The website for all who love the eternal city

Renewal of Troubles respecting the Succession.
As we have just seen, Diocletian's device of the tetrarchy did secure for once the orderly transfer of the reins of government from the hands of one set of rulers to those of another. But the system was too complicated to be worked by any hand less strong and skilful than that of the one who devised it. As the historian Gibbon says, " It required such a fortunate mixture of different tempers and abilities as could scarcely be found or even expected a second time; two emperors without jealousy, two Caesars without ambition, and the same general interests invariably pursued by four independent princes."
Galerius and Constantius, who, it will be remembered, had become Augusti on the abdication of Diocletian and Maximian, had reigned together only one year when the latter died at York, in Britain. His soldiers, disregarding the rule of succession as determined by the system of Diocletian, proclaimed his son Constantine emperor. Six competitors for the throne arose in different quarters. For eighteen years Constantine fought to gain the supremacy. The Battle of the Milvian Bridge (A.D. 312): "In this Sign conquer." — One of the most important of the battles that took place between the contending rivals for the imperial purple was the battle of the Milvian Bridge, in which Maxentius, who was holding Italy and Africa, was defeated by Constantine. The circumstances attending this historic battle were these.
Constantine, who was in the North, venturously crossed the Alps with an army of forty thousand men. Defeating the forces of Maxentius in the battle of Turin, he marched southward, and finally engaged his rival in a decisive combat at the Milvian Bridge on the Tiber, about two miles from Rome.
Constantine's standard on this celebrated battlefield was the Christian Cross. He had been led to adopt this emblem through the appearance, as once he prayed to the sun-god, of a cross above the setting sun, with this inscription upon it: " By this sign conquer." Obedient unto the celestial vision, Constantine had at once made the Cross his banner, and it was beneath this emblem that his soldiers marched to victory at the battle of the Milvian Bridge.
Whatever may have been the circumstances or the motives which led Constantine to make the Cross his standard, this act of his constitutes a turning point in the history of the Roman empire, and especially in that of the Christian Church. Christianity had come into the world as a religion of peace and good will. The Master had commanded his disciples to put up the sword, and had forbidden its use by them either in the spread or in the defence of the new faith. For three centuries now his followers had obeyed literally this injunction of the Founder of the Church, so that a Quaker, non-military spirit had up to this time characterized the new sect. By many of the early Christians the profession of arms had been declared to be incompatible with the Christian life.
Now in a moment all this was changed. The most sacred emblem of the new faith was made a battle-standard, and into the new religion was infused the military spirit of the imperial government that had made that emblem the ensign of the state. From the day of the battle at the Milvian Bridge, a martial spirit has animated the religion of the Prince of Peace. Since then, Christian warriors have often made the Cross their battle-standard. This infusion into the Church of the military spirit of Rome was one of the most important consequences of the espousal of the Christian cause by the emperor Constantine.
The Battles of Adrianople and Chalet-don (A.D. 323).
The defeat of Maxentius left Constantine but one remaining rival — Licinius, who was holding the East. The ten years immediately following the battle at the Milvian Bridge witnessed two wars between the co-regents of the empire. The last great battles of the rivals were fought at Adrianople and Chalcedon (A.D. 323). On the first field Constantine with an army of a hundred and fifty thousand men met his adversary with a force of a hundred and sixty-five thousand. The battle-cry of the soldiers of Constantine was, "God our Saviour," that of the enemy, " On our side are many gods, on theirs only one."
Licinius was defeated, with a loss in killed of thirty-four thousand men. He himself escaped from the field, raised another army in Asia Minor, and tried once more the fortunes of battle at Chalcedon. Here he suffered another crushing defeat, and soon afterwards was captured and put to death. Constantine was now the sole ruler of the Roman world.
Constantine makes Christianity the Religion of the Court By a decree issued at Milan in A.D. 313, the year after the battle at the Milvian Bridge, Constantine placed Christianity on an equal footing with the other religions of the empire. The language of this famous edict of toleration, the Magna Charta, as it has been called, of the Church, was as follows:
" We grant to Christians and to all others full liberty of following that religion which each may choose."
But by subsequent edicts Constantine made Christianity in effect the state religion and extended to it a patronage which he withheld from the old pagan worship. By the year A.D. 321 he had granted the Christian societies the right to receive gifts and legacies, and he himself enriched the Church with donations of money and grants of land.
This marks the beginning of the great possessions of the Church, and with these the entrance into it of a worldly spirit. From this moment can be traced the decay of its primitive simplicity, and a decline from its early high moral standard.
It is these deplorable results of the imperial patronage that Dante laments in his well-known lines:
Ah, Constantine! of how much ill was mother,
Not thy conversion, but that marriage dower
Which the first wealthy Father took from thee !
Another of Constantine's acts touching the new religion is of special historical interest and importance. He recognized the Christian Sunday, "the day of the sun," as a day of rest, forbidding ordinary work on that day, and ordering that Christian soldiers be then permitted to attend the services of their church. This recognition by the civil authority of the Christian Sabbath meant much for the slave. Now, for the first time in the history of the Aryan peoples, the slave had one day of rest in each week. It was a good augury of the happier time coming when all the days should be his own.
The Church Council of Nicaea (A.D. 325).
With the view of harmonizing the different sects that had sprung up among the Christians, and to settle the controversy between the Arians and the Athanasians respecting the nature of Christ, — the former denied his equality with God the Father, — Constantine called the first Oecumenical, or General Council of the Church, at Nicsea, a town of Asia Minor, A.D. 325. Arianism was denounced, and a formula of Christian faith adopted, which is known as the Nicene Creed.
Constantine founds Constantinople, the New Rome, on the Bosporus (A.D. 330).
After the recognition of Christianity, the most important act of Constantine was the selection of Byzantium, on the Bosporus, as the new capital of the empire. Constantine was not the first to entertain the idea of seeking in the East a new centre for the Roman world. The anger of the Italians was stirred against the first Cassar by the mere report that he intended to restore ancient Ilium, the fabled cradle of the Roman race, and make that the capital of the empire. Mark Antony was also believed to have had in mind the transfer of the seat of government from the West to the East.
There were no sufficient grounds, however, at the time of the establishment of the empire for shifting the location of the capital ; but since then the situation of things had wholly changed, and now there were many and weighty reasons urging Constantine to establish a new capital in the East.
There were urgent military reasons for making the change. The most dangerous enemies of the empire now were the barbarians behind the Danube, and the kings of the recently restored Persian monarchy. This condition of things rendered almost necessary the establishment in the East of a new and permanent basis for military operations, and pointed to Byzantium, with its admirable strategic position, as the site, above all others, adapted to the needs of the imperilled empire.
There were also commercial reasons for the transfer of the capital. Rome had long before this ceased to be in any sense the commercial centre of the state, as it was in early times. Through the Roman conquest of Greece and Asia, the centre of the population, wealth, and commerce of the empire had shifted eastward. Now, of all the cities in the East, Byzantium was the one most favorably situated to become the commercial metropolis of the enlarged state.
The trade advantages offered by the site had been recog-nized by the early Greeks, and in their age of colonization they had established a colony there. The popular designation, Golden Horn, applied to the harbor, is significant; the curving shore of the bay suggested the term "Horn," while "the epithet 'Golden' was expressive of the riches which every wind wafted into the secure and capacious harbor."
Added to these military and commercial reasons for the removal of the capital from the Tiber to the Bosporus, were religious motives. Constantine had resolved to make Christianity the basis of his government. But the religious associations clinging to the temples, and attached to every spot of the consecrated soil of the old capital, stood as rooted obstacles in the way of his carrying out this resolve, so long as Rome remained the seat of the imperial court.
The priests of the pagan shrines particularly resented the action of Constantine in espousing the new and hated religion, and regarded him as an apostate. It was the existence of these sentiments and feelings among the inhabitants of Rome, which, for one thing, led Constantine to seek elsewhere a new centre and seat for his court and government.
But far outweighing all these military, commercial, and religious reasons for the removal of the capital were the political motives. Constantine, like Diocletian, wished to establish a system of government modelled upon the despotic monarchy of the East. Now, the traditions, the feelings, the temper of the population of Rome constituted the very worst basis conceivable for such a political system.
The Romans could not forget — never did forget — that they had once been masters and rulers of the world. Even after they had become wholly unfit to rule themselves, let alone the ruling of others, they still retained the temper and used the language of masters. Constantine wisely determined to seek in the submissive and servile populations of the East, always accustomed to the rendering of obsequious homage to their rulers, a firm basis for the structure of that absolute monarchy, the foundations of which had been laid by his predecessor Diocletian.
The site for the new capital having been determined upon, the artistic and material resources of the whole Graeco- Roman world were called into requisition to create upon the spot a city worthy its predestined fortunes. Outer walls of vast compass were constructed. The city itself reproduced all the characteristic features of Old Rome.
Even like the city of the Tiber, it was built on seven hills.
On every side arose theatres, baths, porticoes, aqueducts fountains, and monumental columns. An immense hippodrome constructed within the walls represented the Circus Maximus at Rome. A new senate was organized, and the people, as in Old Rome, were divided into curies and tribes. For the embellishment of the new capital, the cities of Greece and of Asia were despoiled of their art treasures, many of which were memorials of the great age of Pheidias.
The imperial invitation, and the attractions of the court, induced multitude to crowd into the new capital, so that almost in a day the old Byzantium grew into a great city.
In honor of the emperor the name was changed to Constantinople, the "City of Constantine." The Old Rome on the Tiber, emptied of its leading inhabitants, soon sank to the obscure position of a provincial municipality.
The Reorganization of the Government-
Another of Constantine's important acts was the reorganization of the government. In this great reform he seems to have followed, in the main, the broad lines drawn by Diocletian, so that his work may be regarded as a continuation of that of his predecessor.
To aid in the administration of the government, Constantine laid out the empire into four great divisions, called prefectures, which were subdivided into thirteen dioceses, an these again into one hundred and sixteen provinces.
The purpose that Constantine had in view in laying the empire out in so many and such small provinces was to diminish the power of the provincial governors, and thus make it impossible for them to raise successfully the standard of revolt. The records of the empire show that during the one hundred and fifty years immediately preceding the accession of Constantine, almost one hundred governors of provinces has ventured to rebel against the imperial authority.
With an aim similar to that which he had in view in subdividing the provinces, Constantine also reduced the size of the legion to fifteen hundred men, and distributed the legionaries in such a way throughout the provinces and along the frontiers as to lessen the chances of successful conspiracy and revolt.
To give still further security to the throne, Constantine divided the civil and military powers, appointing two different sets of persons in each of the larger and smaller divisions of the state, the one set to represent the civil and the other the military authority. At the head of each prefecture was placed a praetorian prefect; at the head of each diocese a vicar or vice-prefect; and at the head of each province a magistrate bearing usually the title of president. These were civil officers, who were charged with the collection of the revenues and the administration of justice in their respective districts.
Alongside these civil magistrates, and forming a similar carefully graded hierarchy, were placed military officers, charged of course simply with the management and control of military affairs.
This separation of the civil and the military authority greatly strengthened the position of the sovereign, since the division of power between the two orders, and their resulting mutual jealousies, reduced to a minimum the danger of treachery and revolution.
But this dual administrative system had its drawbacks. In the first place, this division of authority and responsibility was not conducive to the prompt, energetic, and harmonious conduct of the public business; and in the second place, the great number of officials needed to man and work the complicated system increased greatly the expenses of the government, and made necessary the laying of still heavier burdens of taxation upon the already overburdened people. From the introduction of this system on to the end, the chief function of the ever-needy government seemed to be to devise ways and means of wringing money from the impoverished taxpayers.
The Imperial Court.
Perhaps we cannot better indicate the new relation to the empire into which the head of the Roman state was brought by the innovations of Diocletian and Constantine, than by saying that the empire now became the private estate of the sovereign and was managed just as any great Roman proprietor managed his domain. The imperial household and the entire civil service of the government were simply such a proprietor's domestic establishment drawn on a large scale, and given an oriental cast through the influence of the courts of Asia.
This imperial court or establishment was, next after the body of the Roman law and the municipal system, the most important historical product that the old Roman world transmitted to the later nations of Europe. It became the model of the court of Charlemagne and the later emperors of the so-called Holy Roman Empire ; and in the form that it reappeared here was copied by all the sovereigns of modern Europe. The court of Louis XIV. of France, and indeed his whole scheme of government, were a reproduction of this court and government of Constantinople.
The Character of Constantine.
Constantine was greatly eulogized by contemporary Christian writers, while the partisans of the old pagan religion that he had renounced attributed to him every personal vice and the worst of motives for almost every act of his life. Because
of these different portraitures it is very difficult to form an unbiased estimate of his character and to judge how sincere were the motives under which he acted. But probably we shall not be far wrong if we conclude that he was not always the same. During all the earlier, strenuous years of his life, up to the time when he became undisputed lord of the Roman world, he exhibited, for the most part, only qualities of character calculated to win affection and to stir admiration. After that turn in his affairs, his character appears to have undergone a change for the worse, such a change as we have observed in many another wearer of the imperial purple.
Respecting his conversion to Christianity, it is probable that he embraced the new religion not entirely from conviction, but partly at least from political motives. As the historian Hodgkin puts it, " He was half convinced of the truth of Christianity, and wholly convinced of the policy of embracing it." If his course was dictated by considerations of policy, events abundantly justified his forecast. Christianity was the most vital element in the empire, and the government, through the alliance formed with the Church, had imparted to it new vitality and strength. In any event Constantine's personal religion was a strange mixture of the old and the new. On his medals the Christian Cross is upheld by the pagan deity Victory; and on the head of the great statue of the sun-god Apollo, which he set up in his new capital, and which was probably intended to represent himself, there rested a crown the rays of which were formed of the nails of the sacred Cross. Bearing these things in mind, it need not seem strange to us that Constantine should have desired that he should be worshipped after death, nor incongruous that succeeding Christian emperors should have gratified his wish in allowing the people to offer sacrifices to his statue along with those of the pagan emperors.