The Last Triumph in Rome ~ Diocletian and Maximian's Vicennalia Jubilee of AD 303

Detail of a sculpture from the Arch of Constantine showing the Decennalia or
Five Columns Monument in the background.

Roman triumphs, those vast and glorious celebrations that followed Roman military victories, are beloved of Hollywood directors and epic novelists alike. The vision of the conquering hero riding in a chariot car pulled by a quadriga of white horses with his soldiers marching behind, leading a train of captive enemies through cheering throngs of grateful citizens, scattering coins and good will all around while colossal statues and monuments loom overhead and a humble slave whispers in his ear, “remember thou art mortal” — it is an irresistible scene full of vibrant colors and superlative contrasts. For the record, I thoroughly enjoyed describing one myself at the end of my second book, Belisarius: Glory of the Romans.

But the triumph of Belisarius after his conquest of Vandal Africa happened not in Rome but in Constantinople. This begs the question: when was the last imperial triumph celebrated in the city of Rome itself? The answer seems to be that of Diocletian and Maximian in AD 303 to celebrate their vicennalia as senior Augusti and the decennalia of the Caesars, Galerius and Constantius I. 

Diocletian, who took the throne in AD 284, spent most of his reign at his capital at Nicomedia in the East. It is very likely that he had never visited the Eternal City before arriving there late in AD 303 to begin the celebration of his 20th year as emperor. His plan was to use this event to showcase the achievements of the Tetrarchy he had instituted, including splendid military victories achieved by Galerius over King Narseus of Persia, and Constantius over the usurper Carausius in Britain. 

Details of the triumph of Diocletian are scanty but they do exist both in the ancient sources and in some tantalizing archaeological remains. Writing in On the Deaths of the Persecutors within 10-15 years of the event, Lactantius offers an overview of the triumph from the perspective of a highly educated Christian convert hostile to Diocletian and Maximian:

Click for more info.

The wicked plan having been carried into execution [for the Great Persecution of Christians], Diocletian, whom prosperity had now abandoned, set out instantly for Rome, there to celebrate the commencement of the twentieth year of his reign. That solemnity was performed on the twelfth of the kalends of December [November 20, AD 303]. And suddenly the emperor, unable to bear the Roman freedom of speech, peevishly and impatiently burst away from the city. The kalends of January [December 31] approached at which day the consulship for the ninth time was to be offered to him. Yet, rather than continue thirteen days longer in Rome, he chose that his first appearance as consul should be at Ravenna. [Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors, Chapter 17]

This passage tells us that Diocletian was most likely in Rome from mid-November through mid-December, so approximately a month. The more sympathetic Eutropius also mentions this triumph hinting that during this time, Diocletian and Maximian may have discussed resigning from office: 

Both of them [Diocletian and Maximian], in the same day, exchanged the robe of empire for an ordinary dress, Diocletian at Nicomedia, Herculius [Maximian] at Milan, soon after a magnificent triumph which they celebrated at Rome over several nations, with a noble succession of pictures, and in which the wives, sisters, and children of Narseus [King of Persia] were led before their chariots.” [Eutropius, Breviarium, Book IX, Chapter 27]

Whether the actual wives and children of the Persian king were displayed, or merely their images is a matter of some debate, with most modern scholars assuming that the family of Narseus had been returned to him long before this time.

Another brief notice of this triumph may be found in the Chronicle of the City of Rome which is part of the Chronography of AD 354, though it is difficult to determine if the items listed here occurred or were dedicated during the triumph itself, or simply during the 22 years that Diocletian was on the throne:

Diocletian and Maximian ruled 21 years, 11 months, 12 days. They gave a largess of 1,550 denarii.  While they were ruling many public works were (re)built: the senate, the forum of Caesar, the basilica Julia, the stage of the theatre of Pompey, 2 porticos, 3 nymphaea, 2 temples, the temple of Isis and Serapis, the new arch, and the baths of Diocletian. They scattered in the circus gold and silver coins. The wall which formed the base of the seating for the boxes in the circus collapsed and crushed 13,000 people; and a woman named Irene gave birth to three boys and a girl. They placed the king of the Persians with all nations and their tunics of pearl in number 32 around the temples of the Lord.  They brought 13 elephants, 6 drivers and 250 horsemen into the city.” (Chronography of AD 354) 

Among the architectural works usually included in the rebuilding of the Roman Forum by Diocletian is the so-called Monument of the Five Columns. This work featured five tall columns set up at the rear of the Rostrum in the Roman Forum to celebrate the decennalia of the Tetrarchy. Each of the columns was topped with a statue—one each of the four Tetrarchs (Diocletian, Maximian, Galerius and Constantius) flanking the middle one featuring a portrayal of Jupiter. We have an idea of what this monument looked like because it is apparently represented in the background of one of the reliefs on the Arch of Constantine. See the photo at the top of this post.

A compact summary of what we know about the Five Columns Monument may be found in this lecture by Prof. Diana Kleiner: The Decennial or Five-Column Monument in the Roman Forum. 

Detail of the surviving base of the Decennial Monument. Click to enlarge.
Image borrowed from here.

Of this monument, only a single column base remains today. Often neglected in the Roman Forum, the base shows a pagan sacrificial procession on two sides, one of the Tetrarchs sacrificing to the gods on the third side, and on the fourth side two winged victories holding a shield inscribed “Caesarum Decennalia Feliciter.” In putting together this blog post, I was struck by the similarity in style and motif between this sculpture and one of the illustrations included with the Chronography of AD 354. See below. 

Illustration from the Chronography of AD 354 (left) compared with the column base
of the Decennalia monument (right). Click to enlarge.

Given that these works were created within fifty years of each other, perhaps the similarities are not surprising. For more on the Tetrarchs Jubliee in Rome, see the chapter: "Memorials of the Ability of Them All": Tetrarchic Displays in the Roman Forum’s Central Area by Gregor Kalas.

Scholars have speculated as to why Diocletian left Rome to accept the consulship for the ninth time in the provincial backwater of Ravenna. Lactantius provides a tantalizing bit of evidence, saying that Diocletian “could not bear the Roman freedom of speech.” What the Romans actually had to say which repelled Diocletian is unclear. We know that Diocletian had imposed eastern customs upon the Roman imperial court, including the usage of ostentatious imperial garb, the expectation that subjects would prostrate themselves in his presence, addressing the Augustus as “Dominus” (Lord), and the proliferation of eunuchs as courtiers. We also know that Roman citizens were not averse to boldly ridiculing an emperor in public. See, for example, the mocking chants which the Romans in the Circus directed at Maxentius in AD 312 while his foe Constantine stood outside the city: “Constantine can not be conquered!” A prolonged encounter between an emperor like Diocletian with a hugely inflated self-image, and a raucous multitude with a tradition of engaging in public mockery of its leaders, could easily have led to ill feelings. 

It is also possible that the garbled account of the Chronography of AD 354 contains a clue. In the passage shown above, mention is made of Diocletian and Maximian scattering gold and silver coins in the Circus. Immediately after is recorded that a retaining wall of the Circus collapsed, killing thousands of people. If such a tragedy happened during the celebration of the jubilee, it certainly would have cast a dreadful pall over the event, and may have been considered a portent of ill omen, (juxtaposed with the more fortuitous news of the birthing of quadruplets). Perhaps the reaction of the Augusti to the disaster was seen by the Romans as unsympathetic or insufficient, and spurred them to speak out loudly against Diocletian, causing the latter’s hasty withdrawal from the city. 

Another possibility is that the ongoing persecution of Christians caused public unrest and antipathy toward Diocletian, who may have discovered upon his arrival that Christianity had a much stronger hold on the Eternal City than he had imagined. According to the account in the Liber Pontificalis, Pope Marcellinus was called to sacrifice to the pagan divinities by Diocletian himself. Lamentably, the Pope conceded and offered incense to the idols. The scandal and outrage caused by such a betrayal must have been furious among the Christian community in Rome, for Marcellinus quickly repented of his perfidy and made a public declaration of his Christian faith. He was condemned to death and beheaded along with four companions. By order of Diocletian, their bodies were left to rot in the streets for 26 days. If this public martyrdom of the Pope in Rome did in fact occur during the triumphal jubilee of the Tetrarchs, one could imagine how it might put a damper on the celebration. Conversely, if this martyrdom had played a role in Diocletian leaving the city early, one might have expected Lactantius to mention it at least in passing.

For a more scholarly but perhaps just as fanciful look into this question, check out Williams, Diocletian and the Roman Recovery, page 188. 

Of course, all of the above is speculation and we can not know for certain why Diocletian left Rome when he did, apparently in a lather, never to return to the Eternal City again. On his trip back to Nicomedia, he toured the Danube frontier and at some point contracted a persistent illness that plagued him all throughout his vicennalial year. By December of AD 304, reports were circulating in Nicomedia that Diocletian had died. 

But the end of Diocletian’s reign and retirement are subjects for a separate post.

Diocletian has featured prominently in numerous other posts on this blog, including:

• Was the Wife of Diocletian a Secret Christian?
• "They Leveled that Lofty Edifice with the Ground" ~ The Destruction of the Church at Nicomedia and Commencement of the Great Persecution
• "Inspired by penitence, he was beheaded." ~ The mysterious last days and death of Pope Saint Marcellinus
• “The Scriptures Destroyed by Fire” ~ An official Roman transcript from the Great Persecution of AD 304
• "The Oblivion of a Silent Age" ~ The effort of Diocletian and Galerius to wipe out Christian literature during the Great Persecution

Maxentius and His Ill-Fated Reign ~ The last pagan emperor to rule from Rome or a usurper and "inhuman beast"?

Background: The four original Tetrarchs: Diocletian, Maximian, Galerius and Constantius I.
Foreground left: Constnatine the Great. Foreground right: Maxentius.

Marcus Aurelius Valerius Maxentius, more commonly known as simply Maxentius, ruled in Rome as a usurper from AD 306 until AD 312. His reign came to an abrupt end when he drowned in the Tiber after being defeated at the Battle of the Milvian Bridge by Constantine the Great.

As usurpers go, Maxentius had some impressive familial connections. He was the son of the emperor Maximian Herculius, who was raised to the status of co-Augustus by Diocletian in AD 286. He was also the son-in-law of the emperor Galerius, whom Diocletian would create Caesar in AD 293 and name as his successor as primary Augustus in AD 305. Finally, he was the brother-in-law of Constantius I, the Caesar of the West, who had married his half-sister, Theodora, the daughter of Maximian. Constantius I was, of course, the father of Constantine the Great.

Though he was connected to three imperial families within Diocletian’s Tetrarchy, Maxentius was apparently not well-liked by anyone. Aurelius Victor, a likely pagan writing in the mid-4th century about 50 years after the events, mentions that Maxentius “was dear to no one at all, not even to his father or father-in-law, Galerius.” [See Epitome De Caesaribus, Chapter 40]

Agreeing with this assessment is Lactantius, a well-educated convert to Christianity who served both at the court of Diocletian in Nicomedia and later under Constantine as tutor for the latter’s son, Crispus. In his polemical work of history entitled, On the Deaths of the Persecutors, Lactantius gives the following reason for why neither Maximian nor Galerius had any love for Maxentius:

Click for more info.

“Now Maximian Herculius had a son, Maxentius, married to the daughter of Galerius, a man of bad and mischievous dispositions and so proud and stubborn withal, that he would never pay the wonted obeisance either to his father or father-in-law, and on that account he was hated by them both.” [Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors, Chapter 18]

Later, in the same chapter, Lactantius elaborates on the above, putting words directly into the mouth of Galerius as part of a fascinating dialogue in which Galerius and Diocletian discuss the immediate future of the empire and who shall succeed to the imperial college upon the resignation of Diocletian and Maximian:

“What is to be done?” said Galerius, “for that Maxentius deserves not the office. He who, while yet a private man, has treated me with contumely, how will he act when once he obtains power?”

Diocletian and Galerius eventually ended up setting aside both Maxentius and Constantine, young men with hereditary claims to the empire, in favor of two lackeys of Galerius, namely, Maximin Daia and Severus. This decision would have repercussions which would eventually result in the complete dissolution of the Tetrarchy. Less than a year after this decision, Constantine would be declared emperor by his father’s army at York upon the death of Constantius I in Britain in AD 306. This act was eventually ratified by Galerius, making Constantine a formal member of the Tetrarchy which now included Galerius and Severus as the Augusti, or senior emperors, and Maximin Daia and Constantine as Caesars, or junior emperors.

On the outside looking in, Maxentius began seeking ways to acquire that which he felt had been wrongfully denied to him. Zosimus, a pagan historian writing in the early 6th century, claims that Maxentius was incensed at the good fortune of Constantine and decided to take matters into his own hands. Taking advantage of the newly imposed and extremely unpopular taxes of Galerius on the City of Rome, Maxentius plotted a coup with the assistance of two tribunes of the Praetorian Guard, and a swine merchant. The conspirators assassinated the prefect of Rome, Abellius, and had Maxentius declared Emperor. [See Zosimus, New History, Book 2, Chapter 9]

A bronze follis showing the
fleshy profile of Maxentius.
Click the image to enlarge.

Angered at this usurpation, Galerius ordered his creature Severus to deal with Maxentius. But Maxentius had an ace up his sleeve. He recalled his father to Rome—the retired Maximian Herculius who had ruled as Diocletian’s colleague for twenty years. Maximian had retired unwillingly and had been cooling his heels in southern Italy, so as soon as this opportunity arose for him to regain the purple, he responded eagerly. When Severus arrived in the vicinity of Rome, his army promptly defected to their previous patron and Severus was handed over to be killed. A further campaign by Galerius himself ended in similar ignominy, as the Eastern Augustus fled from Italy before his army could defect to Maxentius and Maximian as well.

Fortune had certainly favored Maxentius to this point, but his situation was still precarious. Not helping matters was that neither he nor his father were men of particularly high character. Maximian soon tired of playing second fiddle and attempted regain his preeminent position by a public denunciation of his upstart son. Lactantius describes the scene:

“He called an assembly of the people of Rome and of the soldiers, as if he had been to make an harangue on the calamitous situation of public affairs. After having spoken much on that subject, he stretched his hands towards his son, charged him as author of all ills and prime cause of the calamities of the state, and then tore the purple from his shoulders. Maxentius, thus stripped, leaped headlong from the tribunal and was received into the arms of the soldiers. Their rage and clamor confounded the unnatural old man and, like another Tarquin the Proud, he was driven from Rome.” [Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors, Chapter XXVIII]

Though the soldiers and the people resoundingly rejected the father on this occasion, it wasn’t long before they wearied of the son as well. Zosimus commented that Maxentius “conducted himself with cruelty and licentiousness towards all the inhabitants of Italy, and even to Rome itself.” [New History, Book II, Chapter 14]. Eutropius, writing in the later 4th century, says that Maxentius was “spreading death among the nobility by every kind of cruelty.” [Breviarium, Book X, Chapter 4]

Maxentius’s unpopularity at home probably excited a revolt of the African provinces against his rule under an elderly usurper named Alexander in AD 308. As the loss of Africa meant the cutting off of Rome’s grain supply, Maxentius was forced to act, sending an army to crush the rebellion in short order. But he won no love by this victory, going overboard in punishing Africa, as reported by Aurelius Victor:

Click for more info.

“Maxentius, the inhuman beast, made more abominable by his excessive lust, had ordered Carthage, the glory of the world, along with the loveliest parts of Africa to be ravaged, pillaged and burned.” [De Caesaribus, Chapter 40]

Later in the same chapter, Aurelius Victor gives another reason why the people and the nobility came to despise Maxentius:

“He had oppressed them so much that on one occasion he permitted the praetorians to massacre the common people, and was the first, through a most reprehensible edict issued under the pretext of obligatory state taxation, to compel the senators and farmers to contribute money for him to squander.”

An anonymous Latin panegyricist provides a few more details, claiming that Maxentius had used the wealth of Rome to hire henchmen whose purpose was to strip every Roman citizen of his goods, saying:

Click for more info.

“The riches collected from the entire world over the course of 1,060 years that monster had given to gangs of men hired to rob citizens. What is more, indiscriminately granting other men’s wives and the heads of the innocent along with their possessions he bound the murderers in devotion even to death; all who either plotted against him or openly attempted anything for their freedom he afflicted with punishments and subdued by armed force. And while he enjoyed the majesty of the city which he had taken, he filled all Italy with thugs hired for every sort of villainy.” [Nixon: In Praise of the Later Roman Emperors]

Considering Maxentius's misrule, as reported in a multiplicity of ancient sources, it is perhaps not surprising that Constantine was aroused against Maxentius, and that the senate and the people of Rome celebrated when Constantine drew near in AD 312. As reported by Eusebius who knew him personally, Constantine could no longer endure the oppression of Maxentius, saying, “that life was without enjoyment to him as long as he saw the imperial city thus afflicted.” [Eusebius, Life of the Blessed Emperor Constantine, Book I, Chapter 26].

What followed was Constantine’s epic campaign to re-take Rome—a campaign that succeeded where those of Severus and Galerius had failed. This effort culminated with the dramatic Battle of the Milvian Bridge on October 28, AD 312.

In more modern times, attempts have been made to rehabilitate the memory of Maxentius. Some have sought to eulogize him as the last pagan emperor to rule from Rome. He is also occasionally lauded as the builder of the so-called Basilica of Maxentius in Rome and is given credit for rebuilding parts of the city that had fallen to neglect while Diocletian ruled the empire from Nicomedia. Others have found reason to praise Maxentius following the amazing discovery of what may have been his imperial insignia, saying that they represented, "the greatness of Maxentius, buried by his loyal people to save something that belonged to him." 

The imperial insignia discovered in Rome in 2006.
Borrowed from: Romeinen Weblog.

Given what the ancients, both pagan and Christian, had to say about him however, it seems clear that the only things truly great about Maxentius were his vices and his atrocities.

"Volumes could be written on the multiform works of succor of Pius XII" ~ The testimony of Eugenio Zolli, chief rabbi of Rome during World War II

“No hero in history has commanded such an army; none is more militant, more fought against, none more heroic than that conducted by Pius XII in the name of Christian charity.” 

These are the words of an elderly Italian Catholic known as Professor Eugenio Maria Zolli. He was not always known by this name, however. Prior to 1945, he was known as Rabbi Israel Zolli, and before that, as Israel Anton Zoller. He was born in 1881 in what was then a Polish region of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. His mother was a German Jew and on her side of the family, a rabbinic tradition stretched back at least a century.

Zolli as a younger man. See additional
photos here.

Israel Zoller’s life would be shaped during the tumultuous years of the Great War. Spending most of his life in Italy, he would change his name to the more Italian-sounding Zolli and go on to become the chief rabbi of Trieste when that city was annexed by Italy following the defeat and dissolution of Austria-Hungary in 1918.

In 1939, Zolli was named chief Rabbi of the city of Rome and would serve until 1944. As such, he would preside over the darkest days for the Jewish community in Rome. He would also witness first-hand the efforts of the Catholic Church in general and of Pius XII in particular, to protect and succor the Jewish people, particularly during the period of Nazi occupation from October 1943 through June of 1944. 

At the same time, all three of Zolli’s brothers would be killed in the Holocaust. 

The quote in the image above may be found in Zolli’s autobiography entitled, Before the Dawn, originally published in 1954. In this work, Zolli provides a robust defense of Venerable Pope Pius XII from which the above quote is drawn. Here is the quote in more context:

“There is no place of sorrow where the spirit of love of Pius XII has not reached. Volumes could be written on the multiform works of succor of Pius XII. The Catholic priesthood throughout the world, religious men and women and the Catholic laity, stand behind the great Pontiff. Who could ever tell what has been done? The rule of severe enclosure falls, everything and all things are at the service of charity. As the sufferings grow, so grows the light from the heart of Christ, and from His Vicar; more vigilant and ready for sacrifice and martyrdom are his sons and daughters in Christ. Young Levites and white-haired priests, religious of all orders, in all lands, dedicated Sisters, all in quest of good works and ready for sacrifice. There are no barriers, no distinctions. All sufferers are children of God in the eyes of the Church, children in Christ, for them and with them all suffer and die. No hero in history has commanded such an army; none is more militant, more fought against, none more heroic than that conducted by Pius XII in the name of Christian charity….

...Like a watchful sentinel before the sacred inheritance of human pain stands the angelic Pastor, Pius XII. He has seen the abyss of misfortune toward which mankind is advancing. He has measured and foretold the greatness of the tragedy. He has made himself the herald of the serene voice of justice and the defender of true peace. He took into his heart all the pain of all the sufferers. He bent over the world saying, “The way you chose was not the just way. The true way is that which leads from the Gospel to Jesus. The good way is marked by a simple and clear word: from the Gospel, with Christ, toward the Kingdom of God.” [Before the Dawn, pages 194–196]

Eugenio Zolli in Rome accompanied by his
godfather, Fr. Gosselino Birola. ca. 1945.

Zolli would formally convert to Catholicism, along with his wife and daughter, as the war was winding down in Europe in February of 1945. As a tribute to his confessor Pius XII (whose name at birth was Eugenio Pacelli), Zolli would take the Christian name Eugenio. 

Unsurprisingly, the reaction of Rome’s Jewish community to Zolli’s action was harsh. Zolli was considered an apostate and shunned by former friends. Worse, slanders began to emerge regarding his reasons for converting. When it was suggested that he had become Catholic for very worldly reasons, Zolli replied: “No selfish motive led me to do this. When my wife and I embraced the Church, we lost everything we had in the world. We shall now have to look for work; and God will help us to find some.” [Before the Dawn, page 16]

It was also theorized that he had converted out of gratitude to Pius XII for saving him during the Nazi occupation. In response to this, Zolli wrote: 

“I did not hesitate to give a negative answer to the question whether I was converted in gratitude to Pius XII for his numberless acts of charity. Nevertheless, I do feel the duty of rendering homage and of affirming that the charity of the Gospel was the light that showed the way to my old and weary heart. It is the charity that so often shines in the history of the Church and that radiated fully in the actions of the reigning Pontiff.” [Before the Dawn, page 196]

Given these statements, it becomes difficult to give any credence to the continuing calumnies heaped upon Venerable Pope Pius XII as a do-nothing during World War II in the face of Nazi atrocities.

Interestingly, though he had studied New Testament theology for many years, it seems that the culminating impetus behind Rabbi Zolli’s conversion to Catholicism was a mystical experience. In a later biography by Judith Cabaud, we read Zolli's account:

“During the feast of Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement) in October 1944, he presided over the prayers of Great Pardon in the synagogue in Rome. 'Suddenly,' he wrote, 'I saw, with the eyes of the mind, a large prairie, and standing in the middle of the green grass was Jesus, dressed in a white robe... At the sight of this, I felt a great interior peace, and, from the depths of my heart, I heard these words: 'You are here for the last time. From now on, you will follow Me.' I received them in the greatest serenity, and my heart immediately responded, 'As it shall be, so it must be.'... An hour later, after supper, in my room, my wife declared to me, 'Today, while you were standing before the Ark of the Torah, it seemed to me that the white figure of Jesus was laying His hands on you, as if He were blessing you.' I was stupefied.” [Taken from Cabaud: Eugenio Zolli, Prophet of a New World] 

Eugenio Zolli was an amazing man whose extraordinary life and thoughtful works deserve greater attention. Maybe start by reading his autobiography, Before the Dawn. Now that I have sampled it, I intend to read it in full.