The Reign of Constantius II by Nicholas Baker-Brian (review)

Reviewed by: The Reign of Constantius II by Nicholas Baker-Brian Eric Fournier Nicholas Baker-Brian The Reign of Constantius II London: Routledge, 2023 Pp. xxii + 414. 190. 00 (Hardback) / 52. 95 (e-book). The Roman emperors Constantine I (r. 306–37 c. e. ) and Julian (r. 360–61), respectively known as "the Great" and "the Apostate, " have been among the most popular subjects of ancient history for centuries. Consequently, titles on these two rulers abound. By contrast, the rule of Constantine's sons has been comparatively neglected, overshadowed by the famous emperors who bookended their reigns. The work under review aims to address this imbalance by focusing on the central character of Constantius II (r. 337–60), including the early years of his rule that he shared with his two brothers, Constantine II (r. 337–40) and Constans (r. 337–50). It takes a traditional historical approach that focuses on political and military events as well as the prosopography of administrators in charge of the empire. As the preliminary page accurately discloses, "The over-arching aim is to investigate power in the post-Constantine period, and the way in which imperial and episcopal networks related to one another with the ambition of participating in the exercise of power. " To do so, Baker-Brian uses an impressive array of sources, including numismatic and iconographic evidence (mostly from the coins themselves), in addition to the more traditional legal texts and historiographical narratives. One feature of his treatment of bishops and the abundant ecclesiastical wranglings that are a mainstay of contemporary (mostly pro-Nicene) accounts of Constantius II's reign is a willingness to give more credit to Philostorgius's (heterousian) perspective than previous scholarship. The result is a measured rehabilitation of sorts, which moves away from partisan accounts as much as possible and situates Constantius II (and his brothers) and the difficult decisions he had to make during his reign within their context, by reassessing sources such as panegyrics that have been relatively neglected by historians. Prior scholarship and historiography also have End Page 143 prominent roles in this study, and Baker-Brian regularly engages with the most recent interpretations. Scholars interested in the topic would do well to consult the work under review in parallel with The Sons of Constantine, AD 337–361: In the Shadows of Constantine and Julian, which the author co-edited with Shaun Tougher (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2020), and which provides many of the original interpretations discussed in the work under review. In addition to the Introduction and Afterword, the book is divided into seven chapters, the first two of which are mostly methodological discussions of the sources. The first focuses on the visual experience that contemporaries would have had of Constantius II, mostly through coins, while the second tackles the traditional literary sources. These are insightful discussions that will benefit students and scholars alike, but mostly advanced students with prior knowledge of the texts and material in question. The rest of the book, Chapters Three to Seven, proceed in chronological order, respectively discussing the aftermath of Constantine's death and the division of powers between the three brothers, the realignment that followed the death of Constantine II in 340, the civil war against Magnentius in the aftermath of Constans's murder, the war against Persia, and Constantius's delegation of power to the Caesars Gallus and Julian. His dealings with bishops are interspersed throughout the chapters following the order of events. In this sense, readers of this journal might be disappointed to find that there is no specific chapter dedicated to the topic of religion and ecclesiastical conflicts in this monograph. The book is a valuable overview of a relatively neglected imperial figure of the fourth century, and students and scholars alike will find a useful discussion of both ancient evidence and recent interpretations relevant to the reign of Constantius II, as long as the reader does not mind the top-down view adopted throughout and the focus on politics. For a book of this price, however, Routledge and the editor are to blame for releasing a book that is replete with typos, missing words (especially conjunctions), and other mechanical issues that the copy editor. . .