Roman Imperial Coins of 249-253 A.D.
By Richard Beale 2005
Introduction
In the year 248 A.D the Roman Empire celebrated its 1000th anniversary and in
the words of Edward Gibbon, “The limits of the Roman Empire still extended from
the Western Ocean [Atlantic] to the Tigris, and from Mount Atlas [in Morocco] to
the Rhine and the Danube." (79). The world had seen nothing like it. A Roman
citizen attending the grand and solemn celebration might well have believed the
inscription stamped on many coins of this period, ROMAE AETERNAE, a dedication to
eternal Rome. But Rome was far from invincible, and the following years, 249 to
253 A.D., were some of the worst the empire would ever see. Goths invaded from
the north and the Sassanian Persians from the East, internal divisions occurred
as many turned away from traditional Roman gods, and a terrible plague spread
through the empire depleting the military and workforce. Government resources
declined even while demands increased and a restless military and populace were
often willing to depose one leader for another in the hope that a change in
leadership would turn events for the better. The three emperors of this period
tried radically different political approaches in their attempts to restore
security and order to the shaken empire.
Thesis
Unfortunately, the contemporary written accounts of these emperors are extremely
limited since historians and government officials had more pressing matters to
attend to than writing about current affairs, so that this period is darkened
not only by the grave events that were taking place, but also by the difficulty
that modern students of history have in understanding them. Fortunately there is
one excellent source of information for this turbulent period that has survived
in great volume: the coins. In this research paper I intend to show that a
careful study of the coins of Trajan Decius, Trebonianus Gallus, and Aemilian,
not only provides us with direct personal evidence of the actions and political
strategies of these very different emperors, but also enables us to evaluate the
character studies written by two later writers, Zosimus and Jordanes.
Historical Background
Before looking at the ancient texts and contemporary numismatic evidence, a
short review of the main events of the period is in order. The three emperors
during this critical time were: Decius 249-251 A.D., Gallus 251-253 A.D., and
Aemilian 253 (3 months). In 249 A.D., the emperor Philip sent one of his most
capable and senior senators, Gaius Messius Quintus Decius, to restore order in
the border province of Moesia (modern day Bulgaria and Serbia). Decius, a native
of nearby Illyricum, had been governor of this province in the 230's, and
therefore was well suited to deal with the terrain, the people, and the local
politics (Nathan 1). However, the worst of the political upheaval died down
before Decius arrived when a rebel leader, Pacatian, was killed by his own men.
The rebels named Decius as their new leader and proclaimed him emperor. It
appears that the senate and populace favored this change and Decius, marching
towards Rome, quickly overcame the emperor Philip and claimed the purple.
As emperor, Decius became active in restoring traditional religion, laws, and
politics. He is most famous for his edicts requiring all citizens to sacrifice
to state gods, something the Christians refused to do, and the result was the
imprisonment, torture, and execution of many of their number. Goths began
raiding the Balkan provinces and much of Decius’ reign was spent responding to
these attacks. On July 1st, 251 A.D. Decius' eldest son, the co-emperor
Herennius Etruscus, was killed by an arrow while fighting the army of the Gothic
king Kniva. This was the first time in Rome's history that an emperor had died
at the hands of a foreign enemy but Decius, in spite of his grief, rallied his
men by proclaiming "Let no one mourn - the death of one soldier is not a great
loss to the Republic" (Jordanes 103). Decius, leaving General Trebonianus Gallus
behind to guard his rear, led his forces in pursuit of the Goths, but Kniva
lured him into a swamp and surrounded the Romans. Decius, along with most of his
men, was killed, and the remaining troops then proclaimed Gallus as the new
emperor.
Gallus, needing to return to Rome to consolidate his power, made a peace treaty
that allowed the Goths to keep all the spoils and prisoners that had thus far
been taken, in addition to the promise of an annual tribute. These concessions
would haunt Gallus’ reign - the Romans were not used to prostrating themselves
before a barbarian race and this settlement, though probably necessary, was a
large factor in Gallus' eventual undoing. In another unprecedented act, Gallus
gave his daughter in marriage to Hostilian, the only surviving son of Decius.
Gallus then elevated Hostilian to the position of co-emperor and gave his own
son, Volusian, the lesser rank of Caesar. Never before had an emperor treated
the family of his predecessor with such magnanimity. During Gallus’ reign, a
terrible plague broke out during A.D. 251 which took the life of his co-emperor
Hostilian (though some writers claim that Gallus had him murdered). The epidemic
ravaged Africa, Asia, and Europe for the next twenty years and the Roman army
was severely depleted.
In the spring of A.D. 253 the Romans finally saw real progress against their
foes when a general, Aemilian, led his army in a successful attack against the
Goths. Aemilian’s success prompted his men to proclaim him emperor, and he led
his army towards Rome. Gallus was caught by surprise, and when his troops saw
that they were outnumbered they killed both him and his son Volusian to avoid
the conflict, thus making Aemilian emperor. But Aemilian soon suffered the same
fate that he had inflicted upon Gallus. When Valerian, a general stationed in
the Alps, heard of Gallus’ fate, he marched his troops towards Rome and this
time it was Aemilian’s army that killed their own leader to avoid battle with a
superior force. Valerian became emperor after Aemilian had ruled just three
months.
Documentary Evidence
Two of the most detailed descriptions of Rome during the years 249 to 253 A.D.
were written by Jordanes and Zosimus, though both wrote their accounts three
hundred years after the events.
Jordanes
Jordanes was a Christian monk or Bishop of Gothic descent living in the lower
Danube region during the mid sixth century. He wrote the “Getica”, or “History
of the Goths”, not only to show the history of his people, but also to show that
“even the greatest structures of human power on this earth - whether Gothic or
Roman - are transient and deceptive, and that man can find lasting peace in God
alone” (Yeat). Jordanes claims to be objective in his analysis and he tells us
“Let no one believe that … I have added anything besides what I have read or
learned by inquiry” (316).
According to Jordanes' account of the period 249-253 A.D, Decius, as Senator,
attempts to repel the Goths marauding in Thrace and Moesia, but when he fails he
blames his own men for the defeat and releases them from service. Decius
immediately returns to Rome, but his men are so angered by the ill treatment
that they join the army of the Gothic king Ostrogotha, who becomes emboldened
and leads a huge army to devastate the Province of Moesia a second time (90-92).
If we believe Jordanes' account, Decius is not only incompetent and not willing
to take responsibility for his failures, but he has also deserted his post and
strengthened his enemy! The Goths make a third foray into Roman territory under
their new leader Kniva but this time they are driven back by the general
Trebonianus Gallus, the new governor of Moesia (92-101). Kniva changes course to
attack the city of Nicopolis, and Decius, now emperor, attempts to intercept the
Gothic army, but falls into a trap. Kniva’s forces “cut the Roman army to
pieces” and the emperor and a few survivors retreat to the camp of Gallus. Kniva
succeeds in taking Nicopolis but Decius leads a force to free the city from the
Goths. Before the battle Decius offers “strange sacrifices to idols” but in the
ensuing combat Decius and his eldest son, Herennius Etruscus, are slain (103).
Trebonianus Gallus is elevated to emperor and makes a peace treaty with the
Goths. Until this point, Jordanes’ history had only mentioned Gallus twice, and
in both instances very positively. Gallus, as a general, had driven back the
Goths, and later he had received the desperate Emperor Decius into his camp.
Jordanes clearly favors this emperor and describes his reign in glowing terms:
“Gallus and Volusian … departed this life after remaining in power barely two
years, yet during this space of time which they spent on earth they reigned amid
universal peace and favor. Only one thing was laid to their charge, namely the
great plague. But this was an accusation made by ignorant slanderers…” (106).
Jordanes’ account of this period closes with a short description of how the
general Aemilian “thought that he too might be able to achieve fame and fortune”
and took charge of the beleaguered armies of Moesia to successfully drive back
the Goths (105). Aemilian then gathers an army and begins to plunder Roman
cities (Jordanes’ does not mention how Aemilian deposed Gallus).
“… he [Aemilian] wrought no small harm to the state. Yet he died almost at the
beginning of his evil attempt, thus losing at once both his life and the power
he lusted after” (105).
There is no ambiguity in Jordanes' views of the emperors Decius, Gallus, and
Aemilian: Decius is inept and ungodly, Gallus is capable and good, and Aemilian
is greedy and wicked.
Zosimus
Zosimus was a Byzantine court official in Greece during the early sixth century.
His “Historia Nova”, or, New History, covered the lives of the Roman emperors
from the beginning of the Imperial period through the fifth century. In contrast
to Jordanes, Zosimus was an ardent pagan and he used his history in an attempt
to discredit the Christians (Vermaat 1).
Zosimus first tells us of Trajan Decius as a senator advising the troubled
emperor Philip on how to handle a series of revolts in Moesia. On hearing of the
troubles all the senators fell silent but “Decius, a person of illustrious birth
and rank and moreover gifted with every virtue, observed that he [the emperor
Philip] was unwise in being so much concerned at those events for they would
vanish of themselves …” Events occurred just as Decius, "enabled with great
experience, had foretold" (14). Philip then compelled Decius to take charge of
the Moesian and Pannonian armies despite Decius’ protest that it was improper.
Once Decius arrived in Moesia, the army saw what great wisdom and military skill
Decius possessed, so they determined that Decius would make a better emperor,
“being more expert in civil and military affairs …” Decius objected when they
clothed him in purple, but the army would not reconsider, so Decius accepted his
fate. Philip, on hearing of these events, assembled an army much larger than the
forces of Decius, but lacking the same military leadership skills he was quickly
defeated and Decius was made emperor (14). The civil war gave opportunity to the
Goths (Zosimus called them Scythians but that is very likely an error) who began
to plunder Thrace, but Decius “was not only victorious in every battle, but
[also] recovered the spoils they had taken …” (15). After cutting off their
retreat Decius posted general Trebonianus Gallus in the rear and led the main
army against the Goths “but Gallus, who was disposed to innovation, sent agents
to the barbarians” and betrayed Decius. Gallus sent bad intelligence to Decius
who fell into the trap that the Goths had lain. Decius and his army were wiped
out to a man. Zosimus' final words about Decius are consistent with all he has
said about this emperor: “Thus ended the life of the excellent emperor Decius”
(15).
According to Zosimus, Gallus openly boasted that he had disposed of Decius, and
he also allows the Goths to keep all the spoils and Roman prisoners they had
taken. Furthermore, Gallus agrees to pay the Goths an annual tribute. Gallus
initially adopts Hostilian, the surviving son of Decius, and elevates him to
co-emperor, but fearing that the populace will again yearn for “the princely
virtues of Decius” has the boy murdered “without regards … to common honor or
justice” (15). Gallus' rule is “so supine” that every Roman province is pillaged
by barbarians: Goths from the north and Persians from the east. In addition, a
terrible plague sweeps through the empire inflicting death at a rate unheard of
in history. After seemingly endless devastation by enemy raiders, one general,
Aemilian, finds the courage to defeat the Goths. This comes as a great surprise
to both the Goths and Romans alike, and Aemilian’s army proclaims him emperor
(16). Aemilian marches toward Rome to depose Gallus, and when the emperor’s men
see the size of the approaching force, and consider that their leader is “a
negligent, indolent man” they murder him and his son Volusian. Aemilian doesn’t
last long however: General Valerian comes south across the Alps too late to aid
Gallus. Rather than fight this general, the troops of Aemilian, who see that his
character is “more like that of a private than of an emperor, now put him to
death as a person unfit for so weighty a charge” (17).
Thus Zosimus' view of Trajan Decius and Trebonianus Gallus is completely
opposite to the viewpoint expressed by Jordanes. To Zosimus, Decius is noble,
wise and capable, whereas Gallus is treacherous, foolish and weak. Both writers
do however agree that Aemilian, while courageous, is not fit to be emperor.
Numismatic Evidence
The coins of this period are a valuable complement to the written sources.
Whereas the written sources are scant, literally millions of Roman coins have
survived until today. While most of the documentary reports describing the
period were written several decades or even centuries after the events, the
coins were produced as the events occurred, and while the written accounts are
based on secondary or tertiary evidence, the inscriptions and designs of the
coins are direct messages from the emperors.
When Trajan Decius took office, the primary imperial coin was the antoninianus
(also called the double-denarius). It is a billon silver coin (silver mixed with
copper) about 4 grams in weight. The antoninianus was produced in mass
quantities and was the staple of commerce. Coins of the early empire had been
nearly pure silver, but emperors discovered that by mixing copper into the
silver, they could produce more coins for the same cost. This was usually done
during a crisis, and if the emperor returned to minting high purity coins after
the emergency had passed, little or no economic inflation would occur. During
the mid third century, when the emperors were faced with one military conflict
after another, sound fiscal policy was secondary to the need to raise money for
troops. According to Kenneth Harl, modern spectrographic analysis of Roman coins
of this period show to what extent the emperors were striving to raise capital
to finance their military campaigns. In 248 A.D., the emperor Philip had minted
antoninianii with an average mass of 4.12 grams and containing 47.07% silver.
This dropped to 3.97 grams, with 41.12% silver content under Decius, and
plummeted to 3.46 grams, 35.94% under Gallus, a drop of over 36% of the coin's
silver content in only five years (Harl 130). Never before had the Roman
currency been debased so rapidly over such a short period of time. Harl also
explained how the same spectrographic studies have shown that coins minted by
the Sassanid Persians in the 260’s contain the exact same impurities as the
Roman antoninianii of the 250’s. This is clear evidence that the Sassanians took
spoils and/or tribute from the Romans in vast quantities (129).
But the most useful historical evidence deriving from these coins lies in the
inscriptions, portraits, and symbols stamped upon them. In the mid-third
century, as one emperor was quickly deposed and replaced by another, the
emperors had a desperate need to establish an identity that would connect them
to their subjects. The citizens of the empire were mostly illiterate, and made
up from a vast range of cultures. Individual written decrees, even though
translated into several languages, could reach and communicate with only a
limited group of citizens who had the opportunity to read them, but the
portraits, symbols and messages on the coins would rapidly reach every person in
the empire. Coins were produced in the millions - for example, the third issue
for Trebonianus Gallus at Antioch produced about 7 million coins (Metcalf 94).
The Rome mint had five issues, and numerous provincial mints were also striking
coins. The obverse of each coin would show the portrait of the emperor, or less
frequently, one of his family members. Around the portrait would be the name and
title of the personage displayed. The reverse would show an image of the emperor
in action, or a Roman god, goddess, or personification, or sometimes a message
within a wreath. These depictions and the Latin inscriptions surrounding them
were used to advance the political views and image of the emperor. Some coins
celebrate special events such as a military victory or the emperor’s accession
to the throne. Personifications such as PAX (peace), FELICITAS (good luck), or
LIBERALITAS (generosity), were used to show the emperor's benevolence. Coins of
the emperor's wife would often show the personification and inscription of
FECUNDITAS (fertility) or PVDICITIA (modesty).
The Coinage of Decius
Shortly after Decius became emperor in June or July 249 A.D., the Rome mint
began striking his first issue with the legend IMP TRAIANVS DECIVS AVG
(Imperator Trajan Decius Augustus). No doubt Decius adopted the additional name
“Trajan” to associate himself with the emperor of that name who had expanded the
empire to its greatest reaches and had earned the title OPTIMO PRINCIPI (The
Best Emperor). The Emperor Trajan, 98-117A.D., had annexed Dacia, a province
that became the key to Decius’ elevation, and besides being admired for his
skill as a general, had been loved for the way that he lived with, and shared
the hardships of the common soldiers on campaign. Decius, in a novel move, had
chosen a name that would both appeal to the desire of the populace to see a
return to Rome’s greatness, but would also endear him to the Roman soldiers who
ultimately had the power of life and death over any emperor during the third
century. All of Decius’ coins show this new title so it is clear that Decius
added this name immediately upon his succession.
Decius' first coinage issue, according to the arrangement laid out by Mattingly,
has seven different reverse types, four of which had been used extensively by
previous emperors: ADVENTVS AVG (arrival of the emperor) showing Decius on
horseback, signifying the emperor's arrival in Rome; PAX AVGVSTI (the peace of
the emperor); VICTORIA AVG (the emperor's victory), presumably the victory in
the civil war with Philip; and VIRTVS AVG (the virtue of the emperor) (111).
The final three reverse types are unique to Decius: GENIVS EXERCITVS ILLVRICIANI
(the spirit of the Illyrian Army); PANNONIAE, depicting the personification of
the province of Pannonia; and DACIA, showing the personification of Dacia
holding a draco standard (Mattingly 111). That Decius devoted three of his seven
silver coin types to such a small section of the empire shows his shrewd
understanding of the political situation. The Balkan armies had been involved in
several revolts, often setting up one of their own men as a new emperor. Decius
had been sent by Philip to quell one revolt, and then Decius became the leader
of another when he deposed Philip, and these armies were destined to create two
new emperors within two years of Decius' death.
Decius' reforms to the bronze coinage provide further evidence of his insightful
and industrious nature. As mentioned earlier, silver coins had become
increasingly debased, but naturally bronze coins had not, so that it became
uneconomical to produce significant quantities of large bronze coins.
Consequently bronze coinage had been slowly falling out of circulation and was
not readily available to make change for the antoninianii. Decius became the
first emperor in two centuries to introduce a new bronze denomination, and he
introduced two of them: a magnificent large bronze of about 40 grams that is
typically called a double sestertius and a very small bronze coin called a
semis. According to Kenneth Harl, these new coins were part of an overall
attempt to revalue bronze coins consistent with inflation so that the semis was
now valued as an assarion, the assarion as a dupondius, etc. (135). This would
result in restoring the value ratio between bronze and silver coins to near what
it had been fifty years earlier, and the small denominations would help slow
inflation. Whether or not this interpretation of Decius coinage reform is
correct, one thing is sure: Decius was implementing new ideas at an astonishing
rate.
Decius actively used his coins to promote his family and attempt to establish a
dynasty. Early in his reign he began issuing coins for Herennia Etruscilla, his
wife. The coins of Herennia, the Augusta, display virtues worthy of a great lady
of Rome: PVDICITIA AVG, the personification of modesty; FECVNDITAS AVG, the
personification of fruitfulness and feminine fertility; and JVNO REGINA,
depicting “Juno the Queen”, the wife of Jupiter. Decius’ two sons were also
portrayed on coins that showed the traditional Roman virtues expected of their
position. Herennius Etruscus, Decius’ elder son, was elevated to Caesar early in
Decius' reign but coin evidence indicates that his elevation to Augustus came
very late. In a recent study of coin hoards, Daniel Schaad found that of 823
coins of Herennius, only four showed him with the more senior title of Augustus,
the rest were all as Caesar (256). Numismatic evidence has also established that
Hostilian, Decius’ youngest son, was given the title Caesar fairly late in
Decius' reign, but well before Herennius was made co-emperor.
Decius' final issue of coinage was as unprecedented as his overt promotion of
the Balkan armies and creation of new coin denominations. The emperor issued a
series of eleven antoninianii portraying the busts of deified emperors including
Augustus, Vespasian, Titus, Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus Pius, Marcus
Aurelius, Commodus, Septimius Severus, and Severus Alexander (Mattingly
130-132). It is very interesting that Decius chose to honor deified emperors on
his coins but Jupiter and his family are conspicuously missing. This
contemporary evidence rebuts the many later Christian writers who saw Decius'
religious persecution as a sign of pagan religious fanaticism (such as Jordanes'
gratuitous mention of Decius' “strange sacrifices to idols”). Judging from the
themes of Decius' coins, it appears that the persecution was not motivated so
much by religious (or anti-religious) fervor, but from a desire to rid the Roman
world of what Decius saw as a fifth column that did not respect traditional
Roman ways.
During his short reign of two years, Decius was surprisingly original in his use
of coins for propaganda and for improving the economy. He honored the army and
provinces whose support was crucial to his success; he portrayed his family as
upholding the traditional Roman virtues; he associated himself with the great
emperors of Rome’s past; and made significant changes to resurrect the bronze
coinage that had begun to lose its usefulness.
The Coinage of Gallus
Trebonianus Gallus was the only emperor of the mid third century that did not
become emperor as a result of civil war or regicide, but he did have the
disadvantage of having to buy peace from the Goths at a very high price. Gallus
was quick to use coins for political purposes and his first issue included an
antoninianus with the inscription MARS PACIFER (Mars the peace bringer) "to put
a good light on the peace bought from the Goths” (Mattingly 156). Two other of
Gallus' first-issue coins also bolster a positive image of the treaty: PAX AVGVS
(the peace from the emperor) and PROVIDENTIA AVG (the foresight of the emperor).
Throughout his entire reign, Gallus' coinage portrayed him as a different kind
of emperor. Unlike Decius, who had promoted the strength of the army and the
greatness of Rome, Gallus’ coins displayed the traits of a benevolent ruler (or
rulers; many of Gallus' coin legends end in AVGG meaning that the coin honors
both Gallus and his son, the co-emperor Volusian): CONCORDIA AVGG (the harmony
between the co-emperors); LIBERTAS AVGG, (the liberty of/from our emperors);
PIETAS AVGG (the moral virtue of the emperors); and VIRTVS AVGG (the manly
virtue of our emperors). It is ironic that a coin in Gallus' last issue from
Rome did include the inscription VICTORIA AVGG, "victory of the emperors", but
this was probably a case of Gallus taking credit for Aemilian's great success.
Gallus' advancement of the surviving members of Decius' family is clearly
documented by the numismatic record. Gallus’ first issue contains coins of
Hostilian as Augustus which are more common than the concurrent minting of coins
depicting Gallus' own son Volusian with the lesser rank of Caesar. Similarly,
Gallus never struck coins for his own wife Baebiana; according to Mattingly, the
rare coins of Herennia with the reverse PVDICITIA AVGG may well have been struck
by Gallus to honor his predecessor’s widow (153). These two instances where
Gallus used his coins to honor the family of Decius rather than his own family
strongly support the idea that he did attempt to live up to the ideal
personified on another of his coins, Aequitas (fairness).
While the plague that started in 251 A.D. is well known, the only literary
mention of Gallus' response is that he arranged for state-paid burials for the
deceased, but several of his coins show his religious and political attitude
towards the epidemic that so devastated the empire. Gallus appealed to the gods
by a coin honoring Salus, the personification of health, and another with the
inscription APOLL SALVTARI, referring to Apollo as “the healer” - unique in
Roman history. A third type, minted exclusively by Gallus, was the antoninianus
picturing the temple of Juno with the legend IVNONI MARTIALI, "to the warlike
Juno." Juno, the consort of Jupiter, was often called upon for the blessing of
health and fertility, and it is possible that this unique combination of her
name with Mars, the god of war, was a call for Juno to make war on the plague.
Gallus' use of two or three coins to appeal to the gods for aid against the
plague is singular in Roman history and indicates his desire to show the people
that the emperor was personally concerned about the impact of the deadly
epidemic.
In spite of Gallus' public promotion of peace and benevolence, recent coin
hoards provide strong evidence that his short reign was mainly spent fighting
the Goths and Persians. A special series of antoninianii with the obverse legend
IMP C C VIB TREB GALLVS AVG had previously puzzled historians. Mairat observed
that these coins have a style similar to that of the Rome mint, but have been
discovered predominantly in hoards found in the Balkan area (1). Besly and Bland
postulated that based on mules (accidental pairings of an obverse of one series
of coins with the reverse of another series) mixing this special series with
coins of Rome, that the special issue was either struck in a Rome workshop, or
struck with dies made at the Rome mint, but that the issue was shipped in mass
to support the armies in the Balkans (21). Their analysis of nineteen coin
hoards also showed that this special issue accounted for about half of all the
Rome mint coins of Gallus. Such a huge portion of the empire's coins being
shipped to this single area is strong evidence that major military action
against the Goths was being funded (Besly and Bland 19-21).
In 1975, a hoard of coins minted under Gallus at the Antioch mint in Syria was
analyzed by William Metcalf (71). Metcalf found that the Antioch mint had
produced nearly ten times as many coins during the second half of Gallus' reign
as it had during the earlier years. In addition, the later coins were of a crude
style and frequently had spelling and mint mark errors (83-85). This massive and
apparently hasty increase in production indicates a pressing military need in
the eastern provinces, as does one of the main coin types of Antioch: MARTEM
PROPVGNATOREM; "...the type appears only in the last issue of Antioch; what is
more, Mars is invoked not in his usual aggressive aspect ... but instead as
propugnator: literally a protector or defender of a place" (Metcalf 71).
What emergency would require the mint to strike so many coins in such a rush,
and what was Mars being called on to protect against? Almost certainly the
Sassanid Persians (Metcalf 86). Historians had long known that Shapur the Great,
the Sassanid king, had invaded the eastern Roman provinces at some time during
the decade of 250 A.D., but these coins provide strong specific evidence that
the invasion took place in the spring of 253 A.D. before Gallus was deposed by
Aemilian but after Gallus had conducted a massive minting operation for that
year (Metcalf 88).
The coins of Gallus show us that his short reign was absorbed by war with both
the Goths and Persians, and with the devastation caused by plague. Gallus'
coinage advances the political image of a just and humane ruler who treated
Decius’ descendants with unprecedented consideration. The three instances in
which Gallus used the name of Mars on his coins are indicative of his unique
peaceful approach: Mars is pacified by a peace treaty; an appeal is made for
Juno to “make war” on disease; and Mars’ name is invoked to protect Rome from
the Persians. With such a consistent appeal for peace and fairness as evidenced
in the coins, it is hard to believe that this was merely a political ploy as
suggested by Zosimus.
The Coinage of Aemilian
Because of the short reign of Aemilian and scant mention of him in written
sources, historians rely heavily on the numismatic record for evidence of his
life and views. For example, according to Vagi, Aemilian's wife, Cornelia
Supera, is unknown to history except from her coins (344). Aemilian's coins tell
us the titles and powers he received from the senate. All of his coins show the
title PIVS FELIX (pious and blessed) - no doubt awarded by the senate
immediately upon his arrival in Rome. One unusual coin shows an image of
Aemilian in military dress making a sacrifice, surrounded by the legend P M TR P
I P P (Pontifex Maximus, Tribunicia Potestas One, Pater Patriae). Military dress
is not the norm for making sacrifices, but Aemilian seems to place all his hopes
on his ability as a general. The title that surrounds the image indicates that
the coin was issued in Aemilian's first year with the power of Tribune and that
he is not a Consul. This supports the idea that Aemilian had been a soldier who
had risen through the ranks, and not a senator as most other generals were
during this period. Likewise, on his coins Aemilian brings back the patron
deities of the army in victorious and warlike aspect such as DIANAE VICTRI
(Diana the victor) and ERCVL VICTORI (Hercules the Victor). When Aemilian issued
coins inscribed VICTORIA AVG (the victory of the emperor), for once there is no
question as to whether the emperor had earned this honor.
Aemilian’s coins show that he based his political hopes on his reputation as a
strong and victorious general and his coins reminded the Romans that when no one
else could, he had driven the barbarians out of Roman territory and restored the
empire's honor. In this one special case, it is the written sources which
support many of the conclusions derived from the coins, and not the reverse.
A Comparison of the Written and Numismatic Sources
The coins of Decius, Gallus, and Aemilian not only provide evidence that does
not exist in other textual or archeological sources, but they also can be used
to evaluate the written sources, particularly the points where the writers
disagree.
There is no doubt that both Zosimus and Jordanes wished to advance their own
religious and political views. Zosimus was fiercely anti-Christian and was
willing to refashion history to advance his ideas. For example, he reordered the
events of Constantine’s life so that the emperor’s victories all occurred before
he converted to Christianity. Thus, it is no surprise that Zosimus praises
Decius, the pagan persecutor of the Christians and disparages Gallus, who had
let the pogrom die.
Jordanes also had an agenda: Jordanes was a Christian and a descendant of the
Goths, and by his own words we know that the purpose of his writing was to
advance Christianity. It is natural that Jordanes would only see the worst in
Decius, an emperor that had been called the anti-Christ by many of the
Christians of his time. Jordanes’ positive view of Gallus could well be
influenced by Gallus’ treaty with the Goths, and Gallus’ apparent
discontinuation of religious persecution.
The coins too have their own particular bias in that their images and
inscriptions do not necessarily tell us the opinions and political strategies of
the emperors so much as they indicate how the emperors wished to be viewed.
Nevertheless, there are several instances where the coin evidence speaks clearly
to resolve the contradictions of the written sources.
Jordanes would have us believe that Decius was incapable of winning a battle
against the Goths, but one of Decius’ last coins, inscribed VICTORIA GERMANICA
(victory over the Goths), shows Decius on horseback being led by Nike (Victory).
This coin is too specific to discount as being a generic type and must surely
commemorate a genuine victory won by Decius (or at least a battle that could
reasonably be presented as a Roman victory). Jordanes’ account is certainly
skewed towards ignoring any of Decius’ successes. This is also true of Zosimus’
claim that “Gallus was so supine … that the Scythians … laid waste to all the
countries … not leaving one nation subject to the Romans unpillaged” (16).
Gallus had sent half of the coins minted at Rome to the Balkan area, and had
greatly expanded production at the Antioch mint when the area was threatened by
the Persians. That such a huge portion of the production of the only two
imperial mints was being poured into the empire’s most threatened areas does not
support the idea that Gallus was oblivious or inactive in the face of his
foreign enemies, but quite the opposite. These wars with both the Persians and
Goths also discredit Jordanes’ idyllic overview of Gallus’ reign where he stated
that “they [Gallus and his son Volusian] reigned amid universal peace and favor”
(106).
Perhaps the most interesting question that arises from the differences in
Jordanes’ and Zosimus’ accounts is: did Hostilian die of the plague or was he
murdered by Gallus? The coin evidence seems to side with Jordanes’ claim that
Gallus and Volusian were blameless (106). Gallus’ public promotion of Hostilian
was made clear and prominent by the significant number of coins struck for
Hostilian with the senior title of Augustus while he issued far fewer coins for
his son Volusian who had taken the lesser title of Caesar. Additionally, Gallus
used his coins to promote the image of a moral and benevolent leader. To show
such consideration to Decius’son, only to dispose of him after a few months, is
very difficult to resolve in the light of the ideals that Gallus consistently
displayed on his coins. Furthermore, we would expect that Gallus’ wife would
appear on coins after the death of Hostilian, but no such coins exist. It seems
that Gallus continued to respect Herennia and allowed her to retain the title of
Augusta. From the coin evidence, it appears that Zosimus was reporting an
anti-Gallus rumor as fact. There is no doubt that Hostilian’s death would have
created suspicion that the young emperor had been disposed of by Gallus, and it
is equally certain that Zosimus would have preferred recording that version.
Conclusion
I have provided a only brief introduction to a broad field of research, but I
have endeavored to show that a careful study of what may have seemed trivial
archaeological artifacts may often reveal substantive and reliable evidence that
adds to, or even corrects, the accounts found in the detailed commentaries that
have been known for centuries. Unlike the later texts dealing with the years 249
to 253 A.D., the coin evidence comes direct from the middle of the chaotic
period: their design, production, and distribution originate from the minds of
the emperors. By adding this entirely new perspective to what we see in the
written sources, we can come much closer to knowing the truth.
Works Cited
Gibbon, Edward. The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Ed. Smeaton, Oliphant.
Vol. I. Chicago: Encylopedia Britannica, 1952.
Harl, Kenneth W. Coinage in the Roman Economy 300 B.C. to A.D. 700. Baltimore
and London: Johns Hopkins UP, 1996.
Jordanes. Getica: De Origine Actibusque Gothorum. Trans. Theedrich Yeat. 2003.
25 Jan. 2005 <http://www.harbornet.com/folks/theedrich/Goths/Goths1.htm#VI>.
Mairat, Jérôme. Rome XI – Trébonien Galle au Coeur de l’Anarchie Militaire.
2002. 25 Jan. 2005 <http://www.cgb.fr/monnaies/rome/r11/article/2atelier.html>.
Mattingly, Harold, et al. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. IV. Part III. Gordian
III – Uranius Antoninus. London: Spink, 1949.
Metcalf, William E. “The Antioch Hoard of Antoniniani and the Eastern Coinage of
Trebonianus Gallus and Volusian.” The American Numismatic Society Museum Notes
22. New York: American Numismatic Society, 1977.
Schaad, Daniel. Le Trésor D’Eauze. Toulouse: APAMP 1992.
Vagi, David L. Coinage and History of the Roman Empire C. 82 B.C. – A.D. 480.
Sidney, Ohio: Amos, 1999.
Vermaat, Robert. “Zosimus - Historia Nova.” Vortigern Studies. 1999. 10 Feb.
2005 <http://www.vortigernstudies.org.uk/artsou/zosim.htm>
Yeat, Theedrich. Introduction to Jordanes’ “Getica.” 2003. 25 Jan. 2005 <http://www.harbornet.com/folks/theedrich/Goths/Goths1.htm#VI>.
Zosimus, New History. Book 1. Trans. G. J. Vossius. London: Green and Chaplin,
1814. Online edition. 2003. 20 Feb. 2005 <http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/zosimus01_book1.htm>