Constantius II was 19 years old when his father, Constantine I, died in May of 337 and left him to rule the Roman Empire along with his co-Emperors. A few months after Constantine I's death, his sons Constantine II, Constantius II and Constans emerged as the three legitimate rulers of the Empire. In 340, Constantine II, the ruler of the Western territories, invaded Constans’ domain and was killed. This left Constantius II with only one co-Emperor, Constans. Constantius governed the eastern provinces with the cities of Antioch and Constantinople, whereas Constans was the Emperor responsible for the western part of the Empire, and although he did not reside in Rome, the eternal city was in his territory. In 350 Constans was killed by the usurper Magnentius, who took Rome in June of 350. For the following few years, Constantius II would find himself opposing the Emperor of Rome until finally defeating Magnentius in 353. Constantius II died in 361 after almost 25 years on the throne.
In contrast to the Emperors Constantine I (306–337) and Julian (361–363), Constantius II has received only little scholarly attention (P. Barcelo, Constantius II und seine Zeit [2004] and P. Maraval, Les fils de Constantin [2013] are exceptions). Recent scholarship has sought to correct this deficit (see e.g. R. Flower, Emperors and Bishops in Late Roman Invective [2013]; J. Wienand [ed.], Contested Monarchy [2015]; A. Omissi, Emperors and Usurpers in the Later Roman Empire [2018]; and N. Baker-Brian and S. Tougher [edd.], Sons of Constantine [forthcoming]), and M.'s book on Constantius and the senatorial elite is a valuable contribution, which will undoubtedly inspire future studies. M. investigates the reign of Constantius II through an analysis of the Emperor's relationship with Rome on one hand and the eastern elite on the other hand. M. employs an extensive range of sources for this endeavour, including literary, numismatic, epigraphic and legal evidence. These sources, some still awaiting publication, are attentively read against the historical context of the Constantinian dynasty.
In Part 1, ‘A Unified Empire (ad 312–337)’, M. outlines the context of Constantius II's reign by examining Constantine I's relationship with Rome and the East respectively. In Chapter 1, ‘Constantine and the Senate of Rome’, M. traces Constantine I's relationship with the Senate in Rome and argues that Constantine maintained a close relationship with the senatorial elite in Rome throughout his reign. M. particularly questions the depiction of Constantine's 326 visit to Rome as a failure as described by Zosimus and Libanius (Or. 19) by finding prosopographical and numismatic evidence of a close political alliance with Rome both before and after 326. In Chapter 2, ‘Constantine's Eastern Roman Empire’, M. examines Constantine's government of the Eastern part of the Roman Empire. M. claims that Constantine relied heavily on Roman senators to rule the Eastern part of the Empire and questions the foundation of a Senate in Constantinople under Constantine in a convincing reading of the Origo Constantini, thus raising the question of when the Senate was established.
In Part 2, ‘Ruling the East (ad 337–350)’, M. examines the early reign of Constantius II during which he shared power with Constantine II (until 340) and Constans. In Chapter 3, ‘The Senatorial Officials of Constantius II’, M. investigates senatorial officials appointed by Constantius II. Although the chapter borders on speculation at times, M. makes a convincing case that Constantius continued to draw support from Rome's senatorial elite in appointments of eastern officials much like Constantine I had done. M. emphasises Rome and its social elite as a means of creating unity in an empire ruled by two Emperors. In Chapter 4, ‘Remembering Constantine in Antioch and Constantinople’, M. covers Constantius’ relationship with Antioch, the city in which he resided for most of his early reign. M. also traces Constantius’ relationship with Constantinople and argues that the city was used as a way to establish dynastic legitimacy of his rule by commemorating its founder Constantine I. Since Constans governed Rome, Constantinople became the symbolic counterpart, even if, as M. argues, it was still without a Senate.
The main part of the book, Part 3, ‘Ruler of Rome and Constantinople (ad 350–361)’, is devoted to an analysis of Constantius’ rule from ad 350, when Constans was killed, to the end of Constantius’ rule in 361. In Chapter 5, ‘Crisis and Innovation: between Magnentius and Gallus’, M. argues that the usurper Magnentius presented a much graver threat to Constantius II than scholarship has traditionally assumed since Constantius relied on Rome for both government officials and ideological legitimacy. M. presents an attractive thesis about the creation of a second Senate in Constantinople using an epigraphic find from Perge in Southern Turkey (the inscription has not yet been published) (pp. 189–96). M. argues that the establishment of a Senate in Constantinople was a necessity for Constantius II because of Magnentius’ rule over Rome and the threat from Gallus Caesar in Antioch. In Chapter 6, ‘Romanizing Constantinople: the Creation of a Second Senate’, M. investigates the development of Constantinople in the 350s and argues that Constantius developed the second Senate on Roman traditions and undertook major investments in the urban, cultural and religious amenities in Constantinople during this period, thereby changing the dynamics between Rome and Constantinople. In Chapter 7, ‘A Roman Triumph: Constantius II in Rome’, M. returns to Rome with an examination of Constantius’ visit to Rome in 357 and of his relationship with the Roman senatorial elite after the foundation of a second Senate in Constantinople. M. argues that Constantius continued to keep a good relationship with Rome and traces appointments, posts and privileges to show that Constantius II did indeed continue to use the Roman elite in his government.
M.'s book provides an important account of the life and times of Constantius II and the noteworthy changes and continuities in imperial power that took place during his reign. M. guides the reader through dense material with astute observations on philology, numismatics, legal texts, epigraphy and historical context. The book questions assumptions about Constantine I's and Constantius II's use of the Roman senatorial elites, about the relationship with the eastern curial elites and about the foundation of a second Senate in Constantinople. Despite a few less convincing arguments, the book is overall an attractive new reading of the transformation of imperial rule and ideology in the mid-fourth century.
