by Ian Hughes
The reasons for Boniface’s appointment as the companion to Castinus in 422 are unknown. However, later in his career he was firmly loyal to Placidia, and it is likely that he was appointed upon advice by Placidia as a counterbalance to Castinus should he become too successful. Unfortunately, having two opposing commanders has never been an effective strategy, and things did not go according to plan. Even before the expedition had sailed for Spain Castinus and Boniface quarrelled.7 The reasons are unclear and may relate to Castinus being unhappy at Boniface’s appointment by Placidia. On the other hand, Prosper claims that it was because Boniface decided that following Castinus would be ‘dangerous to himself and degrading’.8 Whatever the cause, the argument was strong enough to make Boniface fear for his life – at that time Castinus was far more powerful than himself. The net result was that Boniface fled to Africa, which was rapidly becoming his personal power base, for safety.9 At some time after this Boniface’s wife died and in his grief he decided that he should enter a monastery. He was dissuaded from this and shortly after met a Gothic ‘princess’ named Pelagia, who, although an Arian, was persuaded to convert so that he could marry her.10
Map 3. The Western Empire c.423
In the meantime, Castinus continued with the campaign against the Vandals. After initial successes, including the final capture of the usurper Maximus – who was later executed – he managed to pin the Vandals in one place and, having ‘reduced them to starvation by siege so that they were prepared to surrender, he precipitously engaged them in open battle and, being betrayed by his auxiliaries [the Goths], suffered defeat and fled to Tarragona’.11 It would appear that Castinus had become overconfident, possibly antagonizing his Gothic foederati in the process. As a result, the Goths deserted him and he was defeated, although it should be noted that Hydatius ‘hated’ the Goths, and so his statement that they deserted Castinus needs to be treated with some caution.12
Rather than taking the blame for the defeat, Castinus claimed that his failure was the result of a plot against him by Placidia, Boniface and the Goths.13 Whether his claim was true or not is unknown but in the circumstances it remains a strong possibility. This is reinforced by the fact that when news of the defeat reached Ravenna, Honorius and Placidia quarrelled and Placidia fled to Constantinople.14 Boniface, however, secure in Africa, remained loyal to Placidia rather than Honorius, and even helped her by sending her money.15
THE DEATH OF HONORIUS
Shortly afterwards, in August, Honorius died, like his father Theodosius of dropsy.16 Despite the modern conviction that by this time the empire was divided, in contemporary society it was still seen as a single entity, even allowing for the convention of having two separate rulers, so the west waited for Theodosius II, emperor of the east, to make a decision regarding its rule.
Amongst those awaiting developments was the newly returned Aetius. Thanks to his long sojourn with both the Goths and the Huns, it is likely that Aetius’ personal connections at court were fragmentary, and based largely upon the political connections of his father. As a result he was an unknown quantity to many. However, despite this, he was to be caught intimately in the events that were to follow.
At first Castinus appears to have wanted Theodosius to accept the role of sole emperor. This would have been an ideal situation, since in this event Castinus would become the effective ruler of the west. However, Placidia was haranguing Theodosius into accepting the rights of her son Valentinian, who was now four years old, to become the next emperor in Italy. Castinus heard of Placidia’s attempts to promote Valentinian in Constantinople. If Valentinian was installed as emperor, Placidia would become the effective ruler in the west. Castinus had earlier claimed that Placidia had conspired with Boniface to bring him down. If Placidia rose to power, Castinus’ future looked bleak.
There will have been many who supported Placidia in her attempt to restore the ‘House of Theodosius’. Into this group fell Boniface, largely due to his apparent personal connections to Placidia. No doubt he, and others, also felt that they would profit from Placidia’s gratitude when her son was set upon the throne. In fact, Boniface was to benefit from his support of Placidia almost instantly. Before deciding upon the identity of the new emperor, and possibly as a reward for his loyalty to Placidia, it would appear that Theodosius appointed Boniface Comes Africae (Count of Africa). It was now certain that Boniface would maintain his support for the Theodosian dynasty. Castinus would have been dismayed by Boniface’s promotion in Africa, as it signalled that Theodosius was inclined to champion Placidia’s claim for Valentinian by promoting her supporters in the west.
JOHN
Theodosius II failed to make a quick decision. Castinus decided to take a fateful step. As the magister militum Castinus was the senior military official in the West, and, emulating Western magistri of the past, he decided to act on his own initiative. On 20 November 423 he appointed John, the Primicerius Notariorum (Head of the Secretaries), as the new Emperor of the West.17 Placidia’s supporters no doubt fled from Rome and took refuge either in the East or on their own estates. Their places would be taken by loyal supporters of Castinus and John.
Castinus’ part in John’s claim of the throne is sometimes doubted. Yet although Castinus maintained a low profile throughout this period, and ensured that there was no direct link between himself and the elevation of John, there can be little doubt that, as magister militum, he had a major part in the appointment. Without his support, John, who was not the most senior civil servant in the West, would not have been crowned emperor. Furthermore, opposition from Castinus would certainly have resulted in the instant removal of John from power. With the tacit support of Castinus, John was crowned in Rome, before travelling to Ravenna.18
John’s first act was to send an embassy to Constantinople in an attempt to gain recognition for his elevation. At the same time, the embassy was to propose Castinus as the West’s nominee as consul for 424: the embassy failed.19 Furthermore, the ambassadors were badly treated and exiled around the east.20 It was clear that Theodosius was intent on removing John from power.
Exuperantius and Aetius
Before the reply from Constantinople arrived it is clear that John made several appointments to the senior positions of command in the West. Following his return from the Huns, Aetius had been thrust into the political turmoil surrounding the death of Honorius and the elevation of John. It is clear that he gave his support to John in opposition to Theodosius and Boniface. The reasons are unknown and open to speculation. However, there is one possibility that has remained unexplored.
As early as 399 Aetius’ father Gaudentius is attested as being a comes in Africa.21 Merobaudes notes that he was later made ‘comitis a militibus in Galliis’ (‘Count of the troops in Gaul’), possibly a poetic term for the post of magister militum per Gallias.22 However, Renatus Frigeridus claims that Gaudentius eventually became magister equitum.23 Although the dating of these appointments is insecure, it is possible that they date to John’s usurpation, and imply that both Gaudentius and Aetius joined in wholeheartedly with John’s claim to the throne in 424. As reward for their support, Gaudentius was promoted to the post of magister equitum and sent to Gaul, almost certainly supplanting Boniface as the second in command to Castinus. Aetius was given the post of cura palatii (‘Controller of the Palace’).24
Unfortunately, although this hypothesis would explain much, there is no supporting evidence in the sources for it. On the other hand, no other reason is given for Aetius’ support for John and the promotion of Gaudentius helps to explain the similar promotion of Aetius, and also explains why Aetius was so willing to support an unknown usurper.
There is one further detail that may support the appointment of Gaudentius as magister equitum during John’s reign. Castinus was undoubtedly wary of the reaction to John’s crowning in the West. He knew that if the East disagreed with John’s appointment then there would almost certainly be a civil war. Unfortunately, the West was no longer strong enou
gh militarily to oppose the East. Although again speculation, the appointment must have been approved by Castinus for a specific political reason. With Gaudentius as magister equitum, Castinus could transfer all responsibility for the appointment of John to Gaudentius’ shoulders. In this way, if John won, Castinus would remain the senior general. If John lost, Castinus could claim that it was not his fault that John was elevated as emperor: instead, it was clearly simply a plot on the part of John and Gaudentius. In this way, although he could be implicated in John’s appointment, he could avoid the full responsibility in the event of John losing.
At an unknown date Aetius married the daughter of a man named Carpilio. Otherwise unknown, Carpilio is attested as being comes domesticorum at some time in his career.25 The couple had one son, named Carpilio after his maternal grandfather.26 No date is given either for the elder Carpilio’s holding of office or for the marriage. The only clue we have is that Gregory, quoting Frigeridus, dates the marriage to after Aetius’ time as a hostage with the Huns.27 The most obvious time was during the reign of John. Indeed, it is tempting to claim that Carpilio was another of John’s appointees and that the marriage was an attempt to bind the ‘conspirators’ together and ensure their loyalty. However, there is no actual evidence to support this claim.
The only other appointment of which we can be certain is that of an individual named Exuperantius, who came from Poitiers in the centre of Gaul and was appointed as Praefectus Praetorio per Galliarum (‘Praetorian Prefect of Gaul’).28 The promotion of a Gaul to the post may have been intended as an attempt to ensure Gallic loyalty, since it paved the way for further appointments of Gallic nobles to positions of power in the new regime.
Reaction to John’s Appointment
Unfortunately for John, alongside these developments the continued animosity between Castinus and Boniface also had immediate repercussions. Unsurprisingly, in Africa Boniface refused to accept John’s claim to be emperor. Declaring his loyalty to Theodosius, Placidia and the young Valentinian, Boniface immediately cut the supplies of grain from Africa to Italy.29 This was bad news, especially for the citizens of Rome, as prolonged lack of supplies from Africa could easily lead to famine. There was now no doubt that there would be a civil war.
In a similar manner, in 398 Gildo, the commander in Africa, had rebelled against Stilicho and attempted to attach himself to the eastern emperor Arcadius. Stilicho had sent Gildo’s brother Mascezel to Africa and in a lightning campaign Gildo had been defeated.30 It would appear that John attempted the same sort of campaign, dispatching a picked force – including Huns – from Italy to recapture Africa.31 However, the main effect of the campaign being sent to Africa was to leave John too weak to consider any further pre-emptive manoeuvres in Italy.32 Instead, he was forced to remain on the defensive as soon as the expedition left.
In Gaul, John’s attempt to curry favour by the appointment of Exuperantius failed. Although many will have been opposed to John’s position as an usurper, John’s decision to submit clerics to secular jurisdiction also caused offence, and may imply that he had ‘Arian tendencies’.33 Furthermore, Castinus’ abortive campaign in Spain in 422 now caused further complications. The Visigoths under king Theoderic appear to have refused to support the new regime. Instead of supplying troops for Castinus, Theoderic appears to have seen the impending civil war as an opportunity to enlarge his dominions in Gaul. In the confusion the army in Gaul decided to mutiny and the troops in Arles, presumably declaring their loyalty to the Theodosian house, killed Exuperantius.34 Furthermore, the Gallic Chronicler in the entry for 425 states that ‘Count Gaudentius . . . was killed by the soldiers in Gaul.’ Although brief and possible to interpret in different ways, the account implies that Gaudentius had only recently been killed in a ‘military uprising’, and the most obvious reason for this is the Gallic ‘rebellion’ against John.35 As an eastern ‘foreigner’ and a supporter of a regime that was clearly failing, Gaudentius was an obvious target for troops loyal to the House of Theodosius. No doubt the troops involved hoped that by killing Gaudentius they would gain favour with the soon-to-be-restored Theodosian imperial court. Unfortunately for John, he had no troops to spare to avenge either Exuperantius or Gaudentius, and he was forced to remain inactive.36 It was now certain that there would be no help from the west for the army of Italy.
Boniface, Valentinian and Aetius
At some point in 424 the west’s expedition to Africa set sail. Far from regaining Africa and giving John a military victory, the campaign ended in defeat, and one of the major outcomes was to ensure that the forces that John had at his disposal to face the upcoming war against Theodosius II were weak.37 The other was to weaken military and political support for John’s reign in the West.
Furthermore, Theodosius now confirmed his backing for Placidia and Valentinian. They were sent to Thessalonica and, reversing his decision in 421 to not accept Valentinian as nobilissimus and Placidia as Augusta, Theodosius officially invested Valentinian as Caesar on 23 October 424.38 As a further sign of the new-found concord between Theodosius and Placidia, Theodosius belatedly recognized the appointment of Constantius III as emperor of the west in 421, three years after the event, thus ensuring Valentinian’s recognition as the son and heir of the deceased emperor.39 To command the expedition against John, Theodosius appointed Ardabur, the eastern magister utriusque militiae, along with his son Aspar.40 With them was Candidianus, possibly a fellow magister militum to Ardabur.41
Ardabur was an experienced and able commander. He had been in command of the East when war broke out between Rome and Persia in 421. He had led an extensive and successful campaign into Persian territory in 421 and in 422 had ambushed and killed seven Persian generals.42
In late 424, and in desperation, John turned to Aetius. Recognizing the need for large numbers of reliable troops, John ordered Aetius to go to the Huns with a large sum of gold in the hope that Aetius could obtain their support.43 Aetius had faith in his relationships with the new Hunnic kings Rua and Octar, having grown up alongside them for many years. Further, his status as a high-ranking hostage with the Huns would result in Aetius being viewed as the representative of a legitimate government. If John had sent another envoy it is unlikely that this would have been a success, mainly due to the Huns not wishing to waste their time and manpower supporting an unknown usurper. Aetius accepted the mission and began the long journey back to the Hunnic lands.44
The Campaign in the West
Whilst Aetius travelled to the Huns, Theodosius ordered Ardabur and his son Aspar to lead their forces into Italy and defeat John. Accordingly, Ardabur and the eastern army marched through Pannonia and Illyricum to capture Salona.45 Based on the coast, Salona was an ideal strategic point from which to launch a two-pronged attack on Italy. Placidia and Valentinian joined Ardabur at Salona, ready for the proposed invasion.
At the beginning of the campaign season of 425 Ardabur contemplated the actual invasion of Italy. He decided to divide his forces, Ardabur himself leading the naval forces, whilst Aspar and Candidianus led the rest of the army by the land route into Italy.
Aspar now led his troops into Italy. He appears to have taken the cavalry ahead of the main force in an attempt to catch John by surprise. The remainder of the army under Candidianus followed at a slower pace. In this way Aspar managed to surprise John and before a warning could be sounded he captured the city of Aquileia. Placidia and Valentinian joined him there.46
For Ardabur, events took a completely different path. Whilst at sea he was blown off course and his vessel, together with two other triremes, was captured by forces loyal to John.47 John, still hoping for recognition from Theodosius, decided to treat Ardabur well, as otherwise it was certain Theodosius would continue the war. Hearing of the capture of Ardabur, the Eastern army’s morale fell, but Candidianus managed to capture several cities in northern Italy, helping to dispel the gloom.48
Ardabur took advantage of the situation. Allowed to wander at will, he began tal
king to John’s senior officers. These men had probably already begun to regret their support for John. After all, his campaign in Africa had failed and now news arrived that Aspar had already taken Aquileia.49 Yet there may be one further reason for their change of allegiance. Olympiodorus claims that Ardabur ‘suborned the generals that had been retired from their commands’.50 It would appear that, alongside the promotion of Exuperantius and Aetius, John had promoted trusted men to senior posts within the army. The men who had been replaced remained with the army but, obviously, their loyalty to John had been damaged. Although an alternative translation, this explains the willingness of these officers to come to an agreement with Ardabur.
Their co-operation was vital. In the knowledge that the army with John was not totally loyal, Ardabur sent a message – probably with the aid of at least some of these officers – to his son Aspar telling him to travel ‘as though to a victory assured’.51 Aspar followed his father’s orders, travelling quickly to Ravenna with a picked force. In order to conceal Aspar’s movements, Candidianus continued his campaign of subduing the cities of northern Italy.52 It would appear that Aspar was then guided across the marshes that surround Ravenna and so was able to reach the city undetected.53 Finding the gates open, Aspar took control of the city, doubtless helped by the army under John, which at this point almost certainly decided to change its allegiance.
John himself was captured in Ravenna and was then sent under guard to Placidia and Valentinian, who had remained in Aquileia when Aspar attacked Ravenna. Once in Aquileia John was taken to the hippodrome, where he was mutilated by having his hand cut off, and was then paraded on a donkey, before finally being executed by decapitation.54
THE ARRIVAL OF AETIUS
Three days after the execution of John, Aetius returned to Italy leading a large force of Huns.55 His orders from John had been to ‘fall on the rear of the eastern army after it had entered Italy’.56 Acting upon his orders, and likely unaware of John’s death, Aetius immediately attacked the eastern army. After heavy losses on both sides a truce was agreed, probably after messages reached Aetius that John and Gaudentius were dead.57 Aetius was enough of a realist to acknowledge that his position as a rebel was hopeless. In the circumstances, he did the only thing that he could: he used the threat of the Huns as a bargaining point to negotiate with Placidia, now acting as regent for her son.