Sacred Atlas logoSacred Atlas

Felicissimus

Felicissimus was a Roman public officer, the rationalis responsible for administering the imperial mints during Emperor Aurelian's reign. He is primarily remembered for leading an uprising of mint workers against Aurelian after being held responsible for their adulteration of coinage, an event that resulted in significant casualties and potentially influenced monetary reforms.

Country Or Region
Italy

Key Facts

  • Felicissimus was the rationalis, chief of the state treasury, responsible for imperial mints.
  • He incited mint workers to revolt when challenged by Emperor Aurelian for adulterating coinage.
  • The uprising took place on the Caelian Hill.
  • Thousands of soldiers and workers were killed during the revolt.
  • The revolt may have been connected to senatorial and equestrian classes, as Aurelian executed several senators.
  • The mint of Rome was inactive for a period after the revolt, possibly influencing monetary reforms.
Death Year
271?
Manner of Death
Killed during an uprising
Role Type

About Felicissimus

Felicissimus was a public officer in ancient Rome during the reign of Emperor Aurelian, serving as the rationalis, or chief of the state treasury. His primary historical significance stems from his role in instigating and leading an uprising of mint workers against the emperor.

Mint Workers Revolt

As the rationalis, Felicissimus was responsible for the administration of the imperial mints. The mint workers in Rome had engaged in the profitable practice of adulterating the coinage, a practice that included the Divus Claudius coin issued early in Aurelian's reign. When Emperor Aurelian confronted Felicissimus about these activities, Felicissimus incited the mint workers to revolt. The ensuing uprising, which took place on the Caelian Hill, was brutally suppressed. Reports indicate that the workers were massacred, and approximately 7,000 soldiers were killed. The revolt may have had wider implications, potentially involving senatorial and equestrian classes, as Aurelian executed several senators following the incident.

Aftermath and Death

Felicissimus was defeated and killed during this revolt. His death is generally placed around 271 AD, though some sources suggest it might have occurred as late as 274 AD. The revolt's impact is suggested by the temporary inactivity of the Roman mint before a monetary reform in 274 and the poor quality of coinage at the beginning of Aurelian's reign, which supports the idea of widespread adulteration. Following Felicissimus's death, Emperor Aurelian appointed Gaius Valerius Sabinus as his successor and transferred the mint operations from Rome to Mediolanum.

Source: Wikipedia ↗

Frequently Asked Questions

Who was Felicissimus?

Felicissimus was a public officer in ancient Rome, serving as the rationalis, or chief of the state treasury, during the reign of Emperor Aurelian. His primary responsibility was the administration of the imperial mints.

What is Felicissimus known for?

Felicissimus is known for leading an uprising of mint workers against Emperor Aurelian. This revolt was incited after he was held responsible for the workers adulterating coinage for their own profit.

When did the revolt led by Felicissimus occur?

The revolt led by Felicissimus occurred during the reign of Emperor Aurelian. While his death is possibly dated to 274, it is more probable that the uprising and his death occurred around 271.

What were the consequences of Felicissimus's revolt?

The revolt resulted in a massacre of mint workers and the deaths of approximately 7,000 soldiers. The mint of Rome was inactive for a period afterward, and it is suggested that this event influenced monetary reforms and the transfer of the mint to Mediolanum.

Was Felicissimus a saint?

While the provided text discusses Felicissimus in the context of a public officer and a historical figure involved in a revolt, it does not present him as a recognized saint within established Christian traditions. He is referred to as a confessor due to his historical significance and potential challenges to religious authority, as hinted by a reference to Cyprian.