Caesaropapism of Constantine the Great and today's refl ection (original) (raw)
Related papers
Caesaropapism and the Reality of the 4th–5th Century Roman Empire
Krakowskie Studia z Historii Państwa i Prawa
The relationships between the secular authorities and the ecclesiastical hierarchy in the Roman Empire of the discussed epoch do not follow the simple pattern known as “caesaropapism” or other similar models of sovereign’s supremacy over the church hierarchy within the “State church”. The reality was much more complex then, since a new model, known as “symphony” began to develop. The notion of “symphony” should be understood as a kind of close cooperation of both powers within the uniform Christian society. Popes strongly affirmed the primacy of Rome within the church. At that time the theory of Pope Gelasius and the doctrine of St. Augustine played a prominent role. Nevertheless, these ideas were not widely received in the East. Later on, the Gelasian and Augustinian theories begun to be studied and appreciated in the scholastic milieu, where the new model of the relationship between the secular and papal power was developing.
Journal of Late Antiquity, 2008
Modern scholarship, following the template laid down by Lactantius and Eusebius, has viewed the achievements of Constantine chiefly through the prism of his Christianity, with the result that his secular achievements have been comparatively neglected. This article addresses those secular policies, focusing on how Constantine sought to assert his legitimacy during the various stages of his rise to power. It takes as its starting point the modern debate on the legitimacy of Constantine’s elevation to the purple and whether or not he can be justifiably described as a usurper. Through close scrutiny of a variety of documentary sources—particularly inscriptions, but also coins—it establishes how Constantine sought to affirm the legitimacy of his position as emperor at a number of critical moments, and to have that legitimacy accepted both by other members of the imperial college and by the empire’s populace at large. It emerges that Constantine appealed to a variety of means to assert his legitimacy, for example, as a member of a college of emperors, as the preferred candidate of the army or Senate, as victor in civil war, or as a member of a dynasty. Furthermore, he invested considerable effort in buttressing his claims by actively deconstructing the legitimacy of his rivals, notably Maxentius and Licinius, whom he designated instead as tyranni. Thus Constantine made a notable contribution to the articulation of ideas of imperial legitimacy in the fourth century, and his strategies were adopted, most immediately, by his sons.
The political and military aspects of accession of Constantine the Great
Graeco-Latina Brunensia 24, 2019
The article argues that Constantine the Great, until he was recognized by Galerius, the senior Emperor of the Tetrarchy, was an usurper with no right to the imperial power, nothwithstanding his claim that his father, the Emperor Constantius I, conferred upon him the imperial title before he died. Tetrarchic principles, envisaged by Diocletian, were specifically put in place to supersede and override blood kinship. Constantine’s accession to power started as a military coup in which a military unit composed of barbarian soldiers seems to have played an important role.