Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

The Tetrarchy (Constantine (Edict of Milan in 313 (Pours massive resources…

- - - - Embraces church as an organisation within the empire and places himself at the head
  - - - Portrayed in conflicting ways - sacrificing with the gods, God as saviour of battle
    - - Places emperor in control of debate
    - - Ends division within empire
- - - - Leads to Edict of Maximal Prices in 301 - possibly just in East and Diocletian's provinces, maybe not beyond
        
        Blames state of the economy on people charging unfair prices
        
        Doesn't work very well but it was attempted - the emperors saw it was their problem
  - - - Probably stemmed from the need to stabilise coinage and prices and to regulate the collection of taxes
- - - - Constantine succeeded by tetrarchy - but 3 sons and 1 nephew
      - Dynastic succession returns quite quickly
  - - - Tendency toward long-term rule
- - - - At least lives long enough to see it carried out
- - - - Seem more successful than 3rd century as they have consistent operational military machinery to rely on
  - - - Allows a more flexible and powerful response
- - - - Represented himself that way e.g. coinage - no evidence that Diocletian or Maximian ever recognised him - but failure to take action may represent a de facto acceptance for the time being
- - - - More to it than standard persecution narrative from older Christian narratives
    - - Ended by 311
      - Inconsistency suggests they are attempting to placate Fates or Gods - when success stops they have to resume again
      - Many Christians described the persecution of Diocletian's later years as a random outburst yet the signs of it coming were present - convenient narrative
      - Persecution across the empire varied considerably
- - - - Have seen plural rule before - men ruling with sons - works better when all are seasoned generals
      - Choose each other - someone they trust and who is competent
    - - Imperial image management e.g. arch at Thessaloniki
    - - Only tends to be for a short time - often removed, Constantine is the exception
    - - People swapped out, admitted often
        
        Yet capable of accommodating a certain amount of opposition
        
        E.g. in Britain - allowed to rebel because not worth opposing him
      - Not organised enough to prevent the political and military convulsion that followed after Diocletian's retirement and before Constantine's acession
    - - Takes over in Rome after Constantine was made Cesaer and he wasn't
        
        What is unusual is the extent to which he is accpeeted in Rome - starts fighting usurpers of his own
        
        Heart of empire ocucpied for 5/6 years before anyone does anything about it - empire can continue without it