Probus (276-282 A.D.) and Rival Claimants (Proculus, Bonosus, and Saturninus) of the 280s

von Robin Mc Mahon (New York University)

Probus’s Background

M. Aurelius Probus was most likely born in Sirmium in 232 A.D. It is difficult to reconstruct Probus‘ career before he became emperor because of the unreliable nature of the account in the Historia Augusta, but it is certainly possible that he was a tribune under Valerian. Perhaps all that can be said with any reliability is that he served in the military and was on Aurelian’s staff during his Eastern campaigns.[[1]] There is a certain amount of confusion in the sources about him because of the fact that he has often been confused with a certain Tenagino Probus, who served as prefect in Egypt under Claudius II Gothicus.[[2]]

Accession to Power

After the murder of Aurelian, the Senate chose as his successor the septuagenarian senator, Tacitus, who took up the burdens of state and headed with the army to the East. The Eruli had overrun Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia and finally Cilicia, where Tacitus, with help from his half-brother Florianus, defeated them.[[3]] Tacitus, however, either died of an illness or was killed by his own troops; he was succeeded by Florianus.[[4]] In the meantime, Probus had been declared Emperor by his own troops in mid-276, and prepared to meet Florianus, who was marching from the Bosporus, having broken off his victorious engagement against the Eruli. Florianus was acknowledged in Rome and was supported by Gaul, Spain, Britain, and Italy; Probus was supported by Syria, Phoenicia, Palestine and Egypt. The two fought a desultory campaign near Tarsus. With a much smaller force, Probus decided his best strategy would be to avoid a pitched battle and let the heat overcome the troops of Florianus. The latter, having reigned barely two months, was murdered by his own troops.[[5]] Probus became sole Emperor, possibly by August 276.[[6]]

Probus in the West: 276-279

His first order of business was to punish the murderers of Aurelian, who may have also had a hand in the murder of Tacitus.[[7]] On the basis of numismatic evidence, Probus appears to have traveled from the east across the Propontis, and then through the provinces of Thrace, Moesia and Pannonia. It is at this time that he must have defeated the Goths because he already had the title Gothicus by 277 A.D. Shortly after he arrived at the Rhine River he made a trip to Rome to have his powers ratified by the Senate.[[8]]

Following the death of Postumus in 258, the situation in Gaul had rapidly deteriorated and numerous bands of invaders had swept across the Rhine. In the south, the Longiones, together with the Alamanni, had advanced through the Neckar valley into Gaul. The Franks had crossed the Rhine further north. In order to meet this simultaneous threat, Probus divided his forces having his generals campaign against the Franks, while he himself fought against the Longiones and Alamanni. Both Probus and his generals were victorious; in fact, Probus even captured Semnon, the leader of the Longiones, with his son. Both groups of invaders agreed to terms and booty and prisoners were returned; in the end, Probus allowed Semnon and his son their freedom.

Probus is next reported to have fought victoriously against the Burgundians and to have secured his victory with some ingenuity. Because his forces were smaller than those of the invaders, he wanted to engage the enemy on terms as favorable as possible; the Romans were on one side of the river and the barbarians were on the other. Probus was able to induce them to cross the river by having his soldiers hurl insults at them, and being enraged, they began crossing the river. Before the barbarians were able to organize themselves, the Roman army soundly routed them. Smarting from their defeat, the enemy did not live up to their end of the treaty, with the result that, in a second battle, they were again worsted by Probus.[[9]]The barbarians who were taken prisoner were enrolled in the Roman Army and sent to Britain.

Not content with merely defeating the barbarians along the Rhine, Probus took important steps to secure the boundary for the future. He planned and constructed a series of forts and depots on the German side of the Rhine at various crossing points, which he garrisoned with troops. Further, Probus apparently took measures to restore economic stability to Gaul by encouraging the planting of vineyards. Probus‘ titles Gothicus Maximus and Germanicus Maximus suggest claims to the success of his operations in the area.[[10]]

Events in the East 279-280

The sources do not give many details of Probus’s activities in Raetia and Illyricum, but Zosimus does say he repulsed an invasion of Vandals from Illyricum in a battle along a river generally identified as the Lech. In 279, theatre of operations was Lycia. Zosimus records the curious story of the adventures and death of a robber chieftain name Lydius who may be the same individual called Palfuerius in the Historia Augusta. In order to prevent further troubles, Probus constructed fortresses, and settled large groups of veterans in this area, giving them land in exchange for the promise that their sons would also serve in the legions when they were old enough.[[11]]

Probus’s Military and Economic Activities In Egypt

Meanwhile, Probus had sent his generals to Egypt, where the Blemmyes were stirring up trouble in 280; they had broken through the border, advanced up the Nile, and, in league with the city of Ptolemais, captured the city of Koptus. They were eventually expelled and order was restored by Probus‘ generals. Once Probus had restored order, he set about the task of a large-scale reconstruction of the dikes, canals, and bridges along the Nile, something which not been done since it had been undertaken by Augustus in the years 27-25 B.C. More specifically, the Vita Probi notes, „On the Nile, moreover, he did so much that his sole efforts added greatly to the tithes of grain. He constructed bridges and temples porticos and basilicas, all by the labour of the soldiers, he opened up many river-mouths, and drained many marshes, and put in their place grain-fields and farms“(9.3-4). The importance of this type of work cannot be underestimated since a large percentage of the food supply for Rome came from Egypt and the African provinces.[[12]]

The Revolts of Proculus, Bonosus, and Saturninus

According to the Historia Augusta, although the Persian King, Vahram II, had made peaceful overtures, Probus had rejected these and was planning to push the war forward when he was faced with a series of revolts both in the West and East. It is difficult to place them in their exact time-frame since the sources do not agree. Nevertheless, the situation was serious enough for Probus to cancel his plans for war with Persia and hurry back to the West. On his return Probus settled large numbers of barbarians in the Empire.[[13]] Perhaps this was done to repopulate areas which had been left abandoned by the effects of invasions and plague. This policy, which Probus did not begin, and which was continued by his successors was, however, destined to bring trouble to Rome in the future.

The writer of the Vita Probi in the Historia Augusta indicates that in 280 A.D. Proculus revolted in the vicinity of the city of Lugdunum, which had been severely dealt with by Aurelian and, for reasons not given, spurred on by this fear, had adopted a hostile attitude towards Probus. Proculus apparently had some connections to the Franks and he had hoped to rally them to his cause. They appear, however, to have handed him over to Probus when he arrived on the scene.[[14]]Probably at the same time, Bonosus revolted. His rebellion seems to have been serious as it appears to have required considerable force to be suppressed. Bonosus, an officer in charge of the Rhine fleet, had somehow let the Germans slip over the border and burn the fleet. Fearful of retribution, he apparently took shelter in proclaiming himself emperor. He was, in spite of his lapse with the fleet, an excellent soldier. The fighting was only stopped when Bonosus, despairing of his position, hanged himself. Probus spared the lives of his sons as well as that of his wife.[[15]]

Julius Saturninus, one of Probus ’s commanders in Syria, probably seized power in the year 281. A close friend and associate of Probus, he may have been compelled to adopt the purple by his unruly troops. Although he initially rejected a request of the people of Alexandria to put on the purple, he later changed his mind and proclaimed himself Augustus. In any case, Probus planned to put down the rebellion. However, Saturninus was killed by his own troops before Probus had a chance to act.[[16]]

The sources do not provide much in the way of material to analyze the extent of these revolts and how widespread the feeling was against Probus in the West. There are indications that the revolts were more than local affairs because inscriptions from as far away as Spain have been found where Probus’s name has been erased.[[17]]

In 281 Probus was in Rome to celebrate his victories. Although the Historia Augusta goes into great detail to describe the events of Probus’s triumph and celebrations of his victories in respect to the number of animals and prisoners involved, there may be some truth to its description because Zosimus states there was a uprising which at this time required a force of soldiers to suppress. On a more substantial note, Probus completed the wall around Rome which had been begun by Aurelian.[[18]]

Probus‘ Assassination

Probus was too anxious to push ahead with his plans for an invasion of Persia, which had been postponed due to the revolts and unrest in the West, and, to this end, he left Rome in 282 and proceeded first to his native town of Sirmium when news came that M. Aurelius Carus, Perfect of the Guard, had been proclaimed emperor. When troops sent by Probus to quell the rebellion went over to Carus, Probus‘ remaining troops killed the emperor. His death occurred sometime between September or October 282.[[19]]

Bibliography

Primary Sources:

Chastagnol, André. Histoire Auguste. (Paris, 1994).

Magie, D., ed. Scriptores Historiae Augustae. (Cambridge, 1982).

Paschoud, F. ed.Histoire Nouvelle [par] Zosime. (Paris, 1971).

Zonaras, Annales (12.27.). ed. M. Pinder (Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae), Bonn 1844.

Cohen, Henry. Description Historique des Monnaies Frappées Sous L’Empire Romain. (Paris & London, 1880-1892).

Grenfell, Bernard and Hunt, Arthur S. Oxyrhynchus Papyri. Vol XII (London 1916) No. 1409.

Secondary Works

Barnes, T.D. „Some Persons in the Historia Augusta.“ Phoenix 26 (1972): 140ff.

R. Hanslik, „Aurelius (28).“ Kl. P.. 1: col. 769.

________. „Bonosus (1).“ Kl. P. 1: col. 928.

________.“Proculus (8a).“ RE 23: col. 75-76.

Henze, W. „Aurelius (194).“ RE 2.2: col. 2516-2523.

________. „Bonosus (1).“ RE 3: col. 713-714.

Jones, A.H.M., J.R. Martindale, and J. Morris. „Probus 3.“ The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire. (Cambridge, 1971) 1.736.

Kienast, Dietmar. Römische Kaisertabelle: Grundzüge römischen Kaiserchronologie. (Darmstadt, 1990).

Lépaulle, Emile. Étude historique sur M. Aur. Probus d’après la numismatique du Regne de Cet Empereur. (Lyon, 1884).

Lippold, A. „Saturninus (2).“ Kl. P. 4: col. 1570.

Peachin, Michael. Roman Imperial Titulature and Chronology A.D. 235-284. (Amsterdam, 1990).

Pomeroy, Sarah B. „The Revolt of Saturninus.“ Schweizer Münzblätter 19 (May, 1969) 54-56.

Schwartz, Jacques. „L’empereur Probus et l’Egypte.“ Chronique d’Egypte 45 (1970), 381-386.

Stein, A. „Saturninus (6).“ RE 2A: col.213ff.

________.“Tenagino Probus.“ Klio, 29 (1936): 237-242

Syme, Ronald. Emperors‘ Biography: Studies in the Historia Augusta. (Oxford, 1971).

Vitucci, G. L’imperatore Probo. (Rome, 1952).

Westermann, W.L. „The Papyri and the Chronology of the Reign of the Emperor Probus.“ Aegyptus 1 (1920): 297-301.

Winkler, G. „Proculus (2).“ Kl. P. 4: col. 1150.

Notes:

[[1]]For Probus‘ full name and his year of birth, see Dietmar Kienast, Römische Kaisertabelle: Grundzüge römischen Kaiserchronologie, (Darmstadt, 1990), 250; Probus‘ place of birth and lineage: it is unclear whether his father was a certain Maximus who rose through the ranks to become a tribune (SHA, Vita Probus, 3.1-2) or a certain Dalmatius who was a gardener (Aur. Vict., Epit., 37.1); W. Henze, RE 2.2, s.v. „Aurelius (194),“ col.2517ff; Probus‘ early career under Valerian and subsequent emperors through Aurelian: SHA, Vita Probus, 5.6-7, 6.1ff; Kienast sifts through the farrago of data in the SHA for the reader and points out what material is worth believing (Römische Kaisertabelle, 250).

For the most recent full treatment of Probus‘ reign, see G. Vitucci, L’imperatore Probo. Rome, 1952; for a more concise and recent treatment, see R. Hanslik, Kl. P. 1, s.v. „Aurelius (28),“ col. 769.

[[2]]The confusion in the Historia Augusta may be intentional since Probus is the hero and his biographer certainly wanted to attribute as many valiant deeds to him as he could. The problem is carefully gone over by A. Stein („Tenagino Probus,“ Klio, 29 [1936], 237-242). Stein gives documentary evidence for the career of T. Probus as well as the name Tenagino (which he says is Etruscan in origin). The confusion is also noted in, among other sources, A.H.M Jones (The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, s.v. „Probus (3),“ 1.736), T. Barnes, („Some persons in the Historia Augusta,“ Phoenix, 26[1972],156), and Kienast (Römische Kaisertabelle, 250).

[[3]]Zosimus, 1.63.1-64.3; SHA, Vita Taciti, 13.1ff; Zonar., 12.28 ([Bonn ed.], 2.608.5ff); for an introduction to the events surrounding Tacitus‘ campaign in the east and its sources, see F. Paschoud, Zosime, Histoire Nouvelle, (Paris, 1971), 55, 172, n. 92 , and David Magie, Scriptores Historiae Augustae, (Cambridge, 1982), 3.318, n.3. The exact family relationship between Tacitus and Florian is unclear.

[[4]]Zosimus, 1.63.1-2; Zonar., 12..28 (2.608.13-22); SHA, Vita Tacitus, 13.5.

[[5]]Zonar., 12 29(2.608. 23-609.6); SHA, Vita Taciti, 13.6-14.2, Vita Probi, 14.1-2; Zosimus, 1.63-64; Henze, RE 2.2, col. 2519; David Magie, Scriptores Historiae Augustae, 3. 320 n. 4, 3.321, n.5 ; for a discussion of the chronology of these events, see F. Paschoud, Zosime , 1.172-3, nn. 92-93.

[[6]]Kienast, Römische Kaisertabelle , 250; Peachin, 46-117; David Magie, Scriptores Historiae Augustae, 3.354-355, n.2; ; Henze, RE 2.2, col. 2519; Vitucci, Probo, 24ff; Paschoud provides a general survey of the scholarship on the dating of Probus‘ sole emperorship (Zosime, 1.172ff, n. 93).

[[7]]Zosimus indicates that Probus invited them to a banquet and, while observing the proceedings from above, then gave a signal for the soldiers to attack them.(1.65.1-2) It seems, however, somewhat implausible that they could be so gullible. In Zonaras, Probus rebukes them in person and later put them to death.(12.29[2.609.1ff]). The author of the Vita Probi (13.2-3) in the Historia Augusta indicates some retribution was taken upon the murderers. Probus did not, however, take any action against the followers of Florianus (ibid., 13.3 ); F. Paschoud, Zosime , 1.57, n.94; Henze, RE 2.2, col. 2519.

[[8]]E. Lépaulle, Étude historique sur M. Aur. Probus d’après la numismatique du Regne de Cet Empereur, (Lyon, 1884), 52-53; Henze, RE, 2.2, col. 2520; Henry Cohen, Description Historique des Monnaies Frappées Sous L’Empire Romain, (Paris and London, 1880), Adventus series for Probus, 29-73. Probus‘ title Gothicus: CIL, 11.1178b; SHA, Vita Probi, 13.5; David Magie, Scriptores Historiae Augustae, 3.363, n.5

Probus‘ trip to Rome is discussed by Henze (RE, 2.2, col. 2520) and Lépaulle (54).

[[9]]The fullest treatment of Probus‘ wars with the Germans remains that of Zosimus (1.67-68); the account of these events in the SHA (Vita Probi, 13.5-14.7) is not as detailed as that in Zosimus. Zonaras‘ narrative (12.29 [2.609.20ff]) is cursory at best; Henze, RE, 2.2, col. 2520-2521; the sources and the secondary literature are treated in depth by Paschoud (Zosime,. 1.58, 173, n. 96, 1.59, 175, n. 97); the chronology of these operations is discussed by Vitucci (Probo, 48ff).

[[10]]Probus‘ use of prisoners of war as troops: Zosimus, 1.68.3; Henze, RE, 2.2, col. 2521; Probus‘ fortifications along the Rhine: SHA, Vita Probi,14.1-7; Henze, RE, 2.2, col. 2520ff; vineyards in Gaul: SHA, Vita Probi,18.8; Henze, RE, 2.2, col. 2521.

Probus“ victory titles: Gothicus Maximus, infra, n. 8;.Germanicus Maximus, C.I.L., 8.11931; his victories are reflected in his coinage by such legends as Temporum Felicitas (Cohen 728-731), Securitas Perpetua (ibid, 625-627), and Victoria Germanica (ibid.,754-777); Henze, RE, 2.2, col. 2521.

[[11]]Kienast dates events in Asia Minor, Egypt, and Illyricum to 279-280 A.D. (Römische Kaisertabelle, 250); Zosimus, 1.69.1ff; SHA, Vita Probi, 16.1ff; the story of Lydius/ Palfuerius, Zosimus, 1.69.1-70, SHA, Vita Probi, 16.4-7; Henze, RE, 2.2, col.2521; Paschoud, Zosime,. 1.60, 175ff, n. 98; settlement of veterans: SHA, Vita Probi, 16.6; Henze, RE, 2.2, col.2521.

[[12]]Revolts in Egypt: Zosimus, 1.71.1; SHA, Vita Probi, 17.2, 6; Henze, RE, 2.2, 2522; reconstruction of dikes, canals, and bridges along the Nile: SHA, Vita Probi, 9.2; David Magie, Scriptores Historiae Augustae, 3.351-352, n.3 ; the reconstruction of the dikes can by dated from P. Oxy. 12.409; for a full discussion of the papyrus and its dating, see W.L.Westermann, „The Papyri and the Chronology of the Reign of the Emperor Probus“, Aegyptus, 1 (1920), 297-301. On Probus in Egypt, see J. Schwartz, „L’empereur Probus et l’Egypte“ in Chronique d’Egypte 45 (1970), 381-386.

[[13]]Probus‘ peace with the Persians (SHA, Vita Probi, 18.1) may have been a stop-gap action since he eventually planned to go to war with them (ibid., 20.1); he may have made peace in order to deal with the usurpers in the west (ibid., 18.4; Probus and his dealings with the Persians: Henze, RE, 2.2, col.2522ff; David Magie, Scriptores Historiae Augustae, 3.371, n. 5); Probus‘ settlement of barbarians within the boundaries of the empire: SHA, Vita Probi, 18.2, Zosimus, 1.17.1.

[[14]]Chronology of Proculus‘ revolt: Kienast, Römische Kaisertabelle 252; sources that deal with his revolt: SHA, Vita Probi, 18.5, Vita Firmi, 12.1, 13.1, 4; G. Winkler, Kl. P. 4, s.v. „Proculus (2),“ 1150; R. Hanslik, RE 23, s.v. „Proculus (8a),“ col. 75-76; Henze, RE, 2.2, col.2522; although Kienast accepts the outline of events spelled out in the SHA, he rightly believes that many of the details included about Proculus‘ life should be considered dubious (Römische Kaisertabelle , 252-253); Barnes rejects all the details of Proculus‘ career contained in the SHA (Phoenix, 26 [1972], 168).

[[15]]Chronology of Bonosus‘ revolt: Kienast, Römische Kaisertabelle , 251-252; sources that deal with his revolt: SHA, Vita Probi, 18.5, Vita Firmi, 14-15; W. Henze, R.E. 3, s.v. „Bonosus (1),“ col. 713-714; ibid., RE, 2.2, col.2522; R. Hanslik, Kl. P. 1, s.v. „Bonosus (1),“ col. 928; other sources mention Bonosus‘ revolt in passing: Aur. Vict., Caes. 37.3, Epit., 37.2; Eutrop., 9.17.1; although Kienast accepts the outline of events spelled out in the SHA and apparently the details about his command on the Rhine and his suicide (15.1-3), he rejects the details contained in 14.1-5 of the Vita Firmi (Römische Kaisertabelle, 251-252); Barnes rejects all the details of Bonosus‘ career contained in the SHA (Phoenix, 26 [1972], 150ff).

[[16]]Chronology of Saturninus‘ reign: Kienast, Römische Kaisertabelle , 253; sources that treat Saturninus‘ reign: Zosimus, 1.66.1 (where Saturninus is described as a Mauretanian); Zonar., 12.29 (2.609.10ff); SHA, Vita Probi, 18.4, Vita Firmi, 7-9; Although Kienast rejects Saturninus‘ career which is spelled out in the Vita Firmi at 9.5, he appears to accept the fact that he was dux limitis Orientalis under Aurelian and governor of Syria under Probus (Römische Kaisertabelle , 253), aspects of his career not accepted by Barnes (Phoenix, 26 [1972], 171ff); Saturninus‘ reign is discussed by Vitucci (Probo, 58ff), Lippold (Kl. P. 4, s.v. „Saturninus (2),“ col. 1570), Stein (R.E. 2A, s.v. „Saturninus (6),“ col.213ff), Henze (RE 2.2, col. 2522), and Pomeroy (Sarah B. Pomeroy, „The Revolt of Saturninus“, Schweizer Münzblätter, 19 (1969), 54-56); a good survey of the literature and discussion of the chronology of the revolt is provided by Paschoud (Zosime, 1.57, 173, n. 95). See also A. Chastagnol, „Sur la chronologie des années 275-285“ in Festschrift Jean Lafaurie (Paris, 1980), 75-82.

[[17]]There are several inscriptions where Probus‘ name was later erased; see C.I.L., 2.3738, 8.100, 1353, 10.3728; Henze, RE 2.2, col. 2522-2523.

[[18]]Dating of Probus‘ triumph: Henze, RE 2.2, col. 2523; description of triumph: SHA, Vita Probi, 19.1-8; uprising at Rome: Zosimus, 1.73.1; the wall of Aurelian: Ibid., 1.49.2; Henze, RE 2.2, col. 2523; F. Paschoud, Zosime , 1.43,163-164, n.77.

[[19]]Zosimus, 1.71.4-5; Zonar.,12.29 (2.609.10ff); Magie, Scriptores Historiae Augustae, 3.378-9, n. 1; according to the SHA (Vita Probi, 21.1-4), a tumult occurred and the exasperated soldiers pursued Probus to an „ironclad“ lookout tower and he was killed there. Magie notes, “ The same account of his death is given in Aur[elius] Victor, Caes. 37,4 and Eutropius, ix, 17, 2; on the other hand, this version [preserved in Zosimus and Zonaras}…seems more credible….Probus‘ death took place after 29 Aug., 282 since there are Alexandrian coins of his eighth year, which began on that day….“(Scriptores Historiae Augustae, 3.378-9, n. 1); Paschoud discusses the chronological problems in the sources surrounding the dating of Probus‘ death (Zosime, 1.62, 177-178, n.101).

Copyright (C) 1999, Robin Mc Mahon. This file may be copied on the condition that the entire contents, including the header and this copyright notice, remain intact.

M. Annius Florianus

von P. v. Rohden

Kaiser im J. 276 n. Chr. Leiblicher Bruder des Kaisers (M. Claudius) Tacitus (275–276), Hist. Aug. Tac. 14, 1. 9, 6. Unter ihm Praefectus praetorio (ὕπαρχος), Zonar. XII 28. Zosim. I 63. Nach dem Tode seines Bruders wird er nach der einen Überlieferung (Zonar. XII 29. Zosim. I 64) in Rom vom Senat zum Kaiser gewählt, nach der andern (Vict. Caes. 36, 2. Hist. Aug. Tac. 14, 1) wird er weder vom Senat noch von dem Heere zum Kaiser erhoben, sondern besteigt aus eigenem Antrieb den Thron. In der That erscheint auf seinen zahlreichen Münzen (Eckhel VII 499. Cohen VI² 239–252 nr. 1–108) weder SC noch p. m. noch tr. p.; dagegen findet sich sein vollständiger Titel pont. max., trib. potest., p(ater) p(atriae), procos. auf Inschriften aus Spanien (CIL II 1115), Gallien (Orelli 1036) und Germanien (CIRh 1964), auf der spanischen Inschrift sogar cos., was wahrscheinlich ein Irrtum ist, vgl. Hist. Aug. Tac. 9, 6. Da ihm ausserdem auch in Britannien (CIL VII 1156) und Dalmatien (CIL III Suppl. 10061) Inschriften gesetzt sind, andererseits aber alexandrinische Münzen von ihm fehlen, so wird damit die Angabe des Zonaras XII 29 bestätigt, dass Florianus von Cilicien an im ganzen Westen anerkannt wurde, sein Gegenkaiser (M. Aurelius) Probus dagegen in Syrien und Ägypten herrschte. Der Name des von den Schriftstellern nur Florianus genannten Kaisers lautet auf den Inschriften und Münzen (hier mehr oder weniger abgekürzt): Imp. Caes. M. Annius Florianus pius felix invictus Augustus. Er regierte nur 2 Monate 20 Tage (etwa April–Juli 276), Eutrop. IX 16 (nach anderen Angaben: 84 Tage, Cassiod. chron. J. 276; 88 Tage, Hieron. chron. J. 276; nicht ganz drei Monate, Zonar. XII 29; 60 Tage, Vict. epit. 36, 2; kaum 2 Monate, Hist. Aug. Tac. 14, 2. 5; 1 oder 2 Monate, Vict. Caes. 37, 1). Er wurde in Tarsus von seinen Soldaten getötet, Hist. Aug. Tac. 14, 2; Prob. 10, 8. 13, 4. Vict. Caes. 37, 1. Cassiod. chron. 276. Hieron. chron. 276. Zonar. XII 29. Zosim. I 64 (nach vereinzelter Angabe Vict. epit. 36, 2 soll er sich selbst die Adern geöffnet haben).

Quelle: https://de.wikisource.org/w/index.php?oldid=2939299; Lizenz: CC BY-SA 3.0;

Tacitus (275-276 A.D.)

von Robin Mc Mahon (New York University)

Historia Augusta regarding Tacitus‘ earlier career, including the claim he was related to the historian Tacitus, have been rejected by historians as fictitious.[[3]] The most reliable sources for Tacitus‘ reign, Zosimus and Zonaras, state that he was chosen Emperor by the army following the assassination of Aurelian in the fall of 275, most likely in November.[[4]] At the time of his elevation he was in Interamna (modern Terni, about 60 miles north of Rome). From there he made his way to Rome where he was confirmed
as Emperor by the Senate.[[5]] Tradition has it that he was 75 years old at the time, but there is no way to confirm this.[[6]]

As Emperor, Tacitus first had Aurelian deified, then seized and executed many individuals involved in plotting Aurelian’s murder.[[7]] Tacitus then turned his attention to the defense of the Empire. Although the Franks, Alamanni, and Longiones posed threats in the north, Tacitus determined that the greater danger lay in the East.[[8]] Aurelian had enlisted the aid of several barbarian tribes, including the Heruli and Maeotidae (referred to as Scythians in the sources), for a projected invasion of Parthia.[[9]] Aurelian’s murder cancelled these plans. Feeling cheated of their opportunity for plunder, the tribes attacked the Roman provinces in Asia Minor, overrunning Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia and Cilicia, and caused terrible destruction.[[10]] Tacitus appointed his half-brother Florian Praetorian Prefect. They campaigned in the East against the invaders, winning Tacitus the title Gothicus Maximus.[[11]]

Tacitus, however, did not long enjoy his victory: on his way back to Europe, he died. Zosimus and Zonaras preserve the report that Tacitus had appointed a relative of his, Maximinus, as governor of Syria. Maximinus was murdered; then the assassins, fearing Tacitus’s reaction, murdered him. It was alleged that some of them had also had a hand in murdering Aurelian.[[12]] The Historia Augusta more eccentrically reports that Tacitus became ill with a fever and started showing signs of megalomania: but as the month September Tacitus allegedly wanted named after himself dates his accession incorrectly, the story appears to be a fabrication.[[13]] Tacitus died some time in June of 276.[[14]] His memory was neither condemned nor deified.

Tacitus held the consulship at least twice, first in 273 and again in 276.[[15]] There is numismatic evidence of a third consulship but there is no record of a third in any of the fasti, that is, the lists of consuls.[[16]] Because of the paucity of the sources and the brevity of his reign, little can be said of his policies. It is unlikely that the military would choose as Emperor anyone like the contemplative, abstemious civilian the Historia Augusta portrays.[[17]] A hint may be given by the fact that Tacitus’s colleague in the consulship of 273, Julius Placidianus, commanded an army corps in Narbonensis and later went on to be a Praetorian Perfect.[[18]] Nevertheless, some numismatic and epigraphic evidence suggests that Tacitus sought to strike a milder tone than his predecessor. Prominent among his coin legends is Clementia Temporum.[[19]] Unlike both Aurelian and Tacitus‘ successor, Probus, Tacitus did not take the title, deus et dominus natus [„born god and master“].[[20]] He also issued no Sol Invictus coins honoring Aurelian’s favorite deity.[[21]] Some of his coins revive the SC (senatus consulto) marking senatorial authority for the issue, which had been missing in previous reigns. Tacitus also used the Genius Senatus, inscriptions which had disappeared under Valerian.[[23]] Further, in some inscriptions he is styled auctor verae libertatis [„originator of true liberty“], and on coins restitutor rei publicae [„restorer of the state“].[[22]]

Historiography

Tacitus largely fell out of the ancient historiographical record. The best sources are Zosimus and Zonaras. The Historia Augusta creates its own fiction of Tacitus out of forged documents, bogus names and faulty chronology.[[25]]

Two problems emerge from the evidence for Tacitus’s short reign. The first is the six-month interregnum said to have intervened between the death of Aurelian and Tacitus‘ accession. The years 260-285 have been the subject of close chronological scrutiny, and it has been shown that, although there might have been a brief interval between emperors (something not uncommon), amounting to a few weeks, anything longer is not possible.[[26]] The error appears to have originated in the Latin historians, who confused the duration of Tacitus‘ and Florian’s reign with the
brief period between the reigns of Aurelian and Tacitus.[[27]]

The second question is whether or not the edict of the Emperor Gallienus, which had excluded senators from military commands and any other dealings with the military, was set aside during the reigns of Tacitus and Florian.[[28]] Aurelius Victor reports that Gallienus, acting largely through fear of revolts and usurpation, replaced the senators in military offices with Equites. Several passages in the Historia Augusta claim that these edicts were suspended for the duration of the reigns of Tacitus and Florian. The overwhelming consensus among historians, however, is that the passages in the Historia Augusta are unhistorical: no credible evidence suggests that Gallienus‘ edicts were even temporarily set aside.[[29]]

Bibliography

Primary Sources:

Chastagnol, André (tr.). Histoire Auguste. Paris, 1994.

Cohen, Henry. Description historique des monnaies frappées sous l’Empire romain. Paris & London, 1880-1892.

Dessau, Hermann. Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae. Berlin, 1892.

Festy, Michel (ed.). Pseudo-Aurelius Victor, Abrégé des Césars. Paris, 1999.

Grenfell, Bernard; Hunt, Arthur. „Horoscope of Sarapammon.“ The Oxyrhynchus Papyri. Part II. No. 1476. London, 1916.

________. Oxyrhynchus Papyri. Vol XII. No. 1409. London, 1916.

Hazzard, J.C. (ed.). Eutropius. New York, 1898.

Liebenam, Willy (ed.). Fasti Consulares Imperii Romani. Bonn, 1909.

Magie, D. (ed.). Scriptores Historiae Augustae. Cambridge, MA, 1982.

Mommsen, T. (ed.) Monumenta Germania Historica. 9.1. Chronica Minora. Chron, A.D. 354; Laterculus Polemii Silvii. Berlin, 1892.

Paschoud, F. (ed.). Histoire Nouvelle [par] Zosime. Paris, 1971.

Rea, J.R. „The Corn Dole Archive.“ Oxyrhynchus Papyri. Vol. 90. London, 1972.

Zonaras, Annales (12.27). ed. M. Pinder. Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae. Bonn, 1844.

Modern Works:

Alföldi, Andreas. Die monarchische Repräsentation im römischen Kaiserreiche. Darmstadt, 1970.

Anderson, J.G.C. „The Genesis of Diocletian’s Provincial Re-Organization.“ The Journal of Roman Studies. Vol. XXII (1932). Pp. 24-32.

Baynes, Norman. The Historia Augusta: Its Date and Purpose. Oxford, 1926.

________. „Three Notes on the Reforms of Diocletian and Constantine.“ Journal of Roman Studies. Vol. XV (1925) Pp. 195ff.

Den Hengst, Daniel. „Some Notes on the Vita Taciti.“ In Giorgio Bonamente and François Paschoud (eds.), Historiae Augustae Colloquium Genevense. Bari, 1994.

Gilliam, J.F. „The Governors of Syria Coele from Severus to Diocletian,“ AJP, 89 (1958).

Groag, Edmund and Arthur Stein. „Imp. Caesar M. Claudius Tacitus Augustus.“ Prosopographia Imperii Romani. Part II. Claudius, No. 1036. Berlin, 1936.

Hohl, Ernst. „Vopiscus und die Biographie des Kaisers Tacitus.“ Klio. Vol 11 (1911).

Jones, A.H.M., Martindale, J.R. Morris, J. „M. Claudius Tacitus,“ p. 873; „M. Annius Florianus,“ p. 367. The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire. Cambridge, 1971.

Jones, Tom B. „Three Notes on the Reign of Marcus Claudius Tacitus“. Classical Philology vol. xxxiv (1939). Pp. 366-369.

Keyes, Clinton W. The Rise of the Equites. Princeton, 1915.

Kienast, Dietmar. Römische Kaisertabelle: Grundzüge römischen Kaiserchronologie. Darmstadt, 1990.

Kramer, Ida and Tom Jones . „Tribunicia Potestate: A.D. 270-285.“ American Journal of Philology. Vol. lxiv (1943).

Merton, Elke W. Stellenbibliographie zur Historia Augusta. 4 vols. Bonn, 1987.

Peachin, Michael. Roman Imperial Titulature and Chronology, A.D. 235-284. Amsterdam, 1990.

Stein, Arthur. „Zur Chronolgie der römischen Kaiser“. Archiv für Papyrusforschung. Vol 7. Berlin, 1924.

Stein, Arthur. „Tacitus.“ Paulys Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft. Vol. 3, cols. 2872-2881 (Claudius No. 361). Stuttgart, 1899.

Syme, Ronald. Emperors and Biography. Oxford, 1971.

________. Historia Augusta Papers. Oxford, 1983.

Notes:

[[1]]Arthur Stein, „Claudius (no. 361),“ Paulys Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, (Stuttgart 1899) [hereafter PW], vol. 3, cols. 2872ff; Theodor Mommsen, ed., Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum [hereafter CIL], vol. VIII Supp. 18844.

[[2]] Willy Liebenam (ed.), Fasti Consulares Imperii Romani (Bonn, 1909), Year 273; CIL VIII, 18844.

[[3]] Edmund Groag & Arthur Stein, Prosopographia Imperii Romani [hereafter PIR], Pars II (Berlin, 1936), p. 251, no. 1036: „A Cornelis Tacitus rerum Sciptore Orgininem trahit Vita,“ 10.3, originem absurde. Also, Dietmar Keinast, Römische Kaisertabelle (Darmstadt, 1996), p. 247.

[[4]]Arthur Stein, „Zur Chronologie der römischen Kaiser,“ Archiv für Papyrusforschung 7 (1924), p. 46. Aurelian died in November 275, and Tacitus was probably emperor by December 10, 275 and no later than January 1, 276. Also Michael Peachin, Roman Imperial Titulature and Chronology, A.D. 235-284, (Amsterdam, 1990), p. 92; PIR p. 252 No. 1036.

[[5]] David Magie, The Scriptores Historiae Augustae (Cambridge, MA, Loeb edition) „Vita Taciti,“ vii.5 [hereafter, SHA, Vita]; Zonaras, Annales, XII.28, ed. M. Pinder, Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae (Bonn, 1844).

[[6]]SHA, Vita Taciti, VII. 5; Zonaras XII. 28. See, however, Ronald Syme, Emperors and Biography (Oxford, 1971) p. 271. Syme casts substantial doubt over the entire portrayal of Tacitus by the Latin Historians.

[[7]] SHA, Vita Taciti, XIII 1-2.

[[8]] German attacks are mentioned in the SHA, Vita Taciti, III.4. Tacitus’s successor, Probus, campaigned along the German border.

[[9]] SHA, Vita Taciti, XII.2-4; Zosimus, 1.63.1; Zonaras, XII.28.

[[10]] See Magie, SHA, Vita Taciti, p. 318 note 3.

[[11]] Appoints his brother prefect, Zonaras, XII.29; victory: Zonaras XII.20; Zosimus I.63; SHA, Vita, XIII.2; CIL XII 5563; Herman Dessau, Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae [hereafter, Dess.], (Berlin, 1936) vol. 1, 591; Henry Cohen, Description historique des monnaies frappées sous l’Empire romain (Paris & London, 1880-1892), Tacitus, Victoria Gothica: pp. 157-164, Mars Ultor: pp. 55-58, Victoria Aug. pp. 150-156, Victoria Perpetua: pp. 123-124.

[[12]]Zosimus, I.63.2; Zonaras XII.28; J.F. Gilliam, „The Governors of Syria Coele from Severus to Diocletian,“ AJP, 89 (1958).

[[13]]SHA, Vita Taciti, XIII.6.

[[14]] Arthur Stein, Archiv für Papyrusforschung, Vol. VII (1924) p. 46 note 5. The latest known dates for Tacitus from papyri are P. Oxy VI 907 June 7, 276; Wessely Text GR. 74 June 23, 276; and P. Strassb. 8 June 8, 276.

[[15]]Op. cit. Leibman (Fasti), p. 271 (276 A.D.)

[[16]]H. Webb, The Roman Imperial Coinage, vol 5, pt.1 (London, 1923)[hereafter, RIC]. A third consulship appears on coins from Ticinum, Tacitus 120-121. The possibilities are discussed J.R. Rea, „The Corn Dole Archive,“ Oxyrhynchus Papyri. vol XL (1972) pp. 27-28.

[[17]] Ronald Syme, Emperors and Biography (Oxford, 1971), p. 247. „…Nothing precludes the hypothesis that Tacitus was a known and eligible character to generals and officers at Caenophrurium… When Tacitus acceded to power, the Danubian armies… made no stir…Tacitus, if the truth could be known, was perhaps one of the Danubian military. He was extracted from his retirement in Campania by the call of duty and the recognition of old friends.“

[[18]] Ibid., Syme; Dess. 569; PIR 468.

[[19]] R.A.G. Carson, Coins of the Roman Empire (London & New York, 1990), p. 124.

[[20]] Tom B. Jones, „Three Notes on the Reign of Marcus Claudius Tacitus,“ Classical Philology, XXXIV (1939), p. 367.

[[21]] Ibid.

[[22]]VERAE LIBERTATIS AUCTOR, CIL XII 5563; REISTITVT. REIPVBLICAE b , Cohen, Tacitus, 107.

[[23]] Andreas Alföldi, Die monarchische Repräsentation im römischen Kaiserreiche (Darmstadt, 1980), p. 135; RIC vol. 5. p. 333 no. 75; pp. 346-347, nos. 205 and 209. SC, Cohen. „Tacitus,“ nos. 3, 116, 117, 120 et. al..

[[24]]Daniel Den Hengst, „Some Notes on the Vita Taciti,“ Historiae Augusta Colloquium Genevense (Bari, 1994): p. 104, quantifies, „…less than 10% of the lines deal with facts attested elsewhere“; Syme, op. cit.(1983): p. 214, „…none of the names [in the biography] is genuine save those of emperors.“

[[25]] Ronald Syme, Historia Augusta Papers, (Oxford, 1983) p.116. The major themes the author uses the biography for are „…hostility to hereditary monarchy, boy emperors, eunuchs, bureaucrats.“

[[26]]Stein, op. cit. See note 4.

[[27]] Syme, op. cit. (1971), pp. 237-238.

[[28]] Michael Festy (ed.), Pseudo-Aurelius Victor, Abrégé des Césars (Paris, 1999), 33,33 „...senatum militia vetuit et adire exercitum.“

[[29]]Vita Taciti, 19.2-4; and Vita Probi, 13.1. The veracity of the statements was accepted by L. Homo, „L’empereur Gallien et la crise de l’empire romain au iii^e Sieclè,“ Revue Historique, cxiii (1913), pp. 1-22; 225-267. But this view was convincingly argued against by Norman Baynes, „Three Notes on the Reforms of Diocletian & Constantine,“ Journal of Roman Studies, xv (1925): esp. pp. 198-199; J.G.C. Anderson, „The Genesis of Diocletian’s Provincial Re-Organization,“ Journal of Roman Studies xxii (1932): esp. pp. 27-28. Also see Clinton W. Keyes, The Rise of the Equites in the Third Century of the Roman Empire, (Princeton 1932), pp. 36-37; and Lukas de Blois, The Policy of the Emperor Gallienus (Leiden, 1976), esp. pp. 39-89.

Copyright (C) 2000, Robin Mc Mahon. This file may be copied on the condition that the entire contents, including the header and this copyright notice, remain intact.

Aurelian (270-275)

von Peter Jacob

Ausgehend von der Frage nach den Grundlagen des spätantiken Reformwerkes der Kaiser Diokletian und Konstantin untersucht die Arbeit die Schwerpunkte der Staats- und Rechtspolitik Kaiser Aurelians (270-275 n. Chr.). Aurelian erwies sich als typischer Soldatenkaiser und verkörperte damit den neuen Kaisertypus, den die Reichskrise des 3. Jahrhunderts hervorgebracht hatte; zugleich gilt er aber als der Kaiser vor Diokletian, der die Verfassung des neuen römischen Reiches der Spätantike am nachhaltigsten beeinflusst hat. Der Autor beleuchtet die von Aurelian geschaffenen Elemente der spätantiken Entwicklungsdynamik für die Staatsverfassung und für das römische Recht. Dabei wurden neben den für diese Fragestellung traditionell heranzuziehenden literarischen und epigraphischen Zeugnissen mit einem schwerpunktmäßigen Anteil die juristischen Quellen herangezogen, deren Exegese weiten Aufschluß nicht nur über die Zivilrechtsentwicklung, sondern ebenso über die Verwaltungspolitik Aurelians gibt.

Die vollständige Biographie steht Open Access bereit unter http://digi20.digitale-sammlungen.de/de/fs1/object/display/bsb00050148_00002.html

Claudius II Gothicus [und Quintillus]  (268-270)

von Richard D. Weigel (Western Kentucky University)

[http://www.roman-emperors.org/Claudius_Gothicus.jpg]

M. Aurelius Claudius, known to history as Claudius Gothicus or Claudius II, was born in either Dalmatia or Illyria on May 10, probably in A.D. 213 or 214.[[1]] Although the most substantive source on Claudius is the biography in the Scriptores Historiae Augustae (SHA), this account is riddled with fabrications and slanted with fawning praise for this particular emperor, who in the fourth century was viewed as an ancestor of Constantine’s father and thus of the ruling imperial family. This biography, attributed to one Trebellius Pollio, must be read with extreme caution and supplemented with information from other sources, including Aurelius Victor, the Epitome de Caesaribus, Eutropius, Orosius, Zonaras, and Zosimus, as well as coins and inscriptions.

The SHA account describes Claudius as being tall, with fiery eyes, and so strong that he could knock out the teeth of man or beast with one punch. It also says that Trajan Decius rewarded him after Claudius demonstrated his strength while wrestling another soldier in the Campus Martius.[[2]] The SHA author suggests that Claudius may have been descended from the Trojan King Ilus and even from Dardanus, son of Zeus and ancestor of the Trojan royal family, but these suggestions are very likely fabricated to further ennoble Claudius and his putative descendants, the family of Constantine.[[3]] The SHA biography also includes false letters attributed to the emperors Trajan Decius, Valerian, and Gallienus, all attesting to their high opinions of Claudius. Reference is made in these letters to Claudius‘ service as tribune in an otherwise unattested legion V Martialis and also as general in command of Illyria, but these positions may also be fictitious. [[4]] One can assume that Claudius had served for some time in the army, at least under Gallienus and perhaps also under several earlier emperors.

There is some evidence that Claudius was wounded in Gallienus‘ campaign to put down the revolt of Ingenuus and that he later served with Aureolus under Gallienus in the war with Postumus.[[5]] By 268, when Gallienus took his troops into Italy to put down Aureolus‘ revolt, Claudius had emerged as heir-apparent to Gallienus and may also have been involved in the plot to assassinate the emperor.[[6]] Aurelius Victor says that when Gallienus was killed by his own troops besieging Aureolus in Milan, Claudius as tribune was commanding the soldiers stationed at Ticinum, some twenty miles to the south, and that prior to dying Gallienus designated Claudius as his heir. Victor goes on to claim that after succeeding to the purple Claudius forced the Senate to deify Gallienus.[[7]] The SHA account states that the soldiers mutinied after Gallienus‘ death and had to be quieted with a donative of twenty aurei each before settling down and accepting their new emperor.[[8]] Once in power, Claudius quickly dealt with Aureolus, who surrendered and was killed almost immediately. The new emperor also demanded clemency for the supporters of Gallienus.[[9]]

The story of Gallienus‘ deathbed selection of his successor is doubtful at best and is very likely an attempt to deflect blame for the assassination plot from Claudius. The suggestion that the new emperor pressured the Senate to deify Gallienus is more difficult to assess. It is true that securing divine status for one’s predecessor is generally seen as a pious act (e.g. Antoninus Pius requesting deification of Hadrian) that reflects positively on the initiator and the story, recorded only in Aurelius Victor, could just be a fabrication used to build up Claudius‘ moral reputation. What is difficult to penetrate is the biased condemnation
of Gallienus that particularly dominates the Latin sources. They make it hard to see why anyone would want to deify Gallienus and so the story seems out of place. However, deification of a predecessor could also be interpreted as the expected thing to do and the act could have fostered legitimacy of the new emperor and gained support from those who were still loyal to Gallienus so it may well have taken place.

The first major challenge facing the new emperor was that of the Alemanni, who had invaded Raetia and Italy. After an early defeat, Claudius replaced some irresponsible officers and soldiers, designated Aurelian as cavalry commander, and led the army to a decisive victory over the Alemanni.[[10]] This victory earned Claudius the title of Germanicus Maximus and several of his coin-types appear to refer to victory over the Germans.[[11]]

In 269 Claudius served as consul with Paternus.[[12]] This year would also feature his major campaign against the Goths. There are indications that Spain separated itself from the Gallo-Roman Empire of Postumus and Tetricus and recognized Claudius, at least nominally, as emperor. In addition, rebellion within Gaul itself demonstrated the weakening of this independent state, although Claudius avoided engagement at Augustodunum and chose only to send a small force to protect Narbonese Gaul.[[13]] While Claudius concentrated on protecting Roman territory against the Alemanni and Goths, Zenobia extended her Palmyrene Empire by taking Antioch, parts of Asia Minor, and most of Egypt.[[14]] Although Eusebius and Sulpicius Severus portray the period between the reign of Valerian and that of Diocletian as a peaceful pause in the persecution of Christians, the Acts of the Martyrs does list some individuals allegedly martyred during Claudius II’s reign.[[15]]

The coins issued by Claudius II provide some limited insight into his reign.[[16]] In addition to the standard „personified virtues“ coins that are common with most emperors of the second and third centuries, Claudius struck coin-types proclaiming the security of the Empire (SECVRITAS PERPETVA and PAX AETERNA), the fidelity of the army (FIDES MILITVM), and military victories over the Germans and Goths (VICTORIA GERMAN and VICTORIAE GOTHIC).[[17]] In addition, Claudius Gothicus‘ mints struck some other interesting and unusual coin-types. For example, Claudius is one of very few emperors who issued coins portraying the god Vulcan. These must have been limited issues because they are struck only by the Antioch mint and are very rare. The type shows Vulcan standing, with his special tools, the hammer and tongs, and features the unique inscription REGI ARTIS. A variant type with a similar image has been described as carrying another unique coin inscription, DEO CABIRO, and interpreted as depicting one of Vulcan’s sons, the Cabiri, with the same tools. However, the existence of this variant type is doubtful.[[18]] Although the reason for honoring Vulcan (and his sons?) with these coins is unclear, there may be a connection to the fact that the Cabiri were patron gods of Thessalonica who had protected that city against an attack by the Goths.[[19]] Although a connection between Claudius Gothicus and the Cabiri as defenders against Gothic attacks is relatively attractive, it is weakened somewhat by the fact that Valerian and Gallienus had also issued coins with Vulcan in a temple so there may be some other reason for his reappearance on coins in this period.[[20]]

Claudius II issued an unusual and scarce series of coins that features a pair of deities, who are presumably conservatores Augusti, on each reverse. The AETER AVG type depicts Apollo and Diana, who, as gods of the sun and moon, are associated with the concept of aeternitas.[[21]] A type featuring Serapis and Isis is combined with a CONSER AVG inscription and one of Hercules and Minerva with one of CONSERVATORES AVG.[[22]] Apollo and Diana are depicted with a SALVS AVG inscription, Aesculapius and Salus with one of SPES PVBLIC, and Vulcan and Minerva with VIRT AVG. [[23]] The general message is that these deities will protect the future of the empire and the emperor.[[24]]

Other unusual coin-types include MARS VLTOR, the god Augustus had honored with a temple for securing revenge for Caesar’s assassination. This deity had appeared on Roman coins in the reigns of Galba and Severus Alexander.[[25]] Claudius II also minted coins with rarely-seen NEPTVN AVG and SOL AVG types.[[26]] The latter coin indicates some early interest in the god who would become so dominant a few years later on the coins of Aurelian, yet Claudius also used the INVICTVS AVG inscription that Gallienus had paired with an image of Sol with one of Hercules.[[27]] ROMAE AETERNAE coin-types were fairly common in the mid-third century, but Claudius II issued an unusual variant type on an aureus that showed the goddess in her temple and echoed the SAECVLVM NOVVM images associated with Philip I.[[28]] In addition, Claudius introduced a IOVI VICTORI reverse combined with the image normally paired with a IOVI STATORI inscription and a IOVI FVLGERAT reverse inscription, both of which had not been used by any of his predecessors.[[29]] Andreas Alföldi suggested that Claudius‘ GENIVS SENATVS type signified improvement of the relationship between emperor and Senate following the senatorial hostility toward Gallienus.[[30]]

Claudius Gothicus also produced coin-types with reverses of goddesses customarily found paired on coins with images of the Roman empresses. The deities portrayed include Ceres, Diana, Diana Lucifera, and Diana Victrix, Minerva, Venus, and the goddess naturally associated with the image of an empress, Juno Regina.[[31]] One might suggest that Claudius issued these images because he had no empress with which to pair them, but an examination of other emperors‘ reigns during this period reveals that those emperors who did not issue coins bearing the empress‘ image also did not strike these particular goddess types. Although Ceres and Venus images are sometimes paired with an emperor’s portrait, Diana Lucifera is rarely found on emperors‘ coins and Claudius II is the only emperor paired on coins with Juno Regina. In addition, Claudius was the first emperor to issue imperial coins that featured an isolated image of the exotic Egyptian goddess, Isis Faria.[[32]]

Claudius II’s short reign was vulnerable to internal as well as external attack. There may have been a revolt in 269-270 led by a Censorinus, although the date and even the existence of this usurper remain in doubt. The SHA includes him as the last of the „thirty tyrants“ and lists a whole series of offices for him, including two consulships, but no other record exists to confirm such service. The SHA account states that he was proclaimed emperor by his soldiers, but soon afterwards killed by them because of his enforcement of strict discipline. His tomb is listed as being in Bologna, which may provide some idea of the location for the revolt. Henry Cohen dates the revolt to the beginning of the year 270, perhaps on the basis of a reference in the Epitome de Caesaribus, but suggests that coins attributed to Censorinus in earlier works may not exist.[[33]]

The Gothic challenge in 269 proved to be the greatest that Claudius II would face. The Goths assembled a large invading force, reportedly amounting to 320,000 men transported on a fleet of at least 2,000 ships, and first attacked coastal cities along the Black Sea in Moesia. After passing into the Aegean the Goths besieged Thessalonica. At this point, in 269, Claudius left Rome to stop the invasion. The Goths then sent the larger segment of their troops on land toward the Danube, while the fleet took the remaining group to continue the naval attack on Aegean coastal cities. Claudius sent Aurelian’s cavalry to Macedonia to protect Illyria from attack, while he commanded the forces blocking the route to the Danube. In the area of Doberus and Pelagonia, the Goths lost 3,000 men to Aurelian’s cavalry. At Naissus in Moesia, Claudius‘ force succeeded in killing some 50,000 Goths. There were follow-up operations on both land and sea, but the Gothic War had essentially been won.[[34]] Staving off the attacks of the Goths was a major contribution to the survival of the Roman Empire. It was a significant step leading to the subsequent success of Aurelian and the resurrection of the Empire under Diocletian and Constantine. When the Goths eventually succeeded in taking parts of the western Empire in the fifth century, their disruption to the course of civilization was likely much less violent than it would have been had they succeeded in the third century.

In addition to bad weather, a lack of supplies, and hunger, plague was a major factor in the defeat of the Goths. Many of the Gothic prisoners were either impressed into Roman military service or settled on farms as coloni. [[35]] Claudius received the title Gothicus in recognition of his triumph over the Goths. At some point he had also been given the title Parthicus, but the unlikelihood of any conflict with the Parthians in his short reign makes this difficult to explain. Perhaps Damerau was correct in his suggestion that a Parthian unit may have been involved in one of the battles with the Palmyrenes, although on this front there were few achievements to claim.[[36]] In any case, Claudius‘ victory over the Goths was short-lived. The emperor himself caught the plague and died at Sirmium early in 270. He was 56 years old.[[37]] Claudius‘ brother, Quintillus, became emperor briefly before losing out to Aurelian. Claudius also had another brother, Crispus, and the SHA traces the link to Constantius through Crispus‘ daughter Claudia.[[38]]

The Roman Senate showed its respect for Claudius Gothicus by setting up a gold portrait-shield in the Curia and by approving his deification. He was also honored with a golden statue in front of the great temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus and a silver statue set on a column on the Rostra.^[[39]]

In many ways, Claudius II received more adulation and honor in his Nachleben than he had during his lifetime. In the fourth century, attempts to link Constantine’s family to Claudius resulted in the phrases of adoration and outright fabrication that dominate the SHA life and most of our other sources. Constantine even issued commemorative coins honoring Claudius. These carried inscriptions such as: DIVO CLAVDIO OPT[IMO] IMP[ERATORI], MEMORIAE AETERNAE, and REQVIES OPT[IMORVM] ME[RITORVM].[[40]] A tradition grew that changed the story of Claudius‘ death in some sources.
In this version, Claudius, instead of dying from the plague, had actually performed a devotio, in response to an oracle found in the Sibylline Books, and sacrificed his life so that Rome could win the Gothic War.[[41]] One of the most surprising things about the SHA account is that it ignores this more dramatic tradition and has Claudius simply dying from the plague.[[42]]

One must, of course, reject the excessive claims of the SHA to the effect that Claudius II was „destined to rule for the good of the human race“ and would, had he lived longer, „…by his strength, his counsel, and his foresight have restored to us the Scipios, the Camilli, and all those men of old.“[[43]] However, Claudius Gothicus was clearly a good emperor who made a significant contribution to protecting and restoring the Empire. In the third century there aren’t too many emperors who merit such an assessment.

Bibliography

Secondary Sources:

Alföldi, A. „The Crisis of the Empire“ chapter 6 in Cambridge Ancient History 12, 165-231

________.“Zur Kenntnis der Zeit der römischen Soldatenkaiser“ in Zeitschrift für Numismatik (1927), 197-212

Ancona, M. Claudio II e gli usurpatori (Messina, 1901)

Baldini, A. „Claudio Gotico e Costantino in Aurelio Vittore ed Epitome de Caesaribus“ in G. Bonamente and F. Fusco, editors, Costantino il Grande 1 (2 vols., Macerata, 1992-1993), 73-89

Barnes, T. „Some Persons in the Historia Augusta“ in Phoenix 26 (1972), 140-182

Bird, H., translator, Liber de Caesaribus of Sextus Aurelius Victor (Liverpool, 1994)

________. „The Historia Augusta on Constantine’s Lineage“ in Arctos 31 (1997), 9-17.

Cohen, H. Description historique des monnaies frappées sous l’empire romain 6 (Paris, 1880-1892)

Cope, L. „The Nadir of the Imperial Antoninianus in the Reign of Claudius Gothicus“ in Numismatic Chronicle (1969), 145-161

Damerau, P. Kaiser Claudius II. Goticus (Leipzig, 1934)

Duncker, A. Claudius Gothicus (Diss: Marburg, 1868)

Henze, W. „Aurelius Claudius #82“ in Pauly-Wissowa, R.E. II, 2458-2462

Homo, L. De Claudio Gothico, Romanorum Imperatore (268-270) (Paris, 1903)

Kettenhofen, E. „Die Einfälle der Heruler ins Römische Reich im 3. Jh. N. Chr.“ in Klio 74 (1992), 291-313

Kotula, T. Cesarz Klaudiusz II I Bellum Gothicum lat 269-270 (Wroclaw, 1994)

Lippold, A. „Constantius Caesar, Sieger über die Germanen. Nachfahre des Claudius Gothicus?“ in Chiron 11 (1981), 347-369

________. „Kaiser Claudius II. (Gothicus), Vorfahr Konstantins d. Gr., und der römische Senat“ Klio 74 (1992), 380-394

E. Merten, Stellenbiographie zur Historia Augusta 4 (Bonn, 1987)

Parker, H. A History of the Roman World A.D. 138-337 (London, 1958)

Robertson, A. Roman Imperial Coins in the Hunter Coin Cabinet IV (Oxford, 1978)

Stein, A. „Censorinus #4“ in Pauly-Wissowa, R.E.. III.2, 1908

________. „Zeitbestimmungen von Gallienus bis Aurelian“ in Klio 21 (1927),, 78-82

Stevenson, S. A Dictionary of Roman Coins (London, 1889)

Strootmann, W. „Der Sieg über die Alamannen im Jahre 268“ in Hermes 30 (1895), 355-360

Syme, R. Emperors and Biography: Studies in the Historia Augusta (Oxford, 1971)

________. „The Ancestry of Constantine“ in J. von Straub, editor, Bonner Historia-Augusta-Colloquium 1971 (Bonn, 1974), 237-253

Watson, Alaric, Aurelian and the Third Century (London, 1999)

Webb, P. Roman Imperial Coinage 5.1 (London, 1927)

Weigel, R. „Juno Regina and the Roman Empresses“ in SAN 12 (1981), 31-32

Wolfram, H. History of the Goths (Translated by T. Dunlap, Berkeley, 1988)

Notes:

[[1]] Damerau, 39. Henze (2458) suggests 219 or 220, but the earlier date has greater support.

[[2]] SHA Claud. 13.5-8.

[[3]] SHA Claud. 11.9.

[[4]] SHA Claud. 14-17; see Damerau, 21-24 and Syme, 215-216.

[[5]] SHA Gall. 7.1; Damerau, 43.

[[6]] Zosimus 1.40.

[[7]] Aur. Vict. 33; Bird, Liber, 34-35, 143 n.26, and 144 n.27.

[[8]] SHA Gall.15.1-2.; Parker, 187

[[9]] Aur. Vict. 33; SHA Claud. 5; Parker, 187.

[[10]] SHA Aur.18.1; SHA Claud. 11.6-9; Damerau, 52-54, Parker, 187-188.

[[11]] CIL 3.3521 and 12.2228; RIC 108 and 247-250; Damerau, 53, Henze, 2459. For lists of inscriptions pertaining to the reign of Claudius II, see Damerau, 103-107 and Homo, 97-106.

[[12]] Damerau, 38.

[[13]] Henze, 2459-2460; Parker, 188.

[[14]] Zos. 1.44-45; SHA Claud. 11.1-2;
SHA
XXX Tyr. 30.3, 11; Ancona, 32-44; Damerau, 54-61; Henze, 2460-2461;
Parker, 190-191.

[[15]] Homo, 116-118.

[[16]] A. Markl published a seies of articles on the coins of Claudius II in Wiener Numismatische Zeitschrift over the period from 1876 to 1905. Several are referenced in Henze, 2458 and Webb, xi. In addition to Cohen, Robertson, and Webb, see the lists in Homo, 107-115 and Damerau, 92-103.

[[17]] See RIC 230, 237-239, 243, 246-252, 282.

[[18]] RIC 204 and 215. A. Robertson (p. lxxii, n.3) raised the possibility that the DEO CABIRO coin is only a misreading of the REGI ARTIS type, but the scarcity of these coins makes that difficult to verify. See also Homo, 108, citing Markl.

[[19]] P. Webb, 203-204. Webb cites Banduri as his source.

[[20]] RIC Valerian 1, Gallienus 633, and Valerian II 2.

[[21]] RIC 198.

[[22]] RIC 202 and 203.

[[23]] RIC 219, 222, and 224.

[[24]] Three other scarce issues from Antioch, RIC 200 (CONCOR AVG with two veiled figures holding torches and ears of corn), 206 (FELIC AVG with Felicitas and a female figure), and 211 (IOVI CONSERV AVG with Jupiter and the Emperor) could also be included in this series.

[[25]] Stevenson, 541; RIC 66-67 and 126..

[[26]] RIC 214 and 221.

[[27]] RIC 50, RIC Gallienus 640; Homo, 109, citing Markl, doubted the authenticity of this piece.

[[28]] RIC 132.

[[29]] RIC 6, 51, 53, and 124.

[[30]] Alföldi, Crisis, 191. An improved relationship between emperor and Senate is certainly in accord with the reported senatorial honors given to Claudius II following his death. See below.

[[31]] RIC 24, 29, 144, 205, 212, 236, and 245. Weigel, 31-32.

[[32]] RIC 217-218; see also 202 with Isis and Serapis, discussed above.

[[33]] SHA XXX Tyr. 33; Epitome de Caesaribus 34.3; Cohen VI, 173; Henze, 2461; Stein, „Censorinus“, 1908.

[[34]] Zos. 1.42-46; SHA Claud. 6-9, 11.3-4, 12.1; Damerau, 62-75; Henze, 2460.

[[35]] Zos. 1.46; SHA Claud. 9.4-7; Wolfram, 55.

[[36]] Damerau, 61; Henze, 2461.

[[37]] SHA Claud. 12.2-3; Oros. 7.23; Eutr. 9.11; Henze, 2460. Alaric Watson (221-222) places Claudius‘ death in August of 270, citing evidence from Egyptian coin issues, but this view was raised over a century ago and has not generally prevailed. See Stein, „Zeitbestimmungen“, 80-82.

[[38]] SHA Claud.13.1-4; see Watson, 47, 222.

[[39]] SHA Claud.3.3-5; Eutrop. 9.11; Oros. 7.23; Henze, 2462; Parker, 191-192.

[[40]] RIC V.1, pp. 203, 236-237 (coins 292-299); Damerau, 82-84; Homo, 92-96.

[[41]] Aur. Vict. 34; Amm. Mar. 16.10.3 and 31.5-7; Syme, 203-205, 234-235; Lippold, „Kaiser“, 389-390.

[[42]] SHA Claud. 12.2-3; Syme, 203-205, 234-235.

[[43]] SHA Claud. 1.3 (Loeb translation by David Magie).

Copyright © 2001, Richard D. Weigel. This file may be copied on the condition that the entire contents, including the header and this copyright notice, remain intact.