Later Roman Empire

Fiscal System.

While the administration of justice was one of the best features of the Eastern empire, its fiscal system, like wise inherited from the early empire, was one of its worst. If the Government had been acquainted with the principles of public economy, which have not been studied till comparatively recent times, a larger revenue might have been raised without injuring the prosperity of the inhabitants. Taxes were injudiciously im posed and oppressively collected. The commerce of the empire was one of its great sources of strength, but the Government looked on the merchants as a class from which the utmost should be extorted. The chief source of revenue was the land. The main burdens which fell upon the landed proprietors throughout the whole period were the land tax proper and the annona. The land tax (capitatio terrena=the old tributum of the imperial, stipendium of the senatorial provinces) was based, not on the yearly produce, but on the capital of the proprietor, the character and value of the land being taken into account. In later times this seems to have become the Karvi.K6P, or hearth tax. The annona was an additional impost for supporting the army and imperial officials ; it was originally paid in produce. The province was divided into fiscal districts, and the total revenue to be derived from each was entered in a book of assessment. The assessment was in early times revised every r 5 years (the "in diction" period), but subsequently such revisions seem to have been very irregular. The collection of the taxes was managed through the curial system, while it lasted (till 7th century?).

The decurions, or municipal councillors, of the chief town in each district were responsible for collecting and delivering the whole amount, and had to make good the sums owed by de faulters. This system of collective responsibility pressed very heavily on the decurions, and helped to cause their decay in the Western provinces. After the abolition of the curial organization, the principle of collective responsibility remained in the form of the FIrtI3oAti or additional charge ; that is, if a property was left without an owner, the taxes for which it was liable became an extra charge on the other members of the district. The taxes were collected by praktores, who were under the general logothete. The peasant proprietors were also liable to burdens of other kinds, of which the most important was the furnishing of horses, vehicles, postboys, etc., for the State post (see ANGARIA).

The history of landed property and agrarian conditions in the Eastern empire still awaits a thorough examination. It may be noted that individual hereditary proprietorship was always the rule (on Crown and monastic lands as well as in other cases), and that the commonly supposed extensive existence of corn munities possessing land in common is based on erroneous inter pretation of documents. When imperial lands were granted to monasteries or as fiefs to individuals, the position and rights of the peasant proprietors on the estates were not changed, but in many cases the imposts were paid to the new master instead of to the fisc. In the 4th, 5th and 6th centuries the cultivators were attached to the soil (coloni, ascripticii; see SERFDOM), in the in terests of the fiscus ; it has been supposed, on insufficient grounds, that this serfdom was abolished for a time by Leo III., though

it is probable that the condition of the peasants was largely changed by the invasions of the 7th century. In any case the system of compulsory attachment of peasants to their lands remained in force, and the class of adscripticii (ivarlyypact•oc) existed till the latest times. The chief sources for agrarian con ditions are, besides the imperial laws, monastic records, among which may be mentioned as specially valuable those of the monastery of Lemboi near Smyrna.

The general principle of the military defence of the empire in the 4th century consisted in large forces stationary on the frontiers, and reserve forces, stationed in the interior provinces, which could be moved to any point that was in danger. Thus the army was composed of (1 ) the limitanei, frontier-troops ( under duces), and (2) reserve forces (under magistri militum) of two denominations, (a) palatini and (b) comitatenses. The limitanei were the more numerous; it has been estimated that if they numbered about 350,00o, the comitatenses and palatini together amounted to less than 200,000. It is to be noted that for the old legion of 6,000 men a smaller legion of i,000 had been substituted, and that the proportion of cavalry to infantry was small. In the 6th century the fundamental principles of the system were the same ; but the cavalry had become a much more important branch of the service, and in the wars of Belisarius the foederati, barbarian mercenaries of various races, commanded by their own chiefs, played a great role. The peasants of Illyria and Thrace, the mountaineers of southern Asia Minor still supply an important part of the army, but the number of barbarians (Heruli, Vandals, Goths, Slays, Arabs, etc.) is much larger. Solidity and a corresponding want of mobility character ized at this time both cavalry and infantry; their great merit was straight and rapid shooting : Belisarius ascribed his success in Italy to the excellence of the archery. It is remarkable with what small forces (not more than 25,000) the first conquest of Italy was achieved, though Belisarius was far from being a military genius and the discipline in his army was flagrantly defective: Justinian carried out on the frontiers and in the exposed provinces a carefully devised and expensive system of defensive works. Fortified towns along the limes were connected by inter vening forts, and at some distance behind was a second line of more important fortresses more strongly garrisoned, which fur nished both a second barrier and places of refuge for the inhabit ants of the open country. There was an elaborate system of signals by which the garrisons of the front stations could announce not only the imminence of a hostile invasion, but the number and character of the enemy. In North Africa there are abundant remains of the forts of the 6th and 7th centuries, displaying the military architecture of the period and the general frontier system. The typical fortress had three defences : the wall flanked by square towers of three storeys ; at a few yards' distance a second wall of stone ; and outside a deep foss about 2oyd. wide, with vertical sides, filled with water, and along its edge a rampart of earth.