Lucius Petronius Taurus Volusianus: Difference between revisions
→Significance of his consular appointment: In course of revision |
|||
| Line 109: | Line 109: | ||
Bray conjectures that, despite being raised to the consulate, Volusianus nevertheless, continued to serve as Praetorian Praefect until his appointment as ''Praefectus Urbis'' in 267 - see below.<ref name="Bray" /> This is possible: the office of consul was by this time largely ceremonial - though hugely prestigious (especially when held together with a reigning emperor as in Volusianus's case) - and still a pre-requisite of important provincial governorships - but the work-load would not have precluded him from holding other offices. |
Bray conjectures that, despite being raised to the consulate, Volusianus nevertheless, continued to serve as Praetorian Praefect until his appointment as ''Praefectus Urbis'' in 267 - see below.<ref name="Bray" /> This is possible: the office of consul was by this time largely ceremonial - though hugely prestigious (especially when held together with a reigning emperor as in Volusianus's case) - and still a pre-requisite of important provincial governorships - but the work-load would not have precluded him from holding other offices. |
||
The significance of this appointment in the general context of Gallienus's Imperial policy is difficult to assess. There seems no doubt that the tenure of the praetorian prefecture, the quintessential office of the Imperial autocracy, together with full membership of the Senate was regarded as deeply transgressive of social norms as established by the [[ |
The significance of this appointment in the general context of Gallienus's Imperial policy is difficult to assess. There seems no doubt that the tenure of the praetorian prefecture, the quintessential office of the Imperial autocracy, together with full membership of the Senate was regarded as deeply transgressive of social norms as established by the constitutional settlement of [[Augustus]] by which the Emperor shared his authority with the [[Roman Senate]]. During the High Empire (i.e. prior to the reign of [[Diocletian]]) the extent to which individual princes maintained the social subordination of the men they entrusted with the equestrian prefectures{{efn|As observed earlier, the Praetorian Prefecture was the principal office of what was, in practice, the Imperial autocracy. Others included - roughly in order of importance and prestige - the prefectures of Egypt, the ''[[Vigiles]]'', and the Roman [[Corn-Supply]].}} to the senatorial holders of the Great Magistracies inherited from the Republic and especially to the consulate, was regarded as a measure of their fidelity to the legacy of the first Emperor<ref>{{cite book|title = Equestrian prefects and the award of senatorial honours from the Severans to Constantine|last=Salway, B. in: A. Kolb (ed.), Herrschafsstrukturen und Herrschaftspraxis|publisher = Berlin|year = 2006|pages = 115-135}}.</ref>{{efn|[[Marcus Aurelius]] was once recorded as regretting that the fact that [[Pertinax]] had once been consul made him ineligible for such an appointment<ref>{{cite book |title=Septimus Severus: The African Emperor|last=Birley|first= Anthony|year=1971|publisher=Eyre & Spottiswoode|location=London }}</ref>}}. Volusianus was the first Praetorian prefect to hold that office in tandem with the consulate since 203 AD when [[Gaius Fulvius Plautianus|C. Fulvius Plautianus]] had exercised it under Septiminus Severus]] - not a happy precedent from the point of view of senatorial adherents of the Augustan Constitutional settlement. It has been argued that Volusianus's appointment was a sign of Gallienus's mistrust of the Senate. The hostility of that body was held to be evidenced by the fact that, so far as is known, he was not co-opted to any of the high priestly offices that a [[Consul]] Ordinarius usually held<ref> {{cite book|title = The crisis of the Empire: Cambridge Ancient History, Vol. XII, C VI|last = Alfoldi, A.|publisher = CUP|location = Cambridge|year = 1965.}}</ref>. This explanation of the appointment is not impossible given the circumstances of the time in which it was made when Gallienus's prestige was at a low ebb and his Manadate to Rule particularly questionable in the wake of the Persian captivity of his father [[Valerian]] and the related military uprisings in [[Gaul]] and ''[[Illyricum]]'': he might well have considered that he needed to neutralize potential enemies in Rome. However, if Gallienus's motive in 260 AD was to ensure his control of the Senate, this was not a continuing concern for, unlike Severus in the case of Plautianus, he did not see fit to give Volusianus a second term in office{{efn|In the case of Plautianus the grant of ''Consularia ornamenta'' seems to have been regarded as a substitute for a first term in the office - a notion the Senate found profoundly offensive. Gallienus never found it expedient to insult the order in this way.}} and it was not until late-266 that he made him ''[[Praefectus Urbi]]''; and in the interim he chose members of the Senatorial Order as his colleagues or . |
||
Revision as of 16:35, 11 May 2014
 | This article possibly contains original research. (August 2012) |
Vir Consularis Ordinarius Lucius Petronius Taurus Volusianus | |
|---|---|
| Born | Etruria (?) |
| Died | 268 AD (?) Rome? |
| Cause of death | Murdered (?) |
| Nationality | Etruscan (?) |
| Citizenship | Roman |
| Occupation(s) | Soldier and Imperial functionary |
| Employer | Emperor Gallienus |
| Title | Prefect of Vigiles, 259 (?), Praetorian Prefect, 260-6 (?), Consul Ordinarius (with Gallienus), 261, Praefectus Urbi, 267-8 |
| Predecessor | (As Praefectus Urbi) Aspasius Paternus |
| Successor | (As Praefectus Urbi) Flavius Antiochianus |
| Children | Lucius Publius Petronius Volusianus (?) |
Volusianus was a Roman citizen, apparently of equestrian origins, whose career in the Imperial Service in the mid-Third Century AD carried him from a relatively modest station in life to the highest public offices and senatorial status in a very few years.[1] He may have secured his first appointments before the Licinian Dynasty - (Valerian and his son Gallienus) - acceded to the Empire in 253 AD, but it was in the course of their reign that his upward progress achieved an almost unprecedented momentum and the second factor seems to have been a consequence of the first. The nature of his relationship to the Licinii is uncertain, but it seems likely that a common origin in the Etruscan region of central Italy predisposed Gallienus at least in his favour and he seems to have been that prince's most trusted servant and adviser during the period of his sole reign - 260(?)-268 AD.
Sources
Almost all that is known of Volusianus is derived from an inscription.[2] dedicated to him by the Town Council of the municipium of Arretium (Arezzo, Italy) of which he was a patronus.[3] Commentators on the inscription have included: Jones, Martindale & Morris;[4] H.-G. Pflaum;[5] and also J. Bray.[6] As a Consul and Praefectus Urbi Volusianus is mentioned in the Fasti Romani, i.e. the record of Roman office-holders.[7]
Origins
Volusianus was the son of a Roman citizen also with the praenomen 'Lucius' of the Petronii clan. His Roman voting Tribe was the Sabatinae. Sabatina was a district in Etruria; thus it is likely that the family was of Etruscan origin. Volusianus’s patronage of Arezzo in later life does not necessarily mean that he was born there, but it does indicate some strong regional connection.[a]
It is possible that, as an Etruscan of equestrian rank - see below - Volusianus had social connections with powerful senatorial families of Etruscan provenance two of which achieved Imperial status in the mid-Third Century AD. This would go some way to explain the extraordinary momentum of his career from the early 250s AD onward. The Treboniani (the family of the Emperor Trebonianus Gallus) and the Licinii (the family of the Emperors Valerian and Gallienus) have both been suggested in this connection.[5][6] It seems agreed that a connection between these families and the Petronii Volusiani based on a common regional origin is not impossible, but that a blood-relationship is unlikely.[9]
According to the Arretium Inscription Volusianus's career began he was already of equestrian rank, but we do not know if he was born into that level of society or achieved it as a result of his career. He probably became a senator in 261 - see below.
Career
The Arretium Inscription lists Volusianus’s appointments in reverse chronological order according to the usual Roman practice. In chronological order they are:
- LAVRENS LAVINAS – This signifies the holding of a minor priesthood. The holders had to be of equestrian status.[10] This indicates that he had the property qualifications required for equestrian status, but was not yet admitted to the Ordo Equester - see Roman equestrian order for a fuller explanation of this distinction;
- EX V DECVRIIS – Signifies membership of one of the panels of five judges of equestrian status available to decide issues of fact;[11]
- EQVO PVBLICO – Indicates that he had taken part in the annual parade of the equestrians in Rome and was, therefore, an accredited member of the Ordo and was eligible for an official appointments reserved for members of the order;
- CENTVRIO DEPVTATVS – One of the commanders of the troops detached from the provincial armies for special service about the Emperor. These were formed into a unit known as the Peregrini. When the Emperors were in Rome the Peregrini were quartered at the Castra Peregrina Peregrina on the Caelian Hill. The centurio deputatus postings ranked high in the centurionate and were highly political. It seems surprising, therefore, that Volusianus should have been given this job as his first recorded military appointment. It was possible for equestrians to be directly commissioned into the legionary centurionate if an opening could be found in one of the provincial garrisons.[12] However, in the case of the Peregrini a prior posting as a legionary centurion in the provinces was usually a sine qua non. Bray suggests, tentatively, that Volusianus might have had an unrecorded posting as a legionary centurion before he went to the Castra Peregrina,[6] a proposition more confidently asserted by Pflaum.[5] This may explain the apparent anomaly, but there is no evidence to support the notion;
- PRIMVS PILVS Pilus LEGIONIS XXX VLPIAE – Senior ranking centurion of this legion which was normally stationed at Castra Vetera (modern Xanten) in the province of Germania Inferior. Pflaum[5] suggests that Volusianus might have held this appointment prior to the accession of the Licinii (253 AD) during the reign of Trebonianus Gallus. Again, there is no evidence for this, but it is a plausible conjecture. Bray suggests that it was at this time that Volusianus came to the attention of Gallienus when he campaigned against the Franci in Germania Inferior in the early years of his reign;[6]
- PRAEPOSITVS EQVITVM SINGVLIARORVM AVGG NN - Commander of a troop of the Emperor's mounted bodyguard - i.e. the 'Imperial Horse Guard'. The Equites Singulares [13] usually served directly under the command of the Emperor, but Pflaum suggests that Volusianus was entrusted with this command to carry out a special mission.[5] It was certainly the case that in the mid-Third Century the term praepositus indicates a commander appointed for a specific mission or campaign.[14] The formula Augg NN (i.e. Augusti Nostri– i.e. 'of Our August Lords)’ indicates that there were two Emperors when Volusianus held this office. It is generally assumed that the Emperors concerned were Valerian and Gallienus.[6] In other words, this posting occurred at some stage in the period 253-60 AD.[5]
- LEGIONIS X ET XIII GEMINAE PROVINCIAE PANNONIAE ITIM (ITEM?) LEGIONIS DACIAE – Commander (praepositus(?)[4]) of a detached force made up of units from Legio X Gemina which had its main base at Vindobona in Pannonia Superior (modern Vienna, Austria) and Legio XIII Gemina. The latter legion was at this time based at Apulum (Apulum (castra) in the province of Dacia (modern Alba Julia in Romania), but, according to this item in the inscription, it may also have had detachments serving in Pannonia. (This could explain the formulation provinciae Panonniae ('of the province of Pannonia') as intended to distinguish these elements from the main body of the legion (in Dacia). The detachments 'legionis Daciae' (i.e. 'of the Dacian legion') might, therefore, refer either to additional detachments of Leg. XIII transferred from Dacia or to elements of Legio V Macedonica, the other Dacian legion. The use of such ad hoc formations composed of elements of more than one legion and detached from their parent-bodies became increasingly necessary in the troubled middle years of the Third Century AD;[15]
- TRIBVNVS COHORTIS III VIGILUM; XI VRBANAE; III PRAETORIAE – Indicates Volusianus was, successively, a cohort commander in the Vigiles (Roman Watch) (255?), the Cohortes Urbanae(256?), and the Praetorian Guard (257?).[4] The Roman Watch rarely and the Urban Cohorts never on record served outside Rome and, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, it may be presumed that it was in Rome that Volusianus served these appointments. However, Praetorian Cohorts usually followed the Emperor wherever he was. In the middle-late 250s AD they were, presumably divided between the co-Augusti Valerian and Gallienus[b] However, this item in the record of Volusianus's cursus seems to indicate that Coh. III was with Gallienus in the West at this time;
- TRIBVNVS COHORTIS I PRAETORIAE PROTECTOR AVGG NN – This appointment to the senior praetorian cohort is placed in 259?).[4] Again the formulation Augg NN indicates that there were two rulling Emperors so this appointment preceded the capture of Valerian by the Persians. The reference indicates that Coh.I was in the west when Volusianus commanded it, but - unlike the case of Cohs. VI and VII - there is no coin-evidence to support this supposition.[16] This is the also first known reference to he new Imperial bodyguard formation, the Protectores Augusti Nostri (i.e. 'Bodyguards of Our August Lords'). Christol argues that this formation was created specifically for officers serving in the comitatus of Gallienus.[17] The senior Praetorian tribune would almost certainly have fallen into this category;
- PRAEFECTVS VIGILVM PERFECTISSIMVS VIR – Volusianus is now Prefect of the Watch (probably 259 AD). [c] Perfectissimus Vir was an honorific indicating membership of the second rank of the equestrian order;
- PRAEFECTVUS PRAETORIO EMINENTISSIVS VIR – About 260(?).[4] The Praetorian Prefect usually served ‘in the Imperial Presence’. Eminentissimus Vir (lit 'Most Eminent Man') was the highest equestrian rank and was reserved for the Praetorian Prefect. (The Prefects of Egypt, the Corn Supply etc. were always Vires Perfectissimi) .
- VIR CONSULARIS ORDINARIUS – According to the fasti Volusianus was consul ordinarius with Gallienus in 261 - i.e. he was one of the two consuls who gave their name to the year according to the Roman practice although - again according to Roman practice - he is likely to have stepped down after a few weeks/months in favour of a consul suffectus Nevertheless, by achieving this office he became a member of the highest rank of the senatorial nobility, the Viri Consulares, which made him eligible for the highest offices in the Imperial System that were reserved for senators.
Significance of his consular appointment
Bray conjectures that, despite being raised to the consulate, Volusianus nevertheless, continued to serve as Praetorian Praefect until his appointment as Praefectus Urbis in 267 - see below.[6] This is possible: the office of consul was by this time largely ceremonial - though hugely prestigious (especially when held together with a reigning emperor as in Volusianus's case) - and still a pre-requisite of important provincial governorships - but the work-load would not have precluded him from holding other offices.
The significance of this appointment in the general context of Gallienus's Imperial policy is difficult to assess. There seems no doubt that the tenure of the praetorian prefecture, the quintessential office of the Imperial autocracy, together with full membership of the Senate was regarded as deeply transgressive of social norms as established by the constitutional settlement of Augustus by which the Emperor shared his authority with the Roman Senate. During the High Empire (i.e. prior to the reign of Diocletian) the extent to which individual princes maintained the social subordination of the men they entrusted with the equestrian prefectures[d] to the senatorial holders of the Great Magistracies inherited from the Republic and especially to the consulate, was regarded as a measure of their fidelity to the legacy of the first Emperor[19][e]. Volusianus was the first Praetorian prefect to hold that office in tandem with the consulate since 203 AD when C. Fulvius Plautianus had exercised it under Septiminus Severus]] - not a happy precedent from the point of view of senatorial adherents of the Augustan Constitutional settlement. It has been argued that Volusianus's appointment was a sign of Gallienus's mistrust of the Senate. The hostility of that body was held to be evidenced by the fact that, so far as is known, he was not co-opted to any of the high priestly offices that a Consul Ordinarius usually held[21]. This explanation of the appointment is not impossible given the circumstances of the time in which it was made when Gallienus's prestige was at a low ebb and his Manadate to Rule particularly questionable in the wake of the Persian captivity of his father Valerian and the related military uprisings in Gaul and Illyricum: he might well have considered that he needed to neutralize potential enemies in Rome. However, if Gallienus's motive in 260 AD was to ensure his control of the Senate, this was not a continuing concern for, unlike Severus in the case of Plautianus, he did not see fit to give Volusianus a second term in office[f] and it was not until late-266 that he made him Praefectus Urbi; and in the interim he chose members of the Senatorial Order as his colleagues or .
In addition, although it was traditionally the case that men of senatorial rank could not be appointed to the Praetorian Prefecture this rule had been abandoned or, at least, relaxed during the reign of Severus Alexander and in the next fifty or so years until the reforms of Diocletian gave the office definite senatorial status a number of prefects are recorded with the senatorial honorific Vir Clarissimus - i.e. 'Renowned Lord'. There therefore seems to have been no procedural obstacle to Volusianus's continuing to serve as prefect after he was ennobled.[22]
Later life
In 267 Gallienus appointed Volusianus Praefectus Urbis - i.e. Urban Prefect (Imperial Governor of the City of Rome). This was a hugely important and prestigious post in the hierarchy of the Imperial service.[g] Unlike the Praetorian Prefecture - see above - holders of the Urban Prefecture were invariably men of senatorial status. We have no means of knowing why Gallienus decided to relieve Volusianus of the Praeetorian Prefecture in order to give him this appointment or whether it would have been regarded as a promotion or demotion.
As Urban Prefect it is assumed that Volusianus remained in Rome when Gallienus went to the Balkans to deal with the invasion of the Goths and Heruls in 267-8.[6] There is no record of him taking part in that campaign nor is he mentioned by any ancient source in connection with the conspiracy that led to Gallienus's assassination by his leading military officers at Milan.
Heir
Volusianus may have been the father of Lucius Publius Petronius Volusianus.[4] This man is little known, but he seems to have had a distinguished career in a wholly civilian capacity. (As a senator he would have been precluded from following his father into the army). He seems to have followed the senatorial cursus honorum finally achieving the consulship. It is not known whether he ever governed a province[8]
Death
It is normally assumed that Volusianus was done to death as a leading minister of Gallienus in the senatorial-inspired purge that followed the murder of that prince in 268. However, some at least of his family seem to have escaped/been spared - see preceding section.
Conclusion
By any standards Volusianus's was a remarkable career. There is no way of knowing how he performed in his professional capacities. Whatever his merits the favour of Gallienus - possibly based on some family and/or social connection arising from a common Etruscan origin - seems to have been crucial at all stages. However, given the general quality of the men Gallienus appointed to high office, it seems unlikely that the Emperor would have advanced Volusianus to such heights on the mere basis of a shared origin had the man no other quality to recommend him.
Notes
- ^ For Volusianus's Etruscan origins see [8])
- ^ Pratorian Prefect, Successianus was among the officers captured together with the Emperor Valerian by the Persians in 260 and he, presumably, had praetorians under his command.
- ^ 259 is thought to have been the year in which Germanic raiders, (Alemanni/Juthungi), penetrated Italy as far south as Rome and were driven off by an army composed of "soldiers who were then in the City" and citizens.[18] There is no mention in any ancient source that Volusianus's tenure of the Watch Prefecture coincided with this event. However, if he had been sent there to organise the defence of the City it would have reflected well on the Emperor and diminished the glory accruing to the Senatus Populusque Romani. Given the hostility to Gallienus of the Latin historians, the argument from silence is not necessarily conclusive.
- ^ As observed earlier, the Praetorian Prefecture was the principal office of what was, in practice, the Imperial autocracy. Others included - roughly in order of importance and prestige - the prefectures of Egypt, the Vigiles, and the Roman Corn-Supply.
- ^ Marcus Aurelius was once recorded as regretting that the fact that Pertinax had once been consul made him ineligible for such an appointment[20]
- ^ In the case of Plautianus the grant of Consularia ornamenta seems to have been regarded as a substitute for a first term in the office - a notion the Senate found profoundly offensive. Gallienus never found it expedient to insult the order in this way.
- ^ After the reforms of Diocletian at the end of the Third Century the Praetorian Prefect was listed first in the Imperial Service hierarchy. How it ranked in the time of Gallienus is uncertain.
References
- ^ Southern, Pat (2001). The Roman Empire from Severus to Constantine. p. 103. "...most famous besides the cavalry commander Aureolus being Lucius Petronius Taurus Volusianus, a man of low birth who became consul in 261..."
- ^ See Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum (CIL) XI 1836 = ILS 1332 for text of inscription.
- ^ See patronage in ancient Rome for a discussion of the role of a patronus.
- ^ a b c d e f Jones, A.H.M. (1971). The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, Vol i, 6 ‘Volusianus’. Cambridge University Press.
{{cite book}}: Unknown parameter|coauthors=ignored (|author=suggested) (help) - ^ a b c d e f Pflaum, H.-G. (1960). Les Carrieres Procuratoriennes sous Le Haut Empire Romaine. Paris.
- ^ a b c d e f g Bray, J. (1997). Gallienus: A study in reformist and sexual politics, Appendix C. Adelaide, S. Australia: Wakefield Press. pp. 327–330.
- ^ See Chronographer of the Year 354 in 'Chronica Minora' 1: Monumenta Germaniae Historia: ed T. Mommsen, vol IX
- ^ a b P. Lambrechts, La Composition du Senat Romaine de Septime Severe a Diocletien: Budapest, 1937
- ^ Bray(1995: App C)
- ^ Cagnat,, R. (1898). Cours d'Epigraphie Latine. Paris: Fontemoing. p. 118.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) - ^ Buck land, W.W. (1950). Textbook of Roman Law from Augustus to Justinian. Cambridge University Press. p. 632.
- ^ Dobson, B. "The significance of the centurion and the Primipilaris in the Roman Army and administration". ANRW II 1,: 392–434.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) - ^ Speidel, M.P. (1997). Riding for Caesar. Harvard University Press.
- ^ Smith, Prof. R.E. "'Praepositus', 'Dux'".
{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires|journal=(help) - ^ The enforced transformation of the tactical disposition of the Roman forces in the Balkans in the mid-Third Century AD has been much discussed in scholarly circles in recent years. See inter alia Potter, Prof. D.S. (2004). The Roman Empire at Bay - AD 180-395: Part III. Routledge.
- ^ [1]
- ^ Christol, M. (1970). "La carrière de Traianus Mucianus et l'origine des protectores".
{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires|journal=(help) - ^ Zozimus. Historia Nova I 37.
- ^ Salway, B. in: A. Kolb (ed.), Herrschafsstrukturen und Herrschaftspraxis (2006). Equestrian prefects and the award of senatorial honours from the Severans to Constantine. Berlin. pp. 115–135.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link). - ^ Birley, Anthony (1971). Septimus Severus: The African Emperor. London: Eyre & Spottiswoode.
- ^ Alfoldi, A. (1965.). The crisis of the Empire: Cambridge Ancient History, Vol. XII, C VI. Cambridge: CUP.
{{cite book}}: Check date values in:|year=(help)CS1 maint: year (link) - ^ See Howe, L.L. (1942). The Pretorian Prefect from Commodus to Diocletian (A.D. 180-305). Append. H: University of Chicago Press. pp. 120–3.