 | This article includes a list of general references, but it lacks sufficient corresponding inline citations .(August 2014) |
Silvanus [note 1] (died 7 September 355) was a Roman general and usurper of Frankish descent. He revolted in Gaul against Emperor Constantius II, claiming the imperial title for 28 days in AD 355.
Silvanus was born in Gaul, the son of Bonitus, a Laetic Frankish general who had supported Constantine I in the civil war against Licinius. Like so many other Franks of his times, and like his father before him, he was a loyal and thoroughly Romanized "barbarian" in the military service of the Empire. In AD 351, he held the rank of tribune in the army of the rebel Magnentius, and in this role he defected to Emperor Constantius II at the Battle of Mursa Major. Silvanus was soon promoted to the post of magister peditum in Gaul in 353. [2] [3] Gaul had been subject to raiding and looting by Alemanni tribesmen; Constantius entrusted Silvanus with the difficult task of driving the invaders back beyond the Rhine, and restoring the fast-eroding Roman authority in the province. Silvanus fulfilled his mission through a combination of military action and bribing the Alemannic chieftains with the taxes he had collected, and also suppressed the local bagaudae insurrections flaring up again in central and northern Gaul.
The sources then report that Silvanus fell afoul of a plot orchestrated by an official named Dynamius. [4] He obtained letters of recommendation from Silvanus, and then with a sponge he removed all the writing except for Silvanus’ signature. He next forged new letters on the effaced spaces which gave the impression that Silvanus was planning to declare himself emperor and overthrow Constantius II. Ammianus does not record why Dynamius decided to do this, and it is not as if he was in an obvious position to directly benefit from Silvanus’ downfall. It has thus been theorized that someone of a higher position, perhaps the magister militum Arbitio, was directing the plot. [5] Dynamius, being of a relatively low rank, could not get the letters directly into the hands of the emperor, so he gave them to the Praetorian Prefect Lampadius, who passed them on to Constantius. Ammianus also writes that Eusebius, a former comes rei privatae, and Aedesius, a former magister officiorum, were co-conspirators in the scheme.
Constantius then summoned his advisory council, the consistorium. They also thought the letters were legitimate, and orders were given to arrest Silvanus, as well as the individuals to whom the letters were addressed.
But Malarichus, a Frank like Silvanus and the man who would later be offered a position in the military magisterium but would turn it down, and who was at this time a tribunus in the imperial court, spoke up to defend the suspected magister militum. Malarichus summoned his collegae, his associates, of which most are unnamed except Mallobaudes, also a tribunus and a Frank. These officers are thus linked to Silvanus not only by their supportive actions, but also by shared ethnicity and career. They protested against Constantius’ orders, and Malarichus requested that he be allowed to go to Silvanus and investigate the truth of the matter. The strength of this network and their connection to Silvanus is demonstrated when Malarichus offered his own family as hostages to guarantee he would not betray Constantius. Even so, Constantius refused him, and instead sent one of Arbitio’s associates, the agens in rebus Apodemius. We should remember that Ammianus says Arbitio convinced Constantius to send Silvanus to deal with the raids along the Rhine frontier in the hopes he would be too far removed from court to exert any influence, and would maybe even perish. Thus, Arbitio and probably Apodemius were not friends of Silvanus.
Dynamius continued to thicken the plot by forging a new letter and sending it to the tribunus of the Cremona fabrica. This time the letter appeared to come from Silvanus and Malarichus, requesting that the tribunus hastily complete the final preparations for the rebellion. Obviously confused by the unexpected arrival of the letter, the tribunus showed Malarichus the letter and asked for clarification of what exactly he meant. A forged letter now being in his possession, Malarichus was able to once again bring together his collegae to help him confront Constantius with the new evidence. Florentinus, deputy to the magister officiorum, was appointed to investigate the matter and concluded that all the letters were forgeries. The plot uncovered, Constantius looked to punish the true conspirators. Lampadius was arrested and questioned, but was acquitted because of the aid of his friends. Most surprisingly, the orchestrator of it all, Dynamius, was found innocent and promoted to the rank of corrector. Even with his innocence revealed, Silvanus feared that he would still face punishment from the unpredictable emperor. He had been receiving word from his friends about the emperor’s suspicions, and that Apodemius had been seizing his properties in Gaul with impunity, and he did not feel confident that his innocence would protect him. He thought about escaping back to his countrymen, the Franks, but a tribunus in his army, Laniogaisus, told him that the Franks would most likely either kill him or turn him over to the Romans for a ransom. Silvanus, seeing no other viable choice, decided he would truly have to usurp imperial power, and after discussions with the chief officers of his army, he declared himself emperor on 11 August 355 in Colonia Agrippina (modern Cologne). [6]
Historian John Drinkwater doubts that Silvanus’ usurpation occurred at all because of the complete lack of coins produced with Silvanus' face on them, and the inconsistencies of Ammianus’ account, the most detailed version of these events. [7] This opinion has been followed by professor Michael Kulikowski, who writes that it is “certain” the rebellion did not happen and instead Silvanus was executed while still a magister militum. [8]
This position has been countered in part by David Hunt. [9] He points out that, even if Ammianus presents difficulties, only a few years later, emperor Julian wrote about the usurpation, as did Aurelius Victor. Zonaras also makes mention of Silvanus being forced into rebellion because of intrigues. The weight of the contemporary literary evidence is thus impossible to dismiss - it is impossible to believe that all these people could fake an event that occurred within the lifetimes of their audiences. Hunt further argues that the rebellion was simply smaller than Ammianus would have us believe, and Silvanus had not yet secured the mint at Trier to begin distributing coins. Ammianus’ significance of the rebellion is exaggerated because of his personal involvement: initially, before the historian was involved, Ammianus wishes to portray Silvanus and a poor innocent man falling afoul of the brutal conspiracies plaguing Constantius’ court. Then when Ammianus does become involved in Silvanus’ downfall, the usurper is shifted to be more akin to a regular rebel that deserves to be executed, in order to make Ammianus’ role in such an end more palatable.
It is also worthwhile to consider John Weisweiler’s argument that Ammianus is offering a meta-lesson to his audience, educating them on how to read and use literature through a motif of the misuse of literature (Dynamius’ forged letters). [10] Thus the potential rhetorical elements in Ammianus’ account muddy the waters of what really occurred, however not to a fatal extent.
Historian Christopher Bendle provides an additional explanation as to why Silvanus issued no coins: [11] a period of extensive planning usually occurred before a rebellion. [12] This planning is naturally secretive, and even though the act of usurpation is often portrayed as spontaneous it is long in the making. Furtive connections are established between the usurper and other important individuals and groups: military leaders and soldiers, senators, the Church, and civilian bureaucrats, including those who ran the imperial fabricae and mints. Silvanus, however, did not have the luxury of a planning period. Dynamius’ conspiracy must have happened over a relatively short span of time, with Silvanus only making his decision to usurp suddenly. Prior to his declaration, he was considering other options such as fleeing across the border to the Franks instead of planning a rebellion. Furthermore, Silvanus gave a donative to his soldiers on Constantius’ birthday, effectively boosting their loyalty to the emperor, only four days before he would declare himself a rebel emperor. This could in fact indicate that on that date Silvanus had still not decided on his course of action, and thus potentially only had three or fewer days to prepare, assuredly not enough time to connect with the commanders in charge of the mints in Trier. Even after Silvanus’ declaration and him reaching out to contact the mint, the commander would want to verify messages and assess his own position in regard to the likely ensuing civil war before committing to Silvanus’ side. Silvanus would have to decide on the motifs and symbols he wished to use, and have dies created. Then there would be the matter of distribution. Thus, although it can still strike as surprising that Vetranio issued no coins, it is not certain evidence that his rebellion never occurred. Furthermore, the lack of coins pales in comparison to the weight of contemporary literature in favor of the rebellion.
When news of Silvanus' rebellion came to the imperial court at Milan, Ammianus reports that at first there was great panic, and Constantius called a midnight meeting of his consistorium. They settled on the idea of using the magister militum Ursicinus to deal with Silvanus. Ursicinus was sent to Cologne with Ammianus himself, along with Verinianus, eight other protectores, and some tribuni. They were to deliver an official letter to Silvanus, recalling him to court as if nothing were amiss, apparently in the hope that he would simply give up the usurpation. When they arrived, however, Ursicinus figured the rebellion had progressed too far for this to succeed, and he instead decided he would pose as a fellow malcontent, unhappy with Constantius and willing to join the rebellion. This worked, and Ursicinus was taken on as one of Silvanus’ closest confidants. While Silvanus complained to Ursicinus about the unfairness of Constantius’ decisions, the protectores and tribuni were able to bribe the Bracchiati and Cornuti companies of soldiers into betraying Silvanus, and they murdered the usurper while he was on his way to a Christian church service. After Silvanus’ death, his rebellion rapidly dissipated and those involved were arrested and tried. [13]
It has been suggested by at least one scholar that Ammianus invented the entire coup attempt to gloss over the role played by his patron, Ursicinus, in the murder of a fellow general. [14] This theory suggests that Constantius had grown suspicious of the popular Frankish general and so offered his post to Ursicinus, who then murdered his peer in the course of a botched change of command. It has been noted that Silvanus did not mint any coinage (which would have been a clear indication of a usurpation attempt), unlike other equally short-lived usurpers of the era, such as Poemenius. [15] However, the thesis of a concocted coup attempt is generally rejected by scholars. [16] The lack of numismatic evidence is not determinative, because Trier, the nearest minting centre to Colonia Agrippina, closed its gates to Silvanus.
Ammianus concludes his treatment of the Silvanus episode:
Such was the end of a commander of no small merit, who was driven by fear of the slanders in which a hostile clique had ensnared him in his absence to adopt extreme measures in self-defence. [17]
Ammianus Marcellinus, occasionally anglicised as Ammian, was a Roman soldier and historian who wrote the penultimate major historical account surviving from antiquity. Written in Latin and known as the Res gestae, his work chronicled the history of Rome from the accession of the Emperor Nerva in 96 to the death of Valens at the Battle of Adrianople in 378. Only the sections covering the period 353 to 378 survive.
Constantius II was Roman emperor from 337 to 361. His reign saw constant warfare on the borders against the Sasanian Empire and Germanic peoples, while internally the Roman Empire went through repeated civil wars, court intrigues, and usurpations. His religious policies inflamed domestic conflicts that would continue after his death.
Julian was the Caesar of the West from 355 to 360 and Roman emperor from 361 to 363, as well as a notable philosopher and author in Greek. His rejection of Christianity, and his promotion of Neoplatonic Hellenism in its place, caused him to be remembered as Julian the Apostate in Christian tradition. He is sometimes referred to as Julian the Philosopher.
The 350s decade ran from January 1, 350, to December 31, 359.
Year 355 (CCCLV) was a common year starting on Sunday of the Julian calendar. At the time, it was known as the Year of the Consulship of Arbitio and Maesius. The denomination 355 for this year has been used since the early medieval period, when the Anno Domini calendar era became the prevalent method in Europe for naming years.
Valentinian I, sometimes called Valentinian the Great, was Roman emperor from 364 to 375. He ruled the Western half of the empire, while his brother Valens ruled the East. During his reign, he fought successfully against the Alamanni, Quadi, and Sarmatians, strengthening the border fortifications and conducting campaigns across the Rhine and Danube. His general Theodosius defeated a revolt in Africa and the Great Conspiracy, a coordinated assault on Roman Britain by Picts, Scoti, and Saxons. Valentinian founded the Valentinianic dynasty, with his sons Gratian and Valentinian II succeeding him in the western half of the empire.
Magnus Magnentius was a Roman general and usurper against Constantius II. Of Germanic descent, Magnentius served with distinction in Gaul under the emperor Constans. On 18 January 350 Magnentius was acclaimed Augustus. Quickly killing the unpopular Constans, Magnentius gained control over most of the Western Empire. The Eastern emperor Constantius II, the brother of Constans, refused to acknowledge Magnentius' legitimacy and led a successful campaign against Magnentius. Ultimately, Magnentius' forces were scattered after the Battle of Mons Seleucus, and he died by suicide on 10 August 353.
Magister militum was a top-level military command used in the late Roman Empire, dating from the reign of Constantine the Great. The term referred to the senior military officer of the empire. In Greek sources, the term is translated either as strategos or as stratelates.
Flavius Claudius Constantius Gallus was a statesman and ruler in the eastern provinces of the Roman Empire from 351 to 354, as Caesar under emperor Constantius II, his cousin. A grandson of emperor Constantius Chlorus and empress Flavia Maximiana Theodora, and a son of Julius Constantius and Galla, he belonged to the Constantinian dynasty. Born during the reign of his uncle Constantine the Great, he was among the few male members of the imperial family to survive the purge that followed Constantine's death. Under Constantius II, Gallus served as deputy emperor, based in Antioch and married to Constantius' sister Constantina. He dealt with a Jewish revolt in the years 351-352. Gallus ultimately fell out of favor with Constantius and was executed, being replaced as Caesar by his younger half-brother Julian.
Paulus Catena was a senior Roman public official who served as an investigator and notary for Constantius II during the mid-fourth century. He is principally known through the writings of Ammianus Marcellinus, though he is also present in the works of Libanius and Julian the Apostate. Marcellinus describes him as infamously cruel, and a skilled fabricator of false accusations.
The siege of Amida was a military investment of the Roman fortified frontier city of Amida by the Sasanian Empire. It took place in AD 359 when the Sasanian army under king Shapur II invaded the eastern provinces of the Roman Empire. Shapur wanted to exploit the absence of the Roman Emperor Constantius II who was overseeing affairs in the western part of the Empire. The city fell, but the strategic gain was little.
The Battle of Strasbourg, also known as the Battle of Argentoratum, was fought in 357 between the Western Roman army under the Caesar Julian and the Alamanni tribal confederation led by the joint paramount King Chnodomar. The battle took place near Strasbourg, called Argentoratum in Ammianus Marcellinus' account, Argentorate in the Tabula Peutingeriana.
Ursicinus was a Roman senior military officer, holding the rank of Magister Equitum per Orientem and even Magister Peditum Praesentalis in the later Roman Empire c. 349–359. He was a citizen of Antioch and was well connected in the Eastern part of the Roman Empire.
Barbatio was a Roman general of the infantry under the command of Constantius II. Previously he was a commander of the household troops under Gallus Caesar, but he arrested Gallus under the instruction of Constantius, thereby ensuring his promotion on the death of Claudius Silvanus. In 359, both he and his wife Assyria were arrested and beheaded for treason against Constantius, possibly as part of a plot by Arbitio, a senior cavalry commander, and another exponent of the forms of scheming and political intrigue that became such a part of the later Roman Empire.
Flavius Arbitio was a Roman general and Consul who lived in the middle of the 4th century AD.
Mallobaudes or Mellobaudes was a 4th-century Frankish king who also held the Roman title of comes domesticorum. In 354 he was a tribunus armaturarum in the Roman army in Gaul, where he served under Silvanus, who usurped power in 355. Mallobaudes tried unsuccessfully to intervene on his behalf. Appointed comes domesticorum by Gratian, he was second-in-command of the army in Gaul in 378 when he defeated the Alemannic tribes under King Priarius at Battle of Argentovaria according to Ammianus Marcellinus. In 380 he killed Macrian, king of the Bucinobantes and Roman ally, who had invaded Frankish territory. During the usurpation of Maximus, Mallobaudes was killed shortly after the assassination of the emperor Gratian.
Apodemius was an officer of the Roman Empire, a courtier of Emperor Constantius II, involved in the deaths of Constantius Gallus and Claudius Silvanus.
Eusebius was a high-ranking officer of the Roman Empire, holding the position of praepositus sacri cubiculi during the rule of Emperor Constantius II (337-361).
Vadomarius was an Alemannic king and Roman general, who shared power with his brother Gundomadus. After instigating an indecisive campaign in Gaul against the Romans, Vadomarius and his brother signed a treaty with the Roman emperor Constantius II in AD 356. Encouraged by Constantius II, Vadomarius employed his Alemanni forces in an attack against Julian. Vadomarius then concluded a treaty with Julian, after which, he unsuccessfully attempted to play the two Roman figures against one another. When Julian was made aware of this, he arrested Vadomarius and banished him to Hispania. His son Vithicabius succeeded him as king. Later, Vadomarius allied himself with Rome under emperors Jovian and Valens, leading his forces against the usurper Procopius and fighting the Persians on Rome's behalf.
Lucillianus was a high-ranking Roman army officer and father-in-law of the emperor Jovian. He fought with success in the war against Persia, and played a part in the execution of the emperor Constantius II's cousin, Gallus. In 361, Lucillianus was kidnapped by the emperor Julian and forced into retirement. He was recalled to service after the accession of his son-in-law Jovian in 363, and given a senior military command, only to be murdered that same year by mutinous troops in Gaul.
| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
