The later colonate. Centralization 379 



believe that the system known as the later Colonate appeared in full 

 force as a sudden phenomenon. Nor indeed are we compelled to fly 

 so directly in the face of historical experience. That we have no nar- 

 rative of the steps that led to this momentous change, is surely due to 

 the inability of contemporaries to discern the future effect of tendencies 

 operating silently 1 and piecemeal. What seems at the moment insigni- 

 ficant, even if observed, is seldom recorded, and very seldom intention- 

 ally. Hence after generations, seeking to trace effects to causes, are 

 puzzled by defects of record. Their only resource is to supplement, 

 so far as possible, defective record by general consideration of the 

 history of the time in question and cautious inference therefrom : in 

 fact to get at the true meaning of fragmentary admissions in relation 

 to their historical setting. The chief topic to be dealt with here from 

 this point of view is the character of the Roman Empire in several 

 aspects. For among all the anxieties of the government during these 

 troubled centuries the one that never ceased was the fear of failure in 

 supplies of food. 



The character of the Roman Empire had been largely determined 

 by the fact that it arose from the overthrow of a government that had 

 long been practically aristocratic. The popular movements that con- 

 tributed to this result only revealed the impossibility of establishing 

 anything like a democracy, and the unreality of any power save the 

 power of the sword. The great dissembler Augustus concealed a virtual 

 autocracy by conciliatory handling of the remains of the nobility. But 

 the Senate, to which he left or gave many powers, was never capable 

 of bearing a vital part in the administration, and its influence continued 

 to dwindle under his successors. The master of the army was the 

 master of the empire, and influence was more and more vested in those 

 who were able to guide his policy. That these might be, and sometimes 

 were, not born Romans at all, but imperial freedmen generally of Greek 

 or mixed-Greek origin, was a very significant fact. In particular, it 

 marked and encouraged the growth of departmental bureaus, perma- 

 nent and efficient beyond the standard of previous Roman experience. 

 But the price of this efficiency was centralization, a condition that 

 carried with it inevitable dangers, owing to the vast extent of the 

 empire. In modern times the fashionable remedy suggested for over- 

 centralization is devolution of powers to local governments controlling 

 areas of considerable size. Or, in cases of aggregation, the existing 

 powers left to states merged in a confederation are considerable. In 

 any case, the subordinate units are free to act within their several 



1 De Coulanges makes it his main thesis that the later colonate was a creation of custom, 

 at length recognized by law. My conclusions here were reached before reading his fine 

 treatise. 



