Theodosius I AR Siliqua

[Magnus Maximus]

 

Early Life

The man who would be known to us as Emperor Theodosius I was born in A.D. 347 in Cauca, Gallecia Hispania. Theodosius's father, also known as Theodosius the Elder, was a high-ranking military officer under Emperor Valentinian I. It is likely that young Theodosius traveled with his father on campaign and received a classical education that befitted a youth of his social status. When Theodosius the Elder was sent to Britain to put down the Great Conspiracy in 368/9, he brought along his son and the junior officer Maximus. Theodosius I then appeared on the Danube frontier in 374, where he was leading troops as the high rank of a Dux(Duke) and led a campaign against a raiding band of Sarmatians. Unfortunately for Theodosius Junior, Emperor Valentinian I's death in 375 led to a power struggle at the new Emperor(s) Gratian and Valentinian II's court. Theodosius the Elder was accused of some crime by a rival while still serving in Africa and was executed in Carthage. With his father's death and his career in tatters, Theodosius Junior retired to his estates in Hispania to live out the remainder of his life. However, in a stroke of good luck, Theodosius was rehabilitated and given his old command back by Emperor Gratian in 377. 

Cleaning up the Mess
In A.D. 378, Emperor Valens had led a botched punitive expedition against a hoard of Gothic migrants near Adrianople. The subsequent battle at Adrianople led to Valen's death, along with the destruction of the Field army of Thrace and the loss of many high-ranking Roman officers. With so many qualified candidates for the office of Emperor dead, Goths plundering the countryside, and only having the forces of the Western Roman Empire available to him, Emperor Gratian appointed Theodosius I to be his colleague in the East. The accession of Theodosius I is a bit of a mystery in itself; some historians claim that he took power himself and Gratian acquiesced to his usurpation, while the most likely scenario had the pro-Theodosian elements of Gratian's court press for his nomination. Gratian is said to have begrudgingly invested Theodosius with the imperial diadem and robes at Sirmium in 379.
 
Theodosius I's first task was to get a handle on the deteriorating situation in Thrace. With the death of Valens and the near destruction of the Field army of Thrace, the Goths were free to run rampant throughout the region, pillaging and killing as they pleased. The mess that Theodosius inherited should not be understated, as he could not simply transfer troops from the East; any troop redeployments would have been noticed and capitalized on by the Sassanids. Thus Theodosius had to raise local levies and issue mass conscription to raise enough men to reconstitute the Thracian field army. For the next three years, Theodosius I engaged the Goths throughout Thrace and Macedonia; he won a few minor victories with his green army but lost a battle in 380. By the summer of 380, the situation had stabilized enough for Theodosius to feel comfortable to set up his court at Constantinople. In 382, Theodosius negotiated a settlement with the Gothic tribes. In exchange for the cessation of hostilities and land to farm, the Goths would serve as foederati (allied soldiers) and fight whenever called up by the Emperor. 

Two Spaniards and an Illyrian
In 380, the Emperors Gratian, Theodosius I, and Valentinian II issued the Edict of Thessalonica, which put an end to the Arian controversy by effectively outlawing the Christian sect. In the long run, this proved to be the correct decision, as the issue over Christ's nature had led to much instability in the Eastern Roman Empire in the preceding decades. 
In A.D. 383, the unpopular Emperor Gratian was overthrown and killed in a lighting coup by the general Magnus Maximus, an old associate of the Theodosian family. Theodosius either felt that he didn't have the military strength or, more likely, was sympathetic to Maximus's coup and did not intervene to avenge Gratian. Instead, with the help of Ambrose of Milian, a truce between Maximus, Valentinian II, and Theodosius I was reached: Maximus would rule Britannia, Gaul, Spain, and part of Africa. Valentinian II would remain in power in Italy, Africa, and Illyricum and Theodosius would retain the Eastern dioceses. 
In the prelude to the war of 388 with Magnus Maximus, Theodosius negotiated lasting peace with the Sassanid Persians regarding their contested border. Ever since Julian II had botched his invasion of Persia in 363, the Romans and Persians had been in a state of a cold war. Theodosius I's peace with Persia would last for nearly a century.
 In 387, Maximus swiftly and successfully occupied all of Italy, yet Valentinian II and his court were able to flee to Thessalonika. At Thessalonika, Empress Justinia offered her daughter Galla in marriage to the now widowed Theodosius in change for his help in defeating Maximus. Theodosius agreed and married Galla, and made ready for war with Maximus. The campaign of 388 has already been discussed at length here.

 

 Interregnum 
After the defeat of Maximus in the West, Theodosius I restored the young Valentinian II to the throne, yet the restoration would be in name only. Theodosius appointed his allies to all critical positions in the western bureaucracy and left Valentinian under the thumb of the Romanized Frank, Arbogast.  In 391, we hear of Theodosius ordering a massacre of the citizens of Thessalonika after a riot killed a Roman officer. The whole situation arose after a famous chariot racer tried to rape a young boy and was subsequently imprisoned. Crowds immediately demanded the charioteer's release, but the officer in charge refused and dispersed the public, leading to a riot that killed the officer and several of his troops. In response to the disorder, Theodosius unleashed the troops on the rioters, resulting in the deaths of 7000 civilians. News of the massacre angered the influential Bishop of Milian, Ambrose, who denied Theodosius the right to take the eucharist until he repented and denounced his deeds. Theodosius, the devout Nicene Christian, agreed and reconciled with the Bishop. 

Beginning of the End 
In 392, Valentinian II was found hanged in his bed chamber in the city of Vienne, Gaul. Almost immediately after the death of Valentinian was discovered, Arbogast sent word to Theodosius about placing Arcadius on the throne in the West, though Theodosius only gave vague responses. Roughly one hundred days after Valentinian's death, Arbogast, fed up with not receiving concrete orders from Constantinople, appointed a member of the imperial bureaucracy to the purple. Theodosius viewed the entire crisis in the West with apathy and again gave vague half-hearted responses to responses from Eugenius and Arbogast. Only when Eugenius and Arbogast began dismissing Theodosius's appointments in the imperial bureaucracy did Theodosius begin to prepare for war. In early 393, Theodosius appointed his youngest son Honorius to the rank of Augustus, a sign that he did not recognize the regime based in Milan and that he was preparing for war. 

End Game 
In 394, Theodosius marched westward and met Eugenius and Arbogast's forces at the Battle of the Frigidus River. The Roman world would see two large Roman armies clash for the second time in four years. Theodosius's initial assault against Arborgast was thwarted, and his forces sustained severe casualties. On the second day, a segment of the Western army defected to Theodosius, and a miraculous wind phenomenon allowed the Eastern Roman army to triumph over their Western counterparts. After the deaths of both Eugenius and Arbogast, Theodosius made his way to Milian to set up his court and stabilize the situation in the West. Unfortunately for Theodosius, he suffered from a medical condition that caused edema( fluid accumulation around the organs and tissues). Theodosius I died on January 17, 395. He was 49 years old and had ruled the Roman Empire in one form or another for 16 years.
 
Assessment
Theodosius I is an interesting figure in Roman and human history. He was the last Emperor to rule a united Roman Empire, albeit for only four months. In addition, his two civil wars in 388 and 394 severely weakened the Western Roman army's combat ability due to the sheer amount of losses sustained. At the same time, Theodosius did effectively outlaw Greco-Roman paganism. However, it should be said that most of the populace of the Roman empire had converted from the old religion in the last century or so. In addition, it seems that the local administrators did not follow the edict as it had to be reissued by numerous Emperors over the 5th century. I do feel for Theodosius I, though, as he was put in an impossible situation after the death of Valens, and I believe that he dealt with the Gothic problem as best as anyone of his time could have. A significant accomplishment of his administration was the near century-long peace settlement he reached with the Sassanid Persians. It should not be understated how much this helped the Eastern Roman Empire when the Huns began their attacks in the 5th century. I'd say Theodosius I was an ok Emperor who, through his flaws, managed to hold the Eastern Roman Empire together. 

I have successfully completed my coin collecting goal of 2022: owning a siliqua of Theodosius I. 

Siliquae of Theodosius, while not being rare, are much more scarce than those of his Western colleagues. I was fortunate enough to pick this one up for a reasonable price!

 

 

Theodosius I AR Siliqua 17.5mm, 1.97 g, 6h). Lugdunum (Lyon) mint. Struck AD 388-392. Pearl-diademed, draped, and cuirassed bust right / Roma seated left on cuirass, holding Victory on globe and inverted spear; LVGPS. RIC IX 43b.1; Lyon 209; RSC 72†b. Deeply toned, a few light marks and scratches, minor deposits on edge. VF

 

A map of the Roman world in A.D 385( Courtesy of OmniAtlas)

A statue of Theodosius I. 

A silver plate of Theodosius I and his sons. This specific piece was discovered in Spain and was likely given to someone close to the Theodosians. 

Close up on Emperor Theodosius I. 

Please post your coins of any persons of this period( 364-395)!

Edited December 20, 2022 by Magnus Maximus

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

The coin image is missing, at the moment.

Hmm, I didn't know about ominiatlas.  They don't seem to have the 5th century going yet. I want to see the ones the other atlases don't show; the time of Constantine III, the 460's, etc.

[Magnus Maximus]

@Nerosmyfavorite68Thanks for the heads up. Should be fixed now.

[Al Kowsky]

11 hours ago, Magnus Maximus said:

 

Early Life

The man who would be known to us as Emperor Theodosius I was born in A.D. 347 in Cauca, Gallecia Hispania. Theodosius's father, also known as Theodosius the Elder, was a high-ranking military officer under Emperor Valentinian I. It is likely that young Theodosius traveled with his father on campaign and received a classical education that befitted a youth of his social status. When Theodosius the Elder was sent to Britain to put down the Great Conspiracy in 368/9, he brought along his son and the junior officer Maximus. Theodosius I then appeared on the Danube frontier in 374, where he was leading troops as the high rank of a Dux(Duke) and led a campaign against a raiding band of Sarmatians. Unfortunately for Theodosius Junior, Emperor Valentinian I's death in 375 led to a power struggle at the new Emperor(s) Gratian and Valentinian II's court. Theodosius the Elder was accused of some crime by a rival while still serving in Africa and was executed in Carthage. With his father's death and his career in tatters, Theodosius Junior retired to his estates in Hispania to live out the remainder of his life. However, in a stroke of good luck, Theodosius was rehabilitated and given his old command back by Emperor Gratian in 377. 

Cleaning up the Mess
In A.D. 378, Emperor Valens had led a botched punitive expedition against a hoard of Gothic migrants near Adrianople. The subsequent battle at Adrianople led to Valen's death, along with the destruction of the Field army of Thrace and the loss of many high-ranking Roman officers. With so many qualified candidates for the office of Emperor dead, Goths plundering the countryside, and only having the forces of the Western Roman Empire available to him, Emperor Gratian appointed Theodosius I to be his colleague in the East. The accession of Theodosius I is a bit of a mystery in itself; some historians claim that he took power himself and Gratian acquiesced to his usurpation, while the most likely scenario had the pro-Theodosian elements of Gratian's court press for his nomination. Gratian is said to have begrudgingly invested Theodosius with the imperial diadem and robes at Sirmium in 379.
 
Theodosius I's first task was to get a handle on the deteriorating situation in Thrace. With the death of Valens and the near destruction of the Field army of Thrace, the Goths were free to run rampant throughout the region, pillaging and killing as they pleased. The mess that Theodosius inherited should not be understated, as he could not simply transfer troops from the East; any troop redeployments would have been noticed and capitalized on by the Sassanids. Thus Theodosius had to raise local levies and issue mass conscription to raise enough men to reconstitute the Thracian field army. For the next three years, Theodosius I engaged the Goths throughout Thrace and Macedonia; he won a few minor victories with his green army but lost a battle in 380. By the summer of 380, the situation had stabilized enough for Theodosius to feel comfortable to set up his court at Constantinople. In 382, Theodosius negotiated a settlement with the Gothic tribes. In exchange for the cessation of hostilities and land to farm, the Goths would serve as foederati (allied soldiers) and fight whenever called up by the Emperor. 

Two Spaniards and an Illyrian
In 380, the Emperors Gratian, Theodosius I, and Valentinian II issued the Edict of Thessalonica, which put an end to the Arian controversy by effectively outlawing the Christian sect. In the long run, this proved to be the correct decision, as the issue over Christ's nature had led to much instability in the Eastern Roman Empire in the preceding decades. 
In A.D. 383, the unpopular Emperor Gratian was overthrown and killed in a lighting coup by the general Magnus Maximus, an old associate of the Theodosian family. Theodosius either felt that he didn't have the military strength or, more likely, was sympathetic to Maximus's coup and did not intervene to avenge Gratian. Instead, with the help of Ambrose of Milian, a truce between Maximus, Valentinian II, and Theodosius I was reached: Maximus would rule Britannia, Gaul, Spain, and part of Africa. Valentinian II would remain in power in Italy, Africa, and Illyricum and Theodosius would retain the Eastern dioceses. 
In the prelude to the war of 388 with Magnus Maximus, Theodosius negotiated lasting peace with the Sassanid Persians regarding their contested border. Ever since Julian II had botched his invasion of Persia in 363, the Romans and Persians had been in a state of a cold war. Theodosius I's peace with Persia would last for nearly a century.
 In 387, Maximus swiftly and successfully occupied all of Italy, yet Valentinian II and his court were able to flee to Thessalonika. At Thessalonika, Empress Justinia offered her daughter Galla in marriage to the now widowed Theodosius in change for his help in defeating Maximus. Theodosius agreed and married Galla, and made ready for war with Maximus. The campaign of 388 has already been discussed at length here.

 

 Interregnum 
After the defeat of Maximus in the West, Theodosius I restored the young Valentinian II to the throne, yet the restoration would be in name only. Theodosius appointed his allies to all critical positions in the western bureaucracy and left Valentinian under the thumb of the Romanized Frank, Arbogast.  In 391, we hear of Theodosius ordering a massacre of the citizens of Thessalonika after a riot killed a Roman officer. The whole situation arose after a famous chariot racer tried to rape a young boy and was subsequently imprisoned. Crowds immediately demanded the charioteer's release, but the officer in charge refused and dispersed the public, leading to a riot that killed the officer and several of his troops. In response to the disorder, Theodosius unleashed the troops on the rioters, resulting in the deaths of 7000 civilians. News of the massacre angered the influential Bishop of Milian, Ambrose, who denied Theodosius the right to take the eucharist until he repented and denounced his deeds. Theodosius, the devout Nicene Christian, agreed and reconciled with the Bishop. 

Beginning of the End 
In 392, Valentinian II was found hanged in his bed chamber in the city of Vienne, Gaul. Almost immediately after the death of Valentinian was discovered, Arbogast sent word to Theodosius about placing Arcadius on the throne in the West, though Theodosius only gave vague responses. Roughly one hundred days after Valentinian's death, Arbogast, fed up with not receiving concrete orders from Constantinople, appointed a member of the imperial bureaucracy to the purple. Theodosius viewed the entire crisis in the West with apathy and again gave vague half-hearted responses to responses from Eugenius and Arbogast. Only when Eugenius and Arbogast began dismissing Theodosius's appointments in the imperial bureaucracy did Theodosius begin to prepare for war. In early 393, Theodosius appointed his youngest son Honorius to the rank of Augustus, a sign that he did not recognize the regime based in Milan and that he was preparing for war. 

End Game 
In 394, Theodosius marched westward and met Eugenius and Arbogast's forces at the Battle of the Frigidus River. The Roman world would see two large Roman armies clash for the second time in four years. Theodosius's initial assault against Arborgast was thwarted, and his forces sustained severe casualties. On the second day, a segment of the Western army defected to Theodosius, and a miraculous wind phenomenon allowed the Eastern Roman army to triumph over their Western counterparts. After the deaths of both Eugenius and Arbogast, Theodosius made his way to Milian to set up his court and stabilize the situation in the West. Unfortunately for Theodosius, he suffered from a medical condition that caused edema( fluid accumulation around the organs and tissues). Theodosius I died on January 17, 395. He was 49 years old and had ruled the Roman Empire in one form or another for 16 years.
 
Assessment
Theodosius I is an interesting figure in Roman and human history. He was the last Emperor to rule a united Roman Empire, albeit for only four months. In addition, his two civil wars in 388 and 394 severely weakened the Western Roman army's combat ability due to the sheer amount of losses sustained. At the same time, Theodosius did effectively outlaw Greco-Roman paganism. However, it should be said that most of the populace of the Roman empire had converted from the old religion in the last century or so. In addition, it seems that the local administrators did not follow the edict as it had to be reissued by numerous Emperors over the 5th century. I do feel for Theodosius I, though, as he was put in an impossible situation after the death of Valens, and I believe that he dealt with the Gothic problem as best as anyone of his time could have. A significant accomplishment of his administration was the near century-long peace settlement he reached with the Sassanid Persians. It should not be understated how much this helped the Eastern Roman Empire when the Huns began their attacks in the 5th century. I'd say Theodosius I was an ok Emperor who, through his flaws, managed to hold the Eastern Roman Empire together. 

I have successfully completed my coin collecting goal of 2022: owning a siliqua of Theodosius I. 

Siliquae of Theodosius, while not being rare, are much more scarce than those of his Western colleagues. I was fortunate enough to pick this one up for a reasonable price!

 

 

Theodosius I AR Siliqua 17.5mm, 1.97 g, 6h). Lugdunum (Lyon) mint. Struck AD 388-392. Pearl-diademed, draped, and cuirassed bust right / Roma seated left on cuirass, holding Victory on globe and inverted spear; LVGPS. RIC IX 43b.1; Lyon 209; RSC 72†b. Deeply toned, a few light marks and scratches, minor deposits on edge. VF

 

A map of the Roman world in A.D 385( Courtesy of OmniAtlas)

A statue of Theodosius I. 

A silver plate of Theodosius I and his sons. This specific piece was discovered in Spain and was likely given to someone close to the Theodosians. 

Close up on Emperor Theodosius I. 

Please post your coins of any persons of this period( 364-395)!

M. Maximus, lovely coin & great writeup 😊!

[Ancient Coin Hunter]

Nice concise write-up thanks. The internecine warfare likely weakened the Roman army into a state from which it could not really recover, also because of the weakness and pusillanimity of Honorius and Arcadius as rulers. Here's a blue-ish coin of Theodosius and an AE2 of Magnus Maximus...

 

 

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

Ah, the links are fixed.  It's a nice, toned piece and I very much enjoyed the information and maps.

[O-Towner]

Here's another Theo I AR Siliqua which has the same reverse design as yours except it's a VIRTVS ROMANORVM from Treveri.

[Tejas]

That is a very nice coin and a great write-up. Here is one of my Theodosius I siliquae:

 

[Tejas]

My favourite Theodosius coin in my collection is not a Siliqua, but this bronze maiorina:

 

[John Conduitt]

I didn't realise they were difficult to get. I wondered why it took me so long to find one.

Theodosius I Siliqua, 388-392

Treveri. Silver, 1.68g. Pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right; D N THEODO-SIVS P F AVG. Roma seated left on cuirass, holding reversed spear and Victoriola on globe; VIRTVS RO-MANORVM; TRPS in exergue (RIC IX, 94b). From the Vale of Pewsey (Wiltshire) Hoard 2020, Portable Antiquities Scheme: BM-7D34D9.

[Topcat7]

Great write-up (as always) Mag Max. Thank you.

No Siliquae of Theodosius I here, I am afraid, but I did find a 'Centennionalis' amongst a number of his other coins.

 

Theodosius I, Centennionalis,Caesar Kaiser 4,34 g  25 mm RIC IX. Heraclea 24b(delta)

Edited December 20, 2022 by Topcat7

[Ancient Coin Hunter]

5 hours ago, Tejas said:

My favourite Theodosius coin in my collection is not a Siliqua, but this bronze maiorina:

 

Nice example. Mine has a weird blue patina....

[Ancient Coin Hunter]

Here is an AE2 of Arcadius which I should have included above (sorry). [Son of Theodosius the Great] but also a pretty weak ruler...Antioch mint weighs in at over 6 grams. I like it as it has a good portrait and is way better than the tiny AE4's of his which seems to predominate folks' collections...I have a bunch myself

 

Edited December 20, 2022 by Ancient Coin Hunter

[Magnus Maximus]

Nice coins everyone.

Here are a fistfull of siliquae of Magnus Maximus(383-388).

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

I don't think I've picked up any coins of Theodosius since the '90's.  I like the piece on the top right.

[shanxi]

I have only one Theo from the time when I was still collecting emperor heads 

Theodosius I. (AD 379-395)
Cyzicus Mint
Obv: DN THEODOSIVS P F AVG, Bust of Theodosius I, pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed, right
Rev: GLORIA ROMANORVM, Emperor, head right, standing facing, holding standard and globe , SMKA
AE, 22 mm, 4.2g
RIC 9, p.246, 27(a)

[Steppenfool]

Lovely coin. I love the siliqua with the characteristic dark toning. The blockier art style and the toning really exemplifies the transition into chaos and eventually the middle ages! I've found myself rambling a bit about history below, so fair warning to avoid for those who are only here for the coins. I personally don't own any of Theodosus, with my collection stopping at 363.

_____________________________________________________________________

 

I do find myself defending Theodosius regularly in online circles. My main critique of his reign is that he died at a really inopportune time. I actually don't think the timing could have been much worse. He had only recently united the Roman Empire in another bloody civil war, meaning that strong administration was needed to steady the recently depleted ship and consolidate the rival factions. Furthermore, he had only recently eliminated what would have been a talented and experienced Western regime that could have inherited the empire had he died a short time earlier. The fallout from his portentous demise was that two children were destined to inherit a chaotic and divided empire. Of course, this is not his fault but it really is astonishingly poor timing. 

My other heavy critique is the way that his dealings with the Western usurpations were handled. You communicate quite effectively the humming and hawing that Theodosius seems to have done before being persuaded somewhat weakly to engage in total war. I feel either Magnus Maximus and Eugenius could have been accepted as junior Augustus and the empire would have benefited long term. Of course, the counter-argument is that family dynasties had produced (relative) Imperial stability since the days of Constantine's sole reign beginning in 324 and perhaps this was now in the Roman conscious. 

I also think the whole debacle with Ambrose set an awful precedent of bishopric intrusion into Imperial politics. Although the bishops were always troublemakers, they were scarcely troublemakers outside of ecclesiastical matters, and emperors like Constantius II were very heavy handed in their response to bishops who tried to overstep ecclesiastical boundaries and assert political will. I think Theodosius relenting to Ambrose set the stage for more religiously inclined emperors who were greatly influenced by the Christian ecclesiastical power bloc, perhaps at the expense of the empire's management and well-being. In a way, Diocletian's concerns about Christianity being a parallel society at odds with the Empire were somewhat justified by this event.

The above penance is especially troubling when it seems the Imperial response (although not the severity or the  scale) in Thessaloniki was at least somewhat justified. Butheric the magister militum, correctly jailed someone for a crime and refused to yield to the crowd and commit an injustice by releasing him. The crowd then killed Butheric and presumably some other military personnel. A city revolt that results in the slaying of a high ranking military official almost certainly demands violent curtailing by the Emperor. Of course, the reports indicate the violence got incredibly out of hand, but whether this is Theodosius' responsibility is seriously up for debate in my opinion. Furthermore, if Butheric was indeed a Goth as his name may imply, we may be looking at civilian intolerance of Gothic influence. Gothic integration was a cornerstone of Theodosius' management of the terrible situation post-Adrianople and a civilian rejection of that (either actual or implied) could not be accepted. We see how precarious this situation could be as anti-barbarian sentiment flourished in the aftermath. In 398 Synesius in books 14 and 15 of De Regno  perhaps communicates a popular notion:

 

Quote

 Is it not disgraceful that the empire richest in men should yield the crown of glory in war to aliens? For my own part, however may victories such men might win for us, I should be ashamed of the aid so received. 

...

Before matters have come to this pass, one to which they are now tending, we should recover courage worthy of Romans, and accustom ourselves to winning our own victories, admitting no fellowship with these foreigners, but disowning their participation in any rank.

...

Remember that in our case there are not merely two men, and those dishonored individuals heading a rebellion, but great and pernicious armies who, kinsmen of our own slaves, have by evil destiny poured into the Roman Empire,note and furnished generals of great repute both amongst themselves and amongst us, 'by our own coward nature'.

...

This fortress of theirs you must pull down; you must remove the foreign cause of the disease before the festering abscess actually declares itself, before the ill-will of these dwellers in our country is exposed.

 

In 408 upon the death of Stilicho, Honorius gives in to various paranoias and orders the massacre of the foederati families which prompts large amounts of Germans/Goths to flock to Alaric, who will then sack the city.

Quote

Olympius was appointed magister officiorum and replaced Stilicho as the power behind the throne. His new government was strongly anti-Germanic and obsessed with purging any and all of Stilicho's former supporters. Roman soldiers began to indiscriminately slaughter allied barbarian foederati soldiers and their families in Roman cities.

 

With all these things considered, I tend to take a more nuanced view on the massacre at Thessaloniki. A violent Imperial response was justified and in line with Theodosius' potentially volatile (but unavoidable) policy of integration to achieve Imperial stability. The tragedy is the sheer scale and degree of the violence, which it is doubtful that Theodosius is actually responsible for. 

[Magnus Maximus]

15 minutes ago, Steppenfool said:

Lovely coin. I love the siliqua with the characteristic dark toning. The blockier art style and the toning really exemplifies the transition into chaos and eventually the middle ages! I've found myself rambling a bit about history below, so fair warning to avoid for those who are only here for the coins. I personally don't own any of Theodosus, with my collection stopping at 363.

_____________________________________________________________________

 

I do find myself defending Theodosius regularly in online circles. My main critique of his reign is that he died at a really inopportune time. I actually don't think the timing could have been much worse. He had only recently united the Roman Empire in another bloody civil war, meaning that strong administration was needed to steady the recently depleted ship and consolidate the rival factions. Furthermore, he had only recently eliminated what would have been a talented and experienced Western regime that could have inherited the empire had he died a short time earlier. The fallout from his portentous demise was that two children were destined to inherit a chaotic and divided empire. Of course, this is not his fault but it really is astonishingly poor timing. 

My other heavy critique is the way that his dealings with the Western usurpations were handled. You communicate quite effectively the humming and hawing that Theodosius seems to have done before being persuaded somewhat weakly to engage in total war. I feel either Magnus Maximus and Eugenius could have been accepted as junior Augustus and the empire would have benefited long term. Of course, the counter-argument is that family dynasties had produced (relative) Imperial stability since the days of Constantine's sole reign beginning in 324 and perhaps this was now in the Roman conscious. 

I also think the whole debacle with Ambrose set an awful precedent of bishopric intrusion into Imperial politics. Although the bishops were always troublemakers, they were scarcely troublemakers outside of ecclesiastical matters, and emperors like Constantius II were very heavy handed in their response to bishops who tried to overstep ecclesiastical boundaries and assert political will. I think Theodosius relenting to Ambrose set the stage for more religiously inclined emperors who were greatly influenced by the Christian ecclesiastical power bloc, perhaps at the expense of the empire's management and well-being. In a way, Diocletian's concerns about Christianity being a parallel society at odds with the Empire were somewhat justified by this event.

The above penance is especially troubling when it seems the Imperial response (although not the severity or the  scale) in Thessaloniki was at least somewhat justified. Butheric the magister militum, correctly jailed someone for a crime and refused to yield to the crowd and commit an injustice by releasing him. The crowd then killed Butheric and presumably some other military personnel. A city revolt that results in the slaying of a high ranking military official almost certainly demands violent curtailing by the Emperor. Of course, the reports indicate the violence got incredibly out of hand, but whether this is Theodosius' responsibility is seriously up for debate in my opinion. Furthermore, if Butheric was indeed a Goth as his name may imply, we may be looking at civilian intolerance of Gothic influence. Gothic integration was a cornerstone of Theodosius' management of the terrible situation post-Adrianople and a civilian rejection of that (either actual or implied) could not be accepted. We see how precarious this situation could be as anti-barbarian sentiment flourished in the aftermath. In 398 Synesius in books 14 and 15 of De Regno  perhaps communicates a popular notion:

 

 

In 408 upon the death of Stilicho, Honorius gives in to various paranoias and orders the massacre of the foederati families which prompts large amounts of Germans/Goths to flock to Alaric, who will then sack the city.

 

With all these things considered, I tend to take a more nuanced view on the massacre at Thessaloniki. A violent Imperial response was justified and in line with Theodosius' potentially volatile (but unavoidable) policy of integration to achieve Imperial stability. The tragedy is the sheer scale and degree of the violence, which it is doubtful that Theodosius is actually responsible for. 

I agree with your assessment of Theodosius’s policy toward Maximus and Eugenius. I feel as the Empire would have been much better off had Maximus just been left alone in the West. Indeed, Maximus’s defeat set up the Roman world for the civil war between Eugenius and Theodosius in 394.  A recent article I read about this time period said that the Western Roman army lost around 2/3rds of their professional army in the civil wars of 388 and 394. We can see the effects of the civil wars nearly a decade and half later when stilicho had to resort to impressing slaves and stripping the Rhine frontier of soldiers in 405, to cobble together an army to counter a Vandal invasion of northern Italy. 

Edited December 21, 2022 by Magnus Maximus

[Qcumbor]

Great coin and writeup

Theodosius I, Siliqua - Treveri mint, 2nd officina
D N THEODOSIVS P F AVG, diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right
VIRTVS RO MANORVM, Roma seated left, holding Victory and spear, TRPS at exergue
Ref : Cohen # 57, Roman coins # 4176

Q

[Valentinian]

Here is my page listing the full AE type set for Theodosius:

http://augustuscoins.com/ed/ricix/TheodosiusSet.html

Here is one of the scarcer AE types of Theodosius:



AE3. GLORIA REIPVBLICE. Camp gate, cross-rho above, TES in exergue. Obverse with consular bust left. [The reverse is the same as type 38, next, but the flan is a bit larger.] 385 [DO, dated 385 because of the consular bust. p. 108] Only at Thessalonica.
 

Theodosius
16 mm. 3.07 grams. 6:00.
TES
RIC Thessalonica 59b

Struck for Valentinian II, Theodosius, and Arcadius. RIC says "scarce" but I say "rare" and seldom offered. From the very small sample of all the coins of this this type offered over the last 30 years, Theodosius examples have been the most available.

[seth77]

I think Theodosius was a man of considerable experience and energy but also ambition. His ambition was likely encouraged by the somewhat weak administration under Gratian in the West to seek an independent rule and his own dynastic claim in the East. Once Gratian was out of the picture and his rule secure in the East, Theodosius naturally turned West, so while the Roman state in the West might have had to gain from the rule of the likes of Magnus Maximus and then Eugenius and Arbogast, this did not fit well with Theodosius' own ambitions. And his ambitions by this time were very dynastic: Honorius was raised to the purple in 393 and so the West had to be subdued so both his heirs would continue the dynasty ruling the whole empire. I'm also of the opinion that Theodosius was inspired by the Constantinian model and saw his war in the West in 394 as a parallel to Constantius II campaign against Magnentius. But while his energy and talent could place him close to Constantine, none of his heirs had the administrative skills and levelheadedness of Constantius II, which is exactly how the fortunes of the house of Theodosius turned into the misfortunes of the Roman state.

Edited December 22, 2022 by seth77

[Magnus Maximus]

@seth77

Is it fair to say that Valentinian II was living on borrowed time then? Assuming that his death was a suicide, what fate would have befell him had he not killed himself? 

 

Edited December 22, 2022 by Magnus Maximus