Roman tetrarchy
The Roman tetrarchy (from Greek τετρα tetra 'four' and αρχη archē 'rule', 'government', also four-emperor system ) was a system of government in the Roman Empire that was introduced by Emperor Diocletian in 293 AD and after his Resignation in 305 AD gradually fell apart. It provided for four rulers in the imperial rank (two senior emperors with the title Augustus and two junior emperors with the title Caesar ). Even after the proclamation of Constantine emperor in 306 AD, the dissolution of the tetrarchy , individual political ideas that arose here retained their validity; so in particular the multiple empire remained the rule until 476/80.
The time of the tetrarchy brought important internal reforms for the Roman Empire and marked the beginning of late antiquity . The empire was administratively reorganized into a western and an eastern half. Numerous provinces were divided into smaller administrative units, the military administration separated from the civil one and more centralized and bureaucratised . The army was also reorganized into stationary border troops and mobile field units.
prehistory
.JPG)
When Diocletian became emperor in 284, he was faced with the task of reforming the Roman Empire and its system of rule in order to overcome the so-called imperial crisis of the 3rd century (235–284 / 285). This phase was characterized by a high level of political instability: from the outside the empire on the Rhine and Danube was constantly endangered by the Germanic peoples and in the east by the neo-Persian Sassanids ; inside, constant unrest and usurpations weakened the empire. For decades the empire was plagued by a chain of civil wars that also damaged the imperial reputation.
The empire was ruled by so-called soldier emperors, who not infrequently came from the army themselves and were mostly determined almost alone by the army. At the same time, the Roman troops in battle zones were striving to be “close to the emperor”. Whenever the princeps was tied elsewhere, they tended to proclaim successful generals as emperors, which led to civil wars, which in turn diminished the resistance to external enemies. The respective victor in the civil war could only take care of one front at a time and therefore had to send generals again, who, if successful, again grabbed power all too easily. Almost no emperor had died of natural causes since 180, and there were often several Augusti who fought each other - in the years 235–285 there were around 70 emperors in total. Individual areas such as the Gaulish and Palmyrenean Empire also split off from time to time.
Emperor Gallienus (260–268) had already initiated some important army and administrative reforms at the height of the imperial crisis. His successor Claudius Gothicus (268-270) achieved military successes above all against the Goths, so that Aurelian (270-275) was able to carry out further important internal reforms, which was again followed by numerous usurpations . As early as 253, relatives of the emperors were installed more and more often as co-rulers without this initially having stabilized the monarchy. In November 284, Diocletian, the guard officer, was proclaimed emperor; he started out as a usurper himself. In 285 he prevailed against his adversary, the legitimate Emperor Carinus , and was now able to begin a comprehensive reform program, in which he often took up the approaches of his predecessors and systematized them.
In the reform of the rule to a multi-emperor rule, which he soon began, Diocletian was able to rely on developments in the Principate : Already in 69 AD, Galba had designated Lucius Calpurnius Piso Frugi Licinianus as his successor by conferring the title Caesar on him thus already elevated to the rank of emperor by protocol. The Oberkaiser continued to bear the title Augustus . Marcus Aurelius appointed 161 Lucius Verus to Augustus and introduced the custom of simultaneously several Augusti to have. In 238, Pupienus and Balbinus were the first to have two emperors with completely equal formal rights, and Valerian and Gallienus, both with the rank of Augustus, divided the rule of the undivided empire among themselves. Diocletian took up these traditions.
Diocletian's Tetrarchy
Main features
In order to end the civil wars, Diocletian had above all to stabilize the empire. He drew the lesson from the crisis that the Roman Empire, because of its size and the need to be close to the emperor, could no longer be ruled by one ruler alone. As early as 285 AD he made Maximian his Caesar, and a year later, in 286, he gave him the title of Augustus and made him his co-emperor. The empire was administratively divided into a western and an eastern half. A few years later, in 293, Diocletian systematized the multiple empire: he also appointed two Caesares as subordinate co-emperors. Whether both were appointed at the same time or first, on March 1, Constantius I , and only later, on May 21, 293, Galerius , is a matter of dispute in research. In any case, the two Caesares later celebrated their dies imperii ( jubilee of rule) simultaneously on March 1st.
The system devised by Diocletian was based on four rulers with the rank of emperor: There was a senior emperor (Augustus) in the west (there were residences here of Maximian in Milan and Trier of Constantius I) and in the east (residence in Nicomedia of Diocletian and in Thessalonike resided Galerius). The senior emperors each adopted a junior emperor (Caesar) who would later become his successor. Each tetrarch had its own Praetorian prefect . Laws passed by Augustus or Caesar basically applied to the entire Roman Empire . The multi-emperor system in itself was not a novelty, but unlike his predecessors, Diocletian did not appoint any relatives as emperors in the college and probably even ruled out a dynastic succession.
Diocletian himself was formally superior only in terms of auctoritas (dignity, authority): Aurelius Victor ( Caes. 39) speaks of the other emperors looking up to him “like a father or a mighty god”. This was decisive, however: it would later become evident again and again that a multiple empire only worked in an undivided empire if the hierarchy within the ruling college was clear. Otherwise there was a risk of disputes over rank, which could escalate into civil wars.
Diocletian took the title Iovius (after Jupiter, the father of the gods ) as a nickname , his co- Augustus Maximian the name Herculius (after the demigod Hercules ); the Caesares adopted these epithets. This also made it clear that Diocletian, who had also held the consulate once more than his colleague and held the tribunicia potestas, assumed a higher position as senior Augustus . This position was never questioned during his reign. The remainder owed their empire to him as auctor imperii . Contemporary authors consequently emphasized that the empire continued to be a monarchy in which the actual ruler was supported by his three colleagues who had a share in his imperial power. The system offered advantages:
- Even with several problems occurring at the same time in distant places, someone in the emperor's rank could see that everything was going well and satisfy the armies' need for proximity to the emperor.
- The fact that a Caesar could familiarize himself as a junior emperor, there was more stability.
- If an Augustus had a designated successor in Caesar who was already in power, there was no benefit to potential usurpers in murdering Augustus . In general, a usurper always faced at least 3 emperors.
- As the emperors offered deserved military members the opportunity to join the ruling college instead of tying access to power to a single family as before, ambitious men were offered an alternative to usurpation.
The system worked quite well for the first few years. Diocletian as Augustus of the East, made 293 Galerius to Caesar. Maximian , Augustus of the West, adopted his Caesar Constantius Chlorus . The division of labor proved its worth: Diocletian took care of uprisings in Egypt , while Galerius pacified the Persian border, Maximian secured the North African province and Constantius first ensured order in Britain and then defended the Rhine border and secured it with fortresses. Formally, however, Diocletian reserved the last word in the entire empire and was not limited to the East. For example, he ordered 303 persecutions of Christians throughout the empire.
A large number of reforms were initiated under Diocletian, which had an impact far into late antiquity. Thus the provincial division and the military were reformed. In addition, an imperial central administration ( militia officialis ) was created. To counter inflation, he issued an edict of maximum prices and ended the deterioration of the coins of earlier emperors. Finally, there is a comprehensive tax reform that should secure the funds necessary for the army. In the years 303–305, as I said, Christians were persecuted across the empire. This is to be seen in connection with the religious foundation of the tetrarchy: Diocletian regarded Jupiter, Maximian Hercules as a protective deity; To sacrifice to these gods was therefore considered an expression of loyalty. The Christians, however, cursed the traditional Roman gods as idols ; and by refusing to practice the imperial cult , radical Christians drew the wrath of the tetrarchs.
Tetrarchical propaganda
A porphyry group after 1204 by Konstantin Opel to San Marco in Venice was brought, the Tetrarch shows combined. Two of the emperors are connected to a couple with a close hug. Their external appearance is almost identical, which makes naming the people with the help of their portraits impossible. All figures are the same size, wear the same protective armor and a heavy soldier's coat ( chlamys ). They are armed with a sword and their heads are covered with flat caps. The rulers are depicted without individual traits of their personality, their portraits, entirely in keeping with their equal rulership, worked out almost uniformly.
In older research, there was a tendency to see an Augustus and a Caesar in each pair , but it is now generally accepted that two Augusti and two Caesares are represented together - one Herculius each with an Iovius . If you roll up the corner group in a straight line, the two emperors represent the Caesares on the left and the Augusti on the right .
Basically, all four portraits are the same in their facial shapes, the only difference being the indication of a beard in two and the particularly strict expression of the Caesar on the left . Because of this pronounced forehead markings, it is assumed that this figure is Galerius, who also appears in this type in other portraits. His co-regents would therefore have been adapted to his individual portrait. The naming of the tetrarchs of the porphyry group from left to right would be as follows: the Caesares Galerius and Constantius, then the Augusti Diocletian and Maximian.
Other monuments on which tetrarchs appear are the porphyry group in the Vatican , the Galerius Arch of Thessaloniki and the Arch of Constantine .
Abdication of Diocletian and Maximian
On May 1, 305 Diocletian and Maximian resigned as active emperors in two acts of state in Nicomedia (Diocletian) and Milan (Maximian). When Diocletian made this decision and what reasons prompted him to do so is controversial. Lactanz reports of a serious illness of the emperor, which shattered him mentally and physically, so that a resignation was necessary. According to this tradition, Maximian also resigned in order not to endanger the system of tetrarchy based on symmetry and unity (concordia) . Since Diocletian still actively intervened in imperial politics in 308 and lived at least until 311, Lactanz's claim that the emperor was sick and weak is doubted by many researchers.
It is often assumed that the decision to resign was made in 303 at a meeting of the Augusti in Rome, where the emperors celebrated their Vicennalia (their 20th anniversary in power). Another important argument is the construction of Diocletian's Palace in Spalato (Croatia). The start of construction cannot be precisely dated, but since it was evidently designed as a retirement home from the beginning and therefore apparently habitable in 305, the resignation could take several years Have had lead time.
The question of whether the abdication was an integral part of Diocletian's tetrarchical system of rule is also controversial. Many researchers suspect that Diocletian's plan provided that every emperor should actively rule for 20 years: ten years as Caesar and then ten years as Augustus . This would have ensured that at least every 10 years two new men could rise to the imperial rank. This system was also later followed by Galerius. Some researchers, however, follow the (albeit clearly hostile) presentation of lactance, according to which Galerius 305 initiated and enforced Diocletian's resignation. Timothy D. Barnes suspects in this connection that at the imperial meeting of 303 a completely different succession order was established, according to which Constantine (the son of Constantius I) was the new Caesar of Galerius and Maxentius (the son of Maximian) was the new Caesar Constantius 'I. should have been. However, as Lactanz reports, Galerius had prevented this and instead had his nephew Maximinus Daia and his friend Severus raised his mind . In the long term, he also planned a succession to the throne of his son Candidianus . The exact circumstances of the process of resignation can also hardly be reconstructed with certainty. For the general population, however, the resignation came as a surprise.
The fact that after Diocletian's resignation coins were minted that show him slightly bent on the portrait side and show the divine providence of the resting Augusti with the inscription PROVIDENTIA DEORVM QVIES AVGG on the reverse could be interpreted as an indication that a temporary rule was being advertised should. The corresponding motifs were also struck on the coins of Maximianus.
The second tetrarchy
What is certain, however, is that Maximian in the west appointed Constantius as the new higher-ranking Augustus and Severus as Caesar, in the east Galerius was appointed Augustus and Maximinus Daia Caesar accordingly. Constantius ruled in the west of the empire from Trier over Gaul, Britain and Hispania; Galerius, whose seat of government was in Thessalonike (at times also Serdica and Sirmium ), over the Balkan provinces and Asia Minor. Severus' official district comprised Italy and Africa , his seat of government was Milan; Maximinus Daia ruled from Antioch over the Middle East and Egypt. Diocletian and Maximian, who now appear on inscriptions and coins as senior Augusti , sometimes also as patres impp. et Caess., ie appearing as the "fathers" of the reigning emperors, did not actively conduct official business, but retained their auctoritas, with which they additionally legitimized the ruling emperors.
In 305 Constantius began a campaign against the Picts in Britain , to which his son Constantine came to his aid. The campaign was evidently successful, but Augustus died at the end of July 306 of a serious illness. The second tetrarchy with the Augusti Constantius and Galerius failed, among other things, because the dynastic principle could not be completely eliminated: Both Maximian and Constantius had ambitious sons who claimed the title of Augustus for themselves, and Maximian himself became active again in the meantime.
Dissolution of the Tetrarchy
When Constantius Chlorus died in 306, his son Constantine was proclaimed Augustus by the troops , shortly afterwards Maxentius , the son of Maximian, made himself Augustus (not recognized by the other emperors) in Rome . In a conference called in Carnuntum in 308 Diocletian succeeded in stabilizing the system of the tetrarchy for a short time. Galerius and Licinius became Augusti, Konstantin and Maximinus Daia were given the new title filii Augustorum (in fact they were Caesars). Maxentius still ruled Rome itself.
After the death of Galerius in 311 there were four emperors: Licinius, Konstantin, Maximinus Daia and still Maxentius in Rome. Possibly also belonged Candidianus briefly on the Ruler college. Licinius and Constantine allied and went against the other two. Constantine defeated Maxentius 312 in the battle of the Milvian Bridge , Licinius 313 Maximinus Daia. Between 322 and 324 there was a battle between Constantine and Licinius, and from 324 Constantine was sole ruler.
It had been shown that dynastic thinking had not disappeared, especially in the army. The soldiers stuck to their generals or their relatives (as in the case of Constantine's elevation to Augustus after the death of his father). In 324 the system of tetrarchy had failed, which was in fact synonymous with the extensive (but not final) implementation of the dynastic principle.
Aftermath of the tetrarchical order
At the same time, Diocletian's legacy remained partially intact, because multiple empires were also the rule from then on: After 284, only 324–337, 361–363 ( Julian ) and 394/95 ( Theodosius I ) were to be ruled by a single emperor - and also Theodosius had already made his underage sons co-rulers. Even Constantine seems to have planned a new tetrarchy towards the end of his life, which should, however, consist of his natural relatives: In addition to his three sons, his nephew Dalmatius should also have a share in power. And apparently at the end of Late Antiquity, Emperor Maurikios had plans to do this when he stipulated in his will in 597 that the rule would be divided between his four sons.
Schematic overview
1. Tetrarchy (293-305)
| west | east | |
|---|---|---|
| Augusti | Maximian | Diocletian |
| Caesares | Constantius I. Chlorus | Galerius |
2. Tetrarchy (305–306)
After the resignation of the two Augustis , the previous Caesares move up and appoint two new Caesares . Maximinus Daia is the nephew of Galerius.
| west | east | |
|---|---|---|
| Augusti | Constantius I. Chlorus | Galerius |
| Caesares | Severus | Maximinus Daia |
3rd Tetrarchy (306-308)
After the death of Constantius, his troops proclaim his son Constantine to be the new Augustus . Galerius, however, elevated Severus to the new junior Augustus and accepted Constantine with the rank of Caesar .
| west | east | |
|---|---|---|
| Augusti | Severus | Galerius |
| Caesares | Constantine I. | Maximinus Daia |
4th Tetrarchy (308-311)
After the death of Severus, Constantine did not move up to the higher rank, but Licinius was appointed the new Augustus of the West at the Imperial Conference of Carnuntum .
| west | east | |
|---|---|---|
| Augusti | Licinius | Galerius |
| Caesares | Constantine I. | Maximinus Daia |
Situation from May 311
For further development see dissolution of the Roman tetrarchy .
literature
- Dietrich Boschung , Werner Eck (ed.): The tetrarchy. A new system of government and its media presentation. Reichert, Wiesbaden 2006.
- Alexander Demandt , Andreas Goltz, Heinrich Schlange-Schöningen (ed.): Diocletian and the tetrarchy. Aspects of a turning point. de Gruyter, Berlin et al. 2004.
- Frank Kolb : Diocletian and the First Tetrarchy. Improvisation or experiment in the organization of monarchical rule? de Gruyter, Berlin / New York 1987, ISBN 3-11-010934-4 (= studies on ancient literature and history, volume 27).
- Wolfgang Kuhoff : Diocletian and the epoch of the tetrarchy. The Roman Empire between crisis management and rebuilding (284–313 AD). Lang, Frankfurt am Main 2001.
- Roger Rees: Diocletian and the Tetrarchy. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh 2004, ISBN 0-7486-1661-6 .
Web links
Remarks
- ↑ Hubert Fehr, Philipp von Rummel: Die Völkerwanderung , Stuttgart 2011, p. 34.
- ↑ On this vicious circle cf. Felix Hartmann, Change of Rulers and Imperial Crisis, Frankfurt am Main 1982.
- ↑ Cf. for example Ingemar König , The calling of Constantius Chlorus and Galerius to Caesars. Thoughts on the origin of the First Tetrarchy, in: Chiron 4, 1976, pp. 567-576.
- ^ Kolb, Diocletian and the First Tetrarchy , p. 115.
- ↑ See Henning Börm , Born to be emperor. The Principle of Succession and the Roman Monarchy, in: Johannes Wienand (Ed.), Contested Monarchy , Oxford 2015, pp. 243–246.
- ↑ Lactanz, de mortibus persecutorum 17, 5-9.
- ↑ A detailed discussion of the sources and research on this aspect is provided by Kuhoff, Diocletian and the Epoch of Tetrarchy, pp. 299–307, who ultimately advocates dating the final decision to 303.
- ↑ For example Kolb, Diocletian and the First Tetrarchy , pp. 128–158, conclusion p. 157 f.
- ↑ Lactantius, de mortibus persecutorum 18; 20; Timothy D. Barnes, Christianity and dynastic politics (300–325) , in: François Paschoud , Joachim Szidat (eds.), Usurpationen in der Spätantike. Files of the colloquium “Coup d'état and statehood” 6. – 10. March 1996, Solothurn / Bern , Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart 1997, pp. 99-109, here pp. 103 f., 109.
- ↑ Kuhoff, Diocletian and the Epoch of Tetrarchy, p. 784.
- ↑ Kampmann, The coins of the Roman Empire, Regenstauf 2004, p. 372 No. 119.99 and p. 376 No. 120.89
- ↑ Kuhoff, Diocletian and the Epoch of Tetrarchy , p. 787.
- ↑ On the importance of the senior Augusti Kuhoff, Diokletian und die Epoche der Tetrarchy, pp. 784–787.
- ↑ On this Kuhoff, Diocletian and the epoch of the tetrarchy , p. 794.
- ^ Heinrich Chantraine : The order of succession to Constantine the Great, Steiner, Stuttgart 1992.