by
Caesar Gaius Messius Quintus Decius Valerinus –
the Senate recognized
him as emperor, giving him the attribute Traianus
in reference to Emperor Trajan.
Plenty of names here for consideration, Traianus
being particularly interesting.
Trajan Decius is thought to have reigned in
c. 250 AD, about 130 years after the death of the emperor Marcus Ulpius
Traianaus (Trajan) (d. 117 AD). However, since the conventional dating for the
better-known (though still poorly known) Trajan is some 3 centuries out, it becomes
almost inevitable that his namesake, Trajan Decius – who is even more poorly
known (see below) – has been wrongly estimated.
Let us boil down all of this, as I did in my
article:
Filling out Caesar Augustus - and some
who emulated him
(3)
Filling out Caesar Augustus - and some who emulated him
even re-using the same Introduction.
Introduction
Was history merely rhyming, in the case of the
emperor Domitian’s supposed emulation of (the presumably earlier) Augustus, or
was it, rather, repeating?
Caesar Augustus (cf. Luke 2:1) must have been a
highly significant figure in ancient history to have attracted so many who are
considered to have been his emulators - or those characters who have been
dubbed ‘a New Augustus’.
But he, despite his importance, is quite poorly
understood – at least according to my reconstructions of him. For one, Caesar
Augustus was a Seleucid Greek, not a Roman. He was that tyrannical tormentor of
the Maccabees, king Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’, rather than that moderate and
respectable Roman ruler of text book representation.
He was one aspiring to be divine (‘Epiphanes’ means God
Manifest), but considered by his enemies, instead, to have been a Mad Man
(‘Epimanes’).
The Maccabeans labelled him a “butcher”, an “unholy
wretch”, and the “most defiled of all men” (cf. 2 Maccabees 7:29, 34).
And he was the Grecophile (because he was a Greek)
homosexual, Hadrian:
A Jewish tradition has Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’
as Emperor Hadrian
(4) A Jewish
tradition has Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ as Emperor Hadrian
As Hadrian, he was also the prophet Ezekiel’s ill-fated King of Tyre:
Putting
a face to Ezekiel’s Fallen King of Tyre
(6) Putting a face
to Ezekiel's Fallen King of Tyre
Hadrian, in fact, called Tyre a Metropolis,
“Great City”, Mother of other cities.
Now, the
emperor Hadrian is one of those many who are regarded as having been an
emulator of Augustus, and even:
[Hadrian]
a reincarnation of Augustus
(3) Hadrian a
reincarnation of Augustus
Assuredly, Hadrian was an Augustus redivivus!
But what about Nero?
While the insane,
God-aspiring Nero Caesar Augustus can be likened to both identities of Caesar Augustus
(above), Hadrian and Augustus, he even having been described as ‘a New Augustus’,
I cannot, however, conclude that Nero was yet another alter ego of
Augustus – even if we put aside the highly sanitised version of the latter, as
he is so often presented, and focus on the tyrannical madman version as can be
found in Antiochus ‘Mad Man’, and Hadrian in his excesses.
Chronologically, and for other reasons, I do not believe
that Nero can be compressed into a Caesar Augustus, but that Nero was ‘a new
Augustus’ as his emulator.
Let us pause here for a moment to get our heads around the
radical new version of Greco-Roman imperial history that I have so far
proposed.
Conclusion 1.
All of Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’, Augustus, and Hadrian, need to
be wrapped up into the one parcel, as just the one Census emperor at the time
of the Nativity of Jesus Christ:
Time
to consider Hadrian, that ‘mirror-image’ of Antiochus Epiphanes, as also the
census emperor Augustus
More names to be added
… we need
also to add, radiating out from our base above, the Census emperor Diocletian,
who may serve to reinforce the Luke 2 narrative.
Prior to my
connecting of Diocletian with any census, though, I had found that some
scholars were comparing him with Augustus, but especially with the latter’s alter ego (my view), Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’. I wrote of this in my article:
Diocletian repeating Augustus?
(6) Diocletian repeating Augustus?
….
Christian History for Everyman
The career of Gaius Aurelius Valerius
Diocletianus (formerly Diocles) (c. 300 AD, conventional dating),
follows a pattern remarkably similar to that of the Seleucid tyrant king,
Antiochus IV ‘Epiphanes’.
….
This pattern can partly be perceived from the
following comparison of Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ and Diocletian, as provided at:
https://housetohouse.com/the-indestructible-word-2/
…. When Antiochus Epiphanes became ruler in Syria
in 175 b.c. [sic] he destroyed the Jewish temple, sold the people of Jerusalem
into slavery, and sought to do away with their sacred writings, forcing Greek
culture upon the Jews. This was all done in an effort to substitute Zeus
worship for the worship of God. Frank E. Hirsch in, “Abomination of
Desolation,” wrote, “The observance of all Jewish laws, especially those
relating to the sabbath and to circumcision, were forbidden under pain of
death. The Jewish cult was set aside; in all the cities of Judaea, sacrifices
must be brought to the pagan deities. Representatives of the crown everywhere
enforced the edict. Once a month the search was instituted, and whoever had
secreted a copy of the law or had observed the rite of circumcision was
condemned to death.”
…. Regarding the ‘Great Persecution’ of Diocletian
– most reminiscent of that of king Antiochus – we read at:
https://www.christian-history.org/diocletian.html
Diocletian and the Great Persecution
Damien Mackey’s comment: This was rather, so I
think, the Seleucid Greek persecution of the Jews.
…. The Great Persecution,
from A.D. 303 to 311 [sic], was a time of sudden transition and massive change
in the history of Christianity. It's the change and what caused it that we want
to focus on.
….
The Push: Diocletian Persecutes the Church
Though it's popular to believe that Christians
were always being persecuted in the Roman empire, it's not true.
Empire-wide persecutions were rare, and the Great
Persecution under Diocletian was the only one of any great length, lasting
eight years.
The "Great" Persecution?
…. It was intense. Diocletian's goal was to wipe
out the Church. He hunted down Christians and their Scriptures. He especially
loved to get hold of church leaders.
He was trying to turn them back to paganism, to
the old Roman religion with the emperor as a God. Therefore, anyone he caught
and tried could be released by offering a sacrifice to the gods or to the
emperor.
They could also gain great favor by turning over
copies of the Scriptures to be burned.
In addition, Diocletian destroyed their church
buildings. This was something that couldn't be done earlier, as Christians
rarely had devoted meeting places in the 2nd century. It was too easy to see
them destroyed or taken over.
While empire-wide persecutions were rare, local
persecutions at the whim of a governer or prelate were not.
It was a horrible, difficult time for Christians
(at least for the leaders). Many Christians fell away, and many others were
tortured, thrown in a dungeon, or put to death.
….
Professor Gunnar Heinsohn, for his part, considered Diocletian to have
ruled at the very time of Augustus, as noted in the above article:
“This
transformation from a more central to a more decentralized administration did
not take place 300 years after these massive internal conflicts, but
during the time that Augustus was still emperor. Diocletian
did not organize decentralization to weaken Rome, but to protect the
capital. Diocletian was not an imitator of Augustus's reforms. He was directly
responsible for their implementation”.
Gunnar
Heinsohn
By now I was thinking that, if Diocletian - yet another presumed
emulator of Augustus - was an actual contemporary, or even more, of Augustus,
then there ought to be evidence of a universal Census during Diocletian’s
reign.
And so I commenced my article:
Census of emperor Diocletian
(6) Census of emperor Diocletian
with this comment:
If Diocletian, a mirror-image of the emperor
Augustus, was, in fact, said Augustus - whom I had already identified with the
Seleucid tyrant, Antiochus IV ‘Epiphanes’, and with the emperor, Hadrian - then
it would be reasonable to expect a significant census of the kingdom to have
been issued by Diocletian (cf. Luke 2:1).
And my readers were not to
be disappointed.
In part, I wrote:
…. So, as that thought about emperor Diocletian
likely issuing a census came to me today (30th June, 2026), I
checked the Internet, and immediately found this truncated piece (my emphasis):
“The systematic assessment and registration of
people and property by the Roman state. *Diocletian reformed the institution to
provide the basis for his new tax regime, with a new Empire-wide census probably
completed by 296. ...”.
“… a new Empire-wide census …”.
Cf. Luke 2:1: “… a census should be
taken of the whole empire”.
Zvi Uri Ma‘oz tells of more than one census from the emperor
Diocletian, and in reference to the governor of Syria (cf. Luke
2:2):
….
Apart from
Diocletian, the other names that I have added to the ever-growing list of alter
egos for Augustus are Caligula and Trajan, who apparently
stands in need of some historical and architectural complementation:
Where
has Trajan’s Forum gone?
(6) Where has
Trajan’s Forum gone?
Trajan I have duly
identified with his presumed successor, Hadrian:
Hadrianus
Traianus Caesar – Trajan transmutes to Hadrian
(6) Hadrianus
Traianus Caesar – Trajan transmutes to Hadrian
Caligula
Caligula
was, like Antiochus, quite insane, extremely self-indulgent, and desirous of
being worshipped.
He best connects
with Caesar Augustus, as does Diocletian, via comparison with the alter ego
of Antiochus:
Caligula
and Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’
(10) Caligula and
Antiochus 'Epiphanes'
“What, therefore, do Caligula and Antiochus Epiphanes have in common,
as their reigns pertain to the Jews? Both reigned during a time when the
Jews
were abandoning their God and breaking covenant with him on a national
scale. The one ruler officially desecrated
the Temple, while the other planned to do so. Both rulers were involved in the emperor cult that required
worship from those they ruled”.
Edward L. Bromfield
“Despite the debate over the precise details of their reigns,
there’s no denying
that Caligula and Nero
left an indelible mark on Roman history and
popular imagination. Their
names have become synonymous with
the worst excesses of
power and the corrupting influence of absolute rule”.
History Tools
One area in which
Caligula intertwines with Augustus is with his honouring of the man (official)
who was a virtual second emperor to Augustus, Marcus Agrippa.
Caligula
exalts Marcus Agrippa
(10) Caligula
exalts Marcus Agrippa
“Another
reason that Caligula produced coins depicting Agrippa
was
that it connected him to Augustus because, as mentioned above,
Agrippa
was one of Augustus’ closest friends”.
Was Agrippa, in fact, ‘one
of Caligula’s closest friends’?
‘Caligula’ (nickname)
bore the very name of Augustus: Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus.
A note: By way of further
confirmation of the legitimacy of my multi-identifying Caesar Augustus - whose
well-known ‘second’, or signet man, was Marcus Agrippa - is that his alter
egos generally had prominent seconds.
I broadly
discussed this fascinating situation in my article:
Herod,
the emperor’s signet right-hand man
(10) Herod, the
emperor's signet right-hand man
For instance, the right-hand man in the case of Antiochus
‘Epiphanes’ was Philip the Phrygian (2 Maccabees 5:22): “He appointed governors
to cause trouble for the people. In Jerusalem he placed Philip, a man from
Phrygia who was more evil than Antiochus himself”.
I Maccabees 6:14-15:
“Then he summoned Philip, one of his Friends, and put him in charge of his
whole kingdom. He gave him his diadem, his robe, and his
signet ring …”.
This Philip became the King of Jerusalem, Herod ‘the Great’
Agrippa/Marcus Agrippa, who was second to Augustus.
The same situation ought to apply as well to Caligula,
exalting Marcus Agrippa.
In the case of Hadrian, the second (I am presuming) was,
again a Herod, the less well-known Herodes Atticus (a name that also connects
with Marcus Agrippa via his wife).
In the case of Diocletian, Maximian may have been that
right-hand man: “Soon after securing sole control, Diocletian named Maximian as
Caesar and, a year later, promoted him to Augustus”.
How
Emperor Diocletian prevented Ancient Rome from imploding - History Skills
And so on.
Conclusion 2.
Potentially to be added
to:
Augustus
Caesar of Luke 2:1 = Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ = Hadrian
are:
Caligula
= Trajan = Diocletian
Phew!
What can we make of all of
this?
Sources for Decius are ‘fragmentary,
late and unreliable’
As we are
going to learn, we have precious little solid information about Trajan Decius.
With regard
to our composite Augustus above (our composite Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’, the great
persecutor of the Jews), and Caligula, we have in Trajan Decius the same
combination ‘Gaius Caesar’.
That
applies, again, to Diocletian: Caesar Gaius Aurelius
Valerius Diocletianus.
With regard
to our composite Trajan/Hadrian above, we have in Trajan Decius the name Trajan
(Traianus), and the common persecution factor.
With regard
to Diocletian above, we have the similar name of Valerinus (for Decius) and
Valerius (for Diocletian), and the Great Persecution factor in common.
Dr. Ilkka
Syvänne introduces the sources for Trajan Decius as follows (2011):
The
Reign of Decius
“Just like with most of
the third century emperors the sources for the reign of Decius are fragmentary,
late and often unreliable.
In fact, the best of our
sources from the point of view of military methods date from the sixth century.
These are the works of Jordanes (Getica), Zosimus (New History), and Maurice
(Strategikon) …. Jordanes’ Getica can be shown to be very unreliable or utterly
false in places …”.
Although
there is evidence for the existence of a Trajan Decius, he – as a C3rd AD
character – is a fictitious composite based upon Caesar Augustus –
Trajan/Hadrian. According to my reconstruction of ancient history above, the
Great Persecution undertaken by Decius and his composite manifestations would
have been aimed at the Jews, rather than the Christians.
It was the
deadly persecution of the Seleucid king Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’.
Although,
with my collapsing of the time of king Antiochus into the period of the
Nativity of Jesus Christ, those who had witnessed the Child Jesus would have
lived - and perhaps died - under the Great Persecution of the tyrant
‘Epiphanes’:
Hadrianic
patterns of martyrdom
(3) Hadrianic
patterns of martyrdom
Once we have crystallised Trajan Decius as a Trajanic
persecutor of the Jews at the time of the Maccabees, then the details that we
have of his persecution fit very well with that of Antiochus and his henchman,
literally standing over the citizens to force them to honour the pagan gods:
“In the chaotic mid-third century, a period collectors often
refer to as the “Barracks Emperor” era, the accession of Gaius Messius Quintus
Decius felt like a stern, metallic echo from a more disciplined past”.
Damien Mackey’s comment:
It was, in fact, that “past”.
“When you hold an antoninianus of this emperor, who ruled
from 249 to 251 AD, the first thing you notice is the name he chose for his
coinage: TRAIANVS DECIVS.
By adopting the name of the great Trajan, he wasn’t just
claiming a title, he was issuing a manifesto”.
Damien Mackey’s comment:
No, he wasn’t. He was that same Trajan.
“He … believed that the only way to save a crumbling Rome
was to return to the rugged, traditional virtues that had once made her the
master of the world.
The General Who Didn’t Want a Crown
Decius’s rise to power was a classic tragedy of the Third
Century. A respected senator and a battle-hardened military commander, he was
the trusted right hand of Philip the Arab. When the Danubian legions revolted
in 249 AD, Philip sent Decius to restore order, believing his loyalty was
beyond reproach. However, the soldiers, weary of Philip’s perceived weakness
and “foreign” eastern influence, saw in Decius a true Roman of the old school.
They proclaimed him emperor against his will. In a bitter twist of fate, Decius
was forced to lead these very legions against his friend and benefactor at the
Battle of Verona. Philip fell, and the Senate, perhaps sensing a return to
order, welcomed Decius with open arms and the honorific of a new Trajan.
The Libellus: A Mandate for Ancient
Piety
Decius viewed the internal decay of Rome as a spiritual
crisis. He believed the Roman gods had turned their backs on the Empire because
the citizens had turned their backs on the old rites. In 250 AD, he issued an
unprecedented imperial edict: every citizen in the Empire was required to
perform a public sacrifice to the gods and the genius of the Emperor”.
Damien Mackey’s comment:
This is the very same stern edict about which we read in I Maccabees
1:41-53:
Then the king
wrote to his whole kingdom that all should be one people and that all
should give up their particular customs. All the nations accepted the command
of the king. Many even from Israel gladly adopted his religion; they
sacrificed to idols and profaned the Sabbath. And the king sent letters by
messengers to Jerusalem and the towns of Judah; he directed them to follow
customs strange to the land, to forbid burnt offerings and sacrifices and
drink offerings in the sanctuary, to profane Sabbaths and festivals, to
defile the sanctuary and the holy ones, to build altars and sacred
precincts and shrines for idols, to sacrifice pigs and other unclean
animals, and to leave their sons uncircumcised. They were to make
themselves abominable by everything unclean and profane so that they would
forget the Law and change all the ordinances. He added, ‘And whoever
does not obey the command of the king shall die’.
In such words he
wrote to his whole kingdom. He appointed inspectors over all the people and
commanded the towns of Judah to offer sacrifice, town by town. Many of the
people, everyone who forsook the Law, joined them, and they did evil in the
land; they drove Israel into hiding in every place of refuge they had.
“Upon completion, they were issued a libellus, a
small papyrus certificate of compliance. For the growing Christian community,
this was a death warrant.
Unlike previous local persecutions, this was the first
systematic, empire-wide effort to enforce traditional paganism. High-profile
martyrs like Pope Fabian fell during this time, while others fled or
apostatized. From a numismatic perspective, the coins of this period are a
visual litany of “The Great Restoration,” featuring the personifications of the
Roman provinces and the gods of the Pantheon, all standing as a bulwark against
“foreign” superstitions”.
No comments:
Post a Comment