One calls plague antonine the pestilential epidemic which struck the Roman empire at the end of the dynasty antonine, during the reigns of Marc Aurèle and Commode, between 165 and 190. It owes its nickname " antonine" with the dynasty which directed the Roman empire then: the Antonins. The English historians name it sometimes also Galenic plague name of Claude Galien celebrates it doctor who exerted then.

Sources

It is about one of the epidemic S best documented Antiquité. All the sources are not however of equal value. The Histoire Auguste describes us the appearance of the epidemic - like Ammien Marcellin and his devastations in the Roman armies. Lucien tells how Alexandre the prophet of Glycon emitted an oracle on the plague. Aelius Aristide describes the disease. Orose mentions also the epidemic. But the most interesting source is obviously in the many medical writings of Galien, even if we do not have any more the book which it had devoted to the plague. Dion Cassius and Hérodien describes us a similar epidemic which struck Rome under Commode and which is often regarded as the return of the first.

Epigraphic sources were also attached to the epidemic. An inscription of Antioche preserved the text of the oracle of Alexandre. But it is difficult on the other hand to ensure that whole or part of oracles of Claros mentioning an epidemic refer well to the plague antonine and not with a former or posterior less important epidemic local. It is even more difficult to associate other inscriptions with this epidemic.

History

According to our sources, the epidemic was declared at the time of the catch of Séleucie of the Tiger by the troops of Lucius Verus carried out by Avidius Cassius into 165. Ancient historiography insisted on this event, and was often taken again by the modern and contemporary historians, the idea being sometimes advanced that the release of the epidemic involved the Roman withdrawal. However this one is explained better by the military situation, and impossibility of occupying a plundered city. The difficulties encountered with the return by the Roman army are also explained by problems of supply. It is certain on the other hand that the important movements of troops which took place during these years could diffuse the epidemic with a greater width.

Of the East the plague was thus diffused in many provinces. In Egypt the papyruses preserved the trace of its devastations: the village of Soknopaiou Nessos is almost entirely depopulated. As the papyrus Thmouis the plague testifies to it was added to agrarian difficulties, economic and social. Brigands devastated the area, the peasants fled of the too heavy taxes. Years 160 marked Egyptian demography durably.

In Asia, it is undoubtedly the epidemic which Aelius Aristide describes with Éphèse towards 165. Oracles of the sanctuaries of Claros towards Colophon mentioning plagues were put in connection with the epidemic, but their dating is dubious, and so some probably refer to the epidemic antonine, others can relate to only one former or posterior local epidemic. One sometimes interpreted these oracles as the sign of an age of anguish, of a turning in “mentalities”. Such judgments strongly should be relativized as showed it Peter Brown, oracles attest vitality of the traditional religiosity rather.

Alexandre d' Abonotichos and its god Glycon also gave an oracle against the plague, whose text was found with Antioche. This oracle illustrates the bonds that Alexandre maintained with the ordinary religiosity his time, but also undoubtedly takes part of its strategy of approach of the circles of the political life of the empire: the epidemic had then touched its center, Rome and Italy.

The arrival and the extension of the epidemic in Italy are well-known for us thanks to the works of Galien. It is extremely possible that the rapid departure of this last, in 166, is explained by the desire to flee the epidemic. But Galien was recalled of Pergame by the emperors and had to return to Italy. The two emperors, Marc Aurèle and Lucius Verus had indeed massed important troops in the north of Italy with Aquilée to face the cruel threats in the Danubian areas. The troops were severely touched by the epidemic in winter 168-169, and the emperors called upon many doctors, of which Galien. This last could then remain in Italy and was one of the most important doctors of the imperial court. The violence of the epidemic then constrained emperors to be turned over to Rome, Verus finding death on the way of the return, but by apoplexy and not by the disease.

The epidemic still seems to have lasted a certain time. Nothing certain however makes it possible to ensure that it is well it which killed Marc Aurèle into 180. The authenticity of the inscription which mentioned it in Norique into 182 was recently called into question: allusion to the plague would have been the result of a modern falsification according to W. Hameter, but the examination of a stamping of the inscription in question cancelled this thesis: the plague still prevailed in Norique into 182. according to M.G. Schmidt, it is thus necessary well to also to allot him the victims mentioned on the album of the worship of Mithra of Virunum.

In general they are the latest sources like Orose, Eutrope or the Histoire Auguste which insist on the damage caused by the plague.

During the reign of Convenient a similar epidemic the town of Rome touched towards 190, and Dion Cassius and Hérodien ensures us that it was spread in all the empire. This episode, which takes seat in a context of food shortage, can be a return of the plague antonine, it is however much less known to us.

Interpretations and assessment of the epidemic

Paléodiagnostic

The plague antonine caused many historical work. The true nature of the disease was discussed. The term of Peste should not induce in error, it does not return indeed to the disease now known under this name and which struck Europe with the Middle Ages hard. The term of plague is here only one translation of the terms Latin read or pestis or of the Greek loimos . The use of the stench term in place of plague is recommended today besides by certain researchers. Since the searchs for R.J and M.L. Littman (1973), one generally considers that it was about an important epidemic of Variole. It is however difficult to reach an absolute certainty relating to this paléodiagnostic, ancient medicine being unaware of the micro-organisms and the idea of contagion did not regard the symptoms as our contemporary doctors, namely like the signs of an infection by an infectious agent invariant, but like the indices of an internal imbalance specific to each patient.

The question is also put to know if this epidemic is the sign of a change in the mode of the diseases of the empire and in its microbial balance, which one calls the Pathocénose since Mirko Grmek. There still our data being very compartmental it is difficult to decide with an absolute certainty.

Assessment

The paléodiagnostic is however important because it involves consequences as for the assessment of the epidemic. This last was extremely discussed. For a long time the impact of the epidemic was considered to be very important, some seeing even the beginning there, or causes it, of the end of the Roman empire, weakened by depopulation. Such evaluations agreed with a Historiographie which devalued late antiquity and saw in the reign of Marc Aurèle an immense caesura.

James Gilliam in 1961, in an article of synthesis founder and still impossible to circumvent, clearly reconsidered these exaggerations as for the assessment of the plague, supported in that a few years later by work of Littman. However its work very often quoted does not see its always followed conclusions. Thus E. Lo Cascio considers that the plague antonine is a strong rupture in the history of the demography of ancient Italy. It is however very difficult to confirm such a judgment on the ground and in archeology. The archaeological practice of Prospection on the ground with large scales ( survey ) makes it possible to better know the rates/rhythms of occupation of the ground, and thus in a certain manner demography, but on the one hand cannot really find such a specific event and on the other hand has evil to differentiate an absolute depopulation from a transformation of the mode of habitat and its distribution.

More recently of many articles were devoted to the epidemic following a work of Richard P. Duncan-Jones (1996). This last chose a statistical approach to evaluate the consequences of the epidemic. It highlighted the disturbances - marked gaps - in the quantitative series of our sources for the years corresponding to the epidemic: thus the Roman monetary production very strongly falls in 167, as well as the number of inscriptions gone back to these years and preserved. This fall would be the consequences of the destroying effects of the epidemic and the disturbance which it caused in demography and the Roman economy. R.P. Duncan-Jones pled then for a very strong evaluation of the impact of the plague.

Its work, whose originality and contribution were amply recognized, has since receipt several criticisms which moderate its conclusions considerably. On the one hand a certain number of work corrected some of the advanced statistics, decreasing the gaps and thus the supposed impact of the epidemic, or putting forward the series not reflecting these gaps. In addition work drew the attention to the speed of the recovery after the disturbance, signs that its consequences in time were limited, prosperity being found under the Sévères. Finally it was observed that the gaps in these series are not ascribable only to the plague but which also should be taken account of the other difficulties of the reign of Marc Aurèle: famines, wars, increased tax pressure… . From this last work, which pleads for a moderated assessment, the table of an important epidemic without comes out to make an absolute rupture of it. If R.P. Duncan Jones and Y. Zelener propose a very strong mortality, about 25 to 33%, the estimate suggested by Littman must thus rather be retained, that is to say an average mortality from 7 to 10% with peaks higher than 15% in urban area, with a total from perhaps 7 to 10 million additional deaths between 166 and 189 for a total population of the empire currently estimated at 64 million inhabitants into 164.

References and Bibliography

Random links:

Units of Planck | Orthomyxoviridae | Interstate 15 | Mastology | Lupara (arms)