Commodus

Ce livre propose une réflexion d’ensemble sur la septième Vie de l’Histoire Auguste, consacrée à l’empereur Commode, fils du philosophe Marc Aurèle et dernier des Antonins. L’auteur met d’abord en évidence son indéniable valeur historique et recherche les sources qui l’ont inspiré. Elle explore ensuite les éléments qu’il est suceptible d’apporter à la connaissance d’un recueil de biographies qui reste l’une des œuvres les plus énigmatiques que nous ait transmis l’Antiquité. Traçant le portrait d’un personnage haut en couleurs, le premier malus princeps de la collection, la Vita Commodi  recèle en effet, sur la personnalité du biographe anonyme et les objectifs qu’il assigne à son œuvre, plus d’indices que ne le laisserait de prime abord soupçonner sa richesse historique.

The article presented herein is a translation of an article published in “Klio. Journal of Polish and World History” 2012, vol. 20, pp. 3–44, therefore it does not include the literature published later (apart from references to new volumes of PIR2). The minor changes introduced are mainly editorial and connected with the need to adapt the text for the English speaking reader.

Summary: The article presents the history of ten praetorian prefects of Emperor Commodus. The prosopographical method used by the author of the article is extremelyuseful in the studies on individuals in the society of Imperium Romanum. In this typeof research, it is particularly important to note that praefecti praetorio as a clerical elite were very well represented in ancient sources, which renders historical material highly representable for this group. During the twelve years’ rule of Commodus, the number of praefecti praetorio, representing nearly forty percent of these officials during the reign of the emperors of the Antonine dynasty (96–192), clearly indicates lack of stability and continuous political struggle in the Rome of those days. The presentation of ten praetorian prefects, the highest equestrian officials, sheds light on the political system of the last emperor of the Antonine dynasty.

This paper examines some aspects of the attitudes of the last Antonine emperors towards the illustrious past of Achaea, namely Marcus Aurelius and his son Commodus. Selected epigraphic and literary testimonies from the province of Achaea (especially Athens, Eleusis, and Sparta) will be assembled together in order to assess the political behavior of these emperors in relation to the past of the province. For example, especially remarkable is the fact that Commodus was enrolled in an Athenian tribe and took up ancient offices in Athens, while Marcus Aurelius resolved an old territorial dispute in Sparta and conceived important constitutional reforms in Athens, all actions closely connected with the remote past of these cities.     

Several questions will be addressed; first, what did the Greek past mean for these emperors and how did they choose to interact with it? Did the emperors have certain role-models in mind concerning their promotion of the Greek past, and if so, who were they? Did the ‘philhellene’ emperor Nero or the prominent intellectuals Philopappus and Herodes Atticus serve as examples? Furthermore, how did Hadrian influence the attitude of Marcus Aurelius, and he that of his son, Commodus? Finally, what was the impact of imperial actions on the illustrious provincials of the Graeco-Roman East? The answers to these queries will illustrate the power of the local and imperial past in 2nd-century ‘old Greece’. This paper also argues that the promotion of the past in the cities of Achaea was not only an expected conduct in an age of collective historical nostalgia, but also a response to the actions of contemporary and pepaideumenoi emperors, who were conceived of as exempla.

ÖZET: Herodianos’un “Marcus Aurelius Devri’nden Sonra İmparatorluk Tarihi” adlı yapıtı, Roma İmparatoru Marcus Aurelius’un ölümünden (MS 180) III. Gordianus’un tahta geçtiği (MS 238) zaman aralığındaki gelişmeleri kapsamakta olup sadece olayların kronolojik bir anlatısı olmasının ötesinde, bir tarihsel ve siyasal düşünceyi de içermektedir. Bu yapıtın eleştirel bir değerlendirmesi, büyük bir tarihsel krizin yaşandığı ve bize görece daha az antik metnin ulaşabildiği MS 3. yy’ın siyasal düşüncesinin de bir kesitini sunmaktadır.
Herodianos’un düşüncesi, tarihsel krizin iki dinamiğinin “meşrûtî monarşi” ve “tiranlık” arasındaki karşıtlıkta yatmaktadır; zira, Herodianos’un “tiranlık” olarak adlandırdığı yönetim tarzı, MS 3. yy bağlamında Rostovtzeff’in tanımladığı şekliyle “askerî monarşi” anlayışına tekabül etmektedir. Herodianos’ta tarihsel olgular, bu karşıtlık temelinde açıklanmaktadır. Herodianos’un düşüncesinde, bir kurum olarak Senatus’un merkezî bir yeri bulunmaktadır. Bu çalışmada, Herodianos’un yapıtında Senatus’un tarihsel rolü ele alındığı gibi, bu kurumun Herodianos’un siyasal düşüncesindeki merkezî konumu, metnin içindeki söylevlerin de analiziyle birlikte, Antikçağ siyasal düşüncesi bağlamında ele alınmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler: Herodianos, Tarihyazımı, Principatus, Askerî Monarşi, Senatus.

ABSTRACT: Herodian’s work that is titled as “History of the Empire from the Death of Marcus” covers the period from Marcus Aurelius’ death (180 AD) to the Gordian III’s accession to the throne (238 AD), and beyond being a chronological narrative of the events, this work also includes a certain historical and political thought. A critical enquiry of this work may present a component of the political thought of 3rd century AD, which was an age of historical crisis. In Herodian’s thought, the dynamics of the historical crisis lies on the contrast between senatorial monarchy and tyranny. The historical facts are explained on the basis of this contrast. Likewise, the regime that was defined as tyranny by Herodian, in the context of the 3rd century AD, corresponds to Mommsen’s and Rostovtzeff ’s conception of “the military monarchy”. Senatus has also a central position as an institution in this narrative. In this study, Senatus’ historical role within the work of Herodian, as well as its central position, will be discussed by an analysis of the speeches that are contained in this work, on the context of ancient political thought.

Keywords: Herodian, Historiography, Principate, Military Monarchy, Senate.

ABSZTRAKT: Heródián "A birodalom története Marcus halálától" című műve a Marcus Aurelius halálától (i.sz. 180) III. Gordianus trónra lépése (i.sz. 238) közötti időszakot öleli fel, és az események kronológiai elbeszélésén túlmenően ez a mű bizonyos történelmi és politikai gondolatokat is tartalmaz. A mű kritikai vizsgálata a Kr. u. 3. század politikai gondolkodásának egy összetevőjét mutathatja be, amely a történelmi válság kora volt. Heródián gondolkodásában a történelmi válság dinamikája a szenátori monarchia és a zsarnokság közötti ellentétben rejlik. A történelmi tényeket ennek az ellentétnek az alapján magyarázza. Hasonlóképpen, a Heródián által zsarnokságként meghatározott rendszer a Kr. u. 3. század kontextusában megfelel Mommsen és Rostovtzeff "katonai monarchia" felfogásának. A senatus mint intézmény szintén központi helyet foglal el ebben a narratívában. Ebben a tanulmányban a Senatusnak a Heródiás művében betöltött történeti szerepét, valamint központi pozícióját a műben szereplő beszédek elemzésével tárgyaljuk az ókori politikai gondolkodás kontextusában.

Kulcsszavak: Heródián, történetírás, principátus, katonai monarchia, szenátus.

АБСТРАКТ: Труд Геродиана "История империи со смерти Марка" охватывает период от смерти Марка Аврелия (180 г. н.э.) до восшествия на престол Гордиана III (238 г. н.э.) и, помимо хронологического изложения событий, содержит определенную историко-политическую мысль. Критическое исследование этого произведения может представить компонент политической мысли III века н. э., который был эпохой исторического кризиса. По мысли Иродиана, динамика исторического кризиса заключается в противопоставлении сенаторской монархии и тирании. На основе этого противопоставления объясняются исторические факты. Подобным образом, режим, который Геродиан определял как тиранию, в контексте III века н. э. соответствует концепции "военной монархии" Моммзена и Ростовцева. Сенат также занимает центральное место как институт в этом повествовании. В данном исследовании историческая роль сената в произведении Геродиана, а также его центральное положение будут рассмотрены на основе анализа речей, которые содержатся в этом произведении, в контексте античной политической мысли.

Ключевые слова: Геродиан, историография, принципат, военная монархия, сенат.

The aim of this paper is to study the image of Commodus to emphasize how much important it was for a Roman Emperor the respect of the usual dress-code. The paper collects and discusses about the images of Commodus in habitu Herculis mentioned in the literary sources or attested in real monuments, as the portrait as Hercules strangulans from Boston or the famous portrait from the Horti Lamiani. The great part of the Herculean portraits of the Emperor were realized in the last year of his reign, and, more precisely, we can link three important public Urban monuments mentioned in the literary sources to the amphitheatrical games in which Commodus himself competed, probably during the last months of 192. Those three statues coherently represented the Emperor as Hercules Romanus.

Die Quintilier sind zweifellos die berühmteste und am besten dokumentierte Familie aus Alexandria Troas. Insbesondere die letzten vier Generationen haben durch ihre Tätigkeit in der römischen Reichsverwaltung, ihre engen Verbindungen zu den Kaisern und Geistesgrößen ihrer Zeit, ihr literarisches Wirken sowie ihren ausgedehnten Villenbesitz mannigfaltige Spuren hinterlassen. Eine willkommene Bereicherung fand unser Quellenmaterial vor Kurzem durch drei neue Inschriften vom alexandrinischen Forum, die 2008 und 2016 von E. Schwertheim veröffentlicht wurden und Auskunft über zwei frühe, zuvor unbekannte Quintilier geben sowie einen nicht näher zu greifenden Κυιντίλ[ιος] der hohen Kaiserzeit nennen. +++ Damit sind inzwischen acht Familienmitglieder sicher bekannt: ein P. Quintilius Maximus und seine Tochter Quintilia Apphia in iulisch-claudischer Zeit, ein Sex. Quintilius Valerius Maximus und sein gleichnamiger Sohn in der Zeit von den Flaviern bis Hadrian sowie die beiden nachfolgenden und bekanntesten Generationen mit jeweils einem Sex. Quintilius Valerius Maximus und einem Sex. Quintilius Condianus in der Antoninenzeit. Hinzu kommt der Vater des ältesten Sex. Quintilius Valerius Maximus, von dem aber leider nur sein Vorname Sextus überliefert ist. +++ Die epigraphischen Neufunde nahm ich zum Anlass, die Familiengeschichte erneut aufzurollen und erstmals einen ausführlichen Gesamtüberblick in deutscher Sprache vorzulegen. Der bislang ungeklärten Frage nach der origo der Quintilier widmet sich der erste Abschnitt, der zwar keine eindeutige Antwort zu liefern vermag, aber zumindest drei mögliche Szenarien aufzeigt und diese hinsichtlich ihrer Plausibilität überprüft. Die nachfolgenden Ausführungen orientieren sich an der chronologischen Abfolge, wobei der fünfte Abschnitt auch eine Darstellung zum reichen Familienbesitz enthält. Die Schlussbemerkung richtet ihren Blick schließlich auf das Verhältnis zwischen den Quintiliern und ihrer langjährigen Heimatgemeinde Alexandria Troas.

This thesis examines the portrayal of youthful Roman emperors in imperial histories and biographies, specifically in the works of Suetonius, Tacitus, Cassius Dio, Herodian, and the Historia Augusta. As such, it limits the scope of research to the first three centuries AD. The emperors that fall into this category are Caligula (25 at accession), Nero (16 at accession), Commodus (co-Augustus at age 16; 19 as Augustus), Caracalla (co-Augustus at age 11; joint-rule with Geta at age 23), Geta (co-Augustus at age 20; joint-rule with Caracalla at age 22), Elagabalus (14 at accession), Alexander Severus (13 at accession) and Gordian III (13 at accession).

For the purpose of this thesis, the phase of youth will be defined as the period between 13/14 years of age and 28 years, in line with the stages of the human life-course suggested by Macrobius.  Laes and Strubbe suggest this age boundary as one that was accepted and popular among the ancient Romans.  They further acknowledge that although people in antiquity did not possess age awareness comparable to modern society, they were not indifferent towards the factor of age. Rather, they discerned a phase between childhood and adulthood to which they did not assign fixed and universal numerological boundaries. Nonetheless, this critical stage of human life was one characterised by restlessness, conflict and change.

This thesis studies the imperial histories and biographies of these young emperors alongside the traditional rhetoric associated with ‘good’ and ‘bad’ emperors. In saying this, it will demonstrate that the age of the youthful emperors played a role in excusing or condemning their carefree behaviour. As was typical of histories and biographies, the nature and character of the emperor was believed to significantly affect the quality of their rule. The emperors discussed within this thesis are generally regarded as bad emperors. Thus, they were often portrayed as lacking self-control, and possessing a licentious and cruel nature. However, it is their youth that made these emperors stand above other bad emperors as the worst of the worst. Reaching the highest office at an age where they typically would not have been allowed to enter political life, these young emperors were perceived as never outgrowing their youthful vices.

Focusing on three thematic areas of youth (guiding youths, youths and leisure, and narratives of cruelty), this thesis will argue that these authors used the topos of ‘youth’ in order to condemn certain negative aspects of the young emperors’ reigns. While cultural expectations of youth gave them a margin of allowance to behave in a youthful manner, typically early on in their reign, the Roman elite authors interpreted the vices that arose from this behaviour as characterising their rule of the Empire. Accordingly, their youth was used as part of the rhetoric of praising and condemning emperors in order to illustrate the inability of a youth to rule in line with expectations of imperial power.

This article proposes a review of the consecratio coins for Commodus issued shortly after this emperor’s death. Most standard numismatic catalogues list these coins as being of doubtful authenticity. However, a typological and stylistic analysis of the several assembled specimens of the type suggests that it was issued by an eastern mint, most likely Alexandria. Furthermore, the die axis and the message content of the specimens suggest that the coins were issued in AD 195, indicating that the emission of the coins was related to the retrospective adoption of Septimius Severus into the Antonine House.

L'étude de la liste de consulaires exécutés sur ordre de Commode dans l'Histoire Auguste, Vie de Commode, 7, 4-7, conduit à identifier un réseau sénatorial alliant Italiens et personnes ou familles d'origine asiatique

This paper is a study of a list of consulars executed by Commodus (Historia Augusta, Vita Commodi, 7, 4-7) : it identifies a senatorial network with allied Italian and Asiatic senatorial families

15 neue Inschriften aus der großen Therme und dem Theater werden vorgelegt: 1) Eine Ehrung für einen sonst unbekannten Kronospriester, der auch Ämter des hellenistischen lykischen Bundes bekleidete, ist das älteste Zeugnis für den Kronoskult in Tlos. 2) und 3) Der Lykiarch Ti. Claudius Ktesikles und seine unbekannte Tochter, eine lykische Bundespriesterin, waren an der Ausstattung der großen Therme beteiligt. 4) und 5) Mit Ti. Aelius Harpalos und M. Claudius Herakleides begegnen erstmals Archipropheten des Kronos. 6) Ein weiterer Stein der als TAM II 587 publizierten Inschrift gibt diese als Ehrung für den Athleten M. Aurelius Epaphrodeitos zu erkennen und ergänzt die bereits bekannte Siegesliste. 7), 13) –15), möglicherweise auch 8), liefern Fragmente neuer Siegerinschriften zu den Kroneia. 9) Der bislang unbekannte Statthalter Flavius Terentius Epidaurius wird wegen Renovierungen an der konstantinischen Therme geehrt. 10) – 15) Die Familie des Ti. Marcius Deiotarianus und seiner Frau [– – –]ia Tlepolemis tritt am Theater mit Sieger– und Ehreninschriften in Erscheinung, vorrangig durch den mutmaßlichen Sohn Ti. Marcius Titianus Deiotarianus, Bürger von Tlos und Balbura.

Caligula (Claudius), Nero, Domitianus en Commodus kregen elk een damnatio memoriae over zich heen geroepen, maar wat hield deze straf net in en wat waren de gevolgen ervan voor hun latere beeld? In dit werk krijgen de vier aangehaalde keizers een situering in de tijd, en wordt besproken hoe werd omgegaan met hun herinnering.

Lucius Aurelius Commodus ist am 31. August des Jahres 161 in der kaiserlichen Villa bei Lanuvium, in der schon sein ver-storbener Großvater Antoninus Pius das Licht der Welt er-blickt hatte, geboren worden. Zum Zeitpunkt seiner Geburt saß sein Vater Marcus Aurelius zusammen mit Lucius Verus, seinem Ko-Regenten, seit etwa einem halben Jahr auf dem Kaiserthron, sodass der Knabe Commodus zusammen mit seinem schon als Kind verstorbenen Zwillingsbruder Fulvi-us Antoninus tatsächlich ,im kaiserlichen Purpur' zur Welt gekommen war. Dieses Privileg war bis dahin nur Britanni-cus, dem Sohn des Claudius und der Valeria Messalina, zu-teil geworden, welcher freilich nie selber an die Regierung gelangt war. Die herausragende Stellung, welche Commodus der Umstand seiner ,Purpurgeburt' in der eigenen Selbstein-schätzung wie auch in den Augen vieler seiner Zeitgenossen verlieh, hat sicher einiges zu seinem späteren autokratischen Auftreten und zu seinem offenen Bruch mit den politischen Traditionen des Prinzipats beigetragen. Vollkommen unabhängig von der Frage nach seiner persön-lichen Eignung war Commodus von seinem Vater praktisch von Geburt an als Thronfolger ausersehen worden. 1 Bereits im Kindesalter wurde er zusammen mit seinem 162 gebore-nen jüngeren Bruder Annius Verus, der für kurze Zeit an die Stelle von Commodus' verstorbenem Zwillingsbruder Ful-vius Antoninus getreten war, aber seinerseits schon 169 an den Folgen einer missglückten Operation sterben sollte, im Oktober 166 zum Caesar erhoben und damit eindeutig zum Nachfolger und zukünftigen Träger der Augustuswürde er-nannt. 2 Von 171 an hat er als nunmehr alleiniger Anwärter auf die Thronfolge den Vater zumindest zeitweise auf dessen Feldzügen gegen die Marcomannen und die Quaden an der Donau begleitet und war mit ihm im Heerlager bei Carn-untum. 3 Spätestens nach seiner Berufung in die wichtigsten Priesterkollegien zu Beginn des Jahres 175 war Commodus jedoch nach Rom zurückgekehrt, wo ihn im Mai die Nach-richt von der Revolte des Avidius Cassius, des Statthalters in der Provinz Syrien, erreichte. Dieses Ereignis war weit mehr als nur ein lokal begrenzter Militärcoup, sondern von einschneidender Bedeutung. Die politische und wirtschaftliche Stabilität des Reiches und die Autorität des Marcus Aurelius waren durch die seit Jahren an-haltenden und immer wieder neu aufflammenden Kämpfe an der Donaugrenze sowie durch die seit einem Jahrzehnt gras-sierende Pockenepidemie, der bereits Hunderttausende zum Opfer gefallen waren, ohnehin schon schwer angeschlagen. Jetzt erhoben sich sieben der im Orient stationierten Legio-nen zusammen mit einer ganzen Reihe von wichtigen Provin-zen, darunter auch Ägypten, der ,Brotkorb' Roms, und riefen Cassius zum Kaiser aus. Dem Reich drohte nicht weniger als ein neuer Bürgerkrieg. Was die Angelegenheit besonders ge-fährlich machte, war aber der Umstand, dass Avidius Cassius alles andere als ein Niemand war: Von der väterlichen Seite her stammte er vom königlichen Geschlecht der Seleukiden ab und über die ehrwürdige gens Cassia, zu der seine Mutter gehörte, war er mit der halben Senatsaristokratie von Rom verwandt oder verschwägert. Avidius Cassius war in Rom selber bis in die höchsten Kreise der Senatsaristokratie bes-tens vernetzt und hatte-wie sich wenig später herausstellen sollte-dort jede Menge Unterstützer bei der zweifellos meh-rere Jahre währenden Vorbereitung für diesen versuchten Staatsstreich gehabt. 4 Marcus Aurelius, der sich seit Jahr und Tag praktisch ununterbrochen bei seinen Legionen an der Donaugrenze aufgehalten hatte, zunächst in Carnuntum und später dann in Sirmium, war zu Recht äußerst alarmiert und schickte den Statthalter des unteren Pannonien, Vettius Sabi-nianus, an der Spitze einer Eingreiftruppe nach Rom, um die Stadt an einem drohenden Abfall zu hindern und um das Le-ben seines Sohnes Commodus zu schützen. Zugleich veran-lasste er Commodus dazu, in der Basilica Traiana ein großes congiarium, eine öffentliche Geldverteilung, zu veranstalten, um so die städtischen Massen an der Seite des regierenden Kaiserhauses zu halten. 5 Unmittelbar darauf wurde Commodus nach Sirmium beor-dert, wo sein Vater ihn am 7. Juli, dem Gedenktag für Ro-mulus, den Gründer Roms, vor den versammelten Truppen statt vor der Bevölkerung der Hauptstadt zum princeps iuven-tutis und damit zum Anführer des ordo equester beförderte. Aus Rom, das er mehr oder weniger Hals über Kopf verlas-sen hatte, hatte Commodus aber eine der wichtigsten Lehren für seine spätere Regentschaft als Kaiser mitgenommen: sich nicht auf die Senatsaristokratie zu verlassen, die er vor allem als eine wankelmütige, den eigenen Interessen verpflichtete und zum Hochverrat neigende Schicht wahrgenommen hat-te, sondern das Fundament des eigenen Machterhalts vor al-lem bei den Soldaten und bei der einfachen Bevölkerung zu suchen. Noch im selben Sommer fiel Avidius Cassius jedoch einem Mordanschlag zum Opfer, und die Erhebung, an deren Spitze

The description of the martyr Pionius’ body after his execution bears a remarkable likeness to a passage in the historian Herodian in which the appearance of the emperor Commodus is described. It seems most likely that the author of the Martyrium Pionii was inspired by Herodian.

The present study aims at examining the Roman foreign policy during the reigns of Antonius Pius and Marcus Aurelius as well as in the first half of the reign of Commodus. The main emphasis put here is on the regions of the Lower- and Mid-Danube. In addition to literary, numismatic and epigraphic sources, archaeological sources and research findings in particular will be evaluated for the ensuing argumentation.
For that matter, the principes’ decisions can be regarded as a result of structurally conditioned forms of individual depiction of power in contrast to or in connection with the emperors’ predecessors. These decisions can also be seen as reactions to certain domestic as well as foreign-policy constellations.
After an extensive preface, the presentation of source material, the analysis of the term ‘foreign policy’ and policymakers in regard of foreign policy in the Principate as well as with an underlying knowledge of Roman frontiers, the main body of this paper will be structured into four larger parts, followed by an appendix. Here, the description of the armies of Raetia, Noricum, and western Dacia provide the basis for the analysis of the decisions regarding the frontier policy pursued by the three named principes.
Chapter 2 deals with the development of frontier policies under Hadrian and thus provides the background of the analysis of Antonius Pius’ decisions on foreign-policy. In doing so, the author of this paper conceives the frontier policy undertaken by Hadrian in order to established the concept of an on-guard defense as point of origin for his successor’s policy.
In chapter 3 the author extensively covers Antonius Pius’ foreign policy. The text elaborates on how deliberately the emperor distinguished himself from his predecessor from the outset of his reign. Whilst Antonius Pius extended the frontiers of the Roman Empire, he remained true to his predecessor’s concept of fortified frontiers, which he enlarged. The emperor also resumed the policy of his predecessor in other areas, such as increasing the discipline within the army.
The author, however, rejects the notion that for the most part, the reign of Antonius Pius proceeded peacefully and without any major conflicts. He also dismisses the view that battles only took place at nearby frontiers and only to a manageable extent. This image, portrayed by literary sources, was revised insofar as that the emperor had to defy the empire’s opponents in tedious wars. He reacted on changes in the periphery of the frontiers and propagated his victories as well as his victoriousness. In addition, at least two attempts of usurpation prove that Antonius Pius’ reign was not undisputed. The image of a peacemaking emperor is attributed to his objectives of reign (Regierungsprogrammatik). The maxim of these objectives was the on-guard foreign policy of an empire, placed under the protection of the gods. Initially, even though the army of this empire was meant to act primarily as a deterrent, it was also, at all times, supposed to enforce the interests of the princeps, who was considered by the gentes, who lived extra fines. as the decision-making authority.
In chapter 4, the study of the foreign policy under Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus, as well as under the sole rule of the former, illustrates that the previously described concept was destined to fail. Here, the war with the Parthians, which was fought directly at the beginning of the dual leadership of Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus, resulted in power-political frictions. At that time, the military successes of Lucius Verus threatened the hitherto clear distribution of power between the two Principes. Hence, Marcus Aurelius was faced with the problem of having to prove his supremacy qua auctoritate. To scotch any potential criticism, the senior Augustus had to associate military success with his name. This is of vital importance for the prehistory of the Marcomannic Wars as these are regarded as a result of two key factors. On the one hand, Marcus Aurelius and his counsellors took the changes within the societies in the Transdanubian territories, which had started during the reign of Antonius Pius, very seriously. Marcus Aurelius and his counsellors had realized that they had to react preventively towards these changes. This, on the other hand, put the emperor in the position of having to produce his own military success, in order to legitimize his position through victories, having shown his personal victoriousness in the field.
In this study, archaeologically certifiable traces of destruction support the subsequent reconstruction of the Marcomannic Wars. As a result, two horizons will be gained as historically evaluable evidence from this kind of source.
Initially, the Roman offensive was directed at the Iazyges of the Hungarian lowlands. At that time, Rome was still at peace with the Marcomanni and Quadi. It was only after Rome had suffered a devastating defeat, presumably at the Lower-Pannonian frontier, that the Germani invaded the empire. They progressed as far as modern day Northern Italy, which etched deeply into the collective memory of the Romans. It was not until 171/172 A.D. that Rome found itself in the position of taking the war to the enemy’s settlement zones beyond the Danube. It can be established that the emperor tried to break the enemy’s coalition, particularly by diplomatic means. He thereby pursued the isolation of the Elb-Germannic gentes in Inner-Germania and intended to keep the Rhine-border calm.
The thesis presented in this chapter is that, after a forced ceasefire caused by the usurpation of Avicius Cassius, Marcus Aurelius intended to establish at least one new province: Marcomannia. Even though the Iazyges can be identified as the main adversaries in the Marcomannic Wars, the archaeological finding speak against alleged plans to seize the Sarmatian territory.
Chapter 5 deals with Commodus’ significant decisions, made after Marcus Aurelius’ death. In the years following the Danube Wars, which had been instigated by his father, Commodus initially appears to be a prudent Princeps, who realised a comprehensive construction project in the Danube provinces in cooperation with his counsellors. It was supposed to meet the latest requirements and was to be premised on the experiences of the war years, which can specifically be seen in the border fortifications and in the deployment of troops. The last chapter provides an overview on the development of Rome’s foreign policy. In the summary, the decisions on foreign-policy and the developments of the examined period of time will be discussed in terms of causes, manifestations and aftermath.

El artículo analiza el desarrollo de la figura del Prefecto del Pretorio, que desde sus comienzos fue una de las más importantes dentro de las instituciones de estado romanas, pero que con la llegada de los cambios políticos después de la muerte de Marco Aurelio, aumentó su protagonismo hasta el punto de gozar de más poder en ocasiones que el mismo emperador. La coyuntura inestable y las fuertes prerrogativas de las que gozaba convirtieron a ese alto funcionario, mitad militar y mitad burócrata, en un personaje clave dentro de las intrigas políticas romanas, que desde su posición inigualable fue capaz a menudo de eliminar al emperador mediante una conspiración para ocupar su lugar. La situación se hizo tan grave llegado el siglo iv que Constantino decidió retirarle el mando de tropas y las funciones militares, convirtiendo al Prefecto del Pretorio en un juez supremo y organizador del suministro.

Quatre passages de l'Histoire Auguste relatent que l'empereur Commode “portait Anubis”. Deux de ces textes permettent de préciser que l'empereur agissait ainsi lors de processions, et qu'il transportait en fait un simulacrum du dieu canidé, en tête des pompes isiaques. Apulée, dans sa description de la fête du Navigium Isidis, place en tête du cortège des dieux un personnage jouant le rôle d'Anubis, avec son encolure de chien. Il doit donc s'agir d'un ministre à la tête coiffée d'un masque imitant la tête d'Anubis. Ce spectacle n'étonnait déjà plus à l'époque de Tibère, à en croire Appien qui nous dépeint Marcus Volusius échappant à la proscription de 43 a.C., en revêtant pareil déguisement. La vraisemblance de l'anecdote paraît confirmée par une peinture de l'Iseum de Pompéi mettant en scène un homme coiffé du masque noir d'Anubis. Un peu plus tard, Juvénal se moque aussi de cette pratique, également raillée par le Pseudo-Cyprien, au milieu du IIIe siècle. Quelques documents figurés hellénistiques tardifs, et surtout d'époque impériale, nous livrent des images de personnes portant le masque d'Anubis. Le titre d'Anuboforus porté à Vienne, dans la vallée du Rhône, par un certain Lepidus Rufus, sur une inscription de la 1ère moitié du IIIe siècle de notre ère, doit désigner les personnages qui avaient l'honneur de jouer le rôle d'Anubis, en portant son masque de canidé.

It is argued that, when the emperor Commodus struck coins with reverse legend celebrating Fortuna under the epithet Manens surrounding a unique depiction of her seated and holding a horse by the bridle, he may have done so in order to celebrate his lucky escape from a potentially fatal accident involving a horse.

On the reverses of certain coin issues of Abydos is shown a scene which can be interpreted as rather depicting Alexander the Great at the time of his crossing of the Hellespont.
Alexander’s crossing in 334 BC is significantly connected to the concept of the δορίκτητος χώρα (spear-conquered territory), a basic ideological feature during the Alexandrian and post-Alexandrian age — with interesting connotations extended also to the Roman world.
The first of these issues was struck in the name of Commodus as caesar; the suggested more precise dating of this coin emission, framed in the appropriate historical context, is quite revealing about the raison d’être for the use of the theme. Additionally, the possibility of a somehow latent anniversary (with regard to Alexander’s crossing) is also examined, at a timing hinted by a tight chronological frame. Moreover, an analogous comparandum has been sought in the Roman Provincial coin series of Smyrna, and more precisely in the case of an issue minted in the name of young Marcus Aurelius, illustrating the ‘dream of Alexander’ on the reverse.
Further issues of Abydos with the crossing scene, struck in the names of Septimius Severus, young Caracalla, Severus Alexander and Maximinus Thrax, are included in the discussion.
The whole matter can largely benefit by insights concerning the perception of the past of a city during the imperial times, alongside with the transformation of a historical of fictional past into a symbolic construct, a so-called “lieu de mémoire”.

Despite positioning himself as a contemporary eyewitness and heir to Thucydides, Herodian has generally been judged to be a poor historian prone to the use of compression , formulaic scenes, and even free invention. This paper examines Herodian's application of a specific plot type to conspiracies against the emperor by praetorian prefects. The use of this plot type reveals something of Herodian's understanding of history and historical methodology, while also serving an important narrative function in his text. Keywords Herodian – ancient historiography – Severan dynasty – Cassius Dio – Historia Augusta – third century AD

The Marcus Aurelius' Marcomannic wars reshaped the Roman world. Their impact can be seen in every Danubian provinces, with evident consequences for many years after Marcus Aurelius' reign period. Because of the war damages and economic decline, in association with the plague spreading, provincial populace was under pressure. In this turbid context some events occur and can be observed in the field even in time of Marcus Aurelius' successor. The damage suffered by three Roman sites situated in South-Carpathian Dacia at Râmnicu Vâlcea, Stolniceni, Ocnița (all of them are in Vâlcea County), very close one and other, seems to be dated at the beginning of Commodus' reign period. Chronological data can be offered by the Râmnicu Vâlcea I hoard, of which hiding moment have to be place in that time. Although, in South-Carpathian Dacia a hoard horizon was formed in this historical context.

Bu çalışmada, Parion kent merkezinde konumlandırılmış olan Roma Hamamı’nda ele geçen Herakles tipindeki heykel parçasının ön değerlendirmesi yapılmıştır. Söz konusu eser, Hamam’ın 4 nolu mekânında, geç dönemde inşa edilmiş olan yapıda spolia (devşirme) olarak kullanım görmüştür. Baş, kollar ve belden aşağısı eksik olarak gün yüzüne çıkarılan heykel parçasının, ikonografi k ve stilistik özelliklerine bakılarak benzer örnekleri ile kıyaslanmış olup, tanımlama ve analizi yapılmıştır.

Статья посвящена изучению риторических стратегий христианина Аполлония и префекта претория Перенния в «Мученичестве Аполлония» (BHG 149; BHO 79). Префект и мученик явно выходят за рамки ролевой модели «судья – обвиняемый». Немалую роль здесь играют факторы, о которых нам прямо ничего не сказано: социальный статус оппонентов, полученное ими образование, аудитория, перед которой мученик произнес свою вторую речь, и ее взаимоотношения с Аполлонием и Переннием (вполне вероятно, что многие слушатели были знакомы и с мучеником, и с перфектом). Обе стороны имели заранее подготовленный план действий, который они и проводили в жизнь.
The article deals with the rhetorical strategies of the Christian Apollonius and the prefectus pretorii Perennius in the «Martyrdom of Apollonius» (BHG 149; BHO 79). The prefect and the martyr clearly go beyond the role model of «judge – accused». A significant role here was played by the factors about which we are not informed: the social status of the opponents, their education, the audience before which the martyr delivered his second speech, and the relationship between this audience and Apollonius and Perennius (it is likely that many listeners were acquainted with both martyr and prefect). The two parties had the beforehand prepared plans of action that they were fulfilling.

This article tries to analyze the different ways in which vision of Commodus’ character is created in two major epic movies on ancient Roman history, ‘The Fall of the Roman Empire’ and ‘Gladiator’. In the former, the greatest vice of the young emperor is negligence of his duties, in accordance with what ancient written sources tell about his fall. Being a gladiator’s true son, he is not suited to fulfill his public role. Therefore he becomes tyrant and false god when the burden of power gradually leads him into madness. Finally he finds his death in the duel fought against Livius, a true heir to Marcus Aurelius’ moral virtues. In the second movie the major concern of the filmmakers is to show Commodus as an evil and cruel man, in the direct opposition to the righteous Maximus. In order to do it convincingly for modern spectators, the director focuses on personal qualities of main characters, as they are presented both in private and in public. Their conflict forms a center of the plot and the core of spectacle of power located in the Coliseum. The amphitheater on the one hand is conceived as a metaphor of Roman public life, and on the other is presented as more universal formula, the arena where good and evil collide, impersonated by the general turned gladiator and the maniac turned emperor.