Valens – Roman Emperor: 364-378 A.D. –
Bronze AE3 19mm (2.71 grams) Sirmium mint 364-378 A.D.
Reference: RIC 6b
DN VALENS PF AVG, pearl diademed, draped & cuirassed
bust right
RESTITVTOR REIP, emperor standing facing, head right, holding laburum &
Victory
on globe, ASIRM in ex.
Royal/Imperial
symbols of power
Ruling dynasties often exploit pomp and ceremony with the use of
regalia
:
crowns
,
robes,
orb (globe) and sceptres
, some of which are reflections
of formerly practical objects. The use of language mechanisms also support this
differentiation with subjects talking of “the crown” and/or of “the
throne
” rather than referring directly to
personal names and items.
Monarchies
provide the most explicit
demonstration of tools to strengthen the elevation of leaders. Thrones sit high
on daises
leading to subjects lifting their gaze
(if they have permission) to contemplate the ruler. Architecture in general can
set leaders apart: note the symbolism inherent in the very name of the Chinese
imperial
Forbidden City
.
You are bidding on the
exact item pictured, provided with a Certificate of
Authenticity and Lifetime Guarantee of Authenticity.
Labarum of Constantine I, displaying the “Chi-Rho” symbol above.
The labarum was a
vexillum
(military standard) that displayed
the “Chi-Rho”
symbol
☧
, formed from the first two
Greek letters
of the word “Christ”
—
Chi
and
Rho
. It was first used by the
Roman emperor
Constantine I
. Since the vexillum consisted of
a flag suspended from the crossbar of a cross, it was ideally suited to
symbolize the
crucifixion
of
Christ
.
Later usage has sometimes regarded the terms “labarum” and “Chi-Rho” as
synonyms. Ancient sources, however, draw an unambiguous distinction between the
two.
Vision of Constantine
A coin of Constantine (c.337) showing a depiction of his labarum
spearing a serpent.
On the evening of October 27, 312, with his army preparing for the
Battle of the Milvian Bridge
, the emperor
Constantine I
claimed to have had a vision
which led him to believe he was fighting under the protection of the
Christian God
.
Lactantius
states that, in the night before the
battle, Constantine was commanded in a dream to “delineate the heavenly sign on
the shields of his soldiers”. He obeyed and marked the shields with a sign
“denoting Christ”. Lactantius describes that sign as a “staurogram”, or a
Latin cross
with its upper end rounded in a
P-like fashion, rather than the better known
Chi-Rho
sign described by
Eusebius of Caesarea
. Thus, it had both the
form of a cross and the monogram of Christ’s name from the formed letters “X”
and “P”, the first letters of Christ’s name in Greek.
From Eusebius, two accounts of a battle survive. The first, shorter one in
the
Ecclesiastical History
leaves no doubt that
God helped Constantine but doesn’t mention any vision. In his later Life of
Constantine, Eusebius gives a detailed account of a vision and stresses that
he had heard the story from the emperor himself. According to this version,
Constantine with his army was marching somewhere (Eusebius doesn’t specify the
actual location of the event, but it clearly isn’t in the camp at Rome) when he
looked up to the sun and saw a cross of light above it, and with it the Greek
words
Ἐν Τούτῳ Νίκα
. The traditionally employed
Latin translation of the Greek is
in hoc signo vinces
— literally “In this
sign, you will conquer.” However, a direct translation from the original Greek
text of Eusebius into English gives the phrase “By this, conquer!”
At first he was unsure of the meaning of the apparition, but the following
night he had a dream in which Christ explained to him that he should use the
sign against his enemies. Eusebius then continues to describe the labarum, the
military standard used by Constantine in his later wars against
Licinius
, showing the Chi-Rho sign.
Those two accounts can hardly be reconciled with each other, though they have
been merged in popular notion into Constantine seeing the Chi-Rho sign on the
evening before the battle. Both authors agree that the sign was not readily
understandable as denoting Christ, which corresponds with the fact that there is
no certain evidence of the use of the letters chi and rho as a Christian sign
before Constantine. Its first appearance is on a Constantinian silver coin from
c. 317, which proves that Constantine did use the sign at that time, though not
very prominently.
He made extensive use of the Chi-Rho and the labarum only later in the conflict
with Licinius.
The vision has been interpreted in a solar context (e.g. as a
solar halo
phenomenon), which would have been
reshaped to fit with the Christian beliefs of the later Constantine.
An alternate explanation of the intersecting celestial symbol has been
advanced by George Latura, which claims that Plato’s visible god in Timaeus
is in fact the intersection of the Milky Way and the Zodiacal Light, a rare
apparition important to pagan beliefs that Christian bishops reinvented as a
Christian symbol.
Iconographic career under Constantine
Coin of
Vetranio
, a soldier is holding two
labara. Interestingly they differ from the labarum of Constantine in
having the Chi-Rho depicted on the cloth rather than above it, and
in having their staves decorated with
phalerae
as were earlier Roman
military unit standards.
The emperor
Honorius
holding a variant of the
labarum – the Latin phrase on the cloth means “In the name of Christ
[rendered by the Greek letters XPI] be ever victorious.”
Among a number of standards depicted on the
Arch of Constantine
, which was erected, largely
with fragments from older monuments, just three years after the battle, the
labarum does not appear. A grand opportunity for just the kind of political
propaganda that the Arch otherwise was expressly built to present was missed.
That is if Eusebius’ oath-confirmed account of Constantine’s sudden,
vision-induced, conversion can be trusted. Many historians have argued that in
the early years after the battle the emperor had not yet decided to give clear
public support to Christianity, whether from a lack of personal faith or because
of fear of religious friction. The arch’s inscription does say that the Emperor
had saved the
res publica
INSTINCTV DIVINITATIS
MENTIS MAGNITVDINE (“by greatness of mind and by instinct [or impulse]
of divinity”). As with his predecessors, sun symbolism – interpreted as
representing
Sol Invictus
(the Unconquered Sun) or
Helios
,
Apollo
or
Mithras
– is inscribed on his coinage, but in
325 and thereafter the coinage ceases to be explicitly pagan, and Sol Invictus
disappears. In his
Historia Ecclesiae
Eusebius further reports
that, after his victorious entry into Rome, Constantine had a statue of himself
erected, “holding the sign of the Savior [the cross] in his right hand.” There
are no other reports to confirm such a monument.
Whether Constantine was the first
Christian
emperor supporting a peaceful
transition to Christianity during his rule, or an undecided pagan believer until
middle age, strongly influenced in his political-religious decisions by his
Christian mother
St. Helena
, is still in dispute among
historians.
As for the labarum itself, there is little evidence for its use
before 317.In the course of Constantine’s second war against Licinius in
324, the latter
developed a superstitious dread of Constantine’s standard. During the
attack of
Constantine’s troops at the
Battle of Adrianople
the guard of the labarum
standard were directed to move it to any part of the field where his soldiers
seemed to be faltering. The appearance of this talismanic object appeared to
embolden Constantine’s troops and dismay those of Licinius.At the final battle of the war, the
Battle of Chrysopolis
, Licinius, though
prominently displaying the images of Rome’s pagan pantheon on his own battle
line, forbade his troops from actively attacking the labarum, or even looking at
it directly.[16]
Constantine felt that both Licinius and
Arius
were agents of Satan, and associated them
with the serpent described in the
Book of Revelation
(12:9).
Constantine represented Licinius as a snake on his coins.
Eusebius stated that in addition to the singular labarum of Constantine,
other similar standards (labara) were issued to the Roman army. This is
confirmed by the two labara depicted being held by a soldier on a coin of
Vetranio
(illustrated) dating from 350.
The Chi Rho is one of the earliest
christograms
used by Christians. It is formed by superimposing the
first two letters in the Greek spelling of the word
Christ
(
Greek
: “Χριστός” ), chi = ch and rho = r, in such a way to produce
the monogram
. The Chi-Rho symbol was also used by pagan Greek scribes to
mark, in the margin, a particularly valuable or relevant passage; the
combined
letters Chi and Rho standing for chrēston, meaning “good.”
Although not technically a cross, the Chi Rho invokes the crucifixion
of Jesus as well as symbolizing his status as the Christ. There is early
evidence of the Chi Rho symbol on Christian Rings of the third century.
The labarum (Greek:
λάβαρον) was a
vexillum
(military standard) that displayed the “Chi-Rho”
symbol, formed from the first two
Greek letters
of the word “Christ”
(Greek:
ΧΡΙΣΤΟΣ, or Χριστός) — Chi (χ)
and Rho (ρ).
It was first used by the
Roman emperor
Constantine I
. Since the vexillum consisted of a flag suspended from
the crossbar of a cross, it was ideally suited to symbolize
crucifixion
. The Chi-Rho symbol was also used by Greek scribes to
mark, in the margin, a particularly valuable or relevant passage; the
combined letters Chi and Rho standing for chrēston, meaning
“good.”
Flavius Julius Valens (Latin:
FLAVIUS IVLIVS VALENS AVGVSTVS; 328 – 9
August 378) was
Roman Emperor
(364-378), after he was given the
Eastern part of the empire by his brother
Valentinian I
. Valens, sometimes known as the
Last True Roman
, was defeated and killed in the
Battle of Adrianople
, which marked the beginning of
the fall of the
Western Roman Empire
.
//
Life
Appointment
to emperor
Valens and his brother
Flavius Valentinianus
(Valentinian) were both born
48 miles west of
Sirmium
(modern
Sremska Mitrovica
,
Serbia
), in the town of Cibalae (Vinkovci,
Croatia
) in 328 and 321, respectively. They had
grown up on estates purchased by their father,
Gratian the Elder
, in Africa and Britain. While
Valentinian had enjoyed a successful military career
prior to his appointment as emperor, Valens apparently
had not. He had spent much of his youth on the family’s
estate and only joined the army in the 360s,
participating with his brother in the Persian campaign
of Emperor
Julian
.
He restored some religious
persecution, and was
Arian
.
In February 364, reigning Emperor
Jovian
, while hastening to
Constantinople
to secure his claim to the throne,
was
asphyxiated
during a stop at Dadastana, 100 miles
east of
Ankara
. Among Jovian’s agents was Valentinian, a
tribunus scutariorum. He was proclaimed
Augustus
on 26 February, 364. Valentinian felt that
he needed help to govern the large and troublesome
empire, and, on 28 March of the same year, appointed his
brother Valens as co-emperor in the palace of
Hebdomon
. The two Augusti travelled together
through Adrianople and Naissus to
Sirmium
, where they divided their personnel, and
Valentinian went on to the West.
Valens obtained the eastern half of
the
Balkan Peninsula
,Greece,
Egypt
,
Syria
and
Anatolia
as far east as Persia. Valens was back in
his capital of Constantinople by December 364.
Revolt
of Procopius
Valens inherited the eastern portion
of an empire that had recently retreated from most of
its holdings in
Mesopotamia
and
Armenia
because of a treaty that his predecessor
Jovian had made with
Shapur II
of the
Sassanid Empire
. Valens’s first priority after the
winter of 365 was to move east in hopes of shoring up
the situation. By the autumn of 365 he had reached
Cappadocian Caesarea when he learned that a usurper had
proclaimed himself in Constantinople. When he died,
Julian had left behind one surviving relative, a
maternal cousin named
Procopius
. Procopius had been charged with
overseeing a northern division of Julian’s army during
the Persian expedition and had not been present with the
imperial elections when Julian’s successor was named.
Though Jovian made accommodations to appease this
potential claimant, Procopius fell increasingly under
suspicion in the first year of Valens’ reign.
After narrowly escaping arrest, he
went into hiding and reemerged at Constantinople where
he was able to convince two military units passing
through the capital to proclaim him emperor on 28
September 365. Though his early reception in the city
seems to have been lukewarm, Procopius won favor quickly
by using propaganda to his advantage: he sealed off the
city to outside reports and began spreading rumors that
Valentinian had died; he began minting coinage flaunting
his connections to the Constantinian dynasty; and he
further exploited dynastic claims by using the widow and
daughter of
Constantius II
to act as showpieces for his regime.
This program met with some success, particularly among
soldiers loyal to the Constantinians and eastern
intellectuals who had already begun to feel persecuted
by the Valentinians.
Valens, meanwhile, faltered. When
news arrived that Procopius had revolted, Valens
considered
abdication
and perhaps even
suicide
. Even after he steadied his resolve to
fight, Valens’s efforts to forestall Procopius were
hampered by the fact that most of his troops had already
crossed the
Cilician
gates into
Syria
when he learned of the revolt. Even so, Valens
sent two legions to march on Procopius, who easily
persuaded them to desert to him. Later that year, Valens
himself was nearly captured in a scramble near
Chalcedon
. Troubles were exacerbated by the refusal
of Valentinian to do any more than protect his own
territory from encroachment. The failure of imperial
resistance in 365 allowed Procopius to gain control of
the dioceses of
Thrace
and Asiana by year’s end.
Only in the spring of 366 had Valens
assembled enough troops to deal with Procopius
effectively. Marching out from Ancyra through
Pessinus
, Valens proceeded into
Phrygia
where he defeated Procopius’s general
Gomoarius at the
Battle of Thyatira
. He then met Procopius himself at
Nacoleia and convinced his troops to desert him.
Procopius was executed on 27 May and his head sent to
Valentinian in
Trier
for inspection.
War
against the Goths
The
Gothic
people in the northern region had supported
Procopius in his revolt against Valens, and Valens had
learned the Goths were planning an uprising of their
own. These Goths, more specifically the Tervingi, were
at the time under the leadership of
Athanaric
and had apparently remained peaceful since
their defeat under Constantine in 332. In the spring of
367, Valens crossed the Danube and marched on
Athanaric’s Goths. These fled into the
Carpathian Mountains
, and eluded Valens’ advance,
forcing him to return later that summer. The following
spring, a Danube flood prevented Valens from crossing;
instead the emperor occupied his troops with the
construction of fortifications. In 369, Valens crossed
again, from
Noviodunum
, and attacked the north-easterly Gothic
tribe of Greuthungi before facing Athanaric’s Tervingi
and defeating them. Athanaric pled for treaty terms and
Valens gladly obliged. The treaty seems to have largely
cut off relations between Goths and Romans, including
free trade
and the exchange of troops for tribute.
Valens would feel this loss of military manpower in the
following years.
Conflict
with the Sassanids
Among Valens’ reasons for contracting
a hasty and not entirely favorable peace in 369 was the
deteriorating state of affairs in the East. Jovian had
surrendered Rome’s much disputed claim to control over
Armenia in 363, and
Shapur II
was eager to make good on this new
opportunity. The
Sassanid
ruler began enticing Armenian lords over to
his camp and eventually forced the defection of the
Arsacid
Armenian king,
Arsakes II
, whom he quickly arrested and
incarcerated. Shapur then sent an invasion force to
seize
Caucasian Iberia
and a second to besiege Arsaces’
son,
Pap
, in the fortress of Artogerassa, probably in
367. By the following spring, Pap had engineered his
escape from the fortress and flight to Valens, whom he
seems to have met at Marcianople while campaigning
against the Goths.
Already in the summer following his
Gothic settlement, Valens sent his general Arinthaeus to
re-impose Pap on the Armenian throne. This provoked
Shapur himself to invade and lay waste to Armenia. Pap,
however, once again escaped and was restored a second
time under escort of a much larger force in 370. The
following spring, larger forces were sent under
Terentius to regain Iberia and to garrison Armenia near
Mount Npat. When Shapur counterattacked into Armenia in
371, his forces were bested by Valens’ generals Traianus
and Vadomarius at Bagavan. Valens had overstepped the
363 treaty and then successfully defended his
transgression. A truce settled after the 371 victory
held as a quasi-peace for the next five years while
Shapur was forced to deal with a
Kushan
invasion on his eastern frontier.
Meanwhile, troubles broke out with
the boy-king Pap, who began acting in high-handed
fashion, even executing the Armenian
bishop
Narses
and demanding control of a number of Roman
cities, including
Edessa
. Pressed by his generals and fearing that Pap
would defect to the Persians, Valens made an
unsuccessful attempt to capture the prince and later had
him executed inside Armenia. In his stead, Valens
imposed another Arsacid,
Varazdat
, who ruled under the regency of the
sparapet
Musel
Mamikonean
, a friend of Rome.
None of this sat well with the
Persians, who began agitating again for compliance with
the 363 treaty. As the eastern frontier heated up in
375, Valens began preparations for a major expedition.
Meanwhile, trouble was brewing elsewhere. In
Isauria
, the mountainous region of western
Cilicia
, a major revolt had broken out in 375 which
diverted troops formerly stationed in the east.
Furthermore, by 377, the
Saracens
under
Queen Mavia
had broken into revolt and devastated a
swath of territory stretching from
Phoenicia
and
Palestine
as far as the
Sinai
. Though Valens successfully brought both
uprisings under control, the opportunities for action on
the eastern frontier were limited by these skirmishes
closer to home.
In 375, Valens’ older brother
Valentinian, while in
Pannonia
had suffered a burst
blood vessel
in his skull, which resulted in his
death on 17 November, 375.
Gratian
, Valentinian’s son and Valens’ nephew, had
already been associated with his father in the imperial
dignity and was joined by his half-brother
Valentinian II
who was elevated, on their father’s
death, to
Augustus
by the imperial troops in
Pannonia
.
Gothic
War
Valens’ plans for an eastern campaign
were never realized. A transfer of troops to the western
empire in 374 had left gaps in Valens’ mobile forces. In
preparation for an eastern war, Valens initiated an
ambitious recruitment program designed to fill those
gaps. It was thus not unwelcome news when Valens learned
that the Gothic tribes had been displaced from their
homeland by an invasion of
Huns
in 375 and were seeking asylum from him. In
376, the
Visigoths
advanced to the far shores of the lower
Danube and sent an ambassador to Valens who had set up
his capitol in
Antioch
. The Goths requested shelter and land in the
Balkan peninsula
. An estimated 200,000 Gothic
Warriors and altogether 1,000,000 Gothic persons were
along the Danube in
Moesia
and the ancient land of
Dacia
.
As Valens’ advisers were quick to
point out, these Goths could supply troops who would at
once swell Valens’ ranks and decrease his dependence on
provincial troop levies — thereby increasing revenues
from the recruitment tax. Among the Goths seeking asylum
was a group led by the chieftain
Fritigern
. Fritigern had enjoyed contact with Valens
in the 370s when Valens supported him in a struggle
against Athanaric stemming from Athanaric’s persecution
of Gothic
Christians
. Though a number of Gothic groups
apparently requested entry, Valens granted admission
only to Fritigern and his followers. This did not,
however, prevent others from following.
When Fritigern and his Goths
undertook the crossing, Valens’s mobile forces were tied
down in the east, on the Persian frontier and in
Isauria. This meant that only
riparian
units were present to oversee the
Goths’ settlement. The small number of imperial troops
present prevented the Romans from stopping a Danube
crossing by a group of Goths and later by Huns and
Alans
. What started out as a controlled resettlement
mushroomed into a massive influx. And the situation grew
worse. When the riparian commanders began abusing the
Visigoths under their charge, they revolted in early 377
and defeated the Roman units in
Thrace
outside of Marcianople.
After joining forces with the
Ostrogoths and eventually the Huns and Alans, the
combined barbarian group marched widely before facing an
advance force of imperial soldiers sent from both east
and west. In a
Ad Salices battle at
, the Goths were once
again victorious, winning free run of Thrace south of
the
Haemus
. By 378, Valens himself was able to march
west from his eastern base in Antioch. He withdrew all
but a skeletal force — some of them Goths — from the
east and moved west, reaching Constantinople by 30 May,
378. Meanwhile, Valens’ councilors,
Comes
Richomeres
, and his generals Frigerid, Sebastian,
and Victor cautioned Valens and tried to persuade him to
wait for Gratian’s arrival with his victorious
legionaries from Gaul, something that Gratian himself
strenuously advocated. What happened next is an example
of
hubris
, the impact of which was to be felt for years
to come. Valens, jealous of his nephew Gratian’s
success, decided he wanted this victory for himself.
Battle
of Adrianople and death of Valens
After a brief stay aimed at building
his troop strength and gaining a toehold in Thrace,
Valens moved out to
Adrianople
. From there, he marched against the
confederated barbarian army on 9 August 378 in what
would become known as the
Battle of Adrianople
. Although negotiations were
attempted, these broke down when a Roman unit sallied
forth and carried both sides into battle. The Romans
held their own early on but were crushed by the surprise
arrival of Visigoth cavalry which split their ranks.
The primary source for the battle is
Ammianus Marcellinus
.
Valens had left a sizeable guard with his baggage and
treasures depleting his force. His right wing, cavalry,
arrived at the Gothic camp sometime before the left wing
arrived. It was a very hot day and the Roman cavalry was
engaged without strategic support, wasting its efforts
while they suffered in the heat.
Meanwhile Fritigern once again sent
an emissary of peace in his continued manipulation of
the situation. The resultant delay meant that the Romans
present on the field began to succumb to the heat. The
army’s resources were further diminished when an ill
timed attack by the Roman archers made it necessary to
recall Valens’ emissary, Comes Richomeres. The archers
were beaten and retreated in humiliation.
Gothic cavalry under the command of
Althaeus and Saphrax then struck and, with what was
probably the most decisive event of the battle, the
Roman cavalry fled. From here, Ammianus gives two
accounts of Valen’s demise. In the first account,
Ammianus states that Valens was “mortally wounded by an
arrow, and presently breathed his last breath,”
(XXXI.12) His body was never found or given a proper
burial. In the second account, Ammianus states the Roman
infantry was abandoned, surrounded and cut to pieces.
Valens was wounded and carried to a small wooden hut.
The hut was surrounded by the Goths who put it to the
torch, evidently unaware of the prize within. According
to Ammianus, this is how Valens perished (XXXI.13.14-6).
The church historian
Socrates
likewise gives two accounts for the death
of Valens.
Some have asserted that he was
burnt to death in a village whither he had retired,
which the barbarians assaulted and set on fire. But
others affirm that having put off his imperial robe
he ran into the midst of the main body of infantry;
and that when the cavalry revolted and refused to
engage, the infantry were surrounded by the
barbarians, and completely destroyed in a body.
Among these it is said the emperor fell, but could
not be distinguished, in consequence of his not
having on his imperial habit.
When the battle was over, two-thirds
of the eastern army lay dead. Many of their best
officers had also perished. What was left of the army of
Valens was led from the field under the cover of night
by Comes Richomer and General Victor.
J.B. Bury
, a noted historian of the period, provides
specific interpretation on the significance the battle:
it was “a disaster and disgrace that need not have
occurred.”
For Rome, the battle incapacitated
the government. Emperor Gratian, nineteen years old, was
overcome by the debacle, and until he appointed
Theodosius I
, unable to deal with the catastrophe
which spread out of control.
Legacy
Aqueduct of Valens
in Istanbul (old
Constantinople
), capital of the
Eastern Roman Empire
.
Adrianople was the most significant
event in Valens’ career. The battle of Adrianople was
significant for yet another reason: the evolution of
warfare. Until that time, the Roman infantry was
considered invincible, and the evidence for this was
considerable. However, the Gothic cavalry completely
changed all that. Although J.B. Bury states that records
are incomplete for the 5th century, all during the 4th
and 6th centuries, history shows that the cavalry took
over as the principal Roman weapon of war on land.
“Valens was utterly undistinguished,
still only a protector, and possessed no military
ability: he betrayed his consciousness of inferiority by
his nervous suspicion of plots and savage punishment of
alleged traitors,” writes
A.H.M. Jones
. But Jones admits that “he was a
conscientious administrator, careful of the interests of
the humble. Like his brother, he was an ernest
Christian.”
To have died in so inglorious a battle has thus come to
be regarded as the nadir of an unfortunate career. This
is especially true because of the profound consequences
of Valens’ defeat. Adrianople spelled the beginning of
the end for Roman territorial integrity in the late
empire and this fact was recognized even by
contemporaries. Ammianus understood that it was the
worst defeat in Roman history since the
Battle of Cannae
(31.13.19), and
Rufinus
called it “the beginning of evils for the
Roman empire then and thereafter.”
Valens is also credited with the
commission of a short history of the Roman State. This
work, produced by Valens’ secretary
Eutropius
, and known with the name Breviarium ab
Urbe condita, tells the story of Rome from its
founding. According to some historians, Valens was
motivated by the necessity of learning Roman history,
that he, the royal family and their appointees might
better mix with the Roman Senatorial class.
Struggles
with the religious nature of the empire
During his reign, Valens had to
confront the theological diversity that was beginning to
create division in the Empire.
Julian
(361–363), had tried to revive the pagan
religions. His reactionary attempt took advantage of the
dissensions between the different factions among the
Christians
and a largely Pagan
rank and file military
. However, in spite of broad
support, his actions were often viewed as excessive, and
before he died in a campaign against the Persians, he
was often treated with disdain. His death was considered
a sign from
God
.
Like the brothers
Constantius II
and
Constans
, Valens and Valentinian I held divergent
theological views. Valens was an
Arian
and
Valentinian I
upheld the
Nicene Creed
. When Valens died however, the cause of
Arianism in the Roman East was to come to an end. His
successor
Theodosius I
would endorse the Nicene Creed.
|