Talk:Tetrarchy

Grammar
{by naming two "Junior Emperors", or Caesari,} I can't follow the grammar here -- why "Caesari" ? I would have expected "Caesaribus", or "Caesares".
 * The correct plural form would be "Caesares," but I have changed it to "Caesar" in the text; two Caesares under each Augustus would have made it a hexarchy instead of a tetrarchy. Flauto Dolce 23:48, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)

In addition the convention would be to put Latin in italics. So the Latin plural would written Caesares and the English plural would be written Caesars. Ashleyvh 09:21, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Revised article
I thought the old Tetrarchy article looked like it could do with some touching up. I've defined 'Tetrarchy' specifically as the Roman system of government which was introduced by Diocletian (since that's the best known Tetrarchy), and appended the other known tetrarchies in a little section at the bottom. Is the Tetrarch page redundant? Is it worth making a disambig page for other tetrarchies or is it sufficient just to have them appended here?

Just one little thing, the location of SIRMIUM, one of the four capitals. You wrote "the SLAVONIAN region of modern Serbia". Slavonia is in Croatia, and the Serbian region you are talking about (where Sirmium is located) is called SREM.


 * This question may be a bit old now, but for what it's worth, yes, I think some kind of disambiguation for other tetrarchies would be good, if only because the page Tetrarch, which discusses the office in general, ends up here, which is about a particular case. And no, I don't think the Tetrarch page is redundant, for the same reason.Swanny18 15:39, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
 * PS I've deleted the word 'unstable' to describe the Jewish Tetrarchy; it lasted twice as long as the Roman one, and the transition of power was far less messy, so I think describing it thus is unjustified in this context. Swanny18 15:43, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

"Quadrumvirate"
Who introduced that term? "Tetrarchy" is a "modern" (i.e. not from antiquity) term to describe that system of government; as far as I know, no one ever uses the Latin word, which isn't even attested (neither for the Diocletianic nor for the other examples of a tetrarchy). I'd suggest removing the reference and possibly the Redirect, too. Varana 19:28, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Hispaniae Under Diocletian's Early Tetrarchy
I have noticed that Hispania appears as part of Maximian's Territory in the map at the top of the page ( http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/07/Tetrarchy_map3.jpg ).

Yet, further down, on the timeline, Hispaniae is listed as Constantius' territory.

Could someone explain when Hispania transferred over from Maximian to Constantius?

Jrajul (talk) 00:06, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:06, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Medallion of Licinius II, British Museum (obverse).png