Summary
The constitution of the Roman empire was in effect relatively simple. The supreme administrator was the emperor. All imperial administrative officers, such as provincial governors and army commanders, were essentially his assistants and delegates.
From the time of Diocletian the governor was responsible for civil matters, while the military commander was responsible for defence and public order. Independent bodies in the provinces of Africa and Egypt took care of the transportation of grain for the public distributions in Rome and Constantinople. The provincial governors too were supervised by the prefect, and from Diocletian onwards by vicarii (lieutenants, appointed over dioceses) and then by prefects. Rome and Constantinople were governed independently by urban prefects with vicarii. All prefects were responsible to the emperor. This administrative structure was essentially the structure through which complaints about taxes and charges proceeded and through which appeals were made. Litigants would submit their cases to a magistrate - in the provinces the governor and in Rome and Constantinople the urban prefect or his vicarius. This was also the judicial structure, since separation of powers was unknown. General administrators such as those just mentioned issued rules, judged cases, and administered.Although it was not as extensive as private law, this public (administrative) law, together with a reasonably effective system of procedure, must have provided citizens with an adequate level of protection against abuse by state officials and others. There are many references in the Theodosian Code to bribes and abuse by officials, but its constitutions also show an abiding imperial concern to ensure the fair application of law.
Notes
1. See instead the chapter by Lintott, 301—31.
2. Gaius 1.8; Ulp.
1 inst. D. 1.4.1 pr.3.face="Times New Roman"> E.g. Plin. Pan. 65.1.
4. C. 1.14.4 (AD 429), still in force in AD 534.
5. C. 1.14.2-3.
6. C. 1.14.3, fragments of which are preserved in C.Th. 1.4.3, C. 1.14.2 and 3, C. 1.19.7, and C. 1.22.5.
7. E.g. Plin. Ep. 10.16 sets out how he examined the finances of the city ofPrusa, which he found to be in a dismal state of administration.
8. See M. S. Youni, ‘Transforming Greek practice into Roman law: manumissions in Roman Macedonia', TR 78 (2010): 311-40.
9. C.Th. 1.4.3.
10. Cf. C.Th. 1.4.1-3.
11. Suet. Claud. 23; Tib. 33.
12. See, e.g., D.
28.4.3 pr.; D. 32.97.13. See the chapter by Metzger, 287—9.
14. W. L. Westermann and A. A. Schiller, Apokrimata: Decisions of Septimius Severus on Legal Matters (New York, 1954).
15. D. Liebs, ‘Recht und Rechtsliteratur,' in Restauration und Erneuerung. Die lateinische Literatur von 284 bis 374 n. Chr. (Handbuch der lateinischen Literatur), ed. R. Herzog (Munich, 1989), 64-65.
16. Liebs (n. 15), 60-64.
17. lang=EN-US>C.Th. 13.5.38.
18. C.Th. 10.10.15 (AD 380).
19. Mainly found in the Theodosian Code. See, in general, on these public bodies, A. J. B. Sirks, Food for Rome (Amsterdam, 1991). On origo, see A.J. B. Sirks, ‘The Colonate in Justinian's Reign', JRS 98 (2008): 126-28.
20. See A.J. B. Sirks, ‘Late Roman Law: The Case of dotis nomen and the praediapistoria,' ZSS 108 (1991): 178-212.
21. C.Th. 12.1.51; a concession to the Greek custom of the epiklerate?
22. D.
27.1.17.1.23. D. 50.15.1.
24. E.g. Plin. Ep. 10.39.
25. See R. Frakes, Contra Potentium Iniurias: The Defensor Civitatis and Late Roman Justice (Munich, 2001).
26. See A. Laniado, Recherches sur les notables municipaux dans l'empire protobyzantin (Paris, 2002).
27. See F. M. Ausbüttel, Die Verwaltung der Städte und Provinzen im spätantiken Italien (Frankfurt - Bern - New York - Paris, 1988).
28. J. H. W. G. Liebeschuetz, Barbarians and Bishops: Army, Church, and State in the Age of Arcadius and Chrysostom (Oxford, 1990), 228-35, for the example of Synesius in Cyrenaica.
29. See, e.g., D. 48.4.1.3, D. 50.4.14.
30. P. Oxy. XII.1415.
31.style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> D. 50.2.2-8; see further A.J. B. Sirks, ‘Die Nomination für die städtischen Ämter im römischen Reich', in Stadt — Gemeinde — Genossenschaft. Festschrift für Gerhard Dilcher zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. A. Cordes, J. Rückert, and R. Schulze (Berlin, 2003), 13-22 (also deals with entry requirements for the sons of senators).
32. C.
10.50.1.33. C.10.42.6.
34. C.Th. 12.1.33.
35. C.Th. 12.1.6 (AD 319).
36. Ulp. D.50.15.4.
37. SeeJ.-M. Carrié, ‘Diocletien et la fiscalité', Antiquité Tardive 2 (1994): 33—64.