Comparing The Reign Of Diocletian And Maximian

785 Words2 Pages

The reign of Diocletian and Maximian came for a brief period between 284 C.E. and 324 C.E. after the murder of Commodus. Civil wars broke through out the Roman Empire as various military factions fought for power. Diocletian restored order by dividing the empire into four sections. This was known as the tetrarchy. Diocletian assumed control over Syria, Egypt, and Asia Minor. Maximian was Diocletian’s counterpart as well. Diocletian took care of matters in the eastern regions of the empire, while Maximian similarly took charge of the western regions, thereby cutting in half the administrative work required to oversee an empire as large as Rome’s. The four tetrarchs based themselves not at Rome but in other cities closer to the frontiers, mainly intended as headquarters for the defense of the …show more content…

In terms of regional jurisdiction, there was no precise division between the four tetrarchs, and this period did not see the Roman state actually split up into four distinct sub-empires. Each emperor had his zone of influence within the Roman Empire, but this influence mainly applied to the theater of war.
When, in 305, the 20-year term of Diocletian and Maximian ended, both abdicated. Their Caesares, Galerius and Constantius Chlorus, were both raised to the rank of Augustus, and two new Caesares were appointed: Maximinus (Caesar to Galerius) and Flavius Valerius Severus (Caesar to Constantius). These four formed the second tetrarchy. However, the system broke down very quickly thereafter. When Constantius died in 306, Galerius promoted Severus to Augustus while Constantine, Constantius’ son, was proclaimed Augustus by his father’s troops. At the same time, Maxentius, the son of Maximian, who also resented being left out of the new arrangements, defeated Severus before forcing him to abdicate and then arranging his murder in 307. Maxentius and Maximian both then declared themselves Augusti. By

Open Document