La escuela católica: una breve caracterización

Among the surviving ancient texts, only one seeks to explain the overlooking of natural-born sons. Lactantius dedicates two chapters of DMP (18-19) to the succession event in 305 since he wishes to explain why the Augusti abdicated, why Maxentius and his favourite emperor

Constantine were snubbed and why the Second Tetrarchy favoured the political supremacy of Galerius. According to Lactantius, Galerius had become arrogant following his victorious

41 _{Paneg. 10(2).14.1: Sed profecto mature ille inlucescet dies, cum uos uideat Roma uictores et alacrem sub dextera}

filium, quem ad honestissimas artes omnibus ingenii bonis natum felix aliquis praeceptor exspectat, … The marriage of Maxentius: See also ILS 666-667, 671; RIC 6 Rome 247-248, 254-255, Ostia 30-31; Lact. DMP 26.1, 26.6, 27.3;

Origo 3.7; Epit. 40.14.

42 _{Origo 4.12: de cuius origine mater eius cum quaesitum esset, Syro quodam genitum esse confessa. Epit. 40.13:}

Sed Maxentium suppositum ferunt arte muliebri tenere mariti animum laborantis auspicio gratissimi partus coepti a puero.

43 _{To distance Maxentius from Fausta: Barnes (1973) 43. The claim that Maxentius was the son of a Syrian perhaps}

suggests that he was conceived or born in Syria, and Maximian was probably in Syria with Diocletian in 283: Barnes (1982) 34 (c. 283); Leadbetter (1998b) 76; Donciu (2012) 39-40. But Eutropia was herself a Syrian (Epit. 40.12; see also Jul. Or. 1.6a), and so this alone might explain the claim.

97

campaign against the Persians (c. 297-298), much to Diocletian’s fear (9.7). He disdained to be called Caesar, and when he heard this name used in letters he would shout with a fierce

demeanour and in a terrifying voice: Quo usque Caesar? (‘How much longer am I to be Caesar?’) (8). Behaving with insolence, he wished to appear and be called the son of Mars, claiming that the god had lain with his mother (9).

Later, Lactantius narrates that Diocletian, whom prosperity had now abandoned, in November 303 visited Rome to celebrate his uicennalia. Intolerant of the free speech of the Roman people, he departed earlier than expected in December, entering upon his ninth

consulship in Ravenna rather than Rome. He thus departed during the cold and rainy conditions of winter, and he contracted a slight but lingering illness. Obliged by the illness to be carried in a litter, he toured the Danube during the summer and then arrived in Nicomedia at which time the illness was increasing in severity. He appeared in public to dedicate a circus at the close of his

uicennalia, after which he was so ill that prayers were offered for his life. On 13 December he

entered a deathlike sleep. There was gloom in the palace, officials were in grief and tearful, and it was believed that Diocletian was not only dead but already buried. On the following morning it was rumoured that he was still alive. Some people suspected that his death was being kept a secret until the arrival of Galerius, lest the soldiers rebel, and the suspicion was widespread enough that no-one believed he was alive until he appeared in public on 1 March, hardly recognizable after the wasting effect of an almost complete year’s illness. He had recovered his spirit, but now suffered from bouts of derangement (17).

Galerius then visited Nicomedia, not to congratulate his pater on his recovery but to pressure him into abdicating. Lactantius relates that Galerius, by this time, had clashed with Maximian and had frightened him with the prospect of civil war (18.1), and there follows a dialogue between Diocletian and his Caesar.44 Galerius is at first gentle in his approach, suggesting that Diocletian is no longer fit for rule due to his age and physical condition and should give himself some repose (2). Diocletian instead proposes that all four men could be Augusti (4). Galerius however wants control over the empire and argues for the maintenance of Diocletian’s dispositio, by which two Augusti hold the supreme power, and two Caesars assist

44 _{Barnes (1996) 545-546 speculates that in 303 all four Tetrarchs met in Italy, and suggests that this was the}

98

them, since concord cannot be maintained between four equals (5). He then asserts the following (6):

Si ipse cedere noluisset, se sibi consulturum, ne amplius minor et extremus esset.

If he (Diocletian) would not wish to concede, he would look to his own interests, lest he remain any longer junior and at the bottom of the hierarchy.

Galerius then complains that he has been doing the hard work for too long. It had been fifteen years since he had been sent to Illyricum to campaign against barbarians, whereas his colleagues were stationed in more peaceful lands (6). Upon hearing this, the tired old man, who had

received from Maximian a letter concerning his meeting with Galerius, and who had learned that Galerius was increasing his army, tearfully replies fiat si hoc placet (‘Let it be done, if this pleases you’) (7).

The question of the new Caesars then arises, and Galerius asserts that they need not consult Maximian and Constantius, since they will accept whatever they decide. Diocletian responds (8):

Ita plane. Nam illorum filios nuncupari necesse est. This is certainly so. For we must appoint their sons.

Lactantius temporarily leaves the dialogue to introduce Maxentius and Constantine to the reader (9-10):

Erat autem Maximiano ‹filius› Maxentius, huius ipsius Maximiani gener, homo perniciosae ac malae mentis, adeo superbus et contumax, ut neque patrem neque socerum solitus sit adorare, et idcirco utrique inuisus fuit. Constantio quoque filius erat Constantinus, sanctissimus adulescens et illo fastigio dignissimus, qui insigni et decoro habitu corporis et industria militari et probis moribus et comitate singulari a militibus amaretur, a priuatis et optaretur, eratque tunc praesens iam pridem a Diocletiano factus tribunus ordinis primi.

The older Maximian had a son, Maxentius, who was the son-in-law of just this younger Maximian (Galerius). He was ruinous and evil in disposition, and he was moreover arrogant and stubborn, so that he used to not do homage (adoratio) either to his father or his father-in-law, and for this reason

99

he was disliked by both. Constantius also had a son, Constantine, a young man of most morally pure character, and most deserving of that exalted rank (the rank of Caesar). By his distinguished and becoming presence, his military diligence, his good habits and his unparalleled affability, he was loved by the soldiers and the choice of the private citizens, and he was at that time present at court, having already been appointed by Diocletian long ago as a tribune of the first rank.

Lactantius then returns to the dialogue, and Galerius objects (11):

‘Ille’, inquit, ‘dignus non est. Qui enim me priuatus contempsit, quid faciet, cum imperium acceperit?’

‘Hic uero et amabilis est et ita imperaturus, ut patre suo melior et clementior iudicetur.’

‘Ita fiet ut ego non possim facere quae uelim. Eos igitur oportet nuncupari qui sint in mea potestate, qui timeant, qui nihil faciant nisi meo iussu.’

‘Maxentius’, he said, ‘is not worthy. For if he despises me as a private citizen, what will he do when he has received imperium?’

‘But Constantine is amiable and will rule in such a way that he will be judged better and milder than his father.’

‘In that case I would not be able to do what I want. Therefore, it is necessary to appoint those who would be in my power, who would fear me and who would do nothing unless by my order.’

Diocletian then asks whom they should appoint, and Galerius replies ‘Severus’, which prompts derision from the Augustus (12):

‘Illumne saltatorem temulentum ebriosum, cui nox pro die est et dies pro nocte?’

‘Dignus’, inquit, ‘quoniam militibus fideliter praefuit, et eum misi ad Maximianum, ut ab eo induatur.’

‘That drunken, intoxicated dancer, for whom the night is day and the day is night?’

‘He is worthy, for he has loyally commanded the soldiers, and I have sent him to Maximian to be invested by him.’

100

Galerius then shows Diocletian his other candidate for Caesar, an adulescens named Daia (actually Daza), whom Lactantius describes as semibarbarus.45 _{The author also notes that Daia}

had received the name Maximinus from Galerius, whose name had been Maximinus before Diocletian changed it to Maximianus as a good omen (13). Diocletian does not recognize the man, and Galerius replies that he is an affinis (relation by marriage). Diocletian is unimpressed (14-15):

At ille gemebundus, ‘Non idoneos homines mihi das, quibus tutela rei publicae committi possit.’ ‘Probaui eos’, inquit.

‘Tu uideris, qui regimen imperii suscepturus es. Ego satis laboraui et provide quemadmodum me imperante res publica staret incolumis. Si quid accesserit aduersi, mea culpa non erit.’

Groaning, Diocletian declared, ‘You are not giving me men fit to entrust with the protection of the state.’

‘I have tested them’, Galerius replied.

‘May you see to them, since you are going to undertake the guidance of the empire. I have laboured and taken care enough so that under my rule the state has remained unharmed. If some adversity should happen, it will not be my fault.’

In chapter 19, the narrative jumps ahead to the scene described at the beginning of this study. On 1 May, Diocletian convenes a military assembly outside Nicomedia and tearfully announces his abdication, explaining that he is infirm and needs rest after his labours. The soldiers excitedly await the appointment of Constantine as Caesar, who is standing on the podium alongside Diocletian, Galerius and others, but they are left surprised when Diocletian declares that Severus and Maximinus will be the new Caesars. Galerius draws forward Maximinus, a man whom they do not recognize, and Diocletian cloaks the appointee with his own purple mantle. Diocletian then re-adopts his old name, Diocles, and he descends from the

101

platform to be carted to his homeland, elsewhere recorded as being Dalmatia.46 _Lactantius

finishes the chapter with a summation of Maximinus’ pre-imperial career (6):

Daia uero sublatus nuper a pecoribus et siluis, statim scutarius, continuo protector, mox tribunus, postridie Caesar, accepit orientem calcandum et conterendum, quippe qui neque militiam neque rem publicam sciret, iam non pecorum sed militum pastor.

But Daia, who had recently been taken up from cattle and forests, immediately became a scutarius (guardsman), then a protector, soon afterwards a tribune and on the next day a Caesar, and he received the east to lay waste and trample underfoot, as one might expect of someone who knew nothing of military or public affairs, a herdsman now not to cattle but to soldiers.

This concludes Lactantius’ account of the succession event, but in chapter 20 he makes several more claims that are relevant. He states that Galerius hoped that Constantius would soon die so that he could make his long-time friend Licinius his co-Augustus (3).47 After celebrating his uicennalia, he would then appoint his son Candidianus as Caesar and abdicate (4):

… tunc uero ipse principatum teneret ac pro arbitrio suo debacchatus in orbem terrae uicennalia celebraret, ac substituto Caesare filio suo, qui tunc erat nouennis, et ipse deponeret, ita cum imperii summam tenerent Licinius ac Severus et secundum Caesarum nomen Maximinus et Candidianus, inexpugnabili muro circumsaeptus securam et tranquillam degeret senectutem.

… then, he himself would hold dominion, and after raging against the world as he wished, he would celebrate his uicennalia. And at that time, after replacing himself with his son as Caesar, who was at present nine years old, he himself would relinquish his power. Thus, with Licinius and Severus holding supreme power and with Maximinus and Candidianus holding the second rank of Caesar, he would be safe, surrounded by an impregnable wall, and he could enjoy a peaceful old age.

No other account seeks to explain the overlooking of the sons, but one should note that Lactantius’ account of the event is not well supported by other sources. The panegyrist in 307 states that Diocletian and Maximian abdicated in accordance with a consilium once made between the pair (7(6).9.2):

46 _{Eutr. 9.19; Epit. 39.1; Const. Porphyr. De Them. 57-58 (CSHB 18); Zon. 12.31.} 47 _{See also 25.4.}

102

Tale est, imperator, quod omnibus nobis incluso gemitu maerentibus facere uoluisti, non quidem tu rei publicae neglegentia aut laboris fuga aut desidiae cupiditate ductus, sed consilii olim, ut res est, inter uos placiti constantia et pietate fraterna ne, quem totius uitae summarumque rerum socium semper habuisses, in alicuius facti communitate desereres neue illius, uiderit quali, certe nouae laudi cederes.

Such a thing you wished to do, emperor, while all of us grieved with our groans suppressed; you were not indeed led by carelessness for the state or the avoidance of work or a longing for idleness, but by adherence, in fact, to a plan once determined between you both and by fraternal piety, so that in sharing some of the deed you would not desert him whom you always had as your partner for your whole life and in the most important affairs, and lest you cede to him the praise for it - of whatever kind that may be, certainly of a novel nature.

The orator also suggests that Maximian had diverse reasons for abdicating, and he specifies old age as a possibility (9.3). Moreover, he notes that it may have been right for Diocletian to abdicate on account of old age or ill health (9.5).

The panegyrist in 310 repeats the claim of a plan and agreement to abdicate, stating that Diocletian abdicated voluntarily (6(7).15.4), and that Maximian was bound by an oath sworn on the Capitol, although he was reluctant to do so (15.6):

At enim diuinum illum uirum qui primus imperium et participauit et posuit consilii et facti sui non paenitet nec amisisse se putat quod sponte transcripsit, felix beatusque uere quem uestra tantorum principum colunt obsequia priuatum… Hunc ergo illum, qui ab eo fuerat frater adscitus, puduit imitari, huic illum in Capitolini Iouis templo iurasse paenituit. Non miror quod etiam genero peierauit.

But certainly, that divine man (Diocletian) who was the first to both share and lay down the imperial power does not repent of his plan or his deed, nor does he believe himself to have let slip what he transferred voluntarily; fortunate and truly blessed is he whom such great princes as you with your deference revere as a private citizen… So, this man was ashamed to imitate that man who had been adopted by him as a brother, and repented of having sworn an oath to him in the temple of Capitoline Jupiter. I do not wonder that he perjured himself even before his son-in-law!

103

If historical, the most likely occasion for the taking of this oath is the visit of Diocletian and Maximian to Rome in November-December 303 to celebrate a joint uicennalia and triumph, since the last two reported times that Diocletian and Maximian were together are in 288 and 290/1.48

The majority of other accounts likewise do not explain the succession with reference to Galerius. Rather, the two elements that appear repeatedly in the accounts of pagans and

Christians alike are the illness of Diocletian and an abdication that was voluntary or agreed upon between the two Augusti.49 Peter Patricius narrates that Galerius troubled Diocletian into

handing over the empire using witchcraft (fragm. 206 (Banchich)), but his account is the exception.50 Other texts do give some support to Lactantius’ account, but this support is of a debateable quality. In Julian’s satire The Caesars, the author depicts Maximian and Galerius as meddlesome, but at this point in the text Diocletian has already abdicated due to weariness (315). The early fourth-century poet Palladas appears to refer to Galerius as ἐπίφθονον (envious) of Diocletian in a lacunose epigram that criticizes the former as an inadequate successor to the latter. However, this envy, as far as we can tell, is not linked to the succession event itself.51 Aurelius Victor notes that some believe Diocletian to have abdicated, and to have persuaded a reluctant Maximian to do likewise, because he predicted future destruction and fragmentation. But Victor dismisses this view as lacking regard for truth, and he opines that Diocletian

48 _{Visit in 303: Lact. DMP 17.1-3; Chron. Min. 1.148 (Chron. 354); Eutr. 9.27, 30; Jer. Chron. 227.25-228.2; Zon.}

12.32. Occasion of oath: Seeck (1897) 1.37; Seston (1946) 187; Chastagnol (1967) 66 n. 2; Kolb (1987) 145-150; Nixon & Rodgers (1994) 241 n. 73; Marcone (2000) 11; Bowman (2005) 86. The movements of Diocletian and Maximian: Barnes (1982) 49-60.

49 _{Eus. HE 8.13.11 (Diocletian abdicates because he is deranged by illness); VC 1.18.1 (Eusebius confesses}

ignorance); Const. Oratio 25 (Diocletian suffers from derangement caused by guilt over the persecution); Eutr. 9.27, 28 (On account of his age, Diocletian voluntarily abdicates and makes Maximian abdicate as well); Epit. 39.5 (Diocletian voluntarily abdicates); Oros. 7.25.14, 26.7 (they retire as a reward to themselves); Soc. HE 1.2.1 (by mutual consent); Chron. Min. 1.522 (Pol. Silv.) (the Augusti voluntarily abdicate); Zos. 2.7.2 (Diocletian becomes a private citizen and Maximian follows his example); Chron. Min. 2.150 (Cassiod.) (the Augusti abdicate because of old age); Malal. 311-312 (CSHB 32) (a confused account in which Maximian abdicates in Antioch); Joh. Ant. fragm. 167.2 (FHG 4, p. 602) (the Augusti abdicate because they are frustrated at the survival of Christianity); Theoph.

Chron. 5796 (the Augusti succumb to madness); Ced. 472 (CSHB 8) (frustration over Christianity); Scut. 41

(frustration over Christianity); Zon. 12.32 (frustration over Christianity). A fragment of Peter Patricius (fragm. 200 (Banchich) = Anon. Cont. fragm. 13.2 (FHG 4, p. 198)), which states that excessive action may lead to risks, may be a reference to the abdications (Banchich (2015) 133). Certain chronicles mention the abdications but provide no reason for them: Jer. Chron. 228.12-14; Chron. Min. 1.231 (Des. Cons.); 1.291 (Barb. Scalig.); 1.447 (Prosp. Ep.

Chron.) (based on Jerome’s text).

50 _{Fragm. 206 (Banchich) = Anon. Cont. fragm. 13.6 (FHG 4, p. 198).} 51 _{P.CtYBR inv. 4000, p. 11.27-28 with Wilkinson (2012b) 46.}

104

abdicated because he spurned ambition (Caes. 39.46-48).52 _{The historical debate with which}

Victor engages is a debate that continues today.