C 10, Tpdn t/xos 43,
named: coins struck in 221 a.d. are 15, ioTHTravuxruv 52, 12, 'Vovnwas 43, 19,
the only authorities for her name. dSeXnvs no 133, Pylakaion or Phylakaion
2 MM. Duchesne and Collignon made in Ch. VIII. Also imoKapfio-ei p. 287,
this identification ; but their restoration K.ap[ir]av p. 312, Neapxou St. 43, 26.
VOL. I. U