A. THE EMPEROR, HIS ADVISORS AND CHANCELLERY

1. Acta prindpis and Imperial Power

§ 160 Cicero, In M. Antonium oratio philippica 1.7.18

And what is there that can so properly be called the act (actum I of a man who,

I.

Cf. Cic. Ep, ad Att. 16.16C.il.

Cicero, In M. Antonium oratio philippica 5.4.10

... If Marcus Antonius is said to have passed any statute confirming the acta of Caesar, or abolishing the dictatorship forever, or leading colonies to the lands, these same laws ought to be passed again, without infraction of the auspices, so that they might bind the people.

Res gestae divi augusti 6 (Mon. Ancy. gr. IIl.ll-21;^rta in thesovereign power of divine, human, public and private affairs, he shall have the right and power to do and execute, just as it was with divas Augustus and Tiberius lulius Caesar Augustus and Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus.

(29) And whatever has been done, executed, decreed or ordered (acta gesta deereta imperata} by Imperator Caesar Vespasianus Augustus or by anyone at his order or command, before the enactment of this law, shall be legal and valid just as if done by the order of the people or the plebs.

During the last century of the republic references are made to the acta of the dictators, specifically with respect to the confirmation of the acta Caesaris (acts of Caesar).¹ The phrase acta principis (acts of the emperor) is clearly a direct borrowing of the republican term.^{[1081] [1082] [1083] Just what arc to be included within the acta of an emperor is somewhat difficult to define. According to Mommsen acta principis are the non-military official actions of the emperor which emanate from him alone, particularly those which he makes known officially to the parties concerned; thereby there seem to be excluded those enactments which Cicero specifically emphasized, namely, leges, but also senatus consulta? Haberleitner has presented a formal classi­fication of acta to include all imperial precepts, as follows: (1) private cor­respondence: (2) pronouncements, including (a) edicta, (b) orationes delivered in the Senate, and (c) adlocutiones addressed to the army; (3) written answers, including (a) epistulae, (b) rescripta, and (c)subscriptiones; (4) judicial decisions, including (a) deereta, and (b) interlocutiones; (5) mandata; (6) leges datae; and (7) privilegia militum et veteranum (grants of citizenship and connubium to soldiers and veterans).[1084] [1085] [1086] The meaning of most of these technical terms will be brought out in the course of this chapter.}

There appears to have been no special conferral of ‘legislative’ power upon Augustus; indeed, in the Res Gestae we are told that he thrice refused the control of the laws (cura legum). Before the discovery of this version of the Res Gestae (and so-called Monumentum Ancyranum), where this state­ment is set forth, passages in Suetonius and Dio seemed to justify the view that control over legislation and the customary traditions was entrusted to Augustus.* Von Premerstein, further, maintained that Augustus was only turning down the cura legum et morum of exceptional magistracies,^{[1087] [1088] [1089] while Jones has argued that evidence docs exist for Augustus’ acceptance of the normal censorial powers as shown in the phrase, the control over the election of senators? But the majority of scholars take the position that Augustus refused any grant of power to re-order the law and morals of the populace? Many of these students of Roman constitutional law base the imperial power upon the prestige and personal influence of the emperor (auctoritas principis, auctoritas Augusti); but there is no agreement as to the nature of this power in the Augustan perod.[1090] [1091] [1092] [1093] In a monograph devoted to the subject, Magdelain sought to distinguish between the early years of Augustus' rule ‘when his auctoritas was no more than the prestige freely accepted of a particularly eminent citizen’,11 and the period when senatus consulta were passed ex auctoritate principis (on the authority of the emperor).11 In this latter period, Augustus issued pronouncements on his own authority, as evidenced by the imperial edicts directed to the Cyrenaeans.1’Another step in the development is to be seen, according to Magdelain, in the clause of the lex (or rather senatus consultum) de imperio Vespasiani which authorized the emperor to take all measures he deemed necessary in any field of law, and to carry this out by means of imperial enactments.[1094] [1095] There are, indeed, modifications of Magdclain’s views, but by and large an institutionalized auctoritas principis is recognized as the constitutional basis for imperial enactments (constitutiones principum) in the time of the Principate?*}

2.

§ 161 Dio cassius, Historic Romano LIII.21.4-5 (27 B.C.)

Most important ofall, he (Augustus) took as advisers for six months, the consuls or the consul when he himself war the other (consul), one of each of the other magistrates, and fifteen men chosen by lol from the remainder of the senators.

Through them he was accustomed to a certain extent to communicate the provi­sions of his laws to the remainder. (5) Some matters he brought before the entire Senate. He thought it best, however, to consider most of the laws and the greater ones in council with a few persons at leisure, and he actedaccordingly; sometimes he tried cases with their help.

Cf. Suet. Aug. 35.

Dio Cassius, Historia Romana LV1I.7.2. (14 A.D.)

... In the forum a tribunal had been erected on which he I Tiberius) sat in public to dispense Justice, and he had with him advisers, after the manner of August us, nor did he take any major step without making it known to the rest.

Dio cassius, Historia Romana LX.4.3 (41 A.D.)

Imost every day. with the whole Senate present or alone, he (Claudius) would sit in a tribunal in the forum or elsewhere trying cases; and he renewed the practice of having advisers with him, which Tiberius had abandoned when he withdrew to his island.

Epistula domitiant ad falerjenses 11-15 (Bruns 255; FIRA I No. 75) (82 A.D.)

Imperator Caesar Domitianus Augustus, son of divus Vespasianus, the most distinguished men of both ranks being present (as advisers), the case between the Falerians and the Firmani having been heard, I have decided what is written below....

Punius, Epistulae VI.31.1, 7-12

I was greatly pleased to be called by our emperor (Trajan) to his council (consilium) at Centum Cellae....(7) On the third day an inquiry was made into the codicils of lulius Tiro, a case which had led to a great deal of discussion and conflicting rumors....(8)... The heirs had written a joint letter to the emperor while he was in Dacia, petitioning him to conduct the case.

Spartianus, Pe vita Hadriani VI1L9, XVIII. 1, XXII. 11 (SHA)

For at that time it was customary for the emperor (Hadrian) when he tried cases to summon both senators and Roman knights to his council and deliver a verdict based on the deliberation of all. (18.1) When he (Hadrian) tried cases, he had in his council not only his friends (amid) and companions (comites), but also jurists, in particular luventius Celsus, Salvius lulianus, Neratius Priscus, and others whom, indeed, the entire Senate had approved. (22.11) He frequently heard cases himself both in Rome and in the provinces, calling to his council consuls and praetors and the foremost of the senators.

Capitolinus, Marcus Antoninus XI. 10 (SHA)

He (Marcus Aurelius) restored the old law (ius vetus) rather than he made new (novum). He kept praefects with him, upon whose authority and responsibility (? or drqft) (periculum) he dictated his legal acts (iura).

Marcellus, Libro XXIX digestorum (D. 28.4.3 pr.)

Recently, in the court of the emperor (Marcus urelius), when a certain testator had cancelled the names of the heirs, and his property was being claimed by the fisc in escheat, there was a good deal of doubt concerning legacies, particularly those which had been bequeathed to the persons whose names had been cancelled, Most thought the legatees were also to be excluded: (an opinion) which I said was clearly to be followed if (the testator) had cancelled the entire writing of the testament.

Kunkel, SZ 85 (1968) 253, 303 f., so interprets the ‘all’ who are cleared from the court-room; cf OLD, s.v. delibero (1). Contra, Crook, Consilium 71 n.5; Millar, JRS 57 (1967) 9, 10 n.21.

Cognjto goharienorum apud caracallam 1-5 (Syria 23 [1942/43] 173; BIDR 49/50 [1948] 46) (May 27, 216 A.D.)

In the consulship ofSabinus and of Anulinus, the 6th day before the Kalends of June, at Antioch, Imperator Caesar Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Pius Felix Augustus Parthicus Maximus Britannicus Maximus Germanicus Maximus, waited upon by the praefecti praetorio (praetorian praefects), most illustrious men, also by his friends (amid) and the secretaries of the bureaus, seated in court, he ordered to be admitted... (the representatives of the parlies and their advocates)...

CT. also C. 9.51.1.

Paulus, Ex libris sex libro l imperialium sententiarum in cognitionibus pro­latarum (D. 50.16.240)

When it was queried whether the expression ‘upon the marriage being dissolved, the dowry is to be returned’, referred not only to divorce but also to death,... and many thought this to be so, while others held contra: according to < the reasons advanced by both sides have been omitted by the compilers >. Moved by this, the emperor decided that by that pad it was intended that in no case would the dowry remain with the husband.

Tabula banasitana 21-52 (CR Acad. Inscrip. 1971 [1972] 468) (July 6, 177A.D.)

Copied and certified from the registry of grants of Roman citizenship of divus Augustus and Tiberius Caesar Augustus...( and succeeding emperors to Marcus Aurelius and Commodus)... which Asclepiodotus, freedman, produced, that which is written below.

The emperor Caesar Lucius Aurelius Commodus Augustus and Marcus Plautius Quintilius being consuls, the day before the Nones of July, at Rome.

Faggura, wife of lulianus, chief of the tribe of Zegrenses. aged 32 years, Iuliana aged 8 years, Maxima aged 4 years. lulianus aged3 years. Diogenianus aged 2 years, children of lulianus named above.

Upon the request of Aurelius lulianus, chief of the Zegrenses, by petition (libellus), supported by Vallius Maximianus by letter (epistula), we have granted Roman citizenship to them, saving the rights of the tribe (salvo hire gentis), without detriment of tribute and taxes of the people and of the fisc.

Done this day, under the same consuls.

Asclepiodotus, freedman, I have certified.

There have signed:

M. Gavius Squilla Gallicanus, son of Marcus; of the Poblilian tribe:

M. Acilius Glabrio, son of Marcus, of the Galerian tribe:

T. Sextius Lateranus, son of Titus, of the Volturian tribe;

C. Septimius Severus, son of Gaius, of the Quirinan tribe;

P. Julius Scapula Tertullus, son of Gaius, of the Sergian tribe;

T. Varius Clemens, son of Titus, of the Claudian tribe;

M. Bassaeus Rufiis, son of Marcus, of the Stellatinan tribe;

P. Taruttienus Patemus, son of Publius, of the Poblilian tribe;

Sex. < ? Tigidius Peren> nis ;

0. Cervidius Scaevola, son of Quintus, of the A menses tribe; Larcius Euripianus, son of Quintus, of the Quirinan tribe;

T. Flavius Piso, son of Titus, of the Palatinan tribe.

The Roman emperors were, from the time of Augustus on, almost without exception, personally involved in the affairs of state, in political, military, financial, as well as legal matters. Millar has presented, in succinct fashion, a recital of the references which reveal the individual attention which the head of the state gave to his tasks.¹ Among other activities the emperor served as judge in the high court which was established to hear cases in first instance and on appeal in criminal, administrative and civil cases? From the very start of the Principate, in addition, the sources touch upon a council to advise and assist the emperor, an institution which persisted throughout the period. The discussion in this section is devoted to the nature and composi­tion of this council and to dwell briefly upon its activities.

Almost a century ago Cuq advanced the thesis that Augustus early in his rule created a deliberative body, which eventually was to replace the Senate as a council on public policy to assist the emperor.’ It began as a committee within the Senate to lay out the business for that body; it continued under succeeding emperors - including persons of equestrian rank-as an advisory body of the emperor; it was converted into a legislative organ by Hadrian and a privy council by Septimius, to appear as the consistorium (imperial council) in post-classical times. In the view of Cuq this was more or less a continuing development.^{[1096] [1097] [1098] [1099] [1100] [1101]}

Mommsen introduced certain fundamental changes in this view? The sen­atorial committee which Augustus set up was strictly a guiding policy group of the Senate and lasted, with minor changes, only into the reign of Tiberius. A somewhat similar privy council was active for a short time during the reign of Alexander Severus.* In addition to these formal political groups, Mom­msen noted that almost all emperors turned to those of his friends (amici principis) and followers (comites) whom he wished, for suggestions and advice in all manner of affairs; he was free to consider these suggestions and advice as he saw fit. In the third place, following republican precedent, the emperors soon set up a judical council to advise and aid the emperor when he acted as judge in civil and criminal cases. This advisory body, at first quite informal, became institutionalized in the course of time, particularly under Hadrian, with leading jurists serving thereon.^{[1102] [1103] [1104] Salaried legal aides were added and it came to be a permanent body assisting the emperor in the development of the law in the latter portion of the Principatc.}

Although modified in part, Mommsen’s view of the consilium principis (council of the emperor), as this legal advisory body has come to be termed, gained general acceptance.* This was, at least, the picture presented in the text books and in legal encyclopedias;’ it was set forth in the treatises on the administration of government^{[1105] [1106] and it appeared in a number of mono­graphs and articles which touched upon the subject.11}

Then, in 1955, Crook, an English scholar of the classics, published a monograph which undertook a re-examination of all pertinent literary and legal texts, inscriptions and papyri, and offered an entirely new approach to the question.^{[1107] [1108] The body of persons from amongst whom the emperor might choose his counsellors was the amiciprincipis(thefriendsoftheemperor).>} Crook agreed with Mommsen that the senatorial committee of Augustus and Tiberius had nothing to do with the advisory group attendant upon the later emperors.[1109] [1110] But he denied that there ever existed a judicial advisory council distinct from the general group of councillors known as the amici principis, or as comites (companions) when they accompanied the emperor on his travels. The bulk of Crook’s book is a careful examination of each recorded instance where the emperors called upon certain members of his chosen amici to act in council, from the time of Augustus to that of Diocletian.” In the early period most of these meetings were held in public, but with the}

§ 161 construction of assembly halls (auditoria) the meetings became largely private, with only petitioning parties, their advocates and witnesses, present with the emperor and his council.'⁶ Most of the reports which have come down to us relate to judicial hearings by the emperor (cognitiones), but administrative hearings would seem to follow the same procedure. Crook has admitted that at times there may have been a law committee of the larger council, as there also was a military committee, but the influence of the council of amici extended into all branches of government, political, financial, military, administrative, as well as legal, and was called upon when emergencies arose. Crook illustrates the operation of the imperial council in various fields of government, including law, in the careers of two amici principis who have left fairly extensive records of their actions, Seneca and Dio Cassius.¹¹A list of the individuals who at one time or another were amici principis discloses the range of persons who assisted the emperors - or at least most of them - in the affairs of state.¹*

The new ideas of Crook seem to have received favorable reception in the reviews of the book” and gained general acceptance in the literature.²⁰ In his review, however, Kunkel disagreed,^{[1111] [1112] [1113] [1114] [1115] [1116] and in subsequent writings has flatly contradicted Crook’s position that there never existed a separate judicial council.[1117] [1118] In fact, analyzing the same source material as Crook, he concluded that Augustus employed an advisory judicial council and that his senatorial committee served as a model for the legal council of the later emperors.15 An emperor might call upon some of his amici in political cases, and regularly employed amici and comites as well as high administrative}

officials, such as the praetorian praefccts, al hearings al which he presided when in the provinces. But in city Rome the sources show that a court con­silium was the regular accompaniment of the emperor in his judicial func­tions. This court consilium was always predominantly composed of senators, chiefly of the highest rank, i.e., consulares (ex*consuls). From the time of Domitian members of the equestrian class were included, but seemingly only those holding praefectural office or in charge of imperial bureaus.^{[1119] [1120] [1121] [1122] [1123] [1124] [1125] The court consilium, Kunkel maintains, ‘was neither a group of insignificant supernumeraries pulled together on occasion and at whim nor a narrow circle of personal friends of the emperor. It was a court of law constituted in accordance with fixed traditional rules to which the leading men of the Senate and (in the 2nd century) the directing officials of the imperial administration belonged.’24 The functions of this judicial body differed, depending on whether it was sitting in a criminal, an administrative or a civil case; in the first two the members of the judicial council participated in the voting on the decision, in civil cases their opinions were but advisory.24The concluding portion of Kunkel’s article is devoted to a discussion of the changes brought about by the shift from public hearings to trials at which the parties and their advocates, and witnesses, appeared in private before the emperor and his judicial council.17}

In the encyclopedia article on the consilium Kunkel emphasizes that the council of the emperor was a specific judicial body, that there never was a council of state (Staatsrat) save under Augustus, and possibly under Alexander Severus.²* The court council was comprised chiefly of senators, with equestrian officials regular members from Hadrian’s time, and with other individuals added now and then. In time salaried legal assistants(con- siliares) were utilized,²’ as well as law clerks (assessores), paid out of the public treasury. These salaried posts existed only in the court of the emperor and those of high officials, not in the praetor’s court.” The court consilium was quite distinct from the council which accompanied the emperor on his travels.^[1126] In this case advisers were appointed from among senatorial amici, to whom equestrian officials were added. This travel council, in contrast to the urban legal council, dealt with political and military matters, as well as judicial affairs.

Whether the views of Crook or those of Kunkel will eventually prevail cannot be predicted at the time of this writing,’¹ but the analysis of the ‘consilium’ of the Tabula Banasitana - if it is one - will undoubtedly be sig­nificant in this determination. Twelve prominent individuals at Rome, six of senatorial rank, of whom five at least were consulares (ex-consuls); six of equestrian status, including an ex-praetorian pracfect, perhaps the two act­ing praetorian praefects, the jurist Scaevola who may have been chief of the bureau a rationibus (of the fisc) at the time, and two other knights who may also have had official posts,” In the editio princeps it is suggested that the twelve men constituted, in Rome, an ad hoc high committee to look into the Roman citizenship of a Berber family.” Schiller has now shown that there was no consilium principis, and if the twelve men formed a high committee, it was to approve the publication of a series of documents emphasizing the generosity and the glory of the Roman state as a means of assuring the loyalty and the support of the neighboring Beduin tribes.”

3. The Palace Secretariat

§ 162 Dio Cassius, Historia Romana LIII. 15,3-5

He (Augustus) sends out procurators... to all the provinces alike, to his own as well as to those of the people, and to this post sometimes men of equestrian rank and sometimes freedmen....(4) He gives instructions to the procurators, to the proconsuls and to the propraetors so that they act under stated orders. Both this practice and the payment of salaries to them and to other officials was estab­lished at this time. (5)... This (salary) was not all the same for them, but as their needs required; the procurators, indeed, get the title of their rank from the amount of salary given them.

Note; Procurators were Sexagenarii (60,000), Centenarii (100,000), Ducenarii (200,000), Trecenarii (300,000) according to the amount of sesterces paid annually.

32. Nicholas, in Jolowicz-Nichoias, Introduction 339-40, seems to favor the views of Kunkel over those ofCrook.

33. Sherwin-White, JRS 63 (1973) 86,90 n.22, notes that the membership of the consilium conforms to that sitting with Caracalla in the trial recorded at Drneir (cognitio Goharienorum); this is not quite exact, for the latter mentions offices, the tabula Banasitana gives names with offices conjectured.

34. Seston-Euzcnnat, CRAcad. Inscrip. 1971 [publ. 1972] 468-90, at p. 487. Cf. also, Sherwin- White, op. cU. n. supra, 89 n.20.

35. Schiller, ‘The Diplomatics of the Tabula Banasitana*, Festschrift Seidl (1975) 143-60, at pp. 155-159.

Suetonius, De vita Caesarum V. 28 (Claudius)

He (Claudius/regarded highly among his freedmen...Posides...Harpocras... and above these, Polybius, secretary of the bureau of studies (a studiis), who often walked between the two consuls; and above all, Narcissus, secretary of the bureau of letters (ab epistulis), and Pallas, secretary of the bureau of accounts (a rationibus), whom at his wish were caused to be honored by decree of the Senate not only with large gifts of money but with quaestorian and praetorian insignia as well.

Tacitus, Historia 1,58.

Vitellius transferred the pre-eminent offices hitherto held only by freedmen to Romans of equestrian rank.

Suetonius, De vita Caesarum VII1.7.2 (Domitian)

He (Domitian) divided the more important offices bet ween freedmen and Romans of equestrian ranks.

Spartianus, De vita Hadriani XXII.8

He (Hadrian) was the first to put Romans of equestrian rank in the bureaus of letters (ab epistulis) and of petitions (a libellis).

Corpus inscriptionum launarum XIV.5347 and 5348

To Lucius Volusius Maecianus, son of Lucius, jurisconsult, praefect of Egypt, praefect of the grain supply, minor pontiff, secretary of the bureau ofpetitions and of taxes (a libellis et censibus) of the emperor Antoninus Augustus Pius, secretary of the bureau of studies and director of libraries, postmaster general (praefectus vehiculorum), secretary of the bureau of petitions of Antoninus Augustus Pius during the reign of divus Hadrianus, associate (to the director) of public works, praefect of the 1st Aelia classica cohort, subaltern (praefectus fabrum ), (monument erected) to the patron of the colony (Ostia) by public decree of the municipal magistrates.

Note: Another recently published inscription adds, as the posts subse­quent to that of praefect of Egypt: praefect of the treasury and consul designate.

Lampridius, Alexander Severus XXXI. 1 (SHA)

The afternoon hours he (Alexander Severus) devoted to the subscription and the reading of letters, the secretaries of the bureau of letters (ab epistulis), of peti­tions (a libellis), and of memorials (a memoria) standing beside him, or oc­casionally if unable to stand on account of ill-health, they would be seated, while the scribes and those attached to the desk re-read everything to him. Then he would add in his own hand whatever was to be added, but according to the opinion of the man who was regarded as the most expert.

The secretariat attached to the emperor, known also as the Palatine offices, comprised a series of bureaus, the chiefs or secretaries of which from the days of the early Principate were posts within the so-called procuratorian career. When Augustus achieved supreme power in the state he began to employ trusted agents (procuratores), slaves, freedmen or even equestrians, as his personal representatives, particularly in the senatorial provinces to supervise the collection of tribute and the payment of the troops; in imperial provinces the primary tasks of the procurators were the administration of the imperial estates.¹ In city Rome Augustus undertook the reorganization of several services and appointed equestrian officials (praefecti) to head the newly created departments? And to handle the ever-increasing correspond­ence and the petitions addressed to him, to take care of his personal expense accounts, and to assist him in other personal affairs, Augustus named particular slaves and freedmen to take charge of these tasks? The designa­tion of positions to which particular individuals were named was hap­hazard and there was no hierarchy of posts among the many appointments? Under succeeding emperors some of these posts were continued, others dropped and new positions created, and gradually equestrians began to replace freedmen as the appointees; in time there developed a hierarchy of positions with increase in salary as one moved up in rank and respon­sibility? The so-called procuratorian career varied considerably during successive epochs of the Principate, both as regards the posts available within each step of promotion as well as in the remuneration accorded the various positions. In recent years all aspects of the career as well as a detailed prosopography of all the individual equites (knights) for whom information is available has been provided by Pflaum? Only one phase in the mid-career ^{[1127] [1128] [1129] [1130] [1131] [1132] of some of the equestrian civil servants, namely, posts in the imperial secre­tariat, is of significance with respect to the subject matter of this chapter. It may be instructive, however, to first trace the career ofthe one equestrian jurist whose memorials provide a full picture of a civil procuratorian career from youth to maturity?}

Legal and literary sources tell us that Lucius Volusius Maecianus was the law teacher of the emperor Marcus Aurelius and a member of the consilium of the emperors Antoninus Pius, Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus.’He was acquainted with the jurist Salvius lulianus, and was the author of a number of legal works, including Quaestiones de fideicommissis (Cases on Trusts) in sixteen books, and De iudiciis publicis (On Public Trials) in fourteen books? The discovery of inscriptions relating to this jurist give a much ful­ler story of his life?⁰ The young man of equestrian rank began his career as a subaltern, associated with a senatorial magistrate. From that he moved to the normal military command of a cohort, garrisoned in Brittany.'¹ Then there was a break in a military career and Maecianus returned to Rome as an assistant to the director of public works (curator operum publicorum). This post was at the bottom of the salary scale, 60,000 sesterces. The young man must have attracted the attention of Antoninus Pius for when the latter became regent during the last months of Hadrian’s rule he made him secre­tary of his bureau of petitions. When Pius became emperor he could not move Maecianus to the same post in the imperial secretariat without grievously violating the regulations for equestrian advancement. Presum­ably by this time Maecianus had progressed in his legal training, for the emperor kept him in Rome by appointment to the post of postmaster general, a centenariate (100,000 HS) position. Hext Maecianus moved to a ducenariate (200,000 HS) position, secretary of the bureau of studies - pre­sumably to furnish technical advice to the emperor-combined with director of libraries. This is a brilliant promotion when it is noted that Suetonius held these posts under Hadrian?’Antoninus Pius was determined to use the services of an outstanding jurist, for Maecianus was made secretary of the

7. The pertinent inscriptions arc set forth by Pflaum, Carrims No. 141,1 333.

8. Kruger, Gesdiichte 199 f.; Kunkel, Hcrlainft 174-76.

9. Comment on the legal works by Schulz, 'fistory 232, and Mayer-Maly,s.v. Volusius.RE 9A (1961) 904, 905 f.

10. Cf. Levy, SZ 52 (1932) 352-55 [ = Schrifttn I 96-98]; Bloch, Notizic 1953, 239,270-72; Pflaum, Carrims No. 141,1 334-36.

11. This was the normal beginning of a ’military’ procuratorian career, leading next to a 60,000 HS post in the provinces; but, as we shall see, Maecianus switched to the ‘civil’ pro­curatorian career, in Rome. Cf, Pflaum, Proawat&trs 237 f,, and Table III (p. 240).

12. Sec inscription published by Marcc-PfUum, CR Acad. Inscrip 1952, 220 fT. [reprinted with discussion. Pflaum, Gtrriires No. 96,1 220 and 223 Ã.].

§ 162 bureau of petitions and of census rolls, the most important legal position among the Palatine offices?³ The jurist received a minor priestly office, an­other sign of imperial favor, and, circa 152 A.D., was named praefectofthe grain supply, and then, in 160, was made governor of Egypt, the climax of his procuralorian career. He continued in this post under the successors of Antoninus Pius.¹⁴ Thereafter, as the most recently discovered inscription reveals, Maecianus was enrolled in the Senate, named to an ancient and revered magistracy, and, finally, consul designate?⁵

Among posts which Maecianus held was that of secretary a libellis, chief of the bureau of petitions. This is one of the Palatine offices which ultimate­ly stem from the services of slaves and freedmen whom Augustus named to handle his personal affairs. Under succeeding emperors these posts continued to be most closely affiliated with the person of the emperor. Some of the most powerful freedmen in the reign of Claudius occupied these offices?* In the time of Domitian an equestrian was first named secretary of the bureau of letters (ab epistulis), a department which apparently handled the correspondence directed to the emperor from officials and civic bodies in the provinces?⁷ The first equestrian head of the bureau of accounts (a rationibus) dates from Trajan’s rule, while Hadrian established equestrian control over further bureaus, a libellis, a censibus and astudiis?* A division of the bureau of letters into ab epistulis Latinis and ab epistulis Graecis was definitively made in the age of Marcus and Verus?* A bureau a cognition­ibus (on judicial investigations) was set up by Alexander Severus. All of these bureaus of the imperial secretariat carried a salary of 300,000 HS for the chief of the department.

Some of these secretariats were closely connected with the activity of the emperor in the process of framing the various imperial pronouncements, or constitutiones. The bureau of petitions is believed to have received the petitions addressed by private individuals to the emperor, and with his agree­ment drafted a reply and submitted it to the emperor for his approval. The

13. Pflaum, Qinftot 335: ‘which constitutes, so to speak, in this time, the Ministry of Justice’ (translation of the author).

14. The earliest papyrus which refers to Maecianus as governor of Egypt is SB 7744(Fcb. 13, 160). and the latest, p. Gen. 35 (Nov. 15, 161) [reff. in Reinmuth, BASF 4 (1967) 75,98]. Marcus Aurelius succeeded Antoninus Pius on Mar. 7, 161 A.D.

15. Whether Maecianus lived to hold the consulate is uncertain; he was born, probably, be­fore 110, and named consul designate circa 165 A.D.

16. Pflaum, ProatHUeurs 36.

17. Cf. Hirschfeld, Venvaitungsbeamien 319 ft The earliest known equestrian secretary ab epistulis is Cnacus Octavius Titinius Capito, see Pflaum, Carriira No. 60,1 143-45.

18. Pflaum, Procurateurs 60. The earliest known equestrian a libellis is Titus Hatcrius Nepos, cf. Pflaum, Camera No. 95,1 217-19, but there may have been equestrians appointed to this post earlier than by Hadrian.

19. See Townend, ‘The Post ab epistulis in the Second Century*, Historia 10(1961) 175-81.

same procedure is said to have been followed by the bureau of letters with respect to correspondence from official sources. Further details on the pro­cedure employed by these two bureaus will be presented infra, in the section on rescripts (§ 166). The bureau a cognitionibus is thought to have been con­cerned with the cases which were tried before the emperor. Presumably this office supplied the emperor with a digest of the briefs submitted, and perhaps also took care of the preparations for the trial of the case.“ The a memoria is a late creation of the early 3rd century which took over much of the business that formerly had been handled by the bureaus ofletters and of peti­tions, but whose exact functions remain uncertain.¹¹ Among the late classical jurists, Papinian, Paul and Ulpian and perhaps others occupied subordinate or primary posts in some of these bureaus, and hence, it is believed by some scholars, contributed of their expertise in the framing of the constitutiones which were issued in the name of the emperor.²² The employment of jurists in the Palatine offices, as well as their positions as praefects, particularly the praetorian praefect, has led to the belief in the bureaucratization of the late classical jurists.¹¹

Recently, Millar has raised serious questions regarding the role of the sec­retariat in the process of imperial pronouncements.¹⁴ In the first place, the preponderance of the evidence shows that those emperors who were inter­ested in the affairs of state became personally involved: petitions were sub­mitted to them, they read them, and they replied to them. Dictation to the staff in the bureau of letters was restored to, but occasionally the emperor added something in his own hand. Nothing regarding the functions of an office can be derived from its title, according to Millar.¹* Many of the secre­taries ab epistulis were literary men, yet the imperial letters show no trace of literary style. Honord assumed that the secretary a libellis wrote the impe­rial answer to the private petitioner, and hence found some correlation be­tween the verbal style of a jurist in his legal works and that of the rescripts in the period when he is thought to have held that office.¹⁴ Millar considers the evidence much too vague for real proof. He concludes that there is not suffi­cient information to reveal the secretariat process in concrete terms, and accordingly states that 'where we arc dealing with a social system totally for-

20. Hirschfcld, Verwaltungsbeamien 329-32; von Prcmcrstcin, s.v. a cognitionibus, RE 4 (1901)220—22.

21. Hirschfcld, op. di., 334-38; Fluss, s.k a memoria, RE 15 (1932) 655-57.

22. E.g., Honors, SDHl 28 (1968) 162, 196 if.

23. Schiller, Seminar 7 (1949) 29, 37-40 [ - American Experience 103-06]; Kunkel, Herkunft 290-304.

24. Millar. JRS 57 (1967) 9-19.

25. Millar, op. dr., 14 f. Directly the opposite point of view was taken by Hirschfcld, Vencaltungsbeamten 331.

26. Honors toe. dt., supra, n.22.

eign to our own experience,... the making of reasonable assumptions about what “must have" happened are all equally irrelevant, indeed positively mis­leading.’^{[1133] [1134] [1135] [1136] [1137] [1138] [1139] All the evidence points in the same direction; in fact on principle the emperors composed their own pronouncements, written as well as ver­bal.7’}

In an article published the same year as that of Millar, de Francisci stresses the close connection between the activities of some of the bureaus of the secretariat and the enactment of constitutiones by the emperor.” To the time of Trajan the edicts of the emperor were the prevalent type of imperial pronouncement. But from the time of Hadrian on the number of rescripts and letters in answer to private petitioners and official bodies increases rapidly, until they become the typical type of constitutions. This results, according to de Francisci, from the reorganization of the secretariat by Hadrian, with a clear distinction of competence being made between the bureau of petitions responsible for the preparation of rescripts, the bureau of letters which prepared the answering letters to officials, and the bureau a cognitionibus responsible for the form of the decisions (decreta) handed down in the imperial court?⁰ The conflicting views of Millar and de Francisci illustrate the difficulty of ascertaining the exact roleplayed by the bureaus, and the secretaries thereof, in preparing imperial constitutions. Yet, in view of the details of the procedure involved in the preparation of the constitutions — to which attention will next be directed — it would seem that secretaries and staff were located in the Palatine area not only to provide information and act as repository centers for documents involv­ing the emperor?¹ but also to perform services in the preparation of the pronouncements ostensibly made by the emperor.