Bust of Probus according to Duruy.
Bust of Probus according to Duruy.
The so-called bust of Probus according to Bernoulli.
When the news of the murder of Tacitus was brought to his half-brother Florianus he claimed the right to succeed him. The soldiers accompanying him and the soldiers posted in the west supported Florianus’s nomination and he was also confirmed in his post by the Senate. So he became the legitimate emperor.
Coin of Florianus
(source: Cohen)
The nomination of Florianus was unacceptable for the ambitious Probus and his friends. The following quote from Vopiscus gives us a good indication of how Probus and his supporters manipulated the soldiers to nominate Probus as emperor:
When the news came of the death of Tacitus, the Forces in the East were for preventing those in Italy [This would be the field army that had been brought from the west and now served under Florianus, but it is also possible that it merely refers to the Praetorians who did not belong to the protectores that had served previously under Probus] and also to prevent the Senate from appointing an emperor for a second time [In other words, Probus and the soldiers did not want to see another Tacitus on the throne]. The question was whom they should choose. The tribunes [These would probably be the tribunes who belonged to the protectores who stage-managed the nomination process] addressed the soldiers, maniple by maniple on the parade-ground saying that we must choose one who is a man of courage, goodness, modesty, clemency and probity. This was repeated so often by everyone and everywhere until they all shouted out ‘Probus Augustus, may the gods serve you!’ [The word probity used here (probum) meant that the soldiers should choose Probus, which the soldiers understood readily after it was repeated often enough so that then all shouted together ‘Probus’.] Then they ran and erected a tribunal of turf and Probus was proclaimed emperor and decked with a purple robe which they took from a statue in the temple and from there he was carried to the Palace [This would presumably be the Palace at Antioch], he all the while moving against his will and drawing back and often saying to them ‘This is not convenient for yourselves. You will not do well under me. I cannot bring favours to you!’ [This was merely a feigned show of reluctance.] [Vopiscus, HA Prob.10.1ff. tr. by Bernard, 283–4, with emendations, corrections and additions.]
Probus and his accomplices had stage-managed Probus’s nomination. He and his friends were vehemently opposed to the policies followed by the Senate and their emperor Tacitus. They certainly did not approve that Florianus would succeed his half-brother. It was the time to put an end to the pretensions of the Senate. Now the Roman Empire and its armies were divided so that Probus possessed Egypt, Phoenicia, Syria and Palestine, while Florianus possessed the area from Cilicia as far as Italy and the Hesperiae, as Zonaras put it at 12.29. The best description of the resulting power struggle is by Zosimus:
A universal civil disturbance arose now, those of the east choosing Probus emperor, and those at Rome Florianus. The former of these governed all Syria, Phoenicia, Palestine, and Egypt; but the latter was in possession of all the countries from Cilicia to Italy; besides which the homage of all the nations beyond the Alps, the Gauls, Spaniards, Britons, and Africans was paid to him. When both therefore were ready for war, Florianus came to Tarsus, resolving to encamp there, leaving his victory over the Scythians at the Bosphorus unfinished, by which he gave them an opportunity of recovering themselves and returning home, though he had cut off their retreat. Probus protracted the time, because he came with less preparation for a battle. By these means it came to pass that the weather, being exceedingly hot, a pestilential The Struggle for Dominance: Probus vs. Florianus 171 disorder broke out amongst the troops of Florianus, most of whom were Europeans, and consequently unaccustomed to such excessive heat, by which many were taken off. [This implies that Probus possessed enough men to block the route from Florianus’s army and that he preferred to reduce the enemy through delay. The outbreak of pestilence among the enemy may imply that Probus resorted to the use of bacteriological warfare, for example by introducing bacteria into the water or food sources.2] When Probus understood this, he thought it a proper time to attack the enemy. The soldiers of Florianus, attempting what exceeded their strength, fought some slight skirmishes before the city, but nothing being done worthy of notice, some of the troops of Probus deposed Florianus. [This means that the soldiers of Florianus were unable to break out from the siege.] Having performed this, he was kept in custody for some time, until his own soldiers said that it was the will of Probus that he should share his empire. Florianus therefore assumed the purple robe again, until the return of those who were sent to know the true resolution of Probus. On their arrival they caused Florianus to be killed by his own soldiers. [Zosimus 1.64.1–4, English tr. 1814, p.31–2 with some changes, emendations and additions by author.]
It is very likely that the letter of Probus to the praefectus praetorio Capito, which is included by Vopiscus, belongs to this place and it may quite well be accurate in its contents too. Vopiscus therefore gives us an important clue of how Probus managed to convince the soldiers of Florianus to change sides.
As I have never coveted the Empire so I have taken it upon my will. It is a most insidious thing and yet it is not free for me to help myself. I must act the part which the soldiers have imposed upon me. I beseech you Capito [otherwise unknown] to enjoy with me the state in safety and provide grain and provisions and necessities for the soldiers. [This implies that Probus had subjected the soldiers of Florianus to hunger by isolating them at the city of Tarsus and that he promised to provide supplies for the soldiers through Capito.] I for my part, if you take the care that all things are done well, shall be glad to have no other prefect than you [This implies that Probus promised to Capito that he would be allowed to keep his position if he betrayed Florianus.]. [Vopiscus, HA Prob. 10.6–7 tr. by Bernard, 284–5, with emendations, corrections and additions.]
I would therefore suggest that Probus, as the better commander, managed to isolate Florianus and his men in the city of Tarsus with the result that Florianus’s army was subdued through the combination of famine and pestilence. When the situation became intolerable Probus approached Capito through a letter and managed to convince him to switch sides with the promise of giving the soldiers provisions while Capito would be allowed to keep his office. On the basis of Zosimus this worked initially, but some of the men who had accepted Probus’s terms changed their minds once the supplies had been delivered to them, and in fact it is possible they had planned this all along by pretending to agree with Probus. This, however, proved impossible in the circumstances, so Florianus was killed by those of his men who rather sided with the winner Probus. Probus and Florianus ruled together for about 2 months and 20 days, which means that Probus was able to defeat his enemy with relative ease thanks to his far superior military skills.3
Now that Probus had managed to get rid off Florianus, the next stage consisted of obtaining the approval of the other armies and the Senate. It was because of this that Probus assumed a conciliatory tone at the very beginning of his reign towards the Senate and it is because of this that I find Vopiscus’s description of Probus’s conciliatory tone towards the Senate at the very beginning of his reign credible:
Fathers of the Senate, It was right that you gave the world the emperor last year and from your own ranks because you are and always will be the sovereigns of the world. I wish that Florianus had waited for the same again from you and that he had not claimed to himself the Empire as if it was his inheritance, … but he having seized it on his own hand, and the army having deferred it to us, and the wiser soldiers having punished him for usurping power, I refer myself fully to the command of your excellencies to judge whether I deserve to be the emperor [If this letter preserves the real contents of Probus’s message it was indeed conciliatory and absolved the Senate from the guilt of having nominated Florianus as emperor. This is by no means impossible.] [Vopiscus, HA Prob. 11.1ff. tr. by Bernard, 285, with emendations, corrections and additions.]
The Senate’s decrees confirming the Victor of the civil war as emperor were suitably humble and flattering if we are to believe Vopiscus, and there is no reason to think that it would not have been so even if it is uncertain whether the actual contents of the decrees and speeches of the Senate are accurate.
The consul Aelius Scorpianus said to them, ‘Conscript fathers, You have heard the letter of Aurelius Valerius Probus. What do you say about it?’ They cried: ‘The gods save the emperor Probus. You have been long a worthy, brave, just, and good commander and general… you are Francicus, Gothicus, Sarmaticus, Parthicus and you are all things [This list implies that Probus was present in most of the campaigns of Aurelian. As commander of the protectores it is not surprising that he would have been close to his emperor and friend Aurelian]. … Then Manlius Statianus, who was the eldest senator spoke thus: ‘Fathers of the Senate, Thanks to the immortal gods and above the rest to Jupiter the Best [Iovi Optimo]… we have no want now of either Aurelian, or Alexander Severus, or the Antonines, or Trajan, or Claudius. We have all things and all their virtues in this one princeps, the knowledge of war, clemency, good life, exemplary way of guiding the commonwealth, and assurance of every virtue. What part of the world is there to which he has not made known his victorious arms? Witness the Marmaridae defeated on African soil; witness the Franks, whom he overthrew in their impassable marshes; witness the Germans [presumably the Iuthungi] and Alamanni, whom he repulsed from the banks of the Rhine. What shall I say about the Sarmatians, Goths, Parthians and Persians, and Pontus? The trophies of Probus flourish everywhere. [The list of enemies defeated includes all those defeated under Aurelian plus the Marmaridae under Claudius and the victory in Pontus against the Goths under Tacitus. Probus was clearly present in most of the major actions.] It would be too long to tell how many kings of great nations has he put to flight, and how many commanders he killed with his own hand [This implies that Probus also challenged other enemy commanders besides the mention of Aradio in Africa on page 60. After the reign of Caracalla, there appears to have been quite a few commanders who challenged the enemy leaders to duels. Another example of this is the challenge to a duel presented by Gallienus to Postumus. For this, see my bio of Gallienus.]; and how many arms he captured without help as a commoner… Therefore, Fathers of the Senate, I decree to him the titles of Caesar and Augustus, and I add thereto the proconsular power, the reverential title of Father of Our Country, the chief pontificate, the right to make three proposals to the Senate, and the tribunician power.’ They cried, ‘We all, all say the same!’ [In other words, the Senate confirmed Probus as emperor, with the traditional powers.] [Vopiscus, HA Prob. 11.5–12.8. tr. by Bernard, 286–8, with emendations, corrections and additions.]
Vopiscus claims that Probus then sent as an answer to the Senate the following letter:
Probus having received this Act of the Senate sent a second letter to them by which he permitted them to be judges of appeals, to create proconsuls, and to create legates with proconsular powers [These have been claimed to confirm the power to nominate military commanders to the Senate, but the matter is more complicated than that.], to give the governors the rights of praetor [This merely confirmed the traditional rights of the governors to be judges], to confirm by Special Decree of the Senate the edicts made by himself. [Vopiscus, HA Prob. 11.5–12.8. tr. by Bernard, 286–8, with emendations, corrections and additions.]
Most modern historians consider the above-mentioned granting of proconsular powers to the Senate to mean the return of military commands back to the senators and therefore to be unhistorical just like the previous return of these powers by Tacitus (HA Tac. 19.2– 4). The reason for this is that there is, according to the majority view among historians, no definitely credible evidence for this, but as always this is a matter of opinion and not a fact.4 However, I would not preclude the possibility that this return did actually take place. There is evidence for senatorial military commands because Syria Coele had a senatorial proconsul whose name was Saturninus (the usurper), but on the basis of the sources it had been Probus who had nominated him.5 This is actually not surprising because it had always been the emperor who decided who would be in which position ever since the reign of the first emperor Augustus. There are three possible ways to reconcile the return of military commands and the current state of evidence for this. Firstly, it is possible that Probus did indeed initially confirm the decisions made by Tacitus so that he was able to ensure smooth succession to power and that he later removed this right from the Senate. Secondly, it is possible that Probus did indeed grant proconsular powers back to the Senate, but we cannot confirm this from the other sources because of some historical accident; even in this case the change would have been merely a cosmetic one because the Senate would not have dared to appoint anyone proconsul without the prior approval of the emperor. Thirdly, it is possible that military and civilian powers had already been divided so that proconsular power in this case actually meant only civilian powers while command of the armies was in the hands of the duces (dukes) and comites (counts) because this phenomenon was already visible under Gallienus. Whatever the truth, the extant evidence suggests that the senators did not receive back the right to military commands, at least in the case of individual units posted along the borders.
The evidence for the relationship between Probus and the Senate is scarce, but it is known that it was generally a good one because the heavily pro-senatorial sources are full of praise for Probus. We know that Probus’s reign meant a return to the days of Aurelian in most respects because his reign was military in nature. He favoured the army and used military themes in his propaganda coins and once again started to use the dominus et deus title previously used by Aurelian. The best explanation for the discrepancy is that Probus was wise enough to pay lip service to the Senate by involving it in his decisions somehow even if it was he who made the decisions in practice just like it had been from the reign of the first emperor Augustus onwards. None of the sources claim that Probus was particularly cruel towards anyone as Aurelian had been, with the implication that he presumably did not launch witch hunts to find traitors among the senators as Aurelian did. All sources basically praise him for his fairness. For example, Zosimus (1.71.4) calls him a good and just ruler. As noted by Kennedy (235–6), if there was one fault in Probus, it was his misplaced trust in his subordinates. In sum, it is clear that Probus was able to maintain a good working relationship with the Senate throughout his reign thanks to his wise treatment of the senators.6
Once securely in power, Probus’s next object was to get rid off the murderers of Aurelian. Zosimus gives us the best description of how this was achieved. It is once again a good example of the military skills of Probus, who knew how to lure his enemies into a trap:
Probus, having thus gained the empire, marched forward, and performed a very recommendable action for the public good, as a prelude to what he should afterwards do. For he resolved to punish those who had murdered Aurelianus, and conspired against Tacitus [This appears to hide the truth that Probus was himself the man who had murdered Tacitus and who had also been the overall commander of the men who had murdered Aurelian. The principal reason for this conclusion is that his elevation to power was clearly stage-managed with the implication that he was the man behind the plot]; though for fear of an insurrection he did not openly execute his design, but planned a company of men, in whom he had confidence, at a convenient post, near to which he invited the murderers to a feast. Coming there in expectation of being entertained at the emperor’s table, Probus ascended into a balcony from whence he could view the action, which he gave a signal to his men to perform. As soon as they received it, they fell on the murderers in their defenceless state, and left only one of them alive, whom he caused afterwards to be burnt alive, as a very dangerous criminal. [It seems probable that this man was a very high-ranking officer in the protectores and therefore one of the principal plotters. According to Zonaras 12.29, Probus rebuked the murderers first, and only then had them all killed. If this is true, then the murderers were simply apprehended first in the ambush and executed only after this.] [Zosimus 1.65.1–2, English tr. 1814, p.32 with some changes and additions by author.]
This is a good example of first rate generalship by Probus. It would have been foolish for him to have given his enemies any chance of resisting. The ‘Illyrian Military Mafia’ had now regained power in a manner befitting a mafia boss. This time they intended to retain it and not repeat the mistake of handing it over to the Senate again.
Some coins of Probus drawn by Beger (1696) and Cohen. Note the religious propaganda (Sol Invictus, Iovi Corn.), which shows continuity from the reign of Aurelian
