*Theodosius I, the Great, 378 A. D.* To meet this crisis, Gratian appointed as Augustus, Theodosius, the son of the Theodosius who had distinguished himself as a general under Valentinian I, but who had fallen a victim to official intrigues at the latter's death. The new emperor undertook with vigor the task of clearing Thrace and the adjoining provinces of the plundering hordes of Goths. By 382 he had forced them to sue for peace and had settled them on waste lands to the south of the Danube. There they remained as an independent people under their native rulers, bound, however, to supply contingents to the Roman armies in return for fixed subsidies. They thus became imperial _foederati_.

*The revolt of Arbogast and Eugenius, 392 A. D.* In 391 Theodosius reduced the Goths to submission when a revolt of the troops in Britain raised Magnus Maximus to the purple. Gratian had shown himself a feeble administrator and had alienated the sympathies of the bulk of his troops by his partiality towards the Germans in his service. Maximus at once crossed into Gaul and was confronted by Gratian at Paris. But the latter was deserted by his army, and was captured and put to death. The authority of Maximus was now firmly established in Britain, Gaul and Spain. He demanded and received recognition from Theodosius, who was prevented from avenging Gratian's death by threatening conditions in the East. The third Augustus, the young Valentinian II, acquired for the time an independent sphere of authority in Italy. However, in 387 A. D. Maximus suddenly crossed the Alps and forced him to take refuge with Theodosius. Having come to terms with Persia, Theodosius refused to sanction the action of Maximus and marched against him. The troops of Maximus were defeated, and he himself captured and executed at Aquileia (388 A. D.). Gaul and the West were speedily recovered for Theodosius by his general, Arbogast.

*Theodosius and Ambrose.* While Theodosius was at Milan in 390 occurred his famous conflict with Bishop Ambrose. In a riot at Thessalonica the commander of the garrison had been killed by the mob, and Theodosius, in his anger, had turned loose the soldiery upon the citizens, of whom seven thousand are said to have been butchered. Scarcely had Theodosius issued the order when he was seized with regret, and endeavored to countermand it; but it was too late. Upon the news of the ma.s.sacre, Ambrose excluded the emperor from his church and refused to admit him to communion until he had publicly done penance for his sin. For eight months Theodosius refused to yield, but Ambrose remained obdurate, and the emperor finally humbled himself and publicly acknowledged his guilt. The question at issue was not the supremacy of secular or religious authority, but whether the emperor was subject to the same moral laws as other men. Nevertheless, it required a high degree of courage for the bishop to a.s.sert the right of the church to pa.s.s judgment in such a matter upon the head of the state.

*The revolt of Arbogast and Eugenius, 392 A. D.* In 391 Theodosius returned to the East, leaving Valentinian as emperor in the West with his residence at Vienna in Gaul. But the powerful Arbogast, whom Theodosius had placed in command of the western troops, refused to act under the orders of the young Augustus, and finally compa.s.sed his death (392 A. D.).

However, he did not dare, in view of his Frankish origin, to a.s.sume the purple himself, and so induced a prominent Roman official named Eugenius to accept the t.i.tle of Augustus. The authority of Eugenius was acknowledged in Italy and all the West, but Theodosius refused him recognition and prepared to crush the usurper. In the autumn of 394 A. D., at the river Frigidus, near Aquileia, Theodosius won a complete victory over Arbogast and Eugenius. The former committed suicide and the latter was put to death.

Early in the next year Theodosius died, leaving the empire to his two sons, Arcadius and Honorius, upon both of whom he had previously conferred the rank of Augustus. The success of Theodosius in coping with the Gothic peril and in suppressing the usurpers Maximus and Eugenius, combined with his vigorous championship of orthodox Christianity, won for him the t.i.tle of the "Great." With the accession of Arcadius and Honorius and the permanent division of the empire into an eastern and a western half, there begins a new epoch of Roman history.

[Ill.u.s.tration: The Roman Empire in 395 A. D.]

CHAPTER XXII

THE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION OF THE LATE EMPIRE

I. THE AUTOCRAT AND HIS COURT

*Powers and t.i.tles 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 a.s.sumption of the divine t.i.tles 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 G.o.d, 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 t.i.tles of the emperor bore witness to his autocratic power. From the princ.i.p.ate 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 t.i.tle which, as we have seen, was but rarely used during the princ.i.p.ate, 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 doc.u.ments, 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 princ.i.p.ate 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 cooptation. The system of election was a legacy from the princ.i.p.ate, 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 a.s.sembled 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 cooptation 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 a.s.sumption of the t.i.tle _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 princ.i.p.ate and were distributed among small fortified posts (_castella_).

To each of these garrisons there was a.s.signed for purposes of cultivation a tract of land free from munic.i.p.al authority. These lands were exempt from taxation, and, although they were not alienable, the right to occupy them pa.s.sed 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 princ.i.p.ate, 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 a.s.signed 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 munic.i.p.al plebs and the agricultural cla.s.ses. 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 princ.i.p.ate, 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 princ.i.p.ate 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 munic.i.p.alities. By the end of the third century the centuriate had disappeared for lack of volunteers of this cla.s.s 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 a.s.similate 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 t.i.tle 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 t.i.tles 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 Illyric.u.m, 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 princ.i.p.ate. 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, Illyric.u.m 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 a.s.sociated 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 Illyric.u.m, 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 const.i.tuted 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 const.i.tuted 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 princ.i.p.ate. He was charged with the collection and disburs.e.m.e.nt of the public revenues which were paid in money, and his t.i.tle 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 princ.i.p.ate. 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 att.i.tude 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 impa.s.sable 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 cooperated 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 n.o.bILITY AND THE SENATE

*The senatorial order.* The conflict between the princ.i.p.ate 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 t.i.tle _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 munic.i.p.al senators.