Diocletian And The Changed Principate

[Emperor Goblinus]

When Diocletian took the throne, one of the major changes he initiated was dropping all pretense of republicanism by adopting Persian court ceremony, calling himself "Dominus," and sitting on an elevated throne. Did all emperors after him keep these regal trappings, or were any of the characteristics brought back by Constantine and all emperors following him, including the Byzantine emperors? Or was all constitutionalism abolished forever in the empire by Diocletian?

[DanM]

When Diocletian took the throne, one of the major changes he initiated was dropping all pretense of republicanism by adopting Persian court ceremony, calling himself "Dominus," and sitting on an elevated throne. Did all emperors after him keep these regal trappings, or were any of the characteristics brought back by Constantine and all emperors following him, including the Byzantine emperors? Or was all constitutionalism abolished forever in the empire by Diocletian?

 

With respect to Constantine and his sons, they were all absolute monarchs who ruled with an iron hand. I think Julian made some attempts to revive the role of the Senate, but thats the only guy I know who tried to reverse anything back towards anything resembling Republican form of government.

[Emperor Goblinus]

Were the emperors following Diocletian still given the powers of greater consul and first citizen by the Senate, or did they just ascend to the throne like any monarch?

[Neos Dionysos]

Were the emperors following Diocletian still given the powers of greater consul and first citizen by the Senate, or did they just ascend to the throne like any monarch?

 

 

For the most part all emperors after Diocletian were in power from military means, for instance Constantine took the throne and his line held it until Julian, (who was part of his family but not the direct line), took it by force, once he was killed in battle, the army chose the next set of Emperors. Jovius died after having been named the chosen successor so Valentinian was then chosen. He chose his brother to be co-Emperor in the East and the Valentinian Dynasty began, and would continue on until a new one came about etc. My point is, the Senate had little say or consul in these matters and during this time. Emperors truely ruled like monarchs and the days of the Senate of being anything more than an administrative body, (if that even), were long gone.

 

Hence why this period is no longer considered part of the Principate but the Dominate.

Edited December 12, 2005 by Neos Dionysos

[M. Porcius Cato]

Emperors truly ruled like monarchs and the days of the Senate being anything more than an administrative body, (if that even), were long gone.

 

Absolutely. In fact, didn't the Senate itself become completely hereditary (like the House of Lords, I suppose) in the Dominate?

[Philhellene]

When Diocletian took the throne, one of the major changes he initiated was dropping all pretense of republicanism by adopting Persian court ceremony, calling himself "Dominus," and sitting on an elevated throne.

 

You forgot that Aurelian was "Dominus" as well. His coins called him "Dominus imperi Romani", "Deus et dominus natus". And before him emperor Domitian called himself "Dominus et deus noster" (Suetonius, Domitian, XIII, 2). So why do you think it was Diocletian who finished republicanism?