Classical Numismatics Discussion Members' Coin Collection Photo Gallery

Image search results - "debt"

(500a) Roman Republic, 119 BC, M. Furius Philius - Furia 18Roman Republic, 119 BC, M. Furius Philius - Furia 18. Crawford 281/1, Sydenham 529; 19mm, 3.23 grams. aVF, Rome; Obverse: laureate head of Janus, M FORVRI L F around; Reverse: Roma standing left erecting trophy, Galic arms around, PHLI in exergue. Ex Ephesus Numismatics.

Gauis Marius
As a novus homo, or new man, Marius found the rise in the Roman cursus honorum ( "course of honours"-- the sequential order of public offices held by aspiring politicians in the Roman Republic) a daunting challenge. It is certain that he used his old family client contacts and his military relations as a source of support. Among these contacts were the powerful Metelli family, and their early support was to prove to be a disaster for them. Just a few short years after his service as Quaestor, Marius was elected Tribune of the Plebes in 119 BC. In this position so soon after the political turmoil and murder of the Gracchi brothers (Gaius murdered 123 BC), Marius chose to follow the populares path, making a name for himself under similar auspices. As Tribune, he would ensure the animosity of the conservative faction of the Senate, and the Metelli, by passing popular laws forbidding the inspection of ballot boxes. In do doing, he directly opposed the powerful elite, who used ballot inspection as a way to intimidate voters in the citizen assembly elections.

Marius would go on to be elected Consul seven times and figure prominantly in the civil unrest of the early eighties as Lucius Cornelius Sulla's opponent. In 88 BC, Sulla had been elected Consul. There was now a choice before the Senate about which general to send to Asia (a potentially lucrative command): either Marius or Sulla. The Senate chose Sulla, but soon the Assembly appointed Marius. In this unsavory episode of low politics, Marius had been helped by the unscrupulous actions of Publius Sulpicius Rufus, whose debts Marius had promised to erase. Sulla refused to acknowledge the validity of the Assembly's action.

Sulla left Rome and traveled to "his"army waiting in Nola, the army the Senate had asked him to lead to Asia. Sulla urged his legions to defy the Assembly's orders and accept him as their rightful leader. Sulla was successful, and the legions murdered the representatives from the Assembly. Sulla then commanded six legions to march with him opon Rome and institute a civil war.

This was a momentous event, and was unforeseen by Marius, as no Roman army had ever marched upon Rome—it was forbidden by law and ancient tradition.

Sulla was to eventually rule Rome as Dictator. In his book Rubicon, historian Tom Holland argues that Sulla's actions had no lasting negative effect upon the health of the Republic, that Sulla was at heart a Republican. However, once a Roman general has defied Republican tradition, once a Roman general has used his command to combat fellow Romans, once a Roman general has set-up himself as Dictator--it follows that the decision to replicate these decsions (think: Caesar and Rubicon) is that much more easiely taken.

J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.

Cleisthenes

0262 Hadrian Sestertius Roma 119-23 AD Lictor Reference.
RIC II, 590b; Banti 620; Strack 555; C 1210; RIC 262

Bust A4

Obv. IMP CAES TRAIANVS HADRIANVS AVG P M TR P COS III
Laureate heroic bust right, slight drapery

Rev. RELIQVA VETERA HS NOVIES MILL ABOLITA / S - C
Lictor standing left, torching heap of bonds and shouldering fasces

25.59 gr
32 mm
6h

Notes.
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=RELIQVA%20VETERA%20HS%20NOVIES%20MILL%20ABOLITA

From the estate of Thomas Bentley Cederlind. Ex Classical Numismatic Group 47 (16 September 1998), lot 1611.

In July of AD 118 Hadrian made his first appearance in Rome as emperor to celebrate a Parthian triumph in the name of Trajan. He was quickly called away to Moesia to subdue the Sarmatians and Roxolani. While away, four high ranking senators – Lucius Quietus, Cornelius Palma, L. Publius Celsus and C. Avidius – were executed by the senate for an alleged conspiracy against Hadrian, despite a promise by Hadrian not to execute members of the Senate. To calm a suspicious public, Hadrian held a week long gladiatorial show, granted an extra public largesse, and, as this coin advertises, relinquished the public debt to the state equaling 900 million sestertii. This event culminated in an elaborate ceremony held in the Forum of Trajan where all records of these debts were set on fire.4 commentsokidoki

064 Valdemar AtterdagPenny of Valdemar IV "Atterdag", king of Denmark 1340-1375
Mint: Roskilde
MB 680

Valdemar IV, called "Atterdag" or "return of the day", is remembered as a successful ruler, who rebuilt the kingdom of Denmark from ruin, and the disastrous economic policies of his predecessors. Valdemar's father, Christopher II, essentially mortgaged the kingdom to foreigners, and due to restrictions on his power, was helpless as Denmark was sliced up and devoured by its neighbors. Valdemar seems to have been an energetic ruler, who was able to piece back his kingdom by repayment of debt, taxation, confiscation, and conquest. Probably not a fun time to live for the average peasant, but the end result was a stronger and more resilient Denmark.

Ex- Bruun Rasmussen 916 (lot 57), TH 5 1999 (lot 371), KG KaaberSt. George's Collection

118 AD: Hadrian relinquishes public debt worth 900 million sestertii Orichalcum sestertius (24.91g, 34mm, 6h). Rome mint. Struck AD 119-121
IMP CAESAR TRAIANVS HADRIANVS AVG P M TR P COS III laureate bust right, drapery on far shoulder
RELIQVA VETERA IIS NOVIES MILL ABOLITA / S C Lictor standing left, holding fasces, setting fire to heap of bonds on the ground to left with brand
RIC 552 [R]; Cohen 914; Foss (Roman Historic Coins) 112/15
CNG EAuction 202; ex White Mountain Collection; ex Mazzini Collection
While Hadrian was on a mission in AD 118, four high ranking senators were executed by the senate for conspiring against Hadrian, despite a promise by Hadrian not to execute members of the Senate. To calm the public, Hadrian granted an extra public largesse and relinquished the public debt to the state equaling 900 million sestertii. In a ceremony held in the Forum Trajanum, all records of these debts were set on fire1 commentsCharles S

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.

2 commentsCleisthenes

1794 Undated AE Halfpenny Token. Bath, Somerset.Obverse: IOHN HOWARD F•R•S• HALFPENNY•. Bust of John Howard facing left.
Reverse: REMEMBER THE DEBTORS IN GOAL (sic) âœ¤. A female figure, the personification of Benevolence, seated facing left, a variety of vessels at her feet and beside her. She is holding a laurel-branch in her left arm and pointing towards a building with a barred window (Ilchester Prison) directing the small figure of a cherub or a child carrying a key to open the prison doors. "GO FORTH" in small letters emanating amid rays from the sky above the small figure.
Edge: PAYABLE AT LONDON OR DUBLIN • + • + • +.
Diameter 29mm | Die Axis 6
Dalton & Hamer: 36d

Thomas Wyon engraved the dies for this token and it was manufactured by William Lutwyche at his works in Birmingham. Lutwyche, besides being a major supplier of genuine tokens, is also known to have made large amounts of spurious coin.

This token was struck in the name of John Howard, who was an expert in prisons and published the book "The State of the Prisons in England & Wales" in 1777, but he did not issue it. The token was issued by William Gye, born in 1750, who worked in his father’s printing works at 4 Westgate Buildings, Bath, before opening an establishment at 13 Market Place. He was an active and successful printer and bookseller, and sometime publisher of the “Bath Courant”, he was highly respected for his attempts to improve the conditions of the city’s poor. His greatest philanthropic endeavours were connected with the relief of the prisoners in the county gaol at Ilchester, which he visited every week with food, clothing and money. He issued trade tokens, and when they were redeemed in his shop, it was his custom to point out the inscription on them (“Remember the debtors”) in order to elicit donations. He died of an apoplectic fit in 1802, and was remembered for his ‘strict integrity and unblemished reputation’. His wife Mary, whom he had married in 1774, inherited his printing and stationery business. Mary managed the business herself before it was passed on to the couple's third son, Henry.*Alex

1795 AE Halfpenny, Chelsea, Middlesex.Obverse: CHELSEA✶. Sailor with wooden leg standing facing left presenting petition to Britannia facing right, seated on bale and holding spear in her right hand, right arm resting on shield, her left hand extended toward supplicant; in exergue, HALFPENNY.
Reverse: THE SUPPORT OF OUR ENDEAVOUR. Hope facing right, leaning on anchor; in exergue, 1795.
Edge: Engrailed.
Diameter: 28mm
Dalton & Hamer: 277

The engraver and diesinker for this token was F. Arnold, and it was manufactured by William Lutwyche at his works in Birmingham.

Although the authority responsible for the issue of this token is unknown, it is possibly associated with the Chelsea Military Hospital, home of the "Chelsea Pensioners". This token may have been issued as a reminder to the Nation of the debt owed to the army and navy, the obverse has been designed to attract attention to their plight, especially since the defeated troops from the disastrous Flanders Campaign of 1794 would have just returned home. The reverse is a reminder that the navy should not be neglected.*Alex

1813 AE Penny, Stockton-on-Tees, County Durham.Obverse: CHRISTOPHER & JENNETT * STOCKTON *, incuse letters on a raised rim. View of the bridge over the Tees being crossed by several small figures including a rider on horse, rowing boat containing two figures in river below; in field above, TEES; in field below, 1813.
Reverse: BRITANNIA * ONE PENNY TOKEN *, incuse letters on a raised rim. Britannia seated facing left on shield, holding olive branch and trident, small ship in left background at her feet.
Edge: Centre-grained.
Diameter 34mm | Weight 19.7gms
Davis:6 | Withers:1109

The die engraver for this token was Peter Wyon. It was issued by Robert Christopher & Thomas Jennett who were booksellers and printers in Stockton, they were also the Stockton agents for the Sun Fire Office.
Jennett was Christopher's apprentice and on the completion of his indentures, he was taken into partnership. Matching the high standards of his companion, Jennett became well known and much respected, growing to be a man of power and influence. He became a magistrate and was mayor of Stockton three times.

The bridge shown on this token was the first bridge to serve the growing town of Stockton, it was a five arch stone bridge which was completed in 1769. Before the existence of the bridge at this location, the only way of crossing the Tees was by the Bishop’s Ferry. The bridge was subject to rent to the Bishop of Durham and the costs of building it had to be repaid, so a system of tolls was charged. These were supposed to be abolished as soon as the debt was cleared, but they remained in place until, in 1819, the local people took the law into their own hands, throwing two of the bridge gates into the river and burning the third gate in the High Street. Although the bridge was good news for Stockton’s business, it had a devastating impact on Yarm. As ships were growing in size at this time, the building of the bridge prevented many ships reaching Yarm because they were unable to navigate further up the river. This only heightened shipping in Stockton and affirmed its place as the main port on the Tees before the 1800s. The bridge also halted Yarm’s shipbuilding industry and, since Stockton was unaffected, yards sprang up east of the bridge towards the sea. By 1876 the old bridge was inadequate and in 1881 work was begun on a new bridge. This new bridge, named the ‘Victoria Bridge’ in recognition of Queen Victoria, was opened in 1887 and the old stone bridge was demolished.*Alex

1ae Marc Antony and OctavianFormed the Second Triumvirate, 43-33 BC, , along with Marcus Aemilius Lepidus. Antony killed himself in 30 BC.

Denarius
41 BC

Marc Antony portrait, right, M ANT IMP AVG III VIR RPCM BARBAT QP
Octavian portrait, right, CAESAR IMP PONT III VIR RPC

RSC 8

Plutarch described Antony thusly: Antony grew up a very beautiful youth, but by the worst of misfortunes, he fell into the acquaintance and friendship of Curio, a man abandoned to his pleasures, who, to make Antony's dependence upon him a matter of greater necessity, plunged him into a life of drinking and dissipation, and led him through a course of such extravagance that he ran, at that early age, into debt to the amount of two hundred and fifty talents. . . . He took most to what was called the Asiatic taste in speaking, which was then at its height, and was, in many ways, suitable to his ostentatious, vaunting temper, full of empty flourishes and unsteady efforts for glory. . . . He had also a very good and noble appearance; his beard was well grown, his forehead large, and his nose aquiline, giving him altogether a bold, masculine look that reminded people of the faces of Hercules in paintings and sculptures. It was, moreover, an ancient tradition, that the Antonys were descended from Hercules, by a son of his called Anton; and this opinion he thought to give credit to by the similarity of his person just mentioned, and also by the fashion of his dress. For, whenever he had to appear before large numbers, he wore his tunic girt low about the hips, a broadsword on his side, and over all a large coarse mantle. What might seem to some very insupportable, his vaunting, his raillery, his drinking in public, sitting down by the men as they were taking their food, and eating, as he stood, off the common soldiers' tables, made him the delight and pleasure of the army. In love affairs, also, he was very agreeable: he gained many friends by the assistance he gave them in theirs, and took other people's raillery upon his own with good-humour. And his generous ways, his open and lavish hand in gifts and favours to his friends and fellow-soldiers, did a great deal for him in his first advance to power, and after he had become great, long maintained his fortunes, when a thousand follies were hastening their overthrow.1 commentsBlindado

1au Otho69

Denarius
Bewigged head, right, IMP OTHO CAESAR AVG TR P
Securitas stg., SECVRITAS P R

RIC 10

Suetonius wrote: Otho was born on the 28th of April 32 AD, in the consulship of Furius Camillus Arruntius and Domitius Ahenobarbus, Nero’s father. In early youth he was so profligate and insolent that he earned many a beating from his own father. . . . After his father died, he feigned love for an influential freedwoman at Court, though she was old and decrepit, in order to win her favour, and then used her to insinuate himself among the emperor’s friends, easily achieving the role of Nero’s chief favourite, not only because they were of a similar disposition, but also some say because of a sexual relationship. . . .

Otho had hoped to be adopted by Galba as his successor, and anticipated the announcement daily. But Piso was chosen, dashing Otho’s hopes, and causing him to resort to force, prompted not only by feelings of resentment but also by his mounting debts. He declared that frankly he would have to declare himself bankrupt, unless he became emperor. . . . When the moment was finally ripe, . . . his friends hoisted him on their shoulders and acclaimed him Emperor. Everyone they met joined the throng, as readily as if they were sworn accomplices and a part of the conspiracy, and that is how Otho arrived at his headquarters, amidst cheering and the brandishing of swords. He at once sent men to kill Galba and Piso. . . .

Meanwhile the army in Germany had sworn allegiance to Vitellius. When the news reached Otho he persuaded the Senate to send a deputation, advising the soldiers to maintain peace and order, since an emperor had already been chosen. However he also sent envoys with letters and personal messages, offering to share power with Vitellius, and marry his daughter. With civil war clearly inevitable, on the approach of Vitellius’s advance guard, who had marched on Rome led by their generals, . . . Otho began his campaign vigorously, and indeed too hastily. . . .

His army won three engagements, but of a minor nature, firstly in the Alps, then near Placentia, and finally at a place called Castor’s, and were ultimately defeated in a decisive and treacherous encounter at Betriacum (on the 14th April). . . . After this defeat, Otho resolved to commit suicide, more from feelings of shame, which many have thought justified, and a reluctance to continue the struggle with such high cost to life and property, than from any diffidence or fear of failure shown by his soldiers. . . . On waking at dawn (on the 16th of April, AD69), he promptly dealt himself a single knife-blow in the left side of his chest, and first concealing and then showing the wound to those who rushed in at the sound of his groaning, he breathed his last. . . . Otho was thirty-six years old when he died, on the ninety-second day of his reign. . . .

Neither his bodily form nor appearance suggested great courage. He is said to have been of medium height, bandy-legged and splay-footed, though as fastidious as a woman in personal matters. He had his body-hair plucked, and wore a toupee to cover his scanty locks, so well-made and so close-fitting that its presence was not apparent. Blindado

1cf OrbianaDenarius

Draped bust, right, SALL BARBIA ORBIANA AVG
Concord std, CONCORDIA AVGG

RIC 319

Orbiana married Severus Alexander about 235, but her mother-in-law convinced him to banish her to Africa. Herodian recorded: Mamaea secured for Alexander a wife from the aristocracy. Although he loved the girl and lived with her, she was afterward banished from the palace by his mother, who, in her egotistic desire to be sole empress, envied the girl her title. So excessively arrogant did Mamaea become that the girl's father, though Alexander esteemed him highly, could no longer endure the woman's insolence toward him and his daughter; consequently, he took refuge in the praetorian camp, fully aware of the debt of gratitude he owed Alexander for the honors he had received from him, but complaining bitterly about Mamaea's insults. Enraged, Mamaea ordered him to be killed and at the same time drove the girl from the palace to exile in Libya. She did this against Alexander's wishes and in spite of his displeasure, but the emperor was dominated by his mother and obeyed her every command. Blindado

68-69 AD - GALBA AR denarius - struck July 68- Jan. 69 ADobv: IMP SER GALBA CAESAR AVG (laureate head right)
rev: DIVA AVGVSTA (A woman dressed in the stola and long robe, holding a patera and hasta)
ref: RIC I 186, C.8 (10frcs)
3.20gms, 17,5mm
Rare

Galba, who was grently indebted to Livia (wife of Augustus), on which account he held her memory in gratitude, and caused her image to be struck on his coins.1 commentsberserker

706a, Nero, 13 October 54 - 9 June 68 A.D.6, Nero, 13 October 54 - 9 June 68 A.D. AE setertius, Date: 66 AD; RIC I 516, 36.71 mm; 25.5 grams; aVF. Obverse: IMP NERO CAESAR AVG PONT MAX TR POT PP, Laureate bust right; Reverse: S C, ROMA, Roma seated left, exceptional portrait and full obverse legends. Ex Ancient Imports.

NERO (54-68 A.D.)

It is difficult for the modern student of history to realize just how popular Nero actually was, at least at the beginning of his reign. Rome looked upon her new Emperor with hope. He was the student of Seneca, and he had a sensitive nature. He loved art, music, literature, and theatre. He was also devoted to horses and horse racing—a devotion shared by many of his subjects. The plebs loved their new Emperor. As Professor of Classics Judith P. Hallett (University of Maryland, College Park) says, “It is not clear to me that Nero ever changed or that Nero ever grew-up, and that was both his strength and his weakness. Nero was an extraordinarily popular Emperor: he was like Elvis” (The Roman Empire in the First Century, III. Dir. Margaret Koval and Lyn Goldfarb. 2001. DVD. PBS/Warner Bros. 2003).

De Imperatoribus Romanis: An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families

Herbert W. Benario
Emory University

Introduction and Sources
The five Julio-Claudian emperors are very different one from the other. Augustus dominates in prestige and achievement from the enormous impact he had upon the Roman state and his long service to Rome, during which he attained unrivaled auctoritas. Tiberius was clearly the only possible successor when Augustus died in AD 14, but, upon his death twenty-three years later, the next three were a peculiar mix of viciousness, arrogance, and inexperience. Gaius, better known as Caligula, is generally styled a monster, whose brief tenure did Rome no service. His successor Claudius, his uncle, was a capable man who served Rome well, but was condemned for being subject to his wives and freedmen. The last of the dynasty, Nero, reigned more than three times as long as Gaius, and the damage for which he was responsible to the state was correspondingly greater. An emperor who is well described by statements such as these, "But above all he was carried away by a craze for popularity and he was jealous of all who in any way stirred the feeling of the mob." and "What an artist the world is losing!" and who is above all remembered for crimes against his mother and the Christians was indeed a sad falling-off from the levels of Augustus and Tiberius. Few will argue that Nero does not rank as one of the worst emperors of all.

The prime sources for Nero's life and reign are Tacitus' Annales 12-16, Suetonius' Life of Nero, and Dio Cassius' Roman History 61-63, written in the early third century. Additional valuable material comes from inscriptions, coinage, papyri, and archaeology.

Early Life
He was born on December 15, 37, at Antium, the son of Cnaeus Domitius Ahenobarbusand Agrippina. Domitius was a member of an ancient noble family, consul in 32; Agrippina was the daughter of the popular Germanicus, who had died in 19, and Agrippina, daughter of Agrippa, Augustus' closest associate, and Julia, the emperor's daughter, and thus in direct descent from the first princeps. When the child was born, his uncle Gaius had only recently become emperor. The relationship between mother and uncle was difficult, and Agrippina suffered occasional humiliation. But the family survived the short reign of the "crazy" emperor, and when he was assassinated, it chanced that Agrippina's uncle, Claudius, was the chosen of the praetorian guard, although there may have been a conspiracy to accomplish this.

Ahenobarbus had died in 40, so the son was now the responsibility of Agrippina alone. She lived as a private citizen for much of the decade, until the death of Messalina, the emperor's wife, in 48 made competition among several likely candidates to become the new empress inevitable. Although Roman law forbade marriage between uncle and niece, an eloquent speech in the senate by Lucius Vitellius, Claudius' closest advisor in the senatorial order, persuaded his audience that the public good required their union. The marriage took place in 49, and soon thereafter the philosopher Seneca [[PIR2 A617]] was recalled from exile to become the young Domitius' tutor, a relationship which endured for some dozen years.

His advance was thereafter rapid. He was adopted by Claudius the following year and took the name Tiberius Claudius Nero Caesar or Nero Claudius Caesar Drusus Germanicus, was preferred to Claudius' natural son, Britannicus, who was about three years younger, was betrothed to the emperor's daughter Octavia, and was, in the eyes of the people, the clear successor to the emperor. In 54, Claudius died, having eaten some poisoned mushrooms, responsibility for which was believed to be Agrippina's, and the young Nero, not yet seventeen years old, was hailed on October 13 as emperor by the praetorian guard.

The First Years of Rule
The first five years of Nero's rule are customarily called the quinquennium, a period of good government under the influence, not always coinciding, of three people, his mother, Seneca, and Sextus Afranius Burrus, the praetorian prefect. The latter two were allies in their "education" of the emperor. Seneca continued his philosophical and rhetorical training, Burrus was more involved in advising on the actualities of government. They often combined their influence against Agrippina, who, having made her son emperor, never let him forget the debt he owed his mother, until finally, and fatally, he moved against her.

Nero's betrothal to Octavia was a significant step in his ultimate accession to the throne, as it were, but she was too quiet, too shy, too modest for his taste. He was early attracted to Poppaea Sabina, the wife of Otho, and she continually goaded him to break from Octavia and to show himself an adult by opposing his mother. In his private life, Nero honed the musical and artistic tastes which were his chief interest, but, at this stage, they were kept private, at the instigation of Seneca and Burrus.

As the year 59 began, Nero had just celebrated his twenty-first birthday and now felt the need to employ the powers which he possessed as emperor as he wished, without the limits imposed by others. Poppaea's urgings had their effect, first of all, at the very onset of the year, with Nero's murder of his mother in the Bay of Naples.

Agrippina had tried desperately to retain her influence with her son, going so far as to have intercourse with him. But the break between them proved irrevocable, and Nero undertook various devices to eliminate his mother without the appearance of guilt on his part. The choice was a splendid vessel which would collapse while she was on board. As this happened, she swam ashore and, when her attendant, having cried out that she was Agrippina, was clubbed to death, Agrippina knew what was going on. She sent Nero a message that she was well; his response was to send a detachment of sailors to finish the job. When she was struck across the head, she bared her womb and said, "Strike here, Anicetus, strike here, for this bore Nero," and she was brutally murdered.

Nero was petrified with fear when he learned that the deed had been done, yet his popularity with the plebs of Rome was not impaired. This matricide, however, proved a turning point in his life and principate. It appeared that all shackles were now removed. The influence of Seneca and Burrus began to wane, and when Burrus died in 62, Seneca realized that his powers of persuasion were at an end and soon went into retirement. Britannicus had died as early as 55; now Octavia was to follow, and Nero became free to marry Poppaea. It may be that it had been Burrus rather than Agrippina who had continually urged that Nero's position depended in large part upon his marriage to Octavia. Burrus' successor as commander of the praetorian guard, although now with a colleague, was Ofonius Tigellinus, quite the opposite of Burrus in character and outlook. Tigellinus became Nero's "evil twin," urging and assisting in the performance of crimes and the satisfaction of lusts.

Administrative and Foreign Policy
With Seneca and Burrus in charge of administration at home, the first half-dozen years of Nero's principate ran smoothly. He himself devoted his attention to his artistic, literary, and physical bents, with music, poetry, and chariot racing to the fore. But his advisors were able to keep these performances and displays private, with small, select audiences on hand. Yet there was a gradual trend toward public performance, with the establishment of games. Further, he spent many nights roaming the city in disguise, with numerous companions, who terrorized the streets and attacked individuals. Those who dared to defend themselves often faced death afterward, because they had shown disrespect for the emperor. The die was being cast for the last phases of Nero's reign.

The Great Fire at Rome and The Punishment
of the Christians
The year 64 was the most significant of Nero's principate up to this point. His mother and wife were dead, as was Burrus, and Seneca, unable to maintain his influence over Nero without his colleague's support, had withdrawn into private life. The abysmal Tigellinus was now the foremost advisor of the still young emperor, a man whose origin was from the lowest levels of society and who can accurately be described as criminal in outlook and action. Yet Nero must have considered that he was happier than he had ever been in his life. Those who had constrained his enjoyment of his (seemingly) limitless power were gone, he was married to Poppaea, a woman with all advantages save for a bad character the empire was essentially at peace, and the people of Rome enjoyed a full measure of panem et circenses. But then occurred one of the greatest disasters that the city of Rome, in its long history, had ever endured.

The fire began in the southeastern angle of the Circus Maximus, spreading through the shops which clustered there, and raged for the better part of a week. There was brief success in controlling the blaze, but then it burst forth once more, so that many people claimed that the fires were deliberately set. After about a fortnight, the fire burned itself out, having consumed ten of the fourteen Augustan regions into which the city had been divided.

Nero was in Antium through much of the disaster, but his efforts at relief were substantial. Yet many believed that he had been responsible, so that he could perform his own work comparing the current fate of Rome to the downfall of Troy. All his efforts to assist the stricken city could not remove the suspicion that "the emperor had fiddled while Rome burned." He lost favor even among the plebs who had been enthusiastic supporters, particularly when his plans for the rebuilding of the city revealed that a very large part of the center was to become his new home.

As his popularity waned, Nero and Tigellinus realized that individuals were needed who could be charged with the disaster. It so happened that there was such a group ready at hand, Christians, who had made themselves unpopular because of their refusal to worship the emperor, their way of life, and their secret meetings. Further, at this time two of their most significant "teachers" were in Rome, Peter and Paul. They were ideal scapegoats, individuals whom most Romans loathed, and who had continually sung of the forthcoming end of the world.

Their destruction was planned with the utmost precision and cruelty, for the entertainment of the populace. The venue was Nero's circus near the Mons Vaticanus. Christians were exposed to wild animals and were set ablaze, smeared with pitch, to illuminate the night. The executions were so grisly that even the populace displayed sympathy for the victims. Separately, Peter was crucified upside down on the Vatican hill and Paul was beheaded along the Via Ostiensis. But Nero's attempt, and hope, to shift all suspicion of arson to others failed. His popularity even among the lower classes was irrevocably impaired.

[For a detailed and interesting discussion of Nero’s reign please see http://www.roman-emperors.org/nero.htm]

The End - Nero's Death and its Aftermath
Nero's and Tigellinus' response to the conspiracy was immediate and long-lasting. The senatorial order was decimated, as one leading member after another was put to death or compelled to commit suicide. The year 66 saw the suicides of perhaps the most distinguished victims of the "reign of terror," Caius Petronius and Thrasea Paetus. Petronius, long a favorite of Nero because of his aesthetic taste, had been an able public servant before he turned to a life of ease and indolence. He was recognized as the arbiter elegantiae of Nero's circle, and may be the author of the Satyricon. At his death, he left for Nero a document which itemized many of the latter's crimes. Thrasea, a staunch Stoic who had been for some years an outspoken opponent of Nero's policies, committed suicide in the Socratic manner. This scene is the last episode in the surviving books of Tacitus' Annals.

In the year 68, revolt began in the provinces. . . the end of Nero's reign became inevitable. Galba claimed the throne and began his march from Spain. Nero panicked and was rapidly abandoned by his supporters. He finally committed suicide with assistance, on June 9, 68, and his body was tended and buried by three women who had been close to him in his younger days, chief of whom was Acte. His death scene is marked above all by the statement, "Qualis artifex pereo," (What an artist dies in me.) Even at the end he was more concerned with his private life than with the affairs of state.

The aftermath of Nero's death was cataclysmic. Galba was the first of four emperors who revealed the new secret of empire, that an emperor could be made elsewhere than in Rome. Civil war ensued, which was only ended by the victory of the fourth claimant, Vespasian, who established the brief dynasty of the Flavians. The dynasty of the Julio-Claudians was at an end.

Nero's popularity among the lower classes remained even after his death.

. . . .

It is not excessive to say that he was one of the worst of Rome's emperors in the first two centuries and more of the empire. Whatever talents he had, whatever good he may have done, all is overwhelmed by three events, the murder of his mother, the fire at Rome, and his savage treatment of the Christians.

Precisely these qualities are the reasons that he has remained so well known and has been the subject of many writers and opera composers in modern times. These works of fiction particularly merit mention: Henryk Sienkiewicz's Quo Vadis, one of the finest works of the 1907 Nobel Laureate in Literature, and John Hersey's The Conspiracy. Nero unquestionably will always be with us.

Copyright (C) 2006, Herbert W. Benario.
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.

1 commentsCleisthenes

BithyniaAs a Roman province, the boundaries of Bithynia frequently varied, and it was commonly united for administrative purposes with the province of Pontus. This was the state of things in the time of Trajan, when Pliny the Younger was appointed governor of the combined provinces, a circumstance to which we are indebted for valuable information concerning the Roman provincial administration. Under the Byzantine Empire Bithynia was again divided into two provinces, separated by the Sangarius, to the west of which the name of Bithynia was restricted.

The most important cities were Nicomedia and Nicaea. The two had a long rivalry with one another over which city held the rank of capital. Both of these were founded after Alexander the Great; but at a much earlier period the Greeks had established on the coast the colonies of Cius (modern Gemlik); Chalcedon (modern KadÄ±köy), at the entrance of the Bosporus, nearly opposite Byzantium (modern Istanbul; and Heraclea Pontica (modern Karadeniz EreÄŸli), on the Euxine, about 120 miles (190 km) east of the Bosporus.ancientone

Conder Token: Kent 13Obv: KENTISH LIBERTY PRESERVED BY VIRTUE & COURAGE, Kentish men meeting William the Conqueror, who is on horseback, 1067 below.

Rev: PROSPERITY TO THE WOODEN WALLS OF OLD ENGLAND, the stern of the ROYAL GEORGE, KENT HALFPENNY / 1795 / TDH.

Edge: PAYABLE AT THO’S HAYCRAFTS DEBTFORD

Half Penny Conder Token

Dalton & Hamer: Kent 13Matt Inglima

France (Feudal): Duchy of Brittany. John I, “the Red” (1237-1286)Roberts 4611 var., Poey d'Avant 356 var. (plate 11, no. 14), Boudeau 36-37 var. , Duplessy 73 var. (apparently no pellet on obverse after the X in the sources)

AR denier, Vannes mint [?], ca. 1250 [?], 19 mm.

Obv: + IOhANNES•DVX•, central cross.

Rev: + B-RIT-ANI-E, triangular shield of the house of Dreux in Brittany consisting of three spots and field of ermine.

John I (c. 1217/18–1286), known as John the Red due to the color of his beard, was the son of Duke Peter I, Duke of Brittany jure uxoris and Alix of Thouars, hereditary Duchess of Brittany. He was hereditary duke from 1221, upon his mother’s death, but his father ruled as regent until he reached adulthood. He experienced a number of conflicts with the Bishop of Nantes and the Breton clergy. In 1240, he issued an edict expelling Jews from the duchy and cancelling all debts to them. He joined Louis IX of France in the Eighth Crusade (1270), and survived the plague that killed the king. The duchy of Brittany experienced a century of peace, beginning with John I and ending with Duke John III's reign in 1341.1 commentsStkp

HadrianRoman Empire
Hadrian
(Reign as 14th Emperor of the Roman Empire 117-138AD)
(b. 76, d. 138AD)

Obverse: IMP CAESAR TRAIANVS HADRIANVS AVG P M TR P COS III, Laureate bust of Hadrian facing right

Reverse: RELIQVA VETERA HS. NOVIES MILL. ABOLITA, Lictor standing facing left, fasces in left hand, lighting a heap of bonds with a torch in his right, three citizens facing him

Orichalcum Sestertius

Minted in Rome 119-121 AD

This design commemorated Hadrian's forgiveness of debts early in his reign. He canceled the arrears of taxes due by individuals from Rome, Italy, and the provinces, for a total of 900 million sestertii and over a period of 16 years. The ceremony took place on the forum where a monument was erected to commemorate the event.

Translations:

IMP CAESAR TRAIANVS HADRIANVS AVG P M TR P COS III=Imperator(Commander-in-Chief) Caesar Trajan Hadrian Augustus, Pontifex Maximus(Greatest Priest,) Tribune of the Plebs, Consul for the 3rd time
RELIQVA VETERA HS. NOVIES MILL. ABOLITA=nine times a hundred thousand sestertii of outstanding debts cancelled

The legend RELIQVA VETERA HS NOVIES MILL ABOLITA literally translates to “old receipts in the amount of nine times a hundred thousand sestertii cancelled." The HS is a standard abbreviation for sestertii and, depending upon its context, it can mean a single sestertius, a unit of one thousand sestertii, or a unit of one hundred thousand sestertii. Novies means "nine times" and applies to the sestertius as a unit of one thousand sestertii. Considering the monumental inscription, the HS in the legend of this sestertius should be interpreted with the thousand, or mille, understood. Thus, the figure should be increased to 900 million sestertii, equaling the sum named on Hadrian’s monumental inscription.

Orichalcum=Brass

Reference: RIC 592a1 commentsSphinx357

Hadrian RIC-0276 Dupondius SalusRome mint, AD 119 - mid-120, Group 1b(b).

IMP CAESAR TRAIANVS HADRIANVS AVG PM TR P COSIII, Radiate nude bust right, with trace of drapery on far (left) shoulder.

SALVS PV-BLICA, S-C, Salus standing left, right foot on globe, holding out patera and holding rudder.

9.0 g; 25x26 mm; 6h.

This type refers to the healthy state of the Empire brought about by Hadrian's wise rule. It was, in effect, propaganda. It was issued around the time of Hadrian's famous remission of 900 million sestercii in tax arrears in advance of his third consulship. This remission was likely not as impressive as it sounded. First, according to Richard Abdy in RICC II/3 much of was was being waived was probably in the category of bad (therefore unrecoverable) debt. Second, Hadrian likely choose the tax remission route as the treasury was still relatively depleted after Hadrian's huge accession double Liberalitas. Therefore the fiscal health of the Empire was somewhat suspect.

RIC II/3 276; Str. 561; BMC 1237.

From "junk bin" of a Beruit-based dealer, purchased at Numismatic Wien show.SC

Hadrian, RIC 568, Sestertius of AD 119 (Libertas restituta)Æ Sestertius (26.40g, Ø34.5mm, 6h). Rome mint. Struck AD 119.
Obv.: IMP CAESAR TRAIANVS HADRIANVS AVG, laureate bust of Hadrian facing right.
Rev.: PONT MAX TR POT COS III (around) LIBERTAS RESTI-TVTA (in ex.) S C (in field), Hadrian seated on Sella Curulis on a platform, extending his hand to a child held by a woman standing before him who places her hand on the head of a second child standing beside her.
RIC 568; BMCRE 1160; Cohen 949 (different description of women having one foot on a pedestal); Strack 526; Banti (I Grandi Bronzi Imperiali II-2) 517 (33 spec.).

ex H.D. Rauch (Wien), 83rd Coin-Auction (2008); ex. Hess-Divo AG auction 308 (2007)

The reverse legend 'LIBERTAS RESTITVTA' means 'Liberty restored'. The interpretation of this type varies. According to Clive Foss (Roman Historical Coins, 1990, Seaby, London) Hadrian faced considerable unpopularity at the beginning of his reign especially after the Senate, during his absence, had four high-ranking senators executed who were accused of conspiracy (even though he had promised never to execute a senator). He went to great lengths trying to gain the favour of the people. This included the cancellation of public debts and the expansion of Trajan's charity program to the poor children of Italy in AD 118, an act celebrated as the restoration of liberty.1 commentsCharles S

Hadrian, RIC 590b, Sestertius of AD 119-121Orichalcum sestertius (24.91g, 34mm, 6h). Rome mint. Struck AD 119-121
Obv.: IMP CAESAR TRAIANVS HADRIANVS AVG P M TR P COS III laureate bust right, drapery on far shoulder.
Rev.: RELIQVA VETERA IIS NOVIES MILL ABOLITA (around) S C (field) Lictor standing left, holding fasces, setting fire to heap of bonds on the ground to left with brand
RIC 590b [R2]; BMCRE 1206; Coh. 1210; Strack 555; Banti (I Grandi Bronzi Imperiali II-2) 620 (18 spec.); G. Mazzini (Monete Imperiali Romane, Milano 1957, 5 voll.) 1210 (this coin)

ex CNG EAuction 202; ex White Mountain Collection; ex Mazzini Collection

In July of 118 AD, Hadrian made his first appearance in Rome as emperor to celebrate a Parthian triumph in the name of Trajan. He was quickly called away to Moesia to subdue the Sarmatians and Roxolani. While away, four high ranking senators, Lucius Quietus, Cornelius Palma, L. Publius Celsus and C. Avidius were executed by the senate for an alleged conspiracy against Hadrian, despite a promise by Hadrian not to execute members of the Senate. To calm a suspicious public, Hadrian held a week long gladiatorial show, granted an extra public largesse and, as this coin advertises, relinquished the public debt to the state equaling 900 million sestertii. This event culminated in an elaborate ceremony held in the Forum Trajanum where all records of these debts were set on fire

In the reverse legend, IIS stands for two semis (=sestertius); with a horizontal bar (IIS) it stands for "Sestertium" which is 100,000 sestertii. Thus IIS NOVIES MILL(IES) stands for 100,000 x 9000 sestertii.

(photo by CNG)
2 commentsCharles S

Hungary. Béla IV (1235-1270). Huszár 306; Toth-Kiss 22.18.1.1 sigla 0.1/1; Unger 228 var.; Réthy I 241 var.; Frynas 18/16; Lengyel 18/37; Adamovszky 369; Rengjeo 42 var.; Mimica 42 var.; Dimnick-Dobrinić 5.1.3 var.Hungary. Béla IV (1235-1270)

AR denár (average .48 g., 12.4 mm.); .51 g., 12.0 mm. max., 0°

Obv: Castle bastion above crescent, lilies to left and right.

Rev: Hebrew letter ×—/het in a floral wreath.

The Hebrew letter ×—/het is probably the mark of Henok, per Rádóczy and Nagy. Henok was enobled as a kammergraf by Béla IV in 1250. The source document refers to “Henel Judeus comes camerae regiae” (= “The Jewish Henel count of the royal chambers [treasury]”). He died indebted to the crown in 1265.

According to Gyöngyössy the type was issued after the Mongol invasion of 1241/1242.

The coins of Béla IV were issued with an average fineness of .800 and “later” .900, per Huszár at 11.

Rengjeo, Mimica and Dimnick-DobriniÄ‡ refer to this emission as a Croatian Freisacher issued in Slavonia under András II (1205-1235) and Dukes Béla (1220-1226; governor of Dalmatia and Croatia) and Kálmán/Coloman (1226-1235; duke of Dalmatia and Croatia) (Group V). This attribution was initially made by Hóman in 1920, who tentatively assigned this emission to a Zagreb mint. However, the basis of this attribution has been proven to be erroneous, and the consensus among Hungarian numismatists is that the emission is Hungarian (per Metcalf [1979] at 156).

Huszár rarity 6, Toth-Kiss rarity 30, Unger value 20 DM, Frynas value NStkp

Hungary. Béla IV (1235-1270). Huszár 307; Toth-Kiss 22.22.1.1 sigla 0.1/1; Unger 229; Réthy I 242; Frynas 18/17; Lengyel 18/41; Adamovszky 368; Rengjeo 43; Mimica 43; Dimnick-Dobrinić 5.2.1Hungary. Béla IV (1235-1270)

AR obulus (average .25 g., 10.0-10.5 mm.); .14 g., 9.22 mm. max., 0°

Obv: Castle bastion above crescent, lilies to left and right.

Rev: Hebrew letter ×—/het in a floral wreath.

The Hebrew letter ×—/Het is probably the mark of Henok, per Rádóczy and Nagy. Henok was enobled as a kammergraf by Béla IV in 1250. The source document refers to “Henel Judeus comes camerae regiae” (= “The Jewish Henel count of the royal chambers [treasury]”). He died indebted to the crown in 1265.

According to Gyöngyössy the type was issued after the Mongol invasion of 1241/1242.

The coins of Béla IV were issued with an average fineness of .800 and “later” .900, per Huszár at 11.

Rengjeo, Mimica and Dimnick-DobriniÄ‡ refer to this emission as a Croatian Freisacher issued in Slavonia under András II (1205-1235) and Dukes Béla (1220-1226; governor of Dalmatia and Croatia) and Kálmán/Coloman (1226-1235; duke of Dalmatia and Croatia) (Group V). This attribution was initially made by Hóman in 1920, who tentatively assigned this emission to a Zagreb mint. However, the basis of this attribution has been proven to be erroneous, and the consensus among Hungarian numismatists is that the emission is Hungarian (per Metcalf [1979] at 156).

Huszár rarity 8, Toth-Kiss rarity 25, Unger value 30 DM, Frynas value NStkp

Hungary. Béla IV (1235-1270). Huszár 313, Toth-Kiss 22.39.1.1, Unger 235, Réthy I 246, Frynas H.18.23, Lengyel 18/48, Adamovszky A377Hungary. Béla IV (1235-1270)

AR denár (average .50 g., 12.1 mm.); .49 g. 12.04 mm. max., 270°

Obv: + REX • BELA • ×—/het •, Crowned bust facing front.

Rev: Eagle with spread wings.

The presence of the symbol on the obverse is not noted in Réthy and Frynas, and is described as a retrograde letter K in Huszár, Adamovszky and Gyöngyössy. It was identified as the Hebrew letter ×—/het by Rádóczy and Nagy, and is probably the mark of Henok. Henok was enobled as a kammergraf by Béla IV in 1250. The source document refers to “Henel Judeus comes camerae regiae” (= “The Jewish Henel count of the royal chambers [treasury]”). He died indebted to the crown in 1265. The symbol is identified as the Hebrew letter ×¦/tsadi by Toth-Kiss and as the letter ×ž/mem by Lengyel. However, neither of those letters can be associated with a known moneyer or mint, and the identification of the letter as a ×—/het is most likely.

According to Gyöngyössy the type was issued after the Mongol invasion of 1241/1242.

The coins of Béla IV were issued with an average fineness of .800 and “later” .900, per Huszár at 11.

Huszár rarity 5, Toth-Kiss rarity 25, Unger value 16 DM, Frynas rarity NStkp

Italy- Forum Romanum- The Forum of TrajanThe Forum of Trajan has a more complicated foundation than the other Imperial Forums. The piazza is closed, with the Basilica Ulpia. At the back of this the Trajan column was elevated between the two Libraries, and it was believed that the complex concluded with the Temple dedicated to Divo Trajan. One entered the piazza through a curved arch passageway, a type of arch of triumph, in the center of a convex wall decorated with jutting columns.
An equestrian statue of Trajan occupied the center of the piazza, which was bordered by porticos with decorated attics-similar to the Forum of Augustus but with Caryatids instead of Daci. Spacious covered exedras opened up behind the porticos. The facade of the basilica, that closed the piazza, also had an attic decorated with Daci statues. The inside of the Basilica had 5 naves with columns along the short sides and apses at both ends; the very spacious central nave had two floors.
The Trajan Column was closed in a small courtyard, bordered by porticos opposite of the Library's facade. These were constituted of large rooms with niches in the walls and decorated with two types of columns.
The temple was probably of an enormous dimension and probably closed by a fenced portico. Today's archeological excavations in the Forum of Trajan have demonstrated that the Temple of Trajan's position is not what it was hypothesized to be in the past. Archeological evidence has clarified the findings in the area to be Insulae- remains of houses rather than those from a temple structure. These findings lie underneath what is today the Province headquarters- the palazzo of Valentini, next to the Column's location.
Rather, the temple was probably situated exactly in the middle of the forum area, where excavation is now taking place.

The Forum of Trajan was utilized as a splendid area of representation for public ceremonies. We know, for example, that in 118 A.D. Adriano publicly burned tables with citizen's debts in the piazza, as a statement to the treasury.
Also, in the late epoch, exedras behind the lateral porticos were used to host poetry readings and conferences.
Court hearings and ceremonies for the freedom of slaves were probably held in the apses of the Basilica.
The Library was probably used as a sort of historical archive of the Roman state and also conserved republican annals.
The sculptural decorations in the various Forum spaces transmitted messages of imperial propaganda of Trajan.
Above all was the celebration of the Daci conquest and the victorious army with focus on the achievement of peace. The representation was sculpted into the walls with images of the conquests.
Images of cupids watering griffins on the entrance wall allude again to the peacefulness of the Empire's power.
The expansion and growth of the Empire, completed with the campaign towards the Orient and interrupted by the death of the Emperor, would have allowed Trajan to consider himself the new founder of Rome.
His representation as a hero is justified in his sepulcher in the base of the Column, in the heart of the city.

Forum of Trajan
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

107 A.D. - Dacia (Romania) conquered and work begins;
January 15th 112 A.D. – Inauguration of the Forum and the Basilica Ulpia;
May 18th 113 A.D. – Inauguration of the Trajan Column;
117 A.D. – Trajan dies and the arch of triumph is ordered by the Senate;
125-138 A.D. – Probable dedication to the temple on behalf of Adrian.

Complex Area: 300x180 meters
uncovered piazza area: 120x90 meters

Area of the Basilica Ulpia: 180x60 meters
Height of Trajan's Column: 39.81 meters
Peter Wissing

Very rare! Late silver obol, trident type with "Sri YaShaaDiTya", Hephthalites, 6th-7th century ADCrowned bust right, no inscriptions / Trident with curved prongs, five Brahmi characters "Sri YaShaaDiTya" around, beginning at 12 o'clock. 12mm, 0.7 grams. Unpublished.

In 2003 or 2004 a small hoard of small silver coins was unearthed in (reportedly) Northern Pakistan. The hoard was dispersed between a number of dealers, and I was lucky enough to get the bulk (reportedly) of the hoard. These fascinating little silver coins were originally sold as "Hephthalite" coins, as per attribution of the Pakistani dealers, but they are completely unpublished in any catalogue and were completely unknown until this find.

Mr.Wilfried Pieper, to whom I am indebted for bringing these coins to my attention, examined a group of 42 pieces and published 15 distinguishable types in a wonderful article in the Journal of the Oriental Numismatic Society - 'New types of early medieval silver portrait coins from northern Pakistan' in ONS-NL 181 (2004). Mark Fishman

Antonivs Protti

Washington and Lafayette Paris Day 1917 MedalObv: Conjoined bust of George Washington and the Marquis de Lafayette facing left, inscription: WASHINGTON - LAFAYETTE. Below the truncation of Lafayette's bust is the artist's name: GASTON LAVRILLIER and maker's mark: PARIS ART.

Rev: 4 JUILLET 1776 / 14 JUILLET 1789 / JOURNEE DE PARIS 1917

Note: Medal was produced as a souvenir for the July 4, 1917 celebration of the United States' entry into World War I. It also symbolizes the debt repaid for France's aide in America's War of Independence from Great Britain.

Medal is made of silver plated bronze.Matt Inglima

[1611a] Justinian I, 4 April 527 - 14 November 565 A.D.Bronze follis, S 201, choice VF, 22.147g, 43.8mm, 180o, 2nd officina, Nikomedia mint, 541 - 542 A.D.; Obverse: D N IVSTINIANVS PP AVG, helmeted and cuirassed bust facing, globus cruciger in right, shield decorated with a horseman brandishing a spear, cross right; Reverse: large M, cross above, ANNO left, Xu (= year 15) right, B below, NIKO in ex; full circle strike on a huge flan. Ex FORVM.

De Imperatoribus Romanis
An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Emperors

Justinian (527-565 A.D.).

James Allan Evans
University of British Columbia

Introduction
The reign of Justinian was a turning-point in Late Antiquity. It is the period when paganism finally lost its long struggle to survive, and when the schism in Christianity between the Monophysite east and the Chalcedonian west became insurmountable. From a military viewpoint, it marked the last time that the Roman Empire could go on the offensive with hope of success. Africa and Italy were recovered, and a foothold was established in Spain. When Justinian died, the frontiers were still intact although the Balkans had been devastated by a series of raids and the Italian economy was in ruins. His extensive building program has left us the most celebrated example of Byzantine ecclesiastical architecture that still survives: Hagia Sophia in modern Istanbul. His reign was a period when classical culture was in sharp decline and yet it had a last flowering, with historians such as Procopius and Agathias working within the tradition inherited from Herodotus and Thucydides, and poets such as Paul the Silentiary who wrote some of the most sensuous poems that the classical tradition has ever produced. The Codex Justinianus, the Institutes and the Digest of Roman jurisprudence, all commissioned by Justinian, are monuments to the past achievements of Roman legal heritage. Justinian's reign sums up the past. It also provides a matrix for the future. In particular, there was the bubonic plague, which appeared in Constantinople in 542, for the first time in Europe, and then travelled round the empire in search of victims, returning to the capital for a new crop in 558. The plague ended a period of economic growth and initiated one of overstrained resources.

The 'Nika' Revolt
The 'Nika' Revolt which broke out in January, 532, in Constantinople, was an outburst of street violence which went far beyond the norms even in a society where a great deal of street violence was accepted. Every city worth notice had its chariot-racing factions which took their names from their racing colors: Reds, Whites, Blues and Greens. These were professional organizations initially responsible for fielding chariot-racing teams in the hippodromes, though by Justinian's time they were in charge of other shows as well. The Blues and the Greens were dominant, but the Reds and Whites attracted some supporters: the emperor Anastasius was a fan of the Reds. The aficionados of the factions were assigned their own blocs of seats in the Hippodrome in Constantinople, opposite the imperial loge, and the Blue and Green "demes" provided an outlet for the energies of the city's young males. G. M. Manojlovic in an influential article originally published in Serbo-Croat in 1904, argued that the "demes" were organized divisions of a city militia, and thus played an important role in the imperial defense structure. His thesis is now generally disregarded and the dominant view is that of Alan Cameron, that demos, whether used in the singular or plural, means simply "people" and the rioting of the "demes", the "fury of the Hippodrome", as Edward Gibbon called it, was hooliganism, which was also Gibbon's view. Efforts to make the Greens into supporters of Monophysitism and the Blues of Orthodoxy founder on lack of evidence. However, in support of Manojlovic's thesis, it must be said that, although we cannot show that the Blue and Green "demes" were an organized city militia, we hear of "Young Greens" both in Constantinople and Alexandria who bore arms, and in 540, when Antioch fell to the Persians, Blue and Green street-fighters continued to defend the city after the regular troops had fled.

Justinian and Theodora were known Blue supporters, and when street violence escalated under Justin I, Procopius claims that they encouraged it. But since Justinian became emperor he had taken a firmer, more even-handed stand. On Saturday, January 10, 532, the city prefect Eudaemon who had arrested some hooligans and found seven guilty of murder, had them hanged outside the city at Sycae, across the Golden Horn, but the scaffold broke and saved two of them from death, a Blue and a Green. Some monks from St. Conon's monastery nearby took the two men to sanctuary at the church of St Lawrence where the prefect set troops to watch. The following Tuesday while the two malefactors were still trapped in the church, the Blues and Greens begged Justinian to show mercy. He ignored the plea and made no reply. The Blues and Green continued their appeals until the twenty-second race (out of twenty-four) when they suddenly united and raised the watchword 'Nika'. Riots started and the court took refuge in the palace. That evening the mob burned the city prefect's praetorium.

Justinian tried to continue the games next day but only provoked more riot and arson. The rioting and destruction continued throughout the week; even the arrival of loyal troops from Thrace failed to restore order. On Sunday before sunrise, Justinian appeared in the Hippodrome where he repented publicly and promised an amnesty. The mob turned hostile, and Justinian retreated. The evening before Justinian had dismissed two nephews of the old emperor Anastasius, Hypatius and Pompey, against their will, from the palace and sent them home, and now the mob found Hypatius and proclaimed him emperor in the Hippodrome. Justinian was now ready to flee, and perhaps would have done so except for Theodora, who did not frighten easily. Instead Justinian decided to strike ruthlessly. Belisarius and Mundo made their separate ways into the Hippodrome where they fell on Hypatius' supporters who were crowded there, and the 'Nika' riot ended with a bloodbath.

A recent study of the riot by Geoffrey Greatrex has made the point that what was unique about it was not the actions of the mob so much as Justinian's attempts to deal with it. His first reaction was to placate: when the mob demanded that three of his ministers must go, the praetorian prefect of the East, John the Cappadocian, the Quaestor of the Sacred Palace Tribonian and the urban prefect Eudaemon, Justinian replaced them immediately. He hesitated when he should have been firm and aggravated the situation. It may well have been Theodora who emboldened him for the final act of repression. Procopius imagines Theodora on the last day engaging in formal debate about what should be done, and misquoting a famous maxim that was once offered the tyrant of Syracuse, Dionysius the Elder "Tyranny is a good shroud." Theodora emends it to "Kingship is a good shroud" and readers of Procopius may have thought wryly that the emendation was unnecessary. The formal debate, and Theodora's great scene, was probably a creation of Procopius' imagination, but a splendid one.

The 'Nika' revolt left Justinian firmly in charge. The mob was cowed and the senatorial opposition that surfaced during the revolt was forced underground. The damage to Constantinople was great, but it cleared the way for Justinian's own building program. Work in his new church of Hagia Sophia to replace the old Hagia Sophia that was destroyed in the rioting, started only forty-five days after the revolt was crushed. The two leaders of the Hippodrome massacre, Mundo and Belisarius, went on to new appointments: Mundo back to Illyricum as magister militum and Belisarius to make his reputation as the conqueror of the Vandals in Africa. The 530s were a decade of confidence and the 'Nika' riot was only a momentary crisis.

(for a detailed account of the reign of Justinian I, see: http://www.roman-emperors.org/justinia.htm)

Last Years
Misfortune crowded into the final years of Justinian's reign. There was another Samaritan revolt in midsummer, 556. Next year, in December, a great earthquake shook Constantinople and in May of the following year, the dome of Justinian's new Hagia Sophia collapsed, and had to be rebuilt with a new design. About the same time, the plague returned to the capital. Then in early 559 a horde of Kutrigur 'Huns' (proto-Bulgars) crossed the frozen Danube and advanced into the Balkans. It split into three columns: one pushed into Greece but got no further than Thermopylae, another advanced into the Gallipoli peninsula but got no further than the Long Wall, which was defended by a young officer from Justinian's native city, while the third, most dangerous spearhead led by the 'Hun' khan, Zabergan himself, made for Constantinople. Faced with this attack and without any forces for defense, Justinian called Belisarius out of retirement, and Belisarius, using a scratch force, the core of which was 300 of his veterans, ambushed the Kutrigur horde and routed it. Once the immediate danger was over, however, Justinian recalled Belisarius and took charge himself. The news that Justinian was reinforcing his Danube fleet made the Kutrigurs anxious and they agreed to a treaty which gave them a subsidy and safe passage back across the river. But as soon as they were north of the Danube, they were attacked by their rivals the Utigurs who were incited by Justinian to relieve them of their booty. The Kutrigurs raided Thrace again in 562, but they and the Utigurs were soon to fall prey to the Avars who swept out of the Asian steppes in the early 560s.

There was discontent in the capital. Street violence was on the increase again. There were bread shortages and water shortages. In late 562, there was a conspiracy which almost succeeded in killing the emperor. The chief conspirator was Marcellus, an argyroprates, a goldsmith and banker, and the conspiracy probably reflected the dissatisfaction of the business community. But Justinian was too old to learn to be frugal. He resorted to forced loans and requisitions and his successor found the treasury deeply in debt.

What remained of the great emperor's achievement? His successor Justin II, out of a combination of necessity and foolhardiness, denied the 'barbarians' the subsidies which had played a major role in Justinian's defense of the frontiers, and, to be fair, which had also been provided by emperors before him. Subsidies had been part of Anastasius' policy as well, but that was before the plague, while the imperial economy was still expanding. The result of Justin II's change of policy was renewed hostility with Persia and a shift of power in the Balkans. In 567 the Avars and Lombards joined forces against the Gepids and destroyed them. But the Lombards distrusted their allies and next year they migrated into Italy where Narses had just been removed from command and recalled, though he disobeyed orders and stayed in Rome until his death. By the end of the century only a third of Italy was in Byzantine hands. On the eastern frontier, Justin alienated the Ghassanid allies and lost the fortress of Daras, a reverse which overwhelmed his frangible sanity. For this Justinian can hardly be blamed. No one can deny his greatness; a recent study by Asterios Gerostergios even lionizes him. But if we look at his reign with the unforgiving eye of hindsight, it appears to be a brilliant effort to stem the tide of history, and in the end, it was more a failure than a moderate success.

Copyright (C) 1998, James Allan Evans. Published: De Imperatoribus Romanis: An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families http://www.roman-emperors.org/startup.htm. Used by permission.

The Church we know today as Hagia Sophia - or Divine Wisdom, its true name - was dedicated by the Emperor Justinian in 537AD. Through many visitudes Justinian's cathedral church of Constantinople still stands, its soring vaults and amazing dome testiments to the human spirit, the engineering talents of its builders and Divine inspiration. In the same fashion that Vespasian's Collesium (the Flavian Amphitheatre) is symbolic of Rome, Justinian's Hagia Sophia is a symbol of Byzantium.

Edited by J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.Cleisthenes

29 files on 1 page(s)