the wife and daughter of diocletian
although we have already indicated the fate of aurelian, we have not yet referred to the woman who shared his imperial title and his great renown. her personality is, in fact, entirely unknown; even her name is preserved for us only on the coinage. we may fairly conjecture that she disliked the plebeian ways of her husband, and discharged the duties of a consort without enthusiasm. daughter of a wealthy and prominent noble, ulpius crinitus, she had conferred a useful distinction on the ambitious peasant at a time when he was making his way in the imperial service, and it is conjectured, on somewhat slender grounds, that she accompanied him on his campaigns. but his life at the palace was short and inglorious. he disliked its pomp and luxury, and found his chief delight in pitting his comedians against each other in eating-contests. he pampered the common citizens by increasing their free ration of bread, and adding pork to it. when he went on to meditate a free distribution of wine, one of his ministers sarcastically suggested that he might add geese and chickens. when the empress, ulpia severina, thought it fitting that she should wear silk mantles, her husband forbade her to indulge in that rare and costly product of a precarious commerce with china.
aurelian was, in fact, essentially a soldier. his manner, and even the reforms which he endeavoured to make, caused grave dissatisfaction at rome, and a conspiracy251 against him was discovered within a few months of the magnificent triumph he had enjoyed. he crushed it with a fierceness that almost obliterated the memory of his great services, and then returned to asia to meet the persians. on his march he was assassinated, in the beginning of the year 275, and the great promise of his reign was unfulfilled. ulpia severina seems to have died before him, as the historian speaks only of a daughter who survived him.
once more we pass swiftly over a number of turbulent years until we come to an empress of whom we have a comparatively ample knowledge. it is generally admitted, though not entirely beyond doubt, that the throne remained vacant for the greater part of the year 275. the “historia augusta,” at least, which was written in the next generation, describes a situation in remarkable contrast to the earlier haste in appointing emperors. we are asked to believe that the senate and the army spent many months in a most edifying encounter, each endeavouring to induce the other to choose a ruler. at length the senators chose one of their number, the aged and upright tacitus, who set out to take command of the troops in asia. within a few weeks, worn by the unwonted fatigue and pained by the unruly behaviour of the soldiers, he passed away. some of the historians declare that he died of actual violence. there is no trace of an empress. we read that tacitus, like aurelian, forbade his wife to wear sumptuous clothing, but this was probably in earlier days. the absence of coins leads us to think that she had died.
he was succeeded by a young and vigorous officer, of peasant extraction, named probus, under whom the empire recovered much of its strength. for six years he laboured successfully to restore the prestige of rome, but his severity led at length to assassination. during a mutiny of the soldiers, in the year 282, “a thousand swords were plunged at once into the bosom of the unfortunate probus,” as gibbon too floridly expresses it.252 from the absence of coins we may almost gather that his wife had died before his accession. carus, who succeeded him, was an aged general of sixty years. he died after a year of strenuous warfare, and left the empire to his sons carinus and numerianus. the younger emperor was dispatched to the east, and carinus virtually reigned alone.
even the experience of our own time has so frequently taught us to expect a mediocre or effeminate issue from a distinguished and virile stock that we do not wonder at this happening constantly in the history of rome. we need not refer it to the mystery of heredity. the vigorous sire had developed and enhanced his strength in the laborious climb to the heights of his chosen world. the son, finding the paths to the summit smoothed, and an engaging luxury at his command without exertion, allows it to degenerate. the finest steel and the purest gold yield and crumble in a corroding atmosphere. we cannot, therefore, affect astonishment at the almost invariable failure of the roman practice of eagerly welcoming a son to the place of his gifted father.
the reign of carinus affords one of the worst illustrations of the evil. indolent, insolent, and luxurious, he saw in his imperial power an opulent ministry to his depraved tastes. he did indeed provide rome with the most splendid entertainments. the amphitheatre rang once more with the coarse applause of the ninety thousand spectators of its bloody contests; the circus was transformed into a forest, in which the strange or beautiful beasts of remote lands lived under the eyes of three hundred thousand romans. but this indulgence of the people’s appetites was held to excuse an unbridled ministry to those of the prince. the whisper went once more through the fetid depths of roman life that there were rich awards for the ingenious and industrious pandar to a sated voluptuary, and the palace exhibited again the loathsome spectacles that had long been expelled from it.
they have little interest for us, as although carinus253 made and unmade nine empresses in little over a year, they are lost in the riot of the time. one poor name, that of magnia urbica, has survived on a few coins. she is given by serviez as the wife of carus, because she is represented with two children on one of the coins. cohen points out, however, that the group does not properly consist of a mother and two children, and he concludes that she was one of the nine wives of carinus. in the number of his consorts carinus surpassed the high record of imperial license, and he was not less original in the grounds for his divorces. sterility has often been pleaded by monarchs as a fit reason for repudiating their wives; it was reserved to carinus to dismiss them the moment they gave proof of fertility. so the women of rome succeeded each other rapidly in the dissolute palace, where the emperor, surrounded by his courtesans, glittering down to his shoes with diamonds and emeralds, sat on rose-strewn couches to his costly banquets.
the new pestilence was blown out of the imperial city by a storm from the east. the younger emperor, numerianus, was a gentle, cultured, and delicate youth. as he led the troops home from the east, he sheltered his eyes from the burning sun by keeping to his tent or his closed litter. at length his complete seclusion gave rise to suspicion, and the soldiers broke into his tent, only to find a mouldering body. the ambition of aper, his father-in-law, who commanded the guards, fastened the guilt upon him, and a general assembly of the soldiers appointed one of their abler officers, diocletian, to judge him. diocletian, possibly with reason, preferred to execute rather than to try aper, and he was at once saluted as emperor by the troops. the son of two slaves, he had educated himself and pushed his way to the highest offices and commands; and he now composedly donned the purple mantle which the soldiers offered him, and led the legions toward rome. carinus marched out against him, but was assassinated by an officer whose wife he had appropriated, and a new chapter opened in the254 annals of rome. a strong man and judicious statesman had come to the throne, and he would occupy it for twenty years.
from our point of view it is disappointing that the wife of diocletian does not come to our notice until his reign is nearly over. her very name was disputed for ages; even now her personality is only faintly illumined by the adventures of her later years. her daughter is a more commanding figure, and other imperial ladies stand out in the chronicle of the times. some of these, such as the mother and wife of constantine, we reserve for the next chapter; and we may compress into a few lines the story of the twenty years’ reign of diocletian.
a year after his accession, which took place in the year 285, diocletian chose a colleague to share the control of the vast empire. this friend and partner, maximian, was the son of peasants, rough, ignorant, and unscrupulous, but an effective commander. he was entrusted with the care of the west, diocletian passed to the east, and several years were profitably spent in restoring the crumbling frontiers. the task proved so formidable that, in 292, they chose two officers for the inferior dignity of “c?sars”—a title which implied that they would probably one day be augusti, and should meantime wear the purple, but have no power to make laws or control finance. of the two, galerius again was a child of the soil, while constantius was the son of a provincial noble; and they were compelled to dismiss their humbler wives, and wed the daughters of the emperors. four courts were thus set up within the empire, while rome found itself coldly neglected, its palace deserted, and its senate impotent.
to the court of galerius we shall return presently, while we leave the affairs of constantius and his wife to the next chapter. the court and the empress of maximian need not detain us. he chose milan as his seat, and began to adorn the northern town with the marble edifices that befitted its new dignity. his wife was a very attractive syrian woman, galeria valeria eutropia. her name has255 led some to conjecture that she was related to the father of constantius, eutropius, one of the chief nobles of dardania, though the connexion is feeble. she seems, in any case, to have regarded her uncultivated husband with disdain, and sought more genial company. her son maxentius is said by some to have been the issue of a liaison with a compatriot, while others declare that he was a boy substituted for the daughter she bore, because maximian desired a son. we may leave these disputable scandals and come to the court of diocletian.
the son of a roman slave had created a glittering court at nicomedia. his palace, round which the city quickly grew in size and magnificence, was adorned and served with an oriental pomp. the successive approaches to the chamber of the emperor were guarded by splendid officials, and when the suppliant or ambassador penetrated at length to the inner apartment, he found the stately diocletian in purple and gold robes, his brow encircled by a glistening diadem, and was compelled to prostrate himself before the divine majesty. it was not, however, the vanity or folly of a caligula, but a calculated policy, that had prompted diocletian to clothe himself with this olympic dignity. earlier emperors, of the same mean extraction, had refused to put a barrier of royal ceremony between themselves and their subjects or soldiers, and had invariably fallen by the hand of the assassin. diocletian was too shrewd, too much attached to life, and too sensible of his beneficent use of power, to incur the risk. he had restored egypt to obedience, humiliated the persians, and devoted an even greater ability to the reform of the administration. co-operating with his vigorous colleague in the west, he had brought peace and prosperity back to the empire.
in the settled years of his reign we begin again to recognize the various personalities of the court. the empress herself is more or less involved in a piquant obscurity. until the end of the seventeenth century her name was unknown, and a great deal of romantic legend was256 reproduced in regard to her. cardinal baronius found in “acts of st. susanna” that her name was st. serena, a martyr for the christian faith. other “acts” of the martyrs furnished a st. eleuthera and a st. alexandra as consorts of diocletian. he seemed to have been an imperial bluebeard. but in 1679 the manuscript was found of an early christian work, “on the deaths of the persecutors,” and the earlier writings were proved, in the words of the learned franciscan, father pagi, to be fictitious and full of untruths. the many saintly martyrs gave way to an empress prisca, who broke down lamentably at the first test of her faith. it is very curious that we have no coins whatever of prisca, though she must have lived through the whole reign of diocletian. this, and the fact that she left him many years before his death, suggest either that she was not married to him at all or that he had little regard for her. she was, in any case, a woman of weak and retiring character, and is mentioned only in association with her daughter.
valeria was a beautiful, attractive, and spirited young woman, with a good deal of the strength, and not a little of the ambition, of her father. she was married to galerius, the c?sar whom diocletian had chosen, and remained with him by the side of the emperor. galerius was, as i said, of peasant origin, and never laid aside the uncultivated roughness of his class. diocletian had, by diligent education, erased the traces of his own lowly origin, but his peasant colleagues had gone straight from the soil to the camp, and the work of a soldier had not given them the least inclination to seek culture. the character of galerius has been painted in the most lurid colours on account of his persecution of the christians, but it is significant that both valeria and prisca clung to his court when diocletian retired. his mother, romula, and other rustic relatives were attracted to his court. there was, it is clear, a most incongruous group of personalities about the court of diocletian, and in the nineteenth year of his reign they were shaken by a severe storm. the257 great and final struggle began between the old faith and the new, and prisca and valeria favoured the latter.
christianity had not been persecuted for half a century, and had made great progress. the cult of the old gods was palpably insincere, and half-a-dozen asiatic creeds were steadily supplanting it. on the streets of nicomedia, as on the streets of rome or any other large city, one might meet any day the white-robed shaven priests of isis, the painted and effeminate ministers of cybele, the persian representatives of the popular cult of mithra, and—until they were expelled by diocletian—the black-garbed clergy of the manich?ans and the christians. the christians were now advancing. there had been some slight and irregular repression of them from time to time since the days of nero, but more than forty years of toleration, and the knowledge that their adherents were now occupying high places in the camp and the court, and that even the wives of the emperor and the c?sar favoured them, gave them strong confidence. one of their churches occupied a central and commanding position in nicomedia. four influential officers of the court attended it, and it seems that valeria and prisca were, if not christians, openly disposed to the new religion. all we know in that regard is that they were “compelled” to sacrifice when the persecution began.
persecution on account of religion, as such, was not natural to the cosmopolitan builders of the pantheon, and diocletian was a broad-minded statesman, so that the origin of the persecution is not so clear as it was once held to be. the literary remains which we have to use have to be handled with caution. the “historia augusta” has ended with carinus, and we shall greatly miss its minute and gossipy descriptions. zosimus, a pagan writing in a christian age, has an appearance of sullen reticence at times and a perceptible bias. aurelius victor and eutropius are scanty, and the immediate christian writers are used very cautiously by modern historians. bishop eusebius says frankly, in his “life of constantine,” that258 he will write only what tends to edify, and the little work “on the deaths of the persecutors” is obviously imaginative in many pages and inaccurate in others. experts still differ as to whether it comes from the pen of the brilliant christian rhetorician lactantius, but all warn us to take account of its strong feeling. our authorities, in a word, now belong to two antagonistic and bitterly hostile creeds, and, as all subsequent historians favour one side or the other, we have to proceed with caution. i have endeavoured, in the remaining chapters, to make my way between them with more than ordinary care and independence.
a few incautious hints given in lactantius throw a faint light on the origin of the great persecution. the writer of the treatise has himself a very positive theory. the root of the evil was, he says, romula, the peasant-mother of the c?sar. fanatically attached to the gods of her native mountains, she inspired her son with a hatred of christianity, and galerius bullied the older emperor into issuing the edict of persecution. we feel that the policy of diocletian would hardly yield to the prejudice of a superstitious woman. there is more enlightenment in the incidental statements that romula was stung by the disdain of christian officers in the palace, and that diocletian was greatly annoyed at seeing christian soldiers disturb the harmony, if not the efficacy, of his sacrificial ceremonies by making the sign of the cross. galerius may have been moved by the growing reluctance of christians to bear arms, and the very pronounced rejection by some of the arms they bore. there is no need to trust the imaginary conversation which lactantius puts in the mouths of diocletian and galerius. they agreed that the zeal of the christians was impertinent or dangerous, and, in the month of february (303), a troop of soldiers was sent to raze to the ground their large and commanding church. on the following day diocletian published an edict forbidding the cult under grave penalties. when the imperial decree was torn down by a zealous christian,259 and this act of treason was openly applauded by his fellows, diocletian was embittered, and blood began to flow. during the next fortnight the emperor’s quarters in the palace were twice found to be in flames. diocletian was convinced that the fire was kindled by christian officers, and gave a full sanction to the work of repressing them.
prisca and valeria were not among the heroines of the persecution. lactantius destroys all the myths of martyred empresses by telling us that they consented to burn a few grains of incense in honour of jupiter, and impotently witnessed the dark roll of the wave of persecution through the provinces. he does not even say that they joined, or rejoined, the church when the persecution was over, and we lose sight of them for a few years. probably they went with diocletian to rome for his triumph in november, and returned with him to nicomedia in the summer of 304. he was confined to the palace by a serious illness during the following winter, and as soon as he recovered he abdicated the throne. it is untrue that the threats of galerius forced him to do this. he had expressed the intention years before.
on a wide plain near nicomedia the army assembled on may 1st, 305, for the unexampled ceremony of the abdication of an emperor. a little hill in the centre was surmounted by a lofty throne and a statue of jupiter, and the ageing emperor—he was in his fifty-ninth year—surrendered the power he had wielded so well for more than twenty years. by a previous arrangement, maximian was abdicating on the same day at milan. the two c?sars became augusti, and two new c?sars were appointed. in their selection we recognize the partial and unskilful hand of galerius. he handed his own c?sarean dignity to a rustic nephew, daza—“who had just left his herds in the forest,” lactantius scornfully says—and sent a loyal and undistinguished friend to receive that of maximian in italy. from that selfish act would develop one of the greatest civil wars since the founding of the empire. in the ranks260 of the officers by the platform was the tall, handsome, gifted, and disappointed young man who would one day be known as constantine the great.
diocletian retired to salona, in his native province of dalmatia, and built, close to the town, what was for the age a magnificent palace. valeria remained in the palace of galerius, and it seems that prisca stayed with her, as we shall presently find her sharing the hard lot of her daughter. why the mother, at least, chose to remain in nicomedia is left to our imaginations. the religion they had favoured was cruelly suppressed, and, if we are to believe lactantius, their virtue must have been outraged by the unbridled license of the new emperor. he is described as an ogre, dragging the noblest women of nicomedia from their husbands, feeding his bears on innocent citizens, and “never taking a meal without a taste of human blood.” yet valeria clung to her husband even through the painful and repulsive illness which ended his life; and her name was given by him to a part of his empire. the picture is evidently overdrawn, yet life in the palace, with galerius and his boorish relatives, cannot have been very congenial, and the temper of galerius would be soured by the events that followed.
the first mishap was the flight of constantine. he had been living for some years at the court of diocletian, and was deeply disappointed and rightly indignant at the choice of the new c?sars. by birth and ability he had the clearest title to the purple. he was now a tall and manly young officer, handsome, popular, and successful, and anxious to join his father constantius in gaul. there is little doubt that he fled during the night, though the romantic story told by lactantius is now generally regarded as a clumsy piece of fiction. it describes galerius as failing to take the youth’s life by engaging him in dangerous contests, and at length devising an ingenious scheme. he one night gives constantine permission to depart after he has seen him in the morning, and warns him that he will be put to death if he is still in nicomedia261 at noon. then the ogre gives orders that he is not to be awakened before noon on the morrow; but the young hero steals all the horses in the stables—there were probably hundreds—cripples all other horses along his route, and flies to his father. the only authentic point is that constantine fled. he would wade back through a sea of blood. within a few months his father was dead, constantine was chosen by the army to succeed him, and galerius was forced to recognize him as c?sar.
galerius gave the title of augustus, which constantius had left vacant at his death, to his loyal severus, but he was soon informed that the troops, the people, and the senate had chosen another emperor at rome. a brief outline of the stirring events that followed will suffice here. the new emperor was maxentius, son of the retired maximian. the father issued from his retreat to join in the fray, and galerius was bound to support severus. diocletian looked on quietly from his gardens at salona. when maximian urged him to return to power, he said that if maximian could see the vegetables he was growing he would not make such a request. briefly, severus was treacherously taken by maximian, and induced to ease the complication by taking his life. maximian, galerius, and diocletian met at carnuntum, on the danube, and it was settled that galerius and licinius (one of his officers) should be recognized as emperors, and constantine and maximin (daza) as c?sars. maxentius was disregarded, and maximian was persuaded to retire once more. how the restless and ambitious old man then clung to constantine, and attempted to murder and displace him, we shall see later.
the expedition of galerius into italy proved disastrous, as he returned in bad health and temper to his dominions. he died in 311, of an unpleasant disease, of which the morbid reader may find a luxurious description in lactantius. valeria remained with him to the end, and then a new and more romantic chapter opened for her and her mother. the two emperors of the east made rival offers of their hospitality; for maximin had exacted an equal dignity with licinius.262 valeria was at that time in her early thirties, and her mourning garments did not detract from her ripe beauty of face and figure. she is represented as weighing the respective immoralities of the two eastern emperors, and considering to which of the two it would be the less dangerous to entrust her virtue. lactantius does not tell us why she was forced to choose at all; why she and her mother did not retire to the luxurious and unsullied palace of diocletian. the end of his life was approaching, it is true, but the palace would still shelter them. on the other hand, maximin and licinius are both very thickly tarred with the brush of lactantius. we shall see something of the conduct of licinius later. as to maximin, if one half of what lactantius and eusebius say is true, he must have been known over the whole empire as an erotic maniac. he may not have been this romantic combination of nero, elagabalus, and carinus, but we know from other writers that he was much more vicious than licinius. when, therefore, we find valeria choosing to live in his palace, we cannot repress a suspicion that the beautiful widow was not quite so unworldly as she is represented to have been.
she had not been long in her new home when certain officers came to tell her that maximin loved her, and was prepared to divorce his wife and wed her. when she refused, the baffled passion turned to rage, and mother and daughter were expelled from the palace. when we learn, from a later passage, that valeria refused to yield her right to the property of galerius, the episode seems more human. a story of adultery was invented, a jew—the villain of early christian literature—was suborned to give false evidence, and several of valeria’s friends were implicated. a number of ladies of high rank were publicly executed, and the empresses, spoiled of their goods, were driven from province to province, until they found themselves lodged in a mean village on the edge of the syrian desert. valeria contrived to acquaint her father with their situation, but the rough maximin rejected his feeble entreaties. they seem to have spent the winter (312–13) in this miserable263 exile. the only comfort was that they had with them candidian, a natural son of galerius, whom valeria had adopted, and severian, the son of severus.
salonina
valeria
enlarged from coins in the british museum
in the early spring the little group were inspirited by the news that the tyrant had fallen in a struggle with licinius, who was now sole emperor in the east. what follows, in the narrative of lactantius, is even more obscure, and suggests still more strongly that much is concealed from us. candidian went openly to the court of licinius, and was cordially received and promoted. the other young man followed. licinius was naturally hostile to all who had taken the side of maximin, but he could hardly be angry with these poor victims of maximin’s rage. valeria, however, went in disguise to nic?a, where the court was, to follow the fortunes of her adopted son.
suddenly something happened which brought upon them all the sword of the executioner. what it was we can only conjecture. a writer like lactantius is so accustomed to regard a savage outbreak on the part of one of the last pagan emperors as a natural event that he disdains to enlighten us. a part of the story has been concealed, and it would not be fantastic to suppose that the spirited, young, and ambitious valeria meditated an intrigue for the advancement of candidian to the throne. it is plain that licinius suspected this. the royal birth and manly bearing of the youth might suffice to draw such a suspicion on him, but do not plausibly explain the treatment of the empresses. nor is there any apparent reason for her disguise. she was willing, lactantius says, to cede her rights to licinius, and the sentence unjustly passed on her by maximin would have no weight with him.
whatever the cause of the trouble was, valeria learned one day that candidian and severian were arrested, and they were presently executed. she fled to the remote syrian village, but she was so plainly implicated, in some way, that she dare not remain there. dressing in the rough robes of the common people, the aged mother and264 her brilliant daughter set out on a painful and aimless journey. either a sentence of death had been passed on them, or they had ground to apprehend one; for their flight would certainly elicit it. lactantius says that they wandered in this disguise for fifteen months, but it is difficult to believe that they could so long evade the imperial troops who hunted them.21 at length they were recognized and arrested in thessalonica, and the tragedy of their unfortunate and, so far as we know, innocent lives was brought to a close. under the eyes of the assembled citizens the wife and daughter of the great emperor were beheaded, and their remains were contemptuously flung into the sea.
