DOCSLIB.ORG

Political Networks, Imperial Relations, and the Division of the Roman Empire, AD 337 to 350

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Political Networks, Imperial Relations, and the Division of the Roman Empire, AD 337 to 350 Political Networks, Imperial Relations, and the Division of the Roman Empire, AD 337 to 350 PhD thesis, December 2019 William Lewis Abstract This thesis argues that the years AD 337 to 350 gave rise to a series of events that prompted one of the earliest and most influential territorial divisions of the Later Roman Empire. Following the death of Constantine the Great, his sons, Constantine II, Constantius II, and Constans, arranged to share power. But a failure of imperial collegiality, culminating in the civil war of 340, led to the empire being divided into autonomous and sovereign states. Following the period of the Tetrarchy, this established a new precedent for how the empire was governed, which eventually became permanent in 395 after the death of Theodosius I. The importance of this first division has been overlooked in scholarship, and this thesis will establish when, how, and why the Roman Empire was divided by the sons of Constantine. This thesis is arranged in the following way. Chapter 1 introduces the thesis, provides an overview of scholarship and the available evidence, establishes a definition of division, and summarises the structure of the thesis. Chapter 2 examines the succession arrangements of Constantine and how they were overturned by Constantius, before considering the negotiations between the sons and their acclamation as Augusti. Chapter 3 reconstructs the governance of the empire from 337 to 340, and demonstrates that there was still a functional imperial hierarchy and undivided empire, even though the authority of Constantine II was beginning to be eroded. Chapter 4 re-examines the conflict between Constantine II and Constans in 340, and argues that the accepted narrative of Constantine II’s aggression is false, and that Constantine II was ambushed on the initiative of Constans. This fatally undermined imperial collegiality and hierarchy, which resulted of the de facto division of the empire between the surviving brothers, Constantius and Constans. Chapter 5 uses prosopography to examine how the newly divided empire functioned, focusing on the praetorian prefecture, the consulship, and the relationship between imperial courts. Chapter 6 looks at the assassination of Constans and its aftermath, which demonstrates how division had become an established part of the imperial administration, and it was only the efforts of Constantius that caused its temporary reunification. Chapter 7 considers Constantius’ attempts to preserve unity in the 350s, and his ultimate failure to address the expectation of division among the army and administration. This chapter concludes the thesis by showing that the division of the Roman Empire from 340 to 350 had become too entrenched to be reversed, and that the precedent established in these years led to the permanent division of the Roman Empire. ii Contents List of Abbreviations vi List of Figures viii Acknowledgements ix Chapter 1: Introduction: Partes Regendae 1 Preface 1 2 Historiographical Context 5 3 Literature Review 11 4 Evidence and Sources 15 5 Defining and Approaching Political Networks, Imperial Relations, and the Division of the Roman Empire 25 6 Thesis Structure 31 7 Conclusion 33 Chapter 2: Constantius, Divider of Empires? The unified empire of Constantine and the rebellion of Constantius in AD 337 1 Introduction 35 2 Constantine’s Executor 37 3 Negotiations in Pannonia 48 4 A Detour to Troesmis 49 5 Mutiny 55 6 Conclusion: The Post-Tetrarchy of Constantius 58 Chapter 3: The Constantinian Triarchy Imperial collegiality and regional autonomy in a loosely unified empire, AD 337 to 340 1 Introduction 61 2 Territory 62 3 Authority 64 4 Legislative Autonomy 69 5 Seniority 76 iii 6 Conclusion 80 Chapter 4: The Civil War of 340 Conspiracy, culpability, and consequence 1 Introduction 82 2 The Sources for the Civil War of 340 84 3 Date and Distance Analysis 93 4 Constans’ Coup 100 5 The Reaction of Constantius 103 6 Conclusion 111 Chapter 5: Ulpius Limenius and the West Political mobility, regional administration, and the consulship: governing a divided empire, AD 340 to 350 1 Introduction 113 2 The Proconsul of Constantinople 116 3 Praetorian Prefects in the West 121 4 Constans’ Eastern Court 133 5 The Consulship 136 6 Conclusion 153 Chapter 6: Fabius Titianus and the Urban Prefecture of Rome High-status officials, the fall of Constans, and the future of dynastic division 1 Introduction 158 2 The Chronography of 354 161 3 Constans’ Urban Prefects 169 4 The Profile of the Urban Prefecture Under Constans 176 5 The Fight for Rome 183 6 Fabius Titianus: praefectus iterum 190 7 A Conspiracy of Constans’ Supporters 194 8 Usurpation in a Divided Empire 200 9 Conclusion 203 iv Chapter 7: Conclusion: Constantius, Unifier of Empires 1 Introduction 206 2 The Years 337 to 350, Revisited 208 3 Constantius and the Reunification of the Roman Empire 211 4 Conclusion 222 Appendix 1: The Constantinian Family Tree 224 Appendix 2: Constantia and Orfitus 225 Appendix 3: A Digression on Julian’s Second Oration 232 Bibliography 236 v List of Abbreviations Amm. Ammianus Marcellinus Rerum Gestarum App. B. Civ. Appian The Civil Wars Art. Pass. Artemii Passio Athan. Athanasius Apol. ad Const. Defence before Constantius Apol. c. Ar. Defence against the Arians Apol. de fuga Defence of his Flight Hist. Ar. History of the Arians Aug. Conf. Augustine Confessions Aur. Vict. Aurelius Victor De Caesaribus CAH Cambridge Ancient History CIL Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum CLRE Bagnall, R. S., A. Cameron, S. R. Schwartz, and K. A. Worp 1987: Consuls of the Later Roman Empire, Atlanta: Scholars Press. CTh Codex Theodosianus COD Concise Oxford Dictionary (Twelfth Edition) Eunap. VS Eunapius Vitae Sophistarum Eus. Eusebius HE Historia Ecclesiastica VC Vita Constantini Firm. Mat. Math. Firmicus Maternus Mathesios libri VIII ILS Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae Jer. Chron. Jerome Chronicle Jul. Julian Ad Ath. Letter to the Athenians Caes. Caesars Ep. Epistlulae Mis. Misopogon Or. Orationes Lact. Mort. Pers. Lactantius On the Deaths of the Persecutors LSA Last Statues of Antiquity Lib. Libanius vi Ep. Epistulae Or. Orationes Or. Const. Letter of the Emperor Constantius to the Senate Concerning Themistius Oros. Orosius History against the Pagans Pan. Lat. Panegyrici Latini Pet. Patr. fr. Petrus Patricius fragments Phot. Epit. Photius Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius Philost. HE Philostorgius Ecclesiastical History PLRE 1 Jones, A. H. M., Martindale, J., and Morris, J. 1971: The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire Vol. 1, A.D.260-395, London: Cambridge University Press. RIC VII Bruun, P., with R. A. G. Carson and C. H. V. Sutherland (eds.) 1966: Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. VII: Constantine and Licinius, A.D. 313- 337, London: Spink & Son. RIC VIII Kent, J. P. C. 1981: The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. VIII: The Family of Constantine I A.D. 337- 364, London: Spink & Son. Ruf. HE Rufinus Ecclesiastical History Soc. HE Socrates Scholasticus Ecclesiastical History Soz. HE Sozomen Ecclesiastical History Suet. Suetonius Vit. Tib. Life of Tiberius Vit. Vitell. Life of Vitellius Symm. Symmachus Ep. Epistulae Or. Orationes Tac. Ann. Tacitus Annales Them. Or. Themistius Orationes Theod. HE Theodoret Ecclesiastical History Zon. Zonaras Epitome Historiarum Zos. Zosimus Historia Nova vii List of Figures Figure 1: The territories of Constantine’s Caesars from 335 to 337 37 Figure 2: The Troesmis inscription 51 Figure 3: The territories of the sons of Constantine as Augusti, from 337 to 340 62 Figure 4: Gold glass depicting Orfitus and Costantia 226 Figure 5: Hypothetical marriage relations of Memmius Vitrasius Orfitus 229 viii Acknowledgements My thanks go first and foremost to my supervisor, Nic Baker-Brian, who encouraged me to approach this thesis in my own way, while providing a limitless supply of ideas, insight, good advice and scholarly wisdom, and without whom this thesis would never have been possible. My thanks also go to my second supervisor Richard Flower, to my friends and family for their tolerance and support, to the SWW DTP for funding the whole enterprise, and to Alexander Gordon for keeping it afloat. I would like to dedicate this thesis to the memory of Uncle Dave and Grandma, who were lost along the way. ix Chapter 1 Introduction: Partes Regendae 1.1 PREFACE This is the story of how the Roman Empire was divided by accident. It is the story of how a great realm was cleaved in two, because of dynastic principles, imperial relations, and the evolving politics of multiple rule. It is a story that has been overlooked in scholarship, and its true significance was unknowable at the time. But the division of the Roman Empire is a story that still affects the world today. It contributed to the fall of the Roman Empire in the West, and the development of national boundaries and identities that have often persisted into the present.1 It determined the culture and institutions of the Byzantine Empire.2 It set the stage for the divergent worlds of Medieval Europe and the Byzantine and Ottoman East. It spelled the end to a kind of unity around the Mediterranean that has never since re-emerged, the absence of which is still felt in the politics and discourse of modernity. Arguably, it was one of the most consequential single events in world history. But when did it happen? Conventional wisdom says 395,3 when the empire was divided between the two successors to Theodosius I, Arcadius in the East and Honorius in the West. But there was not just one division of the Roman Empire. In fact, it was divided multiple times, and in many different ways, before the division became largely permanent with the accession of Arcadius and Honorius.4 Multiple emperorship had a long history, and had become commonplace after 1 It is perhaps unsurprising that many modern national identities are defined in opposition to the Roman Empire, rather than as descendants of it.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Book I. Title XXVII. Concerning the Office of the Praetor Prefect Of
    Book I. Title XXVII. Concerning the office of the Praetor Prefect of Africa and concerning the whole organization of that diocese. (De officio praefecti praetorio Africae et de omni eiusdem dioeceseos statu.) Headnote. Preliminary. For a better understanding of the following chapters in the Code, a brief outline of the organization of the Roman Empire may be given, but historical works will have to be consulted for greater details. The organization as contemplated in the Code was the one initiated by Diocletian and Constantine the Great in the latter part of the third and the beginning of the fourth century of the Christian era, and little need be said about the time previous to that. During the Republican period, Rome was governed mainly by two consuls, tow or more praetors (C. 1.39 and note), quaestors (financial officers and not to be confused with the imperial quaestor of the later period, mentioned at C. 1.30), aediles and a prefect of food supply. The provinces were governed by ex-consuls and ex- praetors sent to them by the Senate, and these governors, so sent, had their retinue of course. After the empire was established, the provinces were, for a time, divided into senatorial and imperial, the later consisting mainly of those in which an army was required. The senate continued to send out ex-consuls and ex-praetors, all called proconsuls, into the senatorial provinces. The proconsul was accompanied by a quaestor, who was a financial officer, and looked after the collection of the revenue, but who seems to have been largely subservient to the proconsul.
    [Show full text]
  • Hadrian and the Greek East
    HADRIAN AND THE GREEK EAST: IMPERIAL POLICY AND COMMUNICATION DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University By Demetrios Kritsotakis, B.A, M.A. * * * * * The Ohio State University 2008 Dissertation Committee: Approved by Professor Fritz Graf, Adviser Professor Tom Hawkins ____________________________ Professor Anthony Kaldellis Adviser Greek and Latin Graduate Program Copyright by Demetrios Kritsotakis 2008 ABSTRACT The Roman Emperor Hadrian pursued a policy of unification of the vast Empire. After his accession, he abandoned the expansionist policy of his predecessor Trajan and focused on securing the frontiers of the empire and on maintaining its stability. Of the utmost importance was the further integration and participation in his program of the peoples of the Greek East, especially of the Greek mainland and Asia Minor. Hadrian now invited them to become active members of the empire. By his lengthy travels and benefactions to the people of the region and by the creation of the Panhellenion, Hadrian attempted to create a second center of the Empire. Rome, in the West, was the first center; now a second one, in the East, would draw together the Greek people on both sides of the Aegean Sea. Thus he could accelerate the unification of the empire by focusing on its two most important elements, Romans and Greeks. Hadrian channeled his intentions in a number of ways, including the use of specific iconographical types on the coinage of his reign and religious language and themes in his interactions with the Greeks. In both cases it becomes evident that the Greeks not only understood his messages, but they also reacted in a positive way.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Rome Vs Rome Ing Late Romans Come from the Cover of the Roman Empire in the Middle of the Fourth
    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.
    [Show full text]
  • 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
    [Show full text]
  • Civic Responses to the Rise and Fall of Sol Elagabal in the Roman Empire
    EMPIRE OF THE SUN? CIVIC RESPONSES TO THE RISE AND FALL OF SOL ELAGABAL IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE Martijn Icks During its long and turbulent history, the city of Rome witnessed many changes in its religious institutions and traditions. For many centuries, these came to pass under the benevolent eye of Iupiter Optimus Maximus, the city‟s supreme deity since time immemorial. Not until the fourth century AD would Iupiter finally loose this position to the monotheistic, omnipotent God of Christianity. However, the power of the thunder god had been challenged before. The first deity who temporarily conquered his throne was Sol Invictus Elagabal, a local sun god from the Syrian town of Emesa. This unlikely usurper was the personal god of the emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, whose short-lived reign lasted from 218 to 222 AD, and who has been nicknamed Elagabalus for his affiliation with Elagabal. Even before his rise to power, Elagabalus served as Elagabal‟s high priest. The deity was worshipped in the form of a conical black stone, a so-called baitylos or “house of god”, which resided in a big temple in Emesa. Elagabalus, at that time a fourteen-year-old boy, performed ritual dances in honour of his god. By doing so, he drew the attention of Roman soldiers who were stationed near the town. They proclaimed the boy emperor under the false pretense that he was a bastard son of emperor Caracalla (211-217 AD). Elagabalus won sufficient military support, defeated the reigning emperor and thus gained the throne. He installed himself in Rome and took his god with him.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1 Barbarian Agency and Imperial Withdrawal: the Causes And
    Chapter 1 Barbarian agency and imperial withdrawal: the causes and consequences of political change in fourth- and fifth-century Trier and Cologne Introduction Snapshots from the years 310, 410, and 510 reveal that the political landscape of the Rhineland changed almost beyond recognition over the course of three centuries. In 310 AD, Trier was one of the foremost cities of the Roman Empire, acting as a main residence of the Emperor Constantine and the seat of the Gallic praetorian prefecture. In Cologne, meanwhile, the completion of the fortress of Divitia just across the Rhine reinforced the city’s significance in the context of imperial defensive strategy. By 410 AD, however, both the imperial residence and the praetorian prefecture had been removed from Trier, and many frontier troops who had been stationed near Cologne were gone. The Rhineland had suffered an apparently devastating barbarian invasion, that of the Vandals, Alans, and Sueves in 406, and was to face many more attacks in the coming half-century. After the invasion, the legitimate emperors were never to re- establish their firm control in the region, and the reign of the usurper Constantine III (407 - 411) marked the last period of effective imperial rule. Around 510 AD, the last vestiges of imperial political power had vanished, and both Trier and Cologne were part of the Frankish kingdom of Clovis. The speed and extent of this change must have dramatically affected many aspects of life within the cities, and, as such, it is crucial that we seek to understand what brought it about. In so doing, we must consider the fundamental question of whether responsibility for the collapse of imperial power in the Rhineland ultimately lies with the imperial authorities themselves, who withdrew from the region, or with the 11 various barbarian groups, who launched attacks on the frontier provinces and undermined the Empire’s control.
    [Show full text]
  • The Political and Military Aspects of Accession of Constantine the Great
    Graeco-Latina Brunensia 24 / 2019 / 2 https://doi.org/10.5817/GLB2019-2-2 The Political and Military Aspects of Accession of Constantine the Great Stanislav Doležal (University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice) Abstract The article argues that Constantine the Great, until he was recognized by Galerius, the senior ČLÁNKY / ARTICLES Emperor of the Tetrarchy, was an usurper with no right to the imperial power, nothwithstand- ing his claim that his father, the Emperor Constantius I, conferred upon him the imperial title before he died. Tetrarchic principles, envisaged by Diocletian, were specifically put in place to supersede and override blood kinship. Constantine’s accession to power started as a military coup in which a military unit composed of barbarian soldiers seems to have played an impor- tant role. Keywords Constantine the Great; Roman emperor; usurpation; tetrarchy 19 Stanislav Doležal The Political and Military Aspects of Accession of Constantine the Great On 25 July 306 at York, the Roman Emperor Constantius I died peacefully in his bed. On the same day, a new Emperor was made – his eldest son Constantine who had been present at his father’s deathbed. What exactly happened on that day? Britain, a remote province (actually several provinces)1 on the edge of the Roman Empire, had a tendency to defect from the central government. It produced several usurpers in the past.2 Was Constantine one of them? What gave him the right to be an Emperor in the first place? It can be argued that the political system that was still valid in 306, today known as the Tetrarchy, made any such seizure of power illegal.
    [Show full text]
  • Of the Roman Empire
    EDITIONLAUSANNE Limited to one tbousand registered sets N0.4'7 THE DECLINEAND FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE VOL. I1 THE HISTORY OF THE DECLINE AND FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE BY EDWARD GIBBON EDITED BY J. B. BURY, M.A. WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY THE RT. HON. W. E. H. LECKY VOL. I1 NEW YORK FRED DE FAU & COMPANY PUBLISHERS COPYRIGHT,I+, FRED DE FAU & COMPANY. CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME PACE... LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS......... xu1 CHAPTER X The Emperors Decks. Gallus. Amilianus. Valerian. and Galliersur - The General Irruption of the Barbarians - The Thirty Tyrads A.D. 248-268 The Nature of the Subject .......i The Emperor Philip .........a 249 Services.Revolt. Victory. and Reign of the Emperor Decius . a 250 He marchesagainst the Goths ......3 Origin of the Goths from Scandinavia .....4 Religion of the Goths ........5 Institutions and Death of Odin .......6 Agreeable. but uncertainHypothesis concerning Odin . 6 Emigration of the Goths fromScandinavia into Prussia . 7 -from Prussia to theUkraine ...... 8 The Gothic Nation increases in its March .... 9 Distinction of the Germans and Sarmatians ....10 Description ofUkraine the ......10 The Goths invade the Roman Provinces .....11 250 Various Events of the Gothic War ... ..12 251 Decius revives the ofice of Censor in the Person of Valerian . 14 The Design Impracticable. and without Effect ....15 Defeat and Death of Decius and his Son .....16 251 Election of Gallus .........IS 252 Retreat of the Goths ....... 18 gallus purchases Peace by the Payment of an annual Tnbut; 18 Popular Discontent .........19 253 Victory and Revolt of Ahilianus ......20 Gallus abandoned and slain .......20 Valerian revenges the Death of Gallus .....21 Is acknowledged Emperor ........21 'i Character of Valerian ....
    [Show full text]
  • The Cambridge Companion to Age of Constantine.Pdf
    The Cambridge Companion to THE AGE OF CONSTANTINE S The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Constantine offers students a com- prehensive one-volume introduction to this pivotal emperor and his times. Richly illustrated and designed as a readable survey accessible to all audiences, it also achieves a level of scholarly sophistication and a freshness of interpretation that will be welcomed by the experts. The volume is divided into five sections that examine political history, reli- gion, social and economic history, art, and foreign relations during the reign of Constantine, a ruler who gains in importance because he steered the Roman Empire on a course parallel with his own personal develop- ment. Each chapter examines the intimate interplay between emperor and empire and between a powerful personality and his world. Collec- tively, the chapters show how both were mutually affected in ways that shaped the world of late antiquity and even affect our own world today. Noel Lenski is Associate Professor of Classics at the University of Colorado, Boulder. A specialist in the history of late antiquity, he is the author of numerous articles on military, political, cultural, and social history and the monograph Failure of Empire: Valens and the Roman State in the Fourth Century ad. Cambridge Collections Online © Cambridge University Press, 2007 Cambridge Collections Online © Cambridge University Press, 2007 The Cambridge Companion to THE AGE OF CONSTANTINE S Edited by Noel Lenski University of Colorado Cambridge Collections Online © Cambridge University Press, 2007 cambridge university press Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, Sao˜ Paulo Cambridge University Press 40 West 20th Street, New York, ny 10011-4211, usa www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521818384 c Cambridge University Press 2006 This publication is in copyright.
    [Show full text]
  • A Remark on the Name of the Emperor Lucius Aurelius Verus in Egypt 448 ADAM ŁUKASZEWICZ
    INSTITUT DES CULTURES MÉDITERRANÉENNES ET ORIENTALES DE L’ACADÉMIE POLONAISE DES SCIENCES ÉTUDES et TRAVAUX XXVI 2013 ADAM ŁUKASZEWICZ A Remark on the Name of the Emperor Lucius Aurelius Verus in Egypt 448 ADAM ŁUKASZEWICZ In documents from Roman Egypt the emperor Lucius Aurelius Verus (AD 161–169)1 appears obviously as co-regent of Marcus Aurelius and is mentioned only together with Marcus Aurelius. In Greek papyri a frequent formula reads: Αὐτοκράτωρ Καῖσαρ Μάρκος Αὐρήλιος ʼΑντωνῖνος Σεβαστὸς καὶ Αὐτοκράτωρ Καῖσαρ Λούκιος Αὐρήλιος Οὐῆρος Σεβαστός.2 The occurrence of Lucius Verus is rare in Egyptian texts. As far as the Egyptian hieroglyphic inscriptions are considered, J. von Beckerath quotes only the examples from R. Lepsius’ Denkmäler.3 The name of Lucius Verus occurs as: Rwky Awrry wr-aA anx-Dt. The names printed in the Denkmäler were copied from three cartouches which are situ- ated on the southern wall in a small western temple of Marcus Aurelius at Philae, in a row together with the cartouches of Marcus Aurelius, with two preserved cartouches containing the titles Αὐτοκράτωρ Καῖσαρ: Awtkrtr Ksrs. Above these cartouches of Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus there is a fragment of a Greek inscription with a date (Pharmouthi 30 of an unknown year) referring to the joint rulers: ] κυρίων Αὐτοκρατόρων Φαρμοῦθι λ ἐπ΄ ἀγαθῷ. New instances of the name of Lucius Verus are available now in the publication by J. Hallof.4 They came from Kom Ombo and Philae. The inscriptions can be found in the main temple of Kom Ombo and in the gate of Hadrian at Philae.
    [Show full text]
  • 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
    [Show full text]