I have translate the german wiki article about the crisis of the third century, as it is quite an impressive article through the use of google translate. The English article pales in comparision to the german article, as it contains very little information for a lot of people. However, it is still better to read a proper book about this time period than rely on an wiki article.
Perhaps people can help me refine the translation?
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichsk...._Jahrhunderts
Quote:
The crisis of the 3rd Century is known by modern historians of the period from 235 to 284/85 AD in the Roman Empire. During this time, when the leadership of the Empire was under the so-called soldier-Emperors, there occurred a series of internal and external crises. The period began at the end of the Severan dynasty, who had proved themselves as a stabilizing factor for the Empire.
Several Germanic armies as well as the new Persian Sassanid Empire threatened the Roman Empire, which had to fend off invasions by in the north and east. Numerous usurpations, the secession of imperial territories ( The Gallic Empire, and the kingdom of Palmyra) and regional economic problems constitute additional burden on the empire during the height of the crisis in 260 . There were several administrative and military reforms embarked during this era to bring the empire back to stability. This final phase of the Principate ended with the reign of Diocletian (284/85), which is associated usually the beginning of the Late Antiquity.
The Roman history of the 3rd. Century has lately become a subject of lively academic discussion. Some researchers follow the traditional approach and assume that there was a complete collapse and a systemic crisis of the empire came to touching on all areas of life. Others are much more cautious and argue that represent the various crises especially for the years around 260 out of the question to see the period but rather as a transition phase of the ancient world through to late antiquity, where there had been a promising approach to tackle the "crisis", also had several provinces of the empire during this period even seen a real boom in prosperity. Some researchers doubt whether even in principle, the applicability of the term "crisis" on the condition of the third century.
· 1 History of the “ Crisis of the third century"
- 1.1 From Maximinus "Thrax" by Valerian
- 1.1.1 The first soldier Emperor Maximinus and the Six Emperors
- 1.1.2 Rome on the defensive: The first attacks of the Scythians and the rise of Sassanid Empire
- 1.2 from Valerian to Claudius Gothicus: external threats and internal unrest
- 1.2.1 Valerian and Gallienus: The futile attempt to stabilize the empire
- 1.2.2 The sole rule of Gallienus: The highlight of the imperial crisis
- 1.3 Overcoming the crisis
- 1.3.1 Claudius Gothicus: The beginnings of stabilization
- 1.3.2 Aurelian1.3.2 Aurelian
- 1.3.3 The last emperor Soldiers: From Tacitus to Carinus
· 2 Timeline
· 3 characteristics of the epoch
· 4 Sources
· 5 Research History
· 6 Literature
· 7 comments
History of the "Crisis of the third century"
From Maximinus "Thrax" to Valerian
The first soldier Emperor Maximinus and the Six Emperors
After the Roman Empire after the turmoil of the second four emperors (193) during the reign of Septimius Severus was stabilized again, slipped away from the later Severern more in control. [1] The army, spoiled by high donative, for the Emperor was always difficult to control. The young, inexperienced and rather weak emperor Severus Alexander was murdered in 235 in Mainz finally by rebelling forces. In its place, the officer Maximinus was proclaimed the new emperor. [2] Several details regarding Maximinus are unclear, since the sources are biased. He[3 He] was obviously not a senator, but an equestrian, as only one Emperor was a senator(Macrinus). He also came from a family that probably had only been relatively recently been granted the Roman citizenship, although his wife apparently belonged to the nobility. [4] His relationship with the Senate was bad because he renounced to move to Rome and to the institution more to show a superficial respect. Although the Senate was virtually powerless in the imperial age, he still enjoyed a high symbolic value. Even in the army, there was apparently some concern in part because the sources report of rebellion at Mogontiacum and by stationed troops in the east, although both rebellion (even if they do occur historically) failed. Maximinus was able to secure its power only gradually and awarded a monetary gifts to the soldiers as well as the urban population of Rome. In 235/36 , he led several successful campaigns against Germans on the Rhine . [5] Given this context , we can classify the recent battlefield find at Kalefeld in Lower Saxony as the location of the battle. ( This sentence needs to be re-looked)
The Senate attitude towards Maximinus, whose relationship with many senators did not seem too at ease in the subsequent period, resulted in a revolt in the province of Africa in the year 238. Apparently Maximinus was forced to increase the tax burden continues to pay the legions, which resulted in the unrest of the provinces. The Senate moved against the Emperor, and proclaimed the usurper proclaimed Gordian I Emperor, who had good contacts in Rome and murdered Maximinus' local supporters with the help of the Praetorian and the Urban prefect. (Possible translation error). Also, about half of the provinces defected from the emperor. Gordian appointed his son of the same name as co-emperor, but he was defeated in the spring of 238 by the loyal troops and was killed, and shortly thereafter, the desperate Gordian I committed suicide. The Senate, which had already been expected with the sanctions on the rise Maximinus placed, then appointed the prestigious Senators Pupienus and Balbinus as the two "Senate Emperor" – which is an unusual event. However, there was unrest in Rome, with the public pushing for an emperor who was related to the Gordians. Of necessity they rose to the very young Gordian III., The grandson of Gordian I, was named Caesar, while Pupienus Balbinus govern the Empire. [6]
Pupienus now marched against Maximinus, was stuck at the siege of Aquileia, and was finally murdered by disgruntled soldiers, together with his son. But even the death of Maximinus did not end the conflict, due to the disputes between Pupienus and Balbinus. The Praetorian Guard, an important political force in Rome, also threatened the authority of the new government. The guard was apparently does not agree with the Senate’s choice emperors, and perhaps also feared being replaced by a new Guard unit. Hence in 238, the praetorian launched a successful attack on Pupienus Balbinus and, thereafter, they raised Gordian III. as the new emperor (Augustus).
Rome on the defensive: The first attacks of the Scythians and the rise of Sassanid Empire
Even after the end of the turmoil of the Six Emperors 238 stabilized the situation only temporarily: The economic situation was tense because of the high spending on the war against Maximinus added, was the threat from the outside. On the Rhine, above all, the Alemanni exerted a pressure, while on the Danube, the Goths had appeared and there were responsible for unrest. While these areas were at risk for a long time, basically the situation was not so new, but the intensity of attacks increased evidently. There were especially now more of tribes) (gentes as the Alamanni and Franks, whose considerable clout and their migration was probably driven by the conflict with Rome. [7] In 238, the so-called "los Gotensturm" broke out, and the Goths began their first attack on Roman territory and captured the town, located south of the Danube Histros while Carpi invaded inferior to the province of Moesia inferior. [8] The history of the struggles against these Germanic invaders from the "classically" oriented Greek authors in the use of traditional ethnography known as Skythai were [9] described the historian Dexippos in his (fragmentary) work Skythika. For Dexippos, the year 238 marks the beginning of the "Scythian war." [10] to 248. While the Goths again behaved calmly, the carpi continued their attacks.
The defensive struggles, the Rome since the 30s of the 3rd Century had to pass on the Danube, but were not comparable to any other threat to the empire as threats arose almost simultaneously in the east. There, the new Persian Sassanid Empire represented a far greater threat to Rome than that the- at least initially - sporadic incursions of Germanic tribes. [11] The Sassanid which had removed the more loosely organized realm of the Parthians in 226 and put in the place of a more centralized state , and possess a much stronger army, especially in the form of armoured cavalry. The Sāsānidenreich, which could look back on an ancient cultural heritage of 400 years), the great rival of Rome in the East to be (for the relevant wars, see Roman-Persian Wars. The Persian King Ardashir I, who wanted by military successes are probably also prove its legitimacy, had for the first time since the era of Alexander Severus advanced into Roman territory, and probably in 236, the strategically important cities of Nisibis and Carrhae fell to the Persians. [12]
III Gordian.
Gordian III apparently tried to maintain a good relationship with the Senate and to the goodwill of the city of Rome population. [13 He] In 241, Timesitheus rose to the position of Praetorian Prefect. He dominated from then on the business of government, and Gordian married his daughter in the same year. Externally, the eastern boundary of Rome remained a focal point: the Sassanians succeeded 240/41, conquered the important city of Hatra too, capital of the Kingdom. [14] Whether the Sassanian assumed real, as if by western sources, [15] claims to territories of the old Achaemenes, is questionable and highly controversial. More detailed knowledge of ancient history are not an absolute requirement for the Sassanian. It therefore could also be a Roman interpretation. [16] The destruction of the Kingdom of Hatra, which had served as an important buffer state in the Roman-Persian border zon, was the reason for the outbreak of new hostilities between Rome and Persia, with much symbols were connected: Gordian left the doors of the Janus temple open in Rome, to underline that Rome was at war. He also asked for the assistance of the goddess Athena Promachus who have assisted the Greeks in the Persian wars, by a cult in Rome for the goddess identified with Athena Minerva donated. Finally, he went Timesitheus of which 243 to the east of the Empire. After initial successes, during which, however, Timesitheus died, and after a heavy defeat suffered by the Romans in the Battle of Mesiche (probably in February) 244 under the Persians by their new king Shapur I, either as a result of fighting or because of an intrigue of the new Praetorian Prefect Philip Arabs, Gordian was killed. [17]
Philip, who was a sheikh of Arab origin, succeeded Gordian. One of his first actions was to make peace with Persia, apparently bought with large cash payments. [18] Philip was very concerned about the legitimacy of his rule and tried to maintain a good relationship the Senate. The deceased did he bring to the Gordian divus, and he established this as pointedly to Severan tradition. Nevertheless, there was during his reign to several rebellion, while some were suppressed relatively quickly, others prevailed ( The last until 249) . In 248, Philip committed with great effort, the 1000-year anniversary of Rome, had not modified propaganda value. Presumably, in this context Asinius Quadratus prepared a 1000-year history of Rome, which is (but do not get to a few fragments). The external situation remained strained, but still manageable; in 245/46 Philip successfully led war against the carpi in the Danube region, and finally ensured peace in that area. The Danube frontier continued to be one of the most vulnerable border regions, because according to Karpen, the Goths, and the Scythians once again invaded Thrace in 249. [19] They also laid siege to the city Marcianopolis, but eventually withdrew. [ 20] In 249, there was the usurpation of an army commander: Decius, who had successfully taken action against Germanic tribes along the Danube, had himself proclaimed emperor by his troops. Philip fell shortly afterwards in the fight against Decius.
Decius, grew to be the Emperor's programmatic surname Traianus, came from the senatorial elite. [21] Apparently, he was quite a traditionalist bent, for he tried hard to maintain the traditional gods and cults were rigorously before against Christians, and a 250 from him Victims should be enacted edict forcing all inhabitants of imperial sacrifices to the gods. To Decius, it probably was primarily a demonstration of loyalty and it should have been clear that the Christian was presented the choice to renounce their faith or die. There were arrests and killings, and it became virtually the first empire-Christian persecution. A religion such as Christianity, which stood in contrast to the traditional gods, cults, is seen as a provocation to the traditionalists Decius, as the gods was seen as protectors of Rome, an important function in the Roman state. The Christians were initially taken completely by surprise While a large number of them renounced their faith, others suffered more death, including the eminent scholar Origen. Christianity has taken decisive but hardly, if only because of the brevity of the action: Decius looked under the situation in the Danube region soon forced to take action against these Goths. In 251, he undertook a campaign against them, but was defeated by the King Cniva and together with his son Herennius Etruscus, he was killed.
The successor of Decius was Trebonianus Gallus, one of the few imperial soldiers who came from Italy. Trebonianus Gallus was faced with another problem: A disease that had probably originated in what is now Ethiopia, which had spread to North Africa and seems to be spreading farther north. In the East, the Sassanian continued their attacks on the Eastern Roman provinces; Persian troops reached Roman-occupied Mesopotamia and Armenia in 252. Meanwhile in the north, Alamanni appear to have become active. Trebonianus Gallus no longer had the time to respond to these threats, because he was killed as a result of the usurpation of the 253 by Aemilianus. Aemilianus was able to hold only a few weeks in power, before the commander Valerian, which Trebonianus Gallus had called for help, had arrived was assassinated by his own troops. With the new Emperor Valerian, the situation stabilized, although it is temporarily, but should only do the Empire during his reign, a massive escalation of problems and the actual time of crisis.
Quote:
[Edit] From Valerian to Claudius Gothicus: External threat and anxiety
Valerian and Gallienus: The futile attempt to stabilize the empire
Valerian who had has come to power 253 , came from a distinguished senatorial family, but little is known about his relationship with the Senate. [22] He was also hardly in Rome, but immediately turned his attention to the threat at the borders, according to some researchers even the actual trigger for the crisis represented. A particularly vulnerable portion of the frontier continues to set the Balkans. The Goths tried to, operating initially in conjunction with the root of the Boran, now even a pirate. In 254 they appeared on the Aegean Sea and landed at Salonika. After Pityus had been attacked unsuccessfully at Pontus has 253 of the boranes, the city fell 256 in the hands of the Goths, which is highly demoralizing effect on the Roman troops in Asia Minor, even Trebizond was plundered by pirates, gothic. Cities that had taken them because of the Pax Romana for centuries, no walls, now had to be hastily fortified.
The Sassanian, already in the 30s of the 3rd Century had made several offensives against the Romans, began under Shapur I 253 or perhaps 252, apparently taking advantage of the turmoil in the Empire, a major offensive. After the Euphratlinie was secured, Shapur defeated a large Roman army at Barbalissos, and pushed inwards to Syria. About these processes mainly informed of his deeds trilingual Shapur, the so-called res gestae divi Saporis, is added [23]Antioch, one of the biggest and most important cities of the empire to conquer, too short, soon after Shapur initially took off again. [24] The Iranian offensive had led to the widespread collapse of the Roman East defense. Apparently, the Roman troops no longer capable of coordinated defense, because the local leaders Uranius Antoninus, the priest king of Emesa, well organized defense against the Persians, where he entered into a (more or less open) competition with the legitimate Emperor. [25] By the early death of the priest-king, although it remained without effect, but points out this event on the following development, led to the formation of the sub-kingdom of Palmyra. by Western sources. Persian troops even managed to , [15] claims to territories of the old Achaemenes, is questionable and highly controversial. More detailed knowledge of ancient history are not an absolute requirement for the Sassanian. It therefore could also be a Roman interpretation. [16] The destruction of the Kingdom of Hatra, which had served as an important buffer state in the Roman-Persian border zon, was the reason for the outbreak of new hostilities between Rome and Persia, with much symbols were connected: Gordian left the doors of the Janus temple open in Rome, to underline that Rome was at war. He also asked for the assistance of the goddess Athena Promachus who have assisted the Greeks in the Persian wars, by a cult in Rome for the goddess identified with Athena Minerva donated. Finally, he went Timesitheus of which 243 to the east of the Empire. After initial successes, during which, however, Timesitheus died, and after a heavy defeat suffered by the Romans in the Battle of Mesiche (probably in February) 244 under the Persians by their new king Shapur I, either as a result of fighting or because of an intrigue of the new Praetorian Prefect Philip Arabs, Gordian was killed. [17]
In 256, in the same year in which the Goths ravaged the coast of Asia Minor, fell again a Persian army in Mesopotamia. The Persians succeeded in not only the occupation of the fortress Circesium, but above all the conquest and destruction of the fortress of Dura Europos, which played a key role in the Roman East defense. A further advance of the Sassanian could indeed be prevented by Roman troops, which probably forced the Persians to retreat. However, the external pressure has left its mark: Several legions were literally wiped out on the frontlines in the north and east, although there was some solutions, such as the formation of a mounted operational reserve, which could be used in hotspots. [26]
Nevertheless, the kingdom was in a precarious position, because neither of the Rhine and Danube in the east nor the external threat was removed. In the summer of 257 Valerian led, perhaps out of concern for the "divine protection of Rome" and in connection with the policy of Decius, a new persecution of Christians. There were a number of death sentences, but also to exile and confiscation.. Therefore, in the research also often assumed fiscal behavior. The American valeria sometimes very bloody persecution was, inter alia, Cyprian of Carthage, the victim, a suppression of the Christian communities was not reached. The persecution was terminated only 260 of the son of Valerian, Gallienus. [27]
Gallienus, page 253 co-emperor, Valerian was transferred from the task of caring for the defense of the West. There too, the situation remained strained, like a drop of Germanic tribes became all too clear: The Franks invaded in 257 or 259 on the Upper Rhine in Roman territory, and reached as far as Hispania, while the Alamanni 259/60 the Upper Germanic-Rhaetian Limes overcame after the Roman troops stationed there as a result of internal conflicts were probably largely withdrawn earlier. The Alamanni were advancing up to northern Italy, where they probably Gallienus (Midsummer) 260 near Milan defeated. Subsequently, the Romans, but had to remove the so-called Dekumatland. . Even a larger group Juthungen overcame the Roman frontier defense before it was defeated near Augsburg, as the so-called altar of Augsburg victory proves. [28]
The triumph of Shapur I over Valerian, Gordian III and Philip the Arab.
In Asia Minor also stir again the Goths. In 258, they attacked several cities of Asia Minor, plundering the conquered cities, [29], among other things they fell Chalcedon, Nicaea and Nicomedia victim. In 259 joined them Valerian, contrary to the north of Asia Minor, but they had since been withdrawn. Meanwhile, Valerian in the East was planning further action against the Persians, but struck him with an offensive in Shapur year 260 beforeIn the early summer of 260 was the Roman army, had personally led the Valerian to the field, defeated in Carrhae, and Valerian was in Persian captivity, from which he was never set free any more. In his deeds to the capture of Valerian Shapur is - a unique and deeply humiliating process for the Romans - notes:
“ "In the third campaign, when we pushed forward and against Carrhae and Edessa Carrhae and besieged Edessa, as the emperor Valerian marched against us, and it has had with him an army of 70,000 men and on the opposite side of Carrhae and Edessa, with one emperor Valerian place great battle for us, and we took the Emperor Valerian prisoner with his own hands and the rest, the praetorian prefect and senators and officers, all of which were always leaders of that army, we took all these with their hands and they were deported to Persia. [ 30] "
Valerian has been combined with several other Roman prisoners were deported to Persia and died in captivity. Die katastrophale Niederlage The catastrophic defeat of Valerian had broader implications, because the Persians now practically no longer faced the Roman army in Mesopotamia, except for small groups. The Roman Eastern provinces were open to the Persians. Evidently Rome is temporarily lost control over a very considerable part of this border zone. [31] In several late-antique sources are not true (in the senatsfreundlichen Historia Augusta) was because even Valerian made serious allegations. His successor, Gallienus faced a huge challenge.
The supremacy of Gallienus: The highlight of the imperial crisis
During the reign of Gallienus (260 to 268), the crisis. Its scope for action was limited, because the borders were almost simultaneously in the West and the East beset by enemies. [32] Following the capture of Valerian collapsed the rest of largely Roman frontier defense in the East. There was some (but only short-term) usurpations in the East, so Macrianus Minor was elevated to the Emperor, but he has already defeated 261 a loyal army. Gallienus made (as far from the sources identified) no effort to free his father, Valerian was treated like a dead emperor. The persecution of Christians was ended and Gallienus returned to the old law practice, was considered since Trajan and provided for criminal liability in principle, despite no specific persecution of Christians. Inside the kingdom not yet come to rest, because it occurred several Usurpationsversuche: in 260 rose Ingenuus in the Balkans and Regalianus in the Danube region, and both were crushed usurpations. These and other localized bound collection of experiments, the additional forces to show a fundamental problem of the imperial soldiers, especially from the 50s of the 3rd Century: In the first years of the imperial troops had occurred in quick succession, often repeatedly to change the ruler, of whom hardly anyone died of natural causes. In particular, the increasingly failed "system acceptance" of the principality, which was based on three pillars (army, senate and people of Rome): [33] The ruler was now almost alone determined mostly by the army. At the same time striving now to the Roman troops in combat zones for "Emperor nearby. If the princeps had just committed elsewhere, they tended to be declared successful generals to emperors, which led to civil wars, which in turn reduced the resistance against foreign enemies. The respective winners in the civil war could then look at the same time just a front, and therefore had to re-appoint generals, who, if successful, in turn, could all too easily grab for power. [34] Therefore, particularly threatened by the three major army units along the Rhine, Danube and the Euphrates (partly in Britain at any time) is a usurpation. This direct and potentially existential threat to the empire made it difficult for Gallienus significantly to stabilize his rule.
The Roman defensive effort against the Persians, who conquered the 260 Antioch for a second time, proved to be rather ineffective until the Exarch (and later king) of Palmyra, Odaenathus, effectively took command. This well had previously tried to reach an agreement with Shapur, but this failed. [35] Gallienus provided him now with the imperium maius for the East and made it as a corrector totius Orientis his de facto deputy there; [36] Gallienus had little any other choice, because the power of the Odaenathus was an inescapable fact of the Roman and resources are not sufficient to act simultaneously against the Germans, the Gallic Empire Special (see below) and the Persians. In fact, succeeded in Palmyrean troops to repel the Persians: 262/63 came before Odaenathus to the Persian chief residence of Ctesiphon. Apparently assistant during this campaign, which primarily served the purpose of securing after 260 lost provinces of Rome, including regular Roman troops to his command. Thus was the major trading center Palmyra, the only stabilizing factor in Rome's eastern border - and eventually a rival to Rome. Odaenathus apparently saw through his successes against the Persians, confirmed in his position of power, as he now called himself rex regum ( "King of Kings") - an apparent reference to the title of the Sassanian (Sahan saw), which is probably about the successes of Palmyra whose king was to emphasize Shapur. At the same time the authority of the Roman central government fell from the spot more. 267 Odaenathus made another campaign in Persia, but broke them off after the Goths had invaded the northern Asia Minor. In the same year Odaenathus was probably a relative of murder victims, perhaps he was also commissioned by Gallienus, who feared the growing power of Odaenathus murdered. [37] After his death, his widow, Zenobia, the regency took over and exploited the weakness of Rome in the East out, in rapid succession, much of the Eastern Roman provinces were (briefly) in Palmyra, including Syria and (though only 269/70), the rich province of Egypt. The result was the sub-kingdom of Palmyra, which turned out to border defense against the Persians as a stabilizing factor [38] and in this situation represented an alternative to the apparently overwhelmed the Roman state. The Greeks of Trebizond Nicostratus not written a (surviving) work of history about this period that most glorified the exploits of Odaenathus. [39]
As early as 260, it was come to the detachment of large sections of the Western Empire and to form part of the Gallic Empire Special (Gallic Empire). [40] The military commander Posthumus had succeeded in the summer of 260 a victory of some Germans, but there was a dispute regarding the distribution of prey between him and the CaesarSaloninus, a son of Gallienus, who had been left behind by the Emperor in Gaul, as his deputy. Posthumus then laid siege to Cologne, where Saloninus resided. This was extradited along with his advisors finally Silvanus and both were executed shortly thereafter. Posthumus himself was proclaimed emperor by his troops, he resided in either Cologne or Trier. Posthumus and his followers claimed to 274 no small part of the West and some successes were recorded in border defense. Gallienus was a result of the various other crises rather late to be active against Posthumus. 265 (some researchers have also been at 266/67) had failed an offensive against the special Gallic Empire. 269 but was also increasingly the authority of the Special Posthumous kingdom called into question, and he was shortly after he had knocked down a usurpation murdered. His successors were not spared from Usurpationsversuchen, with economic problems also played a role, such as the precious metal content decreased markedly in the coinage.
Through the formation of the Gallic Empire and the later establishment of the sub-kingdom of Palmyra was made subordinate to 267/68 only Italy, the Balkans (including Greece), the province of Africa and parts of Asia Minor under the direct control of Gallienus. These centrifugal tendencies in the kingdom were a direct result of insufficient management efficiency, which later led to a significantly greater centralization of management, as well as the overuse of the Army. Again and again had to be withdrawn troops from a border zone that is exposed to others in order to combat hostile intrusions elsewhere, which occurred almost simultaneously in part. The military was overwhelmed with the defense of the borders so that sometimes it was for local militia to take on this task. This was already done in the East after the capture of Valerian. Another example occurred during the Herulereinfalls in Greece 267/68. [41] Once again in 262 the Goths had crossed the Danube, and had even then ferried across the Hellespont into Asia Minor, where they raided several towns in Asia Minor, attacked the "Skythai" looted 267 again, and on the north coast of Asia Minor. Another 267, the Heruli fell with ships on the Sea of Marmara to the Aegean Sea, and finally to Greece. They managed to conquer a whole series of cities and plunder, including Byzantium, Argos and Athens. At their retreat from Attica, they were defeated by a local militia force. During these struggles, the distinguished historian of Dexippos. [42] A fragment from the Skythika of Dexippos, which refers to this event, has been preserved. It represents one of the few contemporary source statements and the content is enlightening, because here also a strong Greek local patriotism and a return to the Greek history is palpable:
"[...] And through perseverance wars are decided more than numerical strength. But we have no contemptible force: Two thousand of us have come together as a whole and our location is heavily fortified. From him we have to break out and damage our enemies, by attacking small groups and lay ambushes when they pass by. [...] The death haunts all that is human life but can in the fight for his country, brings the biggest prize: eternal glory. " [...] This, then, he said. The Athenians, however, drew much strength from the words [...] and then demanded to be led into the war. [43] "
Gallienus, who had planned a campaign against Posthumus and therefore stayed in Italy, moved in troops as soon as he received news of the invasion of Heruli, and defeated them in the spring of 268 on the river Nestus in the Balkans.
In addition to the military problems were also a number of structural problems. The rapid change of rulers prevented a continuous imperial politics. In addition, the soldier-emperor hung so largely dependent on the favor of their troops that they could no longer discipline. Not a few of the later soldier-emperors (from 268) were from Illyricum, which was mainly as a recruiting area of great importance, and came from humble circumstances. Also walked about 260 since the structures in the imperial administration, the army and the provincial administration, as it was also partly to an economic decline: Even against the emperor Gordian III. occurred in the outskirts of the Empire (as in Africa) to revolt, while broad in the Senate and the army was a mutual dislike was the senators and the knights in the administration increasingly repressed. Nevertheless, the kingdom is not durable and broke the backbone of management and control practices remained largely intact. The economy of the empire but was at least as time-and area on the edge of collapse: There was a sharp devaluation, because the resources for the financing of the army and the administration barely sufficient. Since about 270 of the inflation began to escalate. To solve these difficulties Gallienus was obviously an administrative reform, the aspects of late Roman administration under Diocletian and Constantine anticipated. Gallienus closed, although even being descended from the upper class, largely from senators from military service. Instead, knights and military men, gaining access to higher posts, including permits to those who had previously been reserved for senators. Gallienus, speculating appear to mean that people who owed their rise to him, would act as a loyal ambitious senators. By 260 he created a mounted operational reserve, which probably represented the model for the future field army. In particular, the importance of the Danube legions, relied on by the emperor, was always more. Despite all these reforms could no longer enforce nationwide as Gallienus Emperor: 267 or 268 had Aureolus, a commander of Gallienus, collected in northern Italy against the Emperor, Gallienus was in Milan during the siege in August / September 268 victim to an assassination scheme. [44]
The balance of the reign of Gallienus, the longest-reigning emperor Soldiers falls, are mixed, reflecting the sources: in the Latin tradition Gallienus is negatively valued in Greek is more usually positive. In fact, get him in spite of the difficult situation some military successes, and some important internal reforms. However, the Empire was under his rule, the full impact of the imperial crisis, which is of course mainly due to factors such as invasions and usurpations, which could not be influenced by the emperor.
Overcoming the crisis [edit]
Claudius Gothicus: The beginnings of stabilization [edit]
Gothicus Claudius, the successor of Gallienus, found himself confronted with the problems that remain unsolved at the borders. [45] His reign and that of his successor, Aurelian - both are on the "Illyrian emperors counted" - was a turning point of the soldiers in military empire: the empire was previously almost exclusively on the defensive, he succeeded these emperors to limit the danger from the Germans and recover the lost territory in the east and west. Still 268 the Alamanni were advancing across the Danube, with the clear intention of invading Italy, Claudius, however, succeeded in defeating the invaders at Lake Garda. In the spring 269 then the "Skythai" (meaning the Goths, Heruli and other groups) undertook a large-scale, sea-based attack. [46] The fleet sailed from the Black Sea to the Aegean Sea, part of the troops then landed at Salonika, which was besieged in vain. This invasion seems to have encountered significant resistance, it was not possible for attackers to take the (now largely fortified) towns. When Claudius wanted to confront the invaders, they went off. They were then asked by the Romans in the summer of Naissus 269. Here, Claudius, which began mainly sent his cavalry defeated the enemy's army, earning him the nickname Gothicus ( "Gotensieger"). The second group of invaders were defeated in the summer of 270 in several sea battles.
Domestically, the military Claudius promoted from the equestrian and several Illyrians owed him their ascent. It seems the two special kingdom, the Gallic and, Palmyrene have ignored, probably because both the border defense against external enemies and ensured he would not waste resources by offensives against them. However, he concluded Hispania, which is submitted after the death of Postumus again the central government, in its sphere of influence. Otherwise, he concentrated on the defense of the Danube area. Than 270 a plague broke out in the Balkans, also became ill and soon died out because Claudius. Its relationship with the Senate, which gave him extensive awards are given, seems to have been very good. In the Senate's history, he was glorified, which should have been one reason for the fictive genealogical connection of Constantine the Great to Claudius. [47] His short reign is one of the most successful of the imperial soldiers.
Aurelian [ Edit ]
After the death of his younger brother, Claudius, first Quintillus was elevated to the emperor. Collected in September 270 [48] However, in Sirmium, the Danube legions Aurelian, an experienced commander of the cavalry, to the emperor. Aurelian soon left for Italy. Quintillus, leaving his troops in the lurch, committed suicide or was murdered by soldiers. Aurelian succeeded in overcoming the crisis, at least partially, with the preliminary work on it by Emperor Gallienus and had initiated the professionalisation of the army was able to draw. [49] Aurelian had to fend off a series of serious barbarian invasions. The Juthungen, who had broken in the summer of 270 over the Danube into the empire, he could defeat in the fall of that year. In the spring of 271 he fended off an attack of the Vandals into Pannonia, they made peace and withdrew. Shortly after, Aurelius was able to avert an attack by the Juthungen and Alamanni in Italy, albeit with difficulty. Surveys of two usurpers called Septimius Urbanus and were quickly defeated. [50] A revolt in Rome, which was probably triggered by the advance of Juthungen, beat the Kaiser bloodily, which was blamed for it by some historians. Later Aurelian tried to maintain good relations to the Senate. He erected to protect the Aurelian Walls of Rome, which first considered a possible military threat to the capital by foreign enemies was considered. In the Danube region, the situation continued to remain disturbed: In the second half of 271 Aurelian moved to the East and defeated a Gothic squad. The excessively exposed province of Dacia north of the Danube, he gave up.
272 Aurelian turned his attention to the East. In the spring he began a campaign against Palmyra, whose government had tried in vain, 270 for the recognition of Rome. Only now Zenobias Vaballathus son assumed the imperial title and company so that the open usurpation. Palmyra's army was defeated in June / July 272, in August of that year Aurelian took a fight in Palmyra. A siege, as mentioned in the Historia Augusta, was held not well, most likely in the oasis city had a "peace party" gained the upper hand. Zenobia was taken prisoner. Compared with the indigenous elites, the Emperor sat demonstratively to a policy of clemency (dementia), which he apparently reached their cooperation. Executions such as the philosopher Longinus, who had acted as a consultant Zenobias that were the exception. Thus Aurelian brought without undue difficulty to the eastern part of the empire back under central government control. An uprising in Palmyra in the spring of 273 was quickly put down. Shortly thereafter, Aurelian was the reconquest of the Gallic Empire in special attack. In the spring of 274 of the Gallic troops were defeated at Catalaunum, which collapsed in the Gallic Empire Special fast. The breakaway provinces assistant again the central government.
Aurelian returned in late summer of 274 back in triumph to Rome and turned to internal reforms. [51] He introduced a new state cult, that of the sun god Sol Invictus, which he regarded as "master of the Roman Empire" and his personal protector. [52] was an unmistakable tendency to theocratic rule of legitimacy. Aurelian is said to have worn as the first emperor of a tiara and a gold dress. His religious activities were reflected in the time of the Empire crisis has clearly prominent trend toward monotheism or Henotheism that (even the advance of Christianity favored especially in the east). In the last months of his reign Aurelian moved against the Christians. The economy recovered significantly, especially as the empire once again on the western and eastern provinces possessed. A currency reform of the emperor failed.
In September / October 275 Aurelian, who was at that time in Thrace fell victim to a conspiracy that had organized the Imperial Secretary of Eros, the threatened punishment for misconduct. But even after the murder of Aurelian was smashed its consolidation course, which showed slow effects retained. The power of Aurelian was primarily in the recovery of the lost provinces in the west and east and the stabilization of the border. In the late ancient Epitome de Caesaribus his achievements were even compared with those of Alexander and Caesar. [53]
The last emperor Soldiers: From Tacitus to Carinus [edit]
The successor Aurelian took up the most derived from the senatorial elite Tacitus. [54] about his reign are few, some incredible information. To the statement in the Historia Augusta is one that the emperor was related to the same historian, and I can make copies of their works. The majority (more or less reliable) information in the sources they derive from a common source senatsfreundliche, called Enmannsche imperial history. Tacitus, who was raised in his old age to the emperor, was probably more of an embarrassment candidate. He tried to consolidate his position through the distribution of cash gifts and other measures. Above all, he was anxious to gain the good graces of the Senate: On coins, he was hailed as Restitutor reipublicae, as the restorer of the (senatorial aristocracy) Republic. Although it certainly could be no question as Tacitus, but can certainly be described as "Imperial Senate," the value placed on close cooperation, which explains its reputation in the senatorial per sources. But shortly after Tacitus had won a victory over Heruli and Gothic invaders, he died in mid-276th It is possible that he fell victim to an attack.
Domestically, the military Claudius promoted from the equestrian and several Illyrians owed him their ascent. It seems the two special kingdom, the Gallic and, Palmyrene have ignored, probably because both the border defense against external enemies and ensured he would not waste resources by offensives against them. However, he concluded Hispania, which is submitted after the death of Postumus again the central government, in its sphere of influence. Otherwise, he concentrated on the defense of the Danube area. Than 270 a plague broke out in the Balkans, also became ill and soon died out because Claudius. Its relationship with the Senate, which gave him extensive awards are given, seems to have been very good. In the Senate's history, he was glorified, which should have been one reason for the fictive genealogical connection of Constantine the Great to Claudius. [47] His short reign is one of the most successful of the imperial soldiers.
Tacitus was the successor of his brother Florianus first, against which, however, was formed soon in the east of the kingdom of resistance. An experienced, from Sirmium originally Probus officer was charged by his troops as the new emperor. [55] Florianus Probus marched forward with strong associations troops, but was once Probus could hold its own, killed at Tarsus in the south east of Asia Minor (August 276), whereupon Probus began his successor. [56] Probus did not have much time to consolidate his power, because he had to like all the problems Soldatenkaiser pay at the border. Alamanni and Franks in Gaul had broken through the Rhine fortifications and had done some extensive pillaging. Therefore introduced by Probus in the years 277/78 campaigns in Gaul and had recorded some successes. Even if the reports in the sources are probably exaggerated, it nevertheless managed to stabilize the Rhine frontier again. [57] In the spring of 278 broke Probus on the Danube, also there to bring the situation under control. On the way there he defeated Burgundians and Vandals. His success allowed the emperor to celebrate with new coinages.
Almost simultaneously, the Blemmyes were in Egypt, the southern boundary of the Nile Valley had repeatedly threatened, beaten, which makes the line was re-secured. Relations with the Sāsānidenreich other hand, seem to have been, although tense, but it's been no serious fighting. [58] In Asia Minor could be beaten more robbers, led by a certain Lydios, where the emperor, however, as was the case in Egypt, not even locally. Maybe Probus had gone to Rome in the summer of 279. [59] In the reign of Probus there was a series of unsuccessful Usurpationsversuchen. In Britain rose (280 or 281) an unidentified usurper, [60] also did it to the usurpations of 280/81 Proculus and Bonosus (in Gaul or in Cologne) and finally to that of Julius Saturninus in Syria. [61] All four found a quick end, with Saturninus was killed by his own troops, without having to intervene Probus. 281 Probus left a triumphal organize and distribute donations to the people to celebrate his victory over Blemmyes and Teutons. Perhaps during the planning for a campaign in Persia Probus was murdered in September / October 282 by disgruntled soldiers in Sirmium. [62] One reason for these riots may have been the harsh discipline of his soldiers demanded Probus. Probus seems to have been a good administrator and military. His reign will be evaluated in the sources overwhelmingly positive and he is described as a just ruler, pursuing the chosen course of consolidation of Aurelian systematically.
282 of the new emperor was originally from southern Gaul Carus, who had been proclaimed even during the reign of Probus emperor by his troops and was now universal recognition. [63] Soon afterwards raised his two sons Carinus Carus and Numerian to co-emperor. About Sarmatians, who had broken over the Danube into the empire, won Carus top 283 to win. Carus then sat Carinus as a ruler in the West, while he himself set off with Numerian to the east, to go against the Sassanid in the war. The reason for the Persian campaign is unknown, a previous Persian aggression, nothing is said. In any event, the invasion shows that the military might of the empire had improved so much that they now believed, against the great enemy of Rome in the East can move too aggressively. The occasion also seemed like a good deal: The Persian king Bahram II was occupied by a rebellion in the east of his kingdom, and was surprised by the rapid advance Roman perfectly well. The Roman troops penetrated as far as Seleucia-Ctesiphon, the main residence of the Sassanid ago. They took the town a while, but another Roman offensives were unsuccessful. At Ctesiphon Carus 283 died unexpectedly in late July. It is unclear whether it was a violent death. The assertion in some sources, he had been struck by lightning, possibly reflecting the surprise at his unexpected death, which was attributed to a sudden divine intervention. [64]
The Army called after the death of Carus, Numerian, and agreed to the withdrawal of necessity. On the way back to the West died in November 284 and Numerian under unclear circumstances. The army then called out the Guard officer Diocles the new emperor, which is now called Diocletian (Diocletian). Carinus stood in the way of him who had fought successfully in the meantime in the west against the Germans and Diocletian himself opposed in the Balkans. In several battles could say Carinus, but he finally fell (probably in late summer / early fall) 285 victims of a conspiracy, where the conspirators were well supported by Diocletian. Diocletian then stepped up to full power and operate in the following years reaching (in many details in the research, however, controversial) reforms, which the empire was fundamentally redesigned. [65] A new tax system (capitatio-Iugatio) was also introduced as a reorganization of the army by dividing into Comitatenses Limitanei as a mobile field army and border troops. The Empire finally overcame the era of so-called imperial crisis - but tied to many reforms in late antiquity in activities that have heard of some military emperors, including Gallienus and Aurelian had been initiated.
Quote:
Timeline [edit]
See also: List of Soldier Empeors
* 235: Death of the Emperor Severus Alexander, so the end of the Severerdynastie; government beginning of the first emperor Maximinus Thrax soldiers.
* 238: Six Emperors and the beginning of the attacks of Skythai (Goths and other Germanic tribes in the Danube region and the Black Sea).
* 244: Unsuccessful Persian campaign of Emperor Gordian III. ; Defeat of the Romans in the Battle of Mesiche and death of the Emperor.
* 257: the beginning of the persecution of Valerian, which ends only 260th
* 259/60: Successful raids on Roman territory of the Alemanni. A group Juthungen is hit), but on their return march of Roman troops at current levels Augsburg (Augsburg wins altar.
* 260: capture of Valerian by the Sassanian and the crisis in the period following the climax. In the 60 years formed part of the kingdom of Palmyra and the special Gallic Empire.
* 267: pillaging the Heruli and other German tribes in the Aegean Sea. Among other things, Athens will be devastated.
* 268/69: The Romans succeed in victories over the Alamanni and Goths.
* 270: Aurelian was proclaimed emperor. He succeeds in the years to incorporate both Palmyra, as well as the Gallic Empire Special back in the Empire. Dacia is the emperor on the other hand, due to the unfavorable strategic position.
* 285: Emperor Carinus falls victim to a conspiracy. The end of 284, proclaimed emperor Diocletian acquired the sole officer and is seeking major reforms to the Empire.
Characteristics of the epoch [edit]
As in the second half of the 4th Century Roman historian of the history of the 3rd Century, described it, was unanimous in its verdict is negative. Especially critical was considered the time of Emperor Valerian and Gallienus. Eutropius called them even as the time when "the Roman Empire was almost destroyed." [66] Not much different expressed Aurelius Victor and the anonymous author of the Historia Augusta. In the Senate's history, the events have in the middle of the 3rd Century, when the Empire had to fight effectively at all borders and in the interior parts of the empire are detaching and numerous usurpers challenged the ruling emperor left deep traces. The predominantly negative image of the earlier research by the conditions in the 3rd Century drew, is it also due in no small part on valuations in the sources. The judge, however sophisticated and modern research has revised several previously dominant views. [67]
One characteristic of the "kingdom of crisis" is the often rapid change of rulers. [68] Although raised even among the Severern also in late antiquity and again usurpers, but in contrast to the imperial soldiers in these periods, the rebellions were usually unsuccessful. Another feature of the imperial crisis period is that many emperors came not of the senatorial elite. Often the soldiers Emperor pure military, relatively uneducated and of low birth. A striking example of this is the first of them, Maximinus, whose seizure of power, therefore, very excited offense and thus constituted a caesura. However, this rendered the Emperor in the circumstances quite remarkable. That the Senate has been increasingly marginalized, and many emperors put little value on a good relationship with him, but was noted by historians, belonged to the senatorial districts mostly negative. The Senate played in governance now finally no longer important and also the acceptance of the Principate system finally collapsed. [33], however, has suffered as well as the stability of imperial rule as a whole. For the period of military emperors of an institutional crisis is to identify who (contrary to some of the Emperor by a religious foundation of their rule as Aurelian's sun-worship) or by division of power trying to work that could be overcome only in time, Diocletian and Constantine. [69] All the soldier have in common is that they needed their power and relied on the military to legitimize their rule and protection of military successes; a single type of an emperor's soldiers are not there, especially since the emperor was not raised by some troops, but their Herrschaftsantritt a dynastic succession owed. [70]
Another feature of the era is the dramatic deterioration of the external threat. It resulted largely due to a significant strengthening of the internal enemy. The Rhine and Danube had formed a new tribal Germanic major units that possessed a much greater clout. In the East, appeared with the Sāsānidenreich an opponent of Rome was in many respects, quite equal and implemented an aggressive expansion policy. Was accepted by the middle of the 3rd Century, the pressure at the borders, and the kingdom was forced to absorb a series of setbacks. The capture of Valerian by the Persians in 260 and the subsequent events (Skythai and increasing attacks by the formation of the Gallic Empire and part of the kingdom of Palmyra) for bringing the crisis to its climax. But this crisis is not covered all areas of daily life and also had an effect, not all regions of the empire.
Was (in particular, despite the military and political crisis symptoms in the aftermath of Gordian III. And then, at 260), whose main source of external threat, the economy of the kingdom seems to have asserted himself more than was often supposed. In the earlier research has sometimes assumed that in the 3rd Century entire impoverished provinces, the infrastructure collapsed and the pressure on the population of the state has been steadily higher so that the increased impoverishment of people and fled from towns and villages. Barter or barter had taken the place of the money economy. [71] In the new research will be judged much more varied: While leading the distress caused by the increased external financing needs of the state in areas such as the coinage to a deterioration, and the tax pressure increased. But the tax pressure was dangerously after the failure of the monetary reform of Aurelian to a structural problem for the Roman state, as only in this period, inflation rose, is 270 years before such but not identifiable, such as the evaluation of the source material in Egypt ( where the tradition concerning the everyday life and the economy is best), makes clear. [72] Whether for the 3rd Century, a decline in population can be established, as researchers is now also controversial. [73]
The same applies to the question of whether slavery has played in the Roman economy this time, the role ascribed to it in the earlier research, and whether there was a decrease of the slaves and thus come to an economic crisis, as is sometimes assumed. In the sources, this can not correctly situated, as it is questionable whether the productivity of slaves was higher than half-free or free and whether a decline of slavery to the economy had been damaging. [74] Certainly, however, increased the burden on the population, including being decurions () local urban elites, but had particularly affected the lower strata of the population, but even this can not be based on generalizing the whole country, especially the living conditions are not were consistent. Although the structural integrity of the economy suffered from the military conflicts of this time, as the inflation of the 270 years, a serious setback, but she did not collapse, especially because of the complex regional differences. Recent research has demonstrated that it certainly gave regions prospered even further, such as Egypt, Africa and Hispania. But even in Asia Minor, which was directly affected by attacks that may be observed no general decline. [75] While several regions of the trade and the economy flourished, particularly as some provinces were not affected by hostilities broke out in other provinces, some serious problems, which show among other hoards in the northwestern provinces of the empire. From a general economic crisis throughout the empire and for the entire Soldatenkaiser time can not be spoken. [76] also posted in the earlier research thesis from various pagan and Christian sources-looking statements could be deduced a general crisis of consciousness among his contemporaries, [77] has been disputed recently because of widespread destruction expectations of the population can not speak be. [78]
In the area of town life occurred during the period of imperial crisis, not even to a loss of urban self-government or a general decline, although the construction in vulnerable regions, concentrating on fortifications. Along with the plundering of the various invaders, is locally a cultural maturity to determine which is also reflected in the arts. In Athens, it came after the Herulereinfall 267 to a decline. However, the city was also the period of imperial crisis, an important educational center, as well as Rome, Carthage, Alexandria and Antioch.
The developments of the 3rd Century also allowed people from humble origins to the rise of a military career. These climbers and the new urban elites took over the traditional value system, which approached that education plays a major role. In the philosophical realm, where were Plotinus, Porphyry and Longinus act originated with the Neo-Platonism, a new, responsive to the needs of the time flow. In the religious sphere which Christianity grew stronger, and with the traditional deity cults was a trend) to focus on a single deity (Henotheism. Also spread a new religion with universal claim, Manichaeism, from the west of the empire into Central Asia. [79]
Thus, some symptoms of crisis may not be generalized and overstated, and it is doubtful whether even possible to speak at the peak of crisis of a truly existential threat. [80] Although the empire was generally weak, he managed the emperors gradually to regain control, go back on the offensive and regain the temporarily split off parts of the empire in the west and east. The differentiated approach to the more recent research has led to a balanced overall assessment. This takes into account, inter alia, that in the reign of Emperor Gallienus approaches to reform were that were under the following emperors, and still continuing in late antiquity.
The era of "imperial crisis" can be divided into three phases. The first covers the period from the end of the Severan dynasty (235) to about 253, in which the emperor presented clearly in the tradition of the Severan principate. In the second phase, under Valerian and Gallienus, were piling up various symptoms of crisis, until about the middle of the 3rd Century, the crisis reached its climax. It should be noted however, that these two emperors recognized the problems and were trying to address them. In the third phase, from 268 following a strong recovery is evident, these in the fundamental reform of the empire flowed Diocletian and Constantine's time. Thus, the time of the soldier emperors was a period of transition from the Principate to Late Antiquity.
Sources
The sources for the period of "imperial crisis" is one of the most problematic in the field of ancient history, not least because it lacks a cohesive history for this period. [81] The imperial biographies of Marius Maximus ended with Elagabalus. The historical work of Cassius Dio ends in the year 229, and the works of Dio Cassius, Herodian, often dependent on a history of the Empire after Marcus, extends only to 238 and is often unproductive. For the following decades, up until the time Diocletian and Constantine, completely lacking in coherent contemporary representations.
The Late Antique Historia Augusta, a collection of Latin Emperor Biographies - which has been drafted to meet the information contained therein rather than the six writers to 300, but only by an anonymous author probably pagan around 400 - although a full report on the various imperial soldiers, most of the information but they are wrong or at least not very credible, and some biographies are even completely invented. [82] In the field lateinischsprachigen are otherwise more so-called Breviarien (concise histories) from the 4th Century mention, the Caesars of Aurelius Victor, Eutropius of the breviary, the work of Rufius Festus, and the anonymous Epitome de Caesaribus. The authors of this Breviarien used as an important, often the only source of a now lost imperial history, which is known as Enmannsche imperial history. They probably went fairly detailed look at the various tyranni (usurpers) and probably contained less reliable information. Other Latin works that arrived at length on the time of the soldier emperors more or less, have been lost, the relevant passages in the historical work of the last major Roman historian of antiquity, Ammianus Marcellinus, who also found in the surviving portions of his work partly on the 3 . Century, received, or the Annales of Nicomachus Virius Flavian. [83] From a rich Roman history is for the 3rd Century will not be considered anyway. Later Latin authors were based probably on the Senate reports and Greek-works, although some researchers think that in the time of Diocletian possibly other (now lost) Latin historical works have been created. [84]
The Greek historians flourished in contrast to Latin in the time of the "kingdom of crisis." Nicostratus of Trebizond, wrote a book on the period from 244 to the capture of Valerian by the Persians. Ephorus the Younger described the reign of Gallienus, and a certain Eusebius treated in its imperial history, the time to Carus. Of all these works, little more than the names of their authors are known only from the history of Eusebius, two fragments have been preserved. Not fared much better the 1000-year history of Rome of Asinius Quadratus, the only to receive as his Parthergeschichte, a few quotations by later authors. One bright spot are the fragments from the historical works of Dexippos, described in his 12 books comprehensive chronicle the period to 270 and in his battles against the Germans Skythika of about 238 to 270/74, closely based on the style of Thucydides. [85] Dexippos, at the Chronicle EUNAPIUS followed by Sardis, is often described as the greatest historians of his time, which is true also because the source is certainly capable. [86] But this should not obstruct the view out how bad the tradition from the period covered is: The literary output burst (at least in the Greek-speaking east of the empire) not one, but it was lost in the aftermath. [87]
Later historians, however, were able to draw on these works, for example Zosimus (c. 500), or various Byzantine authors, either lay before them the original works, or they drew their information from Zwischenquellen. Among them are the so-called anonymous post Dione (probably identical with the lost histories of Petros Patrikios), John Malalas the chronicler, John of Antioch, and John George Synkellos Zonaras. The quality of the reports varies. They sometimes provide valuable, reliable information about the anonymous post Dione and Zonaras, the latter fell back on the so-called Leoquelle. Of importance also known as the works of church historians such as Lactantius and Eusebius of Caesarea, the "father of church history are" is, as well as other Christian writers such as Origen and Cyprian of Carthage. The Romanized Goth Jordanes, in the 6th Century, wrote, and could rely on his Gothic history now lost sources, also reported on events from the time of the soldier emperors, but is not always reliable. Numerous other works (in Latin and Greek, but also Syrian, Arabic, Armenian or Persian language) contain additional information relevant to the reconstruction of events during the period of "imperial crisis of meaning, but they can for the loss of an integrated historiography the 3rd Unable to compensate for centuries.
For this reason, just come to the non-literary sources a significant impact on the time of the soldier emperors, whether they are numismatic (especially as evidence of some emperors, whose existence would otherwise doubtful), papyrologische (not least important to clarify chronological questions ), inscriptions (as on the altar of Augsburg wins) or archaeological features. However, these sources are often not easy to interpret and to place in the context of imperial history. [88]
[Edit] Research history
The problem is in addition to the general assessment of the era had to define them. Several historian said, appealing to the popular verdict of the historian Cassius Dio, which ended with the death of Marcus Aurelius, a golden age and an era of iron and rust started [89] that one should be starting the era of Emperor Septimius Severus troops. It was between the time of the soldier emperors and the time of the actual "Imperial Crisis" can be distinguished more or less. Nowadays, however, generally allows the time of the emperor and the imperial troops crisis (used here only as a period designation) by the year 235, and end with the accession to power of Diocletian (284/85). [90]
The era of "imperial crisis was already in classical representations such as the Histoire des empereurs et autres princes qui ont regne pendant Les Six premiers siècles de l'Eglise by Louis-Sébastien Le Nain de Tillemont the late 17th Century or in the History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by Edward Gibbon in the 2nd Half of the 18 Half Of The 18th Century dealt with Gibbon, often based on the material basis Tillemont. From a scientific inquiry into this period in the strict sense may, however until the 19th Century are discussed. [91] Even Gibbon considered the time from Septimius Severus as a military rule, but it was based on Cassius Dios assessment. The period from 248 to 268, in which the invasions increased steadily over the empire, the Romans and suffered several defeats, he calls "twenty years of shame and misfortune." [92] Jacob Burckhardt devoted himself in his novel The Time of Constantine the Great (1853) and the military emperors. Burckhardt used to characterize this period, terms such as "Soldatenkaisertum" and "crisis", as Gibbon, but he considered the "Illyrian emperors" as the savior of the empire. The largely negative characterization of this period was followed by the various imperial history of late 19th and early 20 and early 20th century. [93]
Great importance for the progress of research in the first half of the 20th Century were primarily three scholars: Michael Rostovtzeff, Andreas Alföldi and Franz Altheim. [94] So different were these personalities - Rostovtzeff marked by the consequences of the Russian Revolution of 1917, Alföldi drifted from the time of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy, Altheim, was actually an original thinker, from now into the Nazi ideology - were so varied and their research approaches. Rostovtzeff, of the time), from 235 as a "military anarchy" characterized (a French research is still quite common designation came from a socio-economic perspective and believed that it could represent an antagonism between the former Urban and rural population. Alföldi published numerous works on the time of the Empire crisis, including two significant contributions in the 12th Volume of the old Cambridge Ancient History, who Seinerzeit represented a major milestone for the research and even today is still useful. Alföldi was of the opinion that the internal and external symptoms of crisis are in the 3rd Century, a head and nobody thought could protect against the Roman state. Alföldi also looked at the Illyrian emperors as the saviors of the empire, which took the necessary reforms. Altheim also devoted several works to the soldier where he used the term too much of the public was more familiar, and as the beginning of the period looked at the year 193. In his book The emperor Soldiers (1939), which was financed by money from the SS-affiliated research institute, "The Ancestral Heritage", Altheim put forward the theory of the contrast between the regions during the period of imperial soldiers, so have an Illyrian-Germanic opposition existed in the army . The imperial idea had lost more and more followers, until he at the time of Gallienus stronger again came into play. His "Racial approach Altheim led to an attempt to prove the" Germanic "of Maximinus Thrax. But he was criticized, among others, Wilhelm Enßlin, who - working even during the Nazi era in Germany asked - then what role it plays in general. Altheim, whose observations such as those of Rostovtzeff highly time-bound, indicated the time of the soldier emperor as the endpoint of a long period of creeping crisis that had befallen Rome. The concept of "empire crisis" but played only in later, revised editions of his work a role. Despite the many problematic and unsustainable valuations, it remains a merit Altheim, the peripheral regions of the Empire have more strongly involved in the presentation.
Also in the second half of the 20th Century, the preoccupation with the time of crisis, Empire does not. [95] Significant contributions were made by Géza Alföldy who takes the view that a crisis was palpable in contemporary consciousness, as in the work Herodian, and David S. Potter, who believes that broad segments of the population were little affected by the crisis and that many reforms of the military emperors Diocletian and Constantine to the forecasting period, Klaus-Peter Johne, which distinguishes between a military and a longer-term crisis, and Charles Strobel and Christian Witschel. Especially Witschel Strobel and criticized the traditional crisis model to explain the developments in the 3rd Century was unfit. An all-encompassing crisis, even a "world crisis formulated" (as catchy of Alföldi) did not exist. They pointed out that some regions of the empire flourished and were not affected by the military threats that time. Witschel, who designed several models of crisis, argued that there was indeed a local and temporary crises, but these were overcome through reform, they are ultimately only a portion of a long-term transformation been. Also Strobel went from a structural change in the 3rd Century from, but denied the existence of a "crisis consciousness" at that time, because people would not have the many different issues and regional disasters, in contrast to later critics combined into an overall picture. However, several researchers are still present (including Lukas de Blois) a different approach, namely a wider crisis, except that it is fully broken until about 250th
Traditionally, the time of the Soldatenkaiser was usually viewed as negative and placed in the context of an imperial crisis. Some scholars have seen signs of disintegration in the interior, which were exacerbated by external threats only as the main cause (Gibbon, Rostovtzeff), while others kept the external threat of decisive (Altheim). Such mono-causal approaches - as well as the Marxist view of several researchers that internal problems could be attributed mainly to a "crisis of the slave economy" [96] - have proved to be totally unfit. Since the 90s of the 20th Century judge it much more distinct, the time of the soldier emperors is rather understood as an era of change. In fact, in modern research, the opponents and proponents of the concept of crisis is not as far apart as it might initially seem. It is undisputed that some regions prospered during the era of imperial crisis, but also that the Empire had to fight at least occasionally, with serious difficulties. The difference ultimately lies in the weighting of these aspects. [97]
[Edit] References
* Andreas Alföldi: Studies in the History of the world crisis of the 3rd Century after Christ. Darmstadt 1967th
(A collection of his essays Alföldi, still very useful.)
* Bruno Bleckmann: The Crisis of the Third Reich. Century in the late antique and Byzantine history. Nachdionischen investigations into the sources of the Chronicle of John Zonaras. Munich 1992.
(Detailed study of the sources to the authors of the Byzantine Empire crisis.)
* Alan Bowman, Averil Cameron, Peter Garnsey (ed.): The Cambridge Ancient History. 2. 2. rev. rev. Edition, Vol 12 (The Crisis of Empire, AD 193-337). Cambridge 2005th
(Newer data work, although with respect to the political history of very close and in parts already obsolete.)
* Henning Börm: The reign of the Emperor Maximinus and the Six Emperors 238th The beginning of the "kingdom crisis"? . In: Gymnasium. Vol 115, 2008, p. 69-86.
* Stephanie Brecht: The Crisis of the Roman Empire until the outbreak reached its peak in the representation of Byzantine authors. Rahden / Westf. 1999th 1999th
(Includes translated excerpts source.)
* Michel Christol: L'empire romain du IIIe siècle. Histoire politique (de 192, mort de bureau, à 325, Concile de Nice). 2. 2. Edition, Paris 1998.
* John F. Drinkwater: The Gallic Empire. Separatism and Continuity in the North-Western Provinces of the Roman Empire AD 260-274. Stuttgart, 1987 (History Miscellaneous Publications 52).
* Felix Hartmann: Change the rich and the ruler of crisis. Investigations into the causes and consequences of the change in the rulers of the Roman Empire soldiers Empire (3.-century AD). Frankfurt 1982 (European university publications, Ser. III, vol 149).
* Udo Hartmann: The Palmyrene sub-kingdom. Stuttgart 2001 (Oriens et occidens 2).
* Olivier Hekster: Rome and Its Empire, AD 193-284. Edinburgh 2008th
(Knappe, informative manner with the selected source extracts in English translation.)
* Olivier Hekster, Gerda de Kleijn, Danielle Slootjes (ed.), Crises and the Roman Empire. Proceedings of seventh workshop of the International Network Impact of Empire (Nijmegen, June 20-24, 2006). Brill, Leiden etc. 2007th
* Klaus-Peter Johne, Thomas Gerhardt, Udo Hartmann (ed.): Deleto paene Imperio Romano. Processes of transformation of the Roman Empire in the 3rd Century and its reception in modern times. Stuttgart 2006.
(Useful collection of essays on various topics of the imperial crisis.)
* Klaus-Peter Johne (eds): The era of the imperial soldiers. 2 vols Berlin 2008.
(Ambitious project that tries to portray the current state of research by the contributions of numerous experts. It currently provides the basic handbook for the time of the soldier emperors dar.)
* Fergus Millar: P. Herennius Dexippus. The Greek World and the Third Century Invasions. In: Journal of Roman Studies 59, 1969, p. 12-29.
(Important items to historiography of the 3rd century.)
* David S. Potter: The Roman Empire at Bay. AD 180-395. London ua 2004, ISBN 0-415-10058-5.
(Very good overall presentation, taking also highlights the socio-cultural aspects.)
* David S. Potter: Prophecy and History in the Crisis of the Roman Empire. A Historical Commentary on the Thirteenth Sibylline Oracle. Oxford 1990, ISBN 0-19-814483-0.
* Michael Sommer: The soldier emperors. Darmstadt 2004 (history of Compact), ISBN 3-534-17477-1.
(Knappe and informative introduction. Just to recommend not only for lay people, although in some respects controversial and not without problems.)
* Karl Strobel: The Roman Empire in the "3 Century ". Model of a historic crisis? . Stuttgart, 1993 (History Miscellaneous Publications 75), ISBN 3-515-05662-9.
(Main display, it is argued in an all-encompassing approach to the crisis period in the 3rd century.)
* Gerold Walser, Thomas Pekary: The Crisis of the Roman Empire. Report on the research on the history of the 3rd Century (193-284 AD) of 1939 and 1959. Berlin 1962.
* Christian Witschel: crisis - recession - stagnation? The West of the Roman Empire in the 3rd Century AD. Frankfurt am Main 1999.
(Very factual inquiry into the changes of the third century, particularly the "crisis issue" highlights and convincing showing that there had been only around 600 of the decisive break, while the differences between the Principate and late antiquity were overestimated in many respects.)
[Edit] Notes
In the bibliography of literature cited is listed in abbreviated form, all other representations are quoted in full.
1. ↑ Good overview of the period from Commodus in Potter, Roman Empire at Bay, p. 85ff.
2. ↑ to see the survey by Maximinus Ulrich Huttner: From Maximinus to Aemilianus, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 161ff. () with further references, see Henning Börm next: The Reign of Emperor Maximinus and the Six Emperors 238th In: Grammar School 115 (2008), p. 69-86. General event for the history of imperial soldiers, see also John Drinkwater: Maximinus to Diocletian, in Bowman and others, The Cambridge Ancient History, 2nd Edition, Vol 12, p. 28ff.; Potter, Roman Empire at Bay, p. 167ff. The first is the soldier, despite the sometimes outdated research level, still the representation in the 1 Edition of the Cambridge Ancient History worth reading: Wilhelm Enßlin: The Senate and the Army. In: The Cambridge Ancient History. Vol XII: The Imperial Crisis and Recovery AD 193-324. Edited by SA Cook, FE Adcock, including Cambridge, 1939, p. 72ff. See also Karl Christ: History of the Roman Empire. 4. 4. Ed Munich 2002, p. 634ff.; Michael Sommer: Roman History II, Rome and its empire in the imperial period. Stuttgart 2009, p. 261ff.
3. ↑ See Jan Burian: Maximinus. His image in Herodian and the Historia Augusta. In: Philologus 132 (1988), p. 230-244.
4. ↑ Did he really like the historian Herodian says, came from Thrace (Herodian, imperial history 7,1.), Is not entirely clear, see Huttner, from Maximinus to Aemilianus, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 161
5. ↑ Huttner, from Maximinus to Aemilianus, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 166f.
6. ↑ See Huttner, from Maximinus to Aemilianus, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 173ff.
7. ↑ ↑ Cf to Cf Andrew Goltz: The people on the northwestern frontier, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 427ff. and Andreas Goltz: The peoples of the middle and north-eastern frontier, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 449ff. See also General Walter Pohl: The Germans. Munich 2004.
8. ↑ General to see Herwig Wolfram: The Goths. 4. 4. Edition, Munich 2001, p. 53ff. The following battles against the Germans, see also Andreas Alföldi: The invasion of Peoples from the Rhine to the Black Sea. In: The Cambridge Ancient History. Vol XII: The Imperial Crisis and Recovery AD 193-324. Edited by SA Cook, FE Adcock, including Cambridge, 1939, p. 138ff. (classical, although partly outdated representation); Andreas Goltz: The peoples of the middle and north-eastern frontier, in: Johne Others, soldier emperors, especially p. 456ff. () with more recent literature.
9. ↑ The relevant classical historiography see also Millar, P. Herennius Dexippus; Potter, Roman Empire at Bay, p. 241ff.
10. ↑ Dexippos, Skythika, Fragment 20 (= Historia Augusta, Maximus et Balbinus 16.3).
11. ↑ of introduction, see Joseph Wiesehöfer: Empire of the Sassanid, in Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 531ff. In addition, regarding the Sāsānidenreichs is based, inter alia: James Howard-Johnston: East Rome, Sasanian Persia and the End of Antiquity: Historiographical and Historical Studies (Collected Studies). Aldershot 2006; Klaus Schippmann: Broad history of the Sassanid empire. Darmstadt 1990; Wiesehöfer Josef: Ancient Persia. Update. Ed Düsseldorf 2005.
12. ↑ See Erich chain Hofen: The capture of Nisibis and Carrhae by the Sassanid in the reign of Emperor Maximin, 235/236 AD. In: Iranica Antiqua 30 (1995), p. 159-177. The early hostilities between Rome and Persia, see Peter M. Edwell: Between Rome and Persia. The Middle Euphrates, Mesopotamia, and Palmyra under Roman control. London et al, 2008, p. 149ff. And especially Erich chain Hofen: The Roman-Persian wars of the 3rd Century AD According to the inscription on the Sāhpuhrs I. Ka'b-ye Zartošt (SKZ). Wiesbaden 1982, Karin Mosig-Walburg: Romans and Persians, 3 Century until the year 363 AD Gutenberg 2009; Potter, Roman Empire at Bay, p. 217ff. Source translated excerpts can be found in Michael H. Dodgeon, Samuel NC Lieu: The Roman Eastern Frontier and the Persian Wars (AD 226-363). London-New York 1991.
13. ↑ Huttner, from Maximinus to Aemilianus, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 179ff.
14. ↑ To see Josef Wiesehöfer: The early Sasanian policy towards the West and the demise Hatras. In: Klio 64 (1982), p. 437-447.
15. ↑ See Dio Cassius, Herodian, 80.4 and 6.2.
16. ↑ See Erich chain Hofen: The calls of the Achämenidenerbes by Ardašir: a interpretatio romana. In: Orientalia Lovaniensia Periodica 15 (1984), p. 177-190. A more recent overview is relevant Philip Huyse: La revendication de par les territoires Achaemenid Sassaniden: une réalité historique? . Ancien in: Philip Huyse (eds.), Iran: Questions et connaissances I: Études sur l'Iran. Paris 2002, p. 294-308.
17. ↑ Several sources claimed that Philip the Arab had murdered Gordian, but what is the basis of other evidence sources, at least doubtful. See generally David MacDonald: The death of Gordian III - another tradition. In: Historia 30 (1981), p. 502-508; Potter, Roman Empire at Bay, p. 232ff. A clear answer is not possible.
18. ↑ To the Roman payments to the Persians see Henning Börm: causes and functions of the Persian claims to the Romans 3. () to 6th century. In: Historia 57 (2008), p. 327-346. General Christian Körner for Philip's reign: see Philip the Arab. A soldier-emperors in the tradition of Antonin-Severan principate. Berlin ua 2002. See also Huttner, from Maximinus to Aemilianus, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 188ff.; Potter, Roman Empire at Bay, p. 236ff.
19. ↑ Zosimus 1.23. Zosimus mentions the Goths, according to his (presumed) source Dexippos, also "Scythians". About the motives of the invaders is the modern research disagree, surely played a role mainly plunder, see Körner, Philippus Arabs, p. 135, note 63rd
20. ↑ The contemporary Dexippos is as basic a successful failure of the Roman troops (Skythika, fragment 25). The Jordanes, writing 300 years later, was based on the lost Gothic history of Cassiodorus, however, indicates that the Goths had been prompted by monetary payments to the deduction (Getica 16, 89ff.).
21. ↑ In his reign, see Huttner, from Maximinus to Aemilianus, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 201ff. See the following time Andreas Alföldi: The Crisis of Empire. In: The Cambridge Ancient History. Vol XII: The Imperial Crisis and Recovery AD 193-324. Edited by SA Cook, FE Adcock, including Cambridge, 1939, p. 165ff.; Potter, Roman Empire at Bay, 241ff.
22. ↑ see the reign of Valerian and his son Gallienus Andreas Goltz / Udo Hartmann: Valerian and Gallienus, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 223-295.
23. ↑ Basically this is Philip Huyse: Šabuhrs I. The trilingual inscription at Ka'ba-i Zardušt (SKZ). 2 vols London 1999.
24. ↑ The date of the (first) is the conquest of Antioch, as well as several other points in the chronology of this period is controversial, but usually it is assumed 253rd The following is a rule, the reasoning followed in the manual of Johne.
25. ↑ The Persian campaign of 253 see Huttner, from Maximinus to Aemilianus, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 218-221.
26. ↑ ↑ Cf Cf collectively Potter, Roman Empire at Bay, p. 251ff.
27. ↑ The persecution of Christians (see the source documents and other literature) Goltz / Hartmann, Valerian and Gallienus, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 240-242 and p. 256f.
28. ↑ Goltz / Hartmann, Valerian and Gallienus, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 244-246; sound Egon Mayer (ed.): The Augsburg wins altar. Testimony of a troubled time. Saalburgmuseum Bad Homburg vd H. 1995.
29. ↑ Zosimus 1.34 ff The dating is controversial, perhaps these raids also took place before 259. See Goltz / Hartmann, Valerian and Gallienus, 135 in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 247, note
30. ↑ SKZ, § § 18-22, the Greek version, is the translation of Engelbert Winter, Beate Dignas: Rome and the Persian Empire. Berlin 2001, p. 98 This view is confirmed, although propaganda by some Western sources, such as Eutropius (9.7) and later historians as the Byzantine John Zonaras (12.23), but other sources say (for example Zosimus 1,36,2), Valerian, Shapur had to negotiate had been captured and then asked during the interviews. See also Goltz / Hartmann, Valerian and Gallienus, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 250f.
31. ↑ See generally Andreas Luther: Mesopotamian provinces of Rome after the capture of Valerian (260). In: Joseph Wiesehöfer Philip Huyse (eds.): Eran ud Aneran. Studies on the relationship between the Sasanidenreich and the Mediterranean world. Stuttgart 2006, 203-219.
32. ↑ The autocracy of Gallienus: Goltz / Hartmann, Valerian and Gallienus, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 255 ff.
33. ↑ From To characterize the principate as an acceptance system, see Egon Flaig challenge: The Emperor. The usurpation of the Roman Empire. Frankfurt-New York 1992.
34. ↑ At this fatal cycle see Felix Hartmann: Change the rich and the ruler of crisis. Frankfurt am Main 1982.
35. ↑ Petros Patrikios, fragment 10th
36. ↑ See also David Potter: Palmyra and Rome: Odaenathus' titles and the use of the Imperium Maius. In: Journal for Papyrology and Epigraphy 113 (1996), p. 271-285. Swain tried to identify the other hand, that Odaenathus was given no official Roman Office, see Simon Swain: Greek into Palmyrene: Odaenathus as 'corrector totius Orientis'? . In: Journal for Papyrology and Epigraphy 99 (1993), p. 157-164.
37. ↑ To the anonymous post Dione, 7 fragment See generally Hartmann, The Palmyrene part Reich, p. 218ff.
38. ↑ fundamental to Hartmann, The Empire Palmyrene part, see also Hartmann, Das Reich Palmyrene part, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 343ff.
39. ↑ ↑ Cf Cf Hartmann, The Palmyrene part Reich, p. 306f.
40. ↑ See Drinkwater, The Gallic Empire, and Andreas Luther, The Gallic Empire Special, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 325ff. It is disputed in the research, notably the question of whether to assess these events as normal or as a usurpation of a deliberate attempt to capture part of the kingdom.
41. ↑ This was due in Oberpfaffenhofen Erich chain: the invasions of the Roman Empire in the 3rd Heruli Century AD. In: Klio 74 (1992), p. 291-313. See also Millar, P. Herennius Dexippus, p. 26ff.
42. ↑ Even though his participation is disputed in the fighting in modern research and partly, it is very likely that Dexippos is the speaker of the following, so-called general speech. See Gunther Martin Dexipp of Athens. Edition, translation and accompanying studies. Tübingen 2006, p. 37ff.
43. ↑ Dexippos, Skythika, fragment 28a (after Felix Jacoby, The fragments of Greek historians, No. 100) and fragment 25 (Martin, Dexipp of Athens). The translation is, with sharp cuts drawn from the edition with translation by Gunther Martin (Dexipp of Athens, p. 118, 121, 123), see also the related remarks Martins ibid., p. 185ff.
44. ↑ For background see the assassination of Gallienus Goltz / Hartmann, Valerian and Gallienus, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 289ff. See also the detailed analysis of Hartmann: Udo Hartmann, The murder of the Emperor Gallienus, in: Johne (eds), Deleto paene Imperio Romano, p. 81ff.
45. ↑ to Claudius II: Udo Hartmann, Gothicus Claudius and Aurelian, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 297ff.
46. ↑ This train must be distinguished clearly from the above-mentioned idea of Heruli 267/68, which was not often used, see Erich Hofen chain: the invasions of the Roman Empire in the 3rd Heruli Century AD. In: Klio 74 (1992), p. 291-313, especially p. 305ff.
47. ↑ See also Adolf Lippold, Emperor Claudius II (Gothicus), ancestor of Constantine the Great., And the Roman Senate. In: Clio 74 (1992), p. 380-394. However Lippold failed attempt at a dating of the Historia Augusta in the Constantinian period.
48. ↑ Not in the spring, as in the earlier research often assumed, see Udo Hartmann, Gothicus Claudius and Aurelian, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 308f.
49. ↑ to Aurelian: Udo Hartmann, Gothicus Claudius and Aurelian, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 308ff.
50. ↑ Zosimus 1.49.
51. ↑ Udo Hartmann, Gothicus Claudius and Aurelian, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 319ff.
52. ↑ The complex question of the origin and form of this cult, see Steven E. Hijmans: The Sun which did not rise in the East. The Cult of Sol Invictus in the Light of Non-Literary Evidence. In: BABesch. Bulletin Antieke Beschaving 71, 1996, p. 115-150, especially p. 119ff.
53. ↑ 35.2 Epitome.
54. ↑ At this emperor see Klaus-Peter Johne, The "Senate Kaiser Tacitus, in: Johne, soldier emperors, p. 379-393.
55. ↑ Probus to see Gerald Kreuch: The emperor Marcus Aurelius Probus und seine Zeit. Stuttgart 2003, see also next to Gerald Kreuch, Probus and Carus, in: Johne, soldier emperors, p. 395ff. Probus exactly what rank held is not known, but he was probably a fairly high ranking officer (Kreuch, Probus und seine Zeit, p. 126).
56. ↑ Perhaps the assassination of his rival operating Probus, see Zonaras 12.29. General and the Civil War to Florianus see Kreuch, Probus und seine Zeit, p. 122ff.
57. ↑ summary Kreuch, Probus und seine Zeit, p. 133ff.
58. ↑ ↑ Cf to Cf Kreuch, Probus und seine Zeit, p. 155ff.
59. ↑ Kreuch, Probus und seine Zeit, p. 162f.
60. ↑ Zosimus 1.66; see also Zonaras 12.29.
61. ↑ General: Kreuch, Probus und seine Zeit, p. 164ff.
62. ↑ See Kreuch, Probus und seine Zeit, p. 179ff.
63. ↑ To see Kreuch Carus, Probus and Carus, in: Johne, soldier emperors, p. 415ff.
64. ↑ See John Matthews: The Roman Empire of Ammianus. London 1989, p. 133 and 498, note 8
65. ↑ At the end of Empire soldiers see Kreuch, Probus and Carus, in: Johne, soldier emperors, p. 419ff. To see Diocletian including Wolfgang Kuhoff: Diocletian and the era of tetrarchy. The Roman Empire between crisis management and reconstruction (284-313 AD). Frankfurt am Main 2001; Potter, Roman Empire at Bay, p. 280ff., Roger Rees: Diocletian and the Tetrarchy. Edinburgh 2004th
66. ↑ deleto paene imperio Romano (Eutropius 9.9).
67. ↑ See the section on research in this article.
68. ↑ Back Below see also Johne / Hartmann, crisis and transformation of the Empire in the 3rd Century, in: Johne. Soldatenkaiser, p. 1025ff. A good, concise overview also provides Hekster, Rome and Its Empire, p. 3ff.
69. ↑ Johne / Hartmann, crisis and transformation of the Empire in the 3rd Century, in: Johne. Soldatenkaiser, p. 1041ff.
70. ↑ ↑ Cf Cf Johne / Hartmann, crisis and transformation of the Empire in the 3rd Century, in: Johne. Soldatenkaiser, p. 1026f.
71. ↑ glance at Kai Ruffing, the economy, in: Johne, soldier emperors, p. 817-819. See also the overall negative portrayal of Géza Alföldy: Roman social history. 3. 3. Ed Wiesbaden, 1984, p. 133ff.
72. ↑ Ruffing, the economy, in: Johne, soldier emperors, p. 821ff.
73. ↑ Ruffing, the economy, in: Johne, soldier emperors, p. 825ff.
74. ↑ ↑ Cf Cf Ruffing, the economy, in: Johne, soldier emperors,) p. 828 (with further references.
75. ↑ ↑ Cf Cf collectively Kai Ruffing, economic prosperity in the 3rd Century: The cities of Egypt as a paradigm? , In: Johne (eds), Deleto paene Imperio Romano, p. 223ff. in the same volume and the contribution of Christian Witschel, on the situation in Roman Africa during the 3rd Century, p. 145ff.
76. ↑ See, generally, Kai Ruffing, the economy, in: Johne, soldier emperors, p. 817ff. See also Hekster, Rome and Its Empire, p. 31ff.
77. ↑ For example, Géza Alföldy: The Crisis of the Third Century as seen by Contemporaries. In: Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies 15 (1974), p. 89ff.
78. ↑ detail about this: Strobel, The Roman Empire in the 3rd Century. Century. Strobel notes that even where the source material allows more precise statements about the daily life, as in Egypt, it is not possible to demonstrate a longer-term crisis atmosphere (collectively, ibid, p. 285).
79. ↑ generally see to the religious development of Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 927ff.
80. ↑ See the survey by Johne / Hartmann, crisis and transformation of the Empire in the 3rd Century, in: Johne, soldier emperors, p. 1031ff.
81. ↑ A good overview provides the basic manual of Johne Others, soldier emperors, p. 15ff., Especially for historians Udo Hartmann, Historiography, in: Johne, soldier emperors, p. 893ff.
82. ↑ The Historia Augusta, one of the most controversial sources of antiquity, with further references, see introductory: Klaus-Peter Johne: The Historia Augusta, in: Johne, soldier emperors, p. 45ff.
83. ↑ Although it is unclear whether the Republic or the Flavian emperors time has dealt with, as nothing is received from the plant, but speaks more to the latter assumption. See Bruno Bleckmann: Observations on the Annales of Nicomachus Flavian. In: Historia 44 (1995), p. 83-99; Udo Hartmann: The literary sources, in: Johne, soldier emperors, especially p. 36-38; Jörg A. Schlumberger: The Epitome de Caesaribus. Studies on pagan history of the 4th Century AD, Munich 1974, passim.
84. ↑ ↑ Cf Cf Bruno Bleckmann: Considerations Enmannsche imperial history and the shaping of historical traditions in the time of Constantine and tetrarch. In: Giorgio Bonamente, Klaus Rosen (eds.), Historia Augusta Colloquium Bonnense. Bari 1997, p. 11-37, here p. 21ff.
85. ↑ It is fundamental to the history of his time and Dexippos Millar, P. Herennius Dexippus. See now also Gunther Martin Dexipp of Athens. Tübingen 2006 (Edition, translation and accompanying surveys).
86. ↑ Millar, P. Herennius Dexippus, especially p. 21ff., But see the negative assessment by Potter, Roman Empire at Bay, p. 233f.
87. ↑ See especially Paweł Janiszewski: The missing link: Greek pagan historiography in the second half of the third century and in the fourth century AD. Warsaw 2006.
88. ↑ overview of Johne, soldier emperors.
89. ↑ Cassius Dio 72,36,4.
90. ↑ On the problem of definition see salvation primarily Matthew: "soldier emperors as era concept, in: Johne (eds), Deleto paene Imperio Romano, p. 411ff.
91. ↑ In the following discussion, see in particular Thomas Gerhardt: Research: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 125ff.
92. ↑ Gibbon, Decline and Fall, Chapter 10.
93. ↑ overview of Gerhardt, Research, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 130f.
94. ↑ On this subject, see Gerhardt, Research, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 132ff. With supporting documents.
95. ↑ See Gerhardt, Research, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 144 ff.
96. ↑ See, eg, Elena Michajlovna Schtaerman: The crisis of the slave order in the west of the Roman Empire. Berlin, 1964. See also the overview of literature in Géza Alföldy: Roman social history. 3. 3. Ed Wiesbaden, 1984, p. 136, p. 194.
97. ↑ Gerhardt, Research, in: Johne Others Soldatenkaiser, p. 157
Indeed one of the few articels in the German wiki on Ancient history that is better than its English counterpart. Usually German wiki is better on Medievale history, save for sepcific English topics, while English wiki has the better articles on Ancient history.Quote:
Originally Posted by ray243
When I really have a lot of time, I'll checkread it. Otherwise, if there is a particular question on the translation, feel free to ask.Quote:
Perhaps people can help me refine the translation?
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichsk...._Jahrhunderts
My concern is that there are so many people who do not attempt to venture out and start reading non-English source.Quote:
Originally Posted by konny
If you only understood one language, there are so much information and research findings that you will be missing out on.