Carausius carved an empire from within an empire
(As originally published in "The Celator" Vol 10, NO 2, Feb., 1996)
Arthur E. Noot
M. Aurelius Mausaeus Carausius is clearly one of the most remarkable personalities in early British history. There is persuasive evidence that he was a citizen of Menapia, a city in what is now Holland, located between the Rhine and the Scheidt. Although Menapiae civis, he may have indeed have been of British birth since this city also settled its citizens at various points on the British and Irish coasts.
Before focusing upon the time when Maximianus, the colleague ofdiocletian, appointed Carausius admiral of the Roman fleet at Boulogne (Bononia)- and probably Dover, among one or two other sites-it is useful to briefly remind ourselves of the beginnings of Roman supremacy in Britain. Gilbert Askew observed that one of the best-remembered dates in British history is 55 B.C., the year in which C. Julius Caesar first landed in England. He suggests that the reason for the invasion was primarily military, since Britain was believed to be giving aid to the rebellious Gauls. We know that there was a strong racial link Between the Belgic tribes of Northern Gaul and the Belgic conquerors of Southern Britain. After two brief invasions, Caesar withdrew to Gaul with hostages from the British tribes and the promise of tribute. Following Askew’s argument, it was probably hoped that these "punishments" would reduce British support of rebels in Gaul.
Augustus, Tiberius, and Caligula made no serious attempt to expand the empire into Britain and it was not until Claudius that four legions-the II Augusta, IX Hispana, XIV Gemina, and the XX Valeria Victrix-and their auxiliaries were committed to the conquest of the island in A.D. 43. The emperor himself followed the successful expedition, which was ably led by his general Aulus Plautius. By about A.D. 47, Rome controlled all the country to the south of the Fosse Way, the great road running from Axminster to Lincoln, along which a chain of forts was planted. The history of the Roman conquest, its many successes, failures and disasters from that time to the time of Diocletian are well told elsewhere and new archaeological discoveries and interpretations are continually updating our understandings. Interestingly, the province of Britannia is stated to have received more notice on Imperial coins and on the coins of her usurper emperors than any of the other provinces.
The political disturbances of the third century evidently did not have a significant direct impact upon Britain. However, by the early A.D. 280’s the North Sea and the Channel increasingly became infested with Saxon and Frankish pirates. In response, the Classis Britannica was strengthened to deal with this growing menace and an aggressive admiral was sought.
The Romans had maintained a fleet in the Channel from the first century A.D. onwards and by all accounts, there was now only one candidate with the reputation, experience, ability, and tenacity to lead the Roman fleet: Carausius, a general of Maximianus. His bravery as a soldier, his skill as a pilot, and his mastery of nearly every thing nautical made him a logical first choice. Most sources appear to agree that Carausius was moreover a born leader, a plain, personable man, well able to secure the loyalty and even affection of his people.
There continue to be some fairly strong differences of opinion about what actually took place during the period of Carausius’ "take-over" of Britain. Few contemporary sources describe the details of Carausius’ landing in Britain and his subsequent operations, apart from some Roman Imperial references which bear strong traces of bias. A good deal of basic information comes to us in the works of two Scottish chroniclers, John of Frodun and Hector Boethius, who wrote in about the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, respectively. These and other elements of Carausian history are dealt with at length in Percy H. Webb’s article in The Numismatic Chronicle, cited in the bibliography. Therefore, I’ve elected to adopt the point of view that to me seems most logical, given human nature, our present understanding of the times, and the evident postures historically taken by the Roman Imperial government during critical periods.
After his appointment by Maximianus, Carausius displayed zeal and enthusiasm in discharging the duties of his appointed service. But later, his equivocal movements and increasing wealth gave rise to strong suspicions that he was personally acquiring the plundered wealth of the pirates rather than restoring it to the rightful owners (and/or sharing it with the Imperial government!). Always sensitive to suspicious activities of successful and popular appointed leaders outside of Rome, Maximianus ordered that he be arrested.
Carausius very likely took this to mean a death sentence. He immediately took his fleet and fighting men to Britain and was well received by Roman troops there. After some negotiations-again demonstrating his extraordinary ability to work with differing peoples-the Picts and the Scots agreed to help him overthrow Roman rule. It is possible and even likely that he was perceived more as a British citizen than a Roman. He quickly moved south, confronting Roman troops of governor Quintus Bassianus near York. He defeated them, largely because the substantial British contingent attached to Bassianus’ army refused to take part in the struggle. Carausius then marched on London, declaring himself emperor there in A.D. 287, the master of Northern Gaul and Britain.
Always the practical leader, Carausius anticipated a strong Imperial reaction, and so rapidly initiated construction of numerous galleys, cemented strong alliances with various British tribes, and proceeded to train local inhabitants to be effective and patriotic sailor/warriors.
In A.D. 288/89 Maximianus brought together an Imperial fleet to dispute mastery of the Channel and to attempt the invasion and recovery of the rebel island. We have no certain understanding of the details, but it is clear that the seamanship and skill of Carausius’ men caused the defeat of Maximianus, resulting in "The Peace of A.D. 289". Diocletian and Maximianus concluded that it was in their best interests to acknowledge Carausius as their colleague in Britain-for the time being.
The concept of Britain "ruling the waves" as a first line of defense began here, I think, and was further developed much later as the road to world-wide conquest and empire. During this year, coinage was also introduced by Carausius bearing reverse legends PAX AVGGG, VIRTVS AVGGG, etc., the triple "G" implying the unity of the three Augusti: Diocletian, Maximianus, and Carausius. He also issued an extensive series for each of the emperors, with the appropriate portraits.
He did not rest. As several historians note, Carausius proceeded to perform many acts at home and abroad which provide evidence of his ability to rule effectively. He defended the frontiers of his empire from the Caledonians, courted and made alliances with the Franks, and rewarded them for their services by instructing them in naval and military affairs. As far as we know, his ships had nearly absolute control of the Channel and the northern seas, successfully ravaging coastal shipping and cities unfriendly to his reign. His name became as well known as the Emperors in Rome.
In about AD 292/3, Diocletian and Maximianus were joined by two new Caesars, Constantius Chlorus and Galerius. This strengthened the vast Empire’s ability to respond to local problems, disputes and rebellions. Maximianus guarded the Rhine and Constantius took command of the legions now openly appointed for a British war. Constantius quickly besieged Boulogne, eventually capturing the city with all of its naval stores. Great preparations were then made for a full scale invasion of Britain.
Shortly after the fall of Boulogne, Carausius was assassinated by his friend and Prime Minister, Allectus, or as another has written: "...the gallant emperor, who had during seven years with the greatest bravery maintained and kept for himself Britain was treacherously murdered by, or with the connivance of, his minister Allectus..." Constantius Chlorus prepared his fleet, dividing it into two squadrons. He commanded one personally. The second was commanded by his prefect Asclepiodotus. Upon landing in Britain, they rapidly marched against the army of Allectus. Constantius was the victor, and Allectus was killed during the battle. The supremacy of Imperial Rome in Britain was reestablished after a period of about ten years.
Sutherland notes that Carausius issued abundant coinage, much of it from London (ML) and C (amulodunum?, Colchester), some also from RSR(Richborough?) and across the Chanel, a very little from BRI (conium?, = Viriconium, Wroxeter), and a great mass that bore no mint mark. Much of this coinage was rough but interesting because of its range, its adherence to the norms of the coinage of Diocletian (example: XXI at first on many antoniniani), its inclusion of some (light standard) gold and its anticipation of Diocletian’s later 11 r e f o r m e d "argenteus. The collector must appreciate most of all the diversity of types: a comprehensive legionary series, some with fine "Adventus" types, the famous "Expectate Veni" (with Britannia welcoming Carasuius), the Wolf and Twins with "Romano (rum) Renov(atio)", his facing portrait modeled on that of Postumus, the triple portrait of Carausius with his ‘collegues’ Diocletian & Maximianus, the obverses impudently struck in the names of Diocletian and Maximianus alone - and many more.
It should be noted that C. E. King suggests that Carausius’ silver was issued early in his reign and virtually all of it minted at London. The existence of die-links between coins marked RSR and the unmarked pieces led Norman Shiel to conclude that not only were they produced at the same mint but that the unmarked pieces immediately preceded the RSR group. There are a few known coins with the ML mark, one with a doubtful Mintmark and an early portrait and the other from the same dies as a gold piece with a late portrait ... which may be suspect. There are also very few coins mintmarked C either in the field or the exergue of the coin which seem to have been produced at a second mint traditionally thought to be Colchester.
In 294, Diocletian & his partners carried out a reform of the coinage more radical than any before attempted. Aurei continued at 60 to the pound – being accompanied by larger or smaller multiples. The argentei introduced by Carausius were officially adopted - silver coins at a weight of 3 g. or just over, actually a revival of the old Neronian denarius. These were supported by the large copper coins, now known as folles, which contained a small percentage of silver and weighed about 10 g. Smaller pieces were also produced. Ironically, the Britain of Carausius, whatever his motivations, foreshadowed what was to come in the eventual collapse of the Western Roman Empire.
<>
Books for Further Study
Askew, Gilbert. The Coinage of Roman Britain 2ndEdition. SeabyPublications, Ltd. 1980.
Casey, P.J. Carausius and Allectus: The British Usurpers, Yale, 1995.
Grant, Michael. The World of Rome. New American Library, Inc. 1960.
Grant, Michael. The Visible Past. Charles Scribner’s & Sons, NY. 1990.
King, C. E. Roman Silver Coins Vol.V, Carausius to Romulus Augustus. Seaby Publications, London. 1987.
Marcham, Frederick George. A History of England. The Macmillan Cornpany.1937.
Millar, Fergus. The Emperor in the Roman World. University of London, Cornell University Press, NY. 1977.
Seaby Productions. Coins of England and the United Kingdom 29th Edition. London. 1994.
Sear, David. Roman Coins and Their Values. Seaby Publications, Ltd., London. 1988.
Stevenson, S. W. Dictionary of Roman Coins, Republican and Imperial. B.A. Seaby, Ltd., London 1964.
Sutherland, C. H. V. Roman Coins. Ashmolean Museum, Oxford. Putnam’s Sons, NY. 1974.
Webb, Percy H. "Reign and Coinage of Carausius", Numismatic Chronicle, 4th series, Vol. VII. 1907. Issued as a separate work by Spink & Son, Ltd. 1908.