The Tetrarchy

Dr Jamie WoodLecture 3; 12th October 2012

Summary of last week’s lecture

Aims of this lecture

To provide an overview of the main historical actors and events of the Tetrarchy

To focus on the figure and role of Diocletian

To pick out key themes of the Tetrarchic period

To assess the extent to which the Tetrarchy was a key turning point in history of later Roman Empire

Structure

End of 3rd C crisis, rise of Diocletian and the Tetrarchy

Themes (1) Administration/ bureaucracy Military

-------------------------------------------------- Groupwork: 3rd century historians Themes (2)

Economy Religion

Visual sources Breakdown of the Tetrarchy Conclusion

End of 3rd century crisis

Military Diocletian defeats his rivals Military reforms Invasions cease (or are defeated)

Government Development of new system: the

Tetrarchy Sharing of power Reorganisation of bureaucracy and

administration Economic reforms

Why is the Tetrarchy important?

Ends ‘crisis’ of 3rd century

End of the principate (princeps) and beginning of the dominate (dominus)

Last great ‘persecution’ of Christians

A new era: the start of ‘modern’ history?

Who was Diocletian (r. 284-305; d. 311)?

Originally Diocles From low-status family in

Dalmatia (modern Croatia) Rose from ranks Cavalry commander under

Carus (282-3) and his son Numerian (282-4)

Succeeds on Numerian’s death and kills Aper (praetorian prefect and his rival) in full view of army at Nicomedia

Historia Augusta, The Lives of Carus, Carinus and Numerian, 13.2-3

This man [= Diocletian] then, having ascended the tribunal was hailed as Augustus, and when someone asked how Numerian had been slain, he drew his sword and pointing to Aper, the prefect of the guard, he drove it through him, saying as he did so, “It is he who contrived Numerian's death”. So Aper, a man who lived an evil life and in accordance with vicious counsels, met with the end that his ways deserved. My grandfather used to relate that he was present at this assembly when Aper was slain by the hand of Diocletian; and he used to say that Diocletian, after slaying him, shouted, “Well may you boast, Aper, ‘Tis by the hand of the mighty Aeneas you perish.’ (Aeneid, x.830)”

Diocletian’s reign: the early days

284: death of Numerian; D acclaimed Augustus

285: defeat of Carinus (N’s brother); Maximian, fellow army officer appointed Caesar

286: Maximian appointed Augustus

293: Tetrarchy begins

The Tetrarchy

Established by Diocletian and Maximian in 293: Galerius and Constantius I Chlorus appointed

Caesares Rule of four

from Greek: four (tetra) and rule (arch) Division of empire into east and west, with

sub-division in each Lasted (with changes of personnel) until ca.

313 when civil war left Constantine I in west and Licinius in east

How it worked

Territorial division of the Tetrarchy

Two Augusti

Two Caesars

Common iconography = common purpose?

Diocletian

Galerius Constantius I Chlorus

Maximian

Diocletian’s administrative reforms: reform from what?

Small imperial administrative system of early empire

Change in the cities Civic system in earlier empire Tax raising and tax farming Euergetism

Bureaucracy and empire

Keith Hopkins (‘Conquest By Book’, in Beard et al. (eds.), Literacy in the Roman World, JRA Supplement 3; Ann Arbor, 1991) argued that writing, like money, was a medium of exchange – in information and knowledge – which helped to unify Empire Emergence of legal and

documentary culture as the Roman Empire expanded

Resultant process of professionalization and bureaucratization (as we have already seen)

Administrative reforms

Chain of command linked civil administrators directly to emperor (via councils/ departments)

Professionalised hierarchy with elaborate system of honours

Each province has separate civil and military administration (secret service developed)

Increases number of provinces (50 -> 100) Number of officials increased (15k -> 30k) System of taxation developed to meet costs

of increased administration

Lactantius, On the Death of the Persecutors 7(Christian, early 4th C)

‘In his greed and anxiety he [Diocletian] turned the whole world upside down. He appointed three men to share his rule, dividing the world into four parts and multiplying the armies, since each of the four strove to have a far larger number of troops than previous emperors had had when they were governing the state alone. The number of recipients began to exceed the number of contributors by so much that, with farmers’ resources exhausted by the enormous requisitions , fields became deserted and cultivated land was turned into forest. To ensure terror was universal, provinces too were cut into fragments; many governors and even more officials were imposed on individual regions, almost on individual cities, and to these were added numerous accountants, controllers, and prefects’ deputies. The activities of all these people were very rarely civil; they engaged only in repeated condemnations and confiscations, and in exacting endless resources – and the exactions were not just frequent, they were incessant, and involved insupportable injustices. And how could the arrangements for raising soldiers be endured?’

Military reforms

Increased size of army Renewed border defences Developed mobile field army

(comitatenses) Military commands made

smaller Military and administrative

offices separated Clear chain of command

developed (focussed on emperor)

Taxes raised to pay for increased military

Zosimus, New History, 2.34 (late 5th/ early 6th C)

“By the forethought of Diocletian, the frontiers of the empire everywhere were covered, as I have stated, with cities, garrisons and fortifications which housed the whole army. Consequently, it was impossible for the barbarians to cross the frontier because they were confronted at every point by forces capable of resisting their attacks.” Z goes on to criticise Constantine for

abandoning this system

Military problems (and solutions) in Britain Mid 280s: Carausius appointed

to clear pirates from English Channel; successful but then leads breakaway in Britain and northern Gaul with support of legions there

293: Constantius I Chlorus appointed Caesar to take back N. Gaul and Britain

293-296: gradual success; Carausius replaced by Allectus, who is restricted to Britain

296: reconquest of Britain

Carausius

Allectus

25

Group activity feeding back on 3rd century historians

1. Cassius Dio’s Roman History2. Historia Augusta3. HerodianIn your group prepare a short presentation that

provides the following information about your source Date of composition (esp. in relation to events described) Author(s) (who they are, where they are from) What it’s about (e.g. recurrent themes/ topics) Issues (e.g. viewpoint or biases of the author/ history of

the source’s transmission or survival)One member of the group needs to write this up into

a short (readable) summary which I will type up and add to the PowerPoint slides on VITAL.

Cassius Dio

ca. 164-229 AD (at least that is when he stops writing) Wrote 80 volumes of his Roman History covering 1400

years from Aeneas and the foundation of Rome to 229 AD. It is written in Attic Greek.

It survives mainly as extracts in later works by other people (i.e. is fragmentary)

Dio served as a senator under Commodus and was consul under Severus Alexander: so he has an elite viewpoint

Religion is a strong theme. He places a lot of importance on the supernatural. His first work, written before the History, was about dreams and portents. However there is no mention of Christianity. Did it not matter to him?

Dio spent 10 years researching and 12 years writing – he had a lot of sources to draw on

Historia Augusta

Herodian

Diocletian’s monetary reform (294)

New weights and denominations

Maintenance of bi-metallic system

Differential effect in east (more economically developed) and west

Seems to have provoked rise in cost of living; but rise in benefactions

Diocletian, Edict on Maximum Prices, preamble (date: 301)

‘If the excesses perpetrated by persons of unlimited and frenzied avarice could be checked by some self-restraint – this avarice which rushes for gain and profit with no thought for mankind … the situation could perhaps be faced with dissembling and silence, with the hope that human forbearance might alleviate the cruel and pitiable situation. But the only desire of these uncontrolled madmen is to have no thought for the common need.’‘ We hasten, therefore, to apply the remedies long demanded by the situation, satisfied that no-one can complain that our intervention with regulations is untimely or unnecessary, trivial or unimportant.’‘It is our pleasure, therefore, that the prices listed in the subjoined schedule be held in observance in the whole of our Empire …’‘It is our pleasure that anyone who resists the measures in this statute shall be subject to a capital penalty for daring to do so. And let no-one consider the statute harsh, since there is at hand a ready protection from danger in the observance of moderation…’

Religion and the Tetrarchy

Diocletian a religious conservative

Traditional pantheon persisted and imperial cult reinforced Part of increased

stress on centrality of emperor

Link between divine favour and military victory especially important

Diocletian and Jupiter, holding sceptres, sacrificing over altar

Punishing deviance Actions against:

Manichees (eastern dualist sect)▪ D = in charge of the East; conflict with Persia▪ Laws against Manichees in late 290s and 300s

Christians▪ 303-304: Great Persecution▪ Initial attempt to root out Christians from army, bureaucracy and

imperial household seems to have grown into general attempt to exterminate Christians

Objections to these religions: Novelty Alien origins (esp. Manichees) Exclusivist opposition to traditional Roman religions/

morals But is it ‘persecution’ or ‘prosecution’?

A new kind of emperor?

princeps => dominus Greater emphasis on

ceremony, which is stage-managed: E.g. adventus – entry into a city

Emperors wore diadems and clothes embroidered with precious stones

Only emperors allowed to wear purple cloth

Emperors separated from people by a curtain before audiences

Emperors lived in palaces Basilicas keep emperor as

centre of attention / authority

Audience hall, Diocletian’s palace, Split

Constantine’s basilica, Trier

Fall of Diocletian and Maximian

304: D suffers serious illness 304-5: Galerius persuades/ forces D

and M to abdicate (in 305); both retire Galerius becomes Augustusi in east

and Constantius I in west Severus and Maximin (both closely

associated with Galerius) declared Caesars Constantine (son of Constantius I Chlorus)

and Maxentius (son of Maximian) are ignored

= TROUBLE

Diocletian’s cabbages D and M remain in touch and

are consulted by Galerius M tries to return to power

twice; suffers damnatio memoriae

D urged to do the same: ‘If you could show the cabbage

that I planted with my own hands to your emperor, he definitely wouldn't dare suggest that I replace the peace and happiness of this place with the storms of a never-satisfied greed’ (Aurelius Victor, Liber de Caesaribus 39.6)

Diocletian’s palace, Split

Specially-built for D’s retirement in Dalmatia (modern Croatia)

A fortified site: compare to plans of Roman forts

A luxury residence: compare to villas

Conclusions and questions

To what extent is the Tetrarchic system (solely) the work of Diocletian (and Maximian)? It barely outlasted D’s abdication...

Is the Tetrarchy something radically new or simply an intensification of trends we have already witnessed, like the 3rd century crisis? Bureaucratisation Militarisation Exaltation of emperor Policing of deviance (move towards monotheism?)

Homework

Read: Christopher Kelly (1994), ‘Late Roman Bureaucracy: Going through the files’, in A. Bowman and G. Woolf, eds., Literacy and power in the ancient world (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 161-176. [uploaded to VITAL]

In two week’s time we will look at the breakdown of the Tetrarchy, the short-lived ‘Second Tetrarchy’ and the success of Constantine and his Dynasty