Cambridge Ancient Hi.. - Index of

184 7. government and administration
based, and clearly did not appreciate the opportunity to broaden their horizons.
Justinian therefore issued an edict allowing them to come instead to
Constantinople, where a representative of the quaestor would hear their
cases. What is of particular interest in all this is, first, the fact that Justinian
ascribes his revision of arrangements to the appeals of those inconvenienced,
while, secondly, the law implementing the revision was issued on 1
September 537 – little more than fifteen months after the office of quaestor
was first established. 89 It is unusual to be able to determine the speed of
reaction in such an exact manner, but Justinian’s legislation does offer
further examples of laws being issued in response to the difficulties or
complaints of individuals. 90 We are, however, prevented from going further
by the nature of the evidence: we only know of these cases from Justinian’s
reign because his Novels retain their prefaces, in which the background
prompting legislation is sometimes alluded to, but these prefaces have
usually been excised by the compilers of the Codes, on which we rely for
our knowledge of most of the legislation of his predecessors. Justinian,
with his interventionist approach to government, may not be typical: his
accessibility, which might be regarded as a token of a conscientious ruler,
was criticized by Procopius, while Evagrius praised Maurice precisely for
not being too readily available. 91
The other issue highlighted at the start of this section was that of cost.
The later Roman empire is often described as a bureaucratic state whose
substantial running costs, compounded by the role of corrupt practices
such as bribery, contributed to its ultimate demise by placing an excessive
burden on the agricultural base. 92 There is evidence for resistance to taxation:
Salvian, notoriously, speaks of harassed provincials fleeing to the barbarians
or the bagaudae, or putting themselves under the patrocinium of
local potentes. Inhabitants of remote regions might stay put and resist, provoking
protestations of lawlessness from emperors. Emperors were aware
that unpopular activities – for example, warfare in remote areas – might
prompt resistance to the taxation needed to fund it; Arcadius was even
reluctant to harass loyal pagan tax-payers in Gaza in case they abandoned
their city. Paulinus of Pella prided himself on his timely and willing
payment of taxes, through which he attempted to purchase peaceful
repose, but his self-congratulation is contrasted with the behaviour of
others who found the surrender of their wealth especially bitter. 93 It has
89 Nov. 41 and 50, with Stein, Bas-Empire ii.474–5.
90 E.g. Nov. 32, 34, which responded to complaints of Thracian farmers; further details in Jones,
91 LRE 349 n. 59, 350 n. 63. Procop. Secret History 13.1–2; 15.11–12;Evagr.HE v.19.
92 Jones, LRE 563; 469, 819–20; BrownGentlemen and Officers 113. MacMullen (1988) is an extreme
case.
93 Salvian, De Gub. Dei v.5–9;cf.CJ xi.54 (law of Leo, a.d. 468) for patrocinium in the east. Justinian,
Nov. 24, 25; Sidonius, Pan. Maj. 441–69 (taxation of Gaul for use against Vandals); Justinian, Nov. 8.10.2;
Marc. Diac. V. Porph. 41; Paulinus of Pella, Euch. 194–201.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008