The Most Ruthless of All

kevin McGonigal · Nov 17, 2020

dougsmit said: ↑

Compared to some Parthians and Byzantines (Seleucids, medieval Popes???), Caracalla was a nice guy. He only killed one brother (plus an ex wife and a few hundred Alexandrians and who knows.....). I have never subscribed to the theory that I had to admire the people who made the coins I collect. For that matter, I listen to music, watch movies and follow sports without wanting to be like their creators or buying the products some of them endorse. Caracalla was a messed up kid who fit right in with his crowd. Do I pity a guy who gets killed while relieving himself behind a bush? Do I consider Justin Martialis a hero? No to both. Do I think it excessively convenient that the name of the soldier who stabbed Caracalla included Just and Mars? Yup. If I were writing historical fiction, I would have a scene where a bunch of guys drew lots to see who would save Rome by doing the deed. The Roman form of selecting leaders was not as upright as most of us expect today and I am glad we do things a bit differently in the time I live. It does, however make the study of history more interesting than what we would have if every one of them died in bed aged over 100.
Click to expand...

Actually the guys who made the coins, from imperial celators to the slaves wielding the mallet might have been decent human beings. Of course we associate the rulers on the coins with the coins themselves but I really wonder whether rulers took that much of an interest in the fabrication of their coinage. I can, in all good conscience collect ancient coins because doing so does not in anyway endorse the people on them. I collect a lot of things, mostly connected to the study of history, that I used in teaching history. There were areas and objects and subjects I stayed away from, mostly from more recent history, because I feared my students might think I admired them and supported their activities. I think I am OK with ancient material as no one is likely to support ravaging Gallia or promoting Mithraism or thanking Victoria for driving back the barbarians from the gates.

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Cheech9712 · Nov 17, 2020

kevin McGonigal said: ↑

One of the interests of students of ancient coins is to research and write about the images on them especially of that periods' most famous rulers. In doing so we often speak of that person's talents or predilections. Was Alexander the Great the world's greatest conqueror? Was Antoninus Pius the most humane Roman Emperor? Did the numismatic representations of Cleopatra show her to be a beautiful woman? That sort of thing. I would like to consider an unflattering appellation, at least as far as we think it would be, as to who of ancient rulers was the most ruthless of them from Xerxes to Constantine.

First a digression into what being ruthless means. Socrates always insisted that we define the term we are discussing. I would like to see us make a distinction between ruthless and cruel, admittedly a fine one. Following the dictionary definition of those two words, being ruthless seems to imply that one is willing to do whatever is necessary to accomplish a goal, including being merciless about doing it. However, there does not need be a sadistic infliction of pain and suffering to do it, while being cruel implies that the infliction of pain and suffering is the main goal. If so, we can argue that a ruler like Julius Caesar was ruthless in achieving his goals, including the killing of some one million Gauls, but there is no evidence that this Caesar liked, derived enjoyment from, taking lives as some emperors, like Caligula (kill him in a way that he knows he is dying) did with relish. The same with Augustus, who in his own way was a ruthless as his adoptive father, authorizing the death of an elderly Cicero or killing a youth, Caesarion (a multitude of Caesars is no good thing) or banishing his daughter to an island prison, almost for life. That is what we are talking about here, not necessarily enjoying the infliction of pain, but willing to do it. Again, since we cannot always (or ever) know the mind of another, this is, indeed, a fine distinction.

My candidate for the most ruthless of ancient rulers is Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, (188-217) better known from his acquired sobriquet, from his cloak, as Caracalla, a name he never used himself, just as Gaius Caesar did not like or use his nickname of Caligula. Now a few words about what we know of Caracalla. The sources are the two historians Herodian and Dio Cassius who lived close in time to Caracalla and the later Historia Augusta. As ancient historians go, Dio and Herodian are pretty good, whereas the author(s) of the Historia Augusta, well, not so much. Putting all three together does not offer a flattering picture of the emperor. The plain facts of which no one is in doubt are his parents, the emperor Septimius Severus and his mother, the empress Julia Domna and his little brother, Geta, of whom more in a bit. His father associated Caracalla in his reign early to give the youngster a taste of ruling and tried doing the same for the younger Geta. The rivalry of the two siblings was worthy of an afternoon TV show featuring relationship mayhem exacerbated by a host and audience out for blood. Having those two together was like having Michael the Archangel and Lucifer sharing lunch. One could exhaust a thesaurus trying to find a word that would describe the vehemence of their fraternal hatred for each other. That their father was hoping to have the two share the imperial throne after his death (which Caracalla may have attempted to hasten) would turn out to be a Sisyphusean labor, which brings us to the ruthless part.

Most readers here probably already know that after the death of Septimius in York, the two brothers travelled back to Rome, as far apart as two travelers on the same road could be, divided the imperial palace into two separate living quarters and generally steered clear of each other, that is until Caracalla lured Geta into a conference with their mother, Julia, and used the meeting to stab Geta to death in his mother's arms. Now killing one's brothers to get the throne is not all that ruthless, or uncommon in earlier times, and hardly limited to the Roman Empire, but what followed next was. Determined to excise the very memory of Geta from the historical record, Caracalla not only smashed his statutes and defaced his portraits but murdered every person who had had anything to do with his brother. Some 20,000, from palace officials to place servants were eliminated to make sure no one would ever speak his name again. That kid of damnatio memoriae was as ruthless as one can get. Now, many readers here can undoubtedly find other incidences of Caracalla behaving badly but i will mention one more which usually does not get mentioned much. Caracalla had some kind of fetish for Alexander the Great, including having some Roman soldiers trained and equipped to duplicate the Macedonian phalanx. As part of worship of Alexander Caracalla decided to travel to, not surprisingly, Alexandria where upon his arrival he was welcomed by the populace (smart move). The populace of Alexandria was known for being boisterous and irreverent (bad move). It seems that Caracalla was of a short stature and his hero Alexander the Great was not. Apparently the crowd having noticed this, made mention of it and the ensuing banter became a lot more than that. Caracalla called in the troops and turned them loose on the city. The death toll and damage was enormous. Ruthless in spades.

Now I will leave to to others to find and post more matters from the reign of Caracalla or to tell us who else belongs up there among the more ruthless of rulers. Below are some coins associated with the emperor and his family.

From the left, a sestertius of Septimius Severus, Caracalla's father RIC 692a and a sesterius of Julia Domna, his mother, RIC 859 and an as of our bete noir, Caracalla RICIV 519, himself. On the bottom from the left, a Syrian tetradrachma from the mint of Sidon with a very unpleasant but apropos visage, Sear Greek Imperial 2679, one of the first of the new antoninian double denarii of about 50% silver alloy and 5.1 grams, Sear 6805, a silver denarius of his brother, Geta, sear 1913, and lastly a denarius of caracalla, Sear 6805. Hope you like the post and have something to add.

View attachment 1204079 View attachment 1204080
Click to expand...

A little to detailed for me this late. You lost me at your pick. Will try latter. Thanks

kevin McGonigal · Nov 18, 2020

Cheech9712 said: ↑

A little to detailed for me this late. You lost me at your pick. Will try latter. Thanks
Click to expand...

I'll look forward to reading your pick. It's certainly possible to find equally ruthless leaders from history.

Tony1982 · Nov 19, 2020

My favourite portrait of Caracalla

kevin McGonigal · Nov 19, 2020

Tony1982 said: ↑

My favourite portrait of Caracalla
View attachment 1205504
Click to expand...

That is one of the nicest strikes of this emperor I have ever seen. I am guessing the first N of his name is not wear but a filled die.

Log in or Sign up

The Most Ruthless of All

kevin McGonigal Well-Known Member

Guest User Guest

Cheech9712 Every thing is a guess

kevin McGonigal Well-Known Member

Tony1982 Well-Known Member

kevin McGonigal Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

The Most Ruthless of All

kevin McGonigal Well-Known Member

Guest User Guest

Cheech9712 Every thing is a guess

kevin McGonigal Well-Known Member

Tony1982 Well-Known Member

kevin McGonigal Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches