February 28

On This Day In Roman History

The Fourth Council of Constantinople comes to a close on February 28, 870 CE. This council was brought upon by the Eastern Emperor Basil I and Pope Adrian II, which contained some 100 bishops and a handful of other church nobles. The entire purpose of the council was to meet and affirm the decisions made in regards to Nicaean Christianity during the Second Council of Nicaea. While many of the discussions were rather intricate, the overall discussion involved under what circumstances and how the icon/image of Christ should be displayed. 

Did you know?

Pope Leo III, some 7 decades earlier, secured the Western papacy with the protection of Charlemagne. It was during this time that I like to refer to western history as "The Age of Charlemagne" simply because he really was starting to dominate things in the west. The picture was starting to change a bit by the mentioned 870, but the Franks still had a lot of weight in protecting the Popes through these times. With the west being secured under this Frankish control, the pontiffs of the east were met with a schism because they felt themselves the true descendants of the Roman Empire and its religion. 

Pictured: Basil I victorious in a wrestling match against a Bulgarian champion (far left), from the Madrid Skylitzes manuscript. Image by John Skylitzes, via Wikimedia Commons. 

Emperor Basil was known for his abilities in riding and taming horses. He also had a knack for wrestling, as he once reportedly beat a Bulgarian champion. His early fame, in conjunction with randomly being taken in by a wealthy woman who endowed him with riches, paved the way for his companionship with the Emperor. 

A selected quote from the Second Council of Nicaea: "We decree that the sacred image of our Lord Jesus Christ, the liberator and Savior of all people, must be venerated with the same honor as is given the book of the holy Gospels. For as through the language of the words contained in this book all can reach salvation, so, due to the action which these images exercise by their colors, all wise and simple alike, can derive profit from them. For what speech conveys in words, pictures announce and bring out in colors."

Opinion 

Welcome to my daily opinion! It seems like so much of this Byzantine history, especially late Byzantine history, is riddled with theological intricacies. I was happy I could at least spice it up a little today with an image of Basil wrestling a Bulgarian. I love reading how the Byzantines considered themselves still to be Romans at this point, and in my opinion, they are. Romans, like all people, are ever changing; it only makes sense that the new inheritors of Italy and its religion only find schisms with the now changed east. 

Sources

   Bigham, S. (2000). The image of God the Father in Orthodox iconography and other studies. Oakwood.

   Gregory, T. E. (2011). A history of Byzantium. Malden, Mass.: Wiley-Blackwell.

   Rahner, K. (2004). Encyclopedia of theology: the concise Sacramentum mundi. New Delhi: Continuum.

Further Reading: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Council_of_Constantinople_(Roman_Catholic)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basil_I

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlemagne

February 27

On This Day In Roman History, February 27

Theodosius II founds the Imperial University of Constantinople on February 27, 425 CE. The closer Greek translation of the school is known as the University of the Palace Hall of Magnaura. The Pandidakterion, as it is also commonly referred to, contained schools of law, philosophy, medicine, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, music, rhetoric, as well as another 23 schools. This type of education was only uncommon in Byzantine society in the sense that it was a higher level of education; many institutions for education on a variety of subjects, including fine-arts and types of academies, could already be found within Constantinople and other large Eastern Roman cities at this time. Within Byzantine culture, education was rather widespread for the time and could be found even at the "village level". 

Did you know?

The Pandidakterion only opened at the final urging of Theodosius' wife, Aelia Eudocia Augusta. Saint Eudocia, as she is more commonly known, had a prominent role in religious and educational culture within Constantinople during her lifetime. She most notably blended Christian and classic Greek Hellenistic cultures. During a speech she delivered during one of her pilgrimages to Jerusalem, she uttered the famous line "Υμετέρης γενεής τε καί αίματος εύχομαι είναι" or "Of your proud line and blood I claim to be" to her fellow Greek countrymen and woman in Antioch. For some further reading on this interesting woman I would highly recommend the book "Theodosian Empresses: Women and Imperial Dominion in Late Antiquity" (1982) by Kenneth Holum.

Pictured: A mosaic depicting St. Eudocia in the Alexander Nevsky Cathedral, Bulgaria. Image by Elena Chochkova, via Wikimedia Commons. I decided it fitting to picture one if its more dedicated patrons.

Many modern scholars tend to shy away from the use of the word "University" when describing the Pandidakterion, for a variety of reasons. The most prevalent of these reasons is that this school did not have the same "cooperative structures" that are reflected in many late medieval European universities or modern universities. I feel it safe to refer to this center of higher education as a sort of "proto-university".

Opinion

Welcome to my daily opinion! Even with the "dark-ages" approaching, it was still not an uncommon site for low-level (in terms of social standing) Byzantine citizens to receive a basic level of formal education, even within some of the smallest towns and villages. The Latin term "universitas" would not be used for another few hundred years, and it is important to remember that types of these higher-level educational facilities still didn't exist in this fairly well educated (for the time) society. The school would be rebuilt after the sack of Constantinople as Istanbul University, which still exists today. 

Sources

   Cuming, G. J. (1972). Popular belief and practice: papers read at the ninth summer meeting and the tenth winter meeting of the Ecclesiastical History Society. Leiden: Brill.

   Holum, K. G. (1982). Theodosian empresses: Women and imperial dominion in Late Antiquity. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

   Jeffreys, E., Haldon, J., & Cormack, R. (2008). The Oxford handbook of Byzantine studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Further Reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Constantinople

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istanbul_University

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aelia_Eudocia

February 26

On This Day In Roman History, February 26

Flavius Valentinianus Augustus is proclaimed Emperor in front of his soldiers on February 26, 364 CE. The initial reaction was nearly disastrous for Valentinian I and the soldiers nearly rioted during his ascension speech. Valentinian rebutted by taking his new Imperial authority in stride and guaranteeing the army was his first priority. One of his first actions of Emperor was appointing a co-Augustus, even though he was the sole ruler of the Empire. His goal would be to eliminate Eastern discontent at the civic level by allowing them to retain their Imperial interests in the form of the co-Augustus. This eventual appointment would come in the form of his brother, Valens, who ascended to co-Augustus in Constantinople on March 28. 

Did you know?

Although Valens was officially an Augustus, his power was certainly far less than that of Valentinian. Valens official title was praefectura praetorio Orientis, which can be translated as praetorian prefecture of the East. This position was formally established after the death of Constantine in 337 when Constantius II received control of the east. The control of this position reached from the far Eastern Balkans to the south-eastern borders of Jerusalem. The first link in the further reading section contains a map of who controlled what and shows in better detail the territorial expanse I just briefly described. 

Pictured: The Colossus of Barletta. Photo by it.wiki user Marcok, via Wikimedia Commons. 

This bronze statue, standing 16 ft. 7 in. (5.11m) tall, certainly depicts an Eastern Roman Emperor. It very well could depict Valentinian I and would be the only image we have of the man along with few different types of Roman coins depicting his bust. Its discovery was made by The Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II during excavation projects of Ravena. It is most likely when the statue was originally moved to southern Italy. The figure was originally missing parts of its arms and legs which were probably used to cast bells in 1309. Repairs to replace the missing bronze were made in the 15th century. 

Opinion 

Welcome to my daily opinion! One of my favorite times during Valentinian's reign was in 367, during a period known as "The Great Conspiracy". In the winter of 367 Roman soldiers rebelled and allowed a large group of confederated Picts to move through Hadrian's Wall. At the same time, an assortment of Scotti, Saxons, and Attacotti attacked during a probably pre-arranged maneuver in conjunction with the Picts. The result was the complete overrun of Britania and the death of the commanding general to the seacoast regions and the Dux of Brianniarum. The facts and timeline of the event are questionable at best because the only Roman to write about it in extensive detail was hundreds of miles away and relying on second-hand information. It is most likely the soldiers at Hadrian's Wall were simply bribed to stand down, and because a majority of them were already Romano-British in culture, the price was probably lower than Valentinian would care to admit. It is during this period we can see the further destabilization from within the state on all borders of the Roman Empire, and it most definitely was a foreshadowing of what is to come in the west. 

Sources

   Hughes, I. (2013). Imperial brothers: Valentinian, Valens and the disaster at Adrianople. Barnsley: Pen et Sword Military.

   Jones, A. H. (1964). The later Roman empire 284 - 602. Oxford: Blackwell.

   Lenski, N. (2002). Failure of empire: Valens and the Roman state in the fourth century A.D. Berkeley (Calif.): University of California Press.

Further Reading: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Praetorian_prefecture_of_the_East#/media/File:Praetorian_Prefectures_of_the_Roman_Empire_395_AD.png

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinian_I

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossus_of_Barletta

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Conspiracy

February 25

On This Day In Roman History, February 25

Emperor Hadrian formally adopts Antoninus Pius as his heir on February 25, 138 CE. Antoninus had begun to win favor with Hadrian as early as 118, with an unusually successful fulfillment of the roles quaestor and praetor. By 120 Antoninus had served as consul and after was promoted to one of the four administrators in Italia. Sometime between 134 and 136, he became the proconsul of Asia, where he achieved even more success and popularity. Hadrian would then adopt him just a few years later on the condition that Antoninus, in turn, adopted Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus, both of whom would eventually be Emperor. 

Did you know?

Antoninus never commanded, or even saw, a Roman army. The modern historian J. J. Wilkes, The Journal of Roman Studies, writes about this stating "...throughout the twenty-three years of his reign, he never went within five hundred miles of a legion". His non-military reign, while obviously uncommon, came to allow him to be known as one of the "Five Good Emperors". His reign would go down as the most peaceful rule of any Principate Emperor and still saw widespread success domestically, both financially and politically. 

Pictured: Statue of Antonius Pius in military garb and muscle cuirass, from the Museo Chiaramonti in Vatican City. Image by Jean-Pol GRANDMONT, via Wikimedia Commons.

Encyclopedia Britannica writes about Antoninus, praising him alongside authors such as Edward Gibbon as ideal Roman gentleman. " A few months afterwards, on Hadrian's death, he was enthusiastically welcomed to the throne by the Roman people, who, for once, were not disappointed in their anticipation of a happy reign. For Antoninus came to his new office with simple tastes, kindly disposition, extensive experience, a well-trained intelligence and the sincerest desire for the welfare of his subjects. Instead of plundering to support his prodigality, he emptied his private treasury to assist distressed provinces and cities, and everywhere exercised rigid economy (hence the nickname κυμινοπριστης "cummin-splitter"). Instead of exaggerating into treason whatever was susceptible of unfavorable interpretation, he turned the very conspiracies that were formed against him into opportunities for demonstrating his clemency. Instead of stirring up persecution against the Christians, he extended to them the strong hand of his protection throughout the empire. Rather than give occasion to that oppression which he regarded as inseparable from an emperor's progress through his dominions, he was content to spend all the years of his reign in Rome, or its neighbourhood."

Opinion 

Welcome to my daily opinion! While there is no doubt Antoninus was a formidable statesman and administrator, I really think he gets more praise than he deserves. Historian J.B Bury seems to agree with me, stating that "The rest which the Empire enjoyed under his auspices had been rendered possible through Hadrian’s activity...". I fully agree with him and think while Antoninus most certainly does get to fall into the Five Good Emperors, he is in my opinion number 5. Another cool thing about Antoninus is he had confirmed direct descendants well into the fifth century and was notably the maternal grandfather of Commodus. If you want to see a crazy family tree, check out the Nerva-Antonine family tree. I'll put the link first in the further reading section. The last thing I would like to mention today is the crazy fact that the first recorded ambassadorial mission to China is recorded shortly after Antoninus' death. It is the first time the two states met and was most certainly arranged by Antoninus. 

Sources

   Chrisholm, Hugh (1911). The Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences, Literature and General Information, Volumes 1-2. University Press. p. 149.

   Bury, J. B. (1930). A history of the Roman Empire from its foundation to the death of Marcus Aurelius. London.

   Albino Garzetti. From Tiberius to the Antonines A History of the Roman Empire Ad 14-192. (2014). Routledge.

Further Reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoninus_Pius#Nerva.E2.80.93Antonine_family_tree

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoninus_Pius

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Roman_relations

February 24

On This Day In Roman History, February 24

The Roman festival known as Regifugium (the King's flight) is commemorated on February 24.  This holiday supposedly celebrates the fleeing of the legendary seventh king of Rome from the city. This king was known as Lucius Tarquinius Superbus, the final king of Rome. There are conflicting accounts on the actual meaning of this festival, with Plutarch stating it meant the flight of a priest known as the rex sacrorum (king of the sacred). This priest was also known as rex sacrificulus (one who makes offerings made by the king) which may give some clues to contemporary or modern confusion on the holidays meaning. This priest was not allowed to visit the Roman comitium (open-aired meeting place for political purposes) except in the annual case of a sacrifice made on behalf of the king. Upon this sacrifice being completed, the priest would flee the comitium; this symbolical flight may be the actual meaning behind the Regifugium. 

Did you know?

Lucius Tarquinius Superbus would attempt to once again take back Rome after his exile in 509 BCE. This battle would come sometime between 496 - 489 BCE and would be known as the Battle of Lake Regillus. This battle would represent the Roman Republic's first steps at becoming the more dominant force over the Latin League and other Latin Kings/Dictator city-states. 

Pictured: Tarquinius Superbus by Lawrence Alma-Tadema, depicting the king receiving a laurel (1867). Via Wikimedia Commons. 

I have decided to leave a larger passage from Ovid's Fasti II today, as it is his personal take on the story "The Flight of the King".

"Now I have to tell of the Flight of the King: The sixth day from the end of the month has that name. Tarquin the Proud held the last kingship of the Roman people, A man of injustice, but powerful in might. He had taken cities, and overthrown others, And made Gabii his, by base trickery. For the youngest of his three sons, Sextus, clearly a child Of Tarquin, entered the midst of his enemies in the still of night. They drew their swords: he said: `Don't kill the unarmed! That's what my brother, and father, Tarquin, desire, He who lacerated my back with a cruel scourge.' So he could make his plea, he had suffered a beating... It was night, and the whole house was without light: He rose, and drew his sword from his gilded scabbard, And, chaste wife, he entered your bedroom. As he touched the bed, the king's son said: `Lucretia I have a blade, and I, a Tarquin, speak!' She said nothing: she'd no voice or powers of speech Nor any capability for thought in her whole mind. But she trembled like a little lamb, caught straying From the fold, brought low by a wolf's attack. What could she do? Fight? In battle a woman loses. Cry out? But the sword in his right hand restrained her... What she could, she told. The end she suppressed: She wept, and a blush spread over a wife's cheeks. Her husband and her father forgave her being forced: She said: `I deny myself the forgiveness that you grant.' Then she stabbed herself with a blade she had hidden, And, all bloodied, fell at her father's feet. Even then she took care in dying so that she fell With decency, that was her care even in falling... Brutus, with a shout, Gathered the Quirites, and told of the king's evil act. Tarquin the Proud and his children fled, a consul took up the rule For the year: That day was the last day of kingship. Am I wrong, or has the swallow come, herald of the Spring: Does she not fear lest winter should turn back, return again? Often, Procne, you'll complain that you've been too swift, And your husband, Tereus, rejoice in the cold you feel.."

Opinion

Welcome to my daily opinion! Today I really think that both of these stories influenced the festival Regifugium. I believe that while the original notion or ceremony of fleeing may have loosely coincided with the actual fleeing of the final king of Rome. However, the rex sacrificulus probably had his ceremonial fleeing based off of the mentioned flight of the king. The king had very important roles in religious ceremonies for ancient Romans, and after he was gone these duties simply couldn't just stop. When the rex sacrificulus took these duties over, it was still forced upon him to flee from the comitium for the sake of tradition/remembrance. I think this helps to explain why Ovid and Plutarch mention two different individual's flights; simply due to the fact that they represent the same flight, the Flight of the King, and in some ways the birth of the republic. 

Sources

   Franzero, C. M. (1961). The life and times of Tarquin the Etruscan. New York: John Day.

   Rüpke, J., & Gordon, R. (2009). Religion of the Romans. Cambridge: Polity Press.

   Smith, W., Wayte, W., & Marindin, G. E. (1901). A dictionary of Greek and Roman antiquities. London: J. Murray.

Further Reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regifugium

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rex_Sacrorum

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucius_Tarquinius_Superbus

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Lake_Regillus

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comitium

Special Thanks: Nick Ellison 

P.S. Congrats on your CFI Checkride, Nick! 

February 23

On This Day In Roman History, February 23.

The Diocletianic persecutions begin with the destruction of the church in Nicomedia on February 23, 303 CE. These edicts were issued by Emperor Diocletian, as the name implies, and were aimed at forcing universal sacrifice in compliance with classical Roman religion. The problems for Diocletian were arising as early as 299 during the Persian wars when a sacrificial divination meant to predict the future failed. The haruspex declared it must have been because of profane men in the form of Christians within the imperial household. Diocletian and his co-Emperor agreed the best course of action was to force the entire army to perform pagan sacrifices or else face discharge. Later by 303, the initial edicts targeted high-ranking and property holding Christians. The second set of edicts in the summer of 303 ordered the arrest of all bishops and priests. 

Did you know?

In a large majority of Roman provinces, the edicts were very loosely followed and enforced. Many pagans were recorded as being sympathetic for persecuted Christians, and several Christians bought their way out of sacrificing. One of the more interesting stories is a record of a man giving his pagan brother the power of attorney to sacrifice in court on his behalf, therefore avoiding the actual sacrifice. 

Pictured: The Christian Martyrs' Last Prayer, by Jean-Léon Gérôme (1883). Via Wikimedia Commons. 

The passage from Gibbon's work I choose to use today must be recognized for being somewhat bias against Christians, however, his point on the exaggeration of some persecutions are correct regarding their nature. 

"After the church had triumphed over all her enemies, the interest as well as vanity of the captives prompted them to magnify the merit of their respective suffering. A convenient distance of time and place gave an ample scope to the progress of fiction; and the frequent instances which might be alleged of holy martyrs, whose wounds had been instantly healed, whose strength had been renewed, and whose lost members had miraculously been restored, were extremely convenient for the purpose of removing every difficulty, and of silencing every objection. The most extravagant legends, as they conduced to the honour of the church, were applauded by the incredulous multitude, countenanced by the power of the clergy, and attested by the suspicious evidence of ecclesiastical history."

Opinion

Welcome to my daily opinion! It's important to view these events from the middle of the road. While the above quote is somewhat biased, by this point in history there was a large number of practicing Christians within the Empire and local authorities commonly recognized their place in Roman society. It is true that there were some exaggerations put into place by history's "Christian-centric" ways of thinking at later dates, especially in the early dark ages. There is still some truth to these stories, however, and many Christians did in fact pay with their lives simply because of their religious beliefs. At the beginning of the 4th-century, these edicts were simply too little too late, and Christianity was already far too well implanted in large bodies and institutions across the Empire. I have said it before in my daily opinions but if you want to successfully run a multi-cultural/ multi-religious Empire you need to not marginalize, or persecute for that matter, groups within your state. 

Sources

   Frend, W. H. (1991). The rise of Christianity. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

   Gibbon, E., & Womersley, D. (2005). The history of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire: Volume the first (1776) and Volume the second (1781). London: Penguin.

   Liebeschuetz, J. H. (1996). Continuity and change in Roman religion. London: Sandpiper Books.

   Louth, A., & Williamson, G. A. (1989). Eusebius: the history of the church from Christ to Constantine. London: Penguin.

Further Reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diocletianic_Persecution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diocletian

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Milvian_Bridge

February 22

On This Day In Roman History, February 22

The Roman festival of the Caristia, sometimes known as the Cara Cognatio, is celebrated in ancient Rome on February 22. This private holiday was mainly celebrated in one's own home, and looked to celebrate and commemorate the personal family bonds. The family would dine together all day, lighting incense to the personal family Lares. These Lares were guardian deities most likely being a representing hero-ancestors or family guardians of the hearth/home. This holiday follows the trends seen in early February, especially in the context of Parentalia, honoring past family members. This holiday, unlike other Roman public holidays, was allowed to fall on an even numbered date simply because it was privately observed. 

Did you know?

This holiday was practiced and even flourished well into the 6th-century. The Caristia was on the calendar long into the late Roman Empire during Christian rule, and in many ways tranformed into a Christian tradition. Polemius Silvius was responsible for re-writing the Julian calendar to help better integrate Christian holidays into the Roman-Pagan festival cycle. He replaced Caristia with a feast day commemorating the burial of St. Peter and St. Paul, and branding the day as a "love feast". Finally, during the late 6th-century, many of the traditions associated with this festival were deemed too "Pagan". Things like dancing, singing, and drinking were deemed simply too "demonic" to be kept around. 

Pictured: Roman fresco from the lararium of the house of Iulius Polybius (IX 13,3) in Pompeii. Depicts Ancestral sacrifices. Picture by Wikipedia user WolfgangRieger, via Wikimedia Commons.

Ovid writes in jest of the holiday stating that the only way to truly enjoy Caristia is by excluding family members who would normally be causing trouble within the household. 

Many homes had a Lararium where they would display the family Lares. Some could dedicate an entire wall and stone cut mural, while more modest homes would have something closer to a six inch statue depiction within an indent of a wall. Some homes, like that of the image shown, had two Laraiums, one being outside for public purposes, the other the mentioned inside for personal family practices. 

Opinion

Welcome to my daily opinion! I was at first puzzled why some of the more "gruesome" festivals like that of Feralia mentioned a few days ago, can be celebrated nearly back to back with a seemingly wholesome holiday. It starts to make sense, however, as one compares what the true purposes of each holiday meant to the people celebrating them. Both of these holidays are celebrating the purpose of family, both living and past. They really seem to remember and honor those who are still living and have a respectful, if not also pretty creepy, take on the deceased. It is also interesting to think this holiday was one of the few that almost made it through the Christian purge of pagan holidays. We were only a few hundred years off from celebrating this one! 

Sources

   Beard, M., North, J., & Price, S. R. (2013). Religions of Rome. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

   Clarke, J. R. (2007). The houses of Roman Italy, 100 B.C. - A.D. 250: ritual, space, and decoration. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.

   Naso, P. O., & Wiseman, A. (2013). Ovid, Fasti. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.

Further Reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caristia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polemius_Silvius

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lares

Special Thanks: Michael Houghan

February 21

On This Day In Roman History, February 21

Saint Athanasius of Alexandria returns to his episcopal hometown at Alexandria after a series of edicts by Emperor Julian on February 21, 362 CE. This return from exile was actually Anthasansius' 3rd of 5 total exiles. This most recent third exile was brought upon by an appointment of an Arian bishop to the see of Alexandria known as George of Cappadocia. Athanasius would be forced to flee the city and retreat to the safety of the broad expanse of deserts in Upper Egypt. Here he would write several notable letters including "Apology to Constantius" and "Apology for his Flight". Athanasius was a supporter of Trinitarianism, and one of its most prolific defenders. He supported this over the dominant sect of Christianity, Arianism. The edicts that Julian had introduced allowed more freedom for Athanasius in the form of suppressing the Arians, which were the most popular Christians. It was during this time Athanasius was able to re-bolster his beliefs, which was most importantly in the form of the Creed of Niceae. His fourth exile would come in the following year when Julian further disposed of Christian institutions, this time it being Athanasius and his Trinitarianism. 

Did you know?

Gregory of Nazianzus, a prevalent 4th-century Archbishop of Constantinople, considered him the "Pillar of the Church" only a few years after his death. He is labeled today as the "Father of Orthodoxy". He is venerated by Roman Catholics, Lutherans, Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Churches, as well as in the Anglican Communion. His Latin nickname was "Athanasius Contra Mundum" which translates to "Athanasius against the world". This was particularly true due to his number of exiles and direct struggle against the Emperors Constantine, Constantius II, Julian and Valens. 

Pictured: Saint Athanasius and Cyril of Jerusalem (one of Anthanasius' greatest supporters). Athanasius of Alexandria asks questions, Cyril of Jerusalem responds. A 17th-century depiction, via Wikimedia Commons. 

Athanasius was a contemporary "bestselling author" during his time alive. One of his most important works was titled Life of Anthony and covered the life of the Egyptian-born Christian monk Saint Anthony. Being so immensely popular, it help spread the ascetic ideals that Athanasius believed in both the Eastern and Western Christian churches. I have decided to also include an excerpt from his most famous Festal Letter which he wrote during his exiles. "I know moreover that not only this thing saddens you, but also the fact that while others have obtained the churches by violence, you are meanwhile cast out from your places. For they hold the places, but you the Apostolic Faith. They are, it is true, in the places, but outside of the true Faith; while you are outside the places indeed, but the Faith, within you. Let us consider whether is the greater, the place or the Faith. Clearly the true Faith. Who then has lost more, or who possesses more? He who holds the place, or he who holds the Faith?"

Opinion

Welcome to my daily opinion! This guy wrote a lot of stuff, and it really helps to paint the picture of how early Christianity was forming into what it is today. This guy was a serious figure in terms of Christian history and this is proven by being venerated by so many churches. venerated by Roman Catholics, Lutherans, Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Churches, as well as in the Anglican Communion?! Go ahead and find someone with a similar or more impressive resume, you will be pretty hard pressed. While I am not particularly interested in the nitty-gritty theological debates happening within the Christian sects during this time, there is no doubt the historical value this man provides is immense, and as a writer of history, I salute him. 

Sources

   A., Schaff, P., Wace, H., Robertson, A. & A. (1994). Athanasius: select works and letters. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.

   Barnes, T. D. (2004). Athanasius and Constantius: theology and politics in the Constantinian Empire. New York: ACLS History E-Book Project.

   Hardy, E. R. (2006). Christology of the later Fathers. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press.

   Hefele, C. J. (2007). History of the councils of the church: from the original documents, to the close of the second century. Place of publication not identified: Wipf & Stock.

Further Reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athanasius_of_Alexandria

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_the_Great

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_of_Nazianzus

Special Thanks: Michael Houghan

February 20

On This Day In Roman History, February 20

The nine-day festival of Parentalia ends on the night of February 21, leading into the celebration of Feralia. This festival celebrated the Roman spirits of the dead which can be best translated into the Latin "Manes". On February 14th I discussed this interesting word and how we can come to understand what use it had in the previous celebrations of Parentalia. This Feralia, however, is a bit darker in its nature and plays into the dark rites/beliefs aimed at the "gods below" (di inferi). No classical text survives in any detail accounting for what public rites must have taken place except for a curious description from Ovid. He states a Greco-Roman magic ritual takes place with the ring leader being a drunken old woman. She begins by place incense around an area to where an unknown mouse is buried in the floor. She chews 7 black beans in her mouth to a paste, smears this paste onto a head of a fish, and then roasts this fish head with a bronze needle stabbed through it in her home oven. The only clue we are given to what this may have represented comes from some knowledge of the significance of the items used, which I will mention below, and the quote from her that Ovid writes saying "I have gagged spiteful tongues and muzzled unfriendly mouths".

Did you know?

The color black is very important to this story because it most likely shows the ties to the chthonic deities. Historians can see the other important uses of the color black in practices like animal sacrifices. An example of this is black bulls being sacrificed to the chthonic deities at the beginning of Parentalia. The black beans most likely point to this and help us to better understand what these bizarre rituals and magic rites may have been used for. 

Pictured: Triple-formed representation of Hecate. Marble, Roman copy after an original of the Hellenistic period. Photo by Wikipedia user Jastrow, via Wikimedia Commons. 

I chose this image today due to the fact this deity is on the list of the mentioned "Di inferi", or gods of below. Hecate, also sometimes known as Trivia, can be translated to "three paths". She was part of the triple goddess along with Luna and Proserpina, which although having its roots in Greek culture, were later adapted in Roman. 

Ovid writes later about the use of the black beans, which were most likely used to lure malicious spirits from the home, saying "And after washing his hands clean in spring water, he turns, and first he receives black beans and throws them away with face averted; but while he throws them, he says: 'These I cast; with these beans I redeem me and mine.' This he says nine times, without looking back: the shade is thought to gather the beans, and to follow unseen behind. Again he touches water, and clashes Temesan bronze, and asks the shade to go out of his house. When he has said nine times, 'Ghosts of my fathers, go forth!' he looks back, and thinks that he has duly performed the sacred rites."

Opinion 

Welcome to my daily opinion! Another sort of spooky holiday to write about! It is important to remember just how little we know about these ancient rites. Traditions like these were already being lost to time and understanding during the period where we can gather the most information on them. However, the clues we can see from other Roman festivals and other Greco-cultural holidays allows us to deduct some pretty specific meanings alongside with writings like that of Ovid. An interesting note from this festival comes from Ovid once again. He wrote that one time the Romans forgot to practice and sacrifice on Feralia during an important war-time. This in turn prompted spirits of fallen Romans to ascend from their graves, walking the streets moaning and wailing. This is some serious Roman "night of the living dead" material! 

Sources

   Bonnefoy, Y. (1992). Roman and European mythologies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

   Dumézil, G. (1996). Archaic Roman religion: with an appendix on the religion of the Etruscans. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

   O., Boyle, A. J., & Woodard, R. D. (2004). Fasti. London: Penguin Books.

   Rüpke, J. (2011). A companion to Roman religion. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

Further Reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feralia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dea_Tacita

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larunda

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemuria_(festival)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Di_inferi

Special Thanks: Michael Houghan

February 19

On This Day In Roman History, February 19

The Battle of Lugdunum, along with its some 130,000 belligerents, takes place in modern Lyon France on February 19, 197 CE. The Year of the Five Emperors was coming to a conclusion as the final usurper, Septimius Severus, began to move on the current standing Emperor Didius Julianus. Julianus had recently bought his position from the Praetorian Guard, and was now being moved against by the commander of the Pannonian legions, Severus. With successful campaigning in 195, Severus allied with the governor of Syria and with Clodius Albinus, who was the commander of the Britannia legions. Didius Julianus was disposed of and Severus assumed the throne declaring Albinus to the rank of Caesar. This would be short-lived, however, due to Severus eventually naming his own son Caesar. This move to promote his son could only happen once Severus had amassed enough political legitimacy, notably connecting himself with Marcus Aurelius. Upon the declaration, Albinus was declared a public enemy by the rubber-stamp Senate. Albinus would then take his three legions through Gaul eventually meeting Severus at Tinurtium. The final battle concluded at the end of February 19, where Severus' advantage in calvary allowed him to win a decisive victory over the ex-Caesar. 

Did you know? 

Roughly three-quarters of the entire standing Roman forces met at this battle. A detailed account of the battle has been lost to history, as has the actual numbers of forces involved. Dio gives a figure of 300,000 which would simply not be a possible number. The archeological evidence and knowledge of the standing army during this time in Romes history probably puts the figure much closer to 100,000-165,000 combatants involved. 

Pictured: A modern artistic depiction of the dead Albinus being inspected by Severus. Albinus either killed himself after fleeing sometime shortly post-battle or was killed by spy's employed by Severus. Whichever the case, Severus had the body stripped and beheaded, riding his horse over it in order to really get the point across to any leftover political supporters of Albinus. 

Opinion

Welcome to my daily opinion! This Roman civil war would cripple the northern territories ability to resist barbarous attacks, especially in Britain. You cannot simply amass 75% of your entire standing forces, lose a massive chunk from both sides, and then just hope to continue your complete European dominance. Severus would be wary about future problems with Britannia and split it up into two sections, further weakening its structure against northern incursions. Maybe Severus and Albinus should have just had an arm-wrestling competition and called it good. 

Sources

   Birley, A. R. (2000). Septimius Severus: the African emperor. London: Routledge.

   Bowie, E., Swain, S., Harrison, S., & Elsner, J. (2007). Severan Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

   Magie, D., O'Brien-Moore, A., & Ballou, S. H. (1922). The Scriptores historiae Augustae. London: W. Heinemann.

Further Reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Lugdunum

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Didius_Julianus

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_of_the_Five_Emperors

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septimius_Severus

Special Thanks: Michael Houghan

February 18

On This Day In Roman History, February 18

No historical events on this day! I will instead look back at yesterday again and discuss the feriae conceptivae Fornacalia, which normally ends on February 17. The Roman festival Fornacalia has its roots deep within ancient Roman tradition and was celebrated to honor the goddess Fornax. On February 1st I talked about a Roman festival involving the goddess of the door hinge, and today's goddess is only a little less trivial. Fornax was the personification of the oven or furnace, which made it directly related to the making and baking of bread. Families would bring a certain type of grain known as spelt to be toasted into a sacrificial cake at gathering places near the Curio Maximus. It was believed this would help prevent any baking fires that may happen over the course of the coming year. 

Did you know?

This festival was associated with and also honored the Roman mythological figure Quirinus. This figure was an early god embodying the Roman state and government. The entomology for this name is almost certainly derived from the Latin "quiris" meaning "spear", or"wielder of the spear". Quirinus was most likely a Sabine deity comparable to a chief god and was adopted into early Latin culture. 

Pictured: Denarius picturing Quirinus on the obverse, and Ceres enthroned on the reverse, a commemoration by a moneyer in 56 BC of a Cerialia presented by an earlier Gaius Memmius as aedile. Classical Numismatic Group, Inc. http://www.cngcoins.com, via Wikimedia Commons.

The religious historian Angelo Brelich argues to say that Quirinus and Romulus were "originally the same divine entity" during the time of Roman religion becoming demythicised. He defends this mainly by showing the similarities of the two in ancient writings, especially with their association of the specific grain of spelt. Ovid writes of Fornacalia saying "now the Curio Maximus, in a set form of words, declares the shifting date of the Fornacalia, the Feast of Ovens, and round the Forum hang many tablets, on which every ward displays its particular sign."

Opinion

Welcome to my daily opinion! It is so interesting to see the early entomology for these religious figures, and how their overlap is more common the further one looks back. The complexity of all things, even religion, grows stronger over time. As we peak further and further back into these festivals and their associated religious deities, several gods and goddess, as well as traditions, seem to merge from individual beliefs and traditions. Even between the Sabines, Etruscans, and Latins traditions and beliefs that overlap emerge during the early 900's BCE. Of course the fundamentals for these beliefs were happening long before this time, but without a time machine we will never know just how interconnected many of these religions, in their beginning, really were. 

Sources

   O., Boyle, A. J., & Woodard, R. D. (2004). Fasti. London: Penguin Books.

   Orlin, E. M. (2010). Foreign cults in Rome: creating a Roman Empire. New York: Oxford University Press.

   Warde, W. (2012). Roman festivals of the period of the republic. Place of publication not identified: Hardpress Publishing.

Further Reading: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fornacalia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quirinus

https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angelo_Brelich (Italian) 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fornax_(mythology)

Special Thanks: Michael Houghan

February 17

On This Day In Roman History, February 17

The Roman Emperor Flavius Iovianus Augustus is found dead in his personal tent while en route to Constantinople on the morning of February 17, 364 CE. His death was motst likely caused by a small warming fire found within his tent, causing carbon monoxide causing to Jovian. He was planning on consolidating his newfound power there by eliminating some political opponents. Jovian had recently accepted a peace treaty with the Persians on somewhat demeaning terms, which made him wildly unpopular with the Roman public and elite alike. 

Did you know?

Jovian was an active Christian and began to turn around the previous policy of the former Emperor, Julian the Apostate. He went as far to outlaw even private meetings and practicing of pagans and made it punishable by death. He revoked the previous edicts of Julian which had persecuted Christians and re-instated the Labarum as the army standard. Jovian would be painted in positive light for centuries by Christian writers. 

Pictured: Solidus of emperor Jovian, via Wikimedia Commons .

Excerpt from "All Empires History Forum": 

By the 4th Century CE, service in the Roman Army had become a heriditary occupation, sons almost invariably following their fathers into the service. This especially applied in the case of the children of officers. So Jovian pursued a military career like his father, and also served in the comes domesticorum. Either talent, or his father's influence, had put him in command of the corps by the early 360s. Later legends that Jovian's military career was stifled because Emperor Julian opposed his Christian faith appear to be just that - legends.

Jovian seems to have married a woman bearing the clearly Germanic name of Charito. She was the daughter of one Lucillianus, a decorated military officer who had served against the usurper Magnentius and who had also commanded the comes domesticorum under Gallus (358-359). Jovian's marriage to this woman is known to have produced two sons, but history has only remembered the name of the elder, who was named Varronianus in honor of his grandfather.

Opinion

The early beginnings  of feudalism that would define Europe for the next thousand years are starting to take place. As I mentioned above, army careers were most certainly a hereditary service. So many other jobs during this time were following this trend. It was a culture shift that would subsequently add to the world making its shift into the dark ages. It is also interesting to see how romanticized Jovian was for some time in early Christian writings for vanquishing paganism, but he was quickly overshadowed by more prolific Christian activists. 

Sources

   Gibbon, E. (2015). The History Of The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire. Project Gutenberg.

   Odahl, C. M. (2006). Constantine and the Christian empire. London: Routledge.

   Tougher, S. (2008). Julian the Apostate. Edinburgh: Edinburgh Univ. Press.

Further Reading:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jovian_(emperor)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labarum

Special Thanks: Michael Houghan 

February 16

On This Day In Roman History, February 16

Imperator Caesar Nerva Traianus Divi Nervae filius Augustus, known today simply as Trajan, sends a laurelled letter to the Senate declaring the Parthian campaign completed on February 16, 116 CE. Classical historians, such as Dio, considered the campaign to be brought about due to the lust for prestige in the form of territorial annexation. Modern historians consider the motivation to be derived from financial and political issues. Parthia had placed a King in power of Armenia that was considered unacceptable by Rome. Parthia also controlled important Indian trade routes as well as very profitable small scale Semitic city-to-city trade. Trajan looked to turn all three of these elements into a more favorable situation for the Romans. Trajan's health would later begin to falter during the sieging of the city of Hatra, where he may have contracted heat stroke. Trajan would sail back to Italy due to his illness and die in 117 inside the city of Selinus, which would later be named Trajanopolis to honor his passing.

Did you know?

During Trajan's conquest of Dacia, Syrian auxiliary units would be used with much success. One of the more interesting units was a cavalry camel unit from Palmyrene support. This campaign against Dacia was Trajan's first steps into de-stabilizing Semitic trade and putting it under the Roman yoke through the hopeful annexation of Charax. M. I. Finley (a modern historian on ancient economies) controversially argue that this campaign was a "badly miscalculated and expensive assault on Parthia" which led to an example of one of many Roman "commercial wars". 

Pictured: Aureus issued by Trajan to celebrate the conquest of Parthia. The coin depicts Trajan adorned with a laureate and the reverse two mourning Parthians with their heads down below the trophy of Roman conquest. Classical Numismatic Group, Inc. http://www.cngcoins.com, via Wikimedia Commons.

Opinion

Welcome to my daily opinion. While many sources disagree about the causes of the Parthian Campaign, I chose to believe it happened for reasons meeting somewhere in the middle. The Roman Empire was huge, and I mean huge even before the Parthian conquests. The spoils of war seemed obvious, as did the motivation to collapse near-eastern trade monopolies. However, foreign wars against enemies who are very equipped and knowledgeable of the surrounding harsh terrain and environment are expensive. Do we not often see large, rich states and nations spending way too much to do way too little in foreign occupation and conquest? Trajan was the victor of this campaign, and Rome was at its largest territorial expanse. But at what cost? I do think the trade control and territorial control Rome was rewarded came close to making it worth the entire campaign. Close, but no cigar. 

Sources

   Luttwak, E. N. (1994). The grand strategy of the Roman Empire: from the first century A.D. to the third. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press.

   Mattern, S. P. (2002). Rome and the enemy imperial strategy in the principate. Berkeley: University of California Press.

   Sidebotham, S. E. (1986). Roman economic policy in the Erythra Thalassa 30 B.C. - A.D. 217. Leiden: Brill.

Further Reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charax_Spasinu

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trajan#War_against_Parthia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitos_War

Special Thanks: Michael Houghan

February 15

On This Day In Roman History, February 15

The Byzantine Emperors Tiberius III and Leontios, along with Tiberius' brother Heraclius, are executed publicly by Justinian II in the Hippodrome of Constantinople on February 15, 706 CE. This event would ultimately begin as Justinian looked to return from exile and once again rule the empire. His initial gathering of forces was done through the help of Tervel of Bulgaria. This would later go on to become the First Bulgarian Empire soon after this time. He was able to levy some 15,000 Slavic horsemen and approach Constantinople. Upon approaching the city gates, Justinian attempted (for three days) to persuade the citizens to throw open the gates and let him in. On the fourth night, an old sewer was used to gain entry to the city and Justinian was accompanied by a few close allies. Once he was in the city, supporters were eager to rally behind the former Emperor and he performed a coup that was over before morning. 

Did you know?

The common practice of mutilating an Emperor upon his deposition was common in Byzantine culture. Justinian was a victim of this, having his nose cut off by an angry crowd under Leontios in 695. Justinian would later break the status quo by serving as an Emperor who had previously been mutilated; this was never before done. He did so in part by having a solid gold replica of his nose created, which he wore in place of his original.

Pictured: The Mutilation of the Byzantine Emperors Justinian II and Phillipicus, unknown author. Tempera colors, gold leaf, gold paint, and ink on parchment, mid-1410's. Via Wikimedia Commons.

Justinian was weary of potential heirs to both Tiberius III and Leontios. As I mentioned, Tiberius' brother Heraclius was also put to death simply because he would be too dangerous to be kept alive. Several of these men's partisans were later hanged, which ranged from common military men all the way up to high-ranking court officials.

Opinion

Welcome to my daily opinion! The Byzantines were metal. A solid-gold nasal prosthesis?! This has to be one of the craziest revenge stories for the Byzantines. Justinian II came back to power after losing his nose and almost his life only to overthrow the very men who deposed him, and this revenge dish was served ice-cold as he publicly mutilated and executed his rivals. I am going to leave an artist's depiction of this in the first "further reading" link so you can all see how seriously metal this dude probably looked. The metal cherry on top of the metal float is found in Justinian's death; he was arrested and beheaded where his head was kept as a trophy, golden nose and all. 

Sources

   Canduci, A. (2010). The immortal emperors: two thousand years of imperial Roman history. Sydney: Murdoch Books.

   Norwich, J. J. (2004). Byzantium: the early centuries. London: Penguin books.

   The Oxford dictionary of Byzantium. (1991). New York: Oxford Univ. Press.

   Treadgold, W. T. (2000). A history of the Byzantine state and society. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Further Reading:
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/47/ff/20/47ff204b24a707f491c2f33e99f23cd7.jpg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justinian_II
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tervel_of_Bulgaria
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leontios
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiberios_III

Special Thanks: Michael Houghan

February 14

On This Day In Roman History, February 14

The 9-day festival of Parentalia or dies parentales would be celebrated, starting from February 13 and ending on February 22. Its main purpose was to honor the ancestors in one's own family, presenting sacrifices and offerings to their memory. The Roman state observed the holiday by having a Vestal conduct a rite and bringing some type of offering to the tomb of the fabled Tarpeia. Ovid's writing describes the scene of paterfamilias, or heads of the family, which includes offerings like wheat, wine-soaked bread, and flower garlands. This was given in honor of the Manes, which was the Roman-pagan idea of the deities representing the souls of their loved ones. These deities were chthonic in nature, and sometimes very misunderstood by later Christian writers in determining the different spiritual meanings. Marriages were forbidden on this day and all public temples were closed. Many individuals flocked to the graves of their loved ones found outside the pomerium, which was the religious boundary to the city of Rome.

Did you know?

The Tarpeia character I mentioned above is famous within Roman mythology for betraying the city of Rome to the Sabines, which was another rival Italic tribe living within pre-classical Italy. It is fabled she is the daughter of the Roman commander Spurius Tarpeius who was the commander of the citadel under King Romulus. In the myth, she traded many women for abduction in order to be rewarded a fair share of jewelry. After her betrayal was found, her punishment was being stoned to death and then thrown from the top of Rome's Capitoline Hill, which was also known as the Tarpeian Rock. This legend is depicted on two different sets of Denarii, one in 89 BCE and one in 19 BCE, both depicting the woman being crushed by rocks and stoned to death.  

Tombstone of one of the most ancient Christian inscriptions ever found. The top line shows dedication to the Dis Manibus and Christian motto in Greek letters ΙΧΘΥC ΖΩΝΤΩΝ / Ikhthus zōntōn ("fish of the living") shown with the "D M". The middle line shows a depiction of fish and an anchor. The lowest line has the Latin inscription “LICINIAE AMIATI BE/NEMERENTI VIXIT” meaning "Licinia Amias well-deserving lived ...". Marble, early 3rd century CE. From the area of the Vatican necropolis, Rome. Photo by Marie-Lan Nguyen (Own work) via Wikimedia Commons. 

These early Roman-Christian writings help us to understand not only how the new Christians were naming different aspects of Christianity in Latin, but also allows for some insight on what these spiritual words must have meant to Roman-Pagans. 

Opinion 

Welcome to my daily opinion! This holiday sure is cool, it's essentially the Roman "Day of the Dead". The importance of these early Christian-Latin writings cannot be stressed enough. It is difficult to decipher these more complex vocab words pertaining to Roman-Pagan spirituality. As I mentioned above, many Christian historians in Europe really got it wrong. The Romans believed in several different, and sometimes complex, versions of how their spirit would carry on after death. Even today our understanding is not incredibly concrete. The broad category of the dead was labeled under the Latin "di inferi" which can be translated as "those who dwell below." Whatever the Romans truly did believe, it is certain they believed in an after-life where one's spirit was judged, and the individual could pass over into other sections of the afterlife. All of these visions of the afterlife were chthonic in nature. I wonder how Tarpeia was judged as she crossed the spiritual River Styx in the Roman afterlife. Happy Valentines day! 

Sources

   Beard, M., North, J., & Price, S. R. (2013). Religions of Rome. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

   Morford, M. P., & Lenardon, R. J. (1999). Classical mythology. New York, N.Y. ;Oxford: Oxford University Press.

   Toynbee, J. M. (1996). Death and burial in the Roman world. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Further Reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parentalia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomerium

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarpeia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manes

Special Thanks: Joann Schatz 

February 13

On This Day In Roman History, February 13

The Byzantine Emperor Andronikos II Palaiologos dies as a monk inside Constantinople on February 13, 1332. Andronikos had reigned since 1261 when he was proclaimed co-Emperor. Andronikos was plagued economically; he suffered during the decline of the Byzantine coin known as the Hyperpyron. He attempted to fix the treasury problem by increasing several taxes and dismantling the primary Byzantine fleet of 80 ships. This would subsequently pave the way for the reliance of foreign fleet protection primarily in the form of the Republic of Venice. 

Did you know?

Many of Andronikos' victories would come in the form of diplomacy. He attempted to strengthen his empire's relations with that of the Latins, Serbians, and other Macedonian powers. This was done through a network of marriages that involved his daughters and other high-ranking family members. One of the more notable marriages was that of his 5-year-old daughter Simonis, whom Andronikos married off to King Stefan Milutin in 1298. This daughter was regarded later to be known for her purity and beauty. A fresco of her is noted as one of the most valuable pieces of Serbian art in the world. 

Pictured: 14th Century fresco of Andronikos II Palaiologos, Byzantine emperor (1282-1328). Unknown author via Wikimedia Commons. 

Opinion

I have discussed before in my opinion sections the rise of the great republics like that of Venice and Genoa. This is happening during this time, and is evident in the required hiring of their fleets for protection. Didn't Andronikos read any classical Roman history and study to see that a huge contributor to the fall of the once vast empire he claimed to still be a part of was due in part largely to Romans no longer having armies consisting of Romans? To be fair, one has to do what one has to do to make some money back up in that national treasury, but you really have to think Andronikos could have had a little historical context to help make his decision. He was Roman after all. My other opinion today is how in the name of all that is good was it morally acceptable, even in this time, to marry off a 5-year-old daughter? What the heck Andronikos, I know you were in a bit of a 13th-century Byzantine pinch... but come on. 

Sources 

   Bartusis, M. C. (1997). The late Byzantine army arms and society, 1204-1453. Philadelphia Pa: University of Pennsylvania Press.

   Fine, J. V. (2009). The late medieval Balkans: a critical survey from the late twelfth century to the Ottoman Conquest. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

   Grierson, P. (1999). Byzantine coinage. Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection.

Further Reading: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andronikos_II_Palaiologos

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Milutin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simonida

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperpyron

Special Thanks: Michael Houghan

February 12

On This Day In Roman History, February 12

Tiberius Claudius Germanicus, the heir to Claudius and the Julio-Claudian dynasty, is born on February 12, 41 CE. Just yesterday I discussed his death which happened a day before his 14th birthday, when he would be eligible to eclipse his older step-brother Nero as Emperor. Britannicus, as he would later be known, was toted around in the public limelight from a very early age by Claudius. He went to public games with his father and even rode in the same chariot where Claudius is recorded as saying "Good luck, my boy!" in order to incite the crowd to cheer the same. 

Did you know?

Nero received the toga virilis at the early age of 13. This was due to him being irregularly tall and built for his age. Britannicus would not receive his until his 14th birthday, which would put Nero's rule at risk. Unfortunately for Britannicus, his 14th birthday would not come (as I mentioned yesterday) with his death being at the hands of the same poisoner who was hired to murder Claudius. This poisoner, who was named Locusta, was of Gaullic origins and made up a famous trio of ancient poisoners along with Canidia and Martina. 

Pictured: Britannicus, son of the Roman emperor Claudius. Detail of a statue of his mother Messalina. Marble, ca. 45 AD. Former royal collections; seized during the French Revolution, photo by Gautier Poupeau, via Wikimedia Commons. 

This is the same statue I pictured yesterday but from a different angle. Visiting this in the Louvre is on my bucket list! 

Opinion

Today's opinion is going to be a little shorter today, seeing as I am covering essentially the same exact topic as yesterday. Regardless, welcome to my daily opinion! Today I would like to venture to say it is my opinion that Britannicus would have been just as bad as Nero, if not worse. They were raised under pretty similar conditions and obviously in the same times. They would have inherited identical states. They were both largely influenced by the same group of individuals and both had pretty competitive and identical schooling. While I still like to root for the underdog, and in this case the murdered underdog, I think both of these individuals would not have been good Emperors. 

Sources 

  Barrett, A. (1996). Agrippina: Mother of Nero. London: Batsford.

  Tacitus, C., Yardley, J., & Barrett, A. (2008). The annals: the reigns of Tiberius, Claudius, and Nero. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

   S., Graves, R., & Grant, M. (1979). The twelve Caesars. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Further Reading:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Locusta
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toga#Varieties
http://www.roman-emperors.org/britty.htm

Special Thanks: Michael Houghan

February 11

On This Day In Roman History, February 11

Tiberius Claudius Caesar Britannicus dies at a dinner party after being poisoned on February 11, 55 CE. A year earlier Britannicus' father, Emperor Claudius, died after being poisoned by his wife Agrippina. This modern view of Claudius' death is cemented by the speed with which Nero was confirmed the new Emperor and how quickly Claudius' will was suppressed. Several other facts like Claudius' outward lamentation of his wife before his death and Agrippina's obvious spoils for committing this act all point the blame on her. Britannicus would prove to be too dangerous to be left alive if Nero wished to retain power and just one day before becoming eligible as a man (14 years) to contend against Nero, he was poisoned at the mentioned dinner. 

Did you know?

Britannicus' father spent a large portion of his reign on expanding the Empire by annexing several territories. Britain was becoming too important of a territory for Gallic rebels and could no longer be ignored. He sent a Roman general named Aulus Plautius with his accompanying four legions. Eventually, Claudius would establish the province here as Britannia, with its capital at Camulodunum. The Senate went on to honor his work in a triumph and bestowing the honorific title of Britannicus for his achievement. He deferred this title and instead gave it to his son, to which the boy become known as. 

Pictured: Messalina, Claudius' third wife and mother of Britannicus, holding the infant child. Marble, ca. 45 AD. Photo by Ricardo André Frantz, 2005, via Wikimedia Commons.

Valeria Messalina was a first cousin once removed to Claudius. Contemporary historians classify Messalina as a "nymphomaniac" with the Roman senator Publius Cornelius Tacitus going as far to write about her saying she competed with a local prostitute to see who could sleep with more partners in a single night. Whatever Messalina's true attitude was, she did marry her lover Gaius Silius in public while Claudius was away. This marriage, like so many others involving high-ranking Romans, was probably for political reasons and the two realized they may have some traction to carry out a coup. The result was execution for both at the command of Claudius.

Opinion 

Welcome to my daily opinion! I briefly mentioned above the initial invasion of Britain by the general Plautius. When the legions were attempting to make their initial landing, a mutiny was forming due to the fear of essentially sailing out of the known world. It was stopped by a freedman who was in charge of correspondence as well as other military duties by the name of Tiberius Claudius Narcissus. When the soldiers saw the former slave in the commander's position, they cried "Lo Saturnalia!" and regrouped to sail across the straights to Britain. Another cool fact is Claudius actually brought war elephants to the island. If I was a local native to the island and saw Romans advancing from across the known world tugging along war elephants, I would probably surrender too. 

Sources

   Barrett, A. (1996). Agrippina: Mother of Nero. London: Batsford.

   Tacitus, C., Yardley, J., & Barrett, A. (2008). The annals: the reigns of Tiberius, Claudius, and Nero. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

   S., Graves, R., & Grant, M. (1979). The twelve Caesars. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

   Welch, G. P. (1963). Britannia: the Roman conquest and occupation of Britain. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.

Further Reading: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britannicus

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messalina

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudius

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiberius_Claudius_Narcissus

Also on this day:

Emperor Gordian III is murdered in 244 CE.

Heraclius, Byzantine emperor dies in 641 CE.

Special Thanks: Michael Houghan

February 10

On This Day In Roman History, February 10

The Edict of Milan was a plan aiming to treat Christian Romans with more liberties and benevolence within the Empire, created under Constantine I in February, 313 CE. The "Edictum Mediolanense", as it was known in Latin, was engineered by Constantine I and the Dacian-born Emperor Gaius Valerius Licinianus Licinius Augustus. Commonly referred to as Constantine's first great act as a Christian Emperor, the edict furthered the previous Edict of Toleration orchestrated by Emperor Galerius. By late 313 the Christian property that was destroyed was returned and actually reimbursed in the form of state subsidies, and meeting places for Christians were re-opened. 

Did you know?

The translated texts and letters from these edicts were preserved by Eusebius of Caesarea, who translated them to Greek in his works titled Historia Ecclesiastica. The edicts actually refer to the Empire itself as a republic. Within the depths of the "Dominate" era of the Emperors, it is interesting to see that individuals still referred to the Empire as both a commonwealth and a republic.

Pictured: Plaque with the Edict of Toleration of emperor Galerius in Latin Greek and Bulgarian in front of the St Sofia Church, Sofia, Bulgaria. Photo by Wikipedia user Мико, via Wikimedia Commons. 

Quoted from the edict: "Among other arrangements which we are always accustomed to make for the prosperity and welfare of the republic, we had desired formerly to bring all things into harmony with the ancient laws and public order of the Romans, and to provide that even the Christians who had left the religion of their fathers should come back to reason; since, indeed, the Christians themselves, for some reason, had followed such a caprice and had fallen into such a folly that they would not obey the institutes of antiquity, which perchance their own ancestors had first established; but at their own will and pleasure, they would thus make laws unto themselves which they should observe and would collect various peoples in diverse places in congregations."

Opinion

Welcome to my daily opinion! I feel it important to view Constantine's religious beliefs and aptitude at this time as still very much "Romanized". While his early views were probably state-centric, focusing on cutting down the civil strife that was becoming more of a problem from the non-toleration of Christians, Constantine was probably still very religious/ spiritual. It may have been possible that Constantine simply viewed the Christian God as the most powerful in his pantheon of ideas, and in a still very mystical and superstitious culture righting what was wronged was important. In a multi-cultural state, it is important to not marginalize certain communities or groups for the purpose of civil cohesion. I believe Constantine knew this better than anyone, but we should be weary whether his initial motives were inspired via solely Christian ideals and beliefs. It is much more likely his spiritual superstition and political savviness were the original motivators for his edict. 

Sources

   Barnes, T. D. (1981). Constantine and Eusebius. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

   Leithart, P. J. (2010). Defending Constantine: The Twilight of an Empire and the Dawn of Christendom. IVP Academic.

   Sordi, M. (1986). The Christians and the Roman Empire. London: Croom Helm.

   Stevenson, J. (1987). A New Eusebius: documents illustrating the history of the Church to AD 337. London: SPCK.

Further Reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edict_of_Milan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_the_Great

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Licinius

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edict_of_Toleration_by_Galerius

Special Thanks: Michael Houghan

February 9

On This Day In Roman History, February 9

Zeno the Isaurian is proclaimed co-emperor alongside the seven-year-old Leo II by his wife Ariadne and her mother Verina on February 9, 474 CE. A month ago to the day I discussed Zeno's initial loss of power and his resulting fleeing of the capital on January 9, 475 CE. This original reign lasted just under a year and allowed Zeno to become the sole Emperor after Leo II, still just 7 years old, become ill and died in November of 474. Zeno found success in this time via diplomatic triumphs with the Vandal King, Genseric. He set up a prisoner and ransom exchange system as well as stipulating a peace both on land and at sea, positively affecting trade routes that were previously adversely affected. He was still received somewhat negatively in the public eye at this time, mainly due to his foreign origin. The only right to rule as Emperor that Zeno carried was ultimately limited to his marriage with Ariadne. Zeno's mother-in-law, Verina, would soon attempt to elevate her brother Basiliscus to Emperor. She would utilize the negative public opinion of Zeno to overthrow him in January of 475, where shortly thereafter Zeno was forced to flee Constantinople. 

Did you know?

After Zeno regained power in August of 476, another revolt would almost prove to once again overthrow him. Zeno's brother-in-law, Flavius Marcianus, attempted with his brothers to usurp the throne. After an initial assault on the Imperial palace, Zeno was forced to flee under the protection of a hastily levied Isaurian force from the nearby maritime town of Chalcedon. Zeno recouped enough forces the following day to corner and arrest the usurper and his brothers. After several escape attempts by Marcianus, he was eventually successful in fleeing and assembling a small force. He would be stopped on the field of battle by a Flavius Appallius Illus Trocundus, and subsequently captured. 

Pictured: Relief of Ariadne, elder daughter of Emperor Leo I and wife of Zeno. Photo by: Andreas Praefcke, via Wikimedia Commons.

Zeno, like so many other Eastern Emperors, had to deal with the rising cult of the Monophysites. He attempted to remedy the split with a work of writing called the Henotikon. The Monophysites, declared very heretical by the Orthodox Christians, had a very different outlook on theology concerning Christianity. They believed that the divine natures of Christ and humans were one while the Orthodox did not.

Opinion 

It is easy to call the strange ideas of a "heretical cult" like that of the mentioned Monophysites a relic of Christianity. It is my opinion that these ideas were closer to becoming the dominant way of thinking in Eastern Christianity than one might initially think. If things had just gone a little differently there could very well be 300 million practicing Monophysite Christians today, rather than Eastern Orthodox Christians. While Zeno's writing and meditation did help reconcile the two branches of Christianity found under him, it would not be his work that solved the issue; only the passage of time and the cultural consolidation of a single religion would do this. 

Sources

   Meyendorff, J. (1989). Imperial unity and Christian divisions: the church, 450-680 AD. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press.

   Mitchell, S. (2007). A history of the later Roman Empire, AD 284-641: the transformation of the ancient world. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub.

   Runciman, S., & Jeffreys, E. (2006). Byzantine style, religion, and civilization: in honour of Sir Steven Runciman. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Further Reading: 

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Henotikon

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno_(emperor)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcian_(usurper)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trocundus

Special Thanks: Michael Houghan