Caracalla's Problems in the North
(courtesy Caracalla: A Military Biography
by Dr. Ilkka Syvänne)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbarian_invasions_into_the_Roman_Empire_of_the_3rd_century:
After about thirty years of relative quiet along the Rhine-Danubian frontiers [Commodus had ended the Marcomannic Wars c. 180], a new crisis broke out along the Germanic-Rhaetian Limes in 212, caused by the first invasion of the Alemanni confederation.
The invasions of the third century, according to tradition, began with the first incursion conducted by the Germanic confederation of the Alemanni in 212 under Emperor Caracalla...
Having studied the L. Artorius Castus stone now since at least 2019, and having only recently proposed a new reading for the ARM[...]S lacuna (https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2024/12/a-new-reading-for-arms-lacuna-of-l.html, https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2025/01/why-armatas-gentes-is-not-too-vague-or.html, https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2025/01/might-armgentes-for-arms-lacuna-be.html, https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2025/01/arthur-and-miathi-artorius-and-maeatae.html), I've come to the conclusion that opting for a Castus fighting in Britain over one fighting in Armenia is the most reasonable choice.
My problem when looking into the possibility that Castus had taken part in Severus' massive invasion of the British North was what to do with his following procuratorship in the province of Liburnia. The more research I did on the nature of this procuratorship the more I became convinced - as were the Roman epigraphers and Roman military historians I'd consulted - that for an equestrian to be granted ius gladii in what appeared to be a new province carved out of Dalmatia (or, at the very least, was an administrative district that was a subdivision of Dalmatia) called for extraordinary circumstances surrounding its formation. Most likely this involved some kind of emergency preparedness.
ARMENIOS for Armenia of the early 160s has remained a favorite for ARM[...]S. We can also look to a reorganization of Illyricum and Dalmatia under Marcus and Verus at the onset of the Marcomannic Wars c. 168-170. The Roman governor of Britain, Statius Priscus, had been sent to command the army in Armenia. So, really, this argument appears to be very strong.
But Armenia is very far from Britain. My analysis of British vexillations on the Continent and beyond (see https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2022/12/vexillations-sent-from-britain-to-fight.html) revealed that other than a proposed Armenia expedition, the two other most distant postings for British vexillations were Carnuntum in Austria and Sirmium in Serbia.
Furthermore, my gut kept telling me that a prefect of the Sixth Legion at York (a legion whose purpose was always guardianship of the North), commanding British legionary troops, is much more likely to have been fighting in Britain and, indeed, in northern Britain. But this was merely applying probability to the problem, as well as personal bias.
An ARM.GENTES allowed me to find the idea that Castus had fought in Britain to be more acceptable. But, again, if I couldn't find a good reason to have Castus as procurator of Liburnia soon after he led troops in a major military action, I would have to dispense with the proposed reading.
It didn't take me long to find it. I've posted at the top of this page a selection from Wikipedia. That passage describes how a very similar situation arose of the Continent under Caracalla as had existed under Marcus and Verus, viz. the Germanic invasions started again in earnest. For details on how severe these were, both in terms of real damage or threat level, I refer my readers to "Caracalla: A Military Biography" by Ilkka Syvänne.
Caracalla had been in Britain with his father, Severus, during the invasion of the North. Dr. Simon Elliott, author of "Septimius Severus in Scotland: The Northern Campaigns of the First Hammer of the Scots" (p. 152) attempts a hypothetical reconstruction of Caracalla's role in the invasion:
While we can never know what really happened, this is a sound approach by Elliott. Even more interesting for our purposes is his reference to the three British legions being under Caracalla. I have long argued - vociferously at times (because I was predicating my argument on Castus' having left Britain!) - that vexillations were implied on the Castus stone. I even pointed to works like that of Robert Saxer, who had found dozens of instances of what he assumed were implied vexillations in inscriptions. However, if we accept the huge force assembled by Severus and allow for all three legions to have been involved, then we can accept the reading of the Castus stone literally: he was put in charge of the three British legions under Caracalla.
We might then simply say this: after his successful stint as dux under Severus, Castus was placed over the province of Liburnia. Now, we need not insist on the foundation of Liburnia at this time. It is quite possible the province was created c. 170. And that it continued in existence for some three decades. Still, I cannot help but think that once the Marcomannic threat was gone, the new province's distinctiveness would have lapsed quite naturally and it would have again become simply a region within Dalmatia. For this reason we should prefer that Liburnia was formed c. 212 as a response to the Alemannic invasion under Caracalla.
The rather exciting thing about this scenario is that Caracalla would have known Castus. And it remains true that the ius gladii could only be given to an equestrian governor by the Emperor himself.
I asked Dr. Benet Salway (the same scholar who had accepted my proposed ARM.GENTES for the Castus stone as a valid reading, and who thought the Castus stone was Severan in date*) the following question:
"So far as I can tell, there is nothing wrong with having Castus fight armed tribes in Britain under Severus and Caracalla, then be made Liburnian procurator under Caracalla.
Right?"
Dr. Salway responded:
"Yes, it is a hypothesis that is consistent with the evidence."
Now, before I close here, it is important that I state that there are other top scholars (like Professor Roger Tomlin) who continue to favor ARMENIOS. And they may well be right. Basically, what it comes down to in this particular instance is which do you want to believe? We have two choices, really:
1) Castus, prefect of the Sixth Legion at York in northern England, fights with British legionaries in Armenia and then is made procurator of the newly formed Liburnian province in the face of Germanic invasions
or
2) Castus, prefect of the Sixth Legion at York in northern England, fights with British legionaries against the Maeatae and Caledonii confederations and is then made procurator of the newly formed Liburnian province in the face of Germanic invasions (and in the face of a Sarmatian one, incidentally).
Not included in this short list is the Marcellus victory in northern Britain c. 184 and the aftermath of the Deserters' War and the Perennis affair under Commodus (185-187). There was no causative event that would account for the formation of Liburnia at these times - which, at it happens, serves as another argument against reading ARMORICOS for the ARM[...]S lacuna. Commodus had ended the Marconmannic Wars c. 180. And as for ARMATOS of Malcor, Trinchesse and Faggiani (they have Castus's dux command fall unto the period 187-191, a gap in the known British governors), it can also be discounted, as no emergency was happening in or adjacent to Dalmatia towards the end of Commodus' reign or in 192 when that emperor was assassinated. Needless to say, no record exists for counter-offensive action in northern Britain in 187-191.
Some might cling to the "neatness" of ARMENIOS. ARM(ATAS) GENTES is not as aesthetically pleasing and would be a "one-off" in inscriptions. However, there are a great many "one-off" words and phrases in Roman inscriptions. In fact, even the 'PROC CENT PROVINCIAE LIB' of the Castus stone is a "one-off" example. Our record is woefully incomplete and what is extant is painfully small. To be honest, then, to insist on ARMENIOS because it is prettier or less clunky does not seem to me to be an especially effective defense of that reading for the lacuna.
*
Dear Daniel,
Coming to the stone cold without any presuppositions and basing my opinion purely on the script, I would favour a date in the Severan period (AD 193-235) or up to a decade or so later. I base this on the high degree of ligaturing in the design.
Yours sincerely,
Benet Salway
Dear Daniel,
Leaving aside the Virgil, which as verse is not probative, you have now assembled a convincing body of parallels to argue for your restoration of this lacuna on the epitaph for Artorius Castus.
Well done.
Yours sincerely,
Benet Salway
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.