TheAntonine Itinerary (Latin:Itinerarium Antonini Augusti, "Itinerary of theEmperorAntoninus") is anitinerarium, a register of the stations and distances along various roads. Seemingly based on official documents, possibly in part from a survey carried out underAugustus, it describes theroads of theRoman Empire.[1] Owing to the scarcity of otherextant records of this type, it is a valuable historical record.[2]
Almost nothing is known of its author or the conditions of its compilation. Numerousmanuscripts survive, the eight oldest dating to some point between the 7th to 10th centuries after the onset of theCarolingian Renaissance.[3] Despite the title seeming to ascribe the work to the patronage of the 2nd-centuryAntoninus Pius, all surviving editions seem to trace to an original towards the end of the reign ofDiocletian in the early 4th century.[3] The most likely imperial patron—if the work had one—would have beenCaracalla.[1]
| Siglum | Library | Shelfmark | Date (Century) | Folios | Notes | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P | Escorialensis | RBME R II 18 | 7th-9th | 67r-82v | Finishes half way through Gaul on f.82v. | [5] |
| D | BnF | Latin 7230A | 10th | 87r-97v | [6] | |
| L | Vindobonensis | Cod. 181 | 8th | 26r-60v | Earliest to contain theIter Britanniarum. The manuscript was corrected/updated by at least threehands, occurring at different places in thestemma codicum.[7] | [8] |
| B | BnF | Latin 4807 | 9th | 18-64 | British section 58-60. | [9] |
| β | Vindobonensis | Cod. 12825 | 15th | 25v-76v | [10] | |
| R | Florentinus Laurentianus | Plut.89 sup.67 | 10th | [11] | ||
| C | BnF | Latin 4808 | 12th | [12] |
There are many manuscripts preserving thetextual tradition of the Antonine Itinerary. For their edition of 1848 Parthey and Pinder[13] used 21 and listed a further 17 derivatives, however Cuntz (1929)[14] focused his work on the critical edition to just 7 manuscripts:P,D,L,B,β, R andC. He considered manuscriptsP andD to be the most reliable and upon which was based the text of thecritical edition. ManuscriptL was revised on at least 3 occasions by 3 different hands with each placing differently in the stemma; this was used as the basis for the critical text for sections missing fromP andD. Despite being 600 years apart,B andβ are considered sister manuscripts.R andC are sisters from the most recent recension used by Cuntz.
Of Cuntz' critical edition, only manuscriptsL,B,β, R andC preserve theIter Britanniarum.[7]
The British section is known as theIter Britanniarum, and can be described as the 'road map' ofRoman Britain. There are 15 such itineraries in the document applying to different geographic areas.
The itinerary measures distances inRoman miles, where 1,000Roman paces equals one Roman mile. A Roman pace was two steps, left plus right, and was conventionally set at 5 Roman feet (0.296 m), resulting in a Roman mile of 1,479 metres (0.919 miles).
Below are the original Latinablative forms for sites along route 13,[13] followed by a translation with a possible (but not necessarily authoritative) name for the modern sites.[15] A transcriber omitted an entry, so that the total number of paces did not equal the sum of paces between locations.
| Latin ablative | Translated possible site name | Distance | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Roman (mile) | Metric (km) | English (mile) | ||
| Item ab Isca Calleva mpm[16] cviiii[17] sic | A route from Isca Silurum to Calleva Atrebatum thus | 109 | 161 | 100 |
| Burrio mpm viii | Usk, Monmouthshire | 8 | 12 | 7.5 |
| Blestio mpm xi | Monmouth, Monmouthshire | 11 | 16 | 10 |
| Ariconio mpm xi | Bury Hill,Weston under Penyard, Herefordshire | 11 | 16 | 10 |
| Clevo mpm xv | Gloucester, Gloucestershire | 15 | 22 | 14 |
| (no entry - mpm xx) | perhapsCorinium Dobunnorum at modernCirencester, Gloucestershire | (20) | (30) | (18.5) |
| Durocornovio mpm xiiii | perhapsWanborough, Wiltshire | 14 | 21 | 13 |
| Spinis mpm xv | Speen, Berkshire | 15 | 22 | 14 |
| Calleva mpm xv | Silchester, Hampshire | 15 | 22 | 14 |
Below are the original Latin names for sites along route 14,[18] followed by a translation with a possible (but not necessarily authoritative) name for the modern sites.[15]
| Latin ablative | Translated possible site name | Distance | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Roman (mile) | Metric (km) | English (mile) | ||
| Item alio itinere ab Isca Calleva mpm ciii sic | An alternate route from Isca Silurum to Calleva Atrebatum thus | 103 | 152 | 95 |
| Venta Silurum mpm viiii | Caerwent, Monmouthshire | 9 | 13 | 8 |
| Abone mpm xiiii | Sea Mills, Gloucestershire | 14 | 21 | 13 |
| Traiectus mpm viiii | perhapsBitton, near Willsbridge, Gloucestershire | 9 | 13 | 8 |
| Aquis Solis mpm vi | Bath, Somerset | 6 | 9 | 5.5 |
| Verlucione mpm xv | Sandy Lane, Wiltshire | 15 | 22 | 14 |
| Cunetione mpm xx | Mildenhall, Wiltshire | 20 | 30 | 18.5 |
| Spinis mpm xv | Speen, Berkshire | 15 | 22 | 14 |
| Calleva mpm xv | Silchester, Hampshire | 15 | 22 | 14 |
De Situ Britanniae (made availablec. 1749, published 1757) was a forgery byCharles Bertram that provided much spurious information onRoman Britain, including "itineraries" that overlapped the legitimateAntonine Itineraries, sometimes with contradicting information. Its authenticity was not seriously challenged until 1845, and it was still cited as an authoritative source until the late nineteenth century. By then, its false data had infected almost every account of ancient British history, and had been adopted into theOrdnance Survey maps,[19] asGeneral Roy and his successors believed it to be a legitimate source of information, on a par with theAntonine Itineraries. While the document is no longer cited since its authenticity became indefensible, its data has not been systematically removed from past and present works.
Some authors, such asThomas Reynolds, without challenging the authenticity of the forgery, took care to note its discrepancies and challenge the quality of its information.[20][21] This was not always so, even after the forgery was debunked.
Gonzalo Arias (died 2008) proposed that some of the distance anomalies in the British section of theAntonine Itinerary resulted from the loss of Latin grammatical endings, as these had marked junctions heading towards places, as distinct from the places themselves.[22] However, Arias may not have taken account of earlier work indicating that distances were measured between the edges of administrative areas of named settlements as opposed to centre-to-centre, thereby explaining supposed distance shortfalls and providing additional useful data on the approximate sizes of such areas.[23]
There are 34 routes in the itinerary for the provinces ofHispania.
| Route | Start | End | Distance (Roman miles) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Mediolanum (Milan) | Legio VII Gemina (León) | 1257 |
| 2 | Arelate (Arles) | Castulo | 898 |
| 3 | Corduba (Córdoba) | Castulo | 99 |
| 4 | Corduba | Castulo | 78 |
| 5 | Castulo | Malaca (Málaga) | 291 |
| 6 | Malaca | Gades (Cádiz) | 145 |
| 7 | Gades | Corduba | 294 |
| 8 | Hispalis (Seville) | Corduba | 94 |
| 9 | Hispalis | Italica | 6 |
| 10 | Hispalis | Emerita (Mérida) | 162 |
| 11 | Corduba | Emerita | 144 |
| 12 | Olisipo (Lisbon) | Emerita | 161 |
| 13 | Salacia (Alcácer) | Ossonoba (Faro) | 16 |
| 14 | Olisipo | Emerita | 145 |
| 15 | Olisipo | Emerita | 220 |
| 16 | Olisipo | Bracara (Braga) | 244 |
| 17 | Bracara | Asturica (Astorga) | 247 |
| 18 | Bracara | Asturica | 215 |
| 19 | Bracara | Asturica | 299 |
| 20 | Bracara | Asturica | 207 |
| 21 | Esuris (Castro Marim) | Pax Julia | 267 |
| 22 | Esuris | Pax Julia | 76 |
| 23 | Mouth of the Ana (Guadiana) | Emerita | 313 |
| 24 | Emerita | Caesaraugusta (Zaragoza) | 632 |
| 25 | Emerita | Caesaraugusta | 348 |
| 26 | Asturica | Caesaraugusta | 497 |
| 27 | Asturica | Caesaraugusta | 301 |
| 28 | Turiaso (Tarazona) | Caesaraugusta | 56 |
| 29 | Emerita | Caesaraugusta | 458 |
| 30 | Laminium (Fuenllana) | Toletum (Toledo) | 95 |
| 31 | Laminium | Toletum | 249 |
| 32 | Asturica | Tarraco (Tarragona) | 482 |
| 33 | Caesaraugusta | Benearnum (Lescar) | 112 |
| 34 | Asturica | Burdigala (Bordeaux) | 421 |
One or more of the preceding sentences incorporates text from a publication now in thepublic domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Antonini Itinerarium".Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 2 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 148.| International | |
|---|---|
| Other | |
