I read about a Roman king/general who was killed by his own soldiers for not letting them to plunder/loot a newly conquered city.

I think, he allowed them to plunder a city in his previous conquest, and the soldiers expected him to do the same during a latter conquest. But, he didn't agree.

I completely forgot his name.

Who was he?

  • 5
    Welcome to History:SE. What has your research shown you so far? Where have you already searched? Please help us to help you. You might find it helpful to review our site tour and help center, and in particular How to Ask. Jul 26 '19 at 14:42
  • 1
    @sempaiscuba man those guys at AskHistorians take anything and everything as a question. Most of their filters are directed to answers. Should we also reconsider our approach? Though yeah, we proportionally have more questions which get answered
    – Rohit
    Jul 26 '19 at 21:03
  • 3
    @Rohit If you think you can make a case for a change in our approach, it's probably worth raising it as a question on our meta site. Jul 26 '19 at 21:11

Marcus Cassianius Latinius Postumus, murdered in the year 269 CE.

When affairs were in this desperate condition, and the Roman empire almost ruined, POSTUMUS, a man of very obscure birth, assumed the purple in Gaul, and held the government with such ability for ten years, that he recruited the provinces, which had been almost ruined, by his great energy and judgment; but he was killed in a mutiny of the army, because he would not deliver up Moguntiacum, which had rebelled against him, to be plundered by the soldiers, at the time when Lucius Aelianus was endeavouring to effect a change of government.

Eutropius, Abridgment of Roman History, 9.9.1

  • 1
    did he he allow his soldiers to plunder a city in a previous conquest?
    – user38647
    Jul 27 '19 at 0:05
  • 1
    @user366312 Yes, his first act as Emperor of the Gallic Empire (in 260 CE) was besieging Colonia, where the former emperors, Silvanus and Salonius, were. And he plundered that city. Postumus' emperorship was a continuous string of campaigns to consolidate his unstable position (the Gallic Empire itself was a temporary split of the Roman Empire thanks to the political situation of the Crisis of the Third Century) and he plundered several cities to finance those campaigns. In my opinion, he didn't want to plunder Mainz (the one that cost him his life) because he wanted to make it his capital. Jul 27 '19 at 6:08

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy