THE
REIGN OF AEMILIAN: A CHRONOLOGICAL NOTE *
By
H. MATTINGLY
The
reign of Aemilian is one of the most obscure episodes
in the dark third century of
our era.
'Obscurissime
natus obscurius imperavit,' wrote Eutropius
of him, and the epigram has not lost its point
today.
But
on one vexed question—the date of his reign—the
coins, studied in connexion with the literary
traclition, will yield an answer at least approximately
certain,
and from that answer results follow, which are
of vital importance to the chronology of the
whole succeedng
period.
The
duration of the reign of Aemilian was about three
months.* At
Alexandria, where the year began
on August
29th, Aemilian has not uncommon coins of
year Β, none of year Α. This should imply that
his
rule did
not
extend far back behind the end of August.
An inscription of Gemellae in Numidia* shows
Valerian and Gallienus
as Emperors on October 22nd, 253; a detachment
of Legio III Augusta, demobilized and sent
home from
Raetia,
makes a dedication 'pro salute Augg.' to
Victoria Augusta. We have here three pieces of
evidence—all
equally trustworthy. If we can succeed in
combining them, we
should be very near the truth.
Let
us first try the most obvious solution. Aemelian
was
Emperor in July, August, and September,
253 :
his Alexandrian coinage was slow to commence,
but could
still run for several weeks before his
death at Spoletium near the end of September
: the
detachment of Legio
II Augusta has just time to reach Numidia
from Raetia and make its dedication on
October 22nd.
A very little
reflection, however, will lead us to mistrust
this solution. There is barely enough time
for the Alexandrine
coinage in September; there is definitely
not time left for demobilization and repatriation
of the 'Numidian
detachment. We must seek a less obvious,
but
more satisfying answer.
Can
we determine the months of Aemilian's rule in
Rome?
(a)
The inscription quoted above (ILS 531) should
imply a victory of Valerian over
Aemilian not
later than
c. July, 253. Demobilization is a matter
of months, not weeks.
(b)
Aurelius Victor, Liber de Caesaribus, 29 ff.
records the offer
of the Empire
to Valerian and the
appointment
of Gallienus as Caesar 'adulta aestate.'
That cannot be applied to September.
His two years
for Gallus,
Volusian and Aemilian should end
c. July Ist, 253.
(c)
The mint of Viminacium begins its year somewhat
earlier than the
date
(August 29th)
in use at
Alexandria.* But
in year xiiii (A.D. 252-253), ending
perhaps
July-August, Valerian already succeeds
Aemilian.
(d)
The mint of Amisus has the following dates that
concern
our
immediate
purpose:
| 169 |
L.
Aelius Caesar |
A.D.
137-138. |
| 283 |
Trajanus
Decius |
A.D.
251-252. |
| 284 |
Aemilian |
A.D.
252-253.* |
As
Decius was certainly dead
by the beginning of July, A.D.
251,
the
year 283 begins
before that date :
the
year 284 then begins before
that date in A.D. 252, ends
before
that date
in A.D. 253.
Aemilian,
in fact,
has coinage at Amisus in
advance of July, A.D. 253, the date
that according
to
our first hypothesis
is
the earliest possible for
his rule in Rome—perhaps,
even earlier, in A.D. 252.
Putting
these indications together, we conclude that
Aemilian cannot
have reigned
beyond
July, A.D. 253,
at the latest possible,
and that in all probability his
reign
was over
some time
before that
date. If we assign to him
the months of April, May
and June,
we
shall not be far wrong.
He might begin a little earlier,
he cannot
possibly
continue
much later.
Let
us go back to our coins of Alexandria. We see
now
that, as Aemilian was
dead well before
August
29th
253, it is ridiculous
to assign to him after death
a coinage
denied to him in
his lifetime
The Alexandrian
coins of year Β remain
: but year
Β is A.D. 252-253 not
A.D. 253-254,* and Aemilian's
theoretical year 1 takes
us back behind
August
29th, 252.
Aemilian's
rising, in fact, was
like that of
Trajanus Decius.
It began in the provinces
many months before it
reached success
in Rome.
We
can now interpret the reign of Aemilian with
some confidence
in
the light of
the narrative of Zosimus
and Zonaras.* Zosimus
(i, ch. 26 ff.) records that
the peace
patched
up by
Gallus with the Goths
did not last. They raided the
Balkans, while
the Persians
overran
Syria. Aemilian rallied
the Roman forces in Moesia,
defeated the Goths
and invaded
Italy to take Gallus unaware. Gallus, τον χατα την εωαν πραγματων ανηχοος ων,
made such counter preparations
as he
could and
sent Valerian to Raetia
to bring up the armies
of Germany. Gallus fell,
but Aemilian did
not long survive him.
Valerian marched
south
against him, and his
own friends, θεωρουνες (αυτον)…στρατιωτιχως μαλλον η αρχιχως προσιοντα τοις πραγμασιν,
made an end
of him. Zonaras xii,
20
ff. gives a similar
account. The Scythians swept over Macedonia, Thessaly,
Greece and even Italy,
the Persians overran
Armenia. Aemilian,
a Λιβυς ανηρ, αρχων του εν Μυσια στρατευματος,
promised his men the
subsidies due
to the
barbarians,
if they could conquer
them. The soldiers
responded, defeated the
barbarians and proclaimed
Aemilian
Emperor. His fall is
then recorded much as
by Zosimus.
Zonaras
adds the interesting
detail that Aemilian
proposed to the Senate
to let it govern,
while he
fought its wars against
Goths and Persians. Our
Latin authorities
give us the Western tradition,
which neglects
the
earlier phase of Aemilian's
career and concentrates
on his raid
on
Italy and
his three
months' rule at Rome. We can see now how unjust
this summarized version
is.
As early as the summer
of A.D. 252 Aemilian
was
recognized in Alexandria.
His
great victory over the
barbarians will have
been already won.
The mint
of Dacia, which did not
strike at all in year
vi, A.D.
251-252, now resumes
and strikes for Aemilian
in
years vii and
viii,
A.D.
252-253, 253-254, passing
to Valerian in
the
last-named
year. Aemilian's invasion of Italy will have taken
place as early as possible
in A.D.
253. The
mission
of Valerian
to Raetia must in all
probability be placed before
the enc
of A.D. 252. With the
campaigning season
of A.D.
253, Aemilian
struck first. Whether or not helped by any deliberate
delay on the part of
Valerian, he overthrew
Gallus, who
was unassisted
by the German armies.
Valerian in Raetia
continued his preparations. By June-July, if not
earlier,
he was ready, and
at the mere threat of
his invasion Aemilian collapsed
without a blow.*
Aemilian,
then, is one of the honourable line of 'restitutores orbis terrarum,' sprung
from the Balkan lands, who strove to make good by valour and enterprise
the defects of the government at Rome. His work in the Balkans at least
was well done, and, even if he was too much soldier
and
too little statesman to fit the
times, a glance at the fate of Valerian will remind us that to sacrifice
Aemilian for Valerian was possibly no such wise
choice after all.
The
importance of our results for general chronology
is best seen if we
study the mint of Alexandria. In A.D. 249-250 we have Trajanus Decius, Α : in A.D.
250-251 we have Trajanus Decius, Β.
It
is usual now to mark a complete interval of over a year for Trebonianus
Gallus's years, Α and Β, in
which no coins were struck,
A.D.
251-252 blank (Trebonianus Gallus—Β)
and to continue:
A.D. 252-253 Trebonianus Gallus Γ
Aemilian Α (no coins struck)
A.D. 25 3-254 Aemilian Β
Valerian and Gallienus Α
We
now see that Aemilian had replaced Trebonianus
Gallus before the beginning of the Alexandrine
year, A.D.
252-253, and must emend thus:
A.D.
251-252 Trebonianus Gallus, Γ, using the count
of Trajanus
Decius, as colleague of his
son Hostilian
Aemilian Α (no coins struck)
A.D. 252-253 Aemilian Β
Valerian and Gallienus Α
A.D.
253-254 Valerian and Gallienus Β
These
conclusions are not yet generally accepted and
do in fact
run counter to
the system very
ably expounded
by A. Stein in the Archiv fur Papyrusforschung vii
and viii.* But
they rest on unimpeachable evidence
and must be made the basis of our future
dating.* |
