Document 1 Disease Takes Its Toll on the Roman Empire
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
RICE, CARL ROSS. Diocletian's “Great
ABSTRACT RICE, CARL ROSS. Diocletian’s “Great Persecutions”: Minority Religions and the Roman Tetrarchy. (Under the direction of Prof. S. Thomas Parker) In the year 303, the Roman Emperor Diocletian and the other members of the Tetrarchy launched a series of persecutions against Christians that is remembered as the most severe, widespread, and systematic persecution in the Church’s history. Around that time, the Tetrarchy also issued a rescript to the Pronconsul of Africa ordering similar persecutory actions against a religious group known as the Manichaeans. At first glance, the Tetrarchy’s actions appear to be the result of tensions between traditional classical paganism and religious groups that were not part of that system. However, when the status of Jewish populations in the Empire is examined, it becomes apparent that the Tetrarchy only persecuted Christians and Manichaeans. This thesis explores the relationship between the Tetrarchy and each of these three minority groups as it attempts to understand the Tetrarchy’s policies towards minority religions. In doing so, this thesis will discuss the relationship between the Roman state and minority religious groups in the era just before the Empire’s formal conversion to Christianity. It is only around certain moments in the various religions’ relationships with the state that the Tetrarchs order violence. Consequently, I argue that violence towards minority religions was a means by which the Roman state policed boundaries around its conceptions of Roman identity. © Copyright 2016 Carl Ross Rice All Rights Reserved Diocletian’s “Great Persecutions”: Minority Religions and the Roman Tetrarchy by Carl Ross Rice A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty of North Carolina State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts History Raleigh, North Carolina 2016 APPROVED BY: ______________________________ _______________________________ S. -
Collector's Checklist for Roman Imperial Coinage
Liberty Coin Service Collector’s Checklist for Roman Imperial Coinage (49 BC - AD 518) The Twelve Caesars - The Julio-Claudians and the Flavians (49 BC - AD 96) Purchase Emperor Denomination Grade Date Price Julius Caesar (49-44 BC) Augustus (31 BC-AD 14) Tiberius (AD 14 - AD 37) Caligula (AD 37 - AD 41) Claudius (AD 41 - AD 54) Tiberius Nero (AD 54 - AD 68) Galba (AD 68 - AD 69) Otho (AD 69) Nero Vitellius (AD 69) Vespasian (AD 69 - AD 79) Otho Titus (AD 79 - AD 81) Domitian (AD 81 - AD 96) The Nerva-Antonine Dynasty (AD 96 - AD 192) Nerva (AD 96-AD 98) Trajan (AD 98-AD 117) Hadrian (AD 117 - AD 138) Antoninus Pius (AD 138 - AD 161) Marcus Aurelius (AD 161 - AD 180) Hadrian Lucius Verus (AD 161 - AD 169) Commodus (AD 177 - AD 192) Marcus Aurelius Years of Transition (AD 193 - AD 195) Pertinax (AD 193) Didius Julianus (AD 193) Pescennius Niger (AD 193) Clodius Albinus (AD 193- AD 195) The Severans (AD 193 - AD 235) Clodius Albinus Septimus Severus (AD 193 - AD 211) Caracalla (AD 198 - AD 217) Purchase Emperor Denomination Grade Date Price Geta (AD 209 - AD 212) Macrinus (AD 217 - AD 218) Diadumedian as Caesar (AD 217 - AD 218) Elagabalus (AD 218 - AD 222) Severus Alexander (AD 222 - AD 235) Severus The Military Emperors (AD 235 - AD 284) Alexander Maximinus (AD 235 - AD 238) Maximus Caesar (AD 235 - AD 238) Balbinus (AD 238) Maximinus Pupienus (AD 238) Gordian I (AD 238) Gordian II (AD 238) Gordian III (AD 238 - AD 244) Philip I (AD 244 - AD 249) Philip II (AD 247 - AD 249) Gordian III Trajan Decius (AD 249 - AD 251) Herennius Etruscus -
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. -
The Extension of Imperial Authority Under Diocletian and the Tetrarchy, 285-305Ce
University of Central Florida STARS Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 2012 The Extension Of Imperial Authority Under Diocletian And The Tetrarchy, 285-305ce Joshua Petitt University of Central Florida Part of the History Commons Find similar works at: https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd University of Central Florida Libraries http://library.ucf.edu This Masters Thesis (Open Access) is brought to you for free and open access by STARS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 by an authorized administrator of STARS. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STARS Citation Petitt, Joshua, "The Extension Of Imperial Authority Under Diocletian And The Tetrarchy, 285-305ce" (2012). Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019. 2412. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/2412 THE EXTENSION OF IMPERIAL AUTHORITY UNDER DIOCLETIAN AND THE TETRARCHY, 285-305CE. by JOSHUA EDWARD PETITT B.A. History, University of Central Florida 2009 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in the Department of History in the College of Arts and Humanities at the University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida Fall Term 2012 © 2012 Joshua Petitt ii ABSTRACT Despite a vast amount of research on Late Antiquity, little attention has been paid to certain figures that prove to be influential during this time. The focus of historians on Constantine I, the first Roman Emperor to allegedly convert to Christianity, has often come at the cost of ignoring Constantine's predecessor, Diocletian, sometimes known as the "Second Father of the Roman Empire". The success of Constantine's empire has often been attributed to the work and reforms of Diocletian, but there have been very few studies of the man beyond simple biography. -
Name Reign Succession Died
Name Reign Succession Died March 20, 235 CE - Proclaimed emperor by German legions April 238 CE; Assasinated by Praetorian Maximinus I April 238 CE after the murder of Severus Alexander Guard Proclaimed emperor, whilst Pro-consul in Africa, during a revolt against Maximinus. Ruled jointly with his son Gordian II, and in opposition to Maximinus. Technically a usurper, but March 22, 238 CE - retrospectively legitimised by the April 238 CE; Committed suicide upon Gordian I April 12, 238 CE accession of Gordian III hearing of the death of Gordian II. Proclaimed emperor, alongside father March 22, 238 CE - Gordian I, in opposition to Maximinus by April 238 CE; Killed during the Battle of Gordian II April 12, 238 CE act of the Senate Carthage fighting a pro-Maximinus army Proclaimed joint emperor with Balbinus by the Senate in opposition to April 22, 238 AD – Maximinus; later co-emperor with July 29, 238 CE; Assassinated by the Pupienus July 29, 238 AD Balbinus. Praetorian Guard Proclaimed joint emperor with Pupienus by the Senate after death of Gordian I & April 22, 238 AD – II, in opposition to Maximinus; later co- July 29, 238 CE; Assassinated by the Balbinus July 29, 238 AD emperor with Pupienus and Gordian III Praetorian Guard Proclaimed emperor by supporters of April 22, 238 AD – Gordian I & II, then by the Senate; joint February 11, 244 emperor with Pupienus and Balbinus February 11, 244 CE; Unknown, possibly Gordian III AD until July 238 AD. murdered on orders of Philip I February 244 AD – Praetorian Prefect to Gordian III, took September/October -
Constantine and Episcopal Banishment: Continuity and Change in the Settlement of Christian Disputes Eric Fournier
Constantine and Episcopal Banishment: Continuity and Change in the Settlement of Christian Disputes Eric Fournier To cite this version: Eric Fournier. Constantine and Episcopal Banishment: Continuity and Change in the Settlement of Christian Disputes. Hillner, Julia; Enberg, Jakob; Ulrich, Jörg. Clerical Exile in Late Antiquity, Peter Lang, pp.47-65, 2016, Early Christianity in the Context of Antiquity, 17, 978-3-631-69427-5. hal-02572753 HAL Id: hal-02572753 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02572753 Submitted on 13 May 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Éric Fournier1 Constantine and Episcopal Banishment: Continuity and Change in the Settlement of Christian Disputes Abstract: Constantine’s use of clerical banishment followed precedents in respecting their immunity to physical coercion. It also deferred to bishops to adjudicate their own disputes, through councils, which lacked means to enforce their decisions. Exile was thus the optional civil enforcement of counciliar decisions and the harshest sentence Constantine was willing to use against bishops. Upon winning both of his civil wars against imperial rivals presented as ‘per- secutors’, Maxentius in 312 and Licinius in 324, one of Constantine’s first actions was to recall bishops exiled during their alleged persecutions.2 In this context, exile was understood as a persecutory measure against Christians. -
A REASSESSMENT of GALLIENUS' REIGN TROY KENDRICK Bachelor
A REASSESSMENT OF GALLIENUS’ REIGN TROY KENDRICK Bachelor of Arts, University of Lethbridge, 2014 A Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of the University of Lethbridge in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the degree MASTER OF ARTS History Department University of Lethbridge LETHBRIDGE, ALBERTA, CANADA © Troy Kendrick, 2014 Abstract This thesis examines and reassesses the reign of the Roman emperor Gallienus in the mid-third century CE. Specifically, this paper analyses Gallienus’ military and administrative policies, his conception of his emperorship, and the influence his policies had on his successors.Gallienus ruled over the Roman Empire during a period of unprecedented calamities. The misfortunes of the Roman Empire during this period, and the biases against Gallienus in the writings of the ancient Latin authors, left a less-than-favorable impression of Gallienus’ reign. However, a re-evaluation of Gallienus and his policies unveils a remarkably capable emperor, who should be credited with not only saving the Roman Empire from complete collapse, but laying the foundation for the Empire’s recovery in the late third century CE. iii Acknowledgements I would like offer my thanks to committee members David Hay and Kevin McGeough for their assistance and comments regarding my thesis. I would especially like to thank my supervisor, Christopher Epplett, for the invaluable assistance, encouragement, and patience he has extended to me throughout the entire writing process. Finally, I would like to thank my family for -
Barbarians on the Coins of Trajan Decius (249–251)
Studia Ceranea 10, 2020, p. 337–359 ISSN: 2084-140X DOI: 10.18778/2084-140X.10.16 e-ISSN: 2449-8378 Agata A. Kluczek (Katowice) https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0852-0572 Barbarians on the Coins of Trajan Decius (249–251) he theme of the barbarian, especially its variants which presented the bar- T barian as an enemy or a captive, was an ideologically expressive symbol uti- lised in Roman art and mintage across centuries1. It symbolised victory and the capability of conquering a specific person or an entire empire; it expressed the idea of Roman victory and dominance in the ancient world. In the middle of the 3rd century one is struck by its absence in imperial coinage. It falls to the so- called first great crisis (249–253)2, which covered the reign of a number of rulers: Trajan Decius and his sons Herennius Etruscus and Hostilian (249–251), Trebo- nianus Gallus and Volusianus (251–253), as well as Aemilianus (253). The lack of this theme in imperial coinage is intriguing. In the third century, during a time of wars which justified and enforced the presence of the theme, and in the peri- od of a glorification of the emperor as the victor and the unconquerable leader of an empire, the figure of a stranger-enemy was transposed to the reverses of coins, whose content touched upon various spheres of state-social life, not only of military questions3. The absence of the images of the barbarians is surprising 1 Cf. (e.g.) J.A. Ostrowski, „Cum restrictis ad terga manibus”. -
SPEECH in DEFENCE of CAIUS RABIRIUS POSTUMUS Marcus Tullius Cicero
61 BC SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF CAIUS RABIRIUS POSTUMUS Marcus Tullius Cicero translated by Charles Duke Yonge, A.B. Cicero, Marcus Tullius (106-43 BC) - Rome’s greatest orator, philosopher, and rhetorician, he developed a style of speaking that was emulated for centuries thereafter. Cicero was influential in the development of Latin as more than just a utilitarian language. Speech in Defence of Caius Rabirius Postumus (61 BC) - Cicero undertook Caius Rabirius’ defence to please Pompey. Rabirius was a Ro- man knight who was accused of advising Gabinius to restore Ptolemy. He was ac- quitted. THE ARGUMENT When Gabinius, the colleague of Piso, returned from his province of Syria, he was prosecuted on two indictments; in the first prosecution Cicero appeared as a witness against him; but he was acquitted, as Cicero says in his letters to his brother Quintus, in consequence of the stupidity of Lentulus, the prosecutor, and the great exertion of Pompey, and the corruption of the judges. In the second prosecution Cicero was prevailed on by Pompey to defend him; but he was con- demned to perpetual banishment. The trial of Caius Rabirius Postumus, a Roman knight, arose out of that trial of Gabinius. It had been one of the articles against him, that he had received an enormous sum for restoring Ptolemy to his kingdom of Egypt; but when he was convicted, his estate was found inadequate to meet the damages which he was condemned to pay, and the deficiency was now demanded from those through whose hands the management of his money affairs had passed, and who were sup- posed to have been sharers in the spoil; and of these men the chief was Rabirius, who was now accused of having advised Gabinius to undertake Ptolemy’s restora- tion; of having accompanied him; of having been employed by him to solicit the payment of the money, and of having lived at Alexandria for that purpose in the king’s service as the public receiver of the king’s taxes, and wearing the dress of an Egyptian. -
Copyrighted Material
THE CRISIS OF THE THIRD CENTURY 23 1 The Crisis of the Third Century 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 253–268 Gallienus The Byzantine Empire does not have a proper “beginning” since it was, in fact, the continuation of the Roman state, which had begun (according to tradition) in 753 BC. A convenient starting date is the reign of Constantine, but the events of his reign cannot be understood without a consideration of the events and problems of the third century after Christ, since those set the scene for the restructuring and “revival” of Rome in the years that followed. We begin our survey, therefore, with the crisis that affected the Roman world in the middle years of the third century. The 50 years between the death of Severus Alexander and the accession of Diocletian (235–284) witnessed the near collapse of the whole Roman way of life, from the government and military structure to the economy and the thought system that had characterized the ancient world until then. In political terms, no emperor COPYRIGHTEDduring this entire period was MATERIALsecure, and nearly every one of them died a violent death at the hands of rebels. The frontiers of the empire gave way, the enemies of the state, especially in the north and the east, came flooding in, and various parts of the empire became essentially independent. Meanwhile, the economy collapsed, inflation drove prices up, and the coinage became virtually worthless. Not surprisingly, amid these difficulties there developed what we may call a cultural crisis, characterized by changes of style in art, literature, and religion. -
The Imperial Mints During the Reign of Claudius II. Gothicus and Their Issues by Andreas Markl, K
The Imperial Mints during the Reign of Claudius II. Gothicus and their Issues by Andreas Markl, k. k. Major i. P. Translated from the original German, in Numismatische Zeitschrift No. 16, Anno 1894 by Dane Kurth Notes from the translator : 1) For clarity, I have used "IMP" for the "I IIIIP" used on the Rome issues 2) The way that the Cohen references were given in the original article was a little confusing: a) Cohen references for Claudius coins with Gallienus reverses are Cohen refs for Gallienus , b) the Cohen references below only refer to the basic type and not to the varieties of fieldmarks, mintmarks etc. listed below. e.g. IMP CLAVDIVS AVG/LIBERITAS AVG of Siscia, with S in the right field is described as Cohen 115. However, Cohen 115 gives the obverse legend as IMP C CLAVDIVS AVG and makes no mention of the field mark S. So the Cohen references in the following pages cannot be taken as "gospel". c) because a couple of Cohen references appear to be incorrect (possibly type- setters errors) d) the RIC author appears to have been using a different version (numbers in RIC do not correspond to the appropriate coin(s) in my edition of Cohen) I have, where possible used "modern" known references including RIC, Cunetio hoard, Normanby Hoard, Venera = La Venera Hoard, IARCW = Roman Coin Hoards of Wales, Cardiff University. The Cohen volumes: Gallienus (Cohen vol. IV) and Claudius (Cohen vol. V) can be viewed on http://www.inumis.com/rome/index.html 3) Coins described below, which were not already in my RIC list of Claudius II coins, have been added to that list. -
He Woman in the Roman Society
HE WOMAN IN THE ROMAN SOCIETY Ideal – Law – Practice Jakub Urbanik Meeting 2–3: A true Roman woman – a true woman? An ideal or a revolutionary factor? Lucretia T– Virginia – Cornelia – Octavia – Cleopatra – Messalina – Theodora – Elagabalus. Literary topos and reality. Suggested readings: A. THE WOMEN THROUGHOUT THE ROMAN HISTORY: TOPIC REPRESENTATION OF WOMEN IN ROMAN HISTORIOGRAPHY AND LITERATURE 1. Lucretia (Livy, History of Rome 1.57.6-58) While they were drinking at Sextus Tarquinius’ house, where Tarquinius Collatinus, son of Egerius, was also dining, the conversation happened to turn to their wives. Each one praised his own, and the discussion heated up. Collatinus said there was no need for all the talk as only a few hours were needed to prove beyond a doubt that his wife was the most virtuous. ‘We are young and strong. Why don’t we get on our horses and make a surprise visit. Then we’ll see with our own eyes how our wives behave when we’re not around.’ The wine had got them fired up. ‘Let’s go!’ they cried and flew off towards Rome, which they reached as twilight was falling. There they found the daughters-in-law of the king banqueting with their friends. They continued on to Collatia to check on Lucretia, whom they found, not at dinner like the others, but in the atrium of the house, with only her maidservants, working at her wool by lamplight. There was no question who won the contest. She greeted her husband and the Tarquins, and the victorious husband graciously invited the others to dine.