The Constitutio Antoniniana (CA) has recently celebrated its 1,800th anniversary, generating a new wave of scholarly production in relation to one of the most contested topics in Roman history. Alex Imrie is well aware of these controversies, and this book (an adaptation of his PhD thesis) is the first modern single-authored monograph in English devoted to the CA. According to the author, his commendable purpose ‘in examining the rationale of the emperor in promulgating the Antonine Constitution, has been to return the focus to the third century’ (134).

The book is divided into five chapters, with a preface, introduction and epilogue, as well as a helpful list of abbreviations, indexes and an appendix. The preface and introduction rightly show that nearly every aspect of the CA is disputed; as a result, I. aims to bring together several factors that may explain the introduction of this ‘revolutionary constitutional change’ by Caracalla (ix). In the first chapter, a review of the period 193–212 c.e. is provided, with a particular focus on the absence of notices of the CA in ancient literature, the role of jurists, and the importance of the Giessen Papyrus (PGiess. 40) for our understanding of Caracalla's legislation. The other four chapters are very similar to one another in structure: in each case, I. contrasts the explanations given by ancient writers and modern scholars with his own study of the evidence; more specifically, Cassius Dio on fiscal gains (ch. 2), the military rationale (ch. 3), imitation of Alexander the Great (ch. 4) and, finally, how the CA would have contributed to securing the empire of Caracalla (ch. 5).

This holistic approach to the topic, while interesting, suffers from significant pitfalls. The systematic presentation and discussion of previous arguments and possible motives for the CA results in something of a lack of innovative analysis, particularly of the primary sources. This is, for example, obvious in the conclusion to ch. 3, where I. simply affirms that ‘the evidence supports the hypothesis that the emperor had his military apparatus in mind when promulgating the Constitutio Antoniniana’. However, no debate over the use of military diplomata is mentioned, and the mechanisms of provincial recruitment certainly deserve further scrutiny.

Aside from the considerable circularity of similar statements included in the monograph and some bibliographical weaknesses (French scholarship is especially under-represented), the biggest issue for this reviewer is the textual appendix (139–51). Here, I. presents an edition of PGiess. 40 that purports to be ‘embedded within the pre-existing textual scholarship, but resists overreliance on any one previous reconstruction’. And yet the text is virtually identical to that of F. M. Heichelheim, JEg. Arch. 26 (1941), 10–22, which is too generous with restorations. Even if the papyrological edition provided here does note other possible textual emendations, with a few diacritical signs added (surprisingly without periods or underdotted letters), such precautions disappear in a translation provided with a very questionable use of square brackets. I.'s explanations of these reconstructions are likewise uneven; much space is devoted to the adoption of additicia instead of dediticii, but the discussion of lines 11–17 is extremely brief. The biggest problem, however, is that much of this fragmentary text is incorporated directly into the main discussions (e.g. 103, 132) with no associated health-warning, which gives a questionable sense of certainty in support of the author's hypotheses.

Finally, I. could perhaps have focused more on the provincial reception of the CA, instead of presenting a rather unidirectional process subject to different imperial factors. The main result of Caracalla's decision was the spread of Roman citizenship and a subsequent (and well-documented) change of personal nomenclature. However, the reader will not find a deep analysis of this topic in the monograph, for which one should still consult K. Buraselis, ΘΕΙΑ ΔΩΡΕΑ: Das göttlich-kaiserliche Geschenk (2007). These pitfalls aside, this is a well-written book, with a negligible number of typos (e.g. 20). At any event, I.'s book will prove helpful for those looking for an English introduction to the debates that the CA will most likely continue to foster during the next 1,800 years.