Changes

==Etymology==

==Etymology==

[[Latin]] dominatus, past participle of dominari,  from dominus master; akin to Latin domus house

[[Latin]] dominatus, past participle of dominari,  from dominus master; akin to Latin domus house

*Date: [http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/17th_Century 1611]

*Date: [https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/17th_Century 1611]

==Definitions==

==Definitions==

:transitive verb  

:transitive verb  

*2 : to occupy a more elevated or superior position

*2 : to occupy a more elevated or superior position

==Description==

==Description==

The '''Dominate''' was the 'despotic' latter [[phase]] of [[government]] in the ancient [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Empire Roman Empire] from the conclusion of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_of_the_Third_Century Third Century Crisis] of 235–284 until the [[formal]] date of the collapse of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Roman_Empire Western Empire] in AD 476. It followed the period known as the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principate Principate]. In the Eastern half of the Empire, and especially from the time of Justinian I, the system of the Dominate evolved into [[Byzantine]] absolutism[1].

The '''Dominate''' was the 'despotic' latter [[phase]] of [[government]] in the ancient [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Empire Roman Empire] from the conclusion of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_of_the_Third_Century Third Century Crisis] of 235–284 until the [[formal]] date of the collapse of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Roman_Empire Western Empire] in AD 476. It followed the period known as the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principate Principate]. In the Eastern half of the Empire, and especially from the time of Justinian I, the system of the Dominate evolved into [[Byzantine]] absolutism[1].

The [[word]] is derived from the [[Latin]] dominus, meaning lord or master, as an owner versus his [[slave]] — this had been used sycophantically to address emperors from the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julio-Claudian Julio-Claudian] (first) dynasty on, but not used by them as a style — [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiberius Tiberius] in particular is said to have reviled it openly. It became common under [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diocletian Diocletian], who is therefore a [[logical]] [[choice]] as the first ruler of the 'early' dominate. Historian David Potter describes the transformation of Government under Diocletian when describing the shifts in imagery the Emperor used to display his power (in this case the building of a huge new palace at [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirmium Sirmium]):

The [[word]] is derived from the [[Latin]] dominus, meaning lord or master, as an owner versus his [[slave]] — this had been used sycophantically to address emperors from the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julio-Claudian Julio-Claudian] (first) dynasty on, but not used by them as a style — [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiberius Tiberius] in particular is said to have reviled it openly. It became common under [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diocletian Diocletian], who is therefore a [[logical]] [[choice]] as the first ruler of the 'early' dominate. Historian David Potter describes the transformation of Government under Diocletian when describing the shifts in imagery the Emperor used to display his power (in this case the building of a huge new palace at [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirmium Sirmium]):

<blockquote><i>The style of Government so memorably described by Marcus, whereby the emperor sought to show himself as a model of correct aristocratic deportment, had given way to a style in which the emperor was seen to be distinct from all other mortals. His house could no longer be a grander version of houses that other people might live in: it, like him, had to be different.</i></blockquote>

<blockquote><i>The style of Government so memorably described by Marcus, whereby the emperor sought to show himself as a model of correct aristocratic deportment, had given way to a style in which the emperor was seen to be distinct from all other mortals. His house could no longer be a grander version of houses that other people might live in: it, like him, had to be different.</i></blockquote>

During the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principate Principate], the [[Formal|formalities]] of the [[constitution]]ally-never-abolished republic were still very much the 'politically correct' image of [[government]]. It has also often been said to have ended after the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_of_the_Third_Century Third Century Crisis] of 235–284, which concluded when [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diocletian Diocletian] [[established]] himself as Emperor. Moving the notion of the Emperor away from the republican [[forms]] of the Empire's first three centuries, Diocletian introduced a [[novel]] [[system]] of joint rule by four, the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrarchy tetrarchy], and he and his [[colleagues]] and his successors (in two imperial territories, east and west, not four) chose to stop using the title princeps, instead openly displaying the [[naked]] face of Imperial power and adopting a Hellenistic style of government more [[influenced]] by the veneration of the Eastern [[potentates]] of ancient [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt Egypt] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_Empire Persia] than by the heritage of civic collegiality amongst the governing class passed down from the days of the 'uncrowned' [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Republic Roman Republic].

During the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principate Principate], the [[Formal|formalities]] of the [[constitution]]ally-never-abolished republic were still very much the 'politically correct' image of [[government]]. It has also often been said to have ended after the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_of_the_Third_Century Third Century Crisis] of 235–284, which concluded when [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diocletian Diocletian] [[established]] himself as Emperor. Moving the notion of the Emperor away from the republican [[forms]] of the Empire's first three centuries, Diocletian introduced a [[novel]] [[system]] of joint rule by four, the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrarchy tetrarchy], and he and his [[colleagues]] and his successors (in two imperial territories, east and west, not four) chose to stop using the title princeps, instead openly displaying the [[naked]] face of Imperial power and adopting a Hellenistic style of government more [[influenced]] by the veneration of the Eastern [[potentates]] of ancient [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt Egypt] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_Empire Persia] than by the heritage of civic collegiality amongst the governing class passed down from the days of the 'uncrowned' [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Republic Roman Republic].

* Arguably, more crucial than the chosen title was the earlier adoption of a divine status as divus, originally a posthumous exceptional honour awarded by the senate, later granted to the living emperor (and some members of his dynasty), becoming an unwritten prerogative of the crown.

* Arguably, more crucial than the chosen title was the earlier adoption of a divine status as divus, originally a posthumous exceptional honour awarded by the senate, later granted to the living emperor (and some members of his dynasty), becoming an unwritten prerogative of the crown.

* Another clear symptom of the upgrading of the imperial status was that he came to incarnate the notion (abstract under the uncrowned republic) of the majesty of Rome, so that lese majeste became high treason.

* Another clear symptom of the upgrading of the imperial status was that he came to incarnate the notion (abstract under the uncrowned republic) of the majesty of Rome, so that lese majeste became high treason.

* Contemporary historians reject the interpretation of the transition from Principate to Dominate as a clear, easily definable break (cf. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_Antiquity Late Antiquity]). Rather, they now characterise it as a much more subtle, gradual transformation, in which Diocletian's reforms of the Imperial office, while significant, are but one point on a sliding scale. Nevertheless, the distinction between two primary phases of Imperial government in Rome remains an important and useful one.

* Contemporary historians reject the interpretation of the transition from Principate to Dominate as a clear, easily definable break (cf. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_Antiquity Late Antiquity]). Rather, they now characterise it as a much more subtle, gradual transformation, in which Diocletian's reforms of the Imperial office, while significant, are but one point on a sliding scale. Nevertheless, the distinction between two primary phases of Imperial government in Rome remains an important and useful one.

==See also==

==See also==

*[[Hegemony]]

*[[Hegemony]]

[[Category: Law]]

[[Category: Law]]

[[Category: Political Science]]

[[Category: Political Science]]