Talk:Notitia Dignitatum

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Missing section[edit]

I'm puzzeled by this statement

Depending on the strength of units, the late 4th century army may, at one extreme, have equalled the size of the 2nd century force (i.e. over 400,000 men);[2] at the other extreme, it may have been far smaller.

and especially its citation of Heather's book because in my copy of that book he first gives the size during the 2nd century as 300,000 and then goes on to argue that by the 4th century it had been increased by maybe as much as one third Fornadan (t) 15:09, 16 June 2008 (UTC)


Is it worth adding any info on the workshops listed, fo you think? Salvianus (talk) 19:15, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Various versions available[edit]

Hi, the commons:Notitia Dignitatum images seem to come from a different version than the "Bayerische Staatsbibliothek: Notitia Dignitatum Clm 10291", 1542 manuscript scan. According to this archaeology site it comes from a 1436 version made in Basel and available in Paris: "Illustration from Notitia Dignitatum imperii romani (Basel ?, cca. 1436): Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France. Manuscripts. Latin 9661 (fol. 101 verso). See the catalogue L'Or des princes barbares. Du Caucase à la Gaule Ve siècles après J.-C., Musée des Antiquités nationales, château de Saint-Germain-en-Laye (21 septembre 2000 – 8 janvier 2001)/ Reiss-Museum Mannheim (11 février – 4 juin 2001), Éditions des la Réunion des Musées nationaux, Paris, 2000, p. 21.". If that's true, the statement in the lead: "All the known and extant copies of this late Roman document are derived, either directly or indirectly, from a codex (Codex Spirensis) that is known to have existed in the library of the cathedral chapter at Speyer in 1542 but which was lost before 1672 and cannot now be located" might be incorrect. Also, can we bring images on commons also from the "Bayerische Staatsbibliothek" version? They have some copyright statements there but do they make sense for a medieval document reproducing an ancient one? It would be great to have a section describing all these version available and later books interpreting the document. --Codrin.B (talk) 05:11, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Notitia Dignitatum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:14, 10 November 2016 (UTC)