Late antique developments

Late antiquity saw the creation of a semi-totalitarian system of governance called the Dominate, after the title dominus (“lord”) assumed by a now openly autocratic emperor. Legal theorists helped prop up this autocracy with the proposition that the sovereignty of the people had passed to the emperor. Diocletian, systematic as he was, also systematized the divine character of the emperorship, in order to provide further support for the Dominate: the tetrarchs were now presented as a divine family, whom the citizens had to approach (if they approached them at all) with religious reverence. Around this new system, a court

Ceremonial developed that was partly based on Greco-Roman traditions and partly on a Sassanid model. Naturally, the Christian emperors could not be gods, but they remained sacer and thus superhuman beings. Late antique court life and everything it involved would survive into the Byzantine period.

The Dominate also required a new administrative organization, which involved four important developments. First, the imperial bureaucracy took over all duties. The idea of a separate republican, senatorial administration was discarded; the emperor became the sole source of law. In due course, the distinction between the emperor as a ruler and the emperor as a private person became blurred: fiscus and imperial domains merged. The emperor ruled with the assistance of an imperial council, the sacrum consistorium directed by the “quaestor of the holy palace,” but the grand chamberlain (a eunuch) was sometimes the most powerful person in the imperial household. Second, the military and civil administrations were strictly separated. Magistrates, such as provincial governors, were no longer allowed any form of involvement in the military; non-professional officers, whose term in the army was part of their cursus, disappeared. On the other hand, soldiers and centuriones did sometimes perform civilian duties, especially those related to the annona. Third—and this seems to contradict the second point—the civil administration (and, in a certain sense, the whole of society) was militarized; the growing “army” of bureaucrats was reorganized along military lines. Officials now performed their duties as militia. Four, urban and provincial institutions were made uniform. The aim was to replicate the same administrative structures all over the empire; even Italy was divided into provinces. In this context, one might speak of decentralization: the empire was seen as a whole without a clear center, that could subsequently be divided into more or less equal administrative-military units, without paying attention to socioeconomic realities. All this happened under Diocletian’s tetrarchy and under his successors.

The aim of Diocletian’s tetrarchy (his appointment of a co-emperor and two Caesares as the assistants and successors of the Augusti) had been to strengthen his control over the empire and secure the succession. The Caesares were subordinate to the Augusti, and one of the Augusti could issue laws for the whole of the empire. So, formally the empire was still unified, as had been the case in earlier periods, with co-regents. Two administrative layers were established between the tetrarchs and the provinces, newly divided into smaller units: the empire was divided into 12 dioceses, each directed by a vicarius, and into two prefectures, each directed by a praetorian prefect (since the beginning of the 3rd century, the praetorian prefect had developed into a kind of minister of justice and internal affairs). As we saw, the tetrarchy lasted for only one generation, but Constantine did not do away with his predecessor’s initiatives. The number of prefectures was extended to four, although with the abolishment of the Praetorian Guard at the beginning of the 4th century, the prefects no longer had a military task. These four prefectures more or less corresponded with the four official parts of the tetrarchy. The vicarii, who directed the (now 13) dioceses, as well as the governors of the more than 100 provinces, were completely dependent on the prefects. In this way, Diocletian’s four-part division was continued. This four-part division in principle meant a quadrupling of the imperial bureaucracy. This and an expansion of the army in the same period led to enormous financial pressure and was the cause of late antique fiscalism.

Border troops maintained the limes that had been strengthened under Diocletian. These troops no longer came under the command of the provincial governor but were led by duces. Apart from the border troops, there was the comitatus, the (imperial) “escort.” This was a mobile field army that had developed during the 3rd century and subsequently gained importance. This field army had its own magistri and did not fall under the command of the duces. The most important unit within the comitatus was a heavily armed cavalry; after all, the empire had to be able to fight mounted adversaries on every frontier. This does not mean, however, that under Constantine and his successors there was no role for the limitanei, as the border troops came to be called during the 4th century; they were of great importance for the empire’s defense. But as the 4th century progressed, their position unmistakably weakened, and during the 5th century the borders were demilitarized, especially in the West, with obvious results.

Finally, there were the foederati, individuals who came from beyond the borders and fought on the side of the Romans as (paid!) allies. Initially, they were employed for single campaigns, after which they went back to where they came from, but from the late 4th century, larger and smaller groups of foederati permanently settled in the empire. The employment of foederati may be seen as a symptom of a slow but steady “barbarization” (mostly “Germanification”) of army units. At first, Germans were engaged as high officers, but gradually their number among ordinary soldiers grew. During the 4th century, about one-third of the Roman army consisted of soldiers with a Germanic background; the army was then very much an instrument to make Roman soldiers out of Germanic warriors. This changed after the battle of Hadrianopolis: in the 5th century, the Western army mainly consisted of Germanic troops, and at that point the balance of power shifted fundamentally.