|
Claudius II
Gothicus –
Roman Emperor
: 268-270 A.D.
Bronze Antoninianus 23mm (3.53 grams) Antioch mint: 268-270 A.D.
Reference: RIC 225a, C 317
IMPCCLAVDIVSAVG – Radiate, draped bust right.
VIRTVSAVG Exe: S – Virtus standing right, holding spear and resting hand
on shield.
You are bidding on the exact item pictured,
provided with a Certificate of Authenticity and Lifetime Guarantee of
Authenticity.
Virtus was a specific
virtue
in
Ancient Rome
. It carries connotations of valor,
manliness, excellence, courage, character, and worth, perceived as masculine
strengths (from Latin
vir, “man”). It was thus a
frequently stated virtue of
Roman emperors
, and was personified
as a deity
.
Origins
The origins of the word virtus can be traced back to the Latin word
vir, “man”. The common list of attributes associated with virtus are
typically perceived masculine strengths, which may indicate its derivation from
vir. From the early to the later days of the Roman Empire, there appears
to have been a development in how the concept was understood.
Originally virtus was used to describe specifically martial courage,
but it eventually grew to be used to describe a range of Roman virtues. It was
often divided into different qualities including prudentia (prudence),
iustitia
(justice),
temperantia
(temperance,
self-control), and
fortitudo
(courage). This division of
virtue as a whole into
cardinal virtues
is today classified as
virtue ethics
, as described by
Plato
‘s
Republic
and
Aristotle
‘s
Nicomachean Ethics
. It implies a link
between virtus and the Greek concept of
arete
.
This inclusion leads to the belief that at one time virtus extended to
cover a wide range of meanings that covered one general ethical ideal. The use
of the word began to grow and shift to fit the new idea of what manliness meant.
No longer did virtus mean that a person was a brave warrior but it could
also mean that he was a good man, someone who did the right thing. During the
time of the decline of the Roman elite virtus the Roman upper class no
longer thought of themselves as unmanly if they did not serve in the military.
Virtue as described by Aristotle was rediscovered in the medieval age by
Muslim
philosopher
Averroes
, which in turn impacted
Thomas Aquinas
to fuse virtue ethics with
Christianity in connection with the
Renaissance of the 12th century
.
In Roman
political philosophy
Virtus comes from the aristocratic tradition in which it is a specific
type of public conduct. It is really only applicable in the
cursus honorum
, certainly by the late
republic at least. It is not a “private” virtue in the way that modern people
might consider it. Valor, courage, and manliness are not things that can be
pursued in the private sphere of the individual or the individual’s private
concerns. There could be no virtue in exploiting one’s manliness in the pursuit
of personal wealth, for example. virtus is exercised in the pursuit of
gloria for the benefit of the
res publica
resulting in the winning of
eternal “memoria.” According to D.C. Earl “Outside the service of the res
publica there can be no magistratus and therefore, strictly speaking,
no gloria, no nobilitas, no virtus“.
For the nobility virtus lies not only in one’s personal “acta” but
also that of one’s ancestors. However Cicero, a
novus homo
, asserted that virtus was
a virtue particularly suited to the new man just as nobilitas was suited to the
noble. Cicero argued that just as young men from noble families won the favor of
the people so too should the novus homo earn the favor of the people with his
virtus. He even extended the argument that virtus and not one’s
family history should decide a man’s worthiness. Virtus is something that
a man earns himself, not something that is given to him by his family, thus it
is a better measure of a man’s ability. Cicero’s goal was not to impugn the
noble class but widen it to include men who had earned their positions by merit.
The term was used quite significantly by the historian
Sallust
, a contemporary of Cicero. Sallust
asserted that it did not rightfully belong to the nobilitas as a result
of their family background but specifically to the
novus homo
through the exercise of
ingenium (talent). For Sallust and Cicero alike, virtus is situated
in the winning of glory by the execution of illustrious deeds (egregia
facinora) and the observance of right conduct through bonae artes.
Who could have it?
Virtus was not universally applicable to just anyone – generally
(although not always exclusively) only adult male Roman citizens would be
thought of as possessing virtus.
Women
Virtus was rarely to women, likely because of its association with
vir. The highest regarded female virtue was pudicitia: “modesty” or
“chastity”. Cicero
, however, attributes this characteristic
to females several times. He uses it once to describe
Caecilia Metella
when she helps a man who is
being chased by assassins. Twice more he uses it when describing his daughter,
Tullia
, portraying her in his letters as brave
in his absence. He uses it again to describe his first wife
Terentia
during his exile. Livy in Book 2
attributes it to Cloelia.
Children
Virtus was not a term commonly used to describe children. Since
virtus was primarily attributed to a full grown man who had served in the
military, children were not particularly suited to obtain this particular
virtue.
Slaves
While a
slave
was able to be homo (“man”) he was
not considered a vir. Slaves were often referred to as puer (Latin
for boy) to denote that they were not citizens. Since a slave could not
be a vir it follows that they would not be allowed to have the quality of
virtus. Once a slave was manumitted he was able to become a vir
and he was also classified as a freedman but this did not allow him to have
virtus. A good slave or freedman was said to have fides, but no
virtus.
Foreigners
Foreigners
in the Roman world could be
attributed with virtus: If they fought bravely they could be said to have
virtus. Virtus could also be lost in battle. Virtus could
even be a cause to gain citizenship as in the case of Spanish cavalry men
granted citizenship by Cn. Pompeius Strabo in 89 B.C.E. for their virtus
in battle.
How was it used?
Virtus applies exclusively to a man’s behaviour in the public sphere,
i.e. to the application of duty to the
res publica
in the
cursus honorum
. His private business was no
place to earn virtus, even when it involved courage or feats of arms or
other qualities associated to it if performed for the public good.
In private
While in many cultures around the world it is considered “manly” to father
and provide for a family, family life was considered in the Roman world to be
part of the private sphere. During this time there was no place for virtus
in the private sphere. Most uses of virtus to describe any part of
private life are ambiguous and often refer to another similar quality.[11]
In the Roman world the oldest living patriarch of the family was called the
pater familias
and this title implied that
he was able to make all legal and binding decisions for the family; he also
owned all the money, land, and other property. His wife, daughters, sons, and
his sons’ families were all under his
potestas
. The only time a son was seen as
separate from his father’s control in the eyes of other Romans was when he
assumed his public identity as a citizen. He could earn his virtus by
serving in the military, and thus could only demonstrate manliness outside of
the family setting. This is another reason that virtus is not often used
to describe the Roman private life.
In public
Virtus was a crucial component for a political career. Its broad
definition led to it being used to describe a number of qualities that the Roman
people idealized in their leaders.
In everyday life a typical Roman, especially a young boy, would have been
inculcated with the idea of virtus. Since military service was a part of
most Roman men’s life, military training would have started fairly early. Young
boys would have learned how to wield weapons and military tactics starting at
home with their fathers and older male relatives and later in school. Also as a
young boy one would have heard numerous stories about past heroes, battles, and
wars. Some of these stories would have surely told of the virtus of past
heroes, and even family members. Publicly it was easy to see the rewards of
virtus. Public triumphs were held for victorious generals and rewards were
given to brave fighters. All of this propaganda would have encouraged young boys
coming into their manhood to be brave fighters and earn the attribute of
virtus. It was the duty of every generation of men to maintain the
dignitas
which his family had already
earned and enlarge it. This pressure to live up to the standards of one’s
ancestors was great. In achieving virtus one could achieve
gloria
. By gaining virtus and
gloria one could hope to aspire to high political office and great renown.
While young boys were encouraged to earn virtus there were also limits
put on showing virtus in public. Virtus was often associated with
being aggressive[citation
needed] and this could be very dangerous in the
public sphere and the political world. Displays of violent virtus were
controlled through several methods. Men seeking to hold political office
typically had to follow the
cursus honorum
. Many political offices had
an age minimum which ensured that the men filling the positions had the proper
amount of experience in the military and in government. This meant that even if
a man proved himself capable of filling a position or was able to persuade
people that he was capable, he would not necessarily be able to hold the
position until he had reached a certain age. This also served to ensure that in
elections of public offices no one had a certain advantage over another person
because by the time most men went into public office they would have retired
from military service. Furthermore, before any Roman soldier could partake in
single combat he had to gain permission from his general. This procedure was
meant to keep soldiers from putting themselves in extremely dangerous situations
that they may or may not have been able to handle in order gain virtus.
The concept of virtus also tended to be a concept of morality as far
as politics were concerned. This could range from the very literal definition of
manliness seen in aggression and the ruthless acquisition of money, land, and
power, or the lighter, more idealistic political meaning which almost took on
the extended meaning of “pietas”, a man who was morally upright and concerned
with the matters of the state. Plautus in
Amphitruo
contrasted virtus and
ambitio. Virtus is seen as a positive attribute, though ambitio
itself is not necessarily a negative attribute but is often associated with
negative methods such as bribery.
Plautus
said that just as great generals and
armies win victory by virtus, so should political candidates. Ambitio
“is the wrong method of reaching a good end.” Part of virtus, in the
political sphere was to deal justly in every aspect of one’s life, especially in
political and state matters.
Military
Although the two concepts are related, virtus, for the Roman, did not
necessarily emphasize the behavior that the associations of the present-day
English term ‘virtue’ suggest. Virtus was to be found in the context of
‘outstanding deeds’ (egregia facinora), and brave deeds were the
accomplishments which brought gloria (‘a reputation’). This gloria
was attached to two ideas: fama (‘what people think of you’) and
dignitas (‘one’s standing in the community’). The struggle for virtus
in Rome was above all a struggle for public office (honos), since it was
through aspiring to high office, to which one was elected by the People, that a
man could best show his manliness by means of military achievement which would
in turn cultivate a reputation and votes. It was the duty of every aristocrat
and would-be aristocrat to maintain the dignitas which his family had
already achieved and to extend it to the greatest possible degree, through
higher political office and military victories. This system resulted in a strong
built-in impetus in Roman society to engage in military expansion and conquest
at all times.
Sexuality
While in many cultures the virtue of manliness is also seen as being partly
sexual, in the Roman world virtus apparently did not have sexual
connotations. Similar words deriving from the same stem often have sexual
connotations. In the Roman world virtus dealt with a great many areas
such as martial courage, honor, and being morally upright rather than sexual
manliness.
Examples
One of the most well known demonstrations of virtus was shown by
Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus
. Before
Cincinnatus was appointed dictator in 458 BCE, Rome was in the midst of a battle
with the Aequi
and needed someone to take control.
Messengers sent to fetch him found him plowing in his field. Upon being informed
of the appointment, he wept saying, “So my field will be unsown this year, and
we shall be in danger of not having enough food to support us.”[16]
Nevertheless, he dutifully gathered his things, kissed his wife goodbye and
departed to raise an army and defeat the Aequi in a mere fifteen days. Upon
returning home after the victory, Cincinnatus picked up the plough from where he
left it and began plowing again.
Dionysius of Halicarnassus
recounts this story
to illustrate the type of leaders the men of Rome were. He says that they
“worked with their hands, led self-disciplined lives, did not complain about
honorable poverty, and far from pursuing positions of royal power.”
Pompey
is another prominent example of
virtus. In 55 BCE, Pompey inaugurated his grand theatre complex and
dedicated several shrines to different gods, one of these being Virtus.
This consecrated Pompey’s link with virtus. He gained a reputation with
the public as being a man of virtus. Cicero, throughout his speech, the
De imperio Cn. Pompei, connects Pompey with “divina virtus”.[18]
Pompey was so closely connected with virtus that once during a production
of a play at the
Ludi Apollinares
one of the characters
spoofed Pompey by stating “eandem virtutem istam veniet tempus cum graviter
gemes”: “The time will come when you bitterly resent that same virtus“.
The audience did not need to hear his name to know that Pompey was being
referenced.
Marcellus and the
Temple
M. Claudius Marcellus
, during the battle of
Clastidium
in 222 BCE, dedicated a temple to
Honos
and Virtus. This was one of the first
times that Virtus had been recognized as divine. The connection with
Honos would have been obvious to most Romans as demonstrations of virtus
led to election to public office and both were considered honos. The cult
of Honos was already a long-standing tradition in Rome. The marriage of
the two deities ensured that Virtus would also get proper respect from
the Romans. But an objection by the pontiffs was that one temple could not
properly house two gods because there would be no way of knowing which god to
sacrifice to should a miracle happen in the temple.
Claudius II (Latin:
Marcus Aurelius Valerius Claudius Augustus;
May 10, 213 – January 270), commonly known as Claudius Gothicus, was
Roman Emperor
from 268 to 270. During his reign
he fought successfully against the
Alamanni
and scored a crushing victory against
the Goths
at the
Battle of Naissus
. He died after succumbing to
a
plague (perhaps smallpox)
that ravaged the
provinces of the Empire.
Origin and rise to
power
Claudius’ origin is uncertain. Born on May 10, 213, he was either from
Sirmium
in
Pannonia Inferior
or from
Naissus
Dardania
(in
Moesia Superior
).
Claudius had served with the Roman army for all his adult life, making his
way up the military hierarchy until the Emperor
Gallienus
made him the commander of his elite
cavalry
force (hipparchos) and
subsequently his military deputy.In September 268 he found himself assigned as a
military tribune[7]
with the Imperial Army besieging the usurper
Aureolus
in
Milan
.[8]
His troops then proclaimed him Emperor[9]
amid charges, never proven, that he murdered his predecessor
Gallienus
.[10]
However, he soon proved to be less than bloodthirsty, as he asked the
Roman Senate
to spare the lives of
Gallienus
‘ family and supporters. He was less
magnanimous toward Rome’s enemies, however, and it was to this that he owed his
popularity.[11]
It is possible Claudius gained his position and the respect of the soldiers
by being physically strong and especially cruel. A legend tells of Claudius
knocking out a horse’s teeth with one punch. When Claudius performed as a
wrestler in the 250s, he supposedly knocked out the teeth of his opponent when
his genitalia had been grabbed in the match.[12]
Claudius, like
Maximinus Thrax
before him, was of
barbarian
birth. After an interlude of failed
aristocratic
Roman emperors since Maximinus’
death, Claudius was the first in a series of tough soldier-emperors who would
eventually restore the Empire from the
Crisis of the third century
.[13]
The Downfall of
Gallienus
Antoninianus
of Claudius II
During the 260s, the breakup of the
Roman Empire
into three distinct governing
entities (the core Roman Empire, the
Gallic Empire
and the
Palmyrene Empire
) placed the whole Roman
imperium into a precarious position.
Gallienus
was seriously weakened by his failure
to defeat Postumus
in the West, and the ability of
Odaenathus
to live with his arrangement with
Gallienus in the East. By 268, however, the situation had changed, as
Odaenathus
was put to death, most likely out of
court intrigue, and Gallienus fell victim to a mutiny in his own ranks. Upon the
death of Odaenathus, power fell to his younger son, who was dominated by his
mother, Zenobia
.[14]
Under threat of invasion by multiple tribes, Gallienus’ troubles primarily
lay with Postumus
, whom he could not attack because his
attention was required in dealing with
Macrianus
and the invading “Skythai.” After
four years of delay, Postumus had established power, but in 265, when Gallienus
and his men crossed the Alps, they defeated and besieged
Postumus
in an (unnamed)
Gallic
city. When victory appeared to be near,
Gallienus made the mistake of approaching the city walls too closely and was
gravely injured, compelling him to withdraw the campaign. In the next three
years, Gallienus’ troubles would only get worse. The “Skythai” successfully
invaded the Balkans
in the early months of 268, and
Aureolus
, a commander of the cavalry, declared
himself an ally of Postumus and the new emperor in
Milan
.[15]
At this time, another invasion was taking place. A group called the Herulians
navigated through
Asia Minor
and then into
Greece
on a naval expedition. Details of these
invasions are abstract, as it is nearly impossible to reconstruct the
happenings, due to the chain of conflicts initiated by the Herulians in 268.
Scholars assume Gallienus’ efforts were focused on Aureolus, the officer who
betrayed him, and the defeat of the Herulians was left to his successor,
Claudius Gothicus.
The death of Gallienus is surrounded by conspiracy and betrayal, as were many
emperors’ deaths. Different accounts of the incident are recorded, but they
agree that senior officials wanted Gallienus dead. According to two accounts,
the prime conspirator was
Heraclianus
. One version of the story tells of
Heraclianus bringing Claudius into the plot while the account given by
Historia Augusta
exculpates the would-be
emperor and adds the prominent general
Marcianus
into the plot. The removal of
Claudius from the conspiracy is due to his later role as the progenitor of the
house of
Constantine
, a fiction of
Constantine
‘s time, and may serve to guarantee
that the original version from which these two accounts spring was current prior
to the reign of Constantine. It is written that while sitting down at dinner,
Gallienus was told that Aureolus and his men were approaching the camp.
Gallienus rushed to the front lines, ready to give orders, when he was struck
down by a commander of his cavalry. In a different and more controversial
account, Aureolus forges a document in which Gallienus appears to be plotting
against his generals and makes sure it falls into the hands of the emperor’s
senior staff. In this plot,
Aurelian
is added as a possible conspirator.
The tale of his involvement in the conspiracy might be seen as at least partial
justification for the murder of Aurelian himself under circumstances that seem
remarkably similar to those in this story.[16]
Whichever story is true, Gallienus was killed in the summer of 268, and
Marcus Aurelius Claudius
was chosen by the army
outside of Milan
to succeed him. Accounts tell of people
hearing the news of the new Emperor, and reacting by murdering Gallienus’ family
members until Claudius declared he would respect the memory of his predecessor.
Claudius had the deceased emperor deified and buried in a family tomb on the
Appian Way
. The traitor
Aureolus
was not treated with the same
reverence, as he was killed by his besiegers after a failed attempt to
surrender.[17]
The Campaigns of
Claudius
At the time of his Claudius’ accession, the
Roman Empire
was in serious danger from several
incursions, both within and outside its borders. The most pressing of these was
an invasion of
Illyricum
and
Pannonia
by the
Goths
.[18]
Although Gallienus
had already inflicted some damage on
them at the Battle of Nestus,[19]
Claudius, not long after being named Emperor, followed this up by winning his
greatest victory, and one of the greatest in the history of Roman arms.
The Roman Empire in 268 A.D
At the
Battle of Naissus
, Claudius and his legions
routed a huge Gothic army.[20]
Together with his cavalry
commander, the future Emperor
Aurelian
, the Romans took thousands of
prisoners, destroyed the Gothic cavalry as a force, and stormed their
laager
(a circular alignment of wagons long
favored by the Goths).[dubious
–
discuss
] The victory earned
Claudius his surname of “Gothicus” (conqueror of the Goths),[21]
and that is how he is known to this day. More importantly, the Goths were soon
driven back across the
Danube River
by Aurelian, and nearly a century
passed before they again posed a serious threat to the empire.[22]
At the same time, the
Alamanni
had crossed the
Alps and attacked the empire. Claudius responded quickly, routing the
Alamanni at the
Battle of Lake Benacus
in the late fall of 268,
a few months after the battle of Naissus.[23]
For this he was awarded the title of “Germanicus Maximus.”[24]
He then turned on the
Gallic Empire
, ruled by a pretender for the
past fifteen years and encompassing
Britain
,
Gaul, and the
Iberian Peninsula
. He won several victories and
soon regained control of Spain and the Rhone river valley of Gaul.[25]
This set the stage for the ultimate destruction of the Gallic Empire under
Aurelian.[26]
However, Claudius did not live long enough to fulfill his goal of reuniting
all the lost territories of the empire. Late in 269 he had traveled to
Sirmium
[27]
and was preparing to go to war against the
Vandals
, who were raiding in
Pannonia
.[28]
However, he fell victim to the
Plague of Cyprian
(possibly
smallpox
), and died early in January 270.[29]
Before his death, he is thought to have named Aurelian as his successor, though
Claudius’ brother
Quintillus
briefly seized power.[30]
The Senate
immediately deified Claudius as “Divus
Claudius Gothicus”.[31]
The
Empire and Foreign Affairs Under Claudius
Claudius was not the only man to reap the benefits of holding high office
after the death of
Gallienus
. Before the rule of Claudius Gothicus,
there had only been two emperors from the
Balkans
, but afterwards there would only be one
emperor who did not hail from the provinces of
Pannonia
,
Moesia
or
Illyricum
until the year 378, when
Theodosius I
from
Hispania
would take the throne. To comprehend
the structure of government during the reign of Claudius, we must look at four
inscriptions that deepen our understanding of a new, truncated empire. The first
is a dedication to
Aurelius Heraclianus
, the prefect involved in
the conspiracy against Gallienus, from Traianus Mucianus, who also gave a
dedication to
Heraclianus
‘ brother, Aurelius Appollinaris,
who was the equestrian governor of the province of
Thracia
in 267-68 AD.[32]
Because these men shared the family name, Marcus Aurelius, a name given to those
made citizens by the
constitutio Antoniniana
, we can understand that
these men did not come from the imperial élite. The third inscription
reveals the career of
Marcianus
, another leading general by the time
that Gallienus died. The fourth honors Julius Placidianus, the prefect of the
vigiles
. While we cannot prove that Heraclianus,
Appollinaris,
Placidianus
, or Marcianus were of
Danubian
origin themselves, it is clear that
none of them were members of the
Severan
aristocracy, and all of them appear to
owe their prominence to their military roles. To these men must be added Marcus
Aurelius Aurelianus (the future emperor
Aurelian
) and
Marcus Aurelius Probus
(another emperor in
waiting), both men of Balkan background, and from families enfranchised in the
time of Caracalla
.[33]
Although we see a rise in Pannonian, Moesian and Illyrian marshals, and
foreigners become notable figures, it would be impractical to think the
government could function without help from the traditional classes within the
empire. Although their influence was weakened, there were still a number of men
with influence from the older
aristocracy
. Claudius assumed the consulship in
269 with Paternus, a member of the prominent senatorial family, the Paterni, who
had supplied consuls and urban prefects throughout Gallienus’ reign, and thus
were quite influential. In addition,
Flavius Antiochianus
, one of the consuls of
270, who was an urban prefect the year before, would continue to hold his office
for the following year. A colleague of Antiochianus, Virius Orfitus, also the
descendant of a powerful family, would continue to hold influence during his
father’s term as prefect. Aurelian’s colleague as consul was another such man,
Pomponius Bassus, a member of one of the oldest senatorial families, as was one
of the consuls in 272, Junius Veldumnianus.[34]
In his first full year of power, Claudius was greatly assisted by the sudden
destruction of the imperium Galliarum. When Ulpius Cornelius Laelianus, a high
official under Postumus
, declared himself emperor in
Germania Superior
, in the spring of 269,
Postumus
defeated him, but in doing so, refused
to allow the sack of Mainz
, which had served as
Laelianus
‘ headquarters. This proved to be his
downfall, for out of anger, Postumus’ army mutinied and murdered him. Selected
by the troops,
Marcus Aurelius Marius
was to replace Postumus
as ruler. Marius’ rule did not last long though, as
Victorinus
, Postumus’ praetorian prefect,
defeated him. Now emperor of the
Gauls, Victorinus was soon in a precarious position, for the Spanish
provinces had deserted the
Gallic Empire
and declared their loyalty to
Claudius, while in southern
France
,
Placidianus
had captured
Grenoble
. Luckily, it was there that
Placidianus stopped and Victorinus’ position stabilized. In the next year, when
Autun
revolted, declaring itself for Claudius,
the central government made no moves to support it. As a result, the city went
through a siege, lasting many weeks, until it was finally captured and sacked by
Victorinus.[35]
It is still unknown why Claudius did nothing to help the city of
Autun
, but sources tell us his relations with
Palmyra
were waning in the course of 270. An
obscure passage in the
Historia Augusta
life of Gallienus states that
he had sent an army under
Heraclianus
to the region that had been
annihilated by Zenobia
. But because Heraclianus was not
actually in the east in 268 (instead, at this time, he was involved in the
conspiracy of Gallienus’ death), we can see that this can not be correct. But
the confusion evident in this passage, which also places the bulk of “Skythian”
activity during 269 a year earlier, under Gallienus, may stem from a later
effort to pile all possible disasters in this year into the reign of the former
Emperor. This would keep Claudius’ record of being a descendant of
Constantine
from being tainted. If this
understanding of the sources is correct, it might also be correct to see the
expedition of Heraclianus to the east as an event of Claudius’ time.[36]
The victories of Claudius over the
Goths
would not only make him a hero in
Latin
tradition, but an admirable choice as an
ancestor for
Constantine
, who was born at
Naissus
, the site of Claudius’ victory in 269.
Claudius is also held in high esteem by
Zonaras
, whose
Greek
tradition seems to have been influenced
by Latin
. For
Zosimus
, a more reasoned contemporary view
shows him as less grand. Claudius’ successes in the year 269 were not continued
in his next year as Emperor. As the “Skythai” starved in the mountains or
surrendered, the legions pursuing them began to see an epidemic spreading
throughout the men. Also, Claudius’ unwillingness to do anything at the siege of
Autun
likely provoked a quarrel with
Zenobia
.[37]
Although it is not proven that the invasion of
Gaul was the breaking point between Claudius and Zenobia, the
sequence of events point to the siege as an important factor. The issue at hand
was the position that
Odaenathus
held as corrector totius orientis.
Vaballathus
, the son of Zenobia, was given this
title when Zenobia claimed it for him. From then on, tension between the two
empires would only get worse.
Heraclianus
‘ fabled arrival might have been an
effort to reassert central control after the death of Odaenathus, but, if so, it
failed. Although coins were never minted with the face of Odaenathus, soon after
his death coins were made with image of his son.
Under Zabdas
, a
Palmyrene
army invaded
Arabia
and moved into
Egypt
in the late summer. At this time, the
prefect of Egypt was Tenagino Probus, described as an able soldier who not only
defeated an invasion of
Cyrenaica
by the nomadic tribes to the south in
269, but also was successful in hunting down “Skythian” ships in the
Mediterranean
. However, he did not see the same
success in Egypt, for a Palmyrene underground, led by
Timagenes
, undermined
Probus
, defeated his army, and killed him in a
battle near the modern city of
Cairo
in the late summer of 270.[38]
Generally when a Roman commander is slaughtered it is taken as a sign that a
state of war is in existence, and if we can associate the death of
Heraclianus
in 270, as well as an inscription
from
Bostra
recording the rebuilding of a temple
destroyed by the Palmyrene army, then these violent acts could be interpreted
the same way. Yet they apparently were not. As David Potter writes, “The coins
of Vaballathus
avoid claims to imperial power: he
remains vir consularis, rex, imperator, dux Romanorum, a range of titles that
did not mimic those of the central government. The status vir consularis was, as
we have seen, conferred upon
Odaenathus
; the title rex, or king, is simply a
Latin
translation of mlk, or king; imperator in
this context simply means “victorious general”; and dux Romanorum looks like yet
another version of corrector totius orientis” (Potter, 263). These titles
suggest that Odaenathus’ position, not unlike a king in the
Semitic
world, was inheritable. In Roman
culture, the status gained in procuring a position could be passed on, but not
the position itself. It is possible that the thin line between office and the
status that accompanied it were dismissed in Palmyrene court, especially when
the circumstance worked against the interests of a regime that was able to
defeat
Persia
, which a number of Roman emperors had
failed to do. Vaballathus stressed the meanings of titles, because in Palmyrene
context, the titles of Odaenathus meant a great deal. When the summer of 270
ended, things were looking very different in the empire than they did a year
before. After its success,
Gaul was in a state of inactivity and the empire was failing in the
east. Insufficient resources plagued the state, as a great deal of silver was
used for the
antoninianus
, which was again diluted.[39]
Religion
An account written by Aurelius Victor states that Claudius consulted the
Sibylline Books
prior to his campaigns against
the Goths
. Hinting that Claudius “revived the
tradition of the Decii”, Victor illustrates the senatorial view, which saw
Claudius’ predecessor,
Gallienus
, as too relaxed when it came to
religious policies.[40]
Links to
Constantinian dynasty
The unreliable
Historia Augusta
reports Claudius and
Quintillus having another brother named Crispus and through him a niece,
Claudia, who reportedly married Eutropius and was mother to
Constantius Chlorus
.[41]
Some historians suspect this account to be a
genealogical
fabrication, however, intended to
link the family of
Constantine I
to that of a well-respected
emperor.[42]
Saint Valentine
Claudius Gothicus has been linked to
Saint Valentine
since the
Middle Ages
. Contemporary records of his deeds
were most probably destroyed during the
Diocletianic Persecution
on early 4th century[43]
and a tale of martydom was invented in Passio Marii et Marthae, a
“fanciful” work published in the 5th or 6th century.[43][44]
20th-century historians agree that the accounts from this period are not
historically accurate.[43][44]
The legend refers to “Emperor Claudius” but
Claudius I
did not make any persecution against
Christians, so people assigned him to be Claudius II even although this emperor
spent most of his time warring outside of his territory.[43]
Furthermore, there is no evidence, outside of St. Valentine’s legends, for
Claudius II reversing
Gallienus
‘s policy of toleration for
Christians.[45][43]
The legend was retold in later texts. In the
Nuremberg Chronicle
of 1493 AD, the emperor
martyred the Roman priest during a general persecution of Christians. The text
states that St. Valentine was beaten with clubs and finally beheaded for giving
aid to
Christians
in Rome.[43]
The
Golden Legend
of 1260 AD recounts how St.
Valentine refused to deny Christ before the “Emperor Claudius” in 270 AD and as
a result was beheaded.[44]
Since then, February 14 marks
Valentine’s Day
, a day set aside by the
Christian church in memory of the Roman priest and physician.[46]
|
