Page:Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire vol 1 (1897).djvu/468

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been validated.
394
THE DECLINE AND FALL

CHAPTER XIV

Troubles after the abdication of Diocletian—Death of Constantius—Elevation of Constantine and Maxentius—Six Emperors at the same time—Death of Maximian and Galerius—Victories of Constantine over Maxentius and Licinius—Reunion of the Empire under the authority of Constantine

Period of civil wars and confusion, A.D. 305-323 The balance of power established by Diocletian submitted no longer than while it was sustained by the firm and dexterous hand of the founder. 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 Cæsars without ambition, and the same general interest invariably pursued by four independent princes. The abdication of Diocletian and Maximian was succeeded by eighteen years of discord and confusion. The empire was afflicted by five civil wars; and the remainder of the time was not so much a state of tranquillity as a suspension of arms between several hostile monarchs, who, viewing each other with an eye of fear and hatred, strove to increase their respective forces at the expense of their subjects.

Character and situation of ConstantiusAs soon as Diocletian and Maximian had resigned the purple, their station, according to the rules of the new constitution, was filled by the two Cæsars, Constantius and Galerius, who immediately assumed the title of Augustus.[1] The honours of seniority and precedence were allowed to the former of those princes, and he continued, under a new appellation, to administer his ancient department of Gaul, Spain,[2] and Britain. The government of those ample provinces was sufficient to exercise his talents, and to satisfy his ambition. Clemency, temperance, and moderation distinguished the amiable character of Constantius, and his
  1. M. De Montesquieu (Considérations sur la Grandeur et la Décadence des Romains, c. 17) supposes, on the authority of Orosius and Eusebius, that, on this occasion, the empire, for the first time, was really divided into two parts. It is difficult, however, to discover in what respect the plan of Galerius differed from that of Diocletian.
  2. [See below, note 19.]