Back to Chapter Listing
Previous Chapter
Continue Reading
The arduous work of rescuing the distressed empire from tyrants and barbarians had now been completely achieved by a
succession of
Illyrian peasants. As soon as Diocletian entered into the twentieth year of his reign, he celebrated that memorable
aera, as well as the success of his arms, by the pomp of a Roman triumph.
85 Maximian, the equal partner of his power, was
his only companion in the glory of that day. The two Caesars had fought and conquered, but the merit of their exploits was
ascribed, according to the rigor of ancient maxims, to the
auspicious influence of their fathers and emperors.
86 The triumph of
Diocletian and Maximian was less magnificent, perhaps, than those of Aurelian and Probus, but it was dignified by several
circumstances of superior fame and good fortune.
Africa and
Britain, the
Rhine, the
Danube, and the
Nile, furnished their
respective trophies; but the most distinguished ornament was of a more singular nature, a Persian victory followed by an
important conquest. The representations of rivers, mountains, and provinces, were carried before the Imperial car. The images
of the captive wives, the sisters, and the children of the Great King, afforded a new and grateful spectacle to the vanity of the
people.
87 In the eyes of
posterity, this triumph is remarkable, by a distinction of a less honorable kind. It was the last that
Rome ever beheld. Soon after this period, the emperors ceased to vanquish, and Rome ceased to be the capital of the empire.
Footnote 85: Euseb. in Chron. Pagi ad annum. Till the discovery of the treatise De Mortibus Persecutorum, it was
not certain that the triumph and the Vicennalia was celebrated at the same time.
Footnote 86: At the time of the Vicennalia, Galerius seems to have kept station on the Danube. See Lactant. de M.
P. c. 38.
Footnote 87: Eutropius (ix. 27) mentions them as a part of the triumph. As the persons had been restored to Narses,
nothing more than their images could be exhibited.
The spot on which Rome was founded had been consecrated by ancient ceremonies and imaginary miracles. The presence of
some god, or the memory of some hero, seemed to animate every part of the city, and the empire of the world had been
promised to the
Capitol.
88 The native Romans felt and confessed the power of this agreeable
illusion. It was derived from
their ancestors, had grown up with their earliest habits of life, and was protected, in some measure, by the opinion of political
utility. The form and the seat of government were intimately blended together, nor was it esteemed possible to transport the one
without destroying the other.
89 But the
sovereignty of the capital was gradually annihilated in the extent of conquest; the
provinces rose to the same level, and the vanquished nations acquired the name and privileges, without imbibing the partial
affections, of Romans. During a long period, however, the remains of the ancient
constitution, and the influence of custom,
preserved the dignity of Rome. The emperors, though perhaps of African or Illyrian extraction, respected their adopted
country, as the seat of their power, and the center of their extensive dominions. The emergencies of war very frequently
required their presence on the frontiers; but
Diocletian and
Maximian were the first Roman princes who fixed, in time of peace,
their ordinary residence in the provinces; and their conduct, however it might be suggested by private motives, was justified by
very specious considerations of
policy. The court of the emperor of the West was, for the most part, established at
Milan,
whose situation, at the foot of the Alps, appeared far more convenient than that of Rome, for the important purpose of watching
the motions of the barbarians of
Germany. Milan soon assumed the splendor of an Imperial city. The houses are described as
numerous and well built; the manners of the people as polished and liberal. A
circus, a
theatre, a
mint, a
palace,
baths, which
bore the name of their founder Maximian; porticos adorned with statues, and a double circumference of walls, contributed to
the beauty of the new capital; nor did it seem oppressed even by the proximity of Rome.
90 To rival the majesty of Rome was
the ambition likewise of Diocletian, who employed his leisure, and the wealth of the East, in the embellishment of
Nicomedia, a
city placed on the verge of Europe and Asia, almost at an equal distance between the Danube and the Euphrates. By the taste
of the monarch, and at the expense of the people,
Nicomedia acquired, in the space of a few years, a degree of magnificence
which might appear to have required the labor of ages, and became inferior only to Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch, in extent of
populousness.
91 The life of Diocletian and Maximian was a life of action, and a considerable portion of it was spent in
camps, or in the long and frequent marches; but whenever the public business allowed them any relaxation, they seemed to
have retired with pleasure to their favorite residences of
Nicomedia and Milan. Till Diocletian, in the twentieth year of his reign,
celebrated his Roman triumph, it is extremely doubtful whether he ever visited the ancient capital of the empire. Even on that
memorable occasion his stay did not exceed two months. Disgusted with the licentious familiarity of the people, he quitted
Rome with precipitation thirteen days before it was expected that he should have appeared in the senate, invested with the
ensigns of the consular
dignity.
92
Footnote 88: Livy gives us a speech of Camillus on that subject, (v. 51 - 55,) full of eloquence and sensibility, in
opposition to a design of removing the seat of government from Rome to the neighboring city of Veii.
Footnote 89: Julius Caesar was reproached with the intention of removing the empire to Ilium or Alexandria. See Sueton. in Caesar. c. 79. According to the ingenious conjecture of Le Fevre and Dacier, the ode of the third book of Horace was intended to divert from the execution of a similar design.
Footnote 90: See Aurelius Victor, who likewise mentions the buildings erected by Maximian at Carthage, probably during the Moorish war. We shall insert some verses of Ausonius de Clar. Urb.
Footnote 91: Lactant. de M. P. c. 17. Libanius, Orat. viii. p. 203.
Footnote 92: Lactant. de M. P. c. 17. On a similar occasion, Ammianus mentions the dicacitas plebis, as not very agreeable to an Imperial ear. (See l. xvi. c. 10.)
The dislike expressed by Diocletian towards
Rome and Roman
freedom, was not the effect of momentary caprice, but the
result of the most artful policy. That crafty prince had framed a new system of Imperial government, which was afterwards
completed by the family of
Constantine; and as the image of the old constitution was religiously preserved in the senate, he
resolved to deprive that order of its small remains of power and consideration. We may recollect, about eight years before the
elevation, of Diocletian the transient greatness, and the ambitious hopes, of the Roman senate. As long as that enthusiasm
prevailed, many of the nobles imprudently displayed their zeal in the cause of freedom; and after the successes of
Probus had
withdrawn their countenance from the republican party, the senators were unable to disguise their impotent resentment. As the
sovereign of Italy, Maximian was intrusted with the care of extinguishing this troublesome, rather than dangerous spirit, and the
task was perfectly suited to his cruel temper. The most illustrious members of the senate, whom Diocletian always affected to
esteem, were involved, by his colleague, in the accusation of imaginary plots; and the possession of an elegant villa, or a
well-cultivated estate, was interpreted as a convincing evidence of guilt.
93 The camp of the
Praetorians, which had so long
oppressed, began to protect, the majesty of Rome; and as those haughty troops were conscious of the decline of their power,
they were naturally disposed to unite their strength with the authority of the senate. By the prudent measures of Diocletian, the
numbers of the Praetorians were insensibly reduced, their privileges abolished,
94 and their place supplied by two faithful
legions of
Illyricum, who, under the new titles of Jovians and Herculians, were appointed to perform the service of the Imperial
guards.
95But the most fatal though secret wound, which the senate received from the hands of Diocletian and Maximian,
was inflicted by the inevitable operation of their absence. As long as the emperors resided at Rome, that assembly might be
oppressed, but it could scarcely be neglected. The successors of
Augustus exercised the power of dictating whatever laws their
wisdom or caprice might suggest; but those laws were ratified by the sanction of the senate. The model of ancient freedom was
preserved in its deliberations and decrees; and wise princes, who respected the prejudices of the Roman people, were in some
measure obliged to assume the language and behavior suitable to the general and first
magistrate of the
republic. In the armies
and in the provinces, they displayed the dignity of monarchs; and when they fixed their residence at a distance from the capital,
they forever laid aside the dissimulation which Augustus had recommended to his successors. In the exercise of the legislative as
well as the executive power, the sovereign advised with his ministers, instead of consulting the great council of the nation.
The
name of the senate was mentioned with honor till the last period of the empire; the vanity of its members was still flattered with
honorary distinctions; 96 but the assembly which had so long been the source, and so long the instrument of power, was
respectfully suffered to sink into oblivion. The senate of Rome, losing all connection with the Imperial court and the actual
constitution, was left a venerable but useless monument of antiquity on the Capitoline hill.
Footnote 93: Lactantius accuses Maximian of destroying fictis criminationibus lumina senatus, (De M. P. c. 8.)
Aurelius Victor speaks very doubtfully of the faith of Diocletian towards his friends.
Footnote 94:
Truncatae vires urbis, imminuto praetoriarum cohortium atque in armis vulgi numero. Aurelius Victor. Lactantius attributes to Galerius the prosecution of the same plan, (c. 26.)
Footnote 95: They were old corps stationed in Illyricum; and according to the ancient establishment, they each
consisted of six thousand men. They had acquired much reputation by the use of the plumbatoe, or darts loaded with lead. Each soldier carried
five of these, which he darted from a considerable distance, with great strength and dexterity. See Vegetius, i. 17.
Footnote 96: See the Theodosian Code, l. vi. tit. ii. with Godefroy's commentary.
Part IV.
When the Roman princes had lost sight of the senate and of their ancient capital, they easily forgot the origin and nature of their
legal power. The civil offices of
consul, of
proconsul, of
censor, and of
tribune, by the union of which it had been formed,
betrayed to the people its
republican extraction. Those modest titles were laid aside;
97 and if they still distinguished their high
station by the appellation of
Emperor, or
Imperator, that word was understood in a new and more dignified sense, and no
longer denoted the general of the Roman armies, but the sovereign of the Roman world. The name of Emperor, which was at
first of a military nature, was associated with another of a more servile kind. The epithet of
Dominus, or
Lord, in its primitive
signification, was expressive, not of the authority of a prince over his subjects, or of a commander over his soldiers, but of the
despotic power of a master over his domestic slaves.
98 Viewing it in that odious light, it had been rejected with
abhorrence
by the first Caesars. Their resistance insensibly became more feeble, and the name less odious; till at length the style of our
Lord and Emperor was not only bestowed by flattery, but was regularly admitted into the laws and public monuments. Such
lofty epithets were sufficient to elate and satisfy the most excessive vanity; and if the successors of Diocletian still declined the
title of King, it seems to have been the effect not so much of their moderation as of their delicacy. Wherever the
Latin tongue
was in use, (and it was the language of government throughout the empire,) the Imperial title, as it was peculiar to themselves,
conveyed a more respectable idea than the name of king, which they must have shared with a hundred barbarian chieftains; or
which, at the best, they could derive only from
Romulus, or from
Tarquin. But the sentiments of the East were very different
from those of the West. From the earliest period of history, the sovereigns of Asia had been celebrated in the Greek language
by the title of Basileus, or King; and since it was considered as the first distinction among men, it was soon employed by the
servile provincials of the East, in their humble addresses to the Roman throne.
99 Even the attributes, or at least the titles, of
the Divinity, were usurped by Diocletian and Maximian, who transmitted them to a succession of Christian emperors.
100Such extravagant compliments, however, soon lose their impiety by losing their meaning; and when the ear is once accustomed
to the sound, they are heard with indifference, as vague though excessive professions of respect.
Footnote 97: See the 12th dissertation in Spanheim's excellent work de Usu Numismatum. From medals,
inscriptions, and historians, he examines every title separately, and traces it from Augustus to the moment of its disappearing.
Footnote 98: Pliny (in Panegyr. c. 3, 55, &c.) speaks of Dominus with execration, as synonymous to Tyrant, and
opposite to Prince. And the same Pliny regularly gives that title (in the tenth book of the epistles) to his friend rather than master, the virtuous
Trajan. This strange contradiction puzzles the commentators, who think, and the translators, who can write.
Footnote 99: Synesius de Regno, edit. Petav. p. 15. I am indebted for this quotation to the Abbe de la Bleterie.
Footnote 100: Soe Vandale de Consecratione, p. 354, &c. It was customary for the emperors to mention (in the
preamble of laws) their numen, sacreo majesty, divine oracles, &c. According to Tillemont, Gregory Nazianzen complains most bitterly of
the profanation, especially when it was practiced by an Arian emperor.
From the time of Augustus to that of Diocletian, the Roman princes, conversing in a familiar manner among their fellow-citizens,
were saluted only with the same respect that was usually paid to senators and magistrates. Their principal distinction was the
Imperial or military robe of purple; whilst the senatorial garment was marked by a broad, and the
equestrian by a narrow, band
or stripe of the same honorable color. The pride, or rather the policy, of Diocletian, engaged that artful prince to introduce the
stately magnificence of the court of
Persia.
101 He ventured to assume the diadem, an ornament detested by the Romans as
the odious ensign of royalty, and the use of which had been considered as the most desperate act of the madness of
Caligula. It
was no more than a broad white fillet set with pearls, which encircled the emperor's head. The sumptuous robes of Diocletian
and his successors were of silk and gold; and it is remarked with indignation, that even their shoes were studded with the most
precious gems. The access to their sacred person was every day rendered more difficult by the institution of new forms and
ceremonies. The avenues of the palace were strictly guarded by the various schools, as they began to be called, of domestic
officers. The interior apartments were entrusted to the jealous vigilance of the
eunuchs, the increase of whose numbers and
influence was the most infallible symptom of the progress of despotism. When a subject was at length admitted to the Imperial
presence, he was obliged, whatever might be his rank, to fall prostrate on the ground, and to adore, according to the eastern
fashion, the divinity of his lord and master.
102 Diocletian was a man of sense, who, in the course of private as well as public
life, had formed a just estimate both of himself and of mankind: nor is it easy to conceive, that in substituting the manners of
Persia to those of Rome, he was seriously actuated by so mean a principle as that of vanity. He flattered himself, that an
ostentation of splendor and luxury would subdue the imagination of the multitude; that the monarch would be less exposed to
the rude license of the people and the soldiers, as his person was secluded from the public view; and that habits of submission
would insensibly be productive of sentiments of veneration. Like the modesty affected by Augustus, the state maintained by
Diocletian was a theatrical representation; but it must be confessed, that of the two comedies, the former was of a much more
liberal and manly character than the latter. It was the aim of the one to disguise, and the object of the other to display, the
unbounded power which the emperors possessed over the Roman world.
Footnote 101: See Spanheim de Usu Numismat. Dissert. xii.
Footnote 102: Aurelius Victor. Eutropius, ix. 26. It appears by the Panegyrists, that the Romans were soon
reconciled to the name and ceremony of adoration.
Ostentation was the first principle of the new system instituted by Diocletian. The second was division. He divided the empire,
the provinces, and every branch of the civil as well as military administration. He multiplied the wheels of the machine of
government, and rendered its operations less rapid, but more secure. Whatever advantages and whatever defects might attend
these innovations, they must be ascribed in a very great degree to the first inventor; but as the new frame of policy was
gradually improved and completed by succeeding princes, it will be more satisfactory to delay the consideration of it till the
season of its full maturity and perfection.
103 Reserving, therefore, for the reign of
Constantine a more exact picture of the
new empire, we shall content ourselves with describing the principal and decisive outline, as it was traced by the hand of
Diocletian. He had associated three colleagues in the exercise of the supreme power; and as he was convinced that the abilities
of a single man were inadequate to the public defense, he considered the joint administration of four princes not as a temporary
expedient, but as a fundamental law of the constitution. It was his intention, that the two elder princes should be distinguished by
the use of the
diadem, and the title of Augusti; that, as affection or esteem might direct their choice, they should regularly call to
their assistance two subordinate colleagues; and that the Coesars, rising in their turn to the first rank, should supply an
uninterrupted succession of emperors. The empire was divided into four parts. The East and Italy were the most honorable, the
Danube and the Rhine the most laborious stations. The former claimed the presence of the Augusti, the latter were intrusted to
the administration of the Coesars. The strength of the legions was in the hands of the four partners of sovereignty, and the
despair of successively vanquishing four formidable rivals might intimidate the ambition of an aspiring general. In their civil
government, the emperors were supposed to exercise the undivided power of the
monarch, and their edicts, inscribed with their
joint names, were received in all the provinces, as promulgated by their mutual councils and authority. Notwithstanding these
precautions, the political union of the Roman world was gradually dissolved, and a principle of division was introduced, which,
in the course of a few years, occasioned the perpetual separation of the
Eastern and Western Empires.
Footnote 103: The innovations introduced by Diocletian are chiefly deduced, 1st, from some very strong passages in
Lactantius; and, 2dly, from the new and various offices which, in the Theodosian code, appear already established in the beginning of the
reign of Constantine.
The system of Diocletian was accompanied with another very material disadvantage, which cannot even at present be totally
overlooked; a more expensive
establishment, and consequently an increase of taxes, and the
oppression of the people. Instead
of a modest family of slaves and freedmen, such as had contented the simple greatness of Augustus and Trajan, three or four
magnificent courts were established in the various parts of the empire, and as many Roman kings contended with each other
and with the Persian monarch for the vain superiority of pomp and luxury. The number of ministers, of magistrates, of officers,
and of servants, who filled the different departments of the state, was multiplied beyond the example of former times; and (if we
may borrow the warm expression of a contemporary) "
when the proportion of those who received, exceeded the proportion of
those who contributed, the provinces were oppressed by the weight of tributes."
104 From this period to the extinction of the
empire, it would be easy to deduce an uninterrupted series of clamors and complaints. According to his religion and situation,
each writer chooses either Diocletian, or Constantine, or Valens, or
Theodosius, for the object of his invectives; but they
unanimously agree in representing the burden of the public impositions, and particularly the land tax and capitation, as the
intolerable and increasing grievance of their own times. From such a concurrence, an impartial historian, who is obliged to
extract truth from satire, as well as from
panegyric, will be inclined to divide the blame among the princes whom they accuse,
and to ascribe their exactions much less to their personal vices, than to the uniform system of their administration.
* The
emperor Diocletian was indeed the author of that system; but during his reign, the growing evil was confined within the bounds
of modesty and discretion, and he deserves the reproach of establishing pernicious precedents, rather than of exercising actual
oppression.
105 It may be added, that his revenues were managed with prudent economy; and that after all the current
expenses were discharged, there still remained in the Imperial treasury an ample provision either for judicious liberality or for
any emergency of the state.
Footnote 104: Lactant. de M. P. c. 7.
Footnote *: The most curious document which has come to light since the publication of Gibbon's History, is the edict
of Diocletian, published from an inscription found at Eskihissar, (Stratoniccia,) by Col. Leake. This inscription was first copied by
Sherard, afterwards much more completely by Mr. Bankes. This edict was issued in the name of the four Caesars, Diocletian, Maximian,
Constantius, and Galerius. It fixed a maximum of prices throughout the empire, for all the necessaries and commodities of life. The preamble
insists, with great vehemence on the extortion and inhumanity of the venders and merchants. The edict, as Col. Leake clearly shows, was
issued A. D. 303. Among the articles of which the maximum value is assessed, are oil, salt, honey, butchers' meat, poultry, game, fish,
vegetables, fruit the wages of laborers and artisans, schoolmasters and skins, boots and shoes, harness, timber, corn, wine, and beer,
(zythus.) The depreciation in the value of money, or the rise in the price of commodities, had been so great during the past century, that
butchers' meat, which, in the second century of the empire, was in Rome about two denaril the pound, was now fixed at a maximum of eight.
Col. Leake supposes the average price could not be less than four: at the same time the maximum of the wages of the agricultural laborers
was twenty-five. The whole edict is, perhaps, the most gigantic effort of a blind though well-intentioned despotism, to control that which is, and
ought to be, beyond the regulation of the government. See an Edict of Diocletian, by Col. Leake, London, 1826. -
M
Footnote 105: Indicta lex nova quae sane illorum temporum modestia tolerabilis, in perniciem processit. Aurel.
Victor., who has treated the character of Diocletian with good sense, though in bad Latin.
It was in the twenty first year of his reign that
Diocletian executed his memorable resolution of abdicating the empire; an
action more naturally to have been expected from the elder or the younger
Antoninus, than from a prince who had never
practiced the lessons of
philosophy either in the attainment or in the use of supreme power. Diocletian acquired the glory of
giving to the world the first example of a resignation,
106 which has not been very frequently imitated by succeeding
monarchs. The parallel of
Charles the Fifth, however, will naturally offer itself to our mind, not only since the eloquence of a
modern historian has rendered that name so familiar to an English reader, but from the very striking resemblance between the
characters of the two emperors, whose political abilities were superior to their military genius, and whose specious virtues were
much less the effect of nature than of art. The abdication of
Charles appears to have been hastened by the vicissitude of fortune;
and the disappointment of his favorite schemes urged him to relinquish a power which he found inadequate to his ambition. But
the reign of Diocletian had flowed with a tide of uninterrupted success; nor was it till after he had vanquished all his enemies,
and accomplished all his designs, that he seems to have entertained any serious thoughts of resigning the empire. Neither
Charles nor Diocletian were arrived at a very advanced period of life; since the one was only fifty- five, and the other was no
more than fifty-nine years of age; but the active life of those princes, their wars and journeys, the cares of royalty, and their
application to business, had already impaired their constitution, and brought on the infirmities of a premature old age.
107
Footnote 106: Solus omnium post conditum Romanum Imperium, qui extanto fastigio sponte ad privatae vitae statum
civilitatemque remearet, Eutrop. ix. 28.
Footnote 107: The particulars of the journey and illness are taken from Laclantius, c. 17, who may sometimes be
admitted as an evidence of public facts, though very seldom of private anecdotes.
Notwithstanding the severity of a very cold and rainy winter, Diocletian left Italy soon after the ceremony of his
triumph, and
began his progress towards the East round the circuit of the Illyrian provinces. From the inclemency of the weather, and the
fatigue of the journey, he soon contracted a slow illness; and though he made easy marches, and was generally carried in a
close litter, his disorder, before he arrived at
Nicomedia, about the end of the summer, was become very serious and alarming.
During the whole winter he was confined to his palace: his danger inspired a general and unaffected concern; but the people
could only judge of the various alterations of his health, from the joy or consternation which they discovered in the
countenances and behavior of his attendants. The rumor of his death was for some time universally believed, and it was
supposed to be concealed with a view to prevent the troubles that might have happened during the absence of the Caesar
Galerius. At length, however, on the first of March, Diocletian once more appeared in public, but so pale and emaciated, that
he could scarcely have been recognized by those to whom his person was the most familiar. It was time to put an end to the
painful struggle, which he had sustained during more than a year, between the care of his health and that of his dignity. The
former required indulgence and relaxation, the latter compelled him to direct, from the bed of sickness, the administration of a
great empire. He resolved to pass the remainder of his days in honorable repose, to place his glory beyond the reach of fortune,
and to relinquish the theatre of the world to his younger and more active associates.
108
Footnote 108: Aurelius Victor ascribes the abdication, which had been so variously accounted for, to two causes:
1st, Diocletian's contempt of ambition; and 2dly, His apprehension of impending troubles. One of the panegyrists (vi. 9) mentions the age and
infirmities of Diocletian as a very natural reason for his retirement. Note: Constantine (Orat. ad Sanct. c. 401) more than insinuated that
derangement of mind, connected with the conflagration of the palace at Nicomedia by lightning, was the cause of his abdication. But
Heinichen. in a very sensible note on this passage in Eusebius, while he admits that his long illness might produce a temporary depression of
spirits, triumphantly appeals to the philosophical conduct of Diocletian in his retreat, and the influence which he still retained on public affairs. -
M.
The ceremony of his
abdication was performed in a spacious plain, about three miles from Nicomedia. The emperor ascended
a lofty throne, and in a speech, full of reason and dignity, declared his intention, both to the people and to the soldiers who were
assembled on this extraordinary occasion. As soon as he had divested himself of his purple, he withdrew from the gazing
multitude; and traversing the city in a covered
chariot, proceeded, without delay, to the favorite retirement which he had chosen
in his native country of Dalmatia. On the same day, which was the first of May,
109 Maximian, as it had been previously
concerted, made his resignation of the Imperial dignity at
Milan.
Even in the splendor of the Roman triumph,
Diocletian had meditated his design of abdicating the government. As he wished to
secure the obedience of
Maximian, he exacted from him either a general assurance that he would submit his actions to the
authority of his benefactor, or a particular promise that he would descend from the throne, whenever he should receive the
advice and the example. This engagement, though it was confirmed by the solemnity of an oath before the altar of the
Capitoline
Jupiter,
110 would have proved a feeble restraint on the fierce temper of Maximian, whose passion was the love of power,
and who neither desired present tranquility nor future reputation. But he yielded, however reluctantly, to the ascendant which his
wiser colleague had acquired over him, and retired, immediately after his abdication, to a villa in
Lucania, where it was almost
impossible that such an impatient spirit could find any lasting tranquility.
Footnote 109: The difficulties as well as mistakes attending the dates both of the year and of the day of Diocletian's
abdication are perfectly cleared up by Tillemont, Hist. Des Empereurs, tom. iv. p 525, note 19, and by Pagi ad
annum.
Footnote 110: See Panegyr. Veter. vi. 9. The oration was pronounced after Maximian had resumed the
purple.
Diocletian, who, from a
servile origin, had raised himself to the throne, passed the nine last years of his life in a private
condition. Reason had dictated, and content seems to have accompanied, his retreat, in which he enjoyed, for a long time, the
respect of those princes to whom he had resigned the possession of the world.
111 It is seldom that minds long exercised in
business have formed the habits of conversing with themselves, and in the loss of power they principally regret the want of
occupation. The amusements of letters and of devotion, which afford so many resources in
solitude, were incapable of fixing the
attention of Diocletian; but he had preserved, or at least he soon recovered, a taste for the most innocent as well as natural
pleasures, and
his leisure hours were sufficiently employed in building, planting, and gardening. His answer to Maximian is
deservedly celebrated. He was solicited by that restless old man to reassume the reins of government, and the Imperial purple.
He rejected the temptation with a smile of pity, calmly observing, that if he could show Maximian the cabbages which he had
planted with his own hands at Salona, he should no longer be urged to relinquish the enjoyment of happiness for the pursuit of
power. 112 In his conversations with his friends, he frequently acknowledged, that of all arts, the most difficult was the art of
reigning; and he expressed himself on that favorite topic with a degree of warmth which could be the result only of experience.
"How often," was he accustomed to say, "is it the interest of four or five ministers to combine together to deceive their
sovereign! Secluded from mankind by his exalted dignity, the truth is concealed from his knowledge; he can see only with their
eyes, he hears nothing but their misrepresentations. He confers the most important offices upon vice and weakness, and
disgraces the most virtuous and deserving among his subjects. By such infamous arts," added Diocletian, "the best and wisest
princes are sold to the venal
corruption of their courtiers."
113 A just estimate of greatness, and the assurance of immortal
fame, improve our relish for the pleasures of retirement; but the Roman emperor had filled too important a character in the
world, to enjoy without alloy the comforts and security of a private condition. It was impossible that he could remain ignorant of
the troubles which afflicted the empire after his abdication. It was impossible that he could be indifferent to their consequences.
Fear, sorrow, and discontent, sometimes pursued him into the solitude of Salona. His tenderness, or at least his pride, was
deeply wounded by the misfortunes of his wife and daughter; and the last moments of Diocletian were embittered by some
affronts, which Licinius and Constantine might have spared the father of so many emperors, and the first author of their own
fortune. A report, though of a very doubtful nature, has reached our times, that he prudently withdrew himself from their power
by a voluntary death.
114
Footnote 111: Eumenius pays him a very fine compliment: "At enim divinum illum virum, qui primus
imperium et participavit et posuit, consilii et fact isui non poenitet; nec amisisse se putat quod sponte transcripsit. Felix
beatusque vere quem vestra, tantorum principum, colunt privatum." Panegyr. Vet. vii. 15.
Footnote 112: We are obliged to the younger Victor for this celebrated item. Eutropius mentions the thing in a more
general manner.
Footnote 113: Hist. August. p. 223, 224. Vopiscus had learned this conversation from his
father.
Footnote 114: The younger Victor slightly mentions the report. But as Diocletian had disobliged a powerful and
successful party, his memory has been loaded with every crime and misfortune. It has been affirmed that he died raving mad, that he was
condemned as a criminal by the Roman senate, &c.
Before we dismiss the consideration of the life and character of Diocletian, we may, for a moment, direct our view to the place
of his retirement. Salona, a principal city of his native province of
Dalmatia, was near two hundred Roman miles (according to
the measurement of the public highways) from
Aquileia and the confines of Italy, and about two hundred and seventy from
Sirmium, the usual residence of the emperors whenever they visited the Illyrian frontier.
115 A miserable village still preserves
the name of Salona; but so late as the sixteenth century, the remains of a theatre, and a confused prospect of broken arches and
marble columns, continued to attest its ancient splendor.
116 About six or seven miles from the city, Diocletian constructed a
magnificent palace, and we may infer, from the greatness of the work, how long he had meditated his design of abdicating the
empire. The choice of a spot which united all that could contribute either to health or to luxury, did not require the partiality of a
native. "The soil was dry and
fertile, the air is pure and wholesome, and though extremely hot during the summer months, this
country seldom feels those sultry and noxious winds, to which the coasts of Istria and some parts of Italy are exposed. The
views from the palace are no less beautiful than the soil and climate were inviting. Towards the west lies the fertile shore that
stretches along the
Adriatic Sea, in which a number of small islands are scattered in such a manner, as to give this part of the sea the
appearance of a great lake. On the north side lies the bay, which led to the ancient city of Salona; and the country beyond it,
appearing in sight, forms a proper contrast to that more extensive prospect of water, which the Adriatic presents both to the
south and to the east. Towards the north, the view is terminated by high and irregular mountains, situated at a proper distance,
and in many places covered with villages, woods, and vineyards."
117
Footnote 115: See the Itiner. p. 269, 272, edit. Wessel.
Footnote 116: The Abate Fortis, in his Viaggio in Dalmazia, p. 43, (printed at Venice in the year 1774, in two small
volumes in quarto,) quotes a Ms account of the antiquities of Salona, composed by Giambattista Giustiniani about the middle of
the xvith century.
Footnote 117: Adam's Antiquities of Diocletian's Palace at Spalatro, p. 6. We may add a circumstance or two from
the Abate Fortis: the little stream of the Hyader, mentioned by Lucan, produces most exquisite trout, which a sagacious writer, perhaps a
monk, supposes to have been one of the principal reasons that determined Diocletian in the choice of his retirement. Fortis, p. 45. The same author (p. 38) observes, that a taste for agriculture is reviving at Spalatro; and that an experimental farm has
lately been established near the city, by a society of gentlemen.
Though
Constantine, from a very obvious prejudice, affects to mention the palace of Diocletian with contempt,
118 yet one of
their successors, who could only see it in a neglected and mutilated state, celebrates its magnificence in terms of the highest
admiration.
119 It covered an extent of ground consisting of between nine and ten English acres. The form was quadrangular,
flanked with sixteen towers. Two of the sides were near six hundred, and the other two near seven hundred feet in length. The
whole was constructed of a beautiful freestone, extracted from the neighboring quarries of Trau, or Tragutium, and very little
inferior to
marble itself. Four streets, intersecting each other at right angles, divided the several parts of this great edifice, and
the approach to the principal apartment was from a very stately entrance, which is still denominated the Golden Gate. The
approach was terminated by a
peristylium of granite columns, on one side of which we discover the square temple of
Aesculapius, on the other the octagon temple of Jupiter. The latter of those deities Diocletian revered as the patron of his
fortunes, the former as the protector of his health. By comparing the present remains with the precepts of
Vitruvius, the several
parts of the building, the baths, bed-chamber, the
atrium, the
basilica, and the Cyzicene, Corinthian, and Egyptian halls have
been described with some degree of precision, or at least of probability. Their forms were various, their proportions just; but
they all were attended with two imperfections, very repugnant to our modern notions of taste and convenience. These stately
rooms had neither windows nor chimneys. They were lighted from the top, (for the building seems to have consisted of no more
than one story,) and they received their heat by the help of pipes that were conveyed along the walls. The range of principal
apartments was protected towards the south-west by a portico five hundred and seventeen feet long, which must have formed
a very noble and delightful walk, when the beauties of painting and sculpture were added to those of the prospect.
Footnote 118: Constantin. Orat. ad Coetum Sanct. c. 25. In this sermon, the emperor, or the bishop who composed
it for him, affects to relate the miserable end of all the persecutors of the church.
Footnote 119: Constantin. Porphyr. de Statu Imper. p. 86.
Had this magnificent edifice remained in a solitary country, it would have been exposed to the ravages of time; but it might, perhaps, have escaped the rapacious industry of man. The village of
Aspalathus,
120 and, long afterwards, the provincial town of Spalatro, have grown out of its ruins. The Golden Gate now opens into the market-place. St.
John the Baptist has usurped the honors of Aesculapius; and the temple of Jupiter, under the protection of the
Virgin, is converted into the
cathedral church. For this account of Diocletian's palace we are principally indebted to an ingenious artist of our own time and country, whom a
very liberal curiosity carried into the heart of
Dalmatia.
121 But there is room to suspect that the
elegance of his designs and
engraving has somewhat flattered the objects which it was their purpose to represent. We are informed by a more recent and
very judicious traveler, that the awful ruins of Spalatro are not less expressive of the decline of the art than of the greatness of
the Roman empire in the time of Diocletian.
122 If such was indeed the state of
architecture, we must naturally believe that
painting and sculpture had experienced a still more sensible decay. The practice of architecture is directed by a few general and
even mechanical rules. But
sculpture, and above all, painting, propose to themselves the imitation not only of the forms of
nature, but of the characters and passions of the human soul. In those sublime arts, the dexterity of the hand is of little avail,
unless it is animated by fancy, and guided by the most correct taste and observation.
Footnote 120: D'Anville, Geographie Ancienne, tom. i. p. 162.
Footnote 121: Messieurs Adam and Clerisseau, attended by two draughtsmen visited Spalatro in
the month of July, 1757. The magnificent work which their journey produced was published in London seven years
afterwards.
Footnote 122: I shall quote the words of the Abate Fortis. "E'bastevolmente agli amatori dell' Architettura, e dell'
Antichita, l'opera del Signor Adams, che a donato molto a que' superbi vestigi coll'abituale eleganza del suo toccalapis e del
bulino. In generale la rozzezza del scalpello, e'l cattivo gusto del secolo vi gareggiano colla magnificenz del fabricato." See
Viaggio in Dalmazia, p. 40.
It is almost unnecessary to remark, that the civil distractions of the empire, the license of the soldiers, the inroads of the
barbarians, and the progress of
despotism, had proved very unfavorable to
genius, and even to learning. The succession of
Illyrian princes restored the empire without restoring the sciences. Their military education was not calculated to inspire them
with the love of letters; and even the mind of
Diocletian, however active and capacious in business, was totally uninformed by
study or speculation. The professions of law and physic are of such common use and certain profit, that they will always secure
a sufficient number of practitioners, endowed with a reasonable degree of abilities and knowledge; but it does not appear that
the students in those two faculties appeal to any celebrated masters who have flourished within that period.
The voice of poetry
was silent. History was reduced to dry and confused abridgments, alike destitute of amusement and instruction. A languid and
affected eloquence was still retained in the pay and service of the emperors, who encouraged not any arts except those which
contributed to the gratification of their pride, or the defense of their power. 123
Footnote 123: The orator Eumenius was secretary to the emperors Maximian and Constantius, and Professor of
Rhetoric in the college of Autun. His salary was six hundred thousand sesterces, which, according to the lowest computation of that age,
must have exceeded three thousand pounds a year. He generously requested the permission of employing it in rebuilding the
college. See his Oration De Restaurandis Scholis; which, though not exempt from vanity, may atone for his
panegyrics.
The declining age of learning and of mankind is marked, however, by the rise and rapid progress of the new Platonists. The
school of
Alexandria silenced those of Athens; and the ancient sects enrolled themselves under the banners of the more
fashionable teachers, who recommended their system by the novelty of their method, and the austerity of their manners. Several
of these masters,
Ammonius,
Plotinus,
Amelius, and
Porphyry,
124 were men of profound thought and intense application; but
by mistaking the true object of philosophy, their labors contributed much less to improve than to corrupt the human
understanding. The knowledge that is suited to our situation and powers, the whole compass of moral, natural, and
mathematical science, was neglected by the new Platonists; whilst they exhausted their strength in the verbal disputes of
metaphysics, attempted to explore the secrets of the
invisible world, and studied to reconcile
Aristotle with
Plato, on subjects of
which both these philosophers were as ignorant as the rest of mankind.
Consuming their reason in these deep but unsubstantial
meditations, their minds were exposed to illusions of fancy. They flattered themselves that they possessed the secret of
disengaging the soul from its corporal prison; claimed a familiar intercourse with demons and spirits; and, by a very singular
revolution, converted the study of philosophy into that of magic. The ancient sages had derided the popular
superstition; after
disguising its extravagance by the thin pretence of allegory, the disciples of
Plotinus and
Porphyry became its most zealous
defenders. As they agreed with the Christians in a few mysterious points of faith, they attacked the remainder of their
theological system with all the fury of civil war. The new
Platonists would scarcely deserve a place in the history of science, but
in that of the church the mention of them will very frequently occur.
Footnote 124: Porphyry died about the time of Diocletian's abdication. The life of his master Plotinus, which he
composed, will give us the most complete idea of the genius of the sect, and the manners of its professors. This very curious piece is inserted
in Fabricius Bibliotheca Graeca tom. iv. p. 88 - 148.
End of Chapter.
Back to Chapter Listing
Previous Chapter
Continue Reading