Which Emperor had the Shortest Reign?

Obvers of coin of Silbannacus, from British Museum

Over the past few weeks, we've looked at some interesting details about Roman emperors - how old they were, on average, how many of them were assassinated and so on - and today, we're answering a reader's question about which of them ruled for the shortest amount of time.

As always, when answering this question, we come across the problem of who actually qualifies as an emperor in the first place. People who claim to be emperors have, in some cases, as much time as a 'ruler' as those who are universally accepted as such. However, history tends to dismiss most of these usurpers as 'tyrants'.

We've gone over these criteria before, so going over them again seems a little pointless. If you want to know exactly what those criteria are, you can see one of the earlier articles. In those previous articles, I introduced a cut-off point simply so that I didn't have to sit here and process the data of hundreds of 'tyrants', petty emperors and child co-emperors, but for this exercise, I'm going to include everyone up to Constantine XI, who died in 1453. I'm not going to include Charlemagne's little diversion, the Ottomans, or anyone else who claimed to be 'Roman'.

The answer to who was the shortest reigning Roman emperor is quite easy. It was Gordian I, who ruled for just 22 days in March-April 238 AD. His reign, alongside his son Gordian II, occurred during the tumultuous Year of the Six Emperors, a time of political chaos in the Roman Empire.

Gordian I, a respected senator, was proclaimed emperor in Africa by rebels opposing the tyrannical emperor Maximinus Thrax. Gordian II was co-emperor with his father. However, their rule was short-lived because their forces were defeated by the loyalist governor of Numidia, Capelianus, at the Battle of Carthage. Gordian II died in battle, and upon hearing of his son's death, Gordian I took his own life.

Their brief reign set the stage for further instability, eventually leading to the rise of Emperor Gordian III, Gordian I's grandson.

However, there are other candidates who are interesting because remarkably little is known about them. One such fellow was a chap by the name of Silbannacus, about whom almost nothing is known and no records survive. He is only known through the existence of two coins bearing his name, found in the 20th century.

Silbannacus's emergence occurred during the Crisis of the Third Century (235–284 AD), a period marked by political instability, economic collapse, and relentless external threats. This era saw a rapid turnover of emperors, many of whom were usurpers raised to power by discontented military factions. The empire faced invasions by barbarian groups, internal revolts, and economic fragmentation. The situation was compounded by the rapid debasement of the currency and widespread plague, making imperial authority fragile and contested.

Silbannacus appears to have been one of several short-lived claimants to the throne during this chaotic period. However, the specifics of his rise, his rule, and his downfall remain speculative due to the paucity of surviving evidence. Scholars are reliant primarily on numismatic discoveries and the broader historical trends of the era to construct a narrative of his life.

Silbannacus is known to history only through two coins, both of which are critical sources for understanding his existence. The first coin, discovered in 1937, is an antoninianus (a common silver denomination of the time) bearing the inscription "IMP MAR SILBANNACVS AVG." This identifies him as an imperator (military commander) and Augustus, a title reserved for emperors. The obverse features Silbannacus's portrait, while the reverse depicts the god Mercury, accompanied by the legend "VIRTVS AVG," emphasizing the virtue or courage of the emperor.

The second coin was uncovered in 1981, providing further confirmation of Silbannacus's existence. This coin, minted in Rome, suggests that Silbannacus may have briefly controlled the capital or at least attempted to assert his authority there. The numismatic evidence places him in the mid-3rd century AD, likely around 253 or 254 AD, during the reigns of Trebonianus Gallus and his successor Aemilian.

The lack of literary sources mentioning Silbannacus leaves his origins shrouded in mystery. His name suggests a Celtic or Gallic background, as the suffix "-annacus" is common in names from these regions. This has led some historians to speculate that he may have been a military officer of provincial origin, possibly commanding troops in Gaul or along the Rhine frontier. His bid for power could have been rooted in dissatisfaction among the legions or local elites, a recurring theme in the mid-3rd century.

If Silbannacus had indeed proclaimed himself emperor in 253 or 254 AD, his reign would have coincided with a turbulent succession of emperors. Trebonianus Gallus and his son Volusian were overthrown and killed by their own troops, who then elevated Aemilian to the purple. Aemilian himself ruled for only a few months before being deposed and killed by Valerian, who would go on to establish a somewhat more stable rule. Silbannacus may have emerged as a rival to one of these figures, either Trebonianus Gallus or Aemilian, exploiting the disarray and factionalism that characterized the era.

The minting of coins in Rome raises intriguing questions about Silbannacus' level of support and the extent of his authority. It suggests that he may have briefly occupied the city or gained enough backing from the Senate, the Praetorian Guard, or other influential groups to legitimize his claim. However, his failure to secure lasting power indicates that his support was limited or quickly eroded, likely due to opposition from rival claimants or military defeat.

Silbannacus's ultimate fate is unknown, but given the ruthless nature of Roman politics during the Crisis of the Third Century, it is likely that he met a violent end. Most usurpers who failed to consolidate power were executed, often by their own troops or by the forces of a rival emperor. The brevity of his reign and the scarcity of sources suggest that his bid for power was swiftly suppressed.

The absence of ancient accounts regarding Silbannacus further underscores the obscurity of his reign. Figures like him, whose rule was short-lived and geographically limited, often escaped the attention of chroniclers, particularly if their impact on broader imperial events was minimal. The survival of even two coins bearing his name is remarkable, offering a glimpse into the contested and fragmented nature of authority during this period.

Despite his obscurity, Silbannacus is an interesting example for understanding the dynamics of the Roman Empire during the crisis of the third century. His coins provide tangible evidence of the instability and regionalism that characterized this era. The existence of a previously unknown usurper underscores the extent to which imperial authority was contested and the degree to which local power centres could challenge the central government.

Silbannacus also highlights the role of numismatics in reconstructing ancient history. Coins often serve as the sole evidence for obscure rulers, providing valuable information about their claims to power, geographic base, and ideological messaging. In the case of Silbannacus, the depiction of Mercury and the emphasis on "Virtus" reflect the traditional Roman virtues that even short-lived usurpers sought to project.

How long he reigned for is impossible to say, only that it must have been remarkably brief, perhaps even a matter of a few days. It's possible that his reign was so brief that he never really got anywhere near as exciting as sitting on a throne or issuing any orders or edicts and this is why history has totally missed him. He might, conceivably, have been emperor for less than one day.

References

1. Carson, R. A. G. Coins of the Roman Empire in the British Museum: Volume VI. British Museum Press, 1962.

2. Drinkwater, John F. The Gallic Empire: Separatism and Continuity in the North-Western Provinces of the Roman Empire A.D. 260–274. Franz Steiner Verlag, 1987.

3. Mattingly, Harold. Roman Coins from the Third Century Crisis. Numismatic Society of London, 1975.

4. Southern, Patricia. The Roman Empire from Severus to Constantine. Routledge, 2001.

5. Zosimus. Historia Nova. Translated by R. T. Ridley, Byzantina Australiensia, 1982.
   
   

Thanks for reading! If you’re stuck for a gift for a lost loved one, or for someone you hate, or if you have a table with a wonky leg that would benefit from the support of 341 pages of Roman History, my new book “The Compendium of Roman History” is available on Amazon or direct from IngramSpark. Please check it out by clicking the link below!