DOCSLIB.ORG

Rome Vs Rome Ing Late Romans Come from the Cover of the Roman Empire in the Middle of the Fourth

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

THE BATTLE OF MURSA MAJOR THEME Left-handed warriors? Yes, the image has been mirrored. These charg- Rome vs Rome ing Late Romans come from the cover of The Roman Empire in the middle of the fourth Ancient Warfare VI-5. V century found itself in crisis. It had been split by Constantine the Great between his three surviving sons, Constantine II, Constantius II and Constans. However, soon the brothers were at each other’s throats vying for power. By David Davies onstantine II was defeated by the forces of Constans in AD 340, leav- ingC him in control of the western half of the Roman Empire. Howev- er in AD 350, he in turn was usurped by one of his own generals, Mag- nentius, who took the title Emperor of the West- ern Empire. Constans fled but was ambushed and killed by a troop of light cavalry while his party at- tempted to cross the Pyrenees. Magnentius quickly wooed support from the provinces in Britannia, Gaul, and Hispania with his lax approach to pagan- ism. Other provinces remained hesitant and many remained loyal to the Constan- tinian dynasty. The new Western Roman Emperor tried to exert his control directly by appointing his own men to command provinces and legions, ex- ecuting commanders loyal to the old regime, and by moving his forces into poten- tial rebel territories. When Nepotianus (a nephew of Constantine the Great) stormed Rome with a band of gladiators and pro- claimed himself em- peror, the revolt was swiftly dealt with. It became clear to 1 Wargames, soldiers & strategy 95 Cataphracts from the Eastern and Western Roman Empires square off. Magnentius that he would need to be gleaned from the oration of Julian battle that followed was bitter for both defeat the loyalists and Constantius the Apostate and from the writing of sides, with heavy casualties. At first II to secure his position as emperor Byzantine historian Zonaras. Magnentius’ levies broke but the rest of the Western Empire. of the army reformed and stood firm, In order to avoid unnecessary blood- fighting very well. It took repeated as- Another province soon rebelled, this shed, Constantius II sent his Prae- saults from Constantius’ cataphracts time the Pannonian army led by Ve- torian prefect, Flavius Philippus, to and mounted archers on the left wing tranio, their commander. This revolt negotiate. The offer was simple. If to turn that entire flank and break the was recognized by Constantius II who Magnentius would simply withdraw enemy army. As the Western Empire sent him the imperial diadem. The to the province of Gaul, then bat- began to flee, part of it was forced into Eastern Roman Empire was at war tle could be avoided. This plea was the river. Some detachments, includ- in Syria against Persia. Gathering his rejected; Magnentius had gone too ing Magnentius himself, escaped and forces and allying with the rebel Pan- far with so many men just to turn were only saved by the cover of night. However, one of the Western Empire’s nonians, Constantius II marched to back now. The negotiations were not most talented commanders, magister meet Magnentius’ forces, who were without reward, however, as one of officiorum Marcellinus, was killed. marching to crush the rebellion. Magnentius' commanders, a Frank known as Claudius Silvanus, with his A vanguard of scouting troops sent heavy cavalry detachment, deserted THE FORCES by the Eastern Imperial forces were to the Eastern Imperial forces. At his command Magnentius probably ambushed and cut to pieces by the had the best troops from the West- Western Empire forces at Atrans The Western army began to draw up in ern Empire that he could muster. It is (modern day Trojane), spurring Mag- the traditional manner, infantry at the said that every available garrison and nentius to advance with full haste. centre and cavalry at each flank. How- soldier from the Limes had been mo- bilized, leaving the border ever, Constantius II deployed with defenceless against bar- Both sides met in a narrow valley pass the River Drava on his right, denying somewhere near the Drava River in that flank and moving all of Croatia. The Eastern Imperial forces his cavalry forces to the left withdrew to a better fighting position flank. As the majority of his in open country at Mursa (modern forces were already in battle day Osijek), which the Western forc- formation, he immediately es took as a retreat, spurring them on attacked before the to attack. Little is known about the Western forces were battle itself but some information can fully deployed. The Wargames, soldiers & strategy 95 2 FIGHTING THE BATTLE played a large part in this battle, so Both sides were pretty even and we can indulge ourselves here. would have contained very similar barian incursions. Part troops. The Western Empire’s forces CONCLUSION of his army contained would have had some barbarian It is said by Zonaras that this battle a number of reluctant allies (in all likelihood foederati was one of the bloodiest in Roman levies but some, such as equipped with Roman gear), but history. He states that Magnentius the Franks and Saxons, that’s no reason to not field some lost upwards of two-thirds of his had a reputation as barbaric-looking Franks. army while Constantius lost half. fierce warriors. This was a devastating loss to both The battlefield should consist of an sides, at a time when the empire The forces avail- open cultivated plain with perhaps a faced internal rebellion and several able to the Eastern Roman Emperor few woods. The major feature is the invading barbarian armies. would have been limited by time River Drava, which should be on the and distance. He had sailed from right of the Eastern Empire’s forces and Magnentius survived Mursa Major Syria, so in all likelihood the forces on the left of the Western Empire’s. but found his support in Italy evapo- mustered were the local loyalist rating. He retreated to Aquileia and forces with a strong contingent of The following list of forces for each tried to rally support. Constantius Constantius’ cavalry. side is a suggestion, based on what was in no hurry and used his time I feel each side would have con- to rally support of his own in Rome, It is said the Eastern Emperor left the sisted of but also what I have avail- sending forces to secure Africa and battle to pray at the shrine of a Christian able locally to recreate the battle. Spain. Isolated and without allies, martyr, but I doubt this version as it is As there is little known on the forces Magnentius retreated to Mons Se- not mentioned by Julian the Apostate. involved, it is an opportunity to get leucus where the Imperial forces In this version written soon after the out whatever Late Roman models surrounded him in AD 353 and he events, it is Constantius who trained you have in your collection and put chose to take his own life rather and commanded his forces personally. them on the table. Cavalry certainly than be captured. WS&S THE FORCES Western Roman Empire • 2x units of Equites (with spear, heavy throwing spears) com- Magnentius (Counts as light amour and shield). bined formation with archers. a Warlord for Swordpoint) • 2x units of Limitanei infantry • 2x units of Equites (with spear, Eastern Roman Empire (large shield, darts and spears) light amour and shield). Constantius (Counts as an • 2x units of Auxilia infantry (throw- • 2x units of Frank Noble Cav- Emperor for the Swordpoint lists) ing spear, large shield and darts). • 3x units of Cataphract cavalry alry (with spear, light amour The forces we give here are a guide- with kontos and bow and shield). line, to be adapted easily to your 2x units of Illyrians with javelin, • 2x units of Frank Light Cavalry • gaming system of choice. I assume light amour and shield. (with javelin and shield). that each standard unit is 24 infan- • 2x units of Sagittarii mounted Marcellinus (Legate Commander) try or twelve cavalry. For Sword- archers with bow. point use the Late Imperial Roman • 2x units of Legion Infantry (light lists from page 10 of the Dark Age Armour, large shield, darts and Vetranio (Legate Commander) Armies book. Players wishing to use heavy throwing spears) com- • 3x units of Legion infantry (Light Hail Caesar should use the Late Ro- bined formation with archers. Armour, large shield, darts and man lists from page 16 of the Late • 2x units of Limitanei infantry heavy throwing spears) com- Antiquity to Early Medieval army (large shield, darts and spears) bined formation with archers. lists book. The Western Roman Em- 3x units of Frank infantry (spear, • 3x units of Limitanei infantry • pire may take up to 25% from the shield and javelins) (large shield, darts and spears) Frank lists, which must include one 2x units of Auxilia infantry (throw- • unit of Frank Noble Cavalry. The Western Roman Legate ing spear, large shield and darts). (Legate Commander) Eastern Roman Empire uses the • 2x units of Legion infantry (light Flavius Philippus (Legate Commander) standard lists but take a free unit armour, large shield, darts and • 2x units of Frank noble cavalry of Frank Noble Cavalry from his heavy throwing spears) com- (with spear, light amour and opponent’s list (and points) to use bined formation with archers. shield). (Silvanus’ men). for this battle! This represents Sil- • 2x units of Limitanei Infantry • 2x units of Legion infantry (light vanus’ defecting troops. (large shield, darts and spears) armour, large shield, darts and 3 Wargames, soldiers & strategy 95.
Recommended publications
  • La Usurpación De Nepociano (350 D.C.): Una Revisión Historiográfica1

    La Usurpación De Nepociano (350 D.C.): Una Revisión Historiográfica1

    LA USURPACIÓN DE NEPOCIANO (350 D.C.): UNA REVISIÓN HISTORIOGRÁFICA1 Resumen: La historiografía griega y latina ofrece versiones muy contradictorias acerca de la sublevación de Nepociano en Roma en el año 350 d.C. Después de reconsiderar tanto la información de las fuentes antiguas como las interpretaciones que han realizado sobre el epi- sodio los historiadores contemporáneos, se puede afirmar que la sublevación de Nepociano fue una reacción de los miembros de la familia imperial residente en Roma a la usurpación de Magnencio en Galia, después de que éste ordenara el asesinato del emperador Constante. La usurpación de Nepociano contó con un amplio consenso en el Senado y entre los ciuda- danos de Roma, pero no fue suficiente para mantenerse en el poder. De hecho, los senadores favorables a Magnencio acabaron provocando en Roma una revuelta contra Nepociano. Fi- nalmente, veintiocho días después del inicio de la sublevación, las tropas de Magnencio de- pusieron y ejecutaron a Nepociano, asumiendo el control de Roma. Palabras clave: Nepociano, dinastía Flavia, Magnencio, Roma, Constancio II. Abstract: The Greek and Latin historiography offers very contradictory versions about the revolt of Nepotianus in Rome in 350. After reconsidering both the information from the ancient sources and the interpretations that the contemporary historians have made on the episode, it is possible to affirm that the revolt of Nepotianus was a reaction of the members of the imperial family resident at Rome to the usurpation of Magnentius in Gallia, after this one ordered the murder of the emperor Constans. The usurpation of Nepotianus had a wide consensus in the Senate and among the citizens of Rome, but it was not enough to stay in the power.
  • Roman-Barbarian Marriages in the Late Empire R.C

    Roman-Barbarian Marriages in the Late Empire R.C

    ROMAN-BARBARIAN MARRIAGES IN THE LATE EMPIRE R.C. Blockley In 1964 Rosario Soraci published a study of conubia between Romans and Germans from the fourth to the sixth century A.D.1 Although the title of the work might suggest that its concern was to be with such marriages through- out the period, in fact its aim was much more restricted. Beginning with a law issued by Valentinian I in 370 or 373 to the magister equitum Theodosius (C.Th. 3.14.1), which banned on pain of death all marriages between Roman pro- vincials and barbarae or gentiles, Soraci, after assessing the context and intent of the law, proceeded to discuss its influence upon the practices of the Germanic kingdoms which succeeded the Roman Empire in the West. The text of the law reads: Nulli provineialium, cuiuscumque ordinis aut loci fuerit, cum bar- bara sit uxore coniugium, nec ulli gentilium provinciales femina copuletur. Quod si quae inter provinciales atque gentiles adfinitates ex huiusmodi nuptiis extiterit, quod in his suspectum vel noxium detegitur, capitaliter expietur. This was regarded by Soraci not as a general banning law but rather as a lim- ited attempt, in the context of current hostilities with the Alamanni, to keep those barbarians serving the Empire (gentiles)isolated from the general Roman 2 populace. The German lawmakers, however, exemplified by Alaric in his 63 64 interpretatio,3 took it as a general banning law and applied it in this spir- it, so that it became the basis for the prohibition under the Germanic king- doms of intermarriage between Romans and Germans.
  • Exiling Bishops: the Policy of Constantius II

    Exiling Bishops: the Policy of Constantius II

    University of Richmond UR Scholarship Repository Classical Studies Faculty Publications Classical Studies 2014 Exiling Bishops: The olicP y of Constantius II Walter Stevenson University of Richmond, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.richmond.edu/classicalstudies-faculty- publications Part of the History of Christianity Commons Recommended Citation Stevenson, Walt. "Exiling Bishops: The oP licy of Canstantius II." Dumbarton Oaks Papers 68 (2014): 7-27. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Classical Studies at UR Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Classical Studies Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of UR Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Exiling Bishops: The Policy of Constantius II Walt Stevenson onstantius II was forced by circumstances to all instances in which Constantius II exiled bishops Cmake innovations in the policy that his father and focus on a sympathetic reading of his strategy.2 Constantine had followed in exiling bishops. While Though the sources for this period are muddled and ancient tradition has made the father into a sagacious require extensive sorting, a panoramic view of exile saint and the son into a fanatical demon, recent schol- incidents reveals a pattern in which Constantius moved arship has tended to stress continuity between the two past his father’s precedents to mold a new, intelligent regimes.1 This article will attempt to gather
  • ROMAN POLITICS DURING the JUGURTHINE WAR by PATRICIA EPPERSON WINGATE Bachelor of Arts in Education Northeastern Oklahoma State

    ROMAN POLITICS DURING the JUGURTHINE WAR by PATRICIA EPPERSON WINGATE Bachelor of Arts in Education Northeastern Oklahoma State

    ROMAN POLITICS DURING THE JUGURTHINE WAR By PATRICIA EPPERSON ,WINGATE Bachelor of Arts in Education Northeastern Oklahoma State University Tahlequah, Oklahoma 1971 Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate College of the Oklahoma State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS May, 1975 SEP Ji ·J75 ROMAN POLITICS DURING THE JUGURTHINE WAR Thesis Approved: . Dean of the Graduate College 91648 ~31 ii PREFACE The Jugurthine War occurred within the transitional period of Roman politics between the Gracchi and the rise of military dictators~ The era of the Numidian conflict is significant, for during that inter­ val the equites gained political strength, and the Roman army was transformed into a personal, professional army which no longer served the state, but dedicated itself to its commander. The primary o~jec­ tive of this study is to illustrate the role that political events in Rome during the Jugurthine War played in transforming the Republic into the Principate. I would like to thank my adviser, Dr. Neil Hackett, for his patient guidance and scholarly assistance, and to also acknowledge the aid of the other members of my counnittee, Dr. George Jewsbury and Dr. Michael Smith, in preparing my final draft. Important financial aid to my degree came from the Dr. Courtney W. Shropshire Memorial Scholarship. The Muskogee Civitan Club offered my name to the Civitan International Scholarship Selection Committee, and I am grateful for their ass.istance. A note of thanks is given to the staff of the Oklahoma State Uni­ versity Library, especially Ms. Vicki Withers, for their overall assis­ tance, particularly in securing material from other libraries.
  • Emperors and Generals in the Fourth Century Doug Lee Roman

    Emperors and Generals in the Fourth Century Doug Lee Roman

    Emperors and Generals in the Fourth Century Doug Lee Roman emperors had always been conscious of the political power of the military establishment. In his well-known assessment of the secrets of Augustus’ success, Tacitus observed that he had “won over the soldiers with gifts”,1 while Septimius Severus is famously reported to have advised his sons to “be harmonious, enrich the soldiers, and despise the rest”.2 Since both men had gained power after fiercely contested periods of civil war, it is hardly surprising that they were mindful of the importance of conciliating this particular constituency. Emperors’ awareness of this can only have been intensified by the prolonged and repeated incidence of civil war during the mid third century, as well as by emperors themselves increasingly coming from military backgrounds during this period. At the same time, the sheer frequency with which armies were able to make and unmake emperors in the mid third century must have served to reinforce soldiers’ sense of their potential to influence the empire’s affairs and extract concessions from emperors. The stage was thus set for a fourth century in which the stakes were high in relations between emperors and the military, with a distinct risk that, if those relations were not handled judiciously, the empire might fragment, as it almost did in the 260s and 270s. 1 Tac. Ann. 1.2. 2 Cass. Dio 76.15.2. Just as emperors of earlier centuries had taken care to conciliate the rank and file by various means,3 so too fourth-century emperors deployed a range of measures designed to win and retain the loyalties of the soldiery.
  • Ancient Rome

    Ancient Rome

    Ancient Rome William E. Dunstan ROWMAN & LITTLEFIELD PUBLISHERS, INC. Lanham • Boulder • New York • Toronto • Plymouth, UK ................. 17856$ $$FM 09-09-10 09:17:21 PS PAGE iii Published by Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. A wholly owned subsidiary of The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc. 4501 Forbes Boulevard, Suite 200, Lanham, Maryland 20706 http://www.rowmanlittlefield.com Estover Road, Plymouth PL6 7PY, United Kingdom Copyright ᭧ 2011 by Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. All maps by Bill Nelson. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems, without written permission from the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote passages in a review. The cover image shows a marble bust of the nymph Clytie; for more information, see figure 22.17 on p. 370. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Information Available Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Dunstan, William E. Ancient Rome / William E. Dunstan. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-7425-6832-7 (cloth : alk. paper) ISBN 978-0-7425-6833-4 (pbk. : alk. paper) ISBN 978-0-7425-6834-1 (electronic) 1. Rome—Civilization. 2. Rome—History—Empire, 30 B.C.–476 A.D. 3. Rome—Politics and government—30 B.C.–476 A.D. I. Title. DG77.D86 2010 937Ј.06—dc22 2010016225 ⅜ϱ ீThe paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI/ NISO Z39.48–1992. Printed in the United States of America ................
  • The Late Republic – Crises and Civil Wars a Society Falls Apart in Italy

    The Late Republic – Crises and Civil Wars a Society Falls Apart in Italy

    The Late Republic – Crises and Civil Wars A Society Falls Apart In Italy, much had changed after Rome rose to a world power. In the long wars, many peasants and their sons had died. Others had not been able to properly cultivate their farms for years. More and more small farmers left the countryside. In their place, many large farms arose, because large landowners had bought up the land of indebted peasants, forcibly driven some farmers out, and laid claim to large portions of state-owned land for themselves. Their standard of living rose, because they specialized themselves in certain products. They grew wine-grapes and olives on a grand scale, or reorganized themselves toward livestock. Around the cities, there were large landowners who obtained high profits by raising poultry and fish. Such large landowners usually owned several farms, which were managed by administrators, while they themselves pursued political business in Rome. On their estates, slaves worked, who were obtained either as prisoners of war or on the slave markets. According to careful analysis, in the time between 200 B.C. and 150 B.C., approximately 250,000 prisoners of war were brought to Italy as slaves. In the following 100 years, more than 500,000 slaves – mainly from Asia Minor – came to Rome. Especially the small farmers suffered in this situation. Earlier, they had gotten for themselves additional income as daily workers on the estates, but now they were needed there, at most, only for harvest. So many had to give up their farms, and moved with their families to Rome.
  • Calendar of Roman Events

    Calendar of Roman Events

    Introduction Steve Worboys and I began this calendar in 1980 or 1981 when we discovered that the exact dates of many events survive from Roman antiquity, the most famous being the ides of March murder of Caesar. Flipping through a few books on Roman history revealed a handful of dates, and we believed that to fill every day of the year would certainly be impossible. From 1981 until 1989 I kept the calendar, adding dates as I ran across them. In 1989 I typed the list into the computer and we began again to plunder books and journals for dates, this time recording sources. Since then I have worked and reworked the Calendar, revising old entries and adding many, many more. The Roman Calendar The calendar was reformed twice, once by Caesar in 46 BC and later by Augustus in 8 BC. Each of these reforms is described in A. K. Michels’ book The Calendar of the Roman Republic. In an ordinary pre-Julian year, the number of days in each month was as follows: 29 January 31 May 29 September 28 February 29 June 31 October 31 March 31 Quintilis (July) 29 November 29 April 29 Sextilis (August) 29 December. The Romans did not number the days of the months consecutively. They reckoned backwards from three fixed points: The kalends, the nones, and the ides. The kalends is the first day of the month. For months with 31 days the nones fall on the 7th and the ides the 15th. For other months the nones fall on the 5th and the ides on the 13th.
  • Expulsion from the Senate of the Roman Republic, C.319–50 BC

    Expulsion from the Senate of the Roman Republic, C.319–50 BC

    Ex senatu eiecti sunt: Expulsion from the Senate of the Roman Republic, c.319–50 BC Lee Christopher MOORE University College London (UCL) PhD, 2013 1 Declaration I, Lee Christopher MOORE, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. 2 Thesis abstract One of the major duties performed by the censors of the Roman Republic was that of the lectio senatus, the enrolment of the Senate. As part of this process they were able to expel from that body anyone whom they deemed unequal to the honour of continued membership. Those expelled were termed ‘praeteriti’. While various aspects of this important and at-times controversial process have attracted scholarly attention, a detailed survey has never been attempted. The work is divided into two major parts. Part I comprises four chapters relating to various aspects of the lectio. Chapter 1 sees a close analysis of the term ‘praeteritus’, shedding fresh light on senatorial demographics and turnover – primarily a demonstration of the correctness of the (minority) view that as early as the third century the quaestorship conveyed automatic membership of the Senate to those who held it. It was not a Sullan innovation. In Ch.2 we calculate that during the period under investigation, c.350 members were expelled. When factoring for life expectancy, this translates to a significant mean lifetime risk of expulsion: c.10%. Also, that mean risk was front-loaded, with praetorians and consulars significantly less likely to be expelled than subpraetorian members.
  • Facts for Mark Twain's Memory Builder

    Facts for Mark Twain's Memory Builder

    Facts for Mark Twain's Memory Builder Date Date Length of Length of Beginning Ending Rule in Rule in Empire Role Name Rule Rule Years Months Notes Display Phrase Rome King Romulus 753 BC 716 BC 37 years 444 months Romulus (legendary), king of Rome Rome Interreg. Interregnum 716 BC 715 BC 1 year 12 months Interregnum in Rome after Romulus Rome King Numa Pompilius 715 BC 673 BC 42 years 504 months Numa Pompilius, king of Rome Rome King Tullus Hostilius 673 BC 641 BC 32 years 384 months Tullus Hostilius, king of Rome Rome King Ancus Marcius 640 BC 616 BC 24 years 288 months Ancus Marcius, king of Rome Rome King Tarquinius Priscus 616 BC 578 BC 38 years 456 months Tarquinius Priscus, king of Rome Rome King Servius Tullius 578 BC 534 BC 44 years 528 months Servius Tullius, king of Rome Rome King Tarquinius Superbus 534 BC 510 BC 24 years 288 months Tarquinius Superbus, king of Rome Rome Republic Republic 510 BC 45 BC 465 years 5580 months Republic founded in Rome Rome Emperor Julius Caesar 45 BC 44 BC 0 years 6 months Julius Caesar to power in Rome Rome Republic Second Triumvirate 43 BC 31 BC 45 years 144 months Second Triumverate to power in Rome Rome Emperor Augustus 31 BC 14 AD 45 years 540 months Augustus to power in Rome Rome Emperor Tiberius 14 AD 37 AD 23 years 276 months Tiberius, Roman emperor Rome Emperor Caligula 37 AD 41 AD 4 years 48 months Caligula, Roman emperor Rome Emperor Claudius 41 AD 54 AD 13 years 156 months Claudius, Roman emperor Rome Emperor Nero 54 AD 68 AD 14 years 168 months Nero, Roman emperor Rome Emperor Galba
  • A Handbook of Greek and Roman Coins

    A Handbook of Greek and Roman Coins

    CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME OF THE SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND GIVEN IN 1891 BY HENRY WILLIAMS SAGE Cornell University Library CJ 237.H64 A handbook of Greek and Roman coins. 3 1924 021 438 399 Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924021438399 f^antilioofcs of glrcfjaeologj) anU Antiquities A HANDBOOK OF GREEK AND ROMAN COINS A HANDBOOK OF GREEK AND ROMAN COINS G. F. HILL, M.A. OF THE DEPARTMENT OF COINS AND MEDALS IN' THE bRITISH MUSEUM WITH FIFTEEN COLLOTYPE PLATES Hon&on MACMILLAN AND CO., Limited NEW YORK: THE MACMILLAN COMPANY l8 99 \_All rights reserved'] ©jcforb HORACE HART, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY PREFACE The attempt has often been made to condense into a small volume all that is necessary for a beginner in numismatics or a young collector of coins. But success has been less frequent, because the knowledge of coins is essentially a knowledge of details, and small treatises are apt to be un- readable when they contain too many references to particular coins, and unprofltably vague when such references are avoided. I cannot hope that I have passed safely between these two dangers ; indeed, my desire has been to avoid the second at all risk of encountering the former. At the same time it may be said that this book is not meant for the collector who desires only to identify the coins which he happens to possess, while caring little for the wider problems of history, art, mythology, and religion, to which coins sometimes furnish the only key.
  • THE TALE of SAINT ABEBCIUS. the Chief Authority for the Life of This

    THE TALE of SAINT ABEBCIUS. the Chief Authority for the Life of This

    THE TALE OF SAINT ABERCIUS. 339 THE TALE OF SAINT ABEBCIUS. THE chief authority for the life of this saint is the biography by Symeon Metaphrastes, written about 900-50 A.D. It quotes the epitaph on the saint's tomb, and the question whether this epitaph is an original document of the second century A.D., or a later forgery, is one of the utmost importance for the early history of the Christian church, and of many literary points connected with it. The document is not very easily accessible, so that it may be well to quote it as it is given in the Life by Metaphrastes; the criticism of the text has been to a certain extent advanced by the metrical restorations proposed by Pitra and others.1 'E/icXe/eTr;? iroXeas •jroXirrj^ TO'8' eirouqaa ^a>i>, Xv e%co iecupq> <TU>f*aTO<; ivddSe Bicnp, TOVVO/M A/8ep«tos d we /AadrjTT]? Hoifievo'i dyvov, os {36<rK€t, irpofSaTdtv dyeXa<s ovpeai TreStcu? Te" 6<f>6aX- fiov; os e\ei fieydXow} iravra KaOopotovra1;. OVTOS yap f-e eSiSalje ypdfifiara TriaTa' ets 'VwfirjV os eire/M'yfrev ifie a9p7Jtraf ica\ fBaol~kL<T<rav IBeiv ^pvcrocrToXo ^ Xaov 8' elSof eicei Xafiirpav a<bpayi§a e^ovra' ical 2U/SM;S X(*>Pa<> «oW Kal aarea irdvTa, Nt'crt/3tv Ev^pdrrjv Sta/3d<;' irdv- 7as 8' eaj(pv avvofirjyvpovi YlavXov e<ra>0ev. IL'ffTts 8e iravrl irporjye Kal irape6r}Ke Tpo<f)r)v, l%8vv airo •mjyr)'; ira/xfieyiOr] KaOapbv ov iBpd^aro Tlapdevos dyvtj, Kal TOVTOV eVeSaJKe <f>i\ot,<: iadieiv hiairavTO';- oivov ^prjarbv ej(pu<ra Kepao-pa ScBovaa //.«••?•' aprov.