Niebuhr's lectures on Roman history, Vol. 3 (of 3)Niebuhr, Barthold Georg
History
Niebuhr's lectures on Roman history, Vol. 3 (of 3)
Niebuhr, Barthold Georg
Rome -- History
Thus the whole world was again brought into unity. The rest of
Constantine’s reign is not very rich in remarkable events. He carried on
wars against the Goths and Sarmatians, the latter of whom dwelt in those
days from the Theiss to Moravia, whilst the Goths were masters of Dacia.
The Sarmatians make their appearance as the lords of vanquished Germans;
and these serfs, when arms are put into their hands, take advantage of
the opportunity to rid themselves of the yoke. Now were the Sarmatians
obliged to apply to the Romans for protection, and they were scattered
in all directions under the name of Limigantes: hence a Sarmatian colony
as far off as the Moselle, is mentioned by Ausonius. Constantine
undoubtedly ruled from the Roman Wall in Scotland to the borders of
Khurdistan, and to Mount Atlas, just as Diocletian did.
The restoration of the Empire had begun under Diocletian, and it must
also have quite recovered under the rule of Constantine and his sons.
One great drawback, however, was the very heavy weight of taxation which
Diocletian had devised and Constantine had completed, and the system of
indictions. A province was valued in the lump, and assessed at a fixed
sum, which was divided into _capita_ (quotas); and these _capita_ were
imposed in an arbitrary manner, sometimes several of them on one man,
and sometimes one on several persons. The details of this system are not
yet sifted as much as one would wish, although Savigny has written a
very fine treatise on the subject.[65] The chief revenues were those
which were derived from the land-tax, and from personal taxes. These
burthens daily became more oppressive as the expense of the army
increased, which was more and more composed of mercenaries. It is
evident that the value of every kind of produce had now quite fallen
off, and with this the complete change of the monetary system was
connected. In the third century, silver of a very bad standard was
coined, but the currency was not changed: the state seems to have paid
in bad silver, and to have required gold in exchange at the rate of good
old silver. The sesterces are done away with, and henceforth we meet
with the _aurei_, which were formerly mentioned only in connexion with
the pay of the soldiers, and even then but seldom. This most wretched
coinage, of which all the collections of the kind in Europe may afford
specimens,—these chiefly belong to the times between Valerian and
Probus,—gave occasion for a great deal of counterfeit money, of which
the dies and the whole apparatus have every now and then been found in
France. The bad money also accounts for the strange story in Aurelian’s
life of an insurrection, of which the master of the mint is said to have
been the prime mover. Aurelian, in fact, may have tried to bring in
again the good currency, whereas the master of the mint, on his side,
may have found his profit in the bad money; just as Itzig and others did
in the Seven Years’ War. Constantine, however, made the _aureus_
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account