Cambridge Ancient Hi.. - Index of

the cities of the east 219
part in routine civic affairs except as far as he considered that they affected
his church, especially the exercise of Christian compassion and charity or
the suppression of paganism and, more consistently, heresy. 89
In the fifth century, the bishops’ power generally increased as the councils
grew weaker, and as the leaders of the cities became more thoroughly
Christianized. As far as the administration of the cities was concerned,
there was a power vacuum into which the bishop was naturally drawn. But
the extent to which the bishop was drawn into routine civic affairs varied
very greatly from city to city and in accordance with the character of the
individual bishop. No doubt Justinian wanted the bishop to act as the chairman
of the notables. In some cities – for instance, at Gerasa – the bishop
may well have played that role. But even so, he did not simply become part
of the civic or imperial executive. The church had its own sense of priorities
and its own growing financial resources, which were quite separate
from those of the city and from those of the empire. 90 Some churches
received imperial subsidies, but that was always a special favour. We do hear
of bishops who undertook secular civic tasks, like paying for public works
or going on an embassy to Constantinople or even presenting chariot races.
But that was a matter of their individual choice. It was not part of their
regular job. 91 Bishops became prominent in emergencies, in war and
famine. Normally, most bishops seem to have been fully occupied running
their church. Papyri provide us with a relatively detailed view of the administration
of the towns of Egypt. It is remarkable how rarely the documents
mention the bishops in connection with secular affairs. The bishop of
Alexandria, is, of course, an exception.
5. Government by notables
When we look at the laws dealing with the administration of cities, we must
not be misled by the fact that the Code of Justinian includes a lot of laws
aimed at compelling decurions and their property to remain in the service
of their councils and so at the disposal of their cities, and generally gives
the impression that the councils remained essential for running the internal
affairs of cities, as well as for the collection of the taxes of the empire. 92
The Novels – that is, Justinian’s own legislation – and even such of
Justinian’s laws as were early enough to be included in the Code show that
this was no longer so. We read of certain officers or magistrates who might
be responsible for administration of a city. Generally the most important
89 Lib. Or. xxx.11; cf. Lieu (1985) 160–4.
90 See Gaudemet (1958) 288–310. Durliat (1984) and Durliat (1990b) 58–63 are unconvincing.
91 Avramea (1989); Dagron (1977) 19–23; Feissel (1989). Considering the influence and resources of
bishops, references to their intervention in routine administration are surprisingly few.
92 Jones, LRE 741–8.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008