The Historians of Late Antiquity by David Rohrbacher

Author:David Rohrbacher
Language: eng
Format: mobi, epub
Publisher: Taylor and Francis
Published: 2013-04-14T12:00:00+00:00

The bureaucracy

With the exception of the army, the Roman empire had always operated with a surprisingly small number of government employees by modern standards. Tax collection and the erection and maintenance of public works were performed almost entirely at the local level. In comparison with the negligible size of the early imperial administration, however, the later empire saw an explosion in the number of imperial functionaries. This expansion was in part a product of the large increase in the number of provinces and other geographical subdivisions of the empire, which was in turn a product of the increasing demand for tax revenue. This increase in the imperial reach did not, however, necessarily lead to the diminishment of the power of the individual subject. Several layers of government, and in some cases ecclesiastical government as well, created opportunities for some Romans to manipulate the system to their own ends.

Posts in the bureaucracy were filled through a vast network of patronage. Emperors repeatedly promulgated laws which sought to prevent those who would normally have served in local government from receiving exemptions through imperial appointment. This suggests that service in the imperial administration had become increasingly more appealing in the later empire. The highest ranking officials of the bureaucracy, both civilian and military, formed the consistorium, the emperor’s group of advisors, who discussed policy, heard legal cases, received embassies, and participated in ceremonial activities.

Historians held emperors responsible for the quality of their appointments and the activities of their subordinates. For Eutropius, a mark of Antoninus Pius’ honor is that he “gave office to good men” and “detested evil ones” (8.8.2). Eutropius, who himself held several high offices, alternately considers the issue from the perspective of a subject and of an official. He strongly praises Augustus for his great loyalty to his friends, whom he raised to positions of great dignity (7.8.4), while criticizing both Constantius and Julian for being too trusting and generous toward friends (10.15.2, 10.16.3). For Victor, the reigns of Constantine, Constans, and Constantius II were all marred by the poor behavior of some of their subordinates, although this sort of criticism may simply serve as a way for the historian to criticize near-contemporary administrations without insulting the emperors themselves (41.21, 41.23, 42.25). Victor elsewhere considers the roles of subordinates in shaping an emperor’s reign. The emperor Claudius, for example, made outstanding decisions early in his reign, despite his incompetence, because of his good advisors (4.1). Unfortunately, by the end of his reign Claudius was making worse decisions under the influence of his wife and freedmen (4.5). Commodus was such a bad emperor that his dissolute advisors tried to poison him, as he was even more depraved than they were (17.7).

In his account of the reign of Constantius, Ammianus stresses the influence of the eunuchs. The centralization of power and the isolation of the emperor had resulted in the rise of numerous unofficial channels of influence, and for Ammianus, as for many of his contemporaries, the power of eunuchs was thought to be particularly disgraceful (Hopwood 1978; Guyot 1980; Matthews 1989: 274–7; Tougher 1999).

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.