S.

Aurelius Victor: Some Fourth Century Issues

Author(s): H. W. Bird
Source: The Classical Journal, Vol. 73, No. 3 (Feb. - Mar., 1978), pp. 223-237
Published by: The Classical Association of the Middle West and South
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3296689 .
Accessed: 27/04/2011 04:53
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=camws. .
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The Classical Association of the Middle West and South is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to The Classical Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

S. AURELIUS VICTOR: SOME FOURTH CENTURY ISSUES

In piecing togetherthe intricatemosaic of fourth century history the Latin
epitomatorsassume an importantrole and have attractedgrowing scholarly
interest.1The most fruitfulof these sources is Sextus Aurelius Victor who, at
the time when he was writing his De Caesaribus was probably serving at
Sirmiumon the staff of Anatolius, PraetorianPrefectof Illyricum.2Unlike the
otherfourthcenturyepitomatorsVictor was quite readyto expresshis personal
opinions and what follows is a discussion of several topics which clearly
concerned him.
Provincial Origin
Victor's attitudetoward provincial origin is concisely summarizedfor the
readerin c.11.12-23 where he writes:
Up to this time (i.e. by A.D. 96) men born at Rome or in Italy ruled the
empire: thereafter foreigners also ruled. Perhaps, as in the case of
TarquiniusPriscus, they were far better. Indeed, as far as I am concerned, after reading widely and hearing many discussions, I am fully
convinced that the city of Rome has grown great mainly through the
excellence of outsiders and importedskills.
He then proceeds to ask who could be more prudentand moderatethan the
CretanNerva.3 The latterwas, of course, Italianby birth,a fact of which Victor
was apparentlyunaware, but it nevertheless demonstrateshis favourableattitude to men to provincialprovenance. Trajan'sSpanish origin is emphasized,4 and that of Hadrian5is referred to subsequently. The former is, not
unexpectedly,lavishly praisedwhile Hadrian'seloquence anddeep concernfor
laws, ceremonies, schools and men of learning are prominentlydisplayed.
SeptimiusSeverus, a fellow African, is also regardedhighly by Victor, who
notes his flaws but offers extenuating circumstances.6 Alexander Severus,
whose reign for Victor markedthe watershedof the empire, is introducedas a
Syrian.' No stigmais attached. SimilarlyPhilip the Arabis introducedas such
1Vid. T. D. Barnes, "The Epitome De Caesaribus and Its Sources," C.P. 71, 1976, p. 258.
20n the careerof Victor and the date of the compositionof the De Caesaribus, vid, the author's
article, "A Reconstructionof the Life and Careerof S. Aurelius Victor," C.J. 70.4 (1975), pp.
49-54. I have not read P. Dufraigne's Aurelius Victor: Livre des Cesars (Paris, 1975).
3De Caes. 12.1. This passage is reproduced,with some editing, by the Epitomator(Epit. 11.15)
who, in pursuingthe sametheme, adds "Quid Traianodivinius?QuidpraestantiusHadriano?"The
Epitomator,however, appearstacitly to correct Victor's errorregardingNerva's origin.
4lbid. 13.1.
5lbid. 13.12.
61bid.20. lff.
71bid.24.1.

223

224

H. W. BIRD

withoutcomment.8His reign is commendedtoo, especially with regardto his

concernfor the thousandthanniversaryof Rome (how differentit was a hundred
years later!) and his attemptto check male prostitution.
Decius, the following emperor,is on show as a nativeof Sirmium,9a military
usurperwho none the less died valiantly in the service of the state. Probus'
reign is warmly eulogized and he, too, came from Sirmium.10Strikingly
enough the worst of the emperorsat this period, accordingto Victor, was the
hapless Gallienus, who is denigratedby all our Latin sources. He was Italian,
genere satis claro."
When Victor is discussing the tetrarchshe writes as follows:
Illyricum was the homelandof every one of these: althoughthey were
lacking in culturenevertheless, since they had experiencedthe miseries
of ruraland militarylife, they were quite the best men for the state. It is
thereforewell-known that men are readily made virtuous and wise by
undergoing miseries whereas those who are unacquaintedwith hardships, since they judge everyone by the standardsof their own circumstances, are less considerate.12
Some furthercommentsof Victor are germane. ApparentlyConstantineI and
Licinius were of diverse characters. Licinius' solitary notable quality was
parsimonia, a characteristicbranded as agrestis tantummodo.13 The word
agrestis means boorish, crude, uncivilized and is only used negatively by
Victor. Thus he stigmatizesthe parentsof the AfricanusurperAlexanderwho
dominatuistolide incubueratin 308,14and Vetranio,litterarunmprorsus expers
et ingenio stolidior idcircoque agresti vecordia pessimus.15 The latter was
proclaimedemperorat Mursain PannoniaSecundain 350. Similaruse is made
of the word in describingthe Bagaudaein Gaul,16while Maximianis termed
semiagrestis in the same sentence. Finally, Victor observes thatthere may be
some law of naturewhich often, as if on purpose,producesbad men from good
parentsand agrestes ex doctioribus.17 Victor's concernwith the origins of the
emperorsis mainly derived from biographicaltraditionand is sharedwith the
anonymousEpitomatoramong others. His own provincialorigin, however,
may have caused him to reflect more fully thanItalianwriterson the contributions made by non-Italiansto the empire. In addition,he had been stationedat
Sirmium,the hub of the Danubianprovinces, and he appearsto have realized
the growing importanceof this area in the third and fourth centurieswhen it
suppliedboth the soldiers and the soldier-emperorsresponsiblefor safeguarding the empire.18 Hence arose a certain ambivalence in his feeling. He re8lbid. 28.1.
9lbid. 29.1.
10Ibid.37.4.
"Ibid. 32.2; 32.4.
121bid.39.26-27. The Illyrian ancestry of Severus and Maximinus is also noted in c.40. 1.
131bid.41.2-3.
141bid.40.17.
151bid.41.26.
16Ibid.39.17.
171bid.3.5.
18lbid.39.26.

S. AURELIUSVICTOR:SOMEFOURTHCENTURYISSUES

225

spected the toughness and fighting spirit of the Illyrians, particularlyof the
emperors, but he despised their boorish rusticity. Presumablyhe considered
himself a product of the long-established Graeco-Roman tradition which
equatedcities with civilization,19educationwith leadershipandresponsibility.
Italy, Spain and Africa had produced emperors (and private individuals) of
culture, humanitas, a quality he revered and obviously found lacking in
Illyrians. The evidence is in c.40.12. Galerius and ConstantiusChlorus
were endowed with such remarkablenaturaltalentsthatif these gifts had
emanatedfrom learnedminds, and if they hadnot given offence by their
uncouthnessthey would certainly have been considered outstanding.
Recentandpresent-dayparallelsaretoo evidentto be cited. Victorcame froma
relativelyurbanized,sophisticatedprovince, hadreceived a more-or-lessregular Roman education and was more Roman than the Romans. He had been
taught to value those very qualities which the Illyrians did not possess.
Victor's contact with parts of the empire other than Italy, Africa and I1lyricum appears to have been negligible in view of his stereotypedpassing
comments. He labels the Gaulsas naturapraecipites20andthe Greeksas "fond
of embellishing everything" although they are a cultivated people.21
Victor plainly did not despise provincialorigin per se: what he particularly
objected to was the fact that so many individualsof provincialpeasantorigin,
predominantlyIllyrians, had risen to positions of eminence in the armyand in
the imperial service. Such people were greedy, ruthless, uncultivated and
powerful.22They had seized the offices of others, thoughincapableof performing the necessaryduties andhadcorruptedthe establishedculturalmilieu so that
the empire was eventually entrusted to men of lowly birth and inadequate
training.23This leads naturallyon to the second topic of Victor's concern, the
status of education and culture.
Education and Culture
"If we lose eloquence we shall become the same as the barbarians,"wrote
Libanius,24Aurelius Victor's close contemporary.According to C. G. Starr
Aurelius Victor and the educatedmen of his day were "striving to protectthe
standardsby which they gained prefermentin the civil service" andwere fully
19Vid.,ibid. 33.29, "Dum urbeserunt." This attitudeis notedby A. N. Sherwin-White,Racial
Prejudice in Imperial Rome (Cambridge, 1967) p. 3ff. et al. It is interestingto compare the
remarksof Herodian and Dio concerning the Pannonians. The former (2.9.11) writes that the
Pannonianswere tall men of fine physique, naturalandferocious fightersbutdull andslow-witted.
Dio (49.36.2) says thatthey led the most miserableexistences of all people, but thatthey were the
bravestof any men known, extremelybold and bloodthirstyfor they possessed nothingconducive
to a civilized life.
2"Ibid.42.17. Cf. H. A. Tyr.trig. 3.7; Quad. tyr. 7.1. Syme (Ammianusand theHistoriaAugusta,
Oxford, 1968, pp. 189-190) thinks this was a conventional opinion.
21DeCaes. 3.12; 14.1.
221bid.33.13; 25.1.
231bid.24.10.
24Epist.369.9.

226
H. W. BIRD
"aware of the threatof barbarismwithin and withoutthe Empire."25 The De
Caesaribus was, for Starr, "one of the most conscious expressions of this
emphasis." The pointis well-founded. On his firstpage Victorstressesthe fact
thatAugustuswas a cultivatorof men of learning,who aboundedin those days,
since he devotedhimself to the studyof eloquenceandreligions. Subsequently,
after recountingthe death of Vitellius he digresses to emphasize the general
learning of these rulers especially the Julio-Claudians,and to point out that
rulers and, in fact, every good citizen must at least assume the auctoritas
eloquentiae atque eruditionis.26
In keepingwith biographicaltraditionVictor summarilymentionsthe educational and culturalattributesof Vespasian and Titus and when he reaches the
reign of Hadrianhe dwells longingly upon the fact that the latter was welladaptedto the study of eloquence and civil mattersand that at Rome
Accordingto the custom of the Greeksor PompiliusNuma, he began to
concernhimself with religious ceremonies, laws, schools andteachersto
such a degree that he even establisheda school of liberalartswhich they
call the Athenaeumand Rome celebratedthe rites of Ceres and Libera,
called the EleusinianMysteries, in the mannerof the Athenians.27
MarcusAureliusis similarlypraisedfor his eloquence and philosophicalgifts,
Pertinaxfor his general learning,28 but the next significant statementappears
when Victor discusses Didius Julianus, whom he confused with Salvius
Julianus. After praising him for his outstandingknowledge of the law, the
authorgoes on to say that it is quite well-known that unless one's character
assists in checking desires, learningby itself is a poor thing.29This distinction
betweencharacterandextensive knowledge of the law shows some subtlety, as
Den Boer comments: Victor's "judgementis clearcut:praisefor thejurist and
censure of the ingenium that gave rise to saevi mores.'"30
As is to be expected SeptimiusSeverus' culturalattainmentsaredescribedin
glowing terms:
He was given to philosophy and rhetoric, in short to all aspects of the
liberalarts. Similarlyhe wrotean autobiographywith equalelegance and
honesty.31

There may well be some exaggerationhere but in general Severus was welleducated,having studiedat Rome and Athens, and, as even Dio admits, he had
a real regardfor classical culture even if he was not particularlygifted.32
25C.G. Starr,"AureliusVictor: Historianof Empire," A.H.R. 61 (1955/56), p. 582: also, vid.
H. I. Marrou. The History of Education in Antiquity(Eng. trans.) Toronto, 1964, p. 412ff.
26DeCaes. 8.7-8.
271bid.14.2-4.
281bid. 16.1; 16.10; 18.1.
291bid.19.3.
30W. Den Boer, Some Minor Roman Historians (Leyden, 1972), p. 45.
31DeCaes. 20.22.
32Dio, 76.16.1-76.17.2; Epit. 20.8; Eutrop. 8.19; H.A.Sev. 18.5; Get. 2.2; Philostratus,V.S.
2.2; P. W.R.E.2II, 1943-48, s.v. Severus 13; M. Hammond,Mem.Am. Acad. Rom. XXIV (1956),
p. 139ff.

VICTOR:SOMEFOURTH
S. AURELIUS
CENTURY
ISSUES
227
After discussing the death of Alexander Severus Victor dwells upon the
breakdownof the Romansystem, the seizureof powerby untrainedindividuals
and the vile corruptionof any appreciationof culture. State affairshad fallen
into the handsof those lackingbirthand education.33He gives as an instanceof
this the choice by the soldiersof Maximinusas emperorin 235, a manprimuse
militaribus, litterarumfere rudis.34
A remarkablebut understandableintervalnow occurs before Victor makes
any furthermentionof education,eloquence or culture. Apparentlynone of the
militaryemperorspossessed such attributes. Victor either did not know of or
chose to omit the distinct cultural interests and attainmentsof Gallienus, an
unfortunatevictim of senatorial propagandawhose literary and oratorical
abilities are prominentlydisplayed even in the H.A.
The tetrarchs,who belonged to the long line of militaryemperors,possessed
parum humanitatis.35In general the term humanitas denotes culture and
refinement. As previouslystatedGaleriusandConstantius,despitetheirexcellent natural gifts, lacked these qualities. It is while discussing these two
emperors that Victor produces one of his major statements on education,
culture and the necessary characteristicsof an emperor:
Consequentlyit is generally agreed that learning, refinementand courtesy are especially necessary for princes since without such attributes
naturalgood qualities are despised as inelegant or even uncouth;on the
otherhand those attributesbroughteternalrenownto Cyrus, the King of
the Persians.36
Two furtherexamples occur. FirstVetranio,to whom referencehas previously
been made, is stigmatized as totally unlettered, dull-minded and therefore,
because of his peasant stupidity, quite worthless.37 He is contrasted with
Constantius II whose eloquence and culture are twice on display. In fact,
immediately after describing the boorish Vetranio Victor writes:
In less than ten months Constantius, by the power of his eloquence,
deposed (Vetranio)from his imperialpower and removedhim to private
retirement. He alone, since the establishmentof the empire, has gained
this glory by his eloquence andclemency. For when the majorityof both
armies had gathered, an assembly similar to a trial was held and he
accomplishedby his eloquence what would have been difficult to obtain
by force or much bloodshed. This occurrencehas demonstratedquite
clearly thatnot only in civilian mattersbut also in militaryaffairsfluency
of speech is paramount.It is preciselyby meansof such fluency thateven
difficult mattersare more easily accomplishedprovidedthatthe speaker
excels in self-control and integrity.38
33De Caes. 24.9ff.
34Ibid.25.1.
35Ibid.39.26.
36sbid.40.13. The statement,however, is not originalbutpresumablya rhetoricalcommonplace
ultimatelyderivedfrom Xenophon'sCyropaediaand possibly learnedby Victorat school.
371bid.41.26.
38Ibid.42.1.

228

H. W. BIRD
in
his
of
summing up Constantius,he depicts him as ad elegantiam
Finally,
prudens atque orandi genere leni iocundoque.39
Even non-militarymembersof the fourthcenturybureaucracywere seldom
really well-educatedor cultured40 and Victor was no exception. Theirgeneral
knowledgeandphilosophicalreflectionswere superficialandflimsy. None the
less these officials gained theirpositions by means of what educationthey had
andthey bothdespisedandresentedthe militarymembersof the bureaucracy.41
Like the aristocracy, they considered themselves the guardiansof Roman
civilizationandculturein the face of barbarism.Hence it is understandablethat
this is a recurrenttheme in the De Caesaribus.
Novi homines like Victor strove to assimilate the intellectual traditionsof
theirpredecessors. For the same reasonValentinianI engaged Ausoniusto act
as a tutorfor his son Gratian. Anatolius, the praetorianprefect of Illyricum,
whom Victorpraisesin c. 13.6, was intenselyinterestedin arranginga debating
match in Greece when he visited the country while Victor was writing his
history. Openings at the imperial courts, in the treasury,provincial governments and the palatineministriesdependedlargely upon educationand eloquence. These accomplishments separated the bureaucratfrom the common
soldier or peasant and thus the standing of education had to be jealously
maintained. Victor's work appears to be a cri du coeur for he presumably
witnessed the erosion of education and its rewards42and the prefermentof
military agrestes. Those were, in his opinion, incapable of performingthe
duties assigned to them but were shrewd and ruthlessenough to enrich themselves and seize positions of power. Consequentlyit is to be expected that his
feelings towardsthe armywereextremelybitterandthathe shouldnostalgically
look back in history(a traditionalpreoccupation)to the days when things were
different vitae proposito immensumregrediente.
The Army
Victor is especially antipathetictowardsthe armyand makes over a score of
negativecommentsaboutit. Indeed, he does not once mentionthe soldiersin a
positive sense. Echoing Tacitus, his caustic remarksstartin the first chapter
when he informsus thatAugustuswon over the soldiersby gifts.43 In Tiberius'
reign military skills were undermined44and when Caligula was assassinated
si per Quiritesmodo militia exercereturRome would have enjoyed a repeatof
TarquiniusSuperbus'ejection by Brutus. Insteadthe citizens' apathyled to an
influx of foreignersand barbariansinto the army and pari passu, wantonness
came about, morals were corrupted,liberty was lost and greed augmented.45
This is the only occasionon which Victoruses the termQuirites, whichhe links
39Jbid.42.23.
40A Momigliano,Paganism and Christianityin the Fourth Century(Oxford, 1963), pp. 85-86,
discusses the ignoranceof Rome's history of the new militaryand Germanaristocracyand of the
Greek senators of Constantinople. If Victor is representativeof his class, as I believe, then
mediocritymust have prevailedeven with them.
41E.A. Thompson, TheHistorical WorkofAmmianusMarcellinus (Cambridge,1947). p. 76.
42DeCaes. 8.8.
43lbid. 1.1; cf. Tac. Ann. 1.2.1.
"De Caes. 2.3.
45Jbid.3.14-15.

S. AURELIUSVICTOR:SOMEFOURTHCENTURYISSUES

229

with Romanavirtus: the decline towardsbarbarismcommences with the introductioninto the armyof barbarians.It is of his own day thatVictoris thinking.
Victor subsequently discusses the elevation of Otho by the praetorians,
Vitellius by the Germanlegions, Vespasianby the armiesof Moesia, Pannonia
and Syria, aemuli, ut inter se solent, ne dissimiles viderentur.46When Domitian was killed the soldiers were angry because under him they had received
generous benefits at state expense and they demanded that the culprits be
executed more suo seditiosius. They stirredup war on their own since they
resented a change of ruler because of their loss of profits from his generous
donatives.47Even Nerva supposedly took power arbitrio legionum.48
Pertinaxis describedas a man moribusantiquissimis. Small wonderthatthe
soldiers murdered him "for nothing satisfies them even if the world is
exhaustedand in ruins."49The troops' duplicityis also on show when they first
make Macrinusemperorand his son Caesar and then murderthem.50
AlexanderSeverusis idealized andeulogized by Victor who averssomewhat
implausibly that the young emperor kept his troops under strict discipline.
They, frightened by his severity (whence his cognomen Severus) cut him
down.51Whetherby accident or by design Victor had at this juncturereached
the middle of his work and what he considered to be the watershedof the
empire. He pauses here to reflect at some length on the decline of Rome and
what he considered to be the causes (c.24.7-11):
Although he governed for no more than thirteenyears he left the state
strengthenedin all respects. From Romulus to Septimius it evolved
gradually and stood at its peak, so to speak, through the policies of
Bassianus. To prevent its sudden collapse was the task of Alexander.
Thereafter,as long as its rulers were more concernedto dominatetheir
fellow citizens thanto subjugateforeignpeoples andtook up armsagainst
each other, they threw down the Roman state headlong, as it were, and
good men and bad, the noble and the lowly, even many of barbarian
background,were indiscriminatelyput in power. Indeed, wherethere is
universalchaos and mattersare not conductedin their acceptedfashion,
all thinkit right, in the mannerof the mob, to seize the offices of others
which they cannot manage and they foully corrupt knowledge of the
liberalarts. So the violence of fortune,once it has acquireduncontrolled
license, drivesmen on with destructivelust. It was, indeed, keptin check
for a long time by virtue, as if by a wall, but, after almost all had been
brokenby criminalacts, it entrustedthe stateeven to men of lowly birth
and inadequatetraining.
The soldiers replaced Alexander with the crude, practically illiterate
Maximinus,52so it is hardlysurprising,then, that Victor should next describe
46'bid. 8.3.
47Ibid. 11.9-11.
48'bid. 12.2.
'9Ibid. 18.2.
50Ibid.22.4.
51Ibid.24.4.
52Ibid.25.1.

230
H. W. BIRD
them as "the sort of men who are particularlygreedy for money and are
trustworthyand useful only for gain."53
The sad story proceeds. Pupienusand Balbinus(the "Caesars")were killed
in a military coup;54Aemilius Aemilianus seized power by corruptingthe
soldiers;Gallus and Volusianuswere killed by theirown men "in the hope of
greaterrewardsfromAemilianus."55Postumuswas killed by his men because
he would not allow them to plunderthe Moguntiacii.56What comes next is
slightly different: it is a striking denunciationof the army actuaries whom
Victor plainly loathes:
So powerful were the companies of quartermasters,in whose ranks
Attitianuswas serving, thattheircrime succeededeven thoughthey were
attemptinga difficult task. They are the type of people, particularly
nowadays, who are worthless, venal, underhand,rebellious, greedy,
and, as it were, naturallygifted for committingand concealing frauds.
They control the supplies and thereforepose a threatboth to the supervisors of the storesandto the fortunesof the farmerssince they areversed
in the opportunebriberyof those throughwhose folly and loss they have
amassed their wealth.57
Den Boer believes that Victor mentions the actuarii here, in this unique
passage, becausethey threatenedthe position of the boni, especiallysince they
could influence the army, an avenue closed to the boni.58 While this may be
partiallycorrect,the very vehemenceof Victor's feelings indicateto the present
writerthat the authorhad personal acquaintancewith their machinationsand
crimes. The individualshe describes as utilia curantes were probablycurial
officials such as procuratores or susceptores who were liable for the full
amountdue; or the praepositi pagorum, the village or communityheadmen
responsiblefor gatheringsuppliesfromtheirlocal tax unit. Most of themwould
also be farmersforced into service in their municipalityor locality. Victor's
father,too, would probablyhave haddealings with these individualsandquite
possibly had servedin one of these capacitieshimself as well as being a farmer.
It appearslikely that Victor used the termfortunae aratorumbecause he had
himself experiencedthe power of the actuariesover the fortunesof the farmers
and thathe had used the term utilia curantes as a generaldescriptioncovering
all those local officials responsiblefor deliveringthe annona to the mansiones
publicae .59
WhenClaudiusbecameemperorat the deathof GallienusVictorcould return
to his generalizedattackon the army. "Contraryto their nature," he writes,
"the soldiersactuallytook thoughtfor whatwas right."60 Of coursethey were
531bid.26.6.
541bid.27.6.
551bid.31.1-2.
"Ibid. 33.8.
571bid.33.13.
58Op.cit., p. 78.
59Vid.Cod. Theod. VIII.1.14; VIII.1. 15 on actuariesfalsifying accountsanddrawingexcessive
supplies.
60DeCaes. 34. 1.

S. AURELIUS
VICTOR:SOMEFOURTH
CENTURY
ISSUES
231
constrainedto do so by the disastrousstateof affairs. Like TacitusVictorcould
even construepositive actions negatively. He does so again in the subsequent
chapterwhen he describesthe supposed interregnumfollowing the assassination of Aurelian. The legions "on both sides vied in honourand discipline, a
rare virtue in men, especially in circumstancesof this kind, and practically
unheardof among the soldiers."6' Earlier in the same chapter Aurelian is
praisedbecause he punishedgreed andembezzlementand the plunderersof the
provinces "contraryto militarycustom, thoughhe came from theirranks."62
Four more examples complete this somewhattedious recitation. Tetricusin
Gaul had to make overturesto Aurelianbecause his troops had been corrupted
by Faustinus.63Under Probusthe barbarianswere crushed in Gaul, Pannonia
andMoesia which they had invaded"because ouremperorshadbeen killed by
the criminalactions of their own men, as were the usurpersSaturninusin the
East and Bonosus at Cologne." Probushimself was then killed by his troops
becauseafterpacifyingthe empirehe hadallegedly statedthattherewould soon
be no need for troopsand he had used them for drainagework nearSirmium.64
Finally Victor notes that Constantinedisbanded the praetoriansafter the
Battle of the Milvian Bridge in 312. He heartily approves of the act; the
praetorians,he writes, were more suitedfor factionalstrugglesthanfor protecting Rome.65
As a civilian official in the bureaucracyVictor bitterlyresentedthe power
of the armycommandersand officers, the tyrannyof its petty officials and the
uncouthnessof the average soldier. He appearsjealous, envious, and indignant. In his sombrebroodingover the imperialperiodhe discoversthe originof
the disintegrationof the soldiers' moralityandmoralein Augustus'reignand in
that of Caligula when the troops had been seduced by money and the Quirites
had ceased to serve in the army. The final phase of militarydecline is ascribed
to Gallienus whose supposededict"6precludedsenatorsfrom militaryservice
and pavedthe way for semi-barbariansoldiers such as Silvanus(ortus barbaris
parentibus; 42.15) to take senior commands.
But Victor's depictionis inaccurate. Indeed, he demonstratesan ignorance
of the gradualbreakdownof the old legionary system and fails to undertstand
the vital role played by his own countryman,Septimius Severus, and his son,
Caracalla, in changing the natureof the army. Severus had, in effect, been
placed on the throneby the Pannoniansoldiers, a roughlot even in 193, andhe
needed to rewardthem. The praetorians,on the otherhand, hadfought against
him andcould hardlybe trusted. Severusthereforesolved two problemssimultaneously by disbandingthe guardand reformingit with men picked from the
61lbid. 35.11.
62Ibid.35.7.
slbid. 35.4.
37.3-7.
"I41bid.
651bid. 40.25., Victor is Naive and incorrecthere. The praetorianswere enemies and it would
have been dangerous and foolish to leave them under arms.
"Ibid. 33.34; 37.6. The existence of the Edict has justifiably been doubted by a numberof
scholarsfor it is mentionedonly by Victor and the practice of appointingequestriansto military
commandsother than the prefectureof Egypt can be traced back to Septimius Severus: vid. W.
Seston, Diocletien et la tetrarchiept. 1 (Paris, 1946), p. 317; B.H. WarmingtoninH.D.M. Parker,
A History of the Roman WorldA.D. 138 to 337 (London, 1958), p. 395; A. Bellezza, Atti della
Academia Ligure di Scienze e Lettere, 17 (1960), p. 149.

232

H. W. BIRD

Pannonianlegions.67 It was these same Danubiantroops who subsequently

defeated the Easternarmy of Niger and the British-Gallicarmy of Albinus.
They had become prominentin the wars of the reign of M. Aureliusbut it was
from the reign of SeptimiusSeverus onwardsthat their potentialto make and
break emperorsstems.
The Senate
It is maintainedby Den Boer thatcertainpassagesin the De Caesaribusshow
that Victor was "a senator and a cultured man and proud of his senatorial
rank."68 Victor's work as a whole, however, indicatesthat his culturewas at
best only superficial. Furthermore,no passage in the book unequivocally
demonstratesthat he was a senatorat the time of the composition of the De
Caesaribus. Victormerely writes thathis fatherwas tenuisatque indoctusand
that he had achieved vitam honestiorem.69 Indeed, the balanced praise and
criticismof the senateby Victorprobablydenotes thathe was not of senatorial
status and that it was Julian who bestowed senatorialrank on him in late
October,361 by makinghim consulargovernorof PannoniaSecunda. Thatthis
type of promotionhad, indeed, happenedin the middle of the fourthcenturyis
alreadyrevealed by the Theodosian Code which states that a man appointed
consularis could not takeup his post withoutacknowledgingthe senatorialrank
he had acquired.70
Some years ago Alfoldi described Victor as "brimful of senatorialarrogance.''71 Both Starr72and Den Boer73express disagreement,and the former
proceedsto say in a succinct and sympatheticsummarythat Victor's "judgement on the upperclasses of the Early Empirewas far from flattering." What
follows will be seen to bear out and extend Starr'scontention.
While discussing Claudius' acclamation74Victor informs us that when the
senatorslearnedof it they quickly sent out agents to see if they could check the
67Severus'position was similar to that of Constantinein 312. The latter, however, no longer
needed troops at Rome and did not replace the praetorians.On the praetoriansin 193 vid. M.
Durry,Les cohortespreitoriennes(Paris, 1938), p. 245ff.; A. Passerini,Le coortipretorie (Rome,
1939), pp. 179-191; 198. CassiusDio andthe inhabitantsof Rome were terrifiedby the Pannonian
soldiers in 193 (Dio, 74.2.2-3) and even Severus found it difficult to control them (Dio, 46.46.7:
H.A. Sev. 7.6; 8.9). In fact Dio maintainsthat Severus was terrifiedby them, too.
s8W.Den Boer, SomeMinorRomanHistorians, p. 25; also vid. pp. 36, 41. C.E.V. Nixon, An
Historical Studyof the Caesares of SextusAurelius Victor(Diss. Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1971), p.
16 concurs with the presentauthorthat Victor was adlected into the senate in the autumnof A.D.
361 by Julian. This latter study is carefully considered and merits scrutiny. A.H.M. Jones
(Paganism and Christianityin the Fourth Century[vid. note 41] p. 26) notes that men of lower
degree were appointedto higher civilian offices, thereby becoming senators.
69De Caes. 20.5. The Digest (50.4.6-praef.) uses the term tenuis to describean impoverished
decurion. Jones informsus thatthe influx of decurionsinto the senateunderConstantiusII posed a
problem(LaterRomanEmpireII, p. 527). Den Boer (op. cit., p. 91) thinksthatVictor's use of the
term honestiores in De Caes. 39.45 means "both respectablepeople of good behaviourand the
well-born." Here it may mean the former, though it may refer to rank.
70Cod.Theod. VII.ii.13 (383).
71A. Alf6ldi, A Conflict of Ideas in the Later Roman Empire (Oxford, 1952), p. 98.

720p.cit., p. 579.

73Op.cit., p. 25.

74DeCaes., 3.16ff.

S. AURELIUSVICTOR:SOMEFOURTHCENTURYISSUES

233

attempt. Nevertheless, afterthe state and all classes had been torn by various
frightfulrevolts everyone gave in as if by command. It was in this way that
monarchicalpower was confirmed at Rome.
Next, VictorpraisesVespasianfor holdinga census in the traditionalmanner
and for purgingthe senate of its more worthless elements while choosing the
best men from all over the empireto make up a thousandgentes. The emperor
had been hardpressedto discover two hundredpriorto this actionfor so many
had been eliminatedby the saevitia tyrannorum.75The message is clear. The
senate shouldcomprisethe best men of the empireand the unworthyshouldbe
weeded out. But then, the emperor also had to be merciful. Hence Victor
retailed the story of the two senators caught conspiring against Titus and
condemned by their peers. Titus pardoned them (an action which Victor
applauded)after taking them to the games, making them sit on either side of
him and handingthem in turna gladiator'ssword. "Do you see," said Titus,
"that the imperialpower is grantedby Fate and it is senseless to dare a crime
eitherin the hope of acquiringpoweror in the fearof losing it."76 Thatis to say
they would be acting againstFate in trying to obtain power, while he, Titus,
would be doing likewise in executing them throughfear of losing power. The
lesson is presumablyaimed at Constantius: by showing understandingand
considerationto the senate (here the amplissimusordo) might he not also be
acclaimed in the provinces as the generis humani deliciae?
Trajan,though he hailed from Spain, was a member of that amplissimus
ordo. His final act, according to Victor, was to try to returnto Italy at the
request of the senate.77 The story may not be authentic but it does reveal
Victor's opinion of what the relationshipbetween the emperorand the senate
ought to be. Victor's first real criticism of the senatorialclass is somewhat
veiled. He notes with disapprovalthe fact that Hadrianbuilt himself a palace
nearTivoli and busied himself with feasts, statues, paintingsand all the other
trappingsof luxuryand excess "as is the custom with those who are fortunate
and rich."78 Victor obviously did not belong to their group. The chapter
concludes with the strange story that Hadrian ordered a large number of
senatorsto be executedby AntoninusPius andthaton this accountthe senatewas
unwilling to deify Hadriandespite Pius' pleas. Nevertheless, when the supposedly dead senators suddenly reappearedthe senate decreed what it had
originally refused.7"It is plain that Victor thought that Pius had saved the
senatorswhom his predecessorhad orderedexecuted. That is why, so Victor
continues, Antoninuswas able to obtainhis requestandacquiredthe cognomen
Pius.80The story is repeatedin the H.A.81 andbelongs to the worldof fable but
Victor's inclusion of it reflects his sentiments. Emperorsshould not execute
senators.
The next mention of the senate is short and pointed. On the death of M.
Aurelius "the patres and vulgus who in other mattersare separated,decreed
75lbid. 9.9.
76lbid. 10.3-4.
77Jbid.13.11.
7"Ibid.14.6.
791bid.14.13-14; cf. Epit. 14.9; Eutrop. VIII.7.
"8DeCaes. 15.1.
S"Ant.Pius 2.4.

234

H. W. BIRD

everything, temples, columns and priests, to this dead emperor alone."82

Victor was not generally enamouredof the vulgus but on this occasion they
behavedwell, i.e. they did the same as the senate. A similarmentionis madeof
theirjoint action regardingthe abolitio memoriaeof Commodusat the end of
the following chapter."3During the reigns of the Severi, particularlythat of
Septimius Severus, the senate is passed over in silence. The reason is plain.
Severushardlytreatedthe senate with kid gloves andhis immediatesuccessors
did little to change the picture, so Victor is discreet. Only in his heavilyeulogized account of Severus Alexander does he write that the emperor, by
favouringthe jurists Ulpian and Paul, showed himself well-disposed towards
the optimi andjustice.84It is at this point thatVictor pausesto give his lengthy
reflections on the decline of Rome (quoted above).
Victor's subsequent statementcontinues his theme of a break in Roman
tradition. After the death of Alexander, C. Julius Maximinus, an unlettered
soldier, seized power as the choice of the legions. And the senate even
approved the choice, writes Victor, for they deemed it dangerous for an
unarmedgroupto oppose a man backedby arms.85Yet the senatea shorttime
afterwardsdid have its momentof glory. Amid the confusionandriotsat Rome
after the news of Gordian's death had reached the city the senate acted
vigorously to prevent worse atrocities and appointedCalvinus Balbinus and
Clodius Pupienus joint Caesars.86The nobility even accepted the African
soldiers' acclamationof GordianII (in fact, GordianIII)as Augustusandwhen
he had been summonedto Rome the senate recruits,who includedgladiators,
defeated the praetorianswho apparentlyopposed those actions. Pupienus,
meanwhile, supposedlydefeatedand killed the two Maximiniat Aquileia. But
the senatorialresurgencewas short-lived,for bothnomineesof the senatewere
killed by the praetoriansafter a reign of a little more than three months.87
The senatestill continuedto performits symbolic functions,however, and in
the reignof Decius it decreedPriscusa publicenemy."8Afterwardsit bestowed
imperialpower on GallusandHostilianusandmade VolusianusCaesar.89 But
Victor was obviously aware of the vanity of this senatorialprerogativefor he
remarksthat the senate one moment decreed Aemilianusa public enemy and
soon after, uponthe deathsof Gallus, HostilianusandVolusianusit was forced
to bow to fortune, uti solet, and acclaim Aemilianusemperor.90Subsequently
the senate decreed GallienusCaesarafterhis father, Valerian, had been proc82DeCaes. 16.15.
83Jbid.17.10.
841bid.24.6.
85Ibid.25.2.
861bid.26.7. Victor gives Calvinus Balbinus the erroneous nomen Caecilius and wrongly
designates both Augusti as Caesares.
871bid.27.1ff. Victor is singularly ill-informed about this period, confusing GordianII with
GordianIII,'assigning him the rank of Augustus instead of Caesar, and stating that Pupienus
subduedthe Maximini. Since Eutropiusmakes the same mistakes(Eutrop.IX. 1) it appearslikely
that they inheritedthe errorfrom their common source, the Kaisergeschichte. For the length of
reign vid. Chron. Min. I.147.
88Ibid.29.3.
891bid.30.1.
"0Ibid.31.3.

S. AURELIUSVICTOR:SOMEFOURTHCENTURYISSUES

235

laimed emperor by the army.91 What angered Victor above all was that the
heroicClaudiusGothicuscompelled the senateto deify Gallienus.92Quodsane
extortum, writes Victor, using his favourite expression of disgust, "for the
crimesof Gallienuswill neverbe concealed as long as cities exist andall wicked
men will always be comparedwith him.""9 Thenthe senateturnsits resentment
on the supportersand relativesof Gallienusand ordersthem draggedheadlong
to the GemonianSteps. The populacejoins them and they pray to the gods of
the Underworldto provide a resting place for Gallienus there. Fortunately
Claudiusgave ordersthat the survivorsshould be spared,as the nobilitas and
plebes would have committedeven more heinous acts. Again the nobility and
the people are linked: they supposedly suffered equally under the "bad"
emperor. But Victor is plainly shocked by the behaviourof the senatorsand is
at pains to explain or excuse it:
Even the very senators were roused by the abuse of their own order,
which was added to the common misfortune of the Roman world,
because he (Gallienus),throughfearthatby his own indolencethe empire
mightbe transferredto the most worthyof the nobility, hadbeen the first
to forbid the senatorsto undertakemilitaryservice andjoin the army.94
Here we have the majorreasonwhy Gallienuswas so traducedby Latinwriters:
whether by edict or, more probably, by general policy senators henceforth
ceased to play a militaryrole in the empire. This is viewed by Victoras the final
humiliationof the senate. ClaudiusII, on the otherhand, supposedlyregarded
himself as the first member of that amplissimus ordo, the senatus atque
omniumprinceps95and thus the one who had to sacrifice himself, accordingto
the Sibylline Books, to gain victory for the state. Yet when returningto the
notorious"Edict of Gallienus" Victor has to admitthatthe senate was largely
responsible for its own downfall:
Hereafter (i.e. 282) the power of the military grew and the senate's
prerogativeand right to designate an emperorwas snatchedaway up to
our own day. It is uncertainwhetherthe senateitself desiredthis through
apathyor because of fear or throughits hatredof strife. Indeed, military
service, which had been lost throughthe Edict of Gallienus, could have
been restoredwhile the legions were modestly submissive and Tacitus
was ruling, nor would Florianushave rashlyseized power andthe empire
would not havebeen grantedto anyone, howevergood, by the decision of
the common soldiers if that most splendid and noble order had been
serving in the army. Nevertheless,while they enjoyedtheirleisureand at
the same time feared for their riches and considered the use of these
riches and their affluence more importantthan the futurethey paved the
9gIbid.32.3.
92Ibid.33.27.
93Ibid.33.29.
91bid. 33.33.-34.
s95bid.34.4.

236

H. W. BIRD
way for the soldiers and almost for the barbariansto dominatethem and
their descendants.96

This "highly significant passage" is rathera reflection of fourth century

thought than an accurateestimation." The process of senatorialdebilitation
had begun in the first centuryB.C. and merely culminatedin the thirdcentury
A.D. Doubtless the senate still cherishedfond illusions of power and prestige
and in 238 such illusions became a short-livedreality. Victor, however, is
clearly the victim of delusion in consideringthat any real improvementin the
position of the senate occurredunderTacitus and thatthis felicitous situation
terminatedwith the assassinationof Probus. Unable to adduce any positive
evidence he hadrecourseto rhetoricalcommonplacesin blamingthe senatefor
its sloth and addictionto luxury.
We areinformedby Den Boer thatVictor's historicalfocus is increasinglyon
the relationshipbetween the emperorand the senate and that this should not
surpriseus since the problemwas still relevantin his own time." Nevertheless,
Den Boer fails to mentionthat the problemwas personallyrelevantto Victor,
who had social aspirations.Hence he could bothcriticizethose of humblebirth
who reached high position and acted with excessive arroganceand ambition
and express wonderthat manypeople consideredthe nobility arrogant.In fact
they, mindfulof theirpatricianorigins, really had some rightto be pre-eminent
as compensationfor the burdenswith which they were afflicted.99Yet in the
very same chapterVictor could also write that it was a common opinion that
adversitytaughtmen to be good and sensible whereasthose who had always
been fortunatetended to judge others by their own experiences and were less
considerate.100
It seems that Victor, like Ammianus, had a somewhat ambivalentattitude
towards the upperclass. He admiredand respected the nobility for its traditions, its culture, its splendor. It represented,for him, the ancient order, the
class to which he aspired, Rome as it ought to be.
At the same time Victor clearly understoodthe faults and weaknessesof the
aristocracy.He recognizedtheirshortsightedself-indulgence,theirpreoccupation with pleasures, their inertiaand cowardice.101Those last qualities, however, he partiallyforgave because he, too, realized the futility of an unarmed
senateopposinga generalwith an armyat his back. It is not withoutreasonthat
in the second sentenceof the De Caesaribus he notes that Augustuswon over
the soldiers with donatives, the mob with his apparentconcern for the grain
supply and that he subduedthe rest without difficulty.
96Ibid.37.5-7. On this passage and its translationsvid. R. Syme, Emperorsand Biography
(Oxford, 1971), p. 241.
97H. Mattingly, Camb.Anc. Hist. XII, p. 318; Cf. Alfoldi, op. cit., p. 99ff.; Starr,op. cit., p.
579; Bellezza, op. cit., p. 149ff.; H.M.D. Parker,A Historyof theRoman WorldA.D. 138 to 337
(London, 1958), pp. 178-181; p. 213.
98Op.cit., p. 87.
99DeCaes. 39.7. Cf. Tac. Ann. 11.33.
10oDeCaes. 39.27. For the translationof this passage vid. p. 2.
the preoccupationsof the nobiles with otiumvid. J. Matthews, WesternAristocraciesand
101For
the Imperial Court AD 364-425 (Oxford, 1975), pp. 1-55.

237
ISSUES
S. AURELIUS
VICTOR:SOMEFOURTH
CENTURY
Whathe really would have liked to see was an emperorshowingdeferenceto
the senate. This, in turn, should be revitalized and should comprise the best
men of the provinces as well as Italy and should energetically manage the
affairsof the empire, both militaryand civil. He, of course, hoped to play his
partsomeday. The notion was a pipedreamdespite Constantine'semployment
of many senatorsin his administration.It was the armythatcountedandVictor
was painfully aware of this. But this awareness did not preclude hopes, or
perhapsdreams,of a happierstateof affairs, a returnto the democraticdays (in
aristocraticterms) of Antoninus Pius or Marcus Aurelius.102
Conclusion
In examiningAureliusVictor's attitudesandsentimentsone is struckby their
general predictability. An earlier study demonstratesVictor's antipathytowardsConstantinople,the new capital, his pro-Romanbias andpride, his tacit
disapprovalof Christianityand his violent resentmentat the corruptionof the
bureaucracyandthe court.103 This studyexamineshis respectfor educationand
moral rectitude and, almost as a corollary, his hostility to and scorn for the
military and those regions which provided the bulk of the troops in his day.
There is little to excite surprisein any of these attitudes.
Nevertheless, Victor does appearto have had a singularlyrealistic view of
the senate. His reverencefor it as an institutionwas modifiedby his realization
of its impotence,of the apathy,cowardiceandwealth-orientationof manyof its
members. Victor had also made a clear-sighted appraisalof the debt Rome
owed to men of provincialorigin. His distastefor the crudenorthernersdid not
preventhim from appreciatingtheir value to the empire as well as thatof men
from the more civilized provinces.
H. W. BIRD
Universityof Windsor

1020nefinal pointneeds elucidation:Victorfrequentlyjuxtaposesthe senateandthe peopleor the

aratores, the first instance occurringin M. Aurelius' reign. Like Ammianus (XXXI.5.14) he
probably believed that in M. Aurelius' time the Romans flourished because they were not so
hedonisticand because they were still preparedto fight or die for the state. Furthermore,underan
enlightenedrulersuch as M. Aureliusthe highestandthe lowest could be madeto worktogether. It
is clear that such a situationdid not exist in Ammianus' day: nor did it thirty years earlier when
Victorwas writing. Whatemerges is thatVictor anticipatedAmmianusin ascribingthe disintegration of Rome to psychological causes, i.e., to a decline in personalmorality. Thompson'scharge
againstAmmianus(op. cit., p. 132), "He fails to see thata decline in personalmoralityis itself an
historical phenomenon requiringexplanation;it is merely a symptom of underlyingsocial and
economical causes" may just as readily be levelled against Victor.
103H.W.Bird, "ThreeFourthCenturyIssues: A RomanBureaucrat'sPersonalViews," Classical News and Views XX, 1976, p. 91ff.