Diocletian - Roman Emperor: 284-305 A.D. -
Bronze Antoninianus 20mm (2.8 grams) Struck at the mint of Cyzicus 295-296 A.D.
Reference: RIC 15f (VI, Cyzicus)
IMP C C VAL DIOCLETIANVS P F AVG - Radiate, cuirassed bust right.
CONCORDIA MILITVM - Diocletian standing right on left, receiving globe from
Jupiter to right, holding scepter, HΓ in exergue.
You are bidding on the exact item pictured,
provided with a Certificate of Authenticity and Lifetime Guarantee of
Authenticity.
Gaius
Aurelius Valerius Diocletianus (c. 22 December 244[3] – 3
December 311[5]),
born Diocles (Greek:
Διοκλῆς) and commonly known as
Diocletian, was
Roman
Emperor from 20 November 284 to 1 May 305. Born to a
Dalmatian
family of low status, he rose through the ranks of the military to become
cavalry commander to the emperor
Carus. After the
deaths of Carus and his son
Numerian on
campaign in Persia, Diocletian was acclaimed emperor by the army. A brief
confrontation with Carus' other surviving son
Carinus at
the
Battle of the Margus removed the only other claimant to the title. With his
ascension to power, he ended the
Crisis of the Third Century. Diocletian appointed fellow-officer
Maximian
his
Augustus, his senior co-emperor, in 285. He delegated further on 1 March
293, appointing
Galerius and
Constantius as
Caesars, junior co-emperors. Under this "Tetrarchy",
or "rule of four", each emperor would rule over a quarter-division of the
empire. In campaigns against
Sarmatian
and Danubian
tribes (285–90), the
Alamanni
(288), and usurpers in
Egypt (297–98), Diocletian secured the empire's borders and purged it of
threats to his power. In 299, Diocletian led negotiations with
Sassanid Persia, the empire's traditional enemy, and achieved a lasting and
favorable peace.
Diocletian separated and enlarged the empire's civil and
military services and re-organized the empire's provincial divisions,
establishing the largest and most
bureaucratic government in the history of the empire. He established new
administrative centers in
Nicomedia,
Mediolanum,
Antioch, and
Trier, closer to
the empire's frontiers than the traditional capital at Rome had been. Building
on third-century trends towards absolutism, Diocletian styled himself an
autocrat, elevating himself above the empire's masses with imposing forms of
court ceremonial and architecture. Bureaucratic and military growth, constant
campaigning, and construction projects increased the state's expenditures, and
necessitated a comprehensive tax reform. From at least 297 on, imperial taxation
was standardized, made more equitable, and levied at generally higher rates.
Not all Diocletian's plans were successful; the
Edict on Maximum Prices (301), Diocletian's attempt to curb
inflation
via
price controls, was unsuccessful, counterproductive, and quickly ignored.
Although effective while he ruled, Diocletian's Tetrarchic system collapsed
after his abdication under the competing dynastic claims of
Maxentius
and
Constantine, sons of Maximian and Constantius respectively. The
Diocletianic Persecution (303–11), the empire's last, largest, and bloodiest
official persecution of
Christianity, did not destroy the empire's Christian community; indeed,
after 324 Christianity became the empire's preferred religion under its first
Christian emperor,
Constantine. In spite of his failures, Diocletian's reforms fundamentally
changed the structure of Roman imperial government and helped stabilize the
empire economically and militarily, enabling an empire that had seemed near the
brink of collapse in Diocletian's youth to remain essentially intact for another
hundred years. Weakened by illness, Diocletian left the imperial office on May
1, 305, and became the first Roman emperor to voluntarily abdicate the position.
He lived out his retirement in
his palace on the Dalmatian coast, tending to his vegetable gardens. His
palace went on to become the core of the modern day city of
Split
Early
life
Diocletian was probably born near
Salona in
Dalmatia (Solin
in modern Croatia),
some time around 244.[3]
His parents named him Diocles, or possibly Diocles Valerius.[6]
The modern historian
Timothy Barnes takes his official birthday, 22 December, as his actual
birthdate. Other historians are not so certain.[7]
Diocles' parents were of low status, and writers critical of him claimed that
his father was a
scribe or a
freedman of the senator Anullinus, or even that Diocles was a freedman
himself. The first forty years of his life are mostly obscure.[8]
The
Byzantine chronicler
Joannes Zonaras states that he was
Dux
Moesiae,[9]
a commander of forces on the lower
Danube.[10]
The often-unreliable
Historia Augusta states that he served in Gaul, but this account is not
corroborated by other sources, and is ignored by modern historians of the
period.[11]
In 282, the legions of the upper Danube in
Raetia and
Noricum
proclaimed the
praetorian prefect M. Aurelius
Carus as emperor,
beginning a rebellion against emperor
Probus.[12]
Probus' army, stationed in
Sirmium (Sremska
Mitrovica,
Serbia), decided against fighting Carus, and assassinated Probus instead.[13]
Diocles soon gained Carus' trust. Carus soon appointed him to command the
Protectores Domestici, the cavalry arm of the imperial bodyguard.[14]
Carus, already sixty at his accession, wished to establish a
dynasty that could outlive him.[15]]
He immediately elevated his sons
Carinus and
Numerian to
the rank of Caesar.[16]
In 283, Carus raised Carinus to the rank of Augustus,[17]
left him in charge of the care of the West, and moved with Numerian, Diocles,
and the praetorian prefect
Aper to the East, against the
Sassanid Empire. The Sassanids had been embroiled in a succession dispute
since the death of
Shapur I in
272, and were in no position to oppose Carus' advance.[18]
According to Zonaras,
Eutropius,
and
Festus, Carus won a major victory against the Persians, taking
Seleucia
and the Sassanid capital of
Ctesiphon
(near modern
Al-Mada'in,
Iraq), cities on
opposite banks of the
Tigris.[19]
In celebration, Carus and his sons took the
title Persici maximi.[20]
Carus died in July or early August,[21]
reportedly struck by lightning.[22]
Carus' death left his unpopular sons Numerian and Carinus as
the new Augusti. Carinus quickly made his way to Rome from Gaul, and arrived by
January 284; Numerian lingered in the East.[23]
The Roman retreat from Persia was orderly. Since the Persian King
Bahram II
was still struggling to establish his authority, he could not field any armies
against them. The Romans left the country unopposed.[24]
By March 284 Numerian had only reached Emesa (Hims)
in Syria; by
November, only Asia Minor.[25]
In Emesa he was apparently still alive and in good health (he issued the only
extant rescript
in his name there),[26][notes
1] but after he left the city, his staff, including the prefect Aper,
reported that he suffered from an inflammation of the eyes. He traveled in a
closed coach from then on.[28]
When the army reached
Bithynia,[23]
some of Numerian's soldiers smelled an odor reminiscent of a decaying corpse
emanating from the coach.[24]
They opened its curtains. Inside, they found Numerian, dead.[29]
Aper officially broke the news in
Nicomedia
(İzmit) in
November.[30]
Numerianus' generals and tribunes called a council for the succession, and chose
Diocles as emperor,[31]
in spite of Aper's attempts to garner support.[30]
On 20 November 284, the army of the east gathered on a hill 5 km
(3.1 mi) outside
Nicomedia. The army unanimously saluted their new Augustus, and Diocles accepted
the purple imperial vestments. He raised his sword to the light of the sun, and
swore an oath disclaiming responsibility for Numerian's death. He asserted that
Aper had killed Numerian and concealed it.[32]
In full view of the army, Diocles drew his blade and killed Aper.[33]
According to the Historia Augusta, he quoted from
Virgil while
doing so.[34]
Soon after Aper's death, Diocles changed his name to the more Latinate "Diocletianus",[35]
in full Gaius Aurelius Valerius Diocletianus.[36]
Conflict
with Carinus
After his accession, Diocletian and Lucius Caesonius Bassus[37]
were named as consuls.[38]
They assumed the
fasces in
place of Carinus and Numerianus. Bassus was a member of a
Campanian
senatorial family, a former consul and a proconsul of Africa. He had been
chosen by Probus for signal distinction.[39]
He was a man skilled in areas of government where Diocletian, presumably, had no
experience.[30]
Diocletian's elevation of Bassus as consul symbolized his rejection of Carinus'
government in Rome, his refusal to accept second-tier status to any other
emperor,[39]
and his willingness to continue the long-standing collaboration between the
empire's senatorial and military aristocracies.[30]
It also tied his success to that of the Senate, whose support he would need in
an advance on Rome.[39]
Diocletian was not the only challenger to Carinus' rule; the
usurper
M. Aurelius Julianus, Carinus' corrector Venetiae, took control of
northern Italy
and Pannonia
after Diocletian's accession.[40]
He minted coins from the mint at Siscia (Sisak,
Croatia) declaring himself as emperor and promising freedom. It was all good
press for Diocletian, and aided in his portrayal of Carinus as a cruel and
oppressive tyrant.[41]
Julianus' forces were weak, however, and were handily dispersed when Carinus'
armies moved from Britain to northern Italy. As leader of the united East,
Diocletian was clearly the greater threat.[42]
Over the winter of 284–85, Diocletian advanced west across the
Balkans. In
the spring, some time before the end of May,[43]
his armies met Carinus' across the river Margus (Great
Morava) in
Moesia. In modern accounts, the site has been located between the Mons
Aureus (Seone, west of
Smederevo)
and
Viminacium,[39]
near modern
Belgrade, Serbia.[44]
Despite having the stronger army, Carinus held the weaker
position. His rule was unpopular; it was subsequently alleged that Carinus had
mistreated the Senate and seduced the wives of his officers.[45]
It is possible that
Flavius Constantius, the governor of Dalmatia and Diocletian's associate in
the household guard, had already defected to Diocletian in the early spring.[46]
When the
Battle of the Margus began, Carinus' prefect Aristobulus also defected.[30]
In the course of the battle, Carinus was killed by his own men. Following
Diocletian's victory, both the western and the eastern armies acclaimed him
emperor.[47]]
Diocletian exacted an oath of allegiance from the defeated army and departed for
Italy.[48]
Early
rule
Diocletian may have become involved in battles against the
Quadi and
Marcomanni
immediately after the Battle of the Margus. He eventually made his way to
northern Italy and made an imperial government, but it is not known whether
Diocletian visited the city of Rome at this time.[49]
There is a contemporary issue of coins suggestive of an imperial
adventus (arrival) for the city,[50]
but some modern historians state that Diocletian avoided the city, and that he
did so on principle; the city and its Senate were no longer politically relevant
to the affairs of the empire, and needed to be taught as much. Diocletian dated
his reign from his elevation by the army, not the date of his ratification by
the Senate,[51]
following the practice established by Carus, who had declared the Senate's
ratification a useless formality.[52]
If Diocletian ever did enter Rome shortly after his accession, he did not stay
long;[53]
he is attested back in the Balkans by November 2, 285, on campaign against the
Sarmatians.[54]
Diocletian replaced the
prefect of Rome with his consular colleague Bassus. Most officials who had
served under Carinus, however, retained their offices under Diocletian.[55]
In an act the epitomator
Aurelius Victor denotes as unusual act of clementia,[56]
Diocletian did not kill or depose Carinus' traitorous praetorian prefect and
consul Ti. Claudius Aurelius Aristobulus, but confirmed him in both roles,[57]
and later gave him the proconsulate of Africa and the rank of urban prefect.[58]
The other figures who retained their offices might have also betrayed Carinus.[59]
Maximian
made co-emperor
Recent history had demonstrated that sole rulership was
dangerous to the stability of the empire. The assassinations of
Aurelian
(r. 270–75) and Probus testified to that truth.[30]
Conflict boiled in every province of the empire, from Gaul to Syria, from Egypt
to the lower Danube. It was too much for a single person to control, and
Diocletian needed a lieutenant.[61]
At some time in 285 at
Mediolanum
(Milan, Italy),[notes
2] Diocletian raised his fellow-officer
Maximian to
the office of
Caesar, making him co-emperor.[64]
The concept of dual rulership was nothing new to the Roman
Empire.
Augustus, the first emperor (r. 27 BC–AD 14), had shared power with his
colleagues, and more formal offices of co-emperor had existed from
Marcus Aurelius (r. 161–80) on.[65]
Most recently, the emperor Carus and his sons had ruled together, albeit
unsuccessfully. Diocletian was in a less comfortable position than most of his
predecessors, as he had a daughter, Valeria, but no sons. His co-ruler had to be
from outside his family. He could not, therefore, be easily trusted.[66]
Some historians state that Diocletian, like some emperors before him, adopted
Maximian as his filius Augusti, his "Augustan son", upon his appointment
to the throne.[67]
This argument has not been universally accepted.[68]
The relationship between Diocletian and Maximian was quickly
couched in religious terms. Circa 287 Diocletian assumed the title Iovius,
and Maximian assumed the title Herculius.[69]
The titles were probably meant to convey certain characteristics of their
associated leaders; Diocletian, in
Jovian style, would take on the dominating roles of planning and commanding;
Maximian, in
Herculian mode, would act as Jupiter's
heroic subordinate.[70]
For all their religious connotations, the emperors were not "gods" in the
tradition of the
Imperial cult—although they may have been hailed as such in Imperial
panegyrics. Instead, they were seen as the gods' representatives, effecting
their will on earth.[71]
The shift to divine sanctification from military acclamation took the power to
appoint emperors away from the army. Religious legitimization elevated
Diocletian and Maximian above potential rivals in a way military power and
dynastic claims could not.[72]
After his acclamation, Maximian was dispatched to fight the rebel
Bagaudae in
Gaul. Diocletian returned to the East.[73]]
Diocletian progressed slowly. By November 2, he had only
reached Citivas Iovia (Botivo, near
Ptuj,
Slovenia).[74]
In the Balkans during the autumn of 285, he encountered a tribe of
Sarmatians
who demanded assistance from the emperor. The Sarmatians requested that
Diocletian either help them recover their lost lands or grant them pasturage
rights within the empire. Diocletian refused and fought a battle with them, but
was unable to secure a complete victory. The nomadic pressures of the
European Plain remained, and could not be solved by a single war; soon the
Sarmatians would have to be fought again.[75]
He wintered in
Nicomedia.[notes
3] There may have been a revolt in the eastern provinces at this time,
because Diocletian brought settlers from
Asia to populate emptied farmlands in
Thrace.[77]
He visited
Judea the following spring.[notes
4] He probably returned to Nicomedia for the winter. Diocletian's stay
in the East saw diplomatic success in the conflict with Persia: in 287, Bahram
II granted him precious gifts, declared open friendship with the empire, and
invited Diocletian to visit him.[80]]
Roman sources insist that the act was entirely voluntary.[81]
Around the same time, perhaps in 287,[82]
Persia relinquished claims on
Armenia and
recognized Roman authority over territory to the west and south of the Tigris.
The western portion of Armenia was incorporated into the Roman empire and made a
province.
Tiridates III,
Arsacid claimant to the Armenian throne and Roman client, had been
disinherited and forced to take refuge in the Roman empire after the Persian
conquest of 252/3. In 287, he returned to lay claim to the eastern half of his
ancestral domain. He encountered no opposition.[83]
Bahram II's gifts were widely recognized as symbolic of a victory in the ongoing
conflict with Persia; Diocletian was hailed as the "founder of eternal
peace". The events might have represented a formal end to Carus' eastern
campaign, which probably ended without an acknowledged peace.[84]
At the conclusion of discussions with the Persians, Diocletian re-organized the
Mesopotamian frontier and fortified the city of
Circesium
(Buseire, Syria) on the
Euphrates.[85]
Maximian's campaigns were not proceeding as smoothly. The
Bagaudae had been easily suppressed, but
Carausius,
the man he had put in charge of operations against
Saxon and
Frankish
pirates on the
Saxon
Shore, had begun keeping the goods seized from the pirates for himself.
Maximian issued a death-warrant for his larcenous subordinate. Carausius fled
the Continent, proclaimed himself Augustus, and spurred Britain and northwestern
Gaul into open revolt against Maximian and Diocletian.[86]
Spurred by the crisis, on April 1, 286,[87][notes
5] Maximian took up the title of
Augustus.[91]
Maximian's appointment is unusual in that it was impossible for Diocletian to
have been present to witness the event. It has even been suggested that Maximian
usurped the title, and was only later recognized by Diocletian in hopes of
avoiding civil war.[92]
Although this suggestion is unpopular, it is clear that Diocletian meant for
Maximian to act with a certain amount of independence from Diocletian.
Maximian realized that he could not immediately suppress the
rogue commander, and so, for the whole campaigning season of 287, campaigned
against tribes beyond the
Rhinee instead.[95]
The following spring, as Maximian prepared a fleet for an expedition against
Carausius, Diocletian returned from the East to meet Maximian. The two emperors
agreed on a joint campaign against the
Alamanni.
Diocletian invaded Germania through Raetia while Maximian progressed from Mainz.
Each emperor burned crops and food supplies as he went, destroying the Germans'
means of sustenance.[96]
The two men added territory to the empire and allowed Maximian to continue
preparations against Carausius without further disturbance.[97]
On his return to the East, Diocletian managed what was probably another rapid
campaign against the resurgent Sarmatians. No details survive, but surviving
inscriptions indicate that Diocletian took the title Sarmaticus Maximus
after 289.[98]]
Palmyrene
sphere of influence,[99]
or simply attempting to reduce the frequency of their incursions.[100]
No details survive for these events.[101]
Some of the princes of these states were Persian client kings; a disturbing fact
in light of increasing tensions with that kingdom.[102]
In the West, Maximian lost the fleet built in 288 and 289, probably in the early
spring of 290. The panegyrist who refers to the loss suggests that its cause was
a storm,[103]
but this might simply be the panegyrist's attempt to conceal an embarrassing
military defeat.[104]
Diocletian broke off his tour of the Eastern provinces soon thereafter. He
returned with haste to the West, reaching Emesa by May 10, 290,[105]
and Sirmium on the Danube by July 1, 290.[106]
Diocletian met Maximian in Milan in the winter of 290–91,
either in late December 290 or January 291.[107]
The meeting was undertaken with a sense of solemn pageantry. The emperors spent
most of their time in public appearances. It has been surmised that the
ceremonies were arranged to demonstrate Diocletian's continuing support for his
faltering colleague.[99]
A deputation from the Roman Senate met with the emperors, renewing that body's
infrequent contact with the imperial office.[108]
The choice of Milan over Rome further snubbed the capital's pride. But then it
was already a long established practice that Rome itself was only a ceremonial
capital, as the actual seat of the imperial administration was determined by the
needs of defense. Long before Diocletian,
Gallienus
(r. 253–68) had already chosen Milan as the seat of his headquarters.[109]
If the panegyric detailing the ceremony implied that the true center of the
empire was not Rome, but where the emperor sat ("...the capital of the Empire
appeared to be there, where the two emperors met"[110]),
it simply echoed what had already been stated by the historian
Herodian in
the early third century: "Rome is where the emperor is".[111]
During the meeting, decisions on matters of politics and war were probably made,
but they were made in secret.[112]
The Augusti would not meet again until 303.[99]9]
Tetrarchy
Foundation
of the Tetrarchy
Some time after his return, and before 293, Diocletian
transferred command of the war against Carausius from Maximian to Flavius
Constantius. Constantius was a former governor of Dalmatia and a man of military
experience stretching back to
Aurelian's
campaigns against
Zenobia (272–73). He was Maximian's praetorian prefect in Gaul, and the
husband to Maximian's daughter,
Theodora. On March 1, 293 at Milan, Maximian gave Constantius the office of
Caesar.[113]
In the spring of 293, in either Philippopolis (Plovdiv,
Bulgaria)
or Sirmium, Diocletian would do the same for
Galerius,
husband to Diocletian's daughter Valeria, and perhaps Diocletian's praetorian
prefect.[notes
6] Constantius was assigned Gaul and Britain. Galerius was assigned
Syria, Palestine, Egypt, and responsibility for the eastern borderlands.[115]5]
Greek
term meaning "rulership by four".[116]
The Tetrarchic emperors were more or less sovereign in their own lands, and they
travelled with their own imperial courts, administrators, secretaries, and
armies.[117]
They were joined by blood and marriage; Diocletian and Maximian now styled
themselves as brothers. The senior co-emperors formally adopted Galerius and
Constantius as sons in 293. These relationships implied a line of succession.
Galerius and Constantius would become Augusti after Diocletian and Maximian's
departure. Maximian's son
Maxentius,
and Constantius' son
Constantine would then become Caesars. In preparation for their future
roles, Constantine and Maxentius were taken to Diocletian's court in Nicomedia.[118]8]
Diocletian spent the spring of 293 traveling with Galerius
from Sirmium to
Byzantium
(Istanbul,
Turkey).
Diocletian then returned to Sirmium, where he would remain for the following
winter and spring. He campaigned against the Sarmatians again in 294, probably
in the autumn,[120]
and won a victory against them. The Sarmatians' defeat kept them from the Danube
provinces for a long time. Meanwhile, Diocletian built forts north of the
Danube,[121]
at Aquincum
(Budapest,
Hungary),
Bononia (Vidin,
Bulgaria), Ulcisia Vetera, Castra Florentium, Intercisa (Dunaújváros,
Hungary), and Onagrinum (Begeč,
Serbia). The new forts became part of a new defensive line called the Ripa
Sarmatica.[122]
In 295 and 296 Diocletian campaigned in the region again, and won a victory over
the Carpi in the summer of 296.[123]
Afterwards, during 299 and 302, as Diocletian was then residing in the East, it
was Galerius' turn to campaign victoriously on the Danube[124].
By the end of his reign, Diocletian had secured the entire length of the Danube,
provided it with forts, bridgeheads, highways, and walled towns, and sent
fifteen or more legions to patrol the region; an inscription at
Sexaginta Prista on the Lower Danube extolled restored tranquilitas
at the region.[125]5]
The defense came at a heavy cost, but was a significant achievement in an area
difficult to defend.Galerius, meanwhile, was engaged during 291-293 in disputes
in Upper
Egypt, where he suppressed a regional uprising
[127].
He would return to Syria in 295 to fight the revanchist Persian Empire.[128]
Diocletian's attempts to bring the Egyptian tax system in line with imperial
standards stirred discontent, and a revolt swept the region after Galerius'
departure.[129]
The usurper
L. Domitius Domitianus declared himself Augustus in July or August 297. Much
of Egypt, including
Alexandria,
recognized his rule.[128]
Diocletian moved into Egypt to suppress him, first putting down rebels in the
Thebaid in
the autumn of 297,[120]
then moving on to besiege Alexandria. Domitianus died in December 297,[130]
by which time Diocletian had secured control of the Egyptian countryside.
Alexandria, whose defense was organized under Diocletian's former
corrector
Aurelius Achilleus, held out until a later date, probably March 298.[131]1]
Bureaucratic affairs were completed during Diocletian's stay:[132]
a census took place, and Alexandria, in punishment for its rebellion, lost the
ability to mint independently.[133]
Diocletian's reforms in the region, combined with those of Septimus Severus,
brought Egyptian administrative practices much closer to Roman standards.[134]
Diocletian travelled south along the Nile the following summer, where he visited
Oxyrhynchus and
Elephantine.[133]
In Nubia, he made peace with the
Nobatae and
Blemmyes tribes. Under the terms of the peace treaty Rome's borders moved
north to Philae
and the two tribes received an annual gold stipend. Diocletian left Africa
quickly after the treaty, moving from Upper Egypt in September 298 to Syria in
February 299. He met up with Galerius in Mesopotamia.[119]
War
with Persia
In 294,
Narseh, a son
of Shapur who had been passed over for the Sassanid succession, came to power in
Persia. Narseh eliminated
Bahram III,
a young man installed in the wake of Bahram II's death in 293.[135]
In early 294, Narseh sent Diocletian the customary package of gifts between the
empires, and Diocletian responded with an exchange of ambassadors. Within
Persia, however, Narseh was destroying every trace of his immediate predecessors
from public monuments. He sought to identify himself with the warlike kings
Ardashir
(r. 226–41) and
Shapur (r. 241–72), the same Shapur who had sacked Roman Antioch and skinned
the Emperor
Valerian (r. 253–260) to decorate his war temple.[136]
Narseh declared war on Rome in 295 or 296. He appears to have
first invaded western Armenia, where he seized the lands delivered to Tiridates
in the peace of 287.[137]
Narseh moved south into Roman Mesopotamia in 297, where he inflicted a severe
defeat on Galerius in the region between Carrhae (Harran,
Turkey) and Callinicum (Ar-Raqqah,
Syria)[138]
(and thus, the historian
Fergus Millar notes, probably somewhere on the
Balikh river).[139]
Diocletian may or may not have been present at the battle,[140]
but he quickly divested himself of all responsibility. In a public ceremony at
Antioch, the official version of events was clear: Galerius was responsible for
the defeat; Diocletian was not. Diocletian publicly humiliated Galerius, forcing
him to walk for a mile at the head of the imperial caravan, still clad in the
purple robes of the emperor.[141]1]Galerius was reinforced, probably in the spring of 298, by a
new contingent collected from the empire's Danubian holdings.[144]
Narseh did not advance from Armenia and Mesopotamia, leaving Galerius to lead
the offensive in 298 with an attack on northern Mesopotamia via Armenia.[145][notes
8] It is unclear if Diocletian was present to assist the campaign; he
might have returned to Egypt or Syria.[notes
9] Narseh retreated to Armenia to fight Galerius' force, to Narseh's
disadvantage; the rugged Armenian terrain was favorable to Roman infantry, but
unfavorable to Sassanid cavalry. In two battles, Galerius won major victories
over Narseh. During the second encounter, Roman forces seized Narseh's camp, his
treasury, his harem, and his wife.[149]
Galerius continued moving down the Tigris, and took the Persian capital at
Ctesiphon before returning to Roman territory along the Euphrates.[150]
Peace
negotiations
Narseh sent an ambassador to Galerius to plead for the return
of his wives and children in the course of the war, but Galerius had dismissed
him.[151]
Serious peace negotiations began in the spring of 299. Diocletian and Galerius'
magister memoriae (secretary) Sicorius Probus were sent to Narseh to
present terms.[151]
The conditions of the peace were heavy;[152]
Armenia returned to Roman domination, with the fort of Ziatha as its border;
Caucasian Iberia would pay allegiance to Rome under a Roman appointee;
Nisibis, now under Roman rule, would become the sole conduit for trade between
Persia and Rome; and Rome would exercise control over the five satrapies between
the Tigris and Armenia:
Ingilene, Sophanene (Sophene),
Arzanene (Aghdznik),
Corduene (Carduene),
and
Zabdicene (near modern
Hakkâri,
Turkey). These regions included the passage of the Tigris through the
Anti-Taurus range; the
Bitlis pass,
the quickest southerly route into Persian Armenia; and access to the
Tur Abdin
plateau.[153]
A stretch of land containing the later strategic strongholds
of Amida (Diyarbakır,
Turkey) and Bezabde came under firm Roman military occupation.[154]
With these territories, Rome would have an advance station north of Ctesiphon,
and would be able to slow any future advance of Persian forces through the
region.[152]
The Tigris was said to have become the boundary between the two empires, but
what this means is unclear, as the satrapies listed all lie on the far side of
the river. Millar suggests that the satrapies might have been held under a loose
Roman hegemony, without military occupation.[154]
At the conclusion of the peace, Tiridates regained both his throne and the
entirety of his ancestral claim.[151]
Rome secured a wide zone of cultural influence, which led to a wide diffusion of
Syriac Christianity from a center at Nisibis in later decades, and the
eventual Christianization of Armenia.[152]52]
Religious
persecutions
Early
persecutions
At the conclusion of the peace, Diocletian and Galerius
returned to Syrian Antioch.[155]
At some time in 299, the emperors took part in a ceremony of
sacrifice
and
divination in an attempt to predict the future. The
haruspices
were unable to read the entrails of the sacrificed animals, and blamed
Christians in the imperial household. The emperors ordered all members of the
court to perform a sacrifice to purify the palace. The emperors sent letters to
the military command, demanding the entire army perform the required sacrifices
or face discharge.[156]
Diocletian was conservative in matters of religion, a man faithful to the
traditional Roman pantheon and understanding of demands for religious
purification,[157]
but
Eusebius,
Lactantius
and
Constantine state that it was Galerius, not Diocletian, who was the prime
supporter of the purge, and its greatest beneficiary.[158]
Galerius, even more devoted and passionate than Diocletian, saw political
advantage in the politics of persecution. He was willing to break with a
government policy of inaction on the issue.[159]
Antioch was Diocletian's primary residence from 299 to 302,
while Galerius swapped places with his Augustus on the Middle and Lower Danube[160].
He visited Egypt once, over the winter of 301–2, and issued a grain dole in
Alexandria.[159]
Following some public disputes with
Manicheans, Diocletian ordered that the leading followers of
Mani be burnt alive along with their scriptures. In a March 31, 302 rescript
from Alexandria, he declared that low-status Manicheans must be executed by the
blade, and high-status Manicheans must be sent to work in the quarries of
Proconnesus (Marmara
Island, Turkey) or the mines of Phaeno in southern
Palestine.
All Manichean property was to be seized and deposited in the imperial treasury.[161]
Diocletian found much to be offended by in Manichean religion: its novelty, its
alien origins, the way it corrupted the morals of the Roman race, and its
inherent opposition to long-standing religious traditions.[162]
Manichaeanism was also supported by Persia at the time, compounding religious
dissent with international politics.[163]
Excepting Persian support, the reasons why he disliked Manichaenism were equally
applicable, if not more so, to Christianity, his next target.[164]
Great
Persecution
Diocletian returned to Antioch in the autumn of 302. He
ordered that the
deacon
Romanus of Caesarea have his tongue removed for defying the order of the
courts and interrupting official sacrifices. Romanus was then sent to prison,
where he was executed on November 17, 303. Diocletian believed that Romanus of
Caesarea was arrogant, and he left the city for Nicomedia in the winter,
accompanied by Galerius.[165]
According to Lactantius, Diocletian and Galerius entered into an argument over
imperial policy towards Christians while wintering at Nicomedia in 302.
Diocletian argued that forbidding Christians from the bureaucracy and military
would be sufficient to appease the gods, but Galerius pushed for extermination.
The two men sought the advice of the
oracle of
Apollo at
Didyma.[166]66]
The oracle responded that "the just on earth"[167]
hindered Apollo's ability to provide advice. These "just", Diocletian was
informed by members of the court, could only refer to the Christians of the
empire. At the behest of his court, Diocletian acceded to demands for universal
persecution.[168]
On February 23, 303, Diocletian ordered that the newly built
church at Nicomedia be razed. He demanded that its scriptures be burned, and
seized its precious stores for the treasury.[169]
The next day, Diocletian's first "Edict against the Christians" was published.[170]
The edict ordered the destruction of Christian scriptures and places of worship
across the Empire, and prohibited Christians from assembling for worship.[171]
Before the end of February, a fire destroyed part of the imperial palace.[172]
Galerius convinced Diocletian that the culprits were Christians, conspirators
who had plotted with the
eunuchs of the palace. An investigation was commissioned, but no responsible
party was found. Executions followed anyway, and the palace eunuchs Dorotheus
and Gorgonius
were executed. One individual, Peter, was stripped, raised high, and scourged.
Salt and vinegar were poured in his wounds, and he was
slowly boiled over an open flame. The executions continued until at least
April 24, 303, when six individuals, including the
bishop
Anthimus, were
decapitated.[173]
A second fire occurred sixteen days after the first. Galerius left the city for
Rome, declaring Nicomedia unsafe.[172]
Diocletian would soon follow.[173]
Although further persecutionary edicts followed, compelling
the arrest of the Christian clergy and universal acts of sacrifice,[174]
the persecutionary edicts were ultimately unsuccessful; most Christians escaped
punishment, and even pagans were generally unsympathetic to the persecution. The
martyrs'
sufferings strengthened the resolve of their fellow Christians.[175]
Constantius and Maximian did not apply the later persecutionary edicts, and left
the Christians of the West unharmed.[176]
Galerius rescinded the edict in 311, announcing that the persecution had failed
to bring Christians back to traditional religion.[177]
The temporary apostasy of some Christians, and the surrendering of scriptures,
during the persecution played a major role in the subsequent
Donatist
controversy.[178]
Within twenty-five years of the persecution's inauguration, the Christian
emperor Constantine would rule the empire alone. He would reverse the
consequences of the edicts, and return all confiscated property to Christians.[179]
Under Constantine's rule, Christianity would become the empire's preferred
religion.[180]
Diocletian was demonized by his Christian successors: Lactantius intimated that
Diocletian's ascendancy heralded the apocalypse,[181]
and in
Serbian mythology, Diocletian is remembered as
Dukljan, the
adversary of
God.[182]
Later
life
Illness
and abdication
Diocletian entered the city of Rome in the early winter of
303. On November 20, he celebrated, with Maximian, the twentieth anniversary of
his reign (vicennalia), the tenth anniversary of the Tetrarchy (decennalia),
and a triumph for the war with Persia. Diocletian soon grew impatient with the
city, as the Romans acted towards him with what
Edward Gibbon, following
Lactantius,
calls "licentious familiarity"[183].
The Roman people did not give enough deference to his supreme authority; it
expected him to act the part of an aristocratic ruler, not a monarchic one. On
December 20, 303,[184]
Diocletian cut short his stay in Rome and left for the north. He did not even
perform the ceremonies investing him with his ninth consulate; he did them in
Ravenna on
January 1, 304 instead.[185]
There are suggestions in the
Panegyrici Latini and Lactantius' account that Diocletian arranged plans
for his and Maximian's future retirement of power in Rome. Maximian, according
to these accounts, swore to uphold Diocletian's plan in a ceremony in the
temple of Jupiter.[186]
From Ravenna, Diocletian left for the Danube. There, possibly
in Galerius' company, he took part in a campaign against the Carpi.[184]
He contracted a minor illness while on campaign, but his condition quickly
worsened and he chose to travel in a
litter. In the late summer he left for Nicomedia. On November 20, he
appeared in public to dedicate the opening of the circus beside his palace. He
collapsed soon after the ceremonies. Over the winter of 304–5 he kept within his
palace at all times. Rumors alleging that Diocletian's death was merely being
kept secret until Galerius could come to assume power spread through the city.
On December 13, he seemed to have finally died. The city was sent into a
mourning from which it was only retrieved by public declarations of his
survival. When Diocletian reappeared in public on March 1, 305, he was emaciated
and barely recognizable.[187]
Galerius arrived in the city later in March. According to
Lactantius, he came armed with plans to reconstitute the Tetrarchy, force
Diocletian to step down, and fill the imperial office with men compliant to his
will. Through coercion and threats, he eventually convinced Diocletian to comply
with his plan. Lactantius also claims that he had done the same to Maximian at
Sirmium.[188]
On May 1, 305, Diocletian called an assembly of his generals, traditional
companion troops, and representatives from distant legions. They met at the same
hill, 5 km
(3.1 mi) out of
Nicomedia, where Diocletian had been proclaimed emperor. In front of a statue of
Jupiter, his patron deity, Diocletian addressed the crowd. With tears in his
eyes, he told them of his weakness, his need for rest, and his will to resign.
He declared that he needed to pass the duty of empire on to someone stronger. He
thus became the first Roman emperor to voluntarily abdicate his title.[189]
Most in the crowd believed they knew what would follow;
Constantine and Maxentius, the only adult sons of a reigning emperor, men who
had long been preparing to succeed their fathers, would be granted the title of
Caesar. Constantine had traveled through Palestine at the right hand of
Diocletian, and was present at the palace in Nicomedia in 303 and 305. It is
likely that Maxentius received the same treatment.[190]
In Lactantius' account, when Diocletian announced that he was to resign, the
entire crowd turned to face Constantine.[191]
It was not to be:
Severus and
Maximin were declared Caesars. Maximin appeared and took Diocletian's robes.
On the same day, Severus received his robes from Maximian in Milan. Constantius
succeeded Maximian as Augustus of the West, but Constantine and Maxentius were
entirely ignored in the transition of power. This did not bode well for the
future security of the Tetrarchic system.[192]
Retirement
and death
Diocletian retired to his homeland, Dalmatia. He moved into
the expansive
palace he had built on the
Adriatic near the administrative center of Salona. Maximian retired to
villas in
Campania or
Lucania.[193]
Their homes were distant from political life, but Diocletian and Maximian were
close enough to remain in regular contact with each other.[194]
Galerius assumed the consular fasces in 308 with Diocletian as his
colleague. In the autumn of 308, Galerius again conferred with Diocletian at
Carnuntum
(Petronell-Carnuntum,
Austria).
Diocletian and Maximian were both present on November 11, 308, to see Galerius
appoint
Licinius to be Augustus in place of Severus, who had died at the hands of
Maxentius. He ordered Maximian, who had attempted to return to power after his
retirement, to step down permanently. At Carnuntum people begged Diocletian to
return to the throne, to resolve the conflicts that had arisen through
Constantine's rise to power and Maxentius' usurpation.[195]
Diocletian's reply: "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."[196]
He lived on for three more years, spending his days in his
palace gardens. He saw his Tetrarchic system implode, torn by the selfish
ambitions of his successors. He heard of Maximian's third claim to the throne,
his forced suicide, his
damnatio memoriae. In his own palace, statues and portraits of his
former companion emperor were torn down and destroyed. Deep in despair and
illness, Diocletian may have committed
suicide. He
died on December 3, 311.[5][197]
Reforms
Tetrarchic
and ideological
Diocletian saw his work as that of a restorer, a figure of
authority whose duty it was to return the empire to peace, to recreate stability
and justice where barbarian hordes had destroyed it.[198]
He arrogated, regimented and centralized political authority on a massive scale.
In his policies, he enforced an imperial system of values on diverse and often
unreceptive provincial audiences.[199]
In the imperial propaganda from the period, recent history is perverted and
minimized in the service of the theme of the Tetrarchs as "restorers".
Aurelian's achievements are ignored, the revolt of Carausius is backdated to the
reign of Gallienus, and it is implied that the Tetrarchs engineered Aurelian's
defeat of the
Palmyrenes; the period between Gallienus and Diocletian is effectively
erased. The history of the empire before the Tetrarchy is portrayed as a time of
civil war, savage despotism, and imperial collapse.[200]
In those inscriptions that bear their names, Diocletian and his companions are
referred to as "restorers of the whole world",[201]
men who succeeded in "defeating the nations of the barbarians, and confirming
the tranquility of their world".[202]
Diocletian was written up as the "founder of eternal peace".[203]
The theme of restoration was conjoined to an emphasis on the uniqueness and
accomplishments of the Tetrarchs themselves.[200]
The cities where emperors lived frequently in this
period—Milan, Trier,
Arles, Sirmium,
Serdica,
Thessaloniki, Nicomedia, and
Antioch—were
treated as alternate imperial seats, to the exclusion of Rome and its senatorial
elite.[204]
A new style of ceremony was developed, emphasizing the distinction of the
emperor from all other persons. The quasi-republican ideals of Augustus'
primus inter pares were abandoned for all but the Tetrarchs themselves.
Diocletian took to wearing a gold crown and jewels, and forbade the use of
purple cloth to all but the emperors.[205]
His subjects were required to prostrate themselves in his presence (adoratio);
the most fortunate were allowed the privilege of kissing the hem of his robe (proskynesis,
προσκύνησις).[206]
Circuses and basilicas were designed to keep the face of the emperor perpetually
in view, and always in a seat of authority. The emperor became a figure of
transcendent authority, a man beyond the grip of the masses.[207]
His every appearance was stage-managed.[208]
This style of presentation was not new—many of its elements were first seen in
the reigns of Aurelian and Severus—but it was only under the Tetrarchs that it
was refined into an explicit system.[209]
Administrative
In keeping with his move from an ideology of republicanism to
one of autocracy, Diocletian's council of advisers, his consilium,
differed from those of earlier emperors. He destroyed the Augustan illusion of
imperial government as a cooperative affair between emperor, army, and Senate.[210]
In its place he established an effectively autocratic structure, a shift later
epitomized in the institution's name: it would be called a consistorium
("consistory"),
not a council.[211][notes
10] Diocletian regulated his court by distinguishing separate
departments (scrina) for different tasks.[213]
From this structure came the offices of different magistri, like the
Magister officiorum ("Master of offices"), and associated secretariats.
These were men suited to dealing with petitions, requests, correspondence, legal
affairs, and foreign embassies. Within his court Diocletian maintained a
permanent body of legal advisers, men with significant influence on his
re-ordering of juridical affairs. There were also two finance ministers, dealing
with the separate bodies of the public treasury and the private domains of the
emperor, and the praetorian prefect, the most significant person of the whole.
Diocletian's reduction of the Praetorian Guards to the level of a simple city
garrison for Rome lessened the military powers of the prefect, but the office
retained much civil authority. The prefect kept a staff of hundreds and managed
affairs in all segments of government: in taxation, administration,
jurisprudence, and minor military commands, the praetorian prefect was often
second only to the emperor himself.[214]
Altogether, Diocletian effected a large increase in the
number of bureaucrats at the government's command; Lactantius was to claim that
there were now more men using tax money than there were paying it.[215]
The historian Warren Treadgold estimates that under Diocletian the number of men
in the
civil
service doubled from 15,000 to 30,000.[216]
The classicist
Roger Bagnall, based on data produced by
A.H.M. Jones, estimated that there was one bureaucrat for every 5–10,000
people. (By comparison, the ratio in
twelfth-century China was one bureaucrat for every 15,000 people.)[217]
To avoid the possibility of local usurpations[218],
to facilitate a more efficient collection of taxes and supplies, and to ease the
enforcement of the law, Diocletian doubled the number of
provinces from fifty to almost one hundred.[219]
The provinces were grouped into twelve
dioceses, each governed by an appointed official called a
vicarius,
or "deputy of the praetorian prefects".[220]
Some of the provincial divisions required revision, and were modified either
soon after 293 or early in the fourth century.[221].
Rome herself (including her environs, as defined by a 100-miles-radius
perimeter
around the City itself) was kept outside the system, as she was to be
administered by a City Prefect of senatorial rank - the sole prestigious post
with actual power reserved exclusively for senators[222].The
dissemination of imperial law to the provinces was facilitated under
Diocletian's reign, because Diocletian's reform of the empire's provincial
structure meant that there were now a greater number of governors (praesides)
ruling over smaller regions and smaller populations.[223]
Diocletian's reforms shifted the governors' main function to that of the
presiding official in the lower courts:[224]
whereas in the early empire military and judicial functions were the function of
governor, and
procurators had supervised taxation; under the new system vicarii and
governors were responsible for justice and taxation, and a new class of
duces ("dukes"),
acting independently of the civil service, had military command. These dukes
sometimes administered two or three of the new provinces created by Diocletian,
and had forces ranging from two thousand to more than twenty thousand men.[225]
In addition to their roles as judges and tax collectors, governors were expected
to maintain the postal service (cursus
publicus) and ensure that town councils fulfilled their duties.[226]
This curtailment of governors' powers as the emperors'
representatives may have lessened the political dangers of an all-too-powerful
class of imperial delegates, but it also severely limited governors' ability to
oppose local landed elites. On one occasion, Diocletian had to exhort a
proconsul of Africa not to fear the consequences of treading on the toes of the
local magnates of senatorial rank,[227]
If a governor of senatorial rank himself felt these pressures, one can imagine
the difficulties faced by a mere praeses.[228]
Legal
As with most emperors, much of Diocletian's daily routine
rotated around legal affairs—responding to appeals and petitions, and delivering
decisions on disputed matters. Rescripts, authoritative interpretations issued
by the emperor in response to demands from disputants in both public and private
cases, were a common duty of second- and third-century emperors. Diocletian was
awash in paperwork, and was nearly incapable of delegating his duties. It would
have been seen as a dereliction of duty to ignore them. Diocletian's praetorian
prefects—Afranius Hannibalianus, Julius Asclepiodotus, and Flavius
Constantius—aided in regulating the flow and presentation of such paperwork, but
the deep legalism of Roman culture kept the workload heavy.[229]
Emperors in the forty years preceding Diocletian's reign had not managed these
duties so effectively, and their output in attested rescripts is low.
Diocletian, by contrast, was prodigious in his affairs: there are around 1,200
rescripts in his name still surviving, and these probably represent only a small
portion of the total issue.[230]
The sharp increase in the number of edicts and rescripts produced under
Diocletian's rule has been read as evidence of a thoroughgoing effort to realign
the whole empire on terms dictated by the imperial center.[231]
Under the governance of the
jurists
Gregorius, Aurelius Arcadius Charisius, and Hermogenianus, the imperial
government began issuing official books of
precedent,
collecting and listing all the rescripts that had been issued from the reign of
Hadrian (r.
117–38) to the reign of Diocletian.[232]
The Codex Gregorianus includes rescripts up to 292, which the Codex
Hermogenianus updated with a comprehensive collection of rescripts issued by
Diocletian in 293 and 294.[221]
Although the very act of codification was a radical innovation, given the
decentralized nature of the Roman legal system,[233]
the jurists themselves were generally conservative, and constantly looked to
past Roman practice and theory for guidance.[234]
They were probably given more free rein over their codes than the compilers of
the
Codex Theodosianus (438) and
Codex Justinianus (529) would have. Gregorius and Hermogenianus' codices
lack the rigid structuring of later codes,[235]
and were not published in the name of the emperor, but in the names of their
compilers.[236]
After Diocletian's reform of the provinces, governors were
called iudex, or
judge. The
governor became responsible for his decisions first to his immediate superiors,
as well as to the more distant office of the emperor.[237]
It was most likely at this time that judicial records became verbatim accounts
of what was said in trial, making it easier to determine bias or improper
conduct on the part of the governor. With these records and the empire's
universal right of
appeal, imperial authorities probably had a great deal of power to enforce
behavior standards for their judges.[238]
In spite of Diocletian's attempts at reform, the provincial restructuring was
far from clear, especially when citizens appealed the decisions of their
governors. Proconsuls, for example, were often both judges of first instance and
appeal, and the governors of some provinces took appellant cases from their
neighbors. It soon became impossible to avoid taking some cases to the emperor
for arbitration and judgment.[239]
Diocletian's reign marks the end of the classical period of Roman law. Where
Diocletian's system of rescripts shows an adherence to classical tradition,
Constantine's law is full of Greek and eastern influences.[240]
Military
-
See also:
Late Roman army: Diocletian
It is archaeologically difficult to distinguish Diocletian's
fortifications from those of his successors and predecessors. The Devil's Dyke,
for example, the Danubian earthworks traditionally attributed to Diocletian,
cannot even be securely dated to a particular century. The most that can be said
about built structures under Diocletian's reign is that he rebuilt forts along
the Rhine–Iller–Danube
line, in Egypt, and on the frontier with Persia. Beyond that, much discussion is
speculative, and reliant on the broad generalizations of written sources.
Diocletian and the Tetrarchs had no consistent plan for frontier advancement,
and records of raids and forts built across the frontier are likely to indicate
only temporary claims. The Strata Diocletiana, which ran from the
Euphrates to Palmyra and northeast Arabia, is the classic Diocletianic frontier
system, consisting of an outer road followed by tightly spaced forts followed by
further fortifications in the rear.[241]
In an attempt to resolve the difficulty and slowness of transmitting orders to
the frontier, the new capitals of the Tetrarchic era were all much closer to the
empire's frontiers than Rome had been:[242]
Trier sat on the Rhine, Sirmium and Serdica were close to the Danube,
Thessaloniki was on the route leading eastward, and Nicomedia and Antioch were
important points in dealings with Persia.[243]
Lactantius criticized Diocletian for an excessive increase in
troop sizes, declaring that "each of the four [Tetrarchs] strove to have a far
larger number of troops than previous emperors had when they were governing the
state alone".[244]
The fifth-century pagan
Zosimus, by
contrast, praised Diocletian for keeping troops on the borders, rather than
keeping them in the cities, as Constantine was held to have done.[245]
Both these views had some truth to them, despite the biases of their authors:
Diocletian and the Tetrarchs did greatly expand the army, and the growth was
mostly in frontier regions, although it is difficult to establish the precise
details of these shifts given the weakness of the sources.[246]
The army expanded to about 580,000 men from a 285 strength of 390,000 men. The
growth was smaller in the East, which only expanded from 250,000 men to 310,000
men, most of whom manned the Persian frontier. The navy's forces increased from
approximately 45,000 men to approximately 65,000 men.[247][notes
11]
Diocletian's expansion of the army and civil service meant
that the empire's tax burden would rise. Since military upkeep took the largest
portion of the imperial budget, any reforms here would be especially costly.[250]
The proportion of the adult male population serving in the army increased from
roughly 1 in 25 to 1 in 15, an increase judged excessive by some modern
commentators. Official troop allowances were kept to low levels, and the mass of
troops often resorted to extortion or the taking of civilian jobs.[251]
Arrears became the norm for most troops. Many were even given payment in kind in
place of their salaries.[252]
Were he unable to pay for his enlarged army, there would likely be civil
conflict, potentially open revolt. Diocletian was led to devise a new system of
taxation.[251]
Economic
Taxation
Diocletian introduced an extensive new tax system based on
heads (capita) and land (iuga) and tied to a new, regular census
of the empire's population and wealth. Census officials traveled throughout the
empire, assessed the value of labor and land for each landowner, and joined the
landowners' totals together to make city-wide totals of capita and
iuga.[253]
The iugum was not a consistent measure of land, but varied according to
the type of land and crop, and the amount of labor necessary for sustenance. The
caput was not consistent either: women, for instance, were often valued
at half a caput, and sometimes at other values.[252]
The city would provide animals, money, and manpower in proportion to its
capita, and grain in proportion to its iuga.[253][notes
12]
Most taxes were due on each September 1, and levied from
individual landowners by
decuriones (decurions). These decurions, analogous to city councilors,
were responsible for paying from their own pocket what they failed to collect
from the populace.[255]
Diocletian's reforms also increased the number of financial officials in the
provinces: more rationales and magistri privatae are attested
under Diocletian's reign than before. These offices were to manage imperial
properties and to supervise the collection of revenue.[221]
Despite the instability of the coinage, most taxes were either levied in or
convertible into money. Rates shifted to take inflation into account.[253]
In 296, Diocletian issued an edict reforming census procedures. This edict
introduced a general five-year census for the whole empire, replacing prior
censuses that had operated at different speeds throughout the empire. The new
censuses would keep up with changes in the values of capita and iuga.[256]
In the interests of securing a generally egalitarian tax
system, Italy, which had long been exempt from taxes, was exempt no longer. From
290/291 on, most of Italy would now be taxed on the same level as any other
province.[257]
The city prefecture of Rome itself and the surrounding
Suburbicarian diocese (where Roman senators held the bulk of their landed
property), however, remained exempt.[258]
Diocletian's edicts emphasize the common liability of all
taxpayers. Public records of all taxes were established to enhance the
transparency of the operation, so that taxpayers would know exactly how much
their neighbors paid.[259]
The position of decurion had long been an honor sought by wealthy
aristocrats, but under Diocletian its tax-collecting requirements became much
more rigorous. Decurions and the city treasury could be bankrupted if production
figures fell.[255]
The effects of the new tax system were deeply felt: boundary-markers (necessary
for tax administration) dating from the Tetrarchic period make relatively
frequent appearances in Near-Eastern towns, even in remote country districts
like Sakkaia in the northern
Hauran.[260]
The Roman populace, long accustomed to irregular and ineffective tax collection,
went through an uncomfortable period of adjustment to Diocletian's reforms. But
even the lower classes were able to pay this burden.[261]
The benefits of the new system were clear: taxes were predictable, regular, and
fair, and the population was now free from fear. Citizens of the fourth century,
safe behind the frontiers established and paid for by their taxes, no longer had
to fear foreign occupation.[262]
Currency
and inflation
By the early 280s, market forces had created a stable
exchange rate between gold and the copper
antoninianus, more or less stabilizing commodity prices. The
antoninianus, which had become the standard medium, however, remained a
serious issue:[263]
In spite of attempts to wean the nation off metal currency by converting
governmental taxes and salaries to annonary
payments in kind, metal currency remained in wide circulation.[264]
In the wake of a brief period of re-inflation, Diocletian began a more
comprehensive reform of the currency in 293.[265]
The new system consisted of five coins: the aureus/solidus,
a gold coin weighing, like its predecessors, one-sixtieth of a pound; the
argenteus,
a coin weighing one ninety-sixth of a pound and containing ninety-five percent
pure silver; the
follis,
sometimes referred to as the laureatus A, which is a copper coin with
added silver struck at the rate of thirty-two to the pound; the radiatus,
a small copper coin struck at the rate of 108 to the pound, with no added
silver; and a coin known today as the laureatus B, a smaller copper coin
struck at the rate of 192 to the pound.[266][notes
13] Since the nominal values of these new issues were lower than their
intrinsic worth as metals, the state was minting these coins at a loss. This
practice could be sustained only by requisitioning precious metals from private
citizens in exchange for state-minted coin (of a far lower value than the price
of the precious metals requisitioned).[264]
By 301, however, the system was in trouble, strained by a new
bout of inflation. Diocletian therefore issued his Edict on Coinage, an
act re-tariffing all debts so that the nummi, the most common coin in
circulation, would be worth half as much.[267]
In the edict, preserved in an inscription from the city of
Aphrodisias in
Caria (near Geyre,
Turkey), it was declared that all debts contracted before September 1, 301 would
be repaid at the old standards, while all debts contracted after September 1
would be repaid at the new standards.[268]
It appears that the edict was made in an attempt to preserve the current price
of gold and to keep the empire's coinage on silver, Rome's traditional metal
currency.[269]
This edict risked giving further momentum to inflationary trends, as had
happened after Aurelian's currency reforms. Soon the Tetrarchic government could
see no better solution to its monetary woes than a series of price freezes.[270]
The
Edict on Maximum Prices (Edictum De Pretiis Rerum Venalium) was
issued two to three months after the coinage edict,[263]
somewhere between November 20 and December 10, 301.[268]
The best-preserved Latin inscription surviving from the Greek East,[271]
the edict survives in many versions, on materials as varied as wood, papyrus,
and stone.[272]
In the edict, Diocletian declared that the current pricing crisis resulted from
the unchecked greed of merchants, and had resulted in turmoil for the mass of
common citizens. The language of the edict calls on the people's memory of their
benevolent leaders, and exhorts them to enforce the provisions of the edict, and
thereby restore perfection to the world. The edict goes on to list in detail
over one thousand goods and accompanying retail prices not to be exceeded.
Penalties are laid out for various pricing transgressions.[273]
In the most basic terms, the edict was ignorant of the law of
supply and demand: it ignored the fact that prices might vary from region to
region according to product availability, and it ignored the impact of
transportation costs in the retail price of goods. In the judgment of the
historian David Potter, the edict was "an act of economic lunacy".[274]
Inflation, speculation, and monetary instability continued, and a black market
arose to trade in goods forced out of official markets.[275]
The edict's penalties were applied unevenly across the empire (some scholars
believe they were applied only in Diocletian's domains[276]),
widely resisted, and eventually dropped, perhaps within a year of the edict's
issue.[277]
Lactantius has written of the perverse accompaniments to the edict; of goods
withdrawn from the market, of brawls over minute variations in price, of the
deaths that came when its provisions were enforced. His account may be true, but
it seems to modern historians exaggerated and hyperbolic,[278]
and the impact of the law is recorded in no other ancient source.[279]
Legacy
The historian
A.H.M. Jones observed that "It is perhaps Diocletian's greatest achievement
that he reigned twenty-one years and then abdicated voluntarily, and spent the
remaining years of his life in peaceful retirement."[280]
Diocletian was one of the few emperors of the third and fourth centuries to die
naturally, and the first in the history of the empire to retire voluntarily.[281]
Once he retired, however, his Tetrarchic system collapsed. Without the guiding
hand of Diocletian, the empire frequently broke into civil war. Only in 324,
when Constantine alone emerged triumphant, did stability return.[282]
Under the Christian Constantine, Diocletian was maligned. Constantine's rule,
however, validated Diocletian's achievements and the autocratic principle he
represented:[283]
the borders remained secure, in spite of Constantine's large expenditure of
forces during his civil wars; the bureaucratic transformation of Roman
government was completed; and Constantine took Diocletian's court ceremonies and
made them even more extravagant.[284]
Constantine ignored those parts of Diocletian's rule that did
not suit him. Diocletian's policy of preserving a stable silver coinage was
abandoned, and the gold
solidus became the empire's primary currency instead.[285]
Diocletian's paganism was repudiated in favor of an imperially sponsored
Christianity, and his price controls were ignored. But even Christianity would
be tied to the state structure of the empire in an autocratic way, and
Constantine would claim to have the same close relationship with the Christian
God as Diocletian claimed to have with Jupiter.[286]
Most importantly, Diocletian's tax system was preserved and tightened.[287]
Aided by the new state machinery introduced by Diocletian, the
Byzantine Empire would last for over one thousand years after his death.[288]
|