[The following discussion with Professor John Drinkwater if offered in an effort to bring some balance to the ARMORICOS vs. ARMENIOS debate when it comes to consideration of the proper reading for the ARM[...]S lacuna in the L. Artorius Castus memorial inscription. I will state from the outset that I still hold to ARMENIOS, precisely because I obtained broad-based scholarly consensus on the early foundation date for the province of Liburnia, a foundation made on an emergency basis at the onset of the Marcomannic Wars. This view, combined with our knowledge of the Roman governor Statius Priscus being sent to Armenia as commander of the army there in the early 160s, and the apparent Dalmatian connection between Castus, Priscus and Sextus Julius Severus lends considerable weight to the ARMENIOS reading. It also remains true that while ARMORICOS can be made to fit on the stone with allowable ligatures, ARMENIOS is simpler and more in keeping with the style of carving. Finally, with so many problems going on in Britain at the time of the Deserters' War, it is hard to explain how/why a major expedition would have been launched to Gaul.
It is important to recognize, however, that two very prominent scholars (Tomlin and Drinkwater) can disagree about whether we should prefer ARMENIOS or ARMORICOS.]
Armorica and Armenia compared with the two long-range British missions in the extant epigraphic record
"Some have interpreted this as Castus leading British troops across the empire
to Roman Armenia; clearly this is not logical as greater concentrations of troops
would be far nearer and the province of Britain was suffering unrest itself."
- John S. McHugh, THE EMPEROR COMMODUS: GOD AND GLADIATOR
In the past, I explored the possible reading ARMORICOS for the LAC memorial stone. Having shown for the first time the reading could fit properly in the lacuna
I abandoned the reading - despite my gut telling me all along that Castus' three British legionary detachments perfectly matched the 1500 British spearmen sent to Rome at the time if the Deserters' War in Gaul - for chiefly three reasons.
One, evidence seems to suggest that Castus' Liburnia was founded c. 168-170 at the onset of the Marcomannic Wars. The ius gladii power invested in him during his procuratorship represented something done on an emergency basis and thus only seems possible early on. Not after the Marcomannic Wars had been ended by Commodus.
Two, the Roman governor of Britain, Statius Priscus, was sent to command the army in Armenia. As troops were drawn from the Rhine and Danube, some could easily have accompanied Priscus.
Three, Professor Roger Tomlin did not believe the Armorica could be present on the stone because if it were there we were talking about a full-scale Armorican rebellion, not just a action launched against some deserters and assorted riffraff. In his opinion, several other terms would have been used instead.
Well, recently I was discussing tge matter with Professor Lawrence Keppie. He kindly referred me to his colleague, Professor John Drinkwater, whom Keppie described as THE expert on Imperial Roman Gaul.
I wrote the following query to Prof. Drinkwater:
Dear Professor Drinkwater:
I have been very kindly referred to you by your colleague Professor Lawrence Keppie. He and I have been discussing the ARM[...]S lacuna in the Lucius Artorius Castus stone.
The debate regarding this lacuna involves the two possible readings that have been proposed: ARMENIOS and ARMORICOS. Both fit nicely on the stone when allowable ligatures are employed.
Castus was prefect of the Sixth Legion who was apppointed dux and led three British legions (vexillations are implied) ADVERSUS ARM[...]S.
For Armenia, Tomlin points to the emergency sending of the Roman governor of Britain to Armenia in the 160s. As troops for the Armenian war were pulled from the Rhine and the Danube, it is thought reasonable that Priscus might have brought some British soldiers with him. As Castus' next appointment was procurator of Liburnia with ius gladii, and Liburnia seems to have been created on an emergency basis at the onset of the Marcomannic Wars, this reading would seem to make sense.
However, those preferring the ARMORICOS reading can point to the Deserters' War under Commodus in Gallia Lugdunensis and the 1500 British spearmen who at this time escorted the removed legates to Rome and who brought about the execution of Perennis. 1500 nicely divides into three legionary detachments of 500 each. The coincidence is rather striking.
Now, I have read Picard and others on the disturbances and destruction in Armorica at this time. I've also consulted the various treatments of the Deserters' War. Some think this was a major event. But Roger Tomlin says that the deserters were composed of assorted riffraff and that to say ADVERSUS ARMORICOS would mean that all of Armorica would have had to be in open rebellion. For that reason he favors Armenia. He thinks any number of more appropriate and accurate terms would have been used to describe the deserters, just not ARMORICOS.
As you are the expert on Gaulish matters, I'm hoping you could please share your thoughts with me on the Deserters' War and whether this event could, in your opinion, have been designated as an Armorican rebellion.
Thank you, best of New Year's wishes, and respectfully,
Daniel Hunt
To which he responded:
Dear Daniel,
I've just finished putting my first thoughts down on paper.
These are:
1. Although I never went deeply into the issue, I was always instinctively inclined to follow Mommsen in believing that ILS 2770 relates to northern Gaul.
2. That ‘Ar[e]morica’ was a long accepted designation of that large and important strategic area of northern coastal Gaul which stretched from Brittany to the Seine estuary is clear from Caesar’s civitates qui Aremoricae appellantur (BG 5.3, 7.75, 8.31) and the Notitia Dignitatum’s tractus Armoricanus et Nervicanus.
3. That the inhabitants of the civitates of Ar[e]morica could cause trouble for Rome is similarly evident in events of the fifth century (unrest c. 410-c. 449: Zosimus, Rutilius Namatianus De red. suo, the Querolus etc.) and also, I believe, in those of the late-third century (the first Bagaudic revolt, which took full imperial intervention to suppress, and had a huge effect on subsequent imperial and world history).
4. The extent and precise details ‘Deserters’ War’ of the mid-/late-180s may well have been exaggerated and distorted by the sources, but there can be no doubt that the fact that it receives mention indicates that, like the first Bagaudic revolt, it was a very serious affair. Although it probably began in and remained centred on the Rhine-area, I believe that it could well have sparked off significant disruption further afield, including outright rebellion in Ar[e]morica.
Yrs,
John
J. F. Drinkwater, M.A., D.Phil., F.S.A.,
Emeritus Professor of Roman Imperial History,
Department of Classics and Archaeology,
University of Nottingham,
NOTTINGHAM, NG7 2RD,
U.K.
As a follow-up question, I sent this to Prof. Drinkwater:
Thank you, John, for taking your time to help with this.
A related question, if you don't mind.
These 1500 British spearmen who went to Rome to get rid of Perennis... again, this force could well have been composed of 500 men each drawn from each of the three British legions. Past scholars have seen in this force Castus' vexillations sent against the Armoricans.
McHugh in his book The Emperor Commodus suggests that this was an unusually large escort for the removed legates, made necessary by the need to pass through territory adversely affected by the Deserters' War. The author makes an excellent argument for 500 lanciarii being selected from each legion as escorts for the three legates.
Dio tells us the force reached Rome without encountering any resistance.
But is it plausible to propose the following:
Castus is sent to Armorica with troops to quell an uprising. At or shortly after this time, Perennis removes the legates due to the attempt by the troops in Britain to raise Priscus to the purple. Having put down the rebellion, Castus' force is tasked with conveying the removed legates back to Rome. Possibly other parts of Europe were still dealing with unrest.
I can also see Dio confusing accounts of 1500 British soldiers sent to Armorica with a British escort of legates to Rome. It is even possible that a small group was separated from Castus' troops to act as an escort.
Your thoughts?
D.
And his reply:
1. For the reasons I stated in my email of 30th December, I see no problem in principle to believing that there could have been serious trouble in Ar[e]morica in the later-second century resulting in military intervention from Britain. (And Ockham’s razor needs to be deployed: why bring in the complexity of Armenia?)
2. In addition, I think that one may conjecture that this was in some way related to the ‘Deserters’ War’.
3. I suggested that this war was probably focused on the Rhine because, from the later-third to the early-fifth century, this was where most trouble in Gaul originate – because of the presence of the army and, presumably deserters.
4. However, the Augustan History (Pesc. Nig. 4.4) has Pescennius Niger dealing with deserters in Lugdunensis.
5. I have to say that I am always suspicious of the HA, and although its earlier ‘Lives’ are more reliable than its later, this reference occurs in a section of Pescennius Niger’s where – with the supposed letter from Severus to Ragonius Celsus -- it begins to drift into fiction.
5. Furthermore, even accepting what it says about Niger’s command as reliable, I would still locate the focus of the war on the Rhine both because this was a traditional hotbed of trouble and because, according to the account Maternus moved into Italy - so probably from the upper Rhine.
6. Yet Herodian (1.10.2 also reports that there was trouble further much afield, in Gaul and Spain; and one could speculate that the ‘Deserters’ war’ in southern Lugdunensis may have sparked off regional revolt in Ar[e]morica, i.e. that these were two elements in a continuum of severe unrest that may have continued whatever Maternus was up to.
7. I concede, therefore, that an alternative explanation may be that Niger defeated the main body of the deserters in Gaul and that only then did Maternus and the survivors flee into Italy, but I don’t think that this fits the scale of Maternus’ ambitions as described by Herodian (2.10.3).
8. But historical speculation about unproven probabilities/non-probabilities aside, the fundamental issue remains epigraphic. Which reading of ARME… do experts believe better fits both the available space and contemporary epigraphic style and conventions? Anthony Birley, whose epigraphic skills were second to none, specifically accepted Armenios over Amoricanos: The Roman Government of Britain (2nd edition), 2005, 355. This was a problem for supporters of the Ar[e]morican reconstruction. But you have sent me the ARMORICOS reconstruction image and it would appear to work just fine.
9. The question as to whether the British forces gathered for the Ar[e]morican (if such it was) expedition may in some way be linked to Dio’s (72.9-10) 1,500 spearmen sent to Rome who initiated the fall of Perennis – a sort of ancient ‘Wagner’ force – is a wholly distinct issue.
10. I must say that I have my doubts about such a link. We need to know much more, otherwise there is too high a degree of speculation. A huge problem here is that ‘Dio’s’ text here is not his but that of the epitomators, and therefore not wholly reliable. My reading of what we have is that the 1,500 were sent, independently of other events, by their commanders (I can’t find any mention of the legates being arrested and conveyed to Rome by this force) as a sort of military embassy to the emperor, presumably to obtain his forgiveness for their part in the recent political unrest in Britain.
I would make a final point about an Armorican expedition for Castus and his serving as procurator of Liburnia with ius gladii. In the past I argued rather forcefully for the foundation of Liburnia c, 168-170, when we know Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus militarily reorganized Illyricum and Dalmatia. For Castus to have been given the right of the sword meant that something of an emergency situation was going on and this is the only event we know of where actions were taken that sound a lot like the foundation of Liburnia at the outset of the Marcomannic Wars.
However, after the Deserters' War we had a significant action in the East that has not received much attention: another war against the Sarmatians. In 185 A.D. Commodus' coins have the legend VO DE SARMATIS, and the HISTORIA AUGUSTA tells us that generals of the Illyrian army won victories in Sarmatia. The Marcomannic Wars were ended by Commodus c. 180, but it is possible, I suppose, that the war against the Sarmatians was accompanied by Castus being made procurator of Liburnia (whether formed at this time or earlier) with unusual judicial power.
It could also be that brigands were still a problem in Liburnia, as they had been under Marcus Aurelius, and that Castus was given ius gladii for tjis reason.
This is the best we can do for ARMORICOS on Castus' stone.
