CONSTANTINE: USURPER, EMPEROR - BOTH?

I read the other day a great article from Mark Humphries. It talked about how Constantine the Great came to power, and more importantly, hold on to his power. And because I really liked his article, I would like to give a summary of the story to you.

Humphries starts off the topic by talking about how the army declared Constantine (soon getting the title "Great") the Emperor in York in 306 . To this day, York holds his coronation date in honor. It has been stated that such a course of events was inevitable, with which Humphries wholeheartedly agrees. After the death of Augustus Constantius Chlorus, the army fighting at the northern border needed a new emperor. But not just any emperor would do. The army wanted someone who had battle experience and would be close at hand. At the same time, Constantine was seen as a York rebel because he had not consulted with the rest of the tetrarchs before he was declared an emperor. And it didn't help his cause either that Caesar Severus should have been the next Western Augustus after the death of Constantius I Chlorus. Eastern Augustus Galerius certainly expected this kind of outcome. Humphries begins the first chapter, trying to differentiate three terms from one another, which are "emperor", "tyrant" and "usurper". It is difficult for historians to define Constantine as a non-usurper or a usurper, because the term's concept is already ambivalent in nature. Nowadays scholars associate the term "usurper" with rulers who have seized the throne by illegitimate means.

At the same time, it should be remembered that people, who lived in the 4th century, used the term tyranny for emperors, who lost in the civil war and whose regimes were condemned retrospectively. Emperor Diocletian made many reforms during his time as a ruler, one being clarifying the difference between illegitimate and legitimate power. The criterion of legitimate power emphasized the need to belong to the tetrarchy.

Legitimacy also depended heavily on the emperor's own propaganda, and how much were people willing to take it as truth. Humphries believes that the fourth century was an important time for identifying usurpers as tyrants. Constantine played an important role in this, and he strongly emphasized that his co-tetrarchs (Maxentius until 312 and Licinius until 324) are nothing more but mere tyrants. Emperors', who were retrospectively turned into usurpers, other actions needed to be forgotten by all, but especially by historians, and only keep alive the memories of his defeat in the last battle and the consequences that came after the defeat. Failed Augustus's were stamped as a tyrant, no matter how he obtained his power. Humphries argues that Constantine can be called a usurper nevertheless that he was not overthrown: obviously he became an emperor first by being elevated to it by the soldiers and only later sanctioned into being the emperor by the oldest member of the tetrarch, Galerius. Humphries admits that it is difficult to determine with which title (Augustus or Caesar) soldiers elevated Constantine to emperor. The other three tetrarchs agreed to give Constantine only the title of Caesar, because Severus had the right to the title Augustus. Constantine was handed the title Caesar under Severus's hand in order to avoid a power vacuum. Constantine was pleased with his efforts because his first goal was to be recognized by the tetrarchs, which he did quite nicely.

Now the story gets exciting. Constantine's portraits were displayed in Rome, which caused further instability, as Maxentius, the son of Maximian (the former Western Augustus), realized that he had lost, where Constantine had won. Because he didn't like this arrangement, he seized power in Rome on 28th Oct 306. Maxentius refused to accept Severus as a Western Augustus, so Galerius declared Maxentius's power illegal and ordered Severus to restore his power in Italy and Rome. In the spring of 307 Severus started his campaign against Maxentius, which ended as a complete catastrophe: soldiers deserted, Maximian himself imprisoned Severus whereas he was brought to Rome where he died a few months later. All in all a drastic way to go from this life. One moment you're a powerful Augustus, wielding power all over the western part of the empire, but the next moment you die by the hands of some wannabe emperor. Next, Humphries talked about the importance of inter-dynasty marriages during even the times of the tetrarchy. Therefore, Constantine and Maxentius were often presented at court, suggesting that they would be assigned both the next Caesars respectively. This also explains why York's soldiers, after the death of Constantius I, had declared his son the next emperor and why the former Western Augustus Maximian was called back from his retirement (to legitimize his son's power). But ironically Severus and Maximinus were appointed Caesars. Constantinus demonstrated the legitimacy of his power in many ways. Stamp the coins with names of the remaining emperors, advertising Constantine as a legitimate tetrarch. To reinforce legitimacy of power in his territories, he recalled the memory of his father, Constantius I, to the people. The next step Constantine took to hold on to his power came from joining the side with Maximian and Maxentius, who were expecting hostility to Galerius after Severus's death. Galerius didn't like Constantine's new friends, so he refused to mint coins that bared Constantine's name. On the other hand, Constantine's new allies changed their perception of how he was portrayed on their lands. He was first declared as Augustus, which began to appear in his official letters and coins. Secondly, the union was confirmed with Constantine's marriage to Maximian's daughter Fausta. In the year of 307 Constantine decided to emphasize his attachment to Maximian, who was known in Gallia (ruled the region in the years 285-305), rather than to Maxentius (for he was a nobody compared to Maximian, who reigned the regions for 20 years!). The idyllic alliance lasted until the spring of 308, when Maximian thought that it would be a great idea to remove Maxentius from power. Never mind the fact that Maxentius was his own son. Maximian, try as he might, he still managed to fail and was forced to go to Constantine for help. 11th Nov 308 the tetrarchs came to Carnuntum (Diocletian also dragged himself to this meeting) and they decided to force Maximian into retirement again. It's a logical thought that they forced Maximian's hands for if he was so power-hungry to overthrow his own son, then he probably wouldn't willingly pack his bags. Licinius was immediately appointed Augustus, whose first task was to remove Maxentius from power. Galerius once again accepted Constantine as Caesar, later (at the end of 308 or early 309) as filius Augustorum (not Caesar, but not Augustus either, but rather something between) and, finally, in the summer of 310, as a full Augustus. In the early summer of the same year, Maximian once again had a brilliant idea: to overthrow Constantine! Why learn from the first mistake and go to a restful retirement if instead one can try another coup despite the odds. To Maximian's great shock he managed to fail, yet again. Now he committed suicide, for failing two times was enough for him. Constantine no longer emphasized his attachment to Maximian, but uncovered vaguely that his forefather is Claudius II Gothicus himself!

Although Humphries warns the reader that the claim should not be taken seriously. At the main rebellion areas, Constantine had Maximian's legacy systematically destroyed. Humphries finds that Maximian is a good example of how the definition of legitimacy changes according to the situation. Next part talked how Constantine got a grip on North-Africa and Italy. Restless co-ruling between Maxentius and Constantine lasted for six years. Constantine differed from Maxentius by the fact that, when Constantine had minted coins showing him in good relations with previous emperors, Maxentius did not claim to have good relations with other emperors on his coins. In addition, Constantine's power was recognized by the other two tetrarchs, but Maxentius was considered as a rebel, usurper. In the summer of 312, Constantine began to take Italy from Maxentius. 28th Oct Constantine achieved a decisive victory over Maxentius on the Mulvius battle (named after the Mulvius bridge). At the triumph parade Constantine troops wore crosses on their shields and paraded Maxentius's head (drowned in the Tiber River, but the body was pulled out and its head cut off) to show that his rule was over. After three years, this idea was further strengthened when the Senate and the people commemorated Constantine's victory at the Colosseum by building a triumphal arch in the memory of his victory.

Arch presented Constantine as the liberator of Rome from the tyranny of Maxentius, seeking to rewrite and destroy history. Therefore, the archway erased Maxentius's power and its legitimacy from public memory. Maxentius devoted much of his resources and time to present himself as a protector of Roman civil traditions. After Constantine's victory, all the buildings that Maxentius let build were given over to Constantine's name. Constantine's victory brought him besides Rome also the rest of Maxentius' lands, both in Italy and North-Africa. Maxentius's head was also sent to North-African people to marvel. A few years ago, North-Africa had rebelled against Maxentius under the leadership of the ephemeral ruler Domitius Alexandri, but Maxentius's troops crushed the rebellion soon enough. So it is not far-fetched to think that North-Africa was more than happy to see Maxentius head on a pike at long last. Now, the relationship between Constantine and Licinius came up. Two emperors met in Milan in the spring of 313. Two important decisions were made at the meeting. To formalize their alliance, Licinius married Constantine's sister Constantia, reducing the importance of Maximinus in the imperial college. Secondarily, they agreed to not allow Christians to persecuted on their lands anymore, making Maximin's lands the only place where Christians could still be persecuted in the Roman Empire. Licinius assured in the East that his and Constantine's dynasties were the only legitimate families to emerge: he killed the rest of Maximinus family, and executed Diocletian and Gallery widows. The alliance of Licinius and Constantine had also become sour. During the first conflict in 316, Constantine rehabilitated Maximian's memory, declaring both his and Constantine's divinity. Constantine's mother, Helena, and his wife, Fausta, were given the title of Augusta, which secured the imperial family of Constantine. At the same time emperor titles were taken from Licinius and his son and they were soon after sent to exile in Thessaloniki. After a short time they were nevertheless killed. Humphries is confident that it was done in the order of Constantine, as he saw in Maximian how dangerous it is to keep a retired emperor alive. Because one does never know when a retired emperor gets ingenious ideas about overthrowing people and otherwise being a nuisance. Constantinus began erasing Licinius from history, especially in places that had been under his control previously. Constantine left the imperial college as it was, but its members where also his relatives. The children of Constantine successfully learned the importance of securing legitimacy from their father and the ability to destroy the legitimacy of others. At the end, Humphries concludes that his work shows how Constantine redefined and reassessed his legitimacy according to political situations. At the basic level, he showed himself as a ruler who has great respect towards traditional ideals of good government. To show his noble heritage, he juggled with belonging to various lineages: as the legal successor of Constantius I, Maximian's son-in-law, Licinius's brother-in-law, and as a brilliant flash of thought as the successor of Claudius Gothicus. At the same time, he also emphasized his legitimacy by suppressing the legitimacy of other rulers, regardless of the fact that he was associated with them through marriage or blood: Maximian until 310, Maxentius until 312, with Licinius until 324, and finally with Crispus until 326. Finally, Humphries concludes that, in modern terms, Constantine undoubtedly a usurper, but unlike other emperors, his claim to power was accepted.