It is a well known fact that the system of the official communication of the Roman Empire had undergone a striking change after Diocletian’s accession (284): Latin came into prominence and was used exclusively in the Eastern imperial administration where Greek had played an important role before Diocletian. So far this prominence of Latin has commonly been interpreted as an effect of a radical change in the language policy of the Roman state, claiming that Diocletian and Constantine I had introduced a new intolerant and aggressive language policy in the framework of the rehabilitation of the Roman Empire. In my paper I try to demonstrate that this alleged aggressive language policy never existed and that the prominence of Latin in the Eastern part of the Empire spontaneously resulted from the bureaucratic and governmental transformation of the Roman Empire that significantly increased the prestige of the Latin language.
The two Augusti and two Caesars of Diocletian's tetrarchy have been commilitones, originating from the Balkanic provinces. They were chosen by Diocletian an the basis of friendship that was corroborated by family connections. Although these connections were changed partly because of invidia, Diocletian achieved a remarkable success through his system which was tightly connected with the possible oracle of a celtic sibyl. She said that Diocletian would became emperor if he slayed the wild boar. As Diocletian killed Flavius Aper (= boar), the oracle came true. The only representation of the boar slaying that relates to Diocletian is an inscribed tegula with such a representaion found in Intercisa.
The aim of this study is to examine and describe the official language use of the Roman Empire under Justinian I, focusing on the choice between Greek and Latin, the two traditional official languages of the empire. Comparing the practice under Justinian with that of the ages before resp. after Diocletian's accession (284), the conclusion can be drawn that Justinian reformed the official language use on purpose, following the practice of the principate.
Robert (ed.): The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire , vol. II : AD 395 – 527 . Cambridge . Posner , Howard 2015 The Value of Money: Coinage and Diocletian’s Price Edict . Journal of the Numismatic Association of Australia 26 , 1 – 18
. F. Berger : Untersuchungen zu römerzeitlichen Münzfunden in Nordwestdeutschland . Studien zu Fundmünzen der Antike 9 . Berlin 1992 . R. Alston : Roman military pay from Caesar to Diocletian . JRS 84 ( 1994 ) 113 – 123 . F. Berger
Clauss, M. 1973 Untersuchungen zu den principales des römischen Heeres von Augustus bis Diocletian. Cornicularii, speculatores, frumentarii. Diss. Bochum.
Clauss, M. 1980 Frumentarius Augusti. Epigraphica 42, 131
–270), Aurelian (270–275), Probus (276), Carus (282–283), Carinus (283–285), Numerian (283–284), Diocletian (284–305), Maximian (285–305), Galerius (293–311), Constantius Chlorus (293–306), then Licinius (308–324) and Constantine the Great (306–337) with his sons
Heeresgeschichte: Beiträge 1962–1985 . Hrsg.: M. Speidel . Mavors Roman army researches 3 . Amster 1987 , 239 – 297 . Barkóczi 1964 = L. Barkóczi : The population of Pannonia from Marcus Aurelius to Diocletian . ActaArchHung 16 ( 1964 ) 257