Many of the nations of modern Europe have a military budget relatively
and absolutely greater than that of the Roman empire of the third
century; but in these nations the economic system has a high degree of
efficiency, compared with that of the older state, and the waste is
incalculably less. The great difference lies in the slave system, which
was the foundation of ancient society. The total absence of individual
incentive wherever the slaves were worked in gangs—and that was,
perhaps, true of the majority of slaves—made the efficiency and
consequent productivity of each laborer much less.
We must further remember that human waste was also much greater, owing
to the absence of all measures to restrict it. Only the most elementary
of sanitary precautions existed, and they were directed against definite
diseases of plainly infectious character. With a great percentage of the
population undernourished, the ravages of any disease with epidemic
tendencies must have been enormous. Even in the absence of any plague,
such a scourge as consumption alone must have been much more generally
destructive than it is now. As has been recently suggested, malaria in
Italy had a heavy account to answer for in producing the physical
debilitation of the _populus Romanus_, and was therefore a real factor
in the gradual decay of the Roman state.[389]
The incidence of the state burdens was not regulated as it is at the
present time. Taxes were imposed within certain districts, and upon each
district devolved the duty of satisfying the impost. For a long time
Italy had been free from such a burden, but even this exceptional
position was abrogated by Constantine in 300 C.E.
How each district accomplished its task was a local matter, and was
determined by its individual development. Until the reorganization
effected by Diocletian, the old national units had in the main been kept
intact. That is to say, Egypt remained what it had been under the
Ptolemies and for thousands of years before—a strongly centralized
kingdom, rigidly bureaucratic, but measurably well organized. Asia,
again, was a group of independent cities and certain larger districts,
principally rural, the kingdoms of Bithynia, Cappadocia, Galatia, etc.
The tax which the particular province had to deliver was apportioned
among the various units according to their apparent capacity. Here and
there a poll-tax existed, levied upon every inhabitant alike, and on the
existence of this poll-tax far-reaching theories have been constructed.
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