- Katılım
- 4 Şub 2022
- Mesajlar
- 10,778
- Beğeni
- 12,578
The figure behind this issue was the mysterious Poemenius, about whom little is known, and to whom only one reference still survives: Ammianus writes Poemenius, doomed like evil-doers, was taken off for execution and perished - it was he, who [as I have related above] was chosen to defend the fellow citizens when Treveri had closed off its gates to Decentius Caesar [15.6.4]. Unfortunately the earlier books of Ammianus, which would have told us more of his story, do not survive. However, we can piece together something of the situation behind the minting of this issue.
Constantius II, in an attempt to deal a significant blow to the usurper Magnentius who had risen against him and his imperial colleagues, appears to have persuaded local Germanic tribes to launch attacks on Treveri [now Trier], the centre of Magnentius' power. The usurper's brother, Decentius, was in command of the city, but after a period of absence from it in mid AD 353 - perhaps to deal with one of the Germanic incursions - returned to find that the hugely important city had been closed off to him and his men in revolt, and was now under the command of Poemenius. Decentius had no option but to retreat from the city, moving further West, and now, stripped of his power base, bearing no real obstacle to the forces of Constantius II.
This issue dates to the brief period [perhaps a month] of Poemenius' revolt, in which the city mint stopped issuing coinage for Magnentius and Decentius, and instead issued a hybrid series with obverses in the name of Constantius II and using Magnentius' Chi-Ro types for the reverses - a series which heralded the Magnentian clan's consequential loss of power at Trier and in the West and foreshadowed their defeat by Constantius II at the Battle of Mons Seleucus and subsequent suicide later that year.
The series of which this coin is a part, then, is of significant interest and importance, bearing testimony 'to a little known chapter of Roman and numismatic history' and constituting [alongside Ammianus' brief reference to his later execution] all that remains of Poemenius' existence [Holt, pp.72-73].
Constantius II, in an attempt to deal a significant blow to the usurper Magnentius who had risen against him and his imperial colleagues, appears to have persuaded local Germanic tribes to launch attacks on Treveri [now Trier], the centre of Magnentius' power. The usurper's brother, Decentius, was in command of the city, but after a period of absence from it in mid AD 353 - perhaps to deal with one of the Germanic incursions - returned to find that the hugely important city had been closed off to him and his men in revolt, and was now under the command of Poemenius. Decentius had no option but to retreat from the city, moving further West, and now, stripped of his power base, bearing no real obstacle to the forces of Constantius II.
This issue dates to the brief period [perhaps a month] of Poemenius' revolt, in which the city mint stopped issuing coinage for Magnentius and Decentius, and instead issued a hybrid series with obverses in the name of Constantius II and using Magnentius' Chi-Ro types for the reverses - a series which heralded the Magnentian clan's consequential loss of power at Trier and in the West and foreshadowed their defeat by Constantius II at the Battle of Mons Seleucus and subsequent suicide later that year.
The series of which this coin is a part, then, is of significant interest and importance, bearing testimony 'to a little known chapter of Roman and numismatic history' and constituting [alongside Ammianus' brief reference to his later execution] all that remains of Poemenius' existence [Holt, pp.72-73].