| Image search results - "Fair" |
Tacitus, 25 September 275 - 12 April 276 A.D.
Obverse:
Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust right
AK K Λ TAKITOC CEB
AK: AVTOKRATOR is the equivalent of the Latin Imperator, 'emperor'.
K Λ is an abbreviation for K AV IOC, 'Claudius' transliterated into Greek.
TOK: TAKITOC= Tacitus
CEB: SEBASTOS (greek indication for augustus).
With the pellet between TOC . CEB
Reverse:
ETOVC A (year 1)
Dikaiosyne standing left holding scales in right hand and cornucopia in left. Diakaiosyne is the Greek equivalent of Aequitas ('Equity, Fair Dealing' to quote Sear).
Domination: Billon TETRAdrachm (4 drachms): size 21 mm
Mint: Alexandria, provincial.
Comment:
These Egyptian issues are not in RIC, but the old standard catalogue for these is Milne, where yours is no. 4492, with the pellet between TOC . CEB. They are also listed in the new Sear vol.III (though in not as much detail), where the nearest is 11831, which doesn't have the pellets in the obverse legend (Milne 4489). Other references : Curtis 1832, BMC 2403v ; Geissen 3115.
Peter Wissing
|
|
Celtic, Bastarnae Tribe, Thrace, c. 220 - 160 B.C., Imitative of Macedonian Kingdom Type
The Bastarnae were an important ancient people of uncertain, but probably mixed Germanic-Celtic-Sarmatian, ethnic origin, who lived between the Danube and the Dnieper (Strabo, Geography, VII, 3,17) during the last centuries B.C. and early centuries A.D. The etymology of their name is uncertain, but may mean 'mixed-bloods' (compare 'bastard'), as opposed to their neighbours the East Germanic Scirii, the 'clean-' or 'pure-bloods.'
32899. Bronze AE 16, imitative of SNG Cop 1299 (Macedonian Kingdom, time of Philip V and Perseus, 221 - 168 B.C.), Fair/Fine, 2.168g, 16.3mm, obverse Celtic-style bust of river-god Strymon right; reverse TridentCastvlo
|
|
Amyntas III, 393 - 370/369 BC. AE17 Dichalkon. Struck at an uncertain mint in MacedoniaObverse: No legend. Head of Herakles, wearing lion's skin, facing right.
Reverse: AMYNTA above Eagle standing facing right, grasping snake in it's talons and attacking it with it's beak.
Diameter: 16.92mm | Weight: 3.17gms | Die Axis: 6
SNG ANS 100 - 109 | SNG Munchen 49-52 | AMNG 160, 7
Amyntas III was king of Macedonia from about 393 to 370/369 BC, he was the father of Philip II and the grandfather of Alexander the Great. His skillful diplomacy in Greek affairs prepared the way for Macedonia's emergence as a great power under his son Philip II.
Amyntas came to the throne during a period of some confusion after the sudden death of king Archelaus who was killed while out hunting in 399 BC. Archelaus was succeeded by his young son Orestes, who ruled with his guardian Aeropus for four years until his death, possibly at the hands of Aeropus. Aeropus then ruled alone as Aeropus II, until he died of an illness two years later and was succeeded by his son Pausanius.
Diodorus gives two versions of the start of Amyntas' reign but both versions agree that Amyntas came to the throne after assassinating Pausanias but was then driven out by the Illyrians. Amyntas recovered his kingdom in the following year however, with the aid of the Spartans and the Thessalians. He continued to maintain his position by the expedient of siding with the powers ascendant in Greece, securing his alliance with Athens by supporting their claim to Amphipolis, and by adopting the Athenian general Iphicrates as his son. Iphicrates later helped Amyntas' son, Perdikkas III, to secure his claim to the throne.
Several significant figures worked in Macedonia during Amyntas' reign, including Nicomachus, the father of Aristotle, who served as court physician to Amyntas, and Aristotle himself who served as the tutor to Amyntas' grandson, Alexander the Great.
Amyntas died at an advanced age in 370-369 BC, leaving his throne to the eldest of his three sons, Alexander II, who ruled from 369 to 366 BC. Amyntas' other two sons also ended up ruling Macedon, Perdikkas III from 365 to 359 BC and Philip II, the father of Alexander the Great, from 359 to 336 BC.*Alex
|
|
1st Century CE, IRON AGE BRITAIN, Tribe: Iceni, AR Unit, Struck c.60 - 61 under Boudica (Boadicea)Obverse: No legend. Abstract Celtic style head with slit for eye and no ear facing right. Three pellets below head, branch emblem behind neck.
Reverse: No legend. Celtic style horse facing right, lozenge-shaped box with pellets on outer corners below horse. Section of large elaborate wheel-like object above horse, pellet below horse's tail.
Class: Icenian O
Diameter: 14mm | Weight: 0.9gms | Axis: 10
Spink: 434
The first known recorded example of this coin was made by William Stukely, an English antiquarian whose ideas influenced various antiquaries throughout the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Stukeley published over twenty books on archaeology and other subjects during his lifetime and he is regarded as an important forerunner of archaeology for his emphasis on methodically measuring and documenting ancient sites. He died of a stroke in early 1765.
The theory that this coinage was connected with Boudica was originally reported in 1987 and this was endorsed by R D Van Arsdell, an authority on the Celtic coinage of Britain, as Boudican in the 1990's. At the time though this was disputed by many in the numismatic community, some of whom continued to rely on older studies that lumped all "Face-Horse" coins together in a group dating before 20 CE.
However, John Talbot of the University of Oxford carried out research on these issues and, as his die-link and hoard work gradually progressed through the 1990's into the early twenty-first century, these coins were confirmed to be the final coinage of the Iceni. As Talbot's findings were only gradually revealed over a period of time, the accepted dating used in some dealer catalogues did not always keep up with the latest information. During his studies, Talbot discovered that coins from several die sets are only found in the Boudican Rebellion hoards. He also confirmed that these coins were struck in abnormally great numbers for any Icenian issue. But, because he was not certain that this was enough evidence to date the coins to 61 CE. he suggested only that they could have been struck any time after the Claudian Invasion of 43 CE.
Considering though that some die sets are known only from the Boudican Rebellion hoards, that it is still the case that these coins appear in uncirculated condition in the hoards, and that to date none of these coins have been found from secure contexts earlier than the time of the Boudican rebellion, it would appear that the 1987 report was essentially correct and these coins must have been struck nearer to the date of the Boudican Rebellion than earlier, possibly in connection with the financing of that rebellion. The conclusion now is that these coins can, with some confidence, be attributed to Boudica.
THE ICENI
The Iceni were a tribe located in eastern Britain during the Iron Age and the early Roman era. Their territory was bordered by the Corieltauvi to the west, and the Catuvellauni and Trinovantes to the south. In the Roman period, their capital was Venta Icenorum at modern-day Caistor St Edmund.
Julius Caesar did not mention the Iceni in his account of his invasions of Britain in 55 and 54 BC, though they may have been related to the Cenimagni, whom Caesar notes as living north of the River Thames at that time. The Iceni were a significant power in eastern Britain during Claudius I's conquest of Britain in AD 43, in which they allied with Rome. Increasing Roman influence on their affairs led to a revolt in AD 47, though they remained nominally independent under king Prasutagus up until his death around AD 60. Roman encroachment after Prasutagus' death led his wife Boudica to launch a major revolt from 60–61. Boudica's uprising seriously endangered Roman rule in Britain and resulted in the burning of Londinium and other cities. The Romans finally crushed the rebellion, and the Iceni were eventually incorporated into the Roman province.
Archaeological evidence of the Iceni includes torcs, which are heavy rings of gold, silver or electrum worn around the neck and shoulders. The Iceni began producing coins around 10 BC. Their coins were a distinctive adaptation of the Gallo-Belgic "face/horse" design, and in some early issues, most numerous near Norwich, the horse was replaced with a boar. Some coins are inscribed ECENI, making them the only coin-producing group to use their tribal name on coins. The earliest personal name to appear on coins is Antedios (about 10 BC), and other abbreviated names like AESU and SAEMU followed. The name of Prasutagus also appears on some coins as PRASTO.
QUEEN BOUDICA
Queen Boudica was married to Prasutagus, ruler of the Iceni people of East Anglia. When the Romans conquered southern England in AD 43, they allowed Prasutagus to continue to rule. However, when Prasutagus died he left a will dividing his lands between the Roman emperor and his family. The Romans decided to rule the Iceni directly and confiscated all the king's property. When this was contested they are said to have stripped and flogged Boudica and raped her daughters. These actions exacerbated the widespread resentment at Roman rule.
In 60 or 61 AD, while the Roman governor Gaius Suetonius Paullinus was leading a campaign in North Wales, the Iceni rebelled, other tribes joined them, and Boudica led a major uprising against the occupying Roman forces.
Boudica's warriors defeated the Roman Ninth Legion and destroyed the then capital of Roman Britain, Camulodunum (Colchester). They then went on to destroy Londinium (London) and Verulamium (St Albans) killing thousands in the process. Finally, Boudica was defeated by a Roman army led by Paulinus. A great number of her army were killed and, though Boudica's fate is unknown, she is alleged to have either died in battle or poisoned herself to avoid capture. The site of the battle which brought an end to her uprising is also unknown.
The photograph below is of the Victorian statue of Boudica (Boadicea) situated on the Thames embankment in London.
CLICK ON THE IMAGES BELOW TO ENLARGE THEM
  *Alex
|
|
41 - 54, Claudius I, AE Dupondius, Irregular (barbarous) issue struck after 43AD in BritanniaObverse: Blundered legend. Bare head of Claudius I facing left.
Reverse: Blundered legend. Ceres, veiled, seated facing left, holding grain ears and long torch.
Diameter: 26mm | Weight: 9.5gms | Die Axis: 11h
SPINK: 745
Green Patina. Scarce. Found near Sleaford, Lincolnshire, UK
These irregular coins are associated with the Claudian invasion of Britain in 43AD. It appears likely that the authorities allowed them to be struck to augment the scanty supply of bronze from the central mint of Rome and the evidence available from museums and recorded in numismatic literature would seem to bear this out.
Although it is difficult to work out the proportion that these copies bear to the official issues on a national scale, it is quite evident that it is of a considerable size, about 20% on an average over the whole area in which Claudian coins are found, and in some localities well over 50%. When you consider that the actual area over which these coins are found exactly covers the areas of the first conquests, and there are no credible reasons for supposing them to be Gallic importations, the likelihood is that they were struck in Britain itself. Those barbarous examples found beyond the Fosse Way bear witness to the spread of the new coinage, and also to its continuance during the subsequent years of conquest..
The actual types found are equally strong evidence for the connection of these copies with the Claudian legions. Copies of Sestertii are rare, Dupondii less so, but the majority, about 70% of the Claudian copies found in England, are Asses.
Irregular issues of all the foregoing types are found in varying stages of degradation, ranging from coins which show all the detail, and much of the excellence of the official prototypes, down to rough unskilful productions of crude and barbarous style.
The majority of copies, particularly the good ones, have been found in or near the towns which were either administrative and/or military centres, such as Lincoln and Gloucester. This seems to indicate that the coining of irregular issues were, if not official, an acceptable method of supplementing the military funds to pay the troops during the conquest. The first generation copies, since they were intended for paying the soldiers, were fairly accurate in style and weight. In time though, once they had circulated through the tribal centres and the lands that lay between and behind the chief Roman military posts and been absorbed into currency, the copies would themselves be copied. These second-degree copies became proportionately less faithful to the originals and are extremely numerous at such tribal centres as Cirencester, Silchester, Winchester and Dorchester, which were civil, but not military, towns.*Alex
|
|
268 - 270, Roman Imitative Antoninianus (Barbarous Radiate), produced in Britain and the continent. Struck in the name of CLAUDIUS IIObverse: Unclear partial inscription. Radiate head of Claudius II facing right.
Reverse: Unclear partial inscription. Crude depiction of Pax standing facing left, right arm outstretched in front of her holding branch. Struck off-centre.
Hoard find from Northern England.
Diameter: 15mm | Weight: 1.6gms | Die Axis: 4
SPINK: 749
The term 'barbarous radiates', dating from its use by antiquarians in the 19th century, is still often used to refer to the locally produced unofficial coins which imitated the official Roman antoninianii of the period. These coins were not struck by barbarians outwith the Empire as the name would suggest, nor were they intrinsically forgeries or fakes. Instead they were the result of a period of great instability within the Roman empire during which the western provinces especially often experienced a severe lack of coinage. To fill this void small denomination coinage was unofficially issued in very large numbers. Though some of these coins are fairly close copies of the official coins which they imitate, many others have been produced by die engravers who were patently illiterate and often of limited ability artistically as well. Around 274 Aurelian banned the use of these imitative bronzes when he reformed the currency but it is possible that some "barbarous radiates" were still being produced after that date. Whether individual coins are of British or Continental mintage can really only be ascertained by provenance.
*Alex
|
|
271 - 274, Roman Imitative Antoninianus (Barbarous Radiate), produced in Britain and the continent. Struck in the name of TETRICUS IObverse: (TETR)ICVS P F AVG. Radiate head of Tetricus I facing right.
Reverse: (PA)X AVGG Crude depiction of Pax standing facing left, right arm outstretched in front of her and holding vertical spear in her left.
From a hoard found in Northern England.
Diameter: 14mm | Weight: 1.6gms | Die Axis: 6
SPINK: 749
The term 'barbarous radiates', dating from its use by antiquarians in the 19th century, is still often used to refer to the locally produced unofficial coins which imitated the official Roman antoninianii of the period. These coins were not struck by barbarians outwith the Empire as the name would suggest, nor were they intrinsically forgeries or fakes. Instead they were the result of a period of great instability within the Roman empire during which the western provinces especially often experienced a severe lack of coinage. To fill this void small denomination coinage was unofficially issued in very large numbers. Though some of these coins are fairly close copies of the official coins which they imitate, many others have been produced by die engravers who were patently illiterate and often of limited ability artistically as well. Around 274 Aurelian banned the use of these imitative bronzes when he reformed the currency but it is possible that some "barbarous radiates" were still being produced after that date. Whether individual coins are of British or Continental mintage can really only be ascertained by provenance.
*Alex
|
|
271 - 274, Roman Imitative Antoninianus (Barbarous Radiate), produced in Britain and the continent. Struck in the name of TETRICUS II as CAESARObverse: Blundered legend - - IVES - -. Radiate bust of Tetricus II facing right.
Reverse: Likely (PIETA)S AVG. Sacrificial Implements.
From an uncertain British location.
Diameter: 14.5mm | Weight: 2.29gms | Die Axis: 2
SPINK: 749
The term 'barbarous radiates', dating from its use by antiquarians in the 19th century, is still often used to refer to the locally produced unofficial coins which imitated the official Roman antoninianii of the period. These coins were not struck by barbarians outwith the Empire as the name would suggest, nor were they intrinsically forgeries or fakes. Instead they were the result of a period of great instability within the Roman empire during which the western provinces especially often experienced a severe lack of coinage. To fill this void small denomination coinage was unofficially issued in very large numbers. Though some of these coins are fairly close copies of the official coins which they imitate, many others have been produced by die engravers who were patently illiterate and often of limited ability artistically as well. Around 274 Aurelian banned the use of these imitative bronzes when he reformed the currency but it is possible that some "barbarous radiates" were still being produced after that date. Whether individual coins are of British or Continental mintage can really only be ascertained by provenance.
*Alex
|
|
274, Roman Imitative Antoninianus (Barbarous Radiate), produced in Britain and the continent. Struck in the name of TETRICUS II as AUGUSTUSObverse: (IMP C TET)RICVS AG. Radiate bust of Tetricus II facing right, seen from behind.
Reverse: Struck from extremely worn reverse die which possibly depicts Salus feeding serpent arising from altar.
Diameter: 14mm | Weight: 1.7gms | Die Axis: 6
SPINK: 749
RARE
This is an irregular issue (barbarous radiate) giving Tetricus II the title of Augustus rather than Caesar.
Interestingly the Historia Augusta makes this statement with regard to Aurelian's triumph in A.D.274. "In the procession was Tetricus also, arrayed in a scarlet cloak, a yellow tunic, and Gallic trousers, and with him his son, whom he had proclaimed in Gaul as Imperator." (Historia Augusta, xxxiv, iii). Imperator was a title that invariably, when referring to an Imperial figure, implied the rank of Augustus, but no regular official coinage issues of Tetricus II citing him as such are known.
The term 'barbarous radiates', dating from its use by antiquarians in the 19th century, is still often used to refer to the locally produced unofficial coins which imitated the official Roman antoninianii of the period. These coins were not struck by barbarians outwith the Empire as the name would suggest, nor were they intrinsically forgeries or fakes. Instead they were the result of a period of great instability within the Roman empire during which the western provinces especially often experienced a severe lack of coinage. To fill this void small denomination coinage was unofficially issued in very large numbers. Though some of these coins are fairly close copies of the official coins which they imitate, many others have been produced by die engravers who were patently illiterate and often of limited ability artistically as well. Around 274 Aurelian banned the use of these imitative bronzes when he reformed the currency but it is possible that some "barbarous radiates" were still being produced after that date. Whether individual coins are of British or Continental mintage can really only be ascertained by provenance.
*Alex
|
|
Pul with Kaffa c/m
CRIMEA, GOLDEN HORDE, (with Genoese countermark)
Anonymous AE - Pul
Obverse: uncertain Ornament, Kaffa Genoese trading colony; Circular countermark arms of Genoa with partitioned portal, within circular frame of dots.
Reverse: uncertain Ornament
Mint: Uncertain (Bulghar?)
Minted: 14th Century (?) cm - 1420 - 1475
Notes: Fair/Fair(c/m a/VF), Crude
Ref: Retowski, Coins with Genoese Countermarks 2
jimbomar
|
|
Radiato imitativo britannico (270-273 AD)AE, 2.45 gr, 18.56 mm, VF
Zecca non ufficiale britannica (o gallica), sul D/ verosimilmente Vittorino o Tetrico I
D/ legenda di fantasia, testa radiata a dx
R/ legenda di fantasia, divinità sacrifica su un altare appoggiata su uno scudo (o ruota). Compatibile con una FORTVNA REDUX con ruota e timone
Provenienza: ex Marc Breitsprecher collection, Grand Marais Minnesota Usa (da lui acquistata a Embankment station coin fair, London), via vAuctions 290 lot 462, 8 novembre 2012paolo
|
|
Rhodos, Carian Islands, c. 188 - 84 B.C.Silver hemidrachm, cf. SNG Keckman 642 ff. (various magistrates and control symbols)Dexikrates, Fine/Fair, scratches, underweight (perhaps imitative), 0.905g, 13.0mm, 135o, Rhodos (Rhodes) mint, c. 188 - 84 B.C.; obverse radiate head of Helios facing slightly right; reverse rose with bud to right, P-O in fields, magistrates name above,ΔΕΞΙΚΡΑΤΗΣ, control symbol lower left, all within a shallow square incuse;Randygeki(h2)
|
|
Dy.213 Philip IV (the Fair): Gros tournois with a round OPhilip IV, king of France (1285-1314)
Gros tournois with a round O (1280-1290)
Silver (958 ‰), 4.07 g, diameter 26 mm, die axis 12h
O: inner circle: +PhILIPPVS REX; cross pattée; outer circle: BNDICTVâ‹®SITâ‹®HOmЄ⋮DNIâ‹®nRIâ‹®DЄIâ‹®IhV.XPI
R: inner circle: +TVRONVS.CIVIS; châtel tournois; outer circle: a circlet of 12 fleur-de-lis
This type was struck during 1280-1285 (end of Philipp III's reign) and 1285-1290 (beginning of Philip IV's reign). The only difference with the Gros tournois of the first part of Philip III's reign is PHILIPPVS, spelled with 2 P intead of 1.
|
|
Dy.214 Philip IV (the Fair): Gros tournois with a long 0Philip IV, king of France (1285-1314)
Gros tournois with long 0 (1290-1295)
Silver (958 ‰), 3.96 g, diameter 26 mm, die axis 11h
O: inner circle: +PhILIPPVS REX; cross pattée; outer circle: BNDICTVâ‹®SITâ‹®HOmЄ⋮DNIâ‹®nRIâ‹®DЄIâ‹®IhV.XPI
R: inner circle: +TVR0NVS CIVIS; châtel tournois; outer circle: a circlet of 12 fleur-de-lis
The only difference between this emission and the previous one is the 0 in TVR0NVS, which is now long instead of round.
|
|
Dy.217 Philip IV (the Fair): Gros tournois with a long 0 and a lilyPhilip IV, king of France (1285-1314)
Gros tournois with long 0 and a lily (1298)
Silver (958 ‰), 3.98 g, diameter 27 mm, die axis 7h
O: inner circle: +PhILIPPVS(ringlet)REX; cross pattée; outer circle: BNDICTVâ‹®SITâ‹®HOmЄ⋮DNIâ‹®nRIâ‹®DЄIâ‹®IhV.XPI
R: inner circle: +TVR0NVS*CIVIS; châtel tournois; outer circle: a circlet of 12 fleur-de-lis
|
|
Dy.219d Philip IV (the Fair): maille tierce with a round OPhilip IV, king of France (1285-1314)
Maille tierce with round O (09/1306)
Silver (958 ‰), 1.27 g, diameter 18.5 mm, die axis 11h
O: inner circle: +PhILIPPVS REX; cross pattée; outer circle: BHDICTV⋮SIT⋮HOmЄn⋮DOmInI
R: inner circle: +TVRONVS CIVIS; châtel tournois; outer circle: a circlet of 10 fleur-de-lis
|
|
Dy.221 Philip IV (the Fair): denier parisis with a round O Philip IV, king of France (1285-1314)
Denier tournois with round O (1280-1290)
Billon (359 ‰), 0.94 g, diameter 19 mm, die axis 7h
O: PhILIPPVS REX; FRA/OCN
R: +PARISIVS CIVIS; croix pattée
This type was struck during 1280-1285 (end of Philipp III's reign) and 1285-1290 (beginning of Philip IV's reign).
|
|
Dy.223 Philip IV (the Fair): denier tournois with a round O Philip IV, king of France (1285-1314)
Denier tournois with round O (1280-1290)
Billon (299 ‰), 1.00 g, diameter 19 mm, die axis 4h
O: +PhILIPPVS REX; cross pattée
R: +TVRONVS CIVIS; châtel tournois
This type was struck during 1280-1285 (end of Philipp III's reign) and 1285-1290 (beginning of Philip IV's reign). The only difference with the denier tournois of the first part of Philip III's reign is PHILIPPVS, spelled with 2 P intead of 1.
|
|
Dy.223A Philip IV (the Fair): denier tournois with a round O Philip IV, king of France (1285-1314)
Denier tournois with round O (1280-1290)
Billon (299 ‰), 1.10 g, diameter 19 mm, die axis 7h
O: +PhILIPPVS REX; cross pattée
R: +TVRONVS•CIVISx; châtel tournois
This type was struck during 1280-1285 (end of Philipp III's reign) and 1285-1290 (beginning of Philip IV's reign). The only difference with the denier tournois of the first part of Philip III's reign is PHILIPPVS, spelled with 2 P intead of 1.
|
|
Dy.224 Philip IV (the Fair): obol tournois with a round O Philip IV, king of France (1285-1314)
Obol tournois with round O (1280-1290)
Billon (270 ‰), 0.55 g, diameter 15 mm, die axis 2h
O: +PhILIPPVS REX; cross pattée
R: +TVRONVS CIVIS; châtel tournois
This type was struck during 1280-1285 (end of Philipp III's reign) and 1285-1290 (beginning of Philip IV's reign).
|
|
Dy.225 Philip IV (the Fair): denier tournois with a long 0Philip IV, king of France (1285-1314)
Denier tournois with long 0 (1290-1295)
Billon (299 ‰), 0.92 g, diameter 18 mm, die axis 9h
O: +PHILIPPVS REX; cross pattée
R: +TVR0NVS CIVIS; châtel tournois
It is exactly the same type as the denier tournois with round O, but with a long 0, as for the Gros tournois.
|
|
Dy.227 Philip IV (the Fair): double parisis, 1st emissionPhilip IV, king of France (1285-1314)
Double parisis, 1st emission (1295-1303)
Billon (480 ‰), 1.28 g, diameter 20 mm, die axis 11h
O: +PhILIPPVS REX; leafy cross
R: +mOnETA DVPLEX: REGA/LIS under a fleur-de-lis
Philip had to face with extensive financial liabilities. He found money expelling Jews, Lombard bankers, arresting Templars and confiscating their properties. He also debased the French coinage and minted quite a large number of successive types and emissions of coins, with varying silver proportions.
|
|
Dy.229 Philip IV (the Fair): double tournois, 1st emissionPhilip IV, king of France (1285-1314)
Double tournois, 1st emission (1295-1303)
Billon (399 ‰), 1.21 g, diameter 21 mm, die axis 12h
O: +PhILIPPVS REX; cross pattée with one fleur-de-lis
R: +mOn DVPLEX REGAL: chatel tournois' pediment with 2 lis
|
|
Dy.230B Philip IV (the Fair): simple tournoisPhilip IV, king of France (1285-1314)
Simple tournois (1295-1303)
Billon (399 ‰), 0.83 g, diameter 14-15 mm, die axis 6h
O: cross pattée with a symbol in each quadrant : P, h, I and a cross
R: chatel tournois' pediment with 2 fleur-de-lis
|
|
Dy.233 Philip IV (the Fair): obole bourgeoisePhilip IV, king of France (1285-1314)
Obole bourgeoise (1311)
Billon (270 ‰), 0.59 g, diameter 14-16 mm, die axis 6h
O: +PhILIP-PVS REX; latine cross interrupting the legend
R: BVRGENSIS, under a fleur-de-lis: nOV/VS
|
|
Dy.243 Charles IV (the Fair): maille blanche, 1st emissionCharles IV, king of France (1322-1328)
Maille blanche, 1st emission (03/02/1324)
Silver (798 ‰), 1.82 g, diameter 22 mm, die axis 2h
O: inner circle: +kAROLVS(diamond)REX; cross pattée; outer circle: BHDICTV⋮SIT#8942nOmЄ⋮DHI⋮nRI
R: inner circle: +FRANChORVm*; châtel tournois; outer circle: a circlet of 10 fleur-de-lis
The h of FRANChORVm is characteristic of the first emission.
Charles was the younger and third son of former king Philip the Fair. He was consequently not supposed to rule. However, as his two brothers successively died without any living son, he became king in 1322. Six years later, he also died without a male heir. So ended up the capetian senior line in 1328.
The legend began then... Jacques de Molay, last Grand Master of the Knights Templar, had cursed King Philip the Fair and his descendants from his execution pyr in 1314. Was the curse finally efficient ?
Charles'cousin, his nearest parent, became then king of France as Philip VI.
|
|
Dy.243A Charles IV (the Fair): maille blanche, 2ond emissionCharles IV, king of France (1322-1328)
Maille blanche, 2ond emission (07/1324)
Silver (798 ‰), 1.74 g, diameter 21-22 mm, die axis 10h
O: inner circle: +(spade)kAROLVS REX; cross pattée; outer circle: BHDICTV⋮SIT(ring)nOmЄ⋮DHI⋮nRI
R: inner circle: +FRANCORVm(ring); châtel tournois; outer circle: a circlet of 10 fleur-de-lis, the top one being between 2 dots, which is characteristic of the 2ond emission
|
|
Dy.243D Charles IV (the Fair): maille blanche, 3rd emissionCharles IV, king of France (1322-1328)
Maille blanche, 3rd emission (07/23/1326)
Silver (718 ‰), 1.64 g, diameter 22 mm, die axis 11h
O: inner circle: +kAROLVS(square)RE•X•; cross pattée; outer circle: BHDICTV⋮SIT(ring)nOmЄ⋮DHI⋮nRI
R: inner circle: +FRANCORVm; châtel tournois; outer circle: a circlet of 10 fleur-de-lis, the top one being between 2 dots
The RE•X• on the reverse is characteristic of the 3rd emission. Most of the time, the top fleur-de-lis is also surrounded by two dots, similarly to the 2ond emission.
|
|
Dy.244C Charles IV (the Fair): double Parisis, 3rd emissionCharles IV, king of France (1322-1328)
Double parisis, 3rd emission (07/24/1326)
Billon (319 ‰), 1.10 g, diameter 20 mm, die axis 3h
O: +kAROLVS REX(clover); crown with fleur-de-lis and a small ring below
R: +mOnETA DVPLEX; cross with fleur-de-lis
|
|
- 032-031 BC - Marc Antony - RSC 28 - Legion II DenariusMarc Antony
Date: 32-31 BC
Condition: Fair
Denomination: Legionary Denarius
Obverse: ANT AVG III VIR R P C
Galley rt., mast with banners at prow.
Reverse: LEG II
Legionary eagle between two standards.
Mint: Most likely minted in Patrae, Marc Antony's winter headquarters.
RSC 28
3.11g; 18.0mm; 15°Pep
|
|
- 27 BC - 14 AD - Augustus - RIC I 439 - As with "S C" ReverseEmperor: Augustus (r. 27 BC - 14 AD)
Date: 6 BC
Condition: Fair
Denomination: As
Obverse: CAESAR AVGVST PONT MAX TRIBVNIC POT
Caesar Augustus Chief Priest Tribune
Bare head right
Reverse: SEX NONIVS QVINCTILIAN IIIVIR AAAFF around S C.
Sex. Nonius Quinctilianus of The Three Men for Striking and Casting Gold, Silver and Bronze by Senatorial Decree.
Rome mint
RIC I Augustus 439
10.07g; 26.5mm; 270°Pep
|
|
001 Ribe sceatSceatta of uncertain origin, probably Ribe, Denmark
Series X
S.797
O: Facing bust, possibly Odin/Woden
R: Monster right
These coins are generally believed to have been produced in Ribe and had a fairly extensive production with wide distribution throughout the North Sea world.
This particular coin is of an unusual variety, which has quaterfoils of pellets surrounding the face, rather than crosses.
Ex- AMR CoinsSt. George's Collection
|
|
001p. Cleopatra VIIPtolemaic queen of Egypt. She had an affair with Julius Caesar while he was in Egypt, probably producing the son Ptolemy XV Caesar, nicknamed Caesarion. She became a key figure in the struggle between Octavian and Mark Antony when the latter began a long-term affair with her. Several acknowledged children resulted from this affair. The affair was viewed with considerable dislike by the Romans, and Octavian and his supporters made the maximum propaganda use of it. Cleopatra provided significant military forces, particularly ships, to Mark Antony for his last war with Octavian. After losing the Battle of Actium and Octavian's occupation of Egypt, she committed suicide on 10 August 30 BC, at age 39.
Coin: AE20. Chalkis, Phoenicia. 32/31 BC. Obv: Diademed bust of Cleopatra right. Rev: Head of Marc Antony right. Svoronos 1887, BMC [Berytus] 15. RPC 4771. Roma Numismatics Auction 71 Lot 690.lawrence c
|
|
002c. Gaius and Lucius CaesarsJulia, daughter of Augustus, who has had no child by Marcellus (she is only sixteen when he dies), is married to Agrippa, a soldier who has long been the emperor's most trusted supporter. They have two sons, Gaius and Lucius, born in 20 and 17 BC. The boys are adopted by the emperor. The intention now, if Augustus dies, is that Agrippa should rule until one of these grandsons is of an age to take control. But Agrippa dies in 12 BC.
Julia has had a total of five children by Agrippa (the two sons adopted by the emperor, two daughters, and another posthumous son, Agrippa Posthumus). She now has one son by Tiberius, but the child dies in infancy.
By 6 BC it is evident that Tiberius is being set aside. Julia refuses to live with him, and her eldest son Gaius (at the age of fourteen) is given a nominal high appointment as consul. Gaius and Lucius Caesar, grandsons and adopted sons of the emperor, are now clearly the family members in line for the succession. But they die young, Lucius Caesar in AD 2 and then Gaius in AD 4.
LYDIA, Magnesia ad Sipylum. Augustus. 27 BC-AD 14. Æ 19mm (4.93 g). Jugate heads of Augustus and Livia right / Confronted heads of Gaius and Lucius Caesars. RPC 2449. Fair. Rare. Ex-Cngecoli
|
|
003. Tiberius (14 AD - 37 AD)Tiberius.
Hard and secretive by nature and embittered by the neglect with which his step- father allowed him to be treated, he did not arouse personal enthusiasm, and until recently was described by historians as a bloody tyrant. It is only during the last sixty years that he has been more fairly judged, and at present the opinion begins to prevail that he was a genuine Roman, a ruler faithful to his duties, just, wise, and self-contained. The strong opposition which grew up against him was due to his taciturn and domineering disposition, and to the influence of the prefect of the guard, Ælius Sejanus, who alone possessed his confidence.
Lugdunum mint. TI CAESAR DIVI AVG AVGVSTVS, laureate head right / PONTIF MAXIM, Livia, as Pax, seated right, holding olive branch & long scepter RSC 16a. Ex Calgaryecoli
|
|
0050 - Denarius Lutatia 109-8 BCObv/Helmeted head of Roma r., before CERCO, above (RO)MA, behind crossed X.
Rev/Galley r. within oak wreath, Q LVTATI above.
Ag, 18.5mm, 3.94g
Moneyer: Q Lutatius Cerco.
Mint: Rome.
RRC 305/1 [dies o/r: 135/169] - Syd. 559 - Calicó 914 - BMCRR Italy 636 - RCV 182.
ex-Valencia Coin Fair, 29 feb 2008dafnis
|
|
0051 - Denarius Scribonia 62 BCObv/Diademed head of Bonus Eventus r., behind LIBO, before BON EVENT.
Rev/Well-head ornamented with garland and two lyres, tong at base, PVTEAL above, SCRIBON below.
Ag, 19.5mm, 3.42g
Moneyer: L Scribonius Libo.
Mint: Rome.
RRC 416/1b [dies o/r: 206/229] - Syd. 928 - Calicó 1247 - BMCRR Rome 3382 - RSC Scribonia 8-8b - RCV 367.
ex-Valencia Coin Fair, 29 feb 2008dafnis
|
|
0052 - Denarius Augustus 15-13 BCObv/AVGVSTVS DIVI F, Augustus bare head r.
Rev/Bull butting r., IMP X in ex.
Ag, 18.2mm, 3.31g
Mint: Lugdunum.
RIC I/167a [C] - RCV 1610 - BMCRE 451
ex-Valencia Coin Fair, 29 feb 2007dafnis
|
|
0053 - Denarius Vespasian 77-8 ACObv/(I)MP CAESAR VESPASIAN(VS AVG), Vespasian head laureate r.
Rev/Yoke of ochsen l., COS VIII in ex.
Ag, 17.5mm, 3.00g
Mint: Rome.
RIC II.1/107 [C] - RCV 2289 - BMCRE 206 - RSC 126
ex-Valencia Coin Fair, 29 feb 2008dafnis
|
|
0054 - Denarius Vespasian 71 ACObv/IMP CAESAR VESP AVG PM, Vespasian laureate head r.
Rev/AVGVR TRI POT, l. to r. simpulum, aspergillum, jug and lituus (emblems of the augurate and potificate).
Ag, 18.9mm, 3.19g
Mint: Rome.
RIC II.1/356 [CC] - RCV 2282 - BMCRE 64 - RSC 45
ex-Numismática Craven (Valencia Coin Fair)dafnis
|
|
005bb. Antonia, daughter of Claudius JUDAEA, Roman Administration. Claudius, with Britannicus, Antonia, and Octavia. AD 41-54. Æ (23mm, 12.02 g, 12h). Caesarea Panias mint. Struck before 49 CE. Laureate head of Claudius left / The children of Claudius: from left to right, Antonia, Britannicus, and Octavia, the two daughters each holding a cornucopia. Meshorer 350; Hendin 1259; Sofaer 83; RPC I 4842. Fair, green and brown patina with touches of red. Rare.ecoli
|
|
012a. DomitiaDomitia, wife of Domitian. Augusta, 82-96 AD.
In 70, Domitia was married to Lucius Aelius Lamia, but she attracted the attention of Domitian, son of emperor Vespasian. Shortly afterwards she was taken from her husband and remarried with the future emperor. They had a son in the next year and a daughter in 74, both died young. Domitian was very fond of his wife and carried her in all his travels. In 83, Domitia Longina's affair with the actor Paris was disclosed. Paris was executed and Domitia received her letter of divorce from Domitian. She was exiled, but remained close to Roman politics and to Domitian.
CILICIA, Epiphanea. Æ 21mm (7.18 gm). Dated year 151 (83/84 AD). Draped bust right / Athena standing left, righ hand extended, left resting on shield; ANP (date) left. RPC I 1786; SNG Levante 1813; SNG France -; SNG Copenhagen -. VF, dark green patina, some smoothing. Very rare, only 1 specimen (the Levante specimen), recorded in RPC. Ex-CNGecoli
|
|
025 NielsPenny of Niels, king of Denmark 1104-1134
Moneyer: Estman
Mint: Roskilde
Hbg. 9
O: N[ICO]LAVS REX
R: EST
Chipped (possibly as made or due to double striking?) but pleasantly toned example of Niels' scarce coinage. Double struck and somewhat difficult to read. Estman is one of his more common moneyers, and his name is found with various spellings. Coins of Niels are frequently chipped, or just struck on very irregular planchets. This is in contrast to the fairly well-made coinage of his father Svend Estridsen.
Ex- Bruun Rasmussen online auction 1407 (lot 5009)St. George's Collection
|
|
037-041 AD - Caligula - RIC I 38 - Vesta ReverseEmperor: Caligula (r. 37-41 AD)
Date: 37-38 AD
Condition: Fair
Denomination: As
Obverse: C CAESAR AVG GERMANICVS PON M TR POT
Consul Caesar Augustus Germanicus Chief Priest Tribune
Bare head left
Reverse: VESTA (above)
The Emperor looks after the state.
S - C to left and right
Vesta, veiled and draped, seated left on ornamental throne, right holding patera, left long transverse sceptre.
Rome mint
RIC I Caligula 38; VM 9
5.61g; 26.0mm; 180°Pep
|
|
041 GermanicusGermanicus, Caesar
Died 10 Oct 19 A.D.
Æ As struck under Claudius. GERMANICVS CAESAR TI AVG F DIVI AVG N, bare head right / TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG GERM P M TR P IMP P P around S-C
Fair, 8.138g, 27.4mm, 180*, Rome min, 42 A.D., S 1905, RIC 106, BMC 215 ex Forvm ex Bill D.
"Germanicus inflicted serious defeats on the barbarian tribes in Germania and recovered the legionary standards lost by Varus. He was to be Tiberius' successor, but died of and unknown cause. His tremendous popularity helped his son Caligula ontain the throne after Tiberius died."
-----
"Such virtuous conduct brought Germanicus rich rewards. He was so deeply respected and loved by all his kindred that Augustus - I need hardly mention his other relatives - wondered for a long time wether to make him his successor, but at last ordered Tiberius to adopt him."Randygeki(h2)
|
|
041-054 AD - Claudius - RIC I 097 or 113 - Libertas ReverseEmperor: Claudius (r. 41-54 AD)
Date: 41-54 AD
Condition: Fair
Denomination: As
Obverse: TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG P M TR P IMP (P P?)
Tiberius Claudius Caesar Emperor Pontifex Maximus Tribunicia Potestas Imperator (Pater Patriae?)
Bare head left
Reverse: LIBERTAS AVGVSTA
S - C to left and right
The Emperor restores liberty.
Libertas, draped, standing facing, head right, right holding pileus, left extended.
Rome mint
RIC I Claudius 97 or 113; VM 16
6.38g; 29.3mm; 210°Pep
|
|
044 - Hadrian Denarius - RIC -Obv:- HADRIANVS AVGVSTVS, laureate head right with slight drapery on far shoulder (Legend reversed as AVGVSTVS HADRIANVS)
Rev:- COS III, Victory standing right holding wreath and palm (Legend reversed as III COS)
Minted in Eastern Mint. A.D. 129-131
Reference:- BMCRE -. Strack -. RIC -. RSC -. Apparently unpublished.
Strack knew just three Eastern denarii with this transposed obv. legend, including one with a Minerva standing rev. type in the Trau coll., Strack's pl. XVIII, *18. Curtis Clay has another example with this obverse with the Minerva type. This would appear to be a fifth specimen from this obverse die but with a new reverse type.
Additional information on this coin from Curtis Clay:-
"Interesting. Apparently a new rev. type on the Eastern denarii, of uncertain origin.
That's admittedly a fairly standard Victory advancing right rev. type, but I find no such type on any denarius of Hadrian from the mint of Rome, nor on his Asian cistophori.
A similar type does occur on Hadrian's silver quinarii, and on a rather scarce denarius of Trajan struck in 112 but these seem unlikely sources for a type on Hadrian's Eastern denarii.
Moreover on the Roman coins Victory grasps the stem of the palm over her shoulder in her left fist, thumb upwards, whereas on the Eastern denarius she palms the stem, holding it with her downwards pointing thumb while apparently keeping her fingers extended. I imagine that this detail may go back to the source copied, since it seems unlikely that the engraver changed it on his own whim."maridvnvm
|
|
0518-0527 AD - Justin I - Sear 69 - Half FollisEmperor: Justin I (r. 518-527 AD)
Date: 518-527 AD
Condition: Fair
Denomination: Half Follis
Obverse: D N IVSTINVS PP AVG
Diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right, with cross rising from front of diadem.
Reverse: Large K; to left, long cross; to right, "B"; stars above and below.
Constantinople mint, second officina
Sear 69
7.99g; 24.4mm; 180°Pep
|
|
0527-0565 AD - Justinian I - Sear 159 - FollisEmperor: Justinian I (r. 527-565 AD)
Date: 527-565 AD
Condition: Fair
Denomination: Follis
Obverse: DN IVSTINIANVS PP AVG
Bust right; diademed, draped and cuirassed
Reverse: no legend
Large "M"; cross above, crosses to left and right; "E" below.
Exergue: CON (Constantinople mint, fifth officina)
Sear 159
15.64g; 33.26mm; 180°Pep
|
|
0565-0578 AD - Justin II - Sear 366 - Half FollisEmperor: Justin II (r. 565-578 AD)
Date: 569-570 AD
Condition: Fair
Denomination: Half Follis
Obverse: D N IVSTINVS PP AV (or similar)
Justin, on left, and Sophia, on right, seated facing on double throne, both nimbate; he holds globus cruciger, she holds cruciform sceptre.
Reverse: Large K; above, cross; to left, A/N/N/O; to right, E
Exergue: TES (Thessalonica mint)
Sear 366
4.76g; 23.5mm; 150°Pep
|
|
0565-0578 AD - Justin II - Sear 366 - Half Follis - 2nd ExampleEmperor: Justin II (r. 565-578 AD)
Date: 574-575 AD
Condition: Fair
Denomination: Half Follis
Obverse: D N IVSTINVS PP AV (or similar)
Justin, on left, and Sophia, on right, seated facing on double throne, both nimbate; he holds globus cruciger, she holds cruciform sceptre.
Reverse: Large K; above, symbol(s); to left, A/N/N/O; to right, X
Exergue: TES (Thessalonica mint)
Sear 366
5.07g; 22.3mm; 165°Pep
|
|
063 Christopher IIPenny of Christopher II, king of Denmark 1320-1326, 1329-1332
Mint: Jylland
MB 587
Christopher's reign was fairly disastrous, as he was forced to sign a contract on ascension severely limiting his power, which also pretty much took away any revenue. Thus Christopher mortgaged parts of his kingdom to pay for his reign, particularly his wars, which only ended up with the near dissolution of Denmark. It's hard to see much good in Christopher's kingship, although it should be noted that he was a product of his time.
Ex- G WardSt. George's Collection
|
|
066 - Caracalla, AE26, Markianopolis, NemesisAE26 (5 Assarion)
Obv:– ANTWNINOC AVGOVCTOC IOVLIA DOMNA, Confronted busts of Caracalla and Julia Domna
Rev: VP KVNTILIANOV MARKIANOPOLITWN, Nemesis standing left, holding scales and short torch (arshin), wheel at side. E in field
Minted in MARKIANOPOLIS (Moesia Inferior).
The following information comes courtesy of Patricia Lawrence:-
“...I can't just cite Pick. When she holds the scales as well as the goad and has the wheel, it is fair to call her Nemesis-Aequitas. But yours is a plain, straightforward Nemesis. No holding of the cloth of her dress, no griffin by her wheel (Pick 676), which I'd call fancy Nemesis, and no scales of Aequitas (Dikaiosyne) in outstretched right hand (Pick 677). Nor did I identify it in Varbanov's list. If he'd seen it in a regional collection or in a recent auction catalogue, it would be there......just cite "cf. AMNG I, 1, no. 677 (which also has scales)".”maridvnvm
|
|
0661 Focas, 602-610Æ half follis, 23.4mm, 5.18g, Fair
Struck 602-603 at Nicomedia
Phocas and Leontia standing facing, with Phocas holding globus cruciger and Leontia, nimbate, holding cruciform sceptre, a cross between their heads / XX, cross above and NIKO B in exg. Scarce early issue, dark brown patina. Polished.
Ex: Glenn W. Woods
Sear 661; MIB 71Lawrence W
|
|
068-069 AD - Galba - RIC I 375 - Vesta ReverseEmperor: Galba (r. 68-69 AD)
Date: ca. October 68 AD
Condition: Fair
Denomination: As
Obverse: IMP SER GALBA CAES AVG TR P
Imperator Servius Galba Caesar Emperor Tribune
Bare head right
Reverse: VESTA (in exergue)
The Emperor looks after the state.
Vesta, draped, seated left on low chair, right holding palladium, left transverse sceptre.
S - C to left and right
Rome mint
RIC I Galba 375; VM 64
8.78g; 28.4mm; 180°Pep
|
|
07 01 Galba RIC 204Galba. 8 June 68-15 Jan. 69 A.D. AR Denarius. Rome Mint. (3.22g, 19.3mm, 6 h). Obv: IMP SER GALBA CAESAR AVG, bust, laureate draped right. Rev: ROMA RENASCES, Roma standing left, holding Victory on globe and transverse eagle tipped scepter. RIC 204. Ex HBJ.
Galba’s reign marked the end of the Julio-Claudian’s rule of Rome. Rated R3 in the RIC, this type appears fairly scarce with 2 examples in the Reka Devnia hoard, and only 2 in Berk’s photofile. Galba, the first of the 4 emperors of 69 A.D, was governor of Hispania Tarraconensis during Nero’s reign. He was assassinated after 7 months of rule and succeeded by his former supporter, OthoLucas H
|
|
07. Caracalla.Tetradrachm, 205-207 AD, Laodiceia ad Mare.
Obverse: AVT KAI . ANTΩNEINOC . CE . / Laureate bust of Caracalla.
Reverse: ΔHMAPX EΞ VΠATOC B / Eagle, holding wreath in beak, star between legs.
12.91 gm., 25 mm.
Bellinger #57; Prieur #1144.
When Caracalla went to the East to wage war with the Parthians, he issued vast quantities of tetradrachms to finance the activity. This coin, however, is not from that series; it was minted about 10 years earlier when Septimius Severus was still emperor. The main distinguishing feature of this coin is a bust of Caracalla as an adolescent, with just the beginnings of sideburns. It is a fairly scare type. For more information see "Severan Tetradrachms of Laodiceia" by R. G. McAlee in ANS Museum Notes #29 (1984), pages 43-59.
Prieur #1144 has the same obverse die as this coin. However, the reverse legend of #1144 has a Γ at the end of it. Prieur knew of only one example of this coin. Several years ago CNG had a coin from similar dies with the reverse legend ending in a B. Unfortunately, the last letter of the reverse legend on this coin is not real clear.Callimachus
|
|
0760-0791 AH - Murad I - cf. N. Kabaklarli # 03-X-43 - Ottoman MangirSultan: Murad I (r. 1359-1389 AD)
Date: 1359-1389 AD (760-791 AH)
Condition: Fair
Denomination: Mangir
Obverse: Four curls separated by two colons in two rectangular boxes.
Reverse: Four curls separated by two colons in two rectangular boxes.
cf. N. Kabaklarli # 03-X-43
1.58g; 16.5mm; 135 or 315°Pep
|
|
08 02 Otho RIC I 12Otho. 15 Jan. to April 69 A.D. AR Denarius. Rome Mint. 69 A.D. (3.23, 18.5mm, 6h). Obv: IMP M OTHO CAESAR AVG TR P, bare head left. SECVRITAS P R, Securitas standing left, wreath in right, scepter in left. RIC I 12, RSC 19. Ex Forum.
While coins of Otho are fairly rare given the short length of his reign, this issue is perhaps more so with the left facing bust. (RIC 3). Otho supported Galba’s revolt, and then turned on Galba when he wasn't named Galba's heir. He committed suicide after his forces were defeated by those of Vitellius during the Year of the Four Emperors. A nicely centered and well toned coin.
Lucas H
|
|
0834 Hadrian Sestertius, Roma 124-27 AD Aequitas-Moneta Reference.
RIC II, 637; RIC 834; Strack 609; Banti 200
Bust A2
Obv. HADRIANVS AVGVSTVS.
Laureate head with drapery
Rev. COS III S C in field
Aequitas-Moneta standing left, holding scales and sceptre
25.66 gr
31 mm
6h
Note.
Aequitas is the Latin concept of justice, equality, conformity, symmetry, or fairness.
It is the origin of the English word "equity". In ancient Rome, it could refer to either the legal concept of equity, or fairness between individuals.
During the Roman Empire, Aequitas as a divine personification was part of the religious propaganda of the emperor, under the name Aequitas Augusti, which also appeared on coins.
She is depicted on coins holding a cornucopiae and a balance scale (libra), which was more often a symbol of "honest measure" to the Romans than of justice.
(Wiki)
Ex American Numismatic Society #1001.1.22972.okidoki
|
|
0855-0886 AH - Mehmed II - Valentine #38 - Ottoman MangirSultan: Mehmed II (r. 1444-1448 AD, 1451-1481 AD)
Date: 1451-1481 AD (855-886 AH)
Condition: Fair
Denomination: Mangir
Obverse: Muh bin (Murad)
Reverse: Kallad mulkah (Adrina)
Edirne (Adrina) mint
Valentine #38
1.37g; 14.0mm; 180°
Note: If I don't have this coin oriented correctly, please tell me how to. Thank you.Pep
|
|
0976-1025 AD - Basil II (Bulgaroktonos) - Anonymous Follis, Class A2Emperor: Basil II (Bulgaroktonos) (r. 976-1025 AD)
Date: 976-1025 AD
Condition: Fair
Denomination: Anonymous Follis, Class A2
Obverse:     -     
Bust of Christ facing, bearded, with nimbus cross having  in each arm, wearing tunic and himation; right hand raised in blessing in sling of cloak, left holds book with probable  in jeweled border. In field,  -  .
Reverse:     /   /    /
 above and beneath.
Sear 1813; probable DO A2.25
15.47g; 35.3mm; 30°Pep
|
|
0982-0983 AH - Murad III - Ottoman MangirSultan: Murad III (r. 1574-1595 AD)
Date: 1574-1576 AD (982 or 983 AH)
Condition: Fair
Denomination: Mangir
Obverse: Design
Reverse: Blank
Mint: Egypt
8.08g; 18.1mm; 4.77mm thick; ?°Pep
|
|
0ab Lucius Cornelius Sulla FelixL Manlivs, moneyer
82-72 BC
Denarius
Head of Roma, right, MANLI before, PRO Q behind
Sulla in walking quadriga, crowned by Victory, L SVLLA IM in ex.
Seaby, Manlia 4
Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix (c. 138 BC – 78 BC) was a Roman general and conservative statesman. He had the distinction of holding the office of consul twice, as well as reviving the dictatorship. Sulla was awarded a grass crown, the most prestigious and rarest Roman military honor, during the Social War. He was the first man to lead an army to Rome to settle a political dispute, in this case with Marius. In late 81 BC, he stunned the world by resigning his near-absolute powers, restoring constitutional government. After seeing election to and holding a second consulship, he retired to private life and died shortly after.
As to the person, Plutarch wrote: LUCIUS Cornelius Sylla was descended of a patrician or noble family. . . . His general personal appearance may be known by his statues; only his blue, eyes, of themselves extremely keen and glaring, were rendered all the more forbidding and terrible by the complexion of his face, in which white was mixed with rough blotches of fiery red. . . . And when supreme master of all, he was often wont to muster together the most impudent players and stage-followers of the town, and to drink and bandy jests with them without regard to his age or the dignity of his place, and to the prejudice of important affairs that required his attention. When he was once at table, it was not in Sylla's nature to admit of anything that was serious, and whereas at other times he was a man of business and austere of countenance, he underwent all of a sudden, at his first entrance upon wine and good-fellowship, a total revolution, and was gentle and tractable with common singers and dancers, and ready to oblige any one that spoke with him. It seems to have been a sort of diseased result of this laxity that he was so prone to amorous pleasures, and yielded without resistance to any temptation of voluptuousness, from which even in his old age he could not refrain. He had a long attachment for Metrobius, a player. In his first amours, it happened that he made court to a common but rich lady, Nicopolis by name, and what by the air of his youth, and what by long intimacy, won so far on her affections, that she rather than he was the lover, and at her death she bequeathed him her whole property. He likewise inherited the estate of a step-mother who loved him as her own son. By these means he had pretty well advanced his fortunes. . . . In general he would seem to have been of a very irregular character, full of inconsistencies with himself much given to rapine, to prodigality yet more; in promoting or disgracing whom he pleased, alike unaccountable; cringing to those he stood in need of, and domineering over others who stood in need of him, so that it was hard to tell whether his nature had more in it of pride or of servility. As to his unequal distribution of punishments, as, for example, that upon slight grounds he would put to the torture, and again would bear patiently with the greatest wrongs; would readily forgive and he reconciled after the most heinous acts of enmity, and yet would visit small and inconsiderable offences with death and confiscation of goods; one might judge that in himself he was really of a violent and revengeful nature, which, however, he could qualify, upon reflection, for his interest.
Blindado
|
|
100 TitusF/Fair, 3.002g, 18.2mm, 180o, Rome mint, as Caesar, 71 - 72 A.D.; obverse T CAES IMP VESP PON TR POT, laureate head right; reverse NEP RED, Neptune standing left, foot on globe, acrostolium in right and scepter in left.
RIC II Vesp 155, Cohen 121, RIC 366 ex Forvm
"Titus was the very popular victor of the Judean rebellion. He ruled during the eruption of Vesuvius. Titus once complained he had lost a day because twenty-four hours passed without his bestowing a gift. He was, however, generous to a fault. Had he ruled longer, he might have brought bankruptcy and lost hist popularity."
This coin gives thanks to Neptune for the safe return of Titus after the Jewish War.Randygeki(h2)
|
|
102. Trajan. AD 98-117Trajan. AD 98-117. Æ Sestertius (34mm, 25.52 g, 6h). Rome mint. Struck circa AD 103-104. Laureate and draped bust right / Front of the Temple of Jupiter: monumental votive arch/gateway; on the sides, from top to bottom, are the following reliefs: biga driven by Victory, aegis, Gigantomachy, arms, and she-wolf suckling twins; the second tier surmounted by a trophy and giant to either side, gateway spandrels with Victories, pediment with Jupiter between two seated figures, panel above pediment inscribed IOM (= Iovi Optimo Maximo), the whole surmounted by six-horse chariot driven by Jupiter and flanked by Victories. RIC II 572-3 var. (bust type); Woytek 187f; Banti 280. Fair, brown patina, some green, areas of minor porosity and cleaning scratches. Rare. Banti cites only one example with this bust type.
EX-CNG eAuction 310 lot 378 190/150ecoli
|
|
104. Antoninus PiusAntoninus Pius. AD 138-161. Æ Sestertius (31mm, 24.70 g, 12h). Rome mint. Struck AD 149. Laureate head right / Crossed cornucopias from which a grape bunch flanked by two grain ears hang, surmounted by busts of boy. RIC III 857; Banti 410. Near VF, brown patina, minor surface roughness.
From the Fairfield Collection. Ex Pegasi Auctions 25 (8 November 2011), lot 504.
The infants are thought to be T. Aelius Antoninus and T. Aurelius Antoninus, the twin sons of Marcus Aurelius and Faustina Junior born in AD 149. These were the first male offspring of the couple, offering hope for the establishment of the new dynasty, but both died in infancy.
Ex-CNG Eauction 329 446/150/180ecoli
|
|
104. Antoninus Pius & Marcus AureliusAntoninus Pius & Marcus Aurelius
In preparation for the succession, Antoninus' daughter Faustina married Marcus Aurelius in A.D. 145 and she soon became Augusta in place of her deceased mother. Marcus Aurelius was associated in imperial powers and he and L. Verus both held the consulship multiple times in preparation for their accession. In his Meditations, Marcus Aurelius expressed his enduring love and respect for his adoptive father: "Do all things as a disciple of Antoninus. Think of his constancy in every act rationally undertaken, his invariable equability, his piety, his serenity of countenance, his sweetness of disposition, his contempt for the bubble of fame, and his zeal for getting a true grasp of affairs."
Check
Sestertius. ANTONINVS AVG PIVS P P TR P COS III, laureate head right / AVRELIVS CAESAR AVG PII COS S-C. Cohen 34. ecoli
|
|
105b. Lucius VerusLucius Verus was a well educated, active participant in military and political affairs. He had a colorful personality. He is reputed to have been one of the most handsome of emperors whose vanity allowed him to highlight his blond hair with gold dust. The letters of Marcus Cornelius Fronto, teacher to Marcus and Lucius, are far gentler in their portrayal of Lucius' personality and grand life style than are the historical accounts of the biographies included in the Historia Augusta. Whether out of true respect or devoted brotherly love, it is evident that Marcus Aurelius treated Lucius as a partner in governing the empire and commanding its military forces. Typical of his tolerance of others, Marcus Aurelius chronically ignored or defused the questionable behavior and friendships of his brother.
AR Denarius (2.80 gm). Struck 162/3 AD. Bare head right / Providentia standing left holding globe and cornucopiae. RIC III 491 (Aurelius); RSC 156. VF. EX -CNGecoli
|
|
105b. Lucius VerusAequitas, also known as Aecetia, was the goddess of fair trade and honest merchants. Like Abundantia, she is depicted with a cornucopia, representing wealth from commerce. She is also shown holding a balance, representing equity and fairness. During the Roman Empire, Aequitas was sometimes worshipped as a quality or aspect of the emperor, under the name Aequitas Augusti.
Aequitas is the tattoo that one brother has on the film Boondock Saints. His brother has a tattoo of the word veritas. They represent, without surprise, justice/equality/balance/fairness and truth.
Aequitas is the source of the word equity, and also means "equality" or "justice".
Denarius. Rev. Aequitas stg. l. holding scales and cornucopiae. TR P VIII IMP V COS III. S-5363, RSC 32ecoli
|
|
1078-1081 AD - Nicephorus III - Sear 1889 - Anonymous FollisEmperor: Nicephorus III (r. 1078-1081 AD)
Date: 1078-1081 AD
Condition: Fair
Denomination: Anonymous Follis (Class I)
Obverse: Bust of Christ facing, wearing nimbus cruciger, pallium and colobium, and raising right hand in benediction; in left hand, book of Gospels; to left, ; to right, ; normal border.
Reverse: Latin cross, with X at centre, and globule and two pellets at each extremity; in lower field, on either side, floral ornament; in upper field, on either side, crescent.
Constantinople mint
Sear 1889
3.35g; 25.6mm; 180°Pep
|
|
1081-1118 AD - Alexius I Comnenus - Follis - Thessalonica mintEmperor: Alexius I Comnenus (r. 1081-1118 AD)
Date: 1081-1092 AD
Condition: aFair
Denomination: Follis
Obverse: No legend
Bust of the Virgin facing, nimbate and wearing pallium and maphorium; She holds before Her the infant Christ whose nimbate head facing is represented; to left,  ; to right,  ; on either side of Virgin's head, uncertain wedge-shaped object.
Reverse: - ] 
Alexius standing facing, wearing crown and loros, and holding labarum and globus cruciger.
Thessalonica mint
Sear 1909
4.27g; 26.1mm; 165°Pep
|
|
108b. Didia ClaraDidia Clara. Augusta, AD 193. Æ Sestertius. Rome mint. Draped bust right / Hilaritas standing left, holding long palm branch set on ground and cornucopia. RIC IV 20 (Didius); Banti 1. Fair.ecoli
|
|
1099-1102 AH - Suleyman II - 20-Qos-01 - Ottoman MangirSultan: Suleyman II (r. 1687-1691 AD)
Date: 1687-1691 AD (1099-1102 AH)
Condition: Fair/Fine
Denomination: Mangir
Obverse: Symbol of the Ottoman Empire
Reverse: doreb fi Qstantaniyyah
Struck at Qstantaniyyah (Kostantiniye)
Exergue: 1099 (Suleyman II's rule beginning 1099 AH (1687 AD))
20-Qos-01; Valentine #144; KM #87
1.51g; 19.3mm; 345°Pep
|
|
1118-1143 AD - John II - Sear 1954 - Half TetarteronProbable Emperor: John II (r. 1118-1143 AD)
Date: 1118-1143 AD
Condition: Fair
Denomination: Half Tetarteron
Obverse: IC-XC
Christ standing facing on footstool, wearing nimbus cruciger, pallium & colobium, and holding book of Gospels in left.
Reverse: I ΔECΠOT
John standing facing, wearing crown, divitision and loros, and holding labarum and globus cruciger.
Thessalonica mint
Sear 1954
1.67g; 15.7mm; 180°Pep
|
|
1118-1143 AD - John II - Sear 1954 - Half Tetarteron - 2nd ExampleProbable Emperor: John II (r. 1118-1143 AD)
Date: 1118-1143 AD
Condition: Fair
Denomination: Half Tetarteron
Obverse: IC-XC
Christ standing facing on footstool, wearing nimbus cruciger, pallium & colobium, and holding book of Gospels in left.
Reverse: I ΔECΠOT
John standing facing, wearing crown, divitision and loros, and holding labarum and globus cruciger.
Thessalonica mint
Sear 1954
2.14g; 16.3mm; 210°Pep
|
|
1143-1180 AD - Manuel I - Sear 1980 - Half TetarteronProbable Emperor: Manuel I (r. 1143-1180 AD)
Date: 1143-1180 AD
Condition: Fair
Denomination: Half Tetarteron
Obverse: to left,  /Γ/E; to right,  /ΓI/O/S (or similar)
Bust of St. George facing, beardless, wearing nimbus, tunic, cuirass and sagion, and holding spear and shield.
Reverse: MAN HΛ ΔECΠOT (or similar)
Bust facing, wearing crown and loros, and holding labarum and globus cruciger.
Uncertain Greek mint
Sear 1980; DOC 23
2.32g, 16.1mm; 180°Pep
|
|
1204-1261 AD - Latin Occupation of Constantinople - Sear 2038 - AE TrachyLatin Occupation of Constantinople (1204-1261 AD)
Date: 1204-1261 AD
Condition: Mediocre/Fair
Denomination: AE Trachy
Obverse: unknown legend
Christ seated.
Reverse: unknown legend
Virgin Mary, orans.
Sear 2038
1.24g; 17.1mm; ?°Pep
|
|
1204-1261 AD - Latin Occupation of Constantinople - Sear 2047 - AE TrachyLatin Occupation of Constantinople (1204-1261 AD)
Date: 1204-1261 AD
Condition: Mediocre/Fair
Denomination: AE Trachy
Obverse: -
Christ seated.
Reverse: no legend
Half-length figure of emperor.
Sear 2047
1.12g; 19.4mm; 180°Pep
|
|
1308b, Licinius I, 308 - 324 A.D. (Siscia)Licinius I, 11 November 308 - 18 September 324 A.D. Bronze follis, RIC 4, F, Siscia, 3.257g, 21.6mm, 0o, 313 - 315 A.D. Obverse: IMP LIC LICINIVS P F AVG, laureate head right; Reverse IOVI CONSERVATORI AVGG NN, Jupiter standing left holding Victory on globe and scepter, eagle with wreath in beak left, E right, SIS in exergue.
De Imperatoribus Romanis : An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families
Licinius (308-324 A.D.)
Michael DiMaio, Jr.
Salve Regina University
Licinius' Heritage
Valerius Licinianus Licinius, more commonly known as Licinius, may have been born ca. 265. Of peasant origin, his family was from Dacia. A close friend and comrade of arms of the Emperor Galerius, he accompanied him on his Persian expedition in 297. When campaigns by Severus and Galerius in late 306 or early 307 and in the summer of 307, respectively, failed to dislodge Maxentius who, with the luke warm support of his father Maximianus Herculius, was acclaimed princeps on 28 October 306, he was sent by the eastern emperor to Maxentius as an ambassador; the diplomatic mission, however, failed because the usurper refused to submit to the authority of his father-in-law Galerius. At the Conference of Carnuntum which was held in October or November of 308, Licinius was made an Augustus on 11 November 308; his realm included Thrace, Illyricum, and Pannonia.
Licinius' Early Reign
Although Licinius was initially appointed by Galerius to replace Severus to end the revolt of Maxentius , Licinius (perhaps wisely) made no effort to move against the usurper. In fact, his first attested victory was against the Sarmatians probably in the late spring, but no later than the end of June in 310. When the Emperor Galerius died in 311, Licinius met Maximinus Daia at the Bosporus during the early summer of that year; they concluded a treaty and divided Galerius' realm between them. It was little more than a year later that the Emperor Constantine defeated Maxentius at the Battle of the Milvian Bridge on 28 October 312. After the defeat of the usurper, Constantine and Licinius met at Mediolanum (Milan) where Licinius married the former's sister Constantia; one child was born of this union: Valerius Licinianus Licinius. Licinius had another son, born of a slave woman, whose name is unknown. It appears that both emperors promulgated the so-called Edict of Milan, in which Constantine and Licinius granted Christians the freedom to practice their faith without any interference from the state.
As soon as he seems to have learned about the marital alliance between Licinius and Constantine and the death of Maxentius, who had been his ally, Daia traversed Asia Minor and, in April 313, he crossed the Bosporus and went to Byzantium, which he took from Licinius after an eleven day siege. On 30 April 313 the armies of both emperors clashed on the Campus Ergenus; in the ensuing battle Daia's forces were routed. A last ditch stand by Daia at the Cilician Gates failed; the eastern emperor subsequently died in the area of Tarsus probably in July or August 313. As soon as he arrived in Nicomedeia, Licinius promulgated the Edict of Milan. As soon as he had matters in Nicomedeia straightened out, Licinius campaigned against the Persians in the remaining part of 313 and the opening months of 314.
The First Civil War Between Licinius and Constantine
Once Licinius had defeated Maximinus Daia, the sole rulers of the Roman world were he and Constantine. It is obvious that the marriage of Licinius to Constantia was simply a union of convenience. In any case, there is evidence in the sources that both emperors were looking for an excuse to attack the other. The affair involving Bassianus (the husband of Constantius I's daughter Anastasia ), mentioned in the text of Anonymus Valesianus (5.14ff), may have sparked the falling out between the two emperors. In any case, Constantine' s forces joined battle with those of Licinius at Cibalae in Pannonia on 8 October 314. When the battle was over, Constantine prevailed; his victory, however, was Pyrrhic. Both emperors had been involved in exhausting military campaigns in the previous year and the months leading up to Cibalae and each of their realms had expanded so fast that their manpower reserves must have been stretched to the limit. Both men retreated to their own territory to lick their wounds. It may well be that the two emperors made an agreement, which has left no direct trace in the historical record, which would effectively restore the status quo.
Both emperors were variously engaged in different activities between 315 and 316. In addition to campaigning against the Germans while residing in Augusta Treverorum (Trier) in 315, Constantine dealt with aspects of the Donatist controversy; he also traveled to Rome where he celebrated his Decennalia. Licinius, possibly residing at Sirmium, was probably waging war against the Goths. Although not much else is known about Licinius' activities during this period, it is probable that he spent much of his time preparing for his impending war against Constantine; the latter,who spent the spring and summer of 316 in Augusta Treverorum, was probably doing much the same thing. In any case, by December 316, the western emperor was in Sardica with his army. Sometime between 1 December and 28 February 317, both emperors' armies joined battle on the Campus Ardiensis; as was the case in the previous engagement, Constantine' s forces were victorious. On 1 March 317, both sides agreed to a cessation of hostilities; possibly because of the intervention of his wife Constantia, Licinius was able to keep his throne, although he had to agree to the execution of his colleague Valens, who the eastern emperor had appointed as his colleague before the battle, as well as to cede some of his territory to his brother-in-law.
Licinius and the Christians
Although the historical record is not completely clear, Licinius seems to have campaigned against the Sarmatians in 318. He also appears to have been in Byzantium in the summer of 318 and later in June 323. Beyond these few facts, not much else is known about his residences until mid summer of 324. Although he and Constantine had issued the Edict of Milan in early 313, Licinius turned on the Christians in his realm seemingly in 320. The first law that Licinius issued prevented bishops from communicating with each other and from holding synods to discuss matters of interest to them. The second law prohibited men and women from attending services together and young girls from receiving instruction from their bishop or schools. When this law was issued, he also gave orders that Christians could hold services only outside of city walls. Additionally, he deprived officers in the army of their commissions if they did not sacrifice to the gods. Licinius may have been trying to incite Constantine to attack him. In any case, the growing tension between the two rulers is reflected in the consular Fasti of the period.
The Second Civil War Between Licinius and Constantine and Licinius' Death
War actually broke out in 321 when Constantine pursued some Sarmatians, who had been ravaging some territory in his realm, across the Danube. When he checked a similar invasion of the Goths, who were devastating Thrace, Licinius complained that Constantine had broken the treaty between them. Having assembled a fleet and army at Thessalonica, Constantine advanced toward Adrianople. Licinius engaged the forces of his brother-in-law near the banks of the Hebrus River on 3 July 324 where he was routed; with as many men as he could gather, he headed for his fleet which was in the Hellespont. Those of his soldiers who were not killed or put to flight, surrendered to the enemy. Licinius fled to Byzantium, where he was besieged by Constantine. Licinius' fleet, under the command of the admiral Abantus, was overcome by bad weather and by Constantine' s fleet which was under the command of his son Crispus. Hard pressed in Byzantium, Licinius abandoned the city to his rival and fled to Chalcedon in Bithynia. Leaving Martinianus, his former magister officiorum and now his co-ruler, to impede Constantine' s progress, Licinius regrouped his forces and engaged his enemy at Chrysopolis where he was again routed on 18 September 324. He fled to Nicomedeia which Constantine began to besiege. On the next day Licinius abdicated and was sent to Thessalonica, where he was kept under house arrest. Both Licinius and his associate were put to death by Constantine. Martinianus may have been put to death before the end of 324, whereas Licinius was not put to death until the spring of 325. Rumors circulated that Licinius had been put to death because he attempted another rebellion against Constantine.
Copyright (C) 1996, Michael DiMaio, Jr.
Published: De Imperatoribus Romanis: An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families http://www.roman-emperors.org/startup.htm. Used by permission.
Edited by J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.
Cleisthenes
|
|
1308c, Licinius I, 308-324 A.D. (Alexandria)Licinius I, 308-324 A.D. AE Follis, 3.60g, VF, 315 A.D., Alexandria. Obverse: IMP C VAL LICIN LICINIVS P F AVG - Laureate head right; Reverse: IOVI CONS-ERVATORI AVGG - Jupiter standing left, holding Victory on a globe and scepter; exergue: ALE / (wreath) over "B" over "N." Ref: RIC VII, 10 (B = r2) Rare, page 705 - Hunterian Museum, Glasgow, Scotland.
De Imperatoribus Romanis : An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families
Licinius (308-324 A.D.)
Michael DiMaio, Jr.
Salve Regina University
Licinius' Heritage
Valerius Licinianus Licinius, more commonly known as Licinius, may have been born ca. 265. Of peasant origin, his family was from Dacia. A close friend and comrade of arms of the Emperor Galerius, he accompanied him on his Persian expedition in 297. When campaigns by Severus and Galerius in late 306 or early 307 and in the summer of 307, respectively, failed to dislodge Maxentius who, with the luke warm support of his father Maximianus Herculius, was acclaimed princeps on 28 October 306, he was sent by the eastern emperor to Maxentius as an ambassador; the diplomatic mission, however, failed because the usurper refused to submit to the authority of his father-in-law Galerius. At the Conference of Carnuntum which was held in October or November of 308, Licinius was made an Augustus on 11 November 308; his realm included Thrace, Illyricum, and Pannonia.
Licinius' Early Reign
Although Licinius was initially appointed by Galerius to replace Severus to end the revolt of Maxentius , Licinius (perhaps wisely) made no effort to move against the usurper. In fact, his first attested victory was against the Sarmatians probably in the late spring, but no later than the end of June in 310. When the Emperor Galerius died in 311, Licinius met Maximinus Daia at the Bosporus during the early summer of that year; they concluded a treaty and divided Galerius' realm between them. It was little more than a year later that the Emperor Constantine defeated Maxentius at the Battle of the Milvian Bridge on 28 October 312. After the defeat of the usurper, Constantine and Licinius met at Mediolanum (Milan) where Licinius married the former's sister Constantia; one child was born of this union: Valerius Licinianus Licinius. Licinius had another son, born of a slave woman, whose name is unknown. It appears that both emperors promulgated the so-called Edict of Milan, in which Constantine and Licinius granted Christians the freedom to practice their faith without any interference from the state.
As soon as he seems to have learned about the marital alliance between Licinius and Constantine and the death of Maxentius, who had been his ally, Daia traversed Asia Minor and, in April 313, he crossed the Bosporus and went to Byzantium, which he took from Licinius after an eleven day siege. On 30 April 313 the armies of both emperors clashed on the Campus Ergenus; in the ensuing battle Daia's forces were routed. A last ditch stand by Daia at the Cilician Gates failed; the eastern emperor subsequently died in the area of Tarsus probably in July or August 313. As soon as he arrived in Nicomedeia, Licinius promulgated the Edict of Milan. As soon as he had matters in Nicomedeia straightened out, Licinius campaigned against the Persians in the remaining part of 313 and the opening months of 314.
The First Civil War Between Licinius and Constantine
Once Licinius had defeated Maximinus Daia, the sole rulers of the Roman world were he and Constantine. It is obvious that the marriage of Licinius to Constantia was simply a union of convenience. In any case, there is evidence in the sources that both emperors were looking for an excuse to attack the other. The affair involving Bassianus (the husband of Constantius I's daughter Anastasia ), mentioned in the text of Anonymus Valesianus (5.14ff), may have sparked the falling out between the two emperors. In any case, Constantine' s forces joined battle with those of Licinius at Cibalae in Pannonia on 8 October 314. When the battle was over, Constantine prevailed; his victory, however, was Pyrrhic. Both emperors had been involved in exhausting military campaigns in the previous year and the months leading up to Cibalae and each of their realms had expanded so fast that their manpower reserves must have been stretched to the limit. Both men retreated to their own territory to lick their wounds. It may well be that the two emperors made an agreement, which has left no direct trace in the historical record, which would effectively restore the status quo.
Both emperors were variously engaged in different activities between 315 and 316. In addition to campaigning against the Germans while residing in Augusta Treverorum (Trier) in 315, Constantine dealt with aspects of the Donatist controversy; he also traveled to Rome where he celebrated his Decennalia. Licinius, possibly residing at Sirmium, was probably waging war against the Goths. Although not much else is known about Licinius' activities during this period, it is probable that he spent much of his time preparing for his impending war against Constantine; the latter,who spent the spring and summer of 316 in Augusta Treverorum, was probably doing much the same thing. In any case, by December 316, the western emperor was in Sardica with his army. Sometime between 1 December and 28 February 317, both emperors' armies joined battle on the Campus Ardiensis; as was the case in the previous engagement, Constantine' s forces were victorious. On 1 March 317, both sides agreed to a cessation of hostilities; possibly because of the intervention of his wife Constantia, Licinius was able to keep his throne, although he had to agree to the execution of his colleague Valens, who the eastern emperor had appointed as his colleague before the battle, as well as to cede some of his territory to his brother-in-law.
Licinius and the Christians
Although the historical record is not completely clear, Licinius seems to have campaigned against the Sarmatians in 318. He also appears to have been in Byzantium in the summer of 318 and later in June 323. Beyond these few facts, not much else is known about his residences until mid summer of 324. Although he and Constantine had issued the Edict of Milan in early 313, Licinius turned on the Christians in his realm seemingly in 320. The first law that Licinius issued prevented bishops from communicating with each other and from holding synods to discuss matters of interest to them. The second law prohibited men and women from attending services together and young girls from receiving instruction from their bishop or schools. When this law was issued, he also gave orders that Christians could hold services only outside of city walls. Additionally, he deprived officers in the army of their commissions if they did not sacrifice to the gods. Licinius may have been trying to incite Constantine to attack him. In any case, the growing tension between the two rulers is reflected in the consular Fasti of the period.
The Second Civil War Between Licinius and Constantine and Licinius' Death
War actually broke out in 321 when Constantine pursued some Sarmatians, who had been ravaging some territory in his realm, across the Danube. When he checked a similar invasion of the Goths, who were devastating Thrace, Licinius complained that Constantine had broken the treaty between them. Having assembled a fleet and army at Thessalonica, Constantine advanced toward Adrianople. Licinius engaged the forces of his brother-in-law near the banks of the Hebrus River on 3 July 324 where he was routed; with as many men as he could gather, he headed for his fleet which was in the Hellespont. Those of his soldiers who were not killed or put to flight, surrendered to the enemy. Licinius fled to Byzantium, where he was besieged by Constantine. Licinius' fleet, under the command of the admiral Abantus, was overcome by bad weather and by Constantine' s fleet which was under the command of his son Crispus. Hard pressed in Byzantium, Licinius abandoned the city to his rival and fled to Chalcedon in Bithynia. Leaving Martinianus, his former magister officiorum and now his co-ruler, to impede Constantine' s progress, Licinius regrouped his forces and engaged his enemy at Chrysopolis where he was again routed on 18 September 324. He fled to Nicomedeia which Constantine began to besiege. On the next day Licinius abdicated and was sent to Thessalonica, where he was kept under house arrest. Both Licinius and his associate were put to death by Constantine. Martinianus may have been put to death before the end of 324, whereas Licinius was not put to death until the spring of 325. Rumors circulated that Licinius had been put to death because he attempted another rebellion against Constantine.
Copyright (C) 1996, Michael DiMaio, Jr.
Published: De Imperatoribus Romanis: An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families http://www.roman-emperors.org/startup.htm. Used by permission.
Edited by J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.
Cleisthenes
|
|
137-161 AD - Antoninus Pius - RIC III 969 var - TR POT XX COS IIII S CEmperor: Antoninus Pius (r. 137-161 AD)
Date: 156-157 AD
Condition: Fair
Denomination: Dupondis
Obverse: ANTONINVS AVG PIVS PP IMP II
Emperor Antoninus Pius Father of the Country Second Imperatorial Acclamation
Bust left; radiate
Reverse: TR POT XX COS IIII S C
Tribune Twentieth Term Consul Fourth Term; Minted by Senatorial Decree
Annona standing right, foot on prow, holding rudder on globe and modius.
Rome mint
Strack, Antoninus Pius 1128; var. RIC III 969
11.63g; 24.6mm; 15°Pep
|
|
1390 - 1406, Robert III, AR Halfgroat struck 1390 - 1403 at Perth, ScotlandObverse: + ROBERTVS ‡ D ‡ G ‡ REX ‡ SCOTORV. Facing crowned bust of Robert III within double tressure of five arches, broken at the king's shoulders, surrounded by diamond beaded inner circle. Mintmark, cross pattée in legend and small crosses in spaces between words. The whole within diamond beaded outer circle.
Reverse: + DnS PTECTOR MS LIBATOR MS (God is my protector and redeemer) / VILLA : DE PERTh X. Long cross pattée dividing two concentric legends separated by two beaded circles into quarters, trefoil in each quarter of inner circle. Mintmark, cross pattée in outer legend, cross set as saltire in inner legend. The whole within beaded outer circle.
Flan has been holed and later plugged
Diameter: 21.13mm | Weight: 1.23gms | Die Axis: 6h | Rare
SPINK: 5175
Robert III, born John Stewart, was King of Scotland from 1390 until his death in 1406. He was the eldest son of Robert II and Elizabeth Mure and was legitimised with the marriage of his parents in 1347. He was around 53 years old when he ascended the throne.
Early in 1363 John joined his father in a rebellion against his great-uncle David II but submitted to David soon afterwards. By 1367 John had married Anabella Drummond and in 1368 David II created him Earl of Carrick.
John's father, Robert II, became king in 1371 after David II, who was childless, died unexpectedly. In the succeeding years John, who was influential in the government, became progressively more impatient at his father's longevity and in 1384 he got himself appointed the king's lieutenant after having coerced the general council to remove Robert II from direct rule.
John's administration saw a renewal of the conflict with England and, in 1388, the Scots defeated the English at the Battle of Otterburn during which the Scots' commander, James, Earl of Douglas, was killed.
By this time John had been badly injured from being kicked by a horse, but it was the loss of his powerful ally, Douglas, that saw a turnaround in support in favour of John's younger brother Robert, Earl of Fife, to whom the council transferred the lieutenancy in December 1388.
In 1390, Robert II died and John ascended the throne as Robert III, parliament having granted John permission to change his regnal name to Robert III, probably in part to maintain the link back to Robert I but also to disassociate himself from King John Balliol.
Robert, Earl of Fife continued as King's Lieutenant until February 1393 when power was returned to the king. However, at a council in 1399 owing to the king's 'sickness of his person', David, now Duke of Rothesay, became King's Lieutenant under the supervision of a special parliamentary group dominated by Robert, Earl of Fife, now styled Duke of Albany.
After this, Robert III withdrew to his lands in the west and for a time played little or no part in affairs of state. He was powerless to interfere when a dispute between his brother, Robert, Duke of Albany, and his son, David, Duke of Rothesay arose in 1401, which led to David's imprisonment and death in 1402. The general council absolved the Duke of Albany from blame and reappointed him as the King's Lieutenant. The only impediment now to Robert, Duke of Albany inheriting the throne was Robert III's surviving son, James, Earl of Carrick. In 1406, the 11-year-old James, along with the Earl of Orkney, fled to the Bass Rock in the Firth of Forth after being attacked by allies of the Duke of Albany. They remained there for over a month before a ship picked them up to take them to France. However, when their ship was off Flamborough head, it was captured by the English who handed James over as a prisoner to King Henry IV of England. Robert III was at Rothesay Castle where, after hearing of his son's captivity, he died on 4th April 1406. Robert III was buried in Paisley Abbey and in 1888 Queen Victoria provided a new canopy for his tomb.
*Alex
|
|
1404a, Crispus, Caesar 317 - 326 A.D. Bronze AE 3, RIC 17, aEF, Cyzicus mint, 3.196g, 19.9mm, 315o, 321 - 324 A.D.; Obverse: D N FL IVL CRISPVS NOB CAES, laureate, draped and cuirassed bust right; Reverse: IOVI CONSERVATORI, Jupiter standing left holding Victory on globe in right and scepter in left, eagle with wreath in beak to left, X / IIG and captive right, SMKD in exergue; scarce (RIC R3). Ex FORVM.
De Imperatoribus Romanis;
An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Emperors and their Families
Crispus Caesar (317-326 A.D.)
Hans Pohlsander
SUNY Albany
Crispus was the oldest son of the emperor Constantine I and played a fairly important role in the political and military events of the early fourth century. The regular form of his full name is Flavius Iulius Crispus, although the forms Flavius Claudius Crispus and Flavius Valerius Crispus also occur. His mother was a woman named Minervina, with whom Constantine had a relationship, probably illegitimate, before he married Fausta in 307. When Minervina died or when Constantine put her aside we do not know. Nor do we know when she gave birth to Crispus; we may assume, of course, that it was before 307. Some modern authorities, on good grounds, think that it was in 305. Crispus' place of birth must have been somewhere in the East, and it is not known when he was brought to Gaul and when, where, or under what circumstances he was separated from his mother.
Constantine entrusted the education of his son to the distinguished Christian scholar Lactantius, thereby giving a clear sign of his commitment to Christianity. We are not told when Lactantius assumed his duties, but a date before 317 seems likely. Nor do we know how successful he was in instilling Christian beliefs and values in his imperial pupil. No later than January of 322 Crispus must have married a woman named Helena -- not to be confused with Constantine's mother or daughter by the same name- and this woman bore him a child in October of 322. Constantine, we learn, was pleased.
Crispus' official career began at an early age and is well documented. On March 1 of 317, at Serdica (modern Sofia), his father appointed him Caesar. The consulship was his three times, in 318, 321, and 324. While nominally in charge of Gaul, with a prefect at his side, he successfully undertook military operations against the Franks and Alamanni in 320 and 323.
In 324, during the second war between Constantine and Licinius, he excelled as commander of Constantine's fleet in the waters of the Hellespont, the Propontis, and the Bosporus, thus making a significant contribution to the outcome of that war. The high points of his career are amply reflected in the imperial coinage. In addition to coins, we have his portrait, with varying degrees of certainty, in a number of sculptures, mosaics, cameos, etc. Contemporary authors heap praises upon him. Thus the panegyrist Nazarius speaks of Crispus' "magnificent deeds," and Eusebius calls him "an emperor most dear to God and in all regards comparable to his father."
Crispus' end was as tragic as his career had been brilliant. His own father ordered him to be put to death. We know the year of this sad event, 326, from the Consularia Constantinopolitana, and the place, Pola in Istria, from Ammianus Marcellinus. The circumstances, however, are less clear. Zosimus (6th c.) and Zonaras (12th c.) both report that Crispus and his stepmother Fausta were involved in an illicit relationship. There may be as much gossip as fact in their reports, but it is certain that at some time during the same year the emperor ordered the death of his own wife as well, and the two cases must be considered together. That Crispus and Fausta plotted treason is reported by Gregory of Tours, but not very believable. We must resolutely reject the claim of Zosimus that it was Constantine's sense of guilt over these deeds which caused him to accept Christianity, as it alone promised him forgiveness for his sins. A similar claim had already been made by Julian the Apostate. We must also, I think, reject the suggestion of Guthrie that the emperor acted in the interest of "dynastic legitimacy," that is, that he removed his illegitimate first-born son in order to secure the succession for his three legitimate younger sons. But Crispus must have committed, or at least must have been suspected of having committed, some especially shocking offense to earn him a sentence of death from his own father. He also suffered damnatio memoriae, his honor was never restored, and history has not recorded the fate of his wife and his child (or children).
Copyright (C) 1997, Hans A. Pohlsander. Published on De Imperatoribus Romanis;An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Emperors and their Families:
http://www.roman-emperors.org/crispus.htm
What If?
St. Nectarios, in his book, The Ecumenical Synods, writes "Hellenism spread by Alexander paved the way for Christianity by Emperor Constantine the Great."
Constantine's upward gaze on his "Eyes to Heaven" coins recall the coin portraits of Alexander the Great (namely coins struck by the Diodochi), which served as prototypes for the divine ruler portraiture of much of the Hellenistic age. The diadem, of which this is the most elaborate type, was adopted by Constantine and the members of his house as a new symbol of sovereignty.
In the Greek Orthodox Church, Constantine the Great is revered as a Saint.
Is it just possible? Constantine, knowing what happened (or thinking that he does) to Phillip II of Macedon—assassinated on the eve of his greatness, in a plot that most likely involved his wife—and possibly his son. . . isn’t it just possible that Constantine is growing obsessively jealous of his ever more successful and adulated son? Imagine the Constantine who has proven time and again (think: Licinius) that he is a completely self-serving liar and a murderer, decides to murder again? Why "must we resolutely reject the claim of Zosimus that it was Constantine's sense of guilt over these deeds which caused him to accept Christianity, as it alone promised him forgiveness for his sins [?] (see: above). A similar claim had already been made by Julian the [Philosopher]."
Perhaps it is time to cease being apologists for the sometime megalomaniacal Constantine. As Michael Grant notes, "It is a mocking travesty of justice to call such a murderer Constantine the Great . . ." (Grant, Michael. The Emperor Constantine. London: Phoenix Press, 1998. 226).
Edited by J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.
Cleisthenes
|
|
1404b, Crispus, Caesar 317 - 326 A.D. (Thessalonica)Bronze AE 3, RIC 118, VF, Thessalonica mint, 2.740g, 18.0mm, 180o, 320 - 321 A.D. Obverse: FL IVL CRISPVS NOB CAES, laureate, draped and cuirassed bust left; Reverse: CAESARVM NOSTRORVM, VOT V in wreath, TSDVI in exergue.
Flavius Julius Crispus was the son of Constantine I by his first wife. A brilliant soldier, Crispus was well loved by all until 326 A.D., when Constantine had him executed. It is said that Fausta, Crispus stepmother, anxious to secure the succession for her own sons falsely accused Crispus of raping her. Constantine, learning of Fausta`s treachery, had her executed too.
De Imperatoribus Romanis;
An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Emperors and their Families
Crispus Caesar (317-326 A.D.)
Hans Pohlsander
SUNY Albany
Crispus was the oldest son of the emperor Constantine I and played a fairly important role in the political and military events of the early fourth century. The regular form of his full name is Flavius Iulius Crispus, although the forms Flavius Claudius Crispus and Flavius Valerius Crispus also occur. His mother was a woman named Minervina, with whom Constantine had a relationship, probably illegitimate, before he married Fausta in 307. When Minervina died or when Constantine put her aside we do not know. Nor do we know when she gave birth to Crispus; we may assume, of course, that it was before 307. Some modern authorities, on good grounds, think that it was in 305. Crispus' place of birth must have been somewhere in the East, and it is not known when he was brought to Gaul and when, where, or under what circumstances he was separated from his mother.
Constantine entrusted the education of his son to the distinguished Christian scholar Lactantius, thereby giving a clear sign of his commitment to Christianity. We are not told when Lactantius assumed his duties, but a date before 317 seems likely. Nor do we know how successful he was in instilling Christian beliefs and values in his imperial pupil. No later than January of 322 Crispus must have married a woman named Helena -- not to be confused with Constantine's mother or daughter by the same name- and this woman bore him a child in October of 322. Constantine, we learn, was pleased.
Crispus' official career began at an early age and is well documented. On March 1 of 317, at Serdica (modern Sofia), his father appointed him Caesar. The consulship was his three times, in 318, 321, and 324. While nominally in charge of Gaul, with a prefect at his side, he successfully undertook military operations against the Franks and Alamanni in 320 and 323.
In 324, during the second war between Constantine and Licinius, he excelled as commander of Constantine's fleet in the waters of the Hellespont, the Propontis, and the Bosporus, thus making a significant contribution to the outcome of that war. The high points of his career are amply reflected in the imperial coinage. In addition to coins, we have his portrait, with varying degrees of certainty, in a number of sculptures, mosaics, cameos, etc. Contemporary authors heap praises upon him. Thus the panegyrist Nazarius speaks of Crispus' "magnificent deeds," and Eusebius calls him "an emperor most dear to God and in all regards comparable to his father."
Crispus' end was as tragic as his career had been brilliant. His own father ordered him to be put to death. We know the year of this sad event, 326, from the Consularia Constantinopolitana, and the place, Pola in Istria, from Ammianus Marcellinus. The circumstances, however, are less clear. Zosimus (6th c.) and Zonaras (12th c.) both report that Crispus and his stepmother Fausta were involved in an illicit relationship. There may be as much gossip as fact in their reports, but it is certain that at some time during the same year the emperor ordered the death of his own wife as well, and the two cases must be considered together. That Crispus and Fausta plotted treason is reported by Gregory of Tours, but not very believable. We must resolutely reject the claim of Zosimus that it was Constantine's sense of guilt over these deeds which caused him to accept Christianity, as it alone promised him forgiveness for his sins. A similar claim had already been made by Julian the Apostate. We must also, I think, reject the suggestion of Guthrie that the emperor acted in the interest of "dynastic legitimacy," that is, that he removed his illegitimate first-born son in order to secure the succession for his three legitimate younger sons. But Crispus must have committed, or at least must have been suspected of having committed, some especially shocking offense to earn him a sentence of death from his own father. He also suffered damnatio memoriae, his honor was never restored, and history has not recorded the fate of his wife and his child (or children).
Copyright (C) 1997, Hans A. Pohlsander. Published on De Imperatoribus Romanis;An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Emperors and their Families:
http://www.roman-emperors.org/crispus.htm
What If?
St. Nectarios, in his book, The Ecumenical Synods, writes "Hellenism spread by Alexander paved the way for Christianity by Emperor Constantine the Great."
Constantine's upward gaze on his "Eyes to Heaven" coins recall the coin portraits of Alexander the Great (namely coins struck by the Diodochi), which served as prototypes for the divine ruler portraiture of much of the Hellenistic age. The diadem, of which this is the most elaborate type, was adopted by Constantine and the members of his house as a new symbol of sovereignty.
In the Greek Orthodox Church, Constantine the Great is revered as a Saint.
Is it just possible? Constantine, knowing what happened (or thinking that he does) to Phillip II of Macedon—assassinated on the eve of his greatness, in a plot that most likely involved his wife—and possibly his son. . . isn’t it just possible that Constantine is growing obsessively jealous of his ever more successful and adulated son? Imagine the Constantine who has proven time and again (think: Licinius) that he is a completely self-serving liar and a murderer, decides to murder again? Why "must we resolutely reject the claim of Zosimus that it was Constantine's sense of guilt over these deeds which caused him to accept Christianity, as it alone promised him forgiveness for his sins [?] (see: above). A similar claim had already been made by Julian the [Philosopher]."
Perhaps it is time to cease being apologists for the sometime megalomaniacal Constantine. As Michael Grant notes, "It is a mocking travesty of justice to call such a murderer Constantine the Great . . ." (Grant, Michael. The Emperor Constantine. London: Phoenix Press, 1998. 226).
Edited by J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.Cleisthenes
|
|
1407a, Constantius II, 337-361 A.D. (Antioch)AE4, 337-361 A.D. Antioch, aVF/VF,Obv:– DN CONSTANTIVS P F AVG, Pearl and rosette diadem, head right/R: Wreath with VOT XX MVLT XXX, SMANB in exe.RIC VIII Antioch 113,Item ref: RI170b.
AE3, 2.80 grams, 330-333, Heraclea, aVF. Obv: FL IVL CONSTANTIVS NOB C - Laureate bust right, draped and cuirassed. R: GLOR-IA EXERC-ITVS - Two soldiers looking in at each other and both holding a spear; between them, two standards Exe: SMHB.
Constantius II was born in Illyricum in August AD 317, the son of Constantine the Great and Fausta, and was proclaimed Caesar in AD 323.
In AD 337, at the death of his father Constantine, he acceded to the throne together with his two brothers Constantine II and Constans. But this accession by the three brothers was tainted by the murder of their cousins Dalmatius and Hannibalianus, whom Constantine had also intended as joint heirs. These murders are believed to have been masterminded by Constantius II.
Eventually, Constantius II was left as the sole emperor of the Roman empire. Constantius elevated his cousin, Julian, to the rank of Caesar (junior emperor) and gave him his sister Helena in marriage. Julian was assigned the task of dealing with the Frankish leader, Silvanus, who had proclaimed himself emepror at Colonia Agrippina. Julian's success led his men to declare him Augustus. Julian, while reluctant to take the throne, accepted.
Constantius II, therefore, left the Mesopotamian frontier and marched his troops west, seeking to deal with the usurper. As he reached Cilicia in the winter of AD 361, he was overcome by a sudden fever and died at Mopsucrene. Julian, the Apostate, succeded him as Emperor.
Our chief source for Constantius' reign is the great historian Ammianus Marcellinus. He presents a mixed view of that emperor. In some ways a sound administrator and competent general, Constantius is also portrayed as easily influenced by those around him such as his wives, courtiers and the eunuchs of the court (Ammianus 21. 16. 16). Ammianus (21.16.18) also attacks Constantius' great interest in Church affairs--alleging that he bankrupted the courier service with calls for Church councils. Of course, imperial interest in Church affairs was a major policy of his father Constantine and it may be that Constantius was trying to emulate his model (if only with mixed success). Indeed, Constantius II (like his brothers Constantine II and Constans) was raised a Christian. Among his many laws is the famous CTh 16.10.2 of 341 which either prohibited or re-issued his father's prohibition of pagan sacrifices. Sympathetic to Arianism, he spent a great deal of his reign calling Church councils. One of the longest-reigned emperors in Roman history, Constantius is hard for the modern historian to fully understand both due to his own actions and due to the interests of the authors of primary sources for his reign.
By Michael DiMaio, Jr., Salve Regina University & Robert Frakes, Clarion University
Published: De Imperatoribus Romanis: An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families http://www.roman-emperors.org/startup.htm. Used by permission.
Edited by J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.
Cleisthenes
|
|
1407h, Constantius II, 337-361 A.D. (Heraclea)Constantius II 337-361 A.D. AE3, 2.80 grams, 330-333, Heraclea, aVF. Obverse: FL IVL CONSTANTIVS NOB C - Laureate bust right, draped and cuirassed; Reverse: GLOR-IA EXERC-ITVS - Two soldiers looking in at each other and both holding a spear; between them, two standards; SMHB in exergue.
Constantius II was born in Illyricum in August AD 317, the son of Constantine the Great and Fausta, and was proclaimed Caesar in AD 323.
In AD 337, at the death of his father Constantine, he acceded to the throne together with his two brothers Constantine II and Constans. But this accession by the three brothers was tainted by the murder of their cousins Dalmatius and Hannibalianus, whom Constantine had also intended as joint heirs. These murders are believed to have been masterminded by Constantius II.
Eventually, Constantius II was left as the sole emperor of the Roman empire. Constantius elevated his cousin, Julian, to the rank of Caesar (junior emperor) and gave him his sister Helena in marriage. Julian was assigned the task of dealing with the Frankish leader, Silvanus, who had proclaimed himself emepror at Colonia Agrippina. Julian's success led his men to declare him Augustus. Julian, while reluctant to take the throne, accepted.
Constantius II, therefore, left the Mesopotamian frontier and marched his troops west, seeking to deal with the usurper. As he reached Cilicia in the winter of AD 361, he was overcome by a sudden fever and died at Mopsucrene. Julian, the Apostate, succeded him as Emperor.
Our chief source for Constantius' reign is the great historian Ammianus Marcellinus. He presents a mixed view of that emperor. In some ways a sound administrator and competent general, Constantius is also portrayed as easily influenced by those around him such as his wives, courtiers and the eunuchs of the court (Ammianus 21. 16. 16). Ammianus (21.16.18) also attacks Constantius' great interest in Church affairs--alleging that he bankrupted the courier service with calls for Church councils. Of course, imperial interest in Church affairs was a major policy of his father Constantine and it may be that Constantius was trying to emulate his model (if only with mixed success). Indeed, Constantius II (like his brothers Constantine II and Constans) was raised a Christian. Among his many laws is the famous CTh 16.10.2 of 341 which either prohibited or re-issued his father's prohibition of pagan sacrifices. Sympathetic to Arianism, he spent a great deal of his reign calling Church councils. One of the longest-reigned emperors in Roman history, Constantius is hard for the modern historian to fully understand both due to his own actions and due to the interests of the authors of primary sources for his reign.
By Michael DiMaio, Jr., Salve Regina University & Robert Frakes, Clarion University
Published: De Imperatoribus Romanis: An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families http://www.roman-emperors.org/startup.htm. Used by permission.
Edited by J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.Cleisthenes
|
|
1407r, Constantius II, 22 May 337 - 3 November 361 A.D.Bronze AE 3, RIC 272, aVF, 2.203g, 18.1mm, 0o, Rome mint, 352 - 355 A.D.; obverse D N CONSTAN-TIVS P F AVG, pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right; reverse FEL TEMP REPARATIO, soldier spearing fallen horseman, RT in ex.
Constantius II was born in Illyricum in August AD 317, the son of Constantine the Great and Fausta, and was proclaimed Caesar in AD 323.
In AD 337, at the death of his father Constantine, he acceded to the throne together with his two brothers Constantine II and Constans. But this accession by the three brothers was tainted by the murder of their cousins Dalmatius and Hannibalianus, whom Constantine had also intended as joint heirs. These murders are believed to have been masterminded by Constantius II.
Eventually, Constantius II was left as the sole emperor of the Roman empire. Constantius elevated Julian to the rank of Caesar (junior emperor) and gave him his sister Helena in marriage. Julian was assigned the task of dealing with the Frankish leader, Silvanus, who had proclaimed himself emepror at Colonia Agrippina. Julian's success lead his men to declare him Augustus. Julian, while reluctant to take the throne, accepted.
Constantius II, therefore left the Mesopotamian frontier and marched his troops west, seeking to deal with the usurper. As he reached Cilicia in the winter of AD 361, he was overcome by a sudden fever and died at Mopsucrene. Julian, the Apostate, succeded him as Emperor.
Our chief source for Constantius' reign is the great historian Ammianus Marcellinus. He presents a mixed view of that emperor. In some ways a sound administrator and competent general, Constantius is also portrayed as easily influenced by those around him such as his wives, courtiers and the eunuchs of the court (Ammianus 21. 16. 16). Ammianus (21.16.18) also attacks Constantius' great interest in Church affairs--alleging that he bankrupted the courier service with calls for Church councils. Of course, imperial interest in Church affairs was a major policy of his father Constantine and it may be that Constantius was trying to emulate his model (if only with mixed success). Indeed, Constantius II (like his brothers Constantine II and Constans) was raised a Christian. Among his many laws is the famous CTh 16.10.2 of 341 which either prohibited or re-issued his father's prohibition of pagan sacrifices. Sympathetic to Arianism, he spent a great deal of his reign calling Church councils. One of the longest-reigned emperors in Roman history, Constantius is hard for the modern historian to fully understand both due to his own actions and due to the interests of the authors of primary sources for his reign.
By Michael DiMaio, Jr., Salve Regina University & Robert Frakes, Clarion University
Published: De Imperatoribus Romanis: An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families http://www.roman-emperors.org/startup.htm. Used by permission.
Edited by J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.
Cleisthenes
|
|
1409a, Julian II "the Philosopher," February 360 - 26 June 363 A.D.Julian II, A.D. 360-363; RIC 167; VF; 2.7g, 20mm; Constantinople mint; Obverse: DN FL CL IVLIANVS P F AVG, helmeted & cuirassed bust right, holding spear & shield; Reverse: VOT X MVLT XX in four lines within wreath; CONSPB in exergue; Attractive green patina. Ex Nemesis.
De Imperatoribus Romanis,
An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Emperors
Julian the Apostate (360-363 A.D.)
Walter E. Roberts, Emory University
Michael DiMaio, Jr., Salve Regina University
Introduction
The emperor Flavius Claudius Julianus reigned from 360 to 26 June 363, when he was killed fighting against the Persians. Despite his short rule, his emperorship was pivotal in the development of the history of the later Roman empire. This essay is not meant to be a comprehensive look at the various issues central to the reign of Julian and the history of the later empire. Rather, this short work is meant to be a brief history and introduction for the general reader. Julian was the last direct descendent of the Constantinian line to ascend to the purple, and it is one of history's great ironies that he was the last non-Christian emperor. As such, he has been vilified by most Christian sources, beginning with John Chrysostom and Gregory Nazianzus in the later fourth century. This tradition was picked up by the fifth century Eusebian continuators Sozomen, Socrates Scholasticus, and Theodoret and passed on to scholars down through the 20th century. Most contemporary sources, however, paint a much more balanced picture of Julian and his reign. The adoption of Christianity by emperors and society, while still a vital concern, was but one of several issues that concerned Julian.
It is fortunate that extensive writings from Julian himself exist, which help interpret his reign in the light of contemporary evidence. Still extant are some letters, several panegyrics, and a few satires. Other contemporary sources include the soldier Ammianus Marcellinus' history, correspondence between Julian and Libanius of Antioch, several panegyrics, laws from the Theodosian Code, inscriptions, and coinage. These sources show Julian's emphasis on restoration. He saw himself as the restorer of the traditional values of Roman society. Of course much of this was rhetoric, meant to defend Julian against charges that he was a usurper. At the same time this theme of restoration was central to all emperors of the fourth century. Julian thought that he was the one emperor who could regain what was viewed as the lost glory of the Roman empire. To achieve this goal he courted select groups of social elites to get across his message of restoration. This was the way that emperors functioned in the fourth century. By choosing whom to include in the sharing of power, they sought to shape society.
Early Life
Julian was born at Constantinople in 331. His father was Julius Constantius, half-brother of the emperor Constantine through Constantius Chlorus, and his mother was Basilina, Julius' second wife. Julian had two half-brothers via Julius' first marriage. One of these was Gallus, who played a major role in Julian's life. Julian appeared destined for a bright future via his father's connection to the Constantinian house. After many years of tense relations with his three half-brothers, Constantine seemed to have welcomed them into the fold of the imperial family. From 333 to 335, Constantine conferred a series of honors upon his three half-siblings, including appointing Julius Constantius as one of the consuls for 335. Julian's mother was equally distinguished. Ammianus related that she was from a noble family. This is supported by Libanius, who claimed that she was the daughter of Julius Julianus, a Praetorian Prefect under Licinius, who was such a model of administrative virtue that he was pardoned and honored by Constantine.
Despite the fact that his mother died shortly after giving birth to him, Julian experienced an idyllic early childhood. This ended when Constantius II conducted a purge of many of his relatives shortly after Constantine's death in 337, particularly targeting the families of Constantine's half-brothers. ulian and Gallus were spared, probably due to their young age. Julian was put under the care of Mardonius, a Scythian eunuch who had tutored his mother, in 339, and was raised in the Greek philosophical tradition, and probably lived in Nicomedia. Ammianus also supplied the fact that while in Nicomedia, Julian was cared for by the local bishop Eusebius, of whom the future emperor was a distant relation. Julian was educated by some of the most famous names in grammar and rhetoric in the Greek world at that time, including Nicocles and Hecebolius. In 344 Constantius II sent Julian and Gallus to Macellum in Cappadocia, where they remained for six years. In 351, Gallus was made Caesar by Constantius II and Julian was allowed to return to Nicomedia, where he studied under Aedesius, Eusebius, and Chrysanthius, all famed philosophers, and was exposed to the Neo-Platonism that would become such a prominent part of his life. But Julian was most proud of the time he spent studying under Maximus of Ephesus, a noted Neo-Platonic philospher and theurgist. It was Maximus who completed Julian's full-scale conversion to Neo-Platonism. Later, when he was Caesar, Julian told of how he put letters from this philosopher under his pillows so that he would continue to absorb wisdom while he slept, and while campaigning on the Rhine, he sent his speeches to Maximus for approval before letting others hear them. When Gallus was executed in 354 for treason by Constantius II, Julian was summoned to Italy and essentially kept under house arrest at Comum, near Milan, for seven months before Constantius' wife Eusebia convinced the emperor that Julian posed no threat. This allowed Julian to return to Greece and continue his life as a scholar where he studied under the Neo-Platonist Priscus. Julian's life of scholarly pursuit, however, ended abruptly when he was summoned to the imperial court and made Caesar by Constantius II on 6 November 355.
Julian as Caesar
Constantius II realized an essential truth of the empire that had been evident since the time of the Tetrarchy--the empire was too big to be ruled effectively by one man. Julian was pressed into service as Caesar, or subordinate emperor, because an imperial presence was needed in the west, in particular in the Gallic provinces. Julian, due to the emperor's earlier purges, was the only viable candidate of the imperial family left who could act as Caesar. Constantius enjoined Julian with the task of restoring order along the Rhine frontier. A few days after he was made Caesar, Julian was married to Constantius' sister Helena in order to cement the alliance between the two men. On 1 December 355, Julian journeyed north, and in Augusta Taurinorum he learned that Alamannic raiders had destroyed Colonia Agrippina. He then proceeded to Vienne where he spent the winter. At Vienne, he learned that Augustudunum was also under siege, but was being held by a veteran garrison. He made this his first priority, and arrived there on 24 June 356. When he had assured himself that the city was in no immediate danger, he journeyed to Augusta Treverorum via Autessioduram, and from there to Durocortorum where he rendezvoused with his army. Julian had the army stage a series of punitive strikes around the Dieuse region, and then he moved them towards the Argentoratum/Mongontiacum region when word of barbarian incursions reached him.
From there, Julian moved on to Colonia Agrippina, and negotiated a peace with the local barbarian leaders who had assaulted the city. He then wintered at Senonae. He spent the early part of the campaigning season of 357 fighting off besiegers at Senonae, and then conducting operations around Lugdunum and Tres Tabernae. Later that summer, he encountered his watershed moment as a military general. Ammianus went into great detail about Julian's victory over seven rogue Alamannic chieftains near Argentoratum, and Julian himself bragged about it in his later writing. After this battle, the soldiers acclaimed Julian Augustus, but he rejected this title. After mounting a series of follow-up raids into Alamannic territory, he retired to winter quarters at Lutetia, and on the way defeated some Frankish raiders in the Mosa region. Julian considered this campaign one of the major events of his time as Caesar.
Julian began his 358 military campaigns early, hoping to catch the barbarians by surprise. His first target was the Franks in the northern Rhine region. He then proceeded to restore some forts in the Mosa region, but his soldiers threatened to mutiny because they were on short rations and had not been paid their donative since Julian had become Caesar. After he soothed his soldiers, Julian spent the rest of the summer negotiating a peace with various Alamannic leaders in the mid and lower Rhine areas, and retired to winter quarters at Lutetia. In 359, he prepared once again to carry out a series of punitive expeditions against the Alamanni in the Rhine region who were still hostile to the Roman presence. In preparation, the Caesar repopulated seven previously destroyed cities and set them up as supply bases and staging areas. This was done with the help of the people with whom Julian had negotiated a peace the year before. Julian then had a detachment of lightly armed soldiers cross the Rhine near Mogontiacum and conduct a guerilla strike against several chieftains. As a result of these campaigns, Julian was able to negotiate a peace with all but a handful of the Alamannic leaders, and he retired to winter quarters at Lutetia.
Of course, Julian did more than act as a general during his time as Caesar. According to Ammianus, Julian was an able administrator who took steps to correct the injustices of Constantius' appointees. Ammianus related the story of how Julian prevented Florentius, the Praetorian Prefect of Gaul, from raising taxes, and also how Julian actually took over as governor for the province of Belgica Secunda. Hilary, bishop of Poitiers, supported Ammianus' basic assessment of Julian in this regard when he reported that Julian was an able representative of the emperor to the Gallic provincials. There is also epigraphic evidence to support Julian's popularity amongst the provincial elites. An inscription found near Beneventum in Apulia reads:
"To Flavius Claudius Julianus, most noble and sanctified Caesar, from the caring Tocius Maximus, vir clarissimus, for the care of the res publica from Beneventum".
Tocius Maximus, as a vir clarissimus, was at the highest point in the social spectrum and was a leader in his local community. This inscription shows that Julian was successful in establishing a positive image amongst provincial elites while he was Caesar.
Julian Augustus
In early 360, Constantius, driven by jealousy of Julian's success, stripped Julian of many troops and officers, ostensibly because the emperor needed them for his upcoming campaign against the Persians. One of the legions ordered east, the Petulantes, did not want to leave Gaul because the majority of the soldiers in the unit were from this region. As a result they mutinied and hailed Julian as Augustus at Lutetia. Julian refused this acclamation as he had done at Argentoratum earlier, but the soldiers would have none of his denial. They raised him on a shield and adorned him with a neck chain, which had formerly been the possession of the standard-bearer of the Petulantes and symbolized a royal diadem. Julian appeared reluctantly to acquiesce to their wishes, and promised a generous donative. The exact date of his acclamation is unknown, but most scholars put it in February or March. Julian himself supported Ammianus' picture of a jealous Constantius. In his Letter to the Athenians, a document constructed to answer charges that he was a usurper, Julian stated that from the start he, as Caesar, had been meant as a figurehead to the soldiers and provincials. The real power he claimed lay with the generals and officials already present in Gaul. In fact, according to Julian, the generals were charged with watching him as much as the enemy. His account of the actual acclamation closely followed what Ammianus told us, but he stressed even more his reluctance to take power. Julian claimed that he did so only after praying to Zeus for guidance.
Fearing the reaction of Constantius, Julian sent a letter to his fellow emperor justifying the events at Lutetia and trying to arrange a peaceful solution. This letter berated Constantius for forcing the troops in Gaul into an untenable situation. Ammianus stated that Julian's letter blamed Constantius' decision to transfer Gallic legions east as the reason for the soldiers' rebellion. Julian once again asserted that he was an unwilling participant who was only following the desire of the soldiers. In both of these basic accounts Ammianus and Julian are playing upon the theme of restoration. Implicit in their version of Julian's acclamation is the argument that Constantius was unfit to rule. The soldiers were the vehicle of the gods' will. The Letter to the Athenians is full of references to the fact that Julian was assuming the mantle of Augustus at the instigation of the gods. Ammianus summed up this position nicely when he related the story of how, when Julian was agonizing over whether to accept the soldiers' acclamation, he had a dream in which he was visited by the Genius (guardian spirit) of the Roman state. The Genius told Julian that it had often tried to bestow high honors upon Julian but had been rebuffed. Now, the Genius went on to say, was Julian's final chance to take the power that was rightfully his. If the Caesar refused this chance, the Genius would depart forever, and both Julian and the state would rue Julian's rejection. Julian himself wrote a letter to his friend Maximus of Ephesus in November of 361 detailing his thoughts on his proclamation. In this letter, Julian stated that the soldiers proclaimed him Augustus against his will. Julian, however, defended his accession, saying that the gods willed it and that he had treated his enemies with clemency and justice. He went on to say that he led the troops in propitiating the traditional deities, because the gods commanded him to return to the traditional rites, and would reward him if he fulfilled this duty.
During 360 an uneasy peace simmered between the two emperors. Julian spent the 360 campaigning season continuing his efforts to restore order along the Rhine, while Constantius continued operations against the Persians. Julian wintered in Vienne, and celebrated his Quinquennalia. It was at this time that his wife Helena died, and he sent her remains to Rome for a proper burial at his family villa on the Via Nomentana where the body of her sister was entombed. The uneasy peace held through the summer of 361, but Julian concentrated his military operations around harassing the Alamannic chieftain Vadomarius and his allies, who had concluded a peace treaty with Constantius some years earlier. By the end of the summer, Julian decided to put an end to the waiting and gathered his army to march east against Constantius. The empire teetered on the brink of another civil war. Constantius had spent the summer negotiating with the Persians and making preparations for possible military action against his cousin. When he was assured that the Persians would not attack, he summoned his army and sallied forth to meet Julian. As the armies drew inexorably closer to one another, the empire was saved from another bloody civil war when Constantius died unexpectedly of natural causes on 3 November near the town of Mopsucrenae in Cilicia, naming Julian -- the sources say-- as his legitimate successor.
Julian was in Dacia when he learned of his cousin's death. He made his way through Thrace and came to Constantinople on 11 December 361 where Julian honored the emperor with the funeral rites appropriate for a man of his station. Julian immediately set about putting his supporters in positions of power and trimming the imperial bureaucracy, which had become extremely overstaffed during Constantius' reign. Cooks and barbers had increased during the late emperor's reign and Julian expelled them from his court. Ammianus gave a mixed assessment of how the new emperor handled the followers of Constantius. Traditionally, emperors were supposed to show clemency to the supporters of a defeated enemy. Julian, however, gave some men over to death to appease the army. Ammianus used the case of Ursulus, Constantius' comes sacrum largitionum, to illustrate his point. Ursulus had actually tried to acquire money for the Gallic troops when Julian had first been appointed Caesar, but he had also made a disparaging remark about the ineffectiveness of the army after the battle of Amida. The soldiers remembered this, and when Julian became sole Augustus, they demanded Ursulus' head. Julian obliged, much to the disapproval of Ammianus. This seems to be a case of Julian courting the favor of the military leadership, and is indicative of a pattern in which Julian courted the goodwill of various societal elites to legitimize his position as emperor.
Another case in point is the officials who made up the imperial bureaucracy. Many of them were subjected to trial and punishment. To achieve this goal, during the last weeks of December 361 Julian assembled a military tribunal at Chalcedon, empanelling six judges to try the cases. The president of the tribunal was Salutius, just promoted to the rank of Praetorian Prefect; the five other members were Mamertinus, the orator, and four general officers: Jovinus, Agilo, Nevitta, and Arbetio. Relative to the proceedings of the tribunal, Ammianus noted that the judges, " . . . oversaw the cases more vehemently than was right or fair, with the exception of a few . . .." Ammianus' account of Julian's attempt at reform of the imperial bureaucracy is supported by legal evidence from the Theodosian Code. A series of laws sent to Mamertinus, Julian's appointee as Praetorian Prefect in Italy, Illyricum, and Africa, illustrate this point nicely. On 6 June 362, Mamertinus received a law that prohibited provincial governors from bypassing the Vicars when giving their reports to the Prefect. Traditionally, Vicars were given civil authority over a group of provinces, and were in theory meant to serve as a middle step between governors and Prefects. This law suggests that the Vicars were being left out, at least in Illyricum. Julian issued another edict to Mamertinus on 22 February 362 to stop abuse of the public post by governors. According to this law, only Mamertinus could issue post warrants, but the Vicars were given twelve blank warrants to be used as they saw fit, and each governor was given two. Continuing the trend of bureaucratic reform, Julian also imposed penalties on governors who purposefully delayed appeals in court cases they had heard. The emperor also established a new official to weigh solidi used in official government transactions to combat coin clipping.
For Julian, reigning in the abuses of imperial bureaucrats was one step in restoring the prestige of the office of emperor. Because he could not affect all elements of society personally, Julian, like other Neo-Flavian emperors, decided to concentrate on select groups of societal elites as intercessors between himself and the general populace. One of these groups was the imperial bureaucracy. Julian made it very clear that imperial officials were intercessors in a very real sense in a letter to Alypius, Vicar of Britain. In this letter, sent from Gaul sometime before 361, the emperor praises Alypius for his use of "mildness and moderation with courage and force" in his rule of the provincials. Such virtues were characteristic of the emperors, and it was good that Alypius is representing Julian in this way. Julian courted the army because it put him in power. Another group he sought to include in his rule was the traditional Senatorial aristocracy. One of his first appointments as consul was Claudius Mamertinus, a Gallic Senator and rhetorician. Mamertinus' speech in praise of Julian delivered at Constantinople in January of 362 is preserved. In this speech, Claudius presented his consular selection as inaugurating a new golden age and Julian as the restorer of the empire founded by Augustus. The image Mamertinus gave of his own consulate inaugurating a new golden age is not merely formulaic. The comparison of Julian to Augustus has very real, if implicit, relevance to Claudius' situation. Claudius emphasized the imperial period as the true age of renewal. Augustus ushered in a new era with his formation of a partnership between the emperor and the Senate based upon a series of honors and offices bestowed upon the Senate in return for their role as intercessor between emperor and populace. It was this system that Julian was restoring, and the consulate was one concrete example of this bond. To be chosen as a consul by the emperor, who himself had been divinely mandated, was a divine honor. In addition to being named consul, Mamertinus went on to hold several offices under Julian, including the Prefecture of Italy, Illyricum, and Africa. Similarly, inscriptional evidence illustrates a link between municipal elites and Julian during his time as Caesar, something which continued after he became emperor. One concrete example comes from the municipal senate of Aceruntia in Apulia, which established a monument on which Julian is styled as "Repairer of the World."
Julian seems to have given up actual Christian belief before his acclamation as emperor and was a practitioner of more traditional Greco-Roman religious beliefs, in particular, a follower of certain late antique Platonist philosophers who were especially adept at theurgy as was noted earlier. In fact Julian himself spoke of his conversion to Neo-Platonism in a letter to the Alexandrians written in 363. He stated that he had abandoned Christianity when he was twenty years old and been an adherent of the traditional Greco-Roman deities for the twelve years prior to writing this letter.
(For the complete text of this article see: http://www.roman-emperors.org/julian.htm)
Julian’s Persian Campaign
The exact goals Julian had for his ill-fated Persian campaign were never clear. The Sassanid Persians, and before them the Parthians, had been a traditional enemy from the time of the Late Republic, and indeed Constantius had been conducting a war against them before Julian's accession forced the former to forge an uneasy peace. Julian, however, had no concrete reason to reopen hostilities in the east. Socrates Scholasticus attributed Julian's motives to imitation of Alexander the Great, but perhaps the real reason lay in his need to gather the support of the army. Despite his acclamation by the Gallic legions, relations between Julian and the top military officers was uneasy at best. A war against the Persians would have brought prestige and power both to Julian and the army.
Julian set out on his fateful campaign on 5 March 363. Using his trademark strategy of striking quickly and where least expected, he moved his army through Heirapolis and from there speedily across the Euphrates and into the province of Mesopotamia, where he stopped at the town of Batnae. His plan was to eventually return through Armenia and winter in Tarsus. Once in Mesopotamia, Julian was faced with the decision of whether to travel south through the province of Babylonia or cross the Tigris into Assyria, and he eventually decided to move south through Babylonia and turn west into Assyria at a later date. By 27 March, he had the bulk of his army across the Euphrates, and had also arranged a flotilla to guard his supply line along the mighty river. He then left his generals Procopius and Sebastianus to help Arsacius, the king of Armenia and a Roman client, to guard the northern Tigris line. It was also during this time that he received the surrender of many prominent local leaders who had nominally supported the Persians. These men supplied Julian with money and troops for further military action against their former masters. Julian decided to turn south into Babylonia and proceeded along the Euphrates, coming to the fortress of Cercusium at the junction of the Abora and Euphrates Rivers around the first of April, and from there he took his army west to a region called Zaitha near the abandoned town of Dura where they visited the tomb of the emperor Gordian which was in the area. On April 7 he set out from there into the heart of Babylonia and towards Assyria.
Ammianus then stated that Julian and his army crossed into Assyria, which on the face of things appears very confusing. Julian still seems to be operating within the province of Babylonia between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. The confusion is alleviated when one realizes that,for Ammianus, the region of Assyria encompassed the provinces of Babylonia and Assyria. On their march, Julian's forces took the fortress of Anatha, received the surrender and support of several more local princes, and ravaged the countryside of Assyria between the rivers. As the army continued south, they came across the fortresses Thilutha and Achaiachala, but these places were too well defended and Julian decided to leave them alone. Further south were the cities Diacira and Ozogardana, which the Roman forces sacked and burned. Soon, Julian came to Pirisabora and a brief siege ensued, but the city fell and was also looted and destroyed. It was also at this time that the Roman army met its first systematic resistance from the Persians. As the Romans penetrated further south and west, the local inhabitants began to flood their route. Nevertheless, the Roman forces pressed on and came to Maiozamalcha, a sizable city not far from Ctesiphon. After a short siege, this city too fell to Julian. Inexorably, Julian's forces zeroed in on Ctesiphon, but as they drew closer, the Persian resistance grew fiercer, with guerilla raids whittling at Julian's men and supplies. A sizable force of the army was lost and the emperor himself was almost killed taking a fort a few miles from the target city.
Finally, the army approached Ctesiphon following a canal that linked the Tigris and Euphrates. It soon became apparent after a few preliminary skirmishes that a protracted siege would be necessary to take this important city. Many of his generals, however, thought that pursuing this course of action would be foolish. Julian reluctantly agreed, but became enraged by this failure and ordered his fleet to be burned as he decided to march through the province of Assyria. Julian had planned for his army to live off the land, but the Persians employed a scorched-earth policy. When it became apparent that his army would perish (because his supplies were beginning to dwindle) from starvation and the heat if he continued his campaign, and also in the face of superior numbers of the enemy, Julian ordered a retreat on 16 June. As the Roman army retreated, they were constantly harassed by guerilla strikes. It was during one of these raids that Julian got caught up in the fighting and took a spear to his abdomen. Mortally wounded he was carried to his tent, where, after conferring with some of his officers, he died. The date was 26 June 363.
Conclusion
Thus an ignominious end for a man came about who had hoped to restore the glory of the Roman empire during his reign as emperor. Due to his intense hatred of Christianity, the opinion of posterity has not been kind to Julian. The contemporary opinion, however, was overall positive. The evidence shows that Julian was a complex ruler with a definite agenda to use traditional social institutions in order to revive what he saw as a collapsing empire. In the final assessment, he was not so different from any of the other emperors of the fourth century. He was a man grasping desperately to hang on to a Greco-Roman conception of leadership that was undergoing a subtle yet profound change.
Copyright (C) 2002, Walter E. Roberts and Michael DiMaio, Jr. Used by permission.
In reality, Julian worked to promote culture and philosophy in any manifestation. He tried to reduce taxes and the public debts of municipalities; he augmented administrative decentralisation; he promoted a campaign of austerity to reduce public expenditure (setting himself as the example). He reformed the postal service and eliminated the powerful secret police.
by Federico Morando; JULIAN II, The Apostate, See the Julian II Page on NumisWiki
Flavius Claudius Iulianus was born in 331 or maybe 332 A.D. in Constantinople. He ruled the Western Empire as Caesar from 355 to 360 and was hailed Augustus by his legions in Lutetia (Paris) in 360. Julian was a gifted administrator and military strategist. Famed as the last pagan emperor, his reinstatement of the pagan religion earned him the moniker "the Apostate." As evidenced by his brilliant writing, some of which has survived to the present day, the title "the Philosopher" may have been more appropriate. He died from wounds suffered during the Persian campaign of 363 A.D. Joseph Sermarini, FORVM.
Edited by J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.
Cleisthenes
|
|
1505b, Theodosius I, 19 January 379 - 17 January 395 A.D. (Antioch)Theodosius I, 19 January 379 - 17 January 395 A.D. Bronze AE 3, RIC 44(b), VF, Antioch, 2.17g, 18.1mm, 180o, 9 Aug 378 - 25 Aug 383 A.D. Obverse: D N THEODOSIVS P F AVG, rosette-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right; Reverse: CONCORDIA AVGGG, Constantinopolis enthroned facing, r. foot on prow, globe in l., scepter in r., Q and F at sides, ANTG in ex; scarce.
De Imperatoribus Romanis: An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families
THEODOSIUS I (379-395 A.D.)
David Woods
University College of Cork
Origin and Early Career
Flavius Theodosius was born at Cauca in Spain in about 346 to Thermantia and Theodosius the Elder (so-called to distinguish him from his son). Theodosius the Elder was a senior military officer serving in the Western empire and rose to become the magister equitum praesentalis under the emperor Valentinian I from late 368 until his execution in early 375. As the son of a soldier, Theodosius was legally obliged to enter upon a military career. He seems to have served under his father during his expedition to Britain in 367/8, and was the dux Moesiae Primae by late 374. Unfortunately, great controversy surrounds the rest of his career until Gratian had him hailed as his imperial colleague in succession to the emperor Valens at Sirmium on 19 January 379. It is clear that he was forced to retire home to Spain only to be recalled to active service shortly thereafter, but the circumstances of his forced retirement are shrouded in mystery. His father was executed at roughly the same time, and much speculation has centred on the relationship between these events.
[For a very detailed and interesting discussion of the Foreign Policy of Theodosius and the Civil Wars that plagued his reign, please see http://www.roman-emperors.org/theo1.htm]
Family and Succession
Theodosius married twice. His first wife was the Spanish Aelia Flavia Flaccilla. She bore him Arcadius ca. 377, Honorius on 9 September 384, and Pulcheria ca. 385. Theodosius honoured her with the title of Augusta shortly after his accession, but she died in 386. In late 387 he married Galla, daughter of Valentinian I and full-sister of Valentinian II. She bore him Gratian ca. 388, Galla Placidia ca. 388/390, and died in childbirth in 394, together with her new-born son John. Of his two sons who survived infancy, he appointed Arcadius as Augustus on 19 January 383 and Honorius as Augustus on 23 January 393. His promotion of Arcadius as a full Augustus at an unusually young age points to his determination right from the start that one of his own sons should succeed him. He sought to strengthen Arcadius' position in particular by means of a series of strategic marriages whose purpose was to tie his leading "generals" irrevocably to his dynasty. Hence he married his niece and adoptive daughter Serena to his magister militum per Orientem Stilicho in 387, her elder sister Thermantia to a "general" whose name has not been preserved, and ca. 387 his nephew-in-law Nebridius to Salvina, daughter of the comes Africae Gildo. By the time of his death by illness on 17 January 395, Theodosius had promoted Stilicho from his position as one of the two comites domesticorum under his own eastern administration to that of magister peditum praesentalis in a western administration, in an entirely traditional manner, under his younger son Honorius. Although Stilicho managed to increase the power of the magister peditum praesentalis to the disadvantage of his colleague the magister equitum praesentalis and claimed that Theodosius had appointed him as guardian for both his sons, this tells us more about his cunning and ambition than it does about Theodosius' constitutional arrangements.
Theodosius' importance rests on the fact that he founded a dynasty which continued in power until the death of his grandson Theodosius II in 450. This ensured a continuity of policy which saw the emergence of Nicene Christianity as the orthodox belief of the vast majority of Christians throughout the middle ages. It also ensured the essential destruction of paganism and the emergence of Christianity as the religion of the state, even if the individual steps in this process can be difficult to identify. On the negative side, however, he allowed his dynastic interests and ambitions to lead him into two unnecessary and bloody civil wars which severely weakened the empire's ability to defend itself in the face of continued barbarian pressure upon its frontiers. In this manner, he put the interests of his family before those of the wider Roman population and was responsible, in many ways, for the phenomenon to which we now refer as the fall of the western Roman empire.
Copyright (C) 1998, David Woods.
Published: De Imperatoribus Romanis: An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families http://www.roman-emperors.org/startup.htm. Used by permission.
There is a nice segue here, as we pick-up John Julius Norwich's summation of the reign of Theodosius, "Readers of this brief account of his career may well find themselves wondering, not so much whether he deserved the title of 'the Great' as how he ever came to acquire it in the first place. If so, however, they may also like to ask themselves another question: what would have been the fate of the Empire if, at that critical moment in its history after the battle of Adrianople, young Gratian had not called him from his Spanish estates and put the future of the East into his hands? . . . the probability is that the whole Empire of the East would have been lost, swallowed up in a revived Gothic kingdom, with effects on world history that defy speculation.
In his civil legislation he showed, again and again, a consideration for the humblest of his subjects that was rare indeed among rulers of the fourth century. What other prince would have decreed that any criminal, sentenced to execution, imprisonment or exile, must first be allowed thirty days' grace to put his affairs in order? Or that a specified part of his worldly goods must go to his children, upon whom their father's crimes must on no account be visited? Or that no farmer should be obliged to sell his produce to the State at a price lower than he would receive on the open market?
Had he earned his title? Not, perhaps, in the way that Constantine had done or as Justinian was to do. But, if not ultimately great himself, he had surely come very close to greatness; and had he reigned as long as they did his achievements might well have equalled theirs. He might even have saved the Western Empire. One thing only is certain: it would be nearly a century and a half before the Romans would look upon his like again" (Norwich, John Julius. Byzantium, the Early Centuries. London: Penguin Group, 1990. 116-7;118).
Edited by J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.
Cleisthenes
|
|
|
|
|
