Explanation: Diocletian was a Roman Emperor of the late 3rd century and early 4th century AD who royally fucked the government he took over for some twenty years, and then promptly retired to a nice villa in the Balkans. When one of his co-emperors wrote to him begging him to come back and unfuck the mess he seeded, Diocletian responded “If you [the messenger] could show the cabbage that I planted with my own hands to your emperor, he definitely wouldn’t dare suggest that I replace the peace and happiness of this place with the storms of a never-satisfied greed.”
Diocletian was a Roman Emperor of the late 3rd century and early 4th century AD who royally fucked the government he took over for some twenty years, and then promptly retired to a nice villa in the Balkans.
After reading his wiki, I feel like this characterization is a bit unfair. His rule was by most accounts successful, bringing the Empire back from the brink of collapse. He fucked the government essentially by abdicating, rather than being a shit emperor, which is why they wanted him back. It seems the Christians took over during Constantine’s subsequent reign and gave him a bad rap.
Wiki said he’d gotten sick before he abdicated, and reading between the lines it seems pretty certain he also got sick of everybody’s shit. Honestly, being emperor is hazardous to your health; I’d say he made a pretty smart move. The “nice villa” thing makes it sound like he lived in a hovel on a farm or something, but dude lived the rest of his life in a giant city-sized fort he had built for just that purpose. He was no slouch.
After reading his wiki, I feel like this characterization is a bit unfair. His rule was by most accounts successful, bringing the Empire back from the brink of collapse.
The worst of the Crisis of the Third Century was over when he took the reins, but he took the initiative in creating the ultra-fucked state of the Dominate, or Late Empire, which Constantine and later Emperors ran with. A complete lack of understanding of economics combined with delusions of godhood and no respect for Roman traditions, with bureaucratic organizational chaos, the codification of proto-feudalism, and the hollowing out of a robust-if-damaged military system in the hopes of dashing the chances of civil war (it did not dash the chances of civil war) are not qualities which recommend him.
Four Emperors is a lot, it does not stop coups or civil wars but rather precipitates them, and multiplying the imperial bureaucracy by over 10x in order to centralize control is not fiscally responsible - especially when combined with a ballooning of the imperial court and its ‘majesty’.
He fucked the government essentially by abdicating, rather than being a shit emperor, which is why they wanted him back.
The Tetrarchy was fucked before he abdicated. Maximian wanted him back because the system only worked when there was a clear supreme Emperor (contrary to Diocletian’s entire attempt) and Diocletian had spent most of his Emperorship accruing the necessary prestige to make it unthinkable that anyone else would rule. In any case, Diocletian stepping back in would have simply made it clear how broken the Tetrarchy was at that point (and arguably always was), since that would have made 5 theoretically reigning Emperors at war with each other.
It seems the Christians took over during Constantine’s subsequent reign and gave him a bad rap.
That’s partly true - the Christians certainly played up the Great Persecution, but most of my critiques are exactly the kind of top-heavy bureaucracy which the Christian Emperors embraced and perpetuated, and not core to their criticisms of Diocletian.
Wiki said he’d gotten sick before he abdicated, and reading between the lines it seems pretty certain he also got sick of everybody’s shit. Honestly, being emperor is hazardous to your health; I’d say he made a pretty smart move. The “nice villa” thing makes it sound like he lived in a hovel on a farm or something, but dude lived the rest of his life in a giant city-sized fort he had built for just that purpose. He was no slouch.
His villa is nice, certainly. Villas usually are - the word in the Roman context being something between a mansion and a self-sufficient farming estate - but Diocletian’s was palatial. The ruins still exist in Croatia, they’re very cool.
Explanation: Diocletian was a Roman Emperor of the late 3rd century and early 4th century AD who royally fucked the government he took over for some twenty years, and then promptly retired to a nice villa in the Balkans. When one of his co-emperors wrote to him begging him to come back and unfuck the mess he seeded, Diocletian responded “If you [the messenger] could show the cabbage that I planted with my own hands to your emperor, he definitely wouldn’t dare suggest that I replace the peace and happiness of this place with the storms of a never-satisfied greed.”
“We have Cincinnatus at home.”
Cincinnatus at home:
Wish.com Cincinnatus-ass
After reading his wiki, I feel like this characterization is a bit unfair. His rule was by most accounts successful, bringing the Empire back from the brink of collapse. He fucked the government essentially by abdicating, rather than being a shit emperor, which is why they wanted him back. It seems the Christians took over during Constantine’s subsequent reign and gave him a bad rap.
Wiki said he’d gotten sick before he abdicated, and reading between the lines it seems pretty certain he also got sick of everybody’s shit. Honestly, being emperor is hazardous to your health; I’d say he made a pretty smart move. The “nice villa” thing makes it sound like he lived in a hovel on a farm or something, but dude lived the rest of his life in a giant city-sized fort he had built for just that purpose. He was no slouch.
The worst of the Crisis of the Third Century was over when he took the reins, but he took the initiative in creating the ultra-fucked state of the Dominate, or Late Empire, which Constantine and later Emperors ran with. A complete lack of understanding of economics combined with delusions of godhood and no respect for Roman traditions, with bureaucratic organizational chaos, the codification of proto-feudalism, and the hollowing out of a robust-if-damaged military system in the hopes of dashing the chances of civil war (it did not dash the chances of civil war) are not qualities which recommend him.
Four Emperors is a lot, it does not stop coups or civil wars but rather precipitates them, and multiplying the imperial bureaucracy by over 10x in order to centralize control is not fiscally responsible - especially when combined with a ballooning of the imperial court and its ‘majesty’.
The Tetrarchy was fucked before he abdicated. Maximian wanted him back because the system only worked when there was a clear supreme Emperor (contrary to Diocletian’s entire attempt) and Diocletian had spent most of his Emperorship accruing the necessary prestige to make it unthinkable that anyone else would rule. In any case, Diocletian stepping back in would have simply made it clear how broken the Tetrarchy was at that point (and arguably always was), since that would have made 5 theoretically reigning Emperors at war with each other.
That’s partly true - the Christians certainly played up the Great Persecution, but most of my critiques are exactly the kind of top-heavy bureaucracy which the Christian Emperors embraced and perpetuated, and not core to their criticisms of Diocletian.
His villa is nice, certainly. Villas usually are - the word in the Roman context being something between a mansion and a self-sufficient farming estate - but Diocletian’s was palatial. The ruins still exist in Croatia, they’re very cool.