The roman consular year

[Heliodromus]

Can anyone tell me in which month the consular year began and ended (c. 300 AD if it makes any difference), and also how early in the prior year the new consuls would/could be designated?

Also, how late did the practice of using "COS DESIG" on coins last? - a search on Coin Archives doesn't seem to show anything later than Nerva - is there any significance as to why this was done and why it ended?

Ben

[Retrospectator]

According to the Wikipedia:

"The earliest and most common practice was Roman 'consular' dating. This involved naming both consules ordinarii who had been appointed to this office on January 1 of the civil year. Sometimes one or both consuls might not be appointed until November or December of the previous year, and news of the appointment may not have reached parts of the Roman empire for several months into the current year; thus we find the occasional inscription where the year is defined as "after the consulate" of a pair of consuls."

I quote from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anno_Domini

If I have read this correctly, the consular elections took place on 1 January, which seems to imply (if we take November appointments to be late in the previous year then appointments seem to have been made a year in advance.

[Heliodromus]

Thanks, Anticus.

It's interesting that news of the new consuls sometimes spread so slowly, given it's importance in referring to the year!

The indication of Nov/Dec being late seems to imply that there was no fixed deadline other than the end of year for the consuls to be named for the following year, but since they somtimes recorded this impending honor as "COS DESIG", I imagine that they sometimes must have known considerably sooner (else why bother recording it ).

Does anyone know the earliest that the new consuls might be identified?

Ben

[Steve Minnoch]

I can think of one bit of information off the top of my head that has a bearing on the question, although it is much earlier than 300 AD, and isn't definitive by any means.

In AD 97, there were twelve consuls, double the number of the previous year.
Given Nerva had risen to the purple after the coup in September 96, it isn't unreasonable to suppose that the twelve in the list for 98 might have consisted of the six on the original list prepared by Domitian (so as to not offend anyone), and an additional six (including Nerva himself) who needed to be rewarded or acknowledged by the new regime.  If this supposition is correct, it obviously implies that the original list had been drawn up before Domitian's assasination.

Steve

[curtislclay]

   The consular year began for the "ordinary" consuls on 1 January; suffect consuls then replaced them at various dates in the course of the year.
   Strack, Trajan, p. 18, note 40, following Mommsen, Staatsrecht I, 588 f., says that consular elections, including those of the emperors, took place at assemblies in either March or October of the year preceding the consulship.  He cites e.g. military diplomas that do not yet name the emperor consul designate on 14 August and 10 October in the year before their consular year.
    I think it unwise to assume any regularity in the dates when emperors were elected to consulships, however.  Emperors could be designated to the consulship as early or as late as they liked.
    The second Triumvirate, for example, divided up the consulships years in advance, whence Antony frequently has the title COS DESIG ITER ET TER on his coins.  Caius and Lucius Caesars, when they assumed the toga virilis at around age 15, were designated consuls for the years they would become 21, and so on.  Nero hastily assumed a fifth consulship to counter the revolt of Vindex and Galba in spring 68. 
    There is little evidence for any regularity in the dates when emperors were designated to consulships, but plenty of evidence for exceptions and caprice.
    Designations on coins more or less end with Commodus' COS V DES VI of 189.  Gallienus has a very rare VII DES COS, Goebl 1231A.
   

[Heliodromus]

Thanks, Steve.

Thanks for the fact filled answer, Curtis!
 
I'm interested in Galerius's use of V & VI field marks c. 305, and the possibility that these may be the consulships he held at the time. One problem with the VI (Galerius COS VI = 306) is that he used it prior to Diocletian's abdication in May 305, so I was trying to see if he *could* have used it as "COS DESIG" that early... I guess the answer is maybe?

Ben