CHAPTER XXII

THE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION OF THE LATE EMPIRE

I. THE AUTOCRAT AND HIS COURT

*Powers and titles of the emperor.* The government of the late Roman empire was an autocracy, in which the emperor was the active head of the administration and at the same time the source of all legislative, judicial and military authority. For the exercise of this authority the support of the army and the bureaucracy was essential. All the sovereign rights of the Roman people were regarded as having been transferred to the imperial power. The emperor was no longer the First of the Roman citizens—the _primus inter pares_—but all within the empire were in equal degree his subjects. This view of the exalted status of the emperor was expressed in the assumption of the divine titles Jovius and Herculius by Diocletian and Maximian. Their Christian successors, although for the greater part of the fourth century they accepted deification from their pagan subjects, found a new basis for their absolutism in the conception of the emperor as the elect of God, who ruled by divine guidance. Thus the emperor could speak of the _imperium_ which had been conferred upon him by the heavenly majesty. The adjectives “sacred” and “divine” were applied not only to the emperor’s person but also to everything that in any way belonged to him, and the “imperial divinity” was an expression in common use.

As the sole author of the laws, the emperor was also their final interpreter; and since he acted under divine guidance those who questioned his decisions, and those who neglected or transgressed his ordinances, were both alike guilty of sacrilege. The emperor was held to be freed from the laws in the sense that he was not responsible for his legislative and administrative acts, yet he was bound by the laws in that he had to adhere to the general principles and forms of the established law of the state, and had to abide by his own edicts, for the imperial authority rested upon the authority of the laws.

The titles of the emperor bore witness to his autocratic power. From the principate he had inherited those of Imperator, the significance of which was revealed in its Greek rendering of Autocrator, and Augustus, which was as well suited to the new as to the old position of the emperor. More striking, however, was the use of _dominus_ or _dominus noster_, a title which, as we have seen, was but rarely used during the principate, but which was officially prescribed by Diocletian. The term princeps, although it has long lost its original significance, still continued to be employed in official documents, at times in conjunction with _dominus_.

*Imperial regalia.* The imperial regalia likewise expressed the emperor’s autocratic power. With Diocletian the military garb of the principate was discarded for a robe of silk interwoven with gold and Constantine I introduced the use of the diadem, a narrow band ornamented with jewels, which formed part of the insignia of the Persian monarchs, and was symbolic of absolutism in the ancient world.

*The succession.* We have seen how the scheme devised by Diocletian for regulating the succession to the throne broke down after his retirement. His successors refused to abdicate their imperial authority and only surrendered it with life itself. In the appointment of new emperors two principles found recognition—election and coöptation. The system of election was a legacy from the principate, and recourse was regularly had to it when the imperial throne was vacant. The elected emperor was usually the choice of the leading military and civil officials, approved by the army. In Constantinople, from the fifth century at least, the nomination was made by these officers in conjunction with the reorganized senate, and the new emperor was proclaimed before the people assembled in the Hippodrome. The emperors thus appointed claimed to have been elected by the officials, the Senate, and the army with the sanction of the people. However, as the history of the time shows, the right of election might be exercised at any time, and a victorious usurper became a legal ruler. Thus the autocracy, as has been aptly remarked, was tempered by a legal right of revolution. As this method of election guaranteed a high average of ability among emperors, so the custom of coöptation gave opportunity to admit the claim of dynastic succession. An Augustus could appoint as his colleague the one whom he wished to succeed him on the throne. However, it is to be noted that a son who was thus elevated to the purple became emperor by virtue of his father’s will and not by the right of birth.

*The imperial court.* Under Diocletian the organization and ceremonial of the imperial palace were thoroughly remodelled. The servants of the household—ushers, chamberlains, grooms and the like—were now formed into corps on a military basis, with a definite regulation of insignia, pay, term of service and promotion. In harmony with the general spirit of the autocracy, the court ceremonial was designed to widen the gulf between the ruler and his subjects and to protect his person by rendering it inaccessible. Surrounded by all the pomp and pageantry of an oriental potentate, the Roman emperor was removed from contact with all but his immediate _entourage_. The effect of this seclusion was to enhance the power of the few who were permitted to come into touch with him, in particular the officials of the imperial household. The personal servants of the emperor were placed on the same level as the public administrative officers, and the most important of them, the grand chamberlain, before the close of the fourth century had become one of the great ministers of state, with a seat in the imperial cabinet. In conformity with the assumption of the title _dominus_ and of the diadem, was the requirement of prostration from all who were admitted to an audience with the emperor. In addition to its civilian employees, the palace had its special armed guard. These household troops were the scholarians, organized by Constantine I when he disbanded the praetorian guards who had upheld the cause of Maxentius.

II. THE MILITARY ORGANIZATION

*General characteristics.* The chief characteristics of the military organization of the late empire were the complete separation of civil and military authority except in the person of the emperor, the sharp distinction between the mobile forces and the frontier garrisons, and the ever-increasing predominance of the barbarian element, not merely in the rank and file of the soldiers, but also among the officers of highest rank.

*The limitanei.* The troops composing the frontier garrisons were called _limitanei_, or borderers; also, when stationed along a river frontier, _riparienses_. They were the successors of the garrison army of the principate and were distributed among small fortified posts (_castella_). To each of these garrisons there was assigned for purposes of cultivation a tract of land free from municipal authority. These lands were exempt from taxation, and, although they were not alienable, the right to occupy them passed from father to son with the obligation to military service. Thus the _limitanei_ were practically a border militia. Their numbers were materially increased by Diocletian but reduced again by Constantine I who transferred their best units to the field army. The _limitanei_ ranked below the field troops; their physical standards were lower, and their rewards at the end of their term of service inferior.

*The palatini and comitatenses.* To remedy the greatest weakness in the army of the principate, namely, its lack of mobility, Diocletian formed a permanent field force to accompany the emperor on his campaigns, for it was his intention that the emperors should personally lead their armies. Since the field troops thus formed the _comitatus_, or escort, of the emperor they received the name of _comitatenses_. Later certain units of the _comitatenses_ were called _palatini_, or palace troops, a purely honorary distinction. The _palatini_ and _comitatenses_ were stationed at strategic points well within the frontiers.

*Numbers.* In both the garrison and field armies the old legion was broken up into smaller detachments, to each of which the name legion was given. They still continued to be recruited from Romans, but were regarded as inferior in caliber to the _auxilia_, the light infantry corps which were largely drawn from barbarian volunteers. A great number of new cavalry units were formed, so that the proportion of cavalry to infantry was largely increased. At the opening of the fifth century the troops stationed in Spain, in the Danubian provinces, in the Orient and in Egypt had a nominal strength of 554,500 of which 360,000 were _limitanei_ and 194,500 field troops. However, it is extremely doubtful if the separate detachments were maintained at their full numbers. The scholarians, organized as an imperial bodyguard by Constantine I, numbered 3500. They were divided into seven companies called _scholae_, from the fact that a particular _schola_, or waiting hall in the palace, was assigned to each.

*Recruitment.* In the late empire the ranks of the Roman army stood open to all free men who possessed the requisite physical qualifications. Slaves were also enrolled from the fifth century onwards but their admission to military service brought them freedom. Recruits were either volunteers or conscripts. The universal liability to service existed until the time of Valentinian I, although in practice it was limited to the municipal plebs and the agricultural classes. Valentinian placed the obligation to furnish a specified number of recruits upon the landholders of certain provinces, and levied a corresponding monetary tax upon the other provinces. He also made it obligatory for the sons of soldiers to present themselves for service. Many barbarian peoples, settled within the empire, were likewise under an obligation to furnish a yearly number of recruits, who, however, were regarded as volunteers. Still voluntary recruitment was the rule under the late empire even more than under the principate, and the majority of the volunteers for military service were of barbarian origin. Corps of all sorts were named after barbarian peoples, and while barbarian officers received Roman citizenship, the rank and file remained aliens.

*Discipline.* The chief reason for the victories of the Roman armies of the early principate over their barbarian foes lay in their superior discipline and organization. And the burden of maintaining this discipline had rested upon the junior officers or centurions who came from the senatorial order of the Roman municipalities. By the end of the third century the centuriate had disappeared for lack of volunteers of this class and with its disappearance began a decline in discipline and training. The construction of the fortified camp was no longer required, the soldier’s heavy pack was discarded, and before the close of the fourth century the burdensome defensive armor was also given up. In equipment and tactics the Roman troops of the late empire were on a level with their barbarian opponents. Just as the Roman empire was unable to assimilate the barbarian settlers within its frontiers, so the Roman army proved unable to absorb the barbarian elements within its ranks.

*Foederati.* The decline in efficiency of the Roman troops and the confessed inability of the state to deal with its military obligations led to the taking into the Roman pay of warlike peoples along the Roman frontiers. Such peoples were called federated allies (_foederati_), and guaranteed to protect the territory of the empire in return for a stipulated remuneration in money or supplies. Such were the terms upon which the Goths were granted lands south of the Danube by Theodosius the Great. But in this case, as in others, it is hard to distinguish between subsidies paid to _foederati_ and the payments made by many emperors to purchase immunity from invasion by dangerous neighbors. A danger inherent in the system was that the _foederati_ might at any moment turn their arms against their employers. Retaining as they did their political autonomy and serving under their own chiefs, the _foederati_ were not regarded as forming a part of the imperial forces.

*The duces and the magistri militum.* We have already referred to the complete separation of military and civil authority. This was carried out as far as the border troops were concerned by Diocletian. He divided the frontiers into military districts which corresponded to the provinces and placed the garrisons in each under an officer with the title of _dux_. The _duces_ of highest rank were regularly known as _comites_ (counts). Under Diocletian the praetorian prefects remained the highest military officers, and were in command of the field army. As we have seen, Constantine I deprived the praetorian prefecture of its military functions and appointed two new commanders-in-chief—the master of the foot (_magister peditum_) and the master of the horse (_magister equitum_). Under the successors of Constantine these offices were increased in number and the distinction between infantry and cavalry commands was abandoned. Consequently, the titles of master of the horse and master of the foot were altered to those of masters of horse and foot, masters of each service, or masters of the soldiers. In the East by the close of the fourth century there were two masters of the soldiers at Constantinople, each commanding half of the palatini in the vicinity of the capital, and three others commanding the _comitatenses_ in the Orient, Thrace and Illyricum, respectively. In the West there were two masterships at the court, and a master of the horse in the diocese of Gaul.

But while in the East the several masters of the soldiers enjoyed independent commands, in the West by 395 A. D. there had developed a concentration of the supreme military power in the hands of one master, who united in his person the two masterships at the court. The master in Gaul, with the _duces_ and _comites_ in the provinces were under his orders. This subordination was emphasized by the fact that the heads of the office staff (_principes_) of the _comites_ and _duces_ were appointed by the master at the court. On the other hand, in the East, these _principes_ were appointed by a civil official, the master of the offices, who was also charged with the inspection of the frontier defences, and from the opening of the fifth century exercised judicial authority over the _duces_. The latter, however, remained the military subordinates of the masters of the soldiers. Thus the concentration of military power in the West in the hands of a single commander-in-chief prepared the way for the rise of the king-makers of the fifth century, while the division of the higher command in the East prevented a single general from completely dominating the political situation.

*Judicial status of the soldiers.* Characteristic of the times was the removal of soldiers from the jurisdiction of the civil authority. In the fourth century they could only be prosecuted on criminal charges in the courts of their military commanders, and in the fifth century they were granted this privilege in civil cases also.

III. THE PERFECTION OF THE BUREAUCRACY

*The administrative divisions of the empire.* The administrative machinery of the late empire was simply an outgrowth from, and a more complete form of, the bureaucracy which had developed under the principate. All the officers of the state were now servants of the emperor, appointed by him and dismissed at his pleasure. At the basis of the administrative organization lay the division of the empire into prefectures, dioceses and provinces. By the close of the fourth century there were one hundred and twenty provinces, grouped into fourteen dioceses, which made up the four prefectures of Gaul, Italy, Illyricum and the Orient.(17) This division of the empire into four prefectures was carried out under Constans and Constantius. Until the death of Constantine I, the pretorian prefecture had remained an office associated with the person of the emperor, and from the time of Diocletian the number of praetorian prefects had corresponded to the number of Augusti, each emperor appointing one for his own part of the empire. This practice was followed by the sons of Constantine. But after Constans had overthrown Constantine II he left the latter’s territory under the administration of a special prefect, thus establishing the prefecture of Gaul. He afterwards appointed another prefect for Illyricum, which was separated from the jurisdiction of the prefect of Italy. When Constantius became sole emperor in 351, he retained the three prefectures of Constans, and his own previous dominions constituted the fourth, that of the Orient. In 379, Gratian, the emperor in the West, transferred the Illyrian prefecture from his sphere to that of Theodosius, his colleague in the East.

*The praetorian prefects and their subordinates.* Each province had a civil governor, variously known as proconsul, consular, _corrector_ or _praeses_, according to the relative importance of his governorship. The provincial governors, with a few exceptions, were subject to the vicars, who were in charge of the several dioceses, and who, in turn, were under the administrative control of the four praetorian prefects, the heads of the prefectures. The prefects and their subordinates were in charge of the raising of taxes paid in kind and of the administration of justice for the provincials. Italy was now divided into several provinces and Italian soil was no longer exempt from taxation. With the exception of the population of Rome, the inhabitants of Italy were upon the same footing as those of the other provinces, with whom they shared the name of provincials.

*The central administrative bureaus.* The remaining branches of the civil administration were directed by a group of ministers resident at the court, with subordinates in the various administrative departments. These ministers were the master of the offices, the quaestor, the count of the sacred largesses and the count of the private purse. The master of the offices united in his hands the control of the secretarial bureaus of the palace, the oversight over the public post, the direction of the _agentes-in-rebus_, who constituted the imperial secret service, the command of the scholarians, the supervision of several branches of the palace administration, and jurisdiction over practically all of the personal servants of the emperor. As we have seen, in the East he also exercised certain authority over the _duces_. The quaestor (to be distinguished from the holders of the urban quaestorships) was a minister of justice, part of whose duties consisted in the preparation of imperial legislation. The count of the sacred largesses was the successor to the _rationalis_, who had been in charge of the imperial fiscus under the principate. He was charged with the collection and disbursement of the public revenues which were paid in money, and his title was derived from the fact that the funds under his control were used for the imperial donations or largesses. He likewise had the supervision of the imperial factories engaged in the manufacture of silks, and other textiles. The count of the private purse was the head of the department of the _res privata_ and in charge of the revenues from the imperial domains. These ministers with certain other administrative officials of the court and the chief officers of the imperial household, such as the grand chamberlain, were known as the palace dignitaries (_dignitates palatinae_).

Rome and Constantinople were exempt from the authority of the praetorian prefects, and were each administered by a city prefect. Two consuls were nominated annually, one at Rome and one at Constantinople, and gave their names to the official year, but their duties were limited to furnishing certain entertainments for the populace of the capitals. This was also the sole function of the praetorship and quaestorship, which were now filled by imperial appointment upon the recommendation of the city prefects.

*The imperial council of state.* The system of graded subordination, which placed the lower officials in each department under the orders of those having wider powers, brought about the ultimate concentration of the civil and military administration in the hands of about twenty officers who were directly in touch with the emperor and responsible to him alone. From these were drawn the members of the council of state or imperial consistory (so-called from the obligation to remain standing in the presence of the emperor). Permanent members of this council were the four ministers of the court mentioned above, who were known as the counts of the consistory, and also the grand chamberlain.

*The officia.* The officials who were at the head of administrative departments, civil or military, had at their disposal an _officium_ or bureau, the members of which were known as _officiales_. These subaltern employees of the state were free men, no longer slaves or freedmen like their predecessors of the principate. As in the case of the palace servants their numbers, terms of service (_militia_), promotion and discharge were fixed by imperial edicts, and they were not placed at the mercy of the functionary whose office staff they formed. Indeed, owing to the permanent character of the organization of the _officia_, the burden of the routine administration fell upon their members, and not upon their temporary director, for whose acts they were made to share the responsibility. This was particularly true of the bureau chief (_princeps_), who was regularly appointed from the _agentes-in-rebus_ as a spy upon the actions of his superior. Like the soldiers, the civil service employees enjoyed exemption from the ordinary courts of justice and the privilege of defending themselves in the courts of the chief of that branch of the administration to which they were attached.

*Official corruption.* The attitude of the emperor towards his chief servants was marked by mistrust and suspicion. The policy which led to the attempt to weaken the more powerful offices by the separation of civil and military authority and by the subdivision of the administrative districts was adhered to in the provisions for direct communication between the emperor and the subordinates of the great ministers, and the highly developed system of state espionage whereby the ruler kept watch upon the actions of his officers. However, in spite of the efforts of the majority of the emperors to secure an honest and efficient administration, the actual result of the development of this elaborate bureaucratic system was the erection of an almost impassable barrier between the emperor and his subjects. Neither did their complaints reach his ears, nor were his ordinances for their relief effective, because the officials coöperated with one another to conceal their misdemeanors and to enrich themselves at the expense of the civilian population. So thoroughly had the spirit of “graft” and intrigue penetrated all ranks of the civil and military service that to gratify their personal ambitions they were even willing to compromise the safety of the empire itself. The burden imposed upon the tax payers by the vast military and civil establishment was immensely aggravated by the extortions practised by representatives of both services, whose rapacity knew no bounds.

IV. THE NOBILITY AND THE SENATE

*The senatorial order.* The conflict between the principate and the Senate resulted, as we have seen, in the exclusion of members of the senatorial order from all offices of state. But it was unthinkable that the great landed proprietors should be permanently shut out of the public service, and with the loss of any claim to authority by the Senate as a body there was no longer any objection to their entering the service of the emperor. Consequently, the essential distinction between the senatorial and equestrian orders vanished and a new senatorial order arose into which was merged a large equestrian element.

*The clarissimate.* The distinguishing mark of this new senatorial order was the right to the title _clarissimus_, which might be acquired by inheritance, by imperial grant, or by the attainment of an office which conferred the clarissimate upon its holder, either during his term of service or upon his retirement. Practically all of the higher officials in the imperial service were _clarissimi_ and there was consequently a great increase in the number of senators in the course of the fourth century. The place of the equestrian order was in part filled by the perfectissimate, an inferior order of rank conferred upon lower imperial officials and municipal senators.

*The higher orders of rank.* The development of an oriental court life with its elaborate ceremonial demanding a fixed order of precedence among those present at imperial audiences, and the increase in the number and importance of the public officials, which necessitated a classification of the various official posts from the point of view of rank, led to the establishment of new and more exclusive rank classes within the circle of the _clarissimi_. There were in the ascending order the _spectabiles_, or Respectables, and the _illustres_, or Illustrious. The illustriate was conferred solely upon the great ministers of state. Under Justinian, in the sixth century, there was established the still higher order of the _gloriosi_ (the Glorious). The official positions, to which these titles of rank were attached, were called dignities (_dignitates_), and the great demand for admission to these rank classes, which entitled their members to valuable privileges, caused the conferment of many honorary dignities, i. e., titles of official posts with their appropriate rank but without the duties of office.

*The patricians and counts.* The other titles of nobility were those of patrician and count. The former, created by Constantine I in imitation of the older patrician order, was granted solely to the highest dignitaries, although it was not attached to any definite official post. It was Constantine also who revived the _comitiva_, which had been used irregularly of the chief associates of the princeps until the death of Severus Alexander, and put it to a new use. The term count became a title of honor definitely attached to certain offices, but also capable of being conferred as a favor or a reward of merit. Like the other titles of rank the patriciate and the _comitiva_ brought with them not only precedence but also valuable immunities.

Nothing illustrates more clearly the importance of official positions than the division of the people of the empire as a whole into two classes—the _honestiores_ (more honorable) and the _humiliores_ (more humble or plebeians). The former class, which included the imperial senators, the soldiers and the veterans, were exempt from execution except with the emperor’s consent, from penal servitude, and, with some limitations, from torture in the course of judicial investigations.

*The Senate.* The Senate at Rome was not abolished but continued to function both as a municipal council and as the mouthpiece of the senatorial order. After the founding of Constantinople a similar Senate was established there for the eastern part of the empire. At first all _clarissimi_ had a right to participate in the meetings of the Senate, and their sons were expected to fill the quaestorship. However, after the middle of the fifth century only those having the rank of _illustris_ were admitted to the senate chamber, and the active Senate became a gathering of the highest officials and ex-officials of the state. In addition to their functions as municipal councils, the Senates made recommendations for the quaestorship and praetorship, discussed with the imperial officials the taxes which affected the senatorial order and even participated to a certain extent in drafting imperial legislation.

*The senators and the municipalities.* The most important privilege enjoyed by the senators was their exemption from the control of the officials of the municipalities within whose territories their estates were situated. As we shall see, this was one of the chief reasons for the extension of their power in the provinces.

V. THE SYSTEM OF TAXATION AND THE RUIN OF THE MUNICIPALITIES

*The system of taxation.* The debasement of the Roman coinage in the course of the third century resulted in a thorough disorganization of the public finances, for the taxes and disbursements fixed in terms of money had no longer their previous value. Diocletian completely reorganized the financial system by introducing a general scheme of taxation and remuneration in produce in place of coin, and by establishing a new method of assessment. This latter consisted in the division of the land, cattle and agricultural labor into units of equal tax value. The unit of taxation for land was the _iugum_, which differed in size for arable land, vineyards and orchards, as well as for soils of varying fertility. A fixed number of cattle likewise constituted a _iugum_, assessed at the same value as a _iugum_ of land. The unit of labor, regarded as the equivalent of the _iugum_ was the _caput_, which was defined as one man or two women engaged in agricultural occupations. Thus the workers were taxed in addition to the land they tilled.

*The indiction.* The amount of the land tax to be raised each year was announced in an annual proclamation called an indiction (_indictio_), and a revaluation of the tax units was made periodically. The term indiction was also used of the period between two reassessments, which occurred at first every five, but after 312 A. D. every fifteen, years. The indictions thus furnished the basis for a new system of chronology. From the taxes raised in kind the soldiers and those in the civil service received their pay in the form of an allowance (_annona_), which might under certain conditions be commuted for its monetary equivalent.

*Special taxes.* In addition to the land tax raised in the form of produce on the basis of the _iuga_ and _capita_, there were certain other taxes payable in money. The chief of these were: the _chrysargyrum_, a tax levied on all trades; the _aurum coronarium_, a nominally voluntary but really compulsory contribution paid by the municipal senators every five years to enable the emperor to distribute largesses to his officials and troops; the _aurum oblaticium_, a similar payment made by the senatorial order of the empire; and the _collatio glebalis_ or _follis senatoria_, a special tax imposed upon senators by Constantine I.

*Munera.* Besides the taxes, the government laid upon its subjects the burden of performing certain public services without compensation. The most burdensome of these charges (_munera_) were the upkeep of the public post, and the furnishing of quarters (_hospitium_) and rendering other services in connection with the movement of troops, officials and supplies. So heavy was the burden of the post that it denuded of draught animals the districts it traversed and had to be abandoned in the sixth century. It was in connection with the exaction of these charges, the collection of the revenue in kind, and in the administration of justice that the imperial officials found opportunity to practice extortions which weighed more heavily upon the taxpayers than the taxes themselves.

*The curiales.* The class which suffered most directly from the established fiscal system was that of the _curiales_, as the members of the municipal senatorial orders were now called. In the course of the third century the status of _curialis_ had become hereditary, and was an obligation upon all who possessed a definite property qualification, fixed at twenty-five _iugera_ of land in the fourth century. Since the local senates had become agents of the _fiscus_ in collecting the revenues from their municipal territories, the _curiales_, through the municipal officers or committees of the local council, had to apportion the quotas of the municipal burden among the landholders, to collect them, and be responsible for the payment of the total amount to the public officers. They were also responsible for the maintenance of the public post and the performance of other services resting upon the municipalities. Inevitably the _curiales_ sought to protect themselves by shifting the burden of taxation as much as possible upon the lower classes in the municipal territory who regarded them as oppressors. “Every _curialis_ is a tyrant” (_quot curiales, tot tyranni_), says a fourth century writer.

The exactions of the imperial officers proved more than the _curiales_ could meet, and they sought to withdraw from their order and its obligations. But the government required responsible landholders and so they were forbidden to dispose of their properties or to leave their place of residence without special permission. And when they tried to find exemption by entering the imperial senatorial order, the military or civil service, or the clergy, these avenues of escape were likewise closed. Only those who had filled all the municipal offices might become _clarissimi_ and immune from the curial obligations, and only clergy of the rank of bishops were excused, while the lower orders had to supply a substitute or surrender two-thirds of their property before they could leave the _curia_. Valentinian I attempted to aid the _curiales_ by appointing officials known as _defensores __civitatium_ or _plebis_—“defenders of the cities” or “of the plebs”—whose duty it was to check unjust exactions and protect the common people against officials and judges. These _defensores_ were at first persons of influence, chosen by the municipalities and approved by the emperor. They were empowered to try certain cases themselves, and had the right to address themselves directly to the emperor without reference to the provincial governor. However, the _defensores_ accomplished little, and in the fifth century their office had become an additional obligatory service resting upon the _curiales_. By 429 A. D. hardly a _curialis_ with adequate property qualifications could be found in any city, and by the sixth century the class of municipal landholders had practically disappeared.

*The hereditary corporations.* We have seen how, in the course of the third century, the professional corporations were burdened with the duty of performing certain public services in the interest of the communities to which they belonged. The first step taken by the state to insure the performance of these services was to make this duty a charge which rested permanently upon the property of the members of the corporations (_corporati_), no matter into whose possession it passed. But men as well as money were needed for the performance of these charges, and consequently, in order to prevent a decline in the numbers of the _corporati_, the state made membership in these associations an hereditary obligation. This was really an extension of the principle that a man was bound to perform certain services in the community in which he was enrolled (his _origo_). Finally, the emperors exercised the right of conscription, and attached to the various corporations which were in need of recruits persons who were engaged in less needed occupations.

The burden of their charges led the _corporati_, like the _curiales_, to seek refuge in some other profession. They tried to secure enrollment in the army, among the _officiales_, or to become _coloni_ of the emperor or senatorial landholders. But all these havens of refuge were closed by imperial edicts, and when discovered the truant _corporatus_ was dragged back to his association. Only those who attained the highest office within their corporation were legally freed from their obligations.

Although the corporations probably retained their former organization and officers, their active heads were now called _patroni_, and these directed the public services of their colleges. In Rome and Constantinople the colleges were under the supervision of the city prefects, in the municipalities under that of the local magistrates and provincial governors. The professional colleges are the only ones which survived during the late empire. The religious and funerary associations vanished with the spread of Christianity and the general impoverishment of the lower classes.

*The coloni.* Among the agricultural classes the forces which had developed in the course of the principate were still at work. In the fourth century the attachment of the tenant farmers and peasant laborers to the soil was extended to the whole empire. The status of the _coloni_ became hereditary, like that of the _corporati_. Their condition was half way between that of freedmen and that of slaves, for while they were bound to the estate upon which they resided and passed with it from one owner to another, they were not absolutely under the power of the owner and could not be disposed of by him apart from the land. They had also other rights which slaves lacked, yet as time went on their condition tended to approximate more and more closely to servitude. “Slaves of the soil,” they were called in the sixth century. As this status of serfdom was hitherto unknown in Roman law, a great many imperial enactments had to be issued defining the rights and duties of the _coloni_.

*The growth of private domains.* The development of vast private estates at the expense of the public and imperial domains was another prominent characteristic of the times. This was the result of the failure of the state to check the spread of waste lands, in spite of its attempt to develop the system of hereditary leaseholds to small farmers. To maintain the level of production the government opened the way for the great proprietors to take over all deserted lands under various forms of heritable lease or in freehold tenure. The system of attaching waste lands to those of the neighboring landholders and making the latter responsible for their cultivation was an added cause of the growth of large estates. The result of this development was that the state tenants became _coloni_ of the great landlords, and the latter were responsible for the taxes and other obligations of their _coloni_ to the state. The weight of these obligations rested as before upon the _coloni_, and led to their continued flight and a further increase in waste land. Like the _curiales_ and _corporati_, the _coloni_ tried to exchange their status by entering the public service or attaining admission to some other social class. But, in like manner also, they found themselves excluded from all other occupations and classes. Only the fugitive _colonus_ who had managed to remain undetected for thirty years (in the case of women twenty years) could escape being handed back to the land which he had deserted.

*The power of the landed nobility.* The immunities of the senatorial order and the power of the high officials tended to give an almost feudal character to the position of the great landed proprietors. These had inherited the judicial powers of the procurators on the imperial estates and transferred this authority to their own domains. Over their slaves and _coloni_ they exercised the powers of police and jurisdiction. As they were not subject to the municipal authorities, and, during the greater part of the fourth century, were also exempt from the jurisdiction of the provincial governors they assumed a very independent position, and did not hesitate to defy the municipal magistrates and even the minor agents of the imperial government. Their power made their protection extremely valuable, and led to a new type of patronage. Individuals and village communities, desirous of escaping from the exactions to which they were subject in their municipal districts, placed themselves under the patronage of some senatorial landholder and became his tenants. And he did not hesitate to afford them an illegal protection against the local authorities. Complaints by the latter to higher officials secured little redress for they were themselves proprietors and sided with those of their own class. The power of the state was thus nullified by its chief servants and the landed aristocracy became the heirs of the empire.

*Resumé.* The transformation which society underwent during the empire may be aptly described as the transition from a régime of individual initiative to a régime of status, that is, from one in which the position of an individual in society was mainly determined by his own volition to one in which this was fixed by the accident of his birth. The population of the empire was divided into a number of sharply defined castes, each of which was compelled to play a definite rôle in the life of the state. The sons of senators, soldiers, _curiales_, _corporati_, and _coloni_ had to follow in their fathers’ walks of life, and each sought to escape from the tasks to which he was born. In the eyes of the government _collegiati_, _curiales_, and _coloni_ existed solely to pay taxes for the support of the bureaucracy and the army. The consequence was the attempted flight of the population to the army, civil service, the church or the wilderness. Private industry languished, commerce declined, the fields lay untilled; a general feeling of hopelessness paralyzed all initiative. And when the barbarians began to occupy the provinces they encountered no national resistance; rather were they looked upon as deliverers from the burdensome yoke of Rome.