Late Roman Empire

The Late Roman Empire was a period of transformation beginning in the late third century. After the crisis of 235–284, Diocletian and his successors developed administration, taxation, armies and court ceremonial. Republican offices did not all disappear at once; “Dominate” describes changes in imperial authority, not one law abolishing the old system.

Imperial government ended in the fifth-century West while the eastern Roman state continued. Economic and cultural change varied regionally. The Soviet interpretation represented in the bibliography, based on a transition between “slaveholding” and “feudal” formations, belongs to a particular historical school rather than the sole modern explanation of late antiquity.

Transition from the slave system to feudal relations

The third century was a turning point in the history of the ancient Mediterranean. This entire century is filled with the struggle of two tendencies — the dying slave-owning one and the emerging feudal one. The clash of these trends has created a tornado that has drawn all spheres of public life — the economy, social relations, the state system, and culture-into it. At the turn of the third and fourth centuries, the feudal tendency prevailed, and the development of the Roman state entered the stage of decomposition of the slave system and the emergence of feudal relations. Since the third century, large autarkic, i.e. self-sufficient, self-supporting estates have been strengthened. Due to the fact that they developed their own craft in addition to agriculture, they were independent of the city market. Hence the decline of urban crafts and trade. Commodity-money relations are being reduced, and there is an acute shortage of money. The State continues to demand monetary taxes from its subjects, but their payment becomes difficult. The treasury is trying to make up for the tax shortfall by issuing a defective coin, which further undermines the economy. The full-weight coin disappears from circulation, settling in the form of dead treasures in the hands of the rich. The depreciation of the coin contributes to higher prices, especially for food. Penalties for tax arrears are being tightened. Indebted coloni flee their allotments (usually from the failing small estates of urban landowners to the larger and more economically stable possessions of magnates, independent of cities). The struggle of peasants, coloni and slaves against the oppressors is intensifying, which sometimes results in armed uprisings. The provincial nobility made attempts to secede from Rome. There was a frequent change of emperors, who were erected and removed by the army. In the third century, Rome's foreign policy situation changed: the balance of power between it and the barbarian periphery characteristic of the previous century ended, and the offensive of neighboring tribes against the empire began. On the eastern borders of the Roman Empire, a huge strain of forces was required by its opposition to another world war.the Sassanid Empire. In the third century, the decline of ancient culture was clearly manifested; Christianity became widespread, denying all the spiritual values of the ancient world. The main reason for the crisis of the Roman Empire in the third century was that its productive forces had exhausted the possibilities of development within the framework of slave-owning production relations. During the late Republic and early Empire, it turned out that the most rational form of slave production in agriculture was a medium-sized villa with several dozen slaves. On the scale of such a relatively small farm, it was still possible to ensure vigilant supervision of slaves and successfully carry out the specialization and cooperation of slave labor. As practice has shown, the framework of the villa was the limit of the development of commodity agriculture, based on the exploitation of classic-type slaves. The maximum size of a private craft workshop was also limited to a few dozen slaves; a workshop with only a few slaves was more common. The rich owner did not expand his workshop, but opened new similar workshops in other cities of Italy or in the provinces. To increase the productivity of workers, their narrow specialization was especially important. In the old, traditional branches of agriculture and handicrafts, free and slave labor coexisted; in the new branches of production, slave labor prevailed. To further increase the productivity of slave labor, it was necessary to further develop the specialization and cooperation of production, improve the tools of labor and improve the skills of an increasing mass of slaves. But the slaves who were not interested in their work did not correspond to the increased production tasks. Yes, and the masters were afraid to teach their slaves complex professions, to develop their abilities and intelligence. The nature of production relations is determined by the forms of ownership of the means of production; in the Roman Empire of the third century, two main forms of land ownership prevailed: municipal and exempt. Municipal landowners who owned estates on urban land had long maintained commodity farms based mainly on the exploitation of slaves; this was no longer profitable, but the narrow limits of small and medium — sized estates did not allow them to transform their farms into natural, self-sufficient ones based on the exploitation of more interested coloni. In addition, urban landowners incurred large expenses in connection with the performance of public duties — liturgies. This included the costs of building and repairing public buildings and structures (roads, bridges, aqueducts, thermae, etc.), arranging circuses, distributing them to the urban poor, etc. The liturgies were inextricably linked to the very essence of the ancient polis as a civil community. The transition to feudal relations on urban lands was also hindered by the political system of a self-governing city (municipality), which corresponded to ancient slave-owning relations based on the freedom of citizens and the exploitation of non-citizens. Cities were the mainstay of the empire's slave system. During the republic and the early Empire, villages were transformed into municipalities, but since the third century this trend has been stalling. It is replaced by the process of reviving rural communities — not only where they still existed, such as in the Danubian provinces and Northern Gaul, but also where they no longer existed: in urban, imperial and senatorial lands, the dependent rural population — coloni (various landholders) and slaves with peculius — creates their own communities for the purpose of mutual assistance. During the crisis of the third century, owners of exempt land found themselves in a more favorable position than municipal landowners. Being independent of the cities, they were free from liturgies. In the third century, many senators were already permanently residing in their estates in the provinces, despite attempts by some emperors to return them to the capital. Large estates have long been based largely on the labor of various kinds of dependent landholders, i.e., producers who were more interested in their labor than slaves. In the third century. the transfer of rural slaves to peculium is widespread: they are put on allotments, given the opportunity to have a family, a separate home, and a small farm. The position of the Coloni and the slaves is getting closer to Peculius. The owners of exempt saltus could set less burdensome payments and duties for their holders than less affluent villa owners could afford. Therefore, the coloni are fleeing from small estates to large ones. The magnates were interested in weakening the cities that challenged their political independence. To the exim type, i.e. the vast imperial lands were also taken out of the jurisdiction of cities and land ownership. Although there were many slaves in the senatorial and imperial estates, the main workers on the land were coloni; the slaves were mainly used as artisans, servants, and local administration. In accordance with the existence of two main forms of land ownership — municipal and exempt-in the third century, two social groups associated with these forms of ownership collided: urban (municipal) landowners and owners of exempt saltus. It was a clash of two tendencies — slaveholding and feudal. The struggle between slaveholding and feudal tendencies in the third century, which manifested itself in the antagonism of the two main groups of the ruling class, the popular movements and the barbarian offensive, was the beginning of a social revolution that in the following centuries led to the complete collapse of the slave formation throughout the Mediterranean.

Diocletian's Reforms

Diocletian (284–305) strengthened imperial government after prolonged warfare. In 293 the Tetrarchy took shape: two Augusti and two Caesars shared defence and administration. Diocletian operated mainly in the East and Maximian in the West, assisted by Galerius and Constantius Chlorus. Dynastic marriages and coordinated decisions were intended to maintain unity. A universal, unchanging law requiring every Augustus to retire after twenty years is not established.

Smaller provinces were grouped into dioceses. Military and civil commands gradually separated; official staffing and state supply systems expanded. These measures were not completed through one decree and continued under Constantine.

New units and commands developed in the army. Frontier troops and field armies later became more clearly differentiated. Unit sizes varied: every legion cannot be assumed to have contained exactly one thousand soldiers already under Diocletian. Recruiting obligations, settlement of groups within Roman territory and military hiring took differing legal forms.

Currency reforms, assessments and taxation supported state expenditure. Supplies in kind became important, but coinage and trade continued. The Edict on Maximum Prices of 301 limited prices and wages; enforcement and results varied.

Constantine's Reforms

Constantine (306–337) became sole emperor in 324. He continued administrative and military reforms, supported the gold solidus and expanded the new capital. His religious policy differed sharply from Diocletian’s: the agreement with Licinius in 313 permitted Christian worship and restored community property.

He funded Christian buildings and privileged clergy. The Council of Nicaea in 325 adopted a creed and condemned Arius’s teaching, but religious disputes continued. Church support did not immediately prohibit every traditional cult. The particular state position of Nicene Christianity is associated with Theodosius I and the law of 380.

Episcopal structures developed gradually. Rome, Alexandria and Antioch were major centres, followed by Constantinople and Jerusalem. The title “pope” did not disappear from the Alexandrian patriarchate. Landholding and imperial gifts increased the church’s economic role, with regional differences.

The higher clergy of the Christian Church became an ally of the state power and the ruling class, especially the land magnates. At the same time, social struggles often began to take the form of heresies, i.e. religious movements that disagree with the official church. Constantine moved the capital from Italy to the East. This was due to the fact that in the fourth century the western half of the empire fell into economic decline, while the economy of the eastern provinces remained at a higher level. The economic center of the empire shifted to the East, so Rome lost its importance as a political center. In addition, by leaving Rome forever, Constantine emphasized a break with the old political traditions and the final establishment of the dominant-the despotic power of the emperor. The new capital of the Roman Empire since 330. It is an ancient Greek city of Byzantium, located on the European shore of the Bosphorus Strait between the Aegean and Black Seas. In the Byzantine Empire, it was renamed Constantinople, i.e. the city of Constantine (now Istanbul). The location for the capital was chosen well: the city is located at the crossroads of military and commercial (sea and land) roads, it had an advantageous strategic position, occupying a hill facing the Golden Horn Bay on one side. There was a lot of construction going on in the new capital. Among other buildings, Constantine built both Christian churches and pagan temples here. After destroying the tetrarchy, Constantine retained, however, the division of the Roman Empire into four parts for ease of administration. These units became known as prefectures; the officials who headed them, the prefects, reported directly to the emperor. In the fourth century, the estates of coloni, artisans, soldiers, and curials were formed, and there was a tendency to enslave them by legislation in order to provide agriculture and crafts with labor, the army with soldiers, and the state with taxes. In 332, by decree of Constantine, the coloni were attached to the land: they were deprived of the right to transfer from one estate to another. Fugitive coloni were ordered to be shackled, enslaved, and returned to their former places. Later, the laws on attaching coloni were repeatedly confirmed, which indicates the prevalence of column flight. The edict of the emperors Arcadius and Honorius (late IV or early V c.) calls the coloni "slaves of the earth" and allows them to be sold along with their estates. Artisans employed in state workshops were attached to their craft; the rescript of Arcadius and Honorius of 398 even ordered these workers to be branded,"so that they might be more easily found if they went into hiding." Self-employed artisans, forced by economic necessity to unite by profession (as many professions as there are in a given city, so many corporations or colleges), were attached to the colleges: having enrolled in the number of artisans of any profession, a person could no longer leave his craft without the permission of the authorities. The Board was generally responsible for collecting taxes from its members. In the fourth century. Constantine and his successors issued a series of decrees on the enslavement of the curial class — urban landowners, which consisted of city councils-curia. They were forbidden to leave the city, and their rights to sell their estates were restricted. Belonging to the Curial class became hereditary. The most important state duty of this class was the responsibility for collecting taxes from the urban population and from rural residents assigned to the city. Earlier honorary membership in the Curial class (in the third century). it was called the Decurion class) became a heavy burden for most of them. According to the rescript of Constantine of 326, the sons of veterans had to either become curials or go to military service. A significant part of the Roman army consisted of recruits drawn from the rural population (colons, etc.); recruits were branded on the hand. The slaves did not disappear, the productivity of their labor remained the same, but it finally turned out that the exploitation of workers who manage independently is more economical, and the available means of violence already fully allowed for such exploitation; therefore, slaves were relegated to an auxiliary role in production. This did not make their situation any easier. On the contrary, it is precisely from the time of Constantine that the treatment of slaves has been tightened by law. Decree of Constantine of 319 released the master from responsibility for the murder of a slave, if the latter's death was caused by whipping or whipping, or by being put in chains. It was forbidden only to deliberately kill slaves with a club, stone, weapon, hanging, throwing from a height, being torn to pieces by wild animals, fire, poisoning. The list of prohibited methods of killing slaves given in the edict eloquently testifies to the actual reprisals that took place with them.

Results

In late antiquity, large estates, civic communities, villages and state institutions interacted differently across regions. Slavery continued, while the conditions of coloni and other dependent workers changed. Restrictions on movement and hereditary obligations did not amount to a uniform conversion of the whole population into serfs.

Western imperial government lost much of its tax base through warfare, political conflict and the loss of provinces. Eastern rulers retained a more resilient administrative and financial foundation. These differences help explain the western court’s collapse and the eastern Roman state’s survival without reducing them to an inevitable replacement of one social formation by another.

Related topics

• Roman Empire
• Diocletian
• Constantine I the Great
• Dominate
• The crisis of the 3rd century in the Roman Empire

Literature and sources

• Neronova V. D. Pozdnyaya Rimskaya Imperiya (III-V vv.) [Late Roman Empire (III-V centuries)]. The Decline of ancient Societies, Moscow: Znanie Publ.,1983, pp. 221-239