Chapter 5 Securing the Caracallan Empire The transition from a principate shared between the sons of Severus in early 211 to the sole rule of Caracalla, by the close of the same year, had been marked by some of the worst internecine violence ever to be witnessed within the im- perial household. Our main literary sources for the period, Dio and Herodian, differ in points of detail regarding the ways in which the rivalry between Caracalla and Geta was made manifest, but they agree that the final clash between the Augusti was brutal, the younger brother stabbed to death while clinging to his mother.1 While the enmity between both men appears to have been public knowledge, the death of Geta represented a watershed moment in the history of the Empire, nonetheless; emperors had been murdered in the past, but never before had the assassin been someone who already possessed a share of the imperial throne.2 After eliminating his co-emperor in such an open and ferocious manner, the extant evidence suggests that Caracalla felt vulnerable and was concerned about the public legitimacy of his own princi- pate.3 Indeed, given Severus’ nearly continual promotion of his sons as a guar- antee of imperial harmony and continuity, Caracalla’s position at the outset of 212 must have seemed worryingly precarious.4 From the moment of Geta’s death, Caracalla was compelled to offer a pub- lic re-evaluation of recent events, including the assassination of his brother.5 It has already been noted that the emperor made reference to the murder of Geta in the course of the Antonine Constitution, and so it is imperative that the edict is considered as a component part of this wider process. My task in this chapter, then, will be to assess the political significance of the Constitutio Antoniniana in consolidating Caracalla’s position as the sole emperor at a time when his rule seemed fragile. This examination will begin with a consider- ation of the aequitas promoted in the Giessen text, noting that, while scholars such as Mennen and Honoré are partially correct to view the legislation in the context of a wider social change, the social levelling embodied in the edict also contains a more immediate political application when set against the 1 Dio 78.2.3; Hdn. 4.1.3. 2 For an allusion to the brothers’ divergent personalities, see Dio 78.1.4. 3 The economic aspect of army pay and donatives has been discussed in Chapters 2 and 3. 4 Rowan (2012) 93. 5 Kemezis (2014) 31–32. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2018 | doi 10.1163/9789004368231_007 114 Chapter 5 background of a strained relationship between the imperial household and senatorial elite.6 Following this, I will then outline how the Antonine Constitution can be seen to promote and consolidate the Caracallan regime in three distinct ways. Firstly, the religious ideology present in the text will be examined, since this served the dual purpose of promoting an image of personal piety on the part of the emperor, while also allowing him to control the narrative of the events surrounding Geta’s demise. Secondly, Caracalla’s promotion of his own im- perial indulgentia will be discussed. The general importance of this virtue to the Augusti will be observed briefly, since the promotion of generosity was far from unique to Caracalla, before the value of such a display in the context of 212 is noted. Finally, the extent to which the constitutio can be deemed a social contract between the emperor and his citizens will be considered. I will argue that if the legislation is examined through the lens of the patron-client rela- tionship, a theory that Caracalla was attempting to forge a personal tie of loy- alty between himself and the new cives becomes persuasive. This combination of factors ultimately supports the hypothesis that the Constitutio Antoniniana was a key element of Caracallan propaganda in the aftermath of Geta’s assas- sination, in which the emperor endeavoured to redefine the character of the Severan dynasty. The Drive for Aequitas The jurist Paul, a contemporary of the Severi, recorded the general principle that ‘in all matters, especially the law, equity (aequitas) must be considered.’7 Similarly, the drive for equity appears to have been an ideological concern that occupied the earlier Severan emperors. Both Septimius Severus and Caracalla can be observed arbitrating cases, for example, and emphasising how their perception of aequitas had moved them to reach their final conclusions and judgments.8 It is tempting to view this phenomenon in the context of a 6 Mennen (2011) 22–23; Honoré (2004) 114. 7 Dig. 50.17.90: in omnibus quidem, maxime tamen in iurem aequitas spectanda est (emphasis added). 8 For an example of this under Septimius Severus, see Dig. 36(34).1.76.1. For an example from the reign of Caracalla, see CJ 2.1.4. It should be noted, however, that this was not a guaran- tee of complete legal equality (social distinctions were maintained, for example), but rather an assurance of equitable treatment in the spirit of the written law. For more on this, see Buraselis (2007) 60–65..