Gaius Furius Sabinius Aquila Timesitheus
Vir Eminentissimus Gaius Furius Sabinius Aquila Timesitheus | |
---|---|
Born | 190 |
Died | 243 Provincia Mesopotamiae |
Nationality | Roman |
Occupation(s) | Imperial Official and soldier |
Years active | AD 210(?)-243 |
Organization | Imperial Administration |
Known for | Fiscal expertise and generalship |
Title | Praefectus Praetorio (under Gordian III) |
Term | 240-3 AD |
Predecessor | Domitius |
Successor | M. Julius Philippus (later Emperor 'Philip the Arab' |
Children | Furia Sabinia Tranquillina |
Relatives | The Emperor Gordian III (son-in-law)[1] |
Gaius Furius Sabinius Aquila Timesitheus[a] (Greek: Τιμησίθεος) (AD 190-243) was an officer of the Roman Imperial government in the first half of the 3rd century. Most likely of Oriental-Greek origins, he was a Roman citizen, probably of equestrian rank.
He began his career in the Imperial Service as the commander of a
He either died of illness or was murdered in the course of a successful campaign against the Sasanians under king Shapur I in Mesopotamia.
Origins and social status
"Timesitheus" is a
Despite the obscurity of his family background, his reputation and his achievements suggest that he benefitted from an excellent classical education.[e] His parents were almost certainly wealthy and, most likely, of equestrian status.
Career
Early days
Timesitheus' career before his appointment as Praetorian Prefect is recorded on an inscription on a statue from Lugdunum in the province of
Late in the reign of
His next recorded appointment was as Procurator provinciae Arabiae (financial administrator of the province of
The first of these appointments was as Procurator provinciae Syriae Palaestinae ibi Exactor Reliquorum Annonae Sacrae Expeditionis (Procurator of
Death of Alexander Severus
The mutiny of the army in Germany that resulted in the murder
Fall of Maximinus Thrax
The mutiny of his army at Aquileia that brought an end to the regime of Maximinus Thrax also ended Timesitheus's term as the governor of Asia. However, he was soon employed again, this time as procurator provinciarum Lugdunensis et Aquitainicae - i.e. procurator of the two largest Gallic provinces: it would seem that he retained powerful friends in Rome despite his willingness to enter into accommodation with the military tyrant that the Senate had successfully faced down and that his administrative talents were too useful to be gainsaid. Admittedly, on this occasion he was not made an acting-governor; indeed, while procurator of Lugdunensis and Aquitainica he was, nominally at least, demoted to the rank of ducenarius. It could be that influential senators — who mistrusted equestrians who got above their social station and particularly resented brilliant high-fliers such as Timesitheus — may have intended this downgrade of his official ranking as a snub. As already intimated, however, Timesitheus is unlikely to have been either disturbed or impressed.[p]
Return to Rome
Timesitheus seems to have used his position in the government of the Gauls to cultivate the leaders of Gallic society.[17] The Lyons Inscription (already mentioned) refers to him as optimus patronus (i.e. Best of Patrons) which implies that when his term of office came to an end he returned to Rome as an ambassador representing the interests the Gallic provinces. This would have facilitated his renewed access to the Imperial Court. As already indicated, Timesitheus was much admired for his culture and learning - for which much could be forgiven in Roman Society - and his rhetorical prowess no doubt did much to restore his reputation and influence with senior courtiers and senators who were dominant in Imperial politics in the early years of the reign of Gordian III.[17]
So complete was his return to favour that, not long after his return to the City, he succeeded in marrying his daughter,
Reputation as Praetorian Prefect
Timesitheus served as Praetorian Prefect for some three years from 241 until his death in 243. The only narrative source on his term of office is the
Achievements in office
Much of the first two years of Timesitheus's prefecture seems to have been spent producing a stable environment in which government of any sort could be carried on. His main means to this end seems to have been strengthening the authority of the Praetorian Prefecture—his own office—and to move equestrians with a fiscal background, such as himself, into positions of power.[r] The main effect of his manoeuvering seems to have been to ensure that the kind of men who had carried on the government under Alexander Severus were restored to effective office.[20]
The principal challenges to his conduct of affairs seem to have been posed by senators such as Sabinianus, the governor of Africa Proconsularis, whose revolt had to be put down by the equestrian governor of Mauretania, and Tullus Menophilus, the hero of the Siege of Aquileia. The latter was executed in 241 for reasons not properly understood and to have suffered the further penalty of damnatio memoriae - i.e., formal obliteration of his name from the historical record.
Details of Timesitheus' policies and achievements as the (probable) de facto ruler of the Empire during the reign of his son-in-law are sparse. There is evidence of substantial road repairs undertaken in many parts of the Roman World which would have been of economic and strategic significance. Monuments were restored in major cities which might have lifted civilian morale as well as providing employment for sculptors, stonemasons etc. It also seems that there was a thoroughgoing adjustment of the African frontier.[21] It is not possible to tell how far such measures reflected policy guidelines issued by Timesitheus' office to provincial authorities, still less what detailed planning was carried out there. The most that can be said with any confidence is that he does not seem to have stood in the way of functionaries, such as the procurator of Mauretania, who conceived and drove forward such works.
Persia
His main concern as the Emperor's principal minister and adviser was in dealing with the threat to the oriental provinces posed by the renascent power of Persia under one of its most effective "Kings of Kings", Shapur I.
Shapur's ambitions when he succeeded his father Ardashir in 240 were no doubt inflated by his initial successes, but there also seems no doubt that he was determined to: (i) secure strategic control of the minor states of eastern Mesopotamia that controlled access to Roman Syria across the eastern desert frontier west of the River Euphrates; and (ii) replace Rome as the hegemonic power in the Kingdom of Armenia. During the reign of Maximinus, Rome had suffered the loss of considerable territories in Mesopotamia to Ardashir which the Roman Emperor had been unable to prevent or avenge because of his internal distractions: on his accession, Shapur renewed the onslaught, capturing more of the Mesopotamian fortresses and penetrating Syria itself, where Antioch, the capital of the Roman east, may have come under threat. More seriously, perhaps, the confidence of Rome's governing elite that the Empire was capable of seeing off the Persian threat to the Oriens was seriously undermined.[22]
In the first two years of his prefecture, Timesitheus was not able to give his attention to the threat to Rome's territories in the east posed by Shapur, but in 242 he began to organise a response appropriate to the magnitude of the crisis. Under his supervision, a powerful army was put together consisting of
The removal of so many seasoned troops from their Rhine and Danube stations encouraged an assault across the lower Danube by the Carpi and other northern barbarians. However, Timesitheus, en route to the east through the Balkans, inflicted a serious defeat on the invaders in Thracia. He seems then to have followed the usual practice of Roman commanders after victories over barbarian peoples of obliging the defeated to provide contingents of troops. Such measures were intended not only to reinforce his army, but also to remove those restless young men who might have been disposed to make more trouble in its absence.[s]
On arriving in the theatre of operations he seems to have mounted a highly successful campaign against the Persians in Mesopotamia, inflicting a crushing defeat on them at the
The death of Timesitheus
Before the projected campaign to capture Ctesiphon could get underway, Timesitheus died in obscure circumstances. The SHA asserts that Timesitheus was suffering from an attack of diarrhea and that Marcus Julius Philippus (Philip the Arab) succeeded in having his medication doctored, thus fatally inflaming the symptoms of his illness.[25] This account is not found in the Greek sources and is not now generally accepted in academe. His death most likely was caused by dysentery. However, Philip the Arab and his brother, Gaius Julius Priscus, Timesitheus's co-Praetorian Prefect, were the chief beneficiaries of Timesitheus's death.
Following the removal of Timesitheus's presiding genius, the organisation of the campaign - presumably now under Priscus, who succeeded him - fell into disarray. The Augustan History's assertion that Philip (who was promoted to the Praetorian Prefecture in tandem with his brother), deliberately contrived to starve the army of supplies in order to undermine the authority of Gordian may or may not be true, but the decision of the brothers to pursue the attack down the River Euphrates at the turn of 243/4, at the height of the Assyrian rainy season, seems to demonstrate a lack of strategic insight that invited disaster. Whatever its cause, the death of Timesitheus put in motion a series of events that deprived the Roman Empire of what was probably its best chance of quashing the pretensions of the Persian monarchy before it became fully established.
Summation
Timesitheus's historical significance is that in the period when the provisions of Roman administrative law that formally reserved the government of key Imperial provinces for members of the Senatorial order were being increasingly set aside and specialists of equestrian rank brought to the fore, he was one of the foremost examples of the new type of functionary. In his day such officials tended to be particularly expert in fiscal administration, reflecting the Imperial government's urgent need for additional revenues to support the cost of the army reforms introduced by Septimius Severus and Caracalla. However, within a very short time, as the Crisis of the Third Century gathered momentum, the equestrian officers being appointed vice senatorial magistrates in regions at particular risk tended to be professional soldiers than those who had made their way in the procuratorial branches of the Imperial Service. It would appear that Timesitheus combined fiscal expertise of a high order with considerable military competence which probably assisted his advancement. However, it was almost certainly his fiscal capabilities - together with the powerful court-connections that were essential to success at the highest level of the Imperial Service - that supplied the chief underpinning of his career.
He had the reputation in antiquity of being highly cultured, fluent in both Latin and Greek, an exemplar of the virtue of παιδεία (paideia) (in Latin, humanitas), the essential quality of a fully developed human being. (The SHA notes as mark of virtus that he corresponded with his son-in-law in Greek.)[26] This, combined with administrative and military competencies of a high order, rendered Timesitheus the perfect Imperial functionary in the eyes of his contemporaries. These attributes enabled him to survive the violent removal of three emperors and continue to flourish as an indispensable, if not always wholly trusted, servant of the state.
His career bears witness to his rare appreciation of where real power lay in the Roman polity and also of the opportunities that prevailing circumstances were opening up for men of equestrian origins such as himself to share in that power. However, it also suggests that he realized the likely limitations that the social compact still imposed on men originating from outside the charmed circle of the Senatorial order. It would seem that, having made this analysis, he pursued the exercise of real power with a single-minded diligence as an equestrian. Within the constraints of the Imperial System of government, he seems to have been a highly effective statesman and administrator. It is possible that his premature death (however that came about) deprived Rome of the services of a statesman and a general who might have saved the Empire from the humiliations that were to be inflicted on it by Shapur I.
Family tree
previous Maximinus Thrax Roman Emperor 235–238 | Pupienus Roman Emperor 238 | Gordian I Roman Emperor 238 ∞ (?) Fabia Orestilla | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Junius Licinius Balbus consul suffectus | Gaius Furius Sabinius Aquila Timesitheus praetorian prefect | next Philip the Arab Roman Emperor 244–249 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Philip II Roman Emperor co-emperor 247–249 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Nerva–Antonine family tree
| |
Notes:
Except where otherwise noted, the notes below indicate that an individual's parentage is as shown in the above family tree.
| |
References:
|
Notes
- Scriptores Historiae Augustae (SHA) calls him Misitheus.[3] This could also be an uncomplicated error, but, might possibly be an instance of the malicious humour in which the author of those unreliable, but indispensable Imperial biographies so often indulged. However, the SHA account of Timesitheus is beyond fulsome in its praise for his wisdom and learning, his care for his young son-in-law, the Emperor Gordian III, and his administration of the Empire.[4]
- Procurator (Roman).
- ^ Such tendencies seem to have been particularly pronounced among the Greeks of Asia and the Oriens.[5] The Greeks of Achaea (particularly Athens) may have been more concerned to emphasise their pre-Roman heritage and cultural distinction[6]
- Alexander Severusrespectively.
- ^ Zosimus calls him "... a man high in estimation for his learning ...." (Zos. Hist I, 17.2.). The SHA is also very laudatory - see below.
- ^ The lands directly owned by the Severan Dynasty in north east Gaul and the Germanies - as throughout the Empire - are likely to have been substantially increased by Septimius Severus's victory in the civil wars of the 190s and the subsequent confiscations of the property of his defeated enemies and their supporters. This would have increased the demand for expert estate managers such as Timesitheus to administer these acquisitions and maximize the revenues derived from them.[9]
- ^ It is possible that Timesitheus's appointment to these offices related to Caracalla's war against the peoples of southern Germany (213 AD), for which much money would have been required, but there is no evidence to support this proposition.
- ^ Concerning the salary-defined equestrian ranks of sexagenarius, centenarius, etc. see Equites.
- ^ Under prevailing Administrative Law established during the reign of the Emperor Augustus the government of provinces with legionary garrisons was reserved for men of senatorial status. (In the case of provincial Arabiae the senator would have been of praetorian rank - i.e., yet to hold a consulate). However, an Emperor could over-ride this requirement and appoint an equestrian as a temporary expedient if he saw fit. Such appointments became increasingly common in the Third Century AD. Whether Timesitheus would have commanded the legion on active service in person or through a military deputy is not known.
- ^ The Persian Empire had been recently revived under the leadership of the Ardashir, the first "King of Kings" of the Sassanid dynasty.
- ^ The name 'Alamanni' may not yet have been applied by the Romans to the league of German peoples recently formed to the north of their South German territories, the Agri Decumates. However, as a serious threat to the Imperial hegemony in that region this group had been known to the Imperial government at least since the era of Caracalla - see above.
- ^ The war against Persia was termed "Sacred" because the conflict was conducted, in name at least, by the Emperor himself, Alexander Severus. In fact, the men in charge would have been officers who answered to Alexander's mother, Julia Mammaea.
- ^ See inter alia Crisis of the Third Century.
- ^ The inermes status of Timesitheus's provinces does not necessarily mean that there were no troops stationed there: there were undoubtedly detachments from other provinces with legionary garrisons sent to carry out escort/police duties, collect supplies etc.[15]
- lictors - whereas as vice praeses of Germania Inferior he had enjoyed praetorian status only and was thus merely quinque-fascalis - only five lictors. However, even had the emperor cared in the slightest for Timesitheus's presumed feelings - which seems unlikely given what is known of his character - as already suggested, Timesitheus probably set little store by the dignified appurtenances of power as opposed to his ability efficiently to exercise its actuality.[16]
- ^ It is possible that, even in the short term, the main effect of the demise of Maximinus Thrax's administration and the subsequent overthrow of the Senate's preferred candidates for the Empire, Pupienus and Balbinus, was to return to effective power those who had exercised it under Julia Mamaea.[10] As suggested above, Timesitheus seems not to have lacked for influential friends at court or in the City.
- ^ In Timesitheus'case the prime offenders identified by SHA were members of the household of the Empress-Mother, Antonia Gordiana. The usual caveats relating to this source apply
- ^ Two such men were Marcus Julius Philippus (later known as Philip the Arab), and his brother Gaius Julius Priscus, who Timesitheus seems to have made his co-Praetorian Prefect. Like Timesitheus, these men had impressive backgrounds in fiscal administration, but his promotion of them was to have dire consequences for his regime and for the Empire; see below.
- Naqsh-e Rustam, the Persian King was later to claim that the Roman Army he defeated at the Battle of Misichein 244 included German and Gothic auxiliaries.
- ^ It is considered good practice in academe to accept the SHA as a reliable source of information only when its assertions can be verified from other evidence. On this occasion its account of the success of Timesitheus's operations in Mesopotamia seems to be justified in the light of coins issued honouring Gordian and Tranquillina by the Mesopotamian cities of Edessa, Carrhae and Nisbis - see SHA Vita Gord, 26 fn 100.
Citations
- ^ Christol, M (2006). L'Empire Romaine du III Siècle - 295-325 apres J.C. Paris: Editions Errance. p. 98.
- ^ Zos., Hist., I, 17, 2).
- ^ SHA, Vit. Gord. passim).
- ^ SHA Vit. Gord 23, 5-6; 25, 6-7; 27, 2, 4, 7 and 10; and 28, 1-6).
- ^ Madsen(2009:passim.)
- ^ Millar(1969):28-29.
- ^ Pflaum:1960-1:pp 813.
- ^ CIL XIII, 1807 = ILS 1330, Lugdunum.
- ^ Cascio (2005; p. 151)
- ^ a b Potter (2004; pp. 229-30)
- ^ Pflaum (1960; p. 813)
- ^ Pflaum (1960-1; p. 814)
- ^ Pflaum (1960-1:p. 815)
- ^ Pflaum(1960-61:8p 818)
- ^ Le Bohec(2007:120-3)
- ^ Pflaum ibid.
- ^ a b Pflaum(1960-1:p 819)
- ^ Pflaum(1960-1:p 820)
- ^ See, for instance, Enslinn(1965:p 86)). Potter is not so uncriticallly impressed, but nevertheless presents Timesitheus as the type of Novus Homo with a strong fiscal background coming to the fore as the Severan Empire stumbled towards its inevitable failure (Potter(2004:pp 229-31)).
- ^ Potter(2004:xxx).
- ^ Enslinn(1965:86).
- ^ SHA. Vita Gord. 26.3.
- ^ Christol (2006) 98
- ^ SHA Vita Gord 26, 3-6
- ^ 'SHA 28 1, 5.
- ^ SHA (vita tres gordiani: 25.5)
References
- Scriptores Historiae Augustae. Vita Tres Gordiani. Roman Texts. University of Chicago.
- Zosimus (1814). New History, Book I. London: Green and Chaplin.
- Zonaras. Epitome of History, XII, 18. pp. 129–30 D.
- Bohec, Y. Le (2014). Géopolitique de l'Empire romaine. Paris: Edns. Ellipses.
- Cascio, E. L. (2005). Cambridge Ancient History 2nd edn. Vol. XII, Cap 6b, VII; The new organisation of the imperial estates and finances;. Cambridge: CUP. pp. 137–155.
- Christol, Michel (2006). L'Empire Romaine du III Siècle - 295-325 apr. J.C. Paris: Editions Errance. p. 98.
- Ensslin, W. (1965). Cambridge Ancient History Vol XII: Cap II The Senate and the Army. Cambridge: CUP. pp. 57–94.
- Madsen, J.M. (2009). Eager to be Roman. London: Duckworth.
- Mazzarino, S. (1971). "La tradizione sulle guerre tra Shabuhr I e l'Impero romano". Acta Acad. Sci. Hung. Vol. 19. pp. 59–82.
- S2CID 161263352.
- Pflaum, H.-G. (1960). Les carrières procuratoriennes équestres sous le Haut-Empire Romain, C 317. Paris. p. 811.
{{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) - Potter, D. S. (2004). The Roman empire at Bay - AD 180-395. London & New York: Routledge.
- Stein, Arthur (1910), "Furius 89", Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, volume 7, part 1, columns 364–367.