Top Tens – History (Rome): Top 10 Worst Roman Emperors (Dishonorable Mention) (2) Priscus Attalus

Dovahhatty – Unbiased History of Rome XVIII: Barbarians at the Gates

 

(2) PRISCUS ATTALUS –
USURPER: THEODOSIAN DYNASTY (ITALY & GAUL)
(409-410 AD & 414-415 AD)

 

You know – this one surprised me in ranking him as my worst usurper and second worst dishonorable mention.

After all, he usurped the Theodosian dynasty and its worst emperor Honorius at that, so you’d think I’d be all on board for him but I just can’t forgive him the circumstances. Foremost among them being that it wasn’t really him doing the usurping – he was a Senator acclaimed as emperor by the Visigothic leader Alaric just prior to sacking Rome as a puppet against Honorius, the first western emperor to be raised to that office by a barbarian and precursor of the last western Roman emperors to come.

And as easily deposed and stripped of his imperial regalia by Alaric as the latter alternated between beseiging Rome and seeking to achieve his aims through negotiations with Honorius instead.

Or rather, I might have been able to forgive him, given that Attalus did show some signs of trying to be more than a mere puppet, if it hadn’t happened twice – and he’d had the good sense to know when to call it quits, as he was again acclaimed as emperor in Gaul by Alaric’s successor Atalphaus, only to again be deserted by his Visigoth patrons. This time, he didn’t get off so easy, as he was captured by Honorius’ men and exiled to an unknown fate, although it might have been more pleasant than he deserved since he was exiled to the Aeolian Islands.

 

DID DOVAHHATTY DO RIGHT?

 

He only appears briefly but Dovahhatty indeed does him right, as one of the more pathetic wojaks.

 

RATING: 1 STAR*
X-TIER (WILD TIER)

Top Tens – History (Rome): Top 10 Worst Roman Emperors (Dishonorable Mention) (1) Silbannacus

 

(1) SILBANNACUS –
NON-DYNASTIC / CRISIS OF THE THIRD CENTURY

 

A mystery numismatic imperial claimant too obscure even for Dovahhatty – if he had done anything worthwhile, someone would have written something about him, amirite? As it is, we only know about him from two coins.

Once again I refer to Adrian Goldsworthy’s observation that our list of imperial claimants is likely never to be complete or exhaustive, given the paucity of the contemporary historical record and that we are still finding ‘imperial’ coins minted in the name of new or unknown claimants. So it is literally possible for a new emperor to ‘drop’ even today from coins found in his name.

Well, Silbannacus is one such imperial claimant, about whom almost nothing is known as he doesn’t appear in any literary historical sources. It may seem a little unfair to rank him as dishonorable mention and as the lowest of them to boot, but two coins will only get you so far.

Curiously, Silbannacus makes the Wikipedia list of emperors, albeit as being of “ambiguous legitimacy – hence my dishonorable mention for him, which he earns from those two coins in his name found in the twentieth century.

“Based on the design of the coin and its silver content, Silbannacus was most likely concurrent with the reigns of Philip the Arab (r.244–249), Decius (r.249–251), Trebonianus Gallus (r.251–253), Aemilian (r.253), or Valerian (r.253–260). The two most prevalent ideas are the older hypothesis, that Silbannacus was a usurper in Gaul during the reign of Philip the Arab, at some point between 248 and 250, and the newer hypothesis, based on the design of the second coin, that Silbannacus was a briefly reigning legitimate emperor, holding Rome between the death of Aemilian and the arrival of Valerian.”

Shout-out to Sponsian while we’re taking numismatic mystery emperors – too obscure even to make the Wikipedia list of emperors or anything more than this footnote in my dishonorable mentions, although he does have a Wikipedia entry as a possible usurper in the Crisis of the Third Century, apparently from a few coins in his name in a hoard of coins found in Transylvania in the eighteenth century but only verified as authentic in 2022. There seem to be two leading theories for him. The first is that he was a usurper during the reign of Gordian III or Philip the Arab, based on the other coins found with his coins. The other theory is that he was a military commander who proclaimed himself emperor when Dacia was cut off from the rest of the empire around 260 AD.

 

DID DOVAHHATTY DO RIGHT?

 

Not really – Dovahhatty doesn’t even do him at all!

 

RATING: 1 STAR*
X-TIER (WILD TIER)