Podcasts about Tetrarchy

Finally in possession of the supreme power, after having eliminated all rivals and fully dismantling Diocletian's Tetrarchy, what will Constantine do?  Will he use his power for good?  What will he do with the Christians now that he has elevated their faith above all others?  And what really happened to Crispus?    

Join Constantine as he crossed the Alps and marches on Rome, to meet his rival Augustus, Maxentius (son of Maximian the Mischievous) at the fabled Milvian Bridge.  Constantine is intent on unwinding Diocletian's project, the Frankenstein-ish Tetrarchy, and consolidating power in his hands.  He will use his considerable wiles, and the surging Christian sect, to accomplish his audacious objectives.  

In this episode we will examine the story of a real life demon who betrayed his brothers in arms, deceived many in a craven lust for power and murdered his own wife and child. With a resume like that, it goes without saying Roman Emperor, Saint Constantine the Great is held up as an iconic Christian hero. Also making special guest star appearances we have Romans, CAESAR, Christians, Eusebius, Lactantius, Christianity, Roman Empire, France, Britain, Italy, Rome, Tetrarch, Maxentius, Tiber river, Milvian Bridge, Jesus Christ, Chi Rho, Greek, Christos, Twitter, X, staurogram, crucifix, Arch of Constantine, Tetrarchy, Licinius, Maximinus, Edict of Milan, RON BURGUNDY, Paganism, Pontifex Maximus, pagan, Pope, council of Nicaea, Nicene Creed, Holy Trinity, Arius, Holy Land, St Helena, Constantinople, Fausta, Crispus, Jupiter, Persians, Armenia, Tiridates III, Persia, river Jordan, Bishop of Nicomedia, Pentecost, Holy Ghost, Mary, Apostles, Heaven, #SketchComedy #Sketch #Comedy #Sketch Comedy #Atheist #Science #History #Atheism #ConspiracyTheory #Conspiracy #Conspiracies #Sceptical #Scepticism #Mythology #Religion #Devil #Satan #Skeptic #Debunk #SatanIsMySuperhero #Podcast #funny #sketch #skit #comedy #comedyshow #comedyskits #HeavyMetal #RomanEmpire #Rome #AncientRome #Romans #RomanEmperor 

Join Diocletian as he ups the ante, and continues his bold experimentation to reform the Imperial system to deal with the new world of threats that have overwhelmed Rome for the last one hundred years.  But will this new system, that we know as the Tetrarchy, survive the biggest threat of all, human ambition?

Does the thought of a renowned scholar like Scott Hahn aligning with a "schismatic" bishop shake you to your core? Brace yourselves as we unpack this seemingly absurd controversy that has the Catholic community in an uproar over seemingly innocuous comments by Scott. We won't shy away from addressing the backlash from the popesplainers, papolators, and gaslighters and our attempt to appreciate Dr. Hahn's significant contribution to our faith.Ever wondered about the ripple effects of the small, yet annoyingly vocal, movement that supports Pope Francis in the Catholic Church? Put your pondering to rest as we dissect Mike Lewis' video on this topic, and reflect on the disheartening lack of engagement it received. We'll take you through Pope Francis' personnel policy, the spotlight it throws him under, and the unease it stirs within the traditionalists about the Synodal process. Prepare to be captivated as we delve into the controversial views on Church Doctrine, ignited by Mike Lewis's contentious article. We'll be exploring the startling implication that Muslims, Jews, and Christians all belong to the people of God. As we wrap up, get ready for some lighthearted fun with a Catholic trivia game.  Spark your curiosity and join us for an enlightening discussion on the complexities of our faith.********************************************************https://www.avoidingbabylon.comLocals Community:  https://avoidingbabylon.locals.comStore:  https://avoiding-babylon.sellfy.store/RSS Feed for Podcast Apps: https://feeds.buzzsprout.com/1987412.rssSpiritusTV:  https://spiritustv.com/@avoidingbabylonRumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-1626455Odysee:  https://odysee.com/@AvoidingBabylonBuzzsprout - Let's get your podcast launched! Start for FREE Support the showCheck out our new store!

“I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven…” (Mt. 16). Exodus 1:8-2:10 Psalm 124 Romans 12:1-8 Matthew 16:13-20 1. Who is Jesus and what are the keys of the kingdom? Yesterday on Market Street a man wearing worn clothes and just socks on his feet walked along pushing people at random as they waited in a security line to enter Ross' clothing store. Another man crouched in the corner of a bus stop bent over with his head at knee height repeatedly wailing from the heart as a police officer stood five feet away with a loudly barking German shepherd on tight leash. Another man was lying on the ground at Eddy and Mason his hair full of litter. Drugs and mental illness touch nearly every person you encounter just down the hill from here. Most of the stores have left and the world seems like it is ending. This kind of feeling pervades the beginning of J.T. Alexander's book I Am Sophia. His science fiction novel describes a not so distant future as climate change makes the planet uninhabitable. The center of gravity for human culture seems to have shifted into outer space as investors in places like Mars support companies here in the Bay Area doing gene engineering and carbon sequestration. San Francisco has been renamed Sanef and is one of several independent nations formed after the collapse of America. Like narcotics in our time, many people of the future have become addicted to Stims (this acronym which stands for “Sensory-Targetted Immersive Mindtech”). It is a kind of virtual reality that destroys souls. Horrifying and dehumanizing levels of inequality have become commonplace. Poor people are shunned and called lowcontributors. Sometimes they will have their minds effectively erased by the government. Nihilistic terrorists frequently kill ordinary people with bombs. There is almost no religion of any kind. People call it metaphysics (or metafiz) and respond to it with a mixture of disdain, suspicion and fear (as many do around us today). In this anti-religious world of the future there is only one remaining Christian church in the universe. It has ten worshipers and a doubting twenty-nine year old bishop named Peter Halabi. That church is in the ruins of Grace Cathedral. In that future time this very building has holes in the ceiling and the stained glass windows have long been boarded up. But the eleven worship faithfully every Sunday in the Chapel of Nativity. Peter worries that he will have to shepherd the church to extinction. He looks up to that same mural and the image of Mary and says, “I'm not asking… for a big miracle… Just something to let me know [God's] still up there.” [i] Soon a tent appears in front of the Ghiberti Doors. The homeless woman sheltered there enters the church just as Peter is about to read the lesson. She takes the book from him to read and her first words are “I am.” This seems to refer to God's self-description at the burning bush. It is the way the gospels often describe Jesus. It is the meaning of the letters in the corners of icons. This young woman with a scar on her face walks like a dancer. She calls herself Sophia (a biblical word for the divine feminine) and for most of the book we wonder about her. Is she God, the second coming of Jesus Christ? Or is she sick, unstable and deranged. Or is she just a fraud manipulating the gullible Christians for the sake of her own agenda? 2. This feels like the Gospel of Matthew. When Jesus walks on water and then rescues faltering Peter the disciples say, “what sort of man is this” (Mt. 8:27)? The crowds seem to be wondering the same thing when Jesus asks his friends, “Who do people say the Son of Man is” (Mt. 16)? Although we have to answer this question in our lives, as readers of this gospel we stand outside the experience of those depicted in Matthew. We see what they do not. The Gospel begins with these words, “An account of the genealogy of Jesus, the Messiah…” (Mt. 1:1). As we read we wonder when, and which one of them, will realize who Jesus is. This exchange between Jesus and Peter happens in Caesarea Philippi, the capital of the Tetrarchy of Philip son of Herod the Great. Herod dedicated the famous Temple there to Rome and to Emperor Augustus, whose statue stood there. He was the first emperor to add to his title: “Divi Filius” or “Son of the Divine.” Jesus asks his friends who they say he is and Peter says, “You are the Son of the living God” (Mt. 16). Soon we see that Peter does not yet really understand what he is saying. All of us have trouble with this. We think of Jesus as simply a more powerful version of Emperor Augustus when Jesus is really overthrowing that whole way of being. Jesus shows that the way of domination and self-aggrandizement although it seems stable and powerful on the surface is like sand. In contrast we have the path of Peter with his imperfections, his courage and fear, his insight and foolishness, but above all his faith. This improbable foundation is the rock upon which our lives can be founded. This is faith which is a kind of pursuit rather than an accomplishment. Going on Jesus says, “I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven” (Mt. 16). Through history this sentence has been used to justify the church in those moments when we have been more like the Emperor Augustus than like Jesus, as if some institutional authority in Rome or Canterbury could have power over whether a person can be saved. This could not be further from the truth. The Biblical scholar Herman Waetjen points out several other ancient examples that clarify what Matthew means. The power of the keys has to do more with things and policies than people. For instance, the historian Josephus writes about Queen Alexandra who ruled the Hasmonean Kingdom from 78-69 BCE. She deputized Pharisees as the administrators of the state and gave them the power, “to loose and to bind.” For Herman this power is about determining what practices are permitted or forbidden. [ii] We all have a role in this. We all in our way preach the gospel through what we say and how we live. We contribute to the picture of what is acceptable. And we have a responsibility for creating the kind of society which is humane in its care for the people I saw on the streets yesterday. The puritan theologian John Calvin (1509-1564) writes that the reason for this passage about the keys is that over history it has been dangerous to speak Jesus' truth and it is important for us to know both that we are doing God's work and that God stands beside us as we do. [iii] The twentieth century theologian Karl Barth (1886-1968) writes that the thought of God will always disturb the world. Our relations with each other, will never be perfectly clear. We will never adequately understand our situation in the world. That is the reason we need to orient ourselves toward the Eternal, to God. Barth says, “For the vast ambiguity of our life is at once its deepest truth… We know that our thinking of the thought of eternity is never a thing completed in time...” [iv] Our attention to Jesus, our prayer, is how we avoid being conformed to the world. It is how, instead, we are transformed by the renewing of our minds in Christ (Rom. 12). About half of I Am Sophia takes place at Grace Cathedral and half on Mars. In the book, Sophia was terribly abused as a child but she found nourishment in the Bible and other Christian books. This made her a kind of theologian. Was Sophia the Christ? I do not want to spoil the book for you. As he finds himself falling in love with her, Sophia has a great deal to teach the young bishop, and perhaps us also. She says, “You are the guardian of a great treasure. It is your tradition, and it has an incredible spiritual value, an almost miraculous capacity to change lives for the better. But you misplaced the keys to the treasure chest… when scripture and religion became primarily about trying to determine who was right and who was wrong.” [v] Later she gives a kind of invocation, “May your soul have deep roots and strong wings.” [vi] This means that followers of Jesus need to have a foundation, a stable identity, but we also need room to evolve. Changes in technology and society leave modern people less rooted and more focused on wings. You see this in their emphasis on individual freedom, innovation and progress. In contrast, many Christians regard the secular world as destructive and offtrack. This leads them to become so backward looking that they are all roots and no wings. The living, loving God of the gospel became to them static and oppressive. What does not evolve dies. This summer's survey and our town hall meeting this morning address consider this issue. The idea lies at the heart of our mission statement to “reimagine church with courage, joy and wisdom.” For generations Grace Cathedral has been known for this. But it is up to us if we will continue to have roots and wings. Near the end of the novel, Sophia says to Peter, “You think strength means being untouched by the suffering we are approaching. You still do not know me…” [vii] Will San Francisco as we know it die as people self-centeredly and obsessively seek to save themselves? Will the future Grace Cathedral lie in ruins? Will the world know who Jesus is? At the center of Grace Cathedral is not a statue of the emperor or a belief in domination and self-assertion. At the heart of our being is a living person, the living child of God. He calls us by name and offers the keys to a deeper, more humane and faithful life. Come let us follow Jesus. [viii] [i] J.F. Alexander, I am Sophia: A Novel (Eugene, OR: Resource Publications, Wipf and Stock, 2021) 7. [ii] Herman Waetjen, Matthew's Theology of Fulfillment, Its Universality and Its Ethnicity: God's New Israel as the Pioneer of God's New Humanity (NY: Bloomsbury, 2017) 185-7. [iii] “It was important for the apostles to have constant and perfect assurance in their preaching, which they were not only to carry out in infinite labors, cares, troubles, and dangers, but at last to seal with their own blood. In order that they might know, I say, that this assurance was not vain or empty, but full of power and strength, it was important for them to be convinced that in such anxiety, difficulty and danger they were doing God's work; also for them to recognize that God stood beside them while the whole world opposed and attached them; for them, not having Christ, the Author of their doctrine before their eyes on earth, to know that he, in heaven, confirms the truth of the doctrine which he had delivered to them…” John Calvin, The Institutes of the Christian Religion ed. John T. McNeill, Tr. Ford Lewis Battles (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960) 1213 (4.11.1). [iv] “There is – and this is what we mean – a thinking of the thought of grace, of resurrection, of forgiveness, and of eternity. Such thinking is congruous with our affirmation of the full ambiguity of our temporal existence. When once we realize that the final meaning of our temporal existence lies in our questioning as to its meaning, then it is that we think of eternity – in our most utter collapse. For the vast ambiguity of our life is at once its deepest truth. And moreover, when we think this thought, our thinking is renewed; for such rethinking is repentance. We know too that our thinking of the thought of eternity is never a thing completed in time, for it is full of promise. As an act of thinking it dissolves itself; it participates in the pure thought of God, and is there an accepted sacrifice, living, holy, acceptable to God.” Karl Barth, The Epistle to the Romans, 6th Edition tr. Edwyn C. Hoskyns (NY: Oxford University Press, 1975) 437. [v] J.F. Alexander, I am Sophia: A Novel (Eugene, OR: Resource Publications, Wipf and Stock, 2021) 60. [vi] Ibid., 95. [vii] Ibid., 168. [viii] Matthew Boulton, “Who do you say that I am…”, SALT, 21 August 2023. https://www.saltproject.org/progressive-christian-blog/2020/8/18/who-do-you-say-that-i-am-salts-lectionary-commentary-for-twelfth-week-after-pentecost

In the late third century, the Roman Empire was changing rapidly. Civil war had done much to contribute to its near destruction. Now, the radical  Emperor Diocletian came up with an innovative solution for this - the Tetrarchy. He also decided to confront a strange new religion that was increasingly a threat to the traditional Roman gods - Christianity.

After the ApocalypseA Pandemic Survival StoryPrologue - Genesis Plague and Dark Ages Akwesi son of Maesk considered his options. A dry, dusty wind tossed up pregnant waves on the lake. With the dust in the air, the water was brown and murky. Not a good sign.A dozen dirty refugees huddle on the rocky beach around a small fire under the stern watchfulness of 4 of Akwesi's men. 10,000 years in the future, this place would be known as West Turkana, a neighbor of Kenya in the Central Rift of Africa. In these earlier times, on the edge of humankind's transition from hunting and gathering to a more settled, agrarian life, it wasn't any country or state or region of a whole. For Akwesi it was simply the land of his people. This land, this place where his father and his father's father had lived...and had died...was his responsibility to protect. It was his people he thought of now.  ...OK my friends. I've got a lot on my mind. It's only been a month off from the apocalypse. But, I feel a vast, yawning chasm filled with smoky wraiths (created by industrial light and magic) growing between us. These two prologue pieces today are scraps from the cutting room floor. These are pieces I penned that I had to cut. They didn't fit into the episodes I was writing at the time. They didn't add to the story. And they still feel like they are narratives without anchor. A bit meandering. So, I did some rewrite and stuck them in as a prologue. There is a lot to unpack in this narrative. Let's start with the bodies in the pit. I am, as you will have figured out by now, a follower of history and archeology. I suppose in a parallel universe where bills didn't need to be paid I might have been an archeologist. This article of the stone age massacre in Kenya was widely reported back in 2016. They found these remains with hands bound and heads smashed in by the shores of Lake Turkana. The big headline was that one of the victims was in the late stages of pregnancy. Think about that. 10,000 years ago. Modern humans. Just like you and me. 27 men women and children bound and killed by someone.Why? What was the reason behind this massacre? Was it population pressure? Was it religion? Was it disease? Was it one wild-eyed zealot who knew that the outsiders needed to die for their sins? It boggles the mind. They were so far removed from us but, at the same time, so much the same. It points to just how thin the line is between what we consider civilization and savagery. So I painted a picture of the plague. The evil spirits.  The thin place between this world and the next. The questions and decisions. The unknowns. Are we that much different today?  They were people. But they were a hair's breadth from chaos and trying to make their way. They knew so many things. They had our same mental equipment and were trying tom make sense of their world. But all was chaos. In the second part we introduce the old man in his flight from the pandemic. And the point I'm trying to make is that apocalypse is not uncommon. Throughout our history we build things and we think they are permanent. But they are not. They are flimsy films of things that will fall. And the great irony of the Victorians astride their hemophiliac, inbred empire pretending to be something better. Something above the laws of political evolution. Like every society before them they though they had it all figured out. They thought they were the end point. The pinnacle of humanity. With all our science and knowledge, we are still not the end point. We are ever evolving. And we are ever looking over our shoulders at our animal natures in hot pursuit. You can wrap your intentions in science, but they will still stink of pretention. The lesson we never learn is humility. But I also wanted to build a universe with some hope. Some hope for renewal. Some hope for the future. And that brings us to the bottle neck event. This is more of a theory than a fact. Scientist did some regression analysis on DNA and found this bottleneck in our evolution 50-70 thousand years ago. When it first came out they theorized that there was some sort of volcanic event that put population pressure on us. That has been mostly disproven, but there was a bottleneck of some sort and we managed to live through it. Again, these too were modern humans. Physically and mentally just like us. Modern humans weren't alone at the time. We had other cousins. But none of them survived this bottleneck. Why? We don't' know.  We can only guess about climate change and catastrophe. Do you think these humans, whatever the pressure was, felt like it was the apocalypse? Do you think they made hard choices? Do you think they doubted their humanity? Do you think they turned to their god? It seems apocalypse is a very human theme that runs through our history and our very DNA. Likewise, I'm picking on the English and the Victorians because they have one of the most well documented apocalypse events. During the final years of the Roman empire Britannia produced many pretenders to the throne. The last one was the wonderfully named Magnus Maximus who stripped the legions from Britain in 388 and became emperor of the west as part of the Tetrarchy.  At the time the empire was ruled by 2 senior emperors and 2 junior emperors – this was set up by Diocletian in an attempt to add stability to the vast empire. But, what it actually did was set up constant civil war between the independent rulers of each quarter of the empire. Britain was part of Gaul. Magnus Maximus made his play to be ruler of Gaul and then the rest of the empire. In the process he pulled most of the legions out of England. When the Franks and other German tribes invaded and the Western Empire fell, Britain was left to it's own. The word German comes from the same root word as guard and garden and basically means people of the periphery, outsiders. Picture yourself as a Roman plantation owner in the mid 400's. You've got a great view of the Thames but the army has left. It seems peaceful. But there is no force behind the peace. It fell apart pretty quickly. The legend is that the Britains invited a couple Saxons in to fight off the threat from the Welsh and Irish.  When those Saxons showed up they were like “Cool, Unprotected farmland – tell everyone it's a keg party over here!” The word Welsh, by the way, also means ‘Outsider'. Most of the historical apocalyptic events were accompanied by the migration of outsiders into the civilized territories. Sometimes those outsiders just took over form the current rulers and kept going. Sometimes they burnt civilization down to its foundations and started over. In our universe, after the apocalypse, who are the outsiders? Where do they come from? Can civilization be saved? Or will it be a total reset? You will have to wait and see! As always come over and join the other survivors at the Facebook page “OldManApocalypse”.I'm working through creating an e-book of the first season. I've done a first outline of the second season. My plan is still to create 5 seasons as we go through that. For those of you listening far in the future, let me know how I did. I know it's a challenge with theses short episodes because you can listen through a whole season in a week and then you're stuck! But I designed it that way on purpose to make it digestible and manageable for all of us. If you want to help, leave a review on your favorite podcast app, tell a friend or two, or leave me a few bucks on the patreon page. And – as Summer turns to fall, keep surviving.   Get bonus content on Patreon See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

The Tetrarchy was a collegiate form of government when four emperors ruled Rome simultaneously. Dr Roger Rees, University of St Andrews, joins the show again to explain what the Tetrarchy was, how it functioned, and why it was dissolved.

Chrissie gives you a quick overview of Diocletian's Tetrarchy.Read the essay here: https://historywiththeszilagyis.org/hwts010 Find us on Twitter:The Network: @UFPEarth. The Show: @SzilagyiHistory.Chrissie: @TheGoddessLivia. Jason: @JasonDarkElf.Join us in the Federation Council Chambers on Facebook. Send topic suggestions via Twitter or to hwts@ufp.earth. Support our historical work here: patreon.com/historywiththeszilagyisUnited Federation of Podcasts is brought to you by our listeners. Special thanks to these patrons on Patreon whose generous contributions help to produce this podcast and the many others on our network! Tim CooperChrissie De Clerck-SzilagyiMahendran RadhakrishnanJim McMahonCasey PettittVictor GamboaJustin OserVera BibleGreg MolumbyTom ElliotKevin ScharfTom Van ScotterAlexander GatesJim StoffelFit RogersVanessa VaughanChris TribuzioThad HaitAnn MarieJoe MignoneJosh Brewington You can join this illustrious list by becoming a patron here: https://www.patreon.com/ufpearth

Diocletian's reign as Roman Emperor had many voluminous points: his antipathy towards Christianity, the creation of the Tetrarchy, and a rare imperial retirement. Dr Roger Rees, School of Classics, University of St Andrews, joins the show to discuss Diocletian's life.

Advent continues apace, Theophiloi, and we're celebrating with two of the most famous and popular lady saints, St. Barbara and St. Catherine! Babs and Cathy are here to visit total ruination upon the devil (who, sadly, does not actually appear in these stories) using explosions of various sizes. I'm not gonna lie, it gets a little grim, but c'mon. You know how most saints became saints by now, right? Topics of discussion: Quibbling with Martinmas, Advent Saint Tradition Power Rankings, the Tetrarchy, the long tradition of Catha Fabula, the disappointment of Porphyrius, briefly listing the cast of Hades (2020), the benefits of doing things with incontinence, horrible things described like Looney Tunes. Hymnal: "Rollin' (Air Raid Vehicle)" by Limp Bizkit, "Hey Ya" by the Jakob Singers (https://www.youtube.com/user/jakobsingers/featured) Offertory: As Enoch writes, "Whoever of you spends gold or silver for his brother's sake, he will receive ample treasure in the world to come." Support the show via http://ko-fi.com/apocrypals, or check out Official Apocrypals merchandise designed by Erica Henderson! https://www.teepublic.com/user/apocrypals Black Lives Matter. Trans Lives Matter. Heck 12. Isaiah 54:17.

In this episode we look back at the past decade of history we've covered. I offer some of my reflections on writing the podcast as well as the martyrs, the Tetrarchy, the rise of Constantine, and the legacy of the Great Persecution. Music “Sons of Constantinople” by Tyler Cunningham, licensed under Pond5. HistoryoftheEarlyChurch.wordpress.com HistoryoftheEarlyChurch@gmail.com Facebook.com/EarlyChurchPodcast

How did Diocletian and Aurelian save Rome from the crisis of the 3rd century? How did Diocletian inadvertently set up Feudal Europe and the Byzantine Empire for the next 1000 years? And how would you like to pay taxes without using money? What is the Tetrarchy and why are we talking about cabbages? Also goth kids and the fantastic 4 somehow find their way in too.

The succession of the second Tetrarchy grants the eastern Christians a respite from the Great Persecution. However, it is not long before Galerius and his new Caesar Maximinus Daia resume the persecution and introduce new harsher methods of enforcement and punishment in the process. Meanwhile the seeds of schism are sown in the Church of Egypt by the controversial activities of the new bishop of Lycopolis. Music “Sons of Constantinople” by Tyler Cunningham, licensed under Pond5. HistoryoftheEarlyChurch.wordpress.com HistoryoftheEarlyChurch@gmail.com Facebook.com/EarlyChurchPodcast

Episode 3 of Rush Hour History will bring about some drastic changes within the Roman Empire. Constantine will change history with his dream of victory under Christ, Emperor Maxentius will find that an ineffective pontoon bridge can't be fixed by drinking more wine, and the empire will finally get some well-deserved R&R. Or will it?

Episode 2 of Rush Hour History ushers in the humble beginnings of the Byzantine Empire along with the man responsible for building it. Fraught with twists, backstabbings, some bribery, and midnight hangings in the marital suite the empire is off to a rocky start.

Diocletian is the third century emperor that brought the Empire back from the brink of collapse.  After generations of uncertainly, his will, administration, military prowess and ruthless drive established a new period of calm that rippled through the Roman empire.  Just consider the tetrarchy ruling system, new management of provinces, Edict of Prices, and Great (Christian) Persecution! And when it was all said and done he retired in his bespoke fortified villa that became the core of the later town of Split, Croatia.  So richly preserved that it is a noted UNESCO site and also the location for many a scene in Game of Thrones.  Walk the streets of this historic site and explore the archaeology, art, and ancient history beneath with Darius on his recent visit! 

  Amby interviews Andrew Goff, winner of the 2018 World Diplomacy Championship in Washington DC. The guys then discuss Andrew's advice before talking about current games and playing small variant maps. Intro The guys introduce the show, their drinks and the venue (0 mins 10 secs) Interview with Andrew Goff Warning it sounds like the audio dropped off in a couple of spots in the recording for a few seconds. Amby went back to the original audio and it sounds like it was when recorded. No idea why. Sorry folks!!! Kaner and Amby start discussing the prelude to the interview with Andrew Goff, World Diplomacy Champion for 2018 (5 mins) The interview begins with Andrew setting the scene for where he currently is (6 mins) Andrew talks about the tournament, the experience and how it compared with previous tournaments (6 mins 45 secs) He discusses the benefit of having a round off during the tournament (9 mins 30 secs) Amby asks about the greatest challenge Andrew had during the tournament - Doug Moore's gameplay during the rounds (10 mins) Andrew discusses surprises through the tournament - especially the online players turning up to face-to-face tournaments, and how face-to-face players are increasingly changing their styles (14 mins) Amby asks about the evolution of gameplay in the last few years (16 mins 15 secs) Andrew talks about game theory and broader strategy in the game (17 mins 45 secs) Andrew discusses diversity in the game - with more younger players and women coming into Diplomacy (19 mins 45 secs) Amby asks about other's game play when it comes to excellent stabs (21 mins) They discuss the top board and how things were different on that board compared to the preliminary rounds (22 mins 45 secs) Andrew talks about the process for selecting the countries to play on the top board (the Paris Method) and his experience playing England - his least favorite country to play (25 mins) You can view the top board for WDC on Backstabbr. Andrew discusses the thinking behind Liverpool holding, and why he wanted to be the first player stabbed in the west (26 mins 45 secs) At this top level Andrew discusses the nature of avoiding being the top target, and cultural differences if you present yourself strong (30 mins) The time limit and its impact on gameplay (31 mins 30 secs) They talk about the end of the game (35 mins) Amby asks about Andrew's plans to defend his championship in 2019 in Marseilles (39 mins) Amby asks about plans for an Australian based tournament in the future. Andrew challenges Amby to get things happening in Brisbane (40 mins 20 secs) They wrap up the interview (43 mins)   Kaner and Amby return and talk about the interview. Amby asks Kaner about his thoughts on Andrew's insights (43 mins 30 secs) They talk about a more strategic style of gameplay (44 mins) Kaner loves the generalisation from Andrew about what works on Americans and wonders if its true (46 mins) Amby brings up how online players are increasingly getting into face-to-face (47 mins 20 secs) They talk about both going to the March 2019 Australian championships (48 mins 15 secs) Next they talk about putting on a Brisbane based game in the Australian winter of 2019.. Amby discusses the WebDiplomacy Forum thread about some Australian-New Zealand online players playing together (49 mins) Kaner reflects how the time limit impacts the gameplay. Amby suggests a cheeky way Kaner can boost his ranking (51 mins 20 secs) Around the grounds Kaner starts discussing his Heptarchy IV game Hep Bros (54 mins) Amby references the History of England podcast he's listening to, where he's currently up to the War of the Roses, and how it could be applied to the HeptarchyIV board (56 mins) They look at the stats for the variant and find its not very balanced at all (58 mins) Amby starts discussing one of his recent games (Salt air and Blood) that he won on the North Sea Wars variant designed by sqrg - a four player variant with some weird whacky rules around the North Sea which connect to economic supply centres. He then goes onto discuss the funny rule where once your unit takes an economic SC, you can't move it back into the Central North Sea (60 mins) He then goes onto discuss his gameplay needed to win the game (1 hr 4 mins 30 secs) Amby then talks about the normal Dip gameplay that also happened on the board (1 hr 7 mins 20 secs) They then look at the stats for the variant (1 hr 9 mins) After some more drinks, the guys go onto discuss their game they played together: Ver-Dunny, using the variant 843: Treaty of Verdun created by Milan Mach. Kaner makes an initial incorrect guess on which player Amby was, although Amby picked Kaner correctly (the game was anonymous.) Respect to the 3rd player in the game, lydiia. This was an anonymous, gunboat game (1 hr 10 mins 15 secs) Kaner-Amby argy-bargy aside, they both agree this was a great map and variant and offered a lot of opportunity as a 3 player map (1 hr 15 mins) They check the stats for the variant finding solos are frequent but the split between all three players is incredibly close, showing a highly balanced map, which would be great for a tournament map (1 hr 16 mins) Amby talks about he's on a roll with 3 solos, bouncing up from 100 in the vDip Top 100 up to the 50's (1 hr 19 mins) Kaner asks Amby's thoughts on the 4 player South America map (1 hr 19 mins 30 secs) Amby brings up another game he's involved in, the 5 player variant Manifest Destiny, created by Morg and coded by Enriador. Kaner doesn't some aesthetics like the covered wagon icons and the blue used for the USA. Amby discusses the gameplay and map (while maintaining the anonymity of the game). Amby gives Kaner a history lesson about the Republic of Texas. Amby asks our Texan diplomacy players to get in touch to correct anything we got wrong - NOTE: since this podcast was recorded the game has actually ended - Amby was playing Mexico if you care to check the result (1 hr 20 mins) Kaner says the map reminds him a bit of the variant Imperium (based on the German invasions of Rome) (1 hr 27 mins) In preparation for his trip to Italy, Amby has been relistening to the History of Rome podcast and has got all excited again about his variant creation idea based around the Crisis of the Third Century (scroll down half way down for previous discussion about this in episode 22). The variant has Roman civil wars, barbarians and the Antonine plague - Amby later checked at it was actually the Cyprian plague. He goes onto discuss maybe having it based around the Fall of the Tetrarchy when there were four competing Roman emperors (1 hr 28 mins) Kaner starts talking jibberish about the variant Fubar with the main player - and totally overpowered - Fatflap. They look into the variant which is totally WTF. Amby curses sqrg - making a great variant with North Sea Wars and then making something as bizarre as Fubar (1 hr 30 mins) Kaner brings up the South America four player variant by Joe Janbu, and ported across to online Dip by Oliver Auth (1 hr 35 mins 45 secs) More drinks arrive and the guys talk about the bank vaults and bathroom in the Boom Boom Room. Amby says he'll put up photos of them, but then when the guys left they forgot! Hopefully a couple of days after the podcast goes live he'll get some photos (1 hr 39 mins) They get back to Diplomacy and talk about Amby's non-rated 5 day constant NMRing Imperial game. He talks about his current gameplay as Russia and his thinking when he decided to stab China - a further NOTE: due to the number of people in the Boom Boom Room the guys started talking really loud to make sure they were recorded. So unlike previous Amby advice to turn the podcast up, this time you might need to turn it down! (1 hr 42 mins 30 secs) Amby then gives an anonymous update for his Divided States game (1 hr 49 mins) Kaner brings up the discussion about having a Newspaper game - a grey press public posting. In this variant you can pretend to be another country without anyone knowing who it really is. Check out the grey press fog of war Classic Newspaper game thread on vDip to learn more  (1 hr 51 mins 30 secs) Amby mentions the previous By Jingo game as an example of how it works (1 hr 55 mins) Amby talks about his world tour with the bank's money. He mentions there will hopefully one more podcast in mid-November, but then radio silence until January when Amby gets back. While he's away Amby is planning to organise a few interviews while he's away (1 hr 58 mins 15 secs) The guys wrap up (2 hrs 2 mins 30 secs)   Venue: Boom Boom Room, Brisbane. Drinks of choice: Kaner - 150 Lashes Pale Ale from James Squire, New South Wales Amby - Terrazas de los Andes, Malbec from Argentina Just a reminder you can support the show by giving it 5 stars on iTunes or Stitcher. Or if you want to help improve the audio equipment you can donate at Patreon. Lastly, don't forget to subscribe so you get the latest Diplomacy Games episodes straight to your phone!

Explore the background of the 4th Century in which there was chaos. The Great Persecution happened under Diocletian (284-305 AD) around 297-301 AD. Explore the Tetrarchy with the Eastern Empire ruled by Diocletian and Galerius, and the Western Empire ruled by Maximian Augustus and Constantius. Galerius provoked Diocletian into persecuting the Christians. Diocletian retired in 304 AD and insisted that Maximian retire as well. Galerius took over for Diocletian and Constantius took over for Maximian. Galerius continued the persecution. Constantius did not think Christians should be persecuted so did not pursue Christians. Eventually Galerius concedes defeat since the public was not unifying but actually dividing. Galerius issued the Edict of Toleration. Consider Eusebius’ response. Christianity became a religio licita (a legal religion) once again. Constantine was in Britain when his father died and he claimed to be the rightful successor to the throne. Maxentius also claimed the throne. There was a political and physical battle going on but also a spiritual battle. Constantine had a conversion experience in which the Labarum symbol (Chi-Rho) appeared and so it was used on the shields of his men during the battle at Milvian Bridge where he defeated Maxentius. Constantine was theologically confused from the start. Consider Henry Chadwick’s description of Constantine. Constantine never left this syncretic faith. The Arch of Constantine marks the spot of the Battle of Milvian Bridge. Constantine took control of the Western Empire, formed an alliance with Licinius, and agreed to no more persecution of Christians through the Edict of Milan. Was all well and everyone living in peace? Not exactly. Distant rulers such as Maximinus Daia who ruled the furthest eastern part of the Empire carried on the persecution but was eventually overthrown by Licinius. Constantine and Licinius had a complex friendship or relationship. There was distrust between them and in 324 AD Constantine overthrew Licinius. Constantine became the sole ruler of the entire Empire and desired unity.

The Tetrarchy was a lovely idea. It worked so very well when Diocletian was in charge. When he was gone, though, self interest trumped duty. Civil wars ensued: lots of them.

The Tetrarchy: one man's attempt to create an entirely new, entirely workable system. It worked...until he was gone.

Professor Freedman outlines the problems facing the Roman Empire in the third century. The Persian Sassanid dynasty in the East and various Germanic tribes in the West threatened the Empire as never before. Internally, the Empire struggled with the problem of succession, an economy wracked by inflation, and the decline of the local elite which had once held it together. Having considered these issues, Professor Freedman then moves on to the reforms enacted under Diocletian to stabilize the Empire. He attempted to solve the problem of succession by setting up a system of joint rule called the Tetrarchy, to stabilize the economy through tax reform, and to protect the frontiers through militarization. Although many of his policies failed--some within his lifetime--Diocletian nevertheless saved the Roman Empire from collapse. Complete course materials are available at the Open Yale Courses website: http://oyc.yale.edu This course was recorded in Fall 2011.

With the Tetrarchy in shambles, Diocletian will be called out of retirement in 308 AD to help broker a settlement. But the new new order will prove as bad as the old new order.

Less than two years after Diocletian's abdication, the Tetrarchy was left in shambles following the power plays of Constantine and Maxentius.

In 293 AD Diocletian and Maximian invited Constantius and Galerius to share in their Imperial burdens, forming what we today call the Tetrarchy.

Professor Kleiner characterizes third-century Rome as an "architectural wasteland" due to the rapid change of emperors, continuous civil war, and a crumbling economy. There was no time to build and the only major architectural commission was a new defensive wall. The crisis came to an end with the rise of Diocletian, who created a new form of government called the Tetrarchy, or four-man rule, with two leaders in the East and two in the West. Diocletian and his colleagues instituted a major public and private building campaign in Rome and the provinces, which reflected the Empire's renewed stability. Professor Kleiner begins with Diocletian's commissions in Rome--a five-column monument dedicated to the tenth anniversary of the formation of the Tetrarchy, the restoration of the Curia or Senate House, and the monumental Baths of Diocletian. She then presents Diocletian's Palace at Split, designed as a military camp and including the emperor's octagonal mausoleum, followed by an overview of the palaces and villas of other tetrarchs in Greece and Sicily. Professor Kleiner concludes with the villa on the Via Appia in Rome belonging to Maxentius, son of a tetrarch, and the main rival of another tetrarch's son, Constantine the Great.

Professor Kleiner characterizes third-century Rome as an "architectural wasteland" due to the rapid change of emperors, continuous civil war, and a crumbling economy. There was no time to build and the only major architectural commission was a new defensive wall. The crisis came to an end with the rise of Diocletian, who created a new form of government called the Tetrarchy, or four-man rule, with two leaders in the East and two in the West. Diocletian and his colleagues instituted a major public and private building campaign in Rome and the provinces, which reflected the Empire's renewed stability. Professor Kleiner begins with Diocletian's commissions in Rome--a five-column monument dedicated to the tenth anniversary of the formation of the Tetrarchy, the restoration of the Curia or Senate House, and the monumental Baths of Diocletian. She then presents Diocletian's Palace at Split, designed as a military camp and including the emperor's octagonal mausoleum, followed by an overview of the palaces and villas of other tetrarchs in Greece and Sicily. Professor Kleiner concludes with the villa on the Via Appia in Rome belonging to Maxentius, son of a tetrarch, and the main rival of another tetrarch's son, Constantine the Great.

This week's episode is titled, “Keeping a Record”The first 3 Cs of Church History are at times a difficult puzzle to sort out because no coherent historical narrative was being kept.Luke's account in the Books of Acts recounts a time span of about 30 yrs & roughly narrates the spread of the Faith from Jerusalem to Rome. The next narrative doesn't come till the writings of the Christian historian Eusebius in the 4th C.  What we have for a period of over 200 yrs are the writings of the Fathers whose letters give little more than a thumbnail sketch of what was happening. We have to infer & assume a lot by picking up what facts we can about what was happening. As we've seen, the work of the Church Fathers focused mainly on providing pastoral & apologetic support.  Gaining an historical framework for this period comes from merging secular accounts of history with the commentary of the Fathers. But with the work of Eusebius at the opening of the 4th C, the narrative becomes significantly clearer.Eusebius began compiling his magnum opus of Church History in the 290's. Titled Ecclesiastical History, it's an attempt to provide a narrative of the Communion of the Saints from the Apostles to his time.Eusebius was born & raised in Caesarea on the coast of Israel. He was a student of the Christian leader Pamphilas, who was himself a student of the great Apologist Origen. Eusebius became the bishop at Caesarea in 313. He played a major role in the Council of Nicaea in 325, which we'll take a closer look at in a future episode.Eusebius is a key figure in the study of Church History because his Ecclesiastical History is the first work after Luke's to attempt an historical narrative of the Faith. He's also an important figure because of his close association with the Emperor Constantine.I want to quote the opening of Eusebius' narrative because it gives us a sense of the monumental nature of his work.  He knew he was attempting to reconstruct a narrative of the Church from scant resources.In Chapter 1, which he titled, “The Plan of the Work” he writes –It is my purpose to write an account of the successions of the holy apostles, as well as of the times which have elapsed from the days of our Savior to our own; and to relate the many important events which are said to have occurred in the history of the Church; and to mention those who have governed and presided over the Church in the most prominent parishes, and those who in each generation have proclaimed the divine word either orally or in writing.It is my purpose also to give the names and number and times of those who through love of innovation have run into the greatest errors, and, proclaiming themselves discoverers of knowledge falsely so-called, have like fierce wolves unmercifully devastated the flock of Christ. …But at the outset I must crave for my work the indulgence of the wise, for I confess that it is beyond my power to produce a perfect and complete history, and since I am the first to enter upon the subject, I am attempting to traverse as it were a lonely and untrodden path. I pray that I may have God as my guide and the power of the Lord as my aid, since I am unable to find even the bare footsteps of those who have traveled the way before me, except in brief fragments, in which some in one way, others in another, have transmitted to us particular accounts of the times in which they lived. From afar they raise their voices like torches, and they cry out, as from some lofty and conspicuous watch-tower, admonishing us where to walk and how to direct the course of our work steadily and safely.Having gathered therefore from the matters mentioned here and there by them whatever we consider important for the present work, and having plucked like flowers from a meadow the appropriate passages from ancient writers, we shall endeavor to embody the whole in an historical narrative. …This work seems to me of especial importance because I know of no ecclesiastical writer who has devoted himself to this subject; and I hope that it will appear most useful to those who are fond of historical research.Eusebius was unaware of any previous attempt to provide an historical narrative of the development of the Faith from the late 1st C to his time in the early 4th, a period of a little over 200 yrs. From a modern perspective, Eusebius' account might be considered suspect, relying as it does on tradition & at best fragmentary evidence. What must be remembered is the importance of that oral tradition and the accuracy of such transmission over long periods of time. Because the ancient world didn't possess cheap and plentiful means of recording information, it was dependent on oral tradition & rote memorization.  With the advent of the printing press and more economic media, the priority of the oral tradition declined. Eusebius had both written and oral source material to draw from. His work can be considered dependable, while subject to question when it leaned toward the ancient penchant for using history as propaganda.As we return to the narrative timeline of Church history we need to pick up the story with the reign of the Diocletian who presided over the last & in many ways worst round of persecution under the Roman emperors.Though Christians remember Diocletian for that, he was in truth one of the most effective of the Roman Emperors. By the time he came to the throne, the Roman Empire was a sprawling & unwieldy beast of a realm to rule. The City of Rome was an old & decayed relic of its former glory. So Diocletian moved his headquarters eastward to Nicomedia in Asia Minor, modern Turkey.  Instead of trying to exert control over the entire empire himself & solely, Diocletian appointed Maximian as co-emperor to rule the western half of the Empire from Rome while he ruled the East.One of the persistent problems that led to so much unrest in the recent decades was the question of succession; who would rule after the current emperor? To forestall that turmoil, Diocletian appointed dual successors for both himself & Maximian.  Flavius Constantius became Maximian's successor while Diocletian took on Galerius. This established what's known as the Tetrarchy.While Diocletian had no warm & fuzzy feelings for the followers of Christ, it was really his successor Galerius that urged him to launch a campaign of persecution. Galerius was a military commander who thought Christians made poor soldiers. He knew their loyalty was supremely to their God and thought they made for unreliable troops. Galerius was also a committed pagan who believed in the Roman deities. He attributed any setback for the Army & any of the regular natural disasters that shook the realm, to their displeasure that so many of Rome's subjects were turning to the new god on the block. So it was really at Galerius' urging Diocletian approved the severe measures taken against Christians and their churches.  When Diocletian retired to his villa to raise cabbages & turned the eastern half of the Empire over to Galerius, persecution increased.Eventually, Constantius replaced Maximian in the West, just as Galerius had assumed the mantle in the East. And Diocletian's tetrarchy began to unravel. Galerius decided he wanted to be sole ruler and abducted Constantius' son, Constantine who'd been named successor to his father in the West. When Constantius fell ill, Galerius granted Constantine permission to visit him.Constantius died, & Constantine demanded Galerius recognize him as his co-emperor. No doubt Galerius would have launched a military campaign against Constantine's bid for rule of the West, but Galerius himself was stricken with a deadly illness. On his deathbed, Galerius admitted his policy of persecution of Christians hadn't worked and rescinded his policy of oppression.In the West, Constantine's claim to his father's throne was contested by Maximian's son, Maxentius. The showdown between them is known as the Battle of the Milvian Bridge. Maxentius didn't want Constantine marching his troops into Rome so he tore down the Milvian Bridge after marching his troops across it to meet Constantine. Just in case the battle went against Maxentius, he had a temporary bridge built of a string of boats across the river.At this point, the story gets confused because there's been so many who've written about what happened and the reports are varied. On the day before the battle, Constantine prayed, most likely to the sun-god. As he did, he looked toward the sun & saw a cross. Then, either he saw the words or heard them spoken, “By this sign, Conquer.” That night while he slept, Jesus appeared to him in a dream, telling him to have his soldiers place a Christian symbol on their shields. The next morning, chalk was quickly passed round & the soldiers put what's called the Chiron on their shields. Chi & Rho are the first 2 letters of the Greek word Christos, Christ. In English it looks like a P on top of an X.When the 2 forces met, Constantine's veterans bested Maxentius' less experienced troops, who retreated to their makeshift bridge. While crossing, Maxentius fell into the water & drowned. Constantine then marched victoriously into Rome.A year later, he and his new co-emperor Licinius issued what's known as the Edict of Milan, which decreed an end to all religious persecution, not just of Christians, but all faiths. For Constantine, Jesus was now his divine patron & the cross, an emblem of shame & derision for generations, became instead—a kind of charm. Instead of being a symbol of Rome's brutality in executing its enemies, the cross became a symbol of Imperial power.Bishops began to be called priests as they gained parity with their peers in pagan temples. These Christian priests were shown special favors by Constantine. It didn't take long for the pagan priests to realize which way the winds of political favor were blowing. Many converted.Now à there's been much debate over the legitimacy of Constantine's conversion. Was he genuinely born again or was he just a savvy politician who recognized a trend he could co-opt and turn to his favor? People will disagree on this and my meager offering is unlikely to convince anyone. But I think Constantine was probably a genuine Christian. He certainly did some things after his conversion that are difficult to reconcile with a sincere faith, but we have to remember the moral base he grew up in as the son of a Caesar & as a general of Roman legions was very different from the Biblical morality that's shaped Western civilization.  Also, Constantine's actions which are so decidedly non-Christian, like murdering those who threatened his power, may have been rationalized not as personal acts so much as attempts to secure the peace & safety of the empire. I know that's a stretch, but when analyzing history, we need to be careful about judging people when we don't have at our disposal all the facts they did.If we could sit down with Constantine and say, “You shouldn't have executed that guy.” He could very well say something like, “Yes, as a Christian, I shouldn't have. You're right. But I didn't execute him out of personal anger or suspicion or mere selfishness. It really bothers me that I had to off him; but I discovered he was plotting to usurp my throne and it would have thrown the empire into years of civil war & chaos.” To which we'd reply,  “Well Constance, you need to trust God more. He'll protect you. He put you on the throne, He can keep you there.” And Constantine might reply, “Yeah, I considered that & I agree. But it's a tough call. You see, in terms of my personal life, I trust God. But when it comes to my role as Emperor, I need to make tough choices others who don't wield the power I do will understand.”Let's not forget that Constantine, while being a competent general & astute politician, was at best a novice believer.I share this little made-up discussion because it points up something we're going to encounter again & again in our review of the history of the Church. We look on past ages, on what they believed and the things they did, with an attitude of moral superiority because we wouldn't do the terrible things they did, or we assume would do some things they failed to. We need to be cautious with this attitude for the simple reason that when we take the time to listen to the voices of the past and let them explain themselves, we often come to a new appreciation for the difficulty of their lives & choices. We may not agree with them, but we at least realize in their own minds & hearts, they thought they were doing what was best.You make up your own mind about the genuineness of Constantine's faith, but let me encourage you to spend a little time looking up what Eusebius wrote about him and some of the tough decisions Constantine had to make during his reign.Some of the things regarded as incompatible with a genuine conversion is that he retained his title of Pontifex Maximus as the head of the state religious cult. He conceived & hatched political plots to remove enemies. He murdered those deemed a threat to his power.On the other hand, from 312 on, his favor of Christianity was quite public. He granted the same privileges to bishops, pagan priests enjoyed. He banned crucifixion & ended the punishment of criminals by using them in gladiatorial games. He made Sunday a holiday. His personal charity built several large churches. And his private life demonstrated a pretty consistent genuine faith. His children were brought up in the Church & he practiced marital fidelity, at least, as far as we know. That of course, was certainly NOT the case with previous Emperors or even the wider Roman nobility.Critics like to point to Constantine's delay of baptism to shortly before his death as evidence of a lack of faith. I suggest that it ought to be read exactly the opposite. Remember what we learned about baptism a few episodes back. In that time, it was believed after baptism, there were certain sins that couldn't be forgiven. So people delayed baptism to as close to death as possible, leaving little chance for commission of such a sin to occur. Following his baptism, Constantine never again donned the imperial purple of his office but instead wore only his white baptismal robes. That sounds like he was concerned to enter Heaven, not a casual disregard of it.Chief among Constantine's concerns upon taking control of the Empire was unity. It was unity & strength that had moved Diocletian to establish the tetrarchy. Decades of civil war as one powerful general after another seized control and beat down his challengers had desperately weakened & impoverished the realm. Now that Constantine ruled, he hoped the Church would help bring a new era of unity based on a vital & dynamic faith. It didn't take long before he realized the very thing he hoped would bring unity was itself fractured.When the Church was battered & beaten by imperial persecution, it was forced to be one. But when that pressure was removed, the theological cracks that had been developing for a while became immediately evident. Chief among them was the Donatist Controversy we recently considered. In 314 the Donatists appealed to Constantine to settle the issue on who could ordain elders.Think about what a momentous change this was! The church appealed to the civil authority to rule on a spiritual affair! By doing so, the Church asked for imperial sponsorship.At this point we need a robot to wave its arms manically & cry “Danger! Will Robinson, Danger!”Constantine knew this was not a decision he was capable of making on his own so he gathered some church leaders in Arles in the S of France to decide the issue. The Donatist bishops were outnumbered by the non-Donatists – so you know where this is going. They decided against the Donatists.Instead of accepting the decision, the Donatists called the leaders who opposed them corrupt and labeled the Emperor their lackey.  The Church split between the Donatist churches of North Africa and the rest who now looked to Constantine as their leader.As tensions rose, the Emperor sent troops to Carthage in 317 to enforce the installation of a pro-government bishop opposed by the Donatists. For the first but far from last time, Christians persecuted Christians. Opponents of Constantine were exiled from Carthage. After 4 years, he realized his strong arm tactics weren't working and withdrew his troops.We'll pick it up and this point next time.