Julius Philippus (244 - 249 AD)

Family and Background

Philip was born at Shaba in the province of Arabia. We know nothing of his life before his appointment as praetorian prefect as successor (probably) to Timesitheus (father-in- law of Gordian III) in 243. At that time his brother, Julius Priscus, was already praetorian prefect, making this the only time in Roman history that two brothers held this important office simultaneously.
Later tradition blamed Philip for Gordian's assasination. This seems to be the result of a campaign aimed at destroying his reputation after he was killed in 249. We do not know why he was chosen emperor (but see General Considerations).

Principal Events (Foriegn)

Principal Events (Domestic)

Outlines of Policy

Philip began his reign by making a treaty with Persia in which, it appears, he agreed to the status quo at the time of Gordian's murder. This meant that some portions of Roman territory that had not yet been reconquered from the Persians were left under their control. He also paid a huge indemnity. His critics claimed that this was the first time that Rome had surrendered territory (a false claim given that Hadrian had surrendered a great deal more at the beginning of his reign). More seriously, however, the surrender of these bases appears to have left the provinces of Syria and Mesopotamia (northern Iraq and southeast Turkey) open to invasion. In any event, he does not seem to have regarded the treaty as a permanent solution, and Rome was at war with Persia again in 245.
The most interesting feature of Philip's administration was his decision to leave his brother as deputy emperor in the eastern provinces (possibly a reflection of the military situation), and another relative as a sort of deputy emperor in the Balkans. We cannot know why he did this, but it suggests a rather different view of the imperial office than that of his predecessors. In addition to this, there is evidence from Egypt and Asia Minor of other efforts at bureaucratic reform. The temptation to see these reforms as precursors of even more wideranging reforms at the end of the century is, however, unwarrented: after his death Philip was scarcely regarded as a positive example.
The most spectacular actions on Philip's part were the construction of a vast new city on the site of his hometown, and the celebration of the 1000th anniversary of the foundation of the city in 248. The expenditure in both cases was enormous, and there are signs of negative comment on both in our very scetchy sources. A further story, that he converted to Christianity, is false.
In sum, Philip may appear either as a pragmatist (his power-sharing and dealings with Persia being cases in point), or a very weak ruler, dependent upon powerful relatives, who spent more money than he could afford, provoked revolts in several parts of the empire. He seems to have alienated a significant part of the army as well as some significant members of the aristocracy.

Further Reading

Zosimus, New History (a sixth century history of varying reliablity, and never very informative); Eutropius, Short History of Rome; Aurelius Victor, Short History of Rome; Anonymous, Short History of Rome; Potter, Prophecy and History in the Crisis of the Roman Empire.