V

NERVA AND TRAJAN

IV.

IMPERIAL ADMINISTRATION

 

The measures described above, mostly gathered from scattered references to Trajan in the Digest, must not be taken to include more than a small part of his legislation; they do assist, however, to fill in the picture of the man himself, which emerges much more fully from the Bithynian correspondence of Pliny. The letters show a flexible disciplinarian; the replies are brief but pointed, and the reasons for each decision are fully explained. They prove in fact that Trajan was no mere warrior, but a man of serious purpose and very great administrative ability; and with a survey of his administrative changes this sketch of the internal history of his reign must conclude.

The presence of Pliny in Bithynia at all was due to the state of the province which was disclosed by investigations into the case of Varenus Rufus. Trajan took it over temporarily from the Senate with their consent and Pliny was sent out, probably in 111, as a legatus pro praetore directly responsible to the Emperor. The choice was a wise one. The finances of some of the cities were compromised, and Pliny had considerable financial experience. His personal uprightness was beyond question, and his legal training and love of detail, coupled with his philhellenism, made him ideally suitable for dealing with the many petty but complicated problems. His inexperience of provincial government was not necessarily a disadvantage: Trajan wanted a dependent and informative governor, and in Pliny he certainly got his man. The provision was continued, and after Pliny's death his old friend and colleague Cornutus Tertullus took his place, and held the position probably until the end of Trajan's reign.

A leading trouble in Bithynia had been the misgovernment of the cities, though it does not appear that there was a general financial crisis, and fresh public works were being freely inaugurated in the province with Pliny's approval. In their mismanagement, however, the Bithynian cities did not stand alone. Even earlier than his appointment a senatorial friend of his, by name Maximus, had been sent to Achaea. The emperors could always, of course, interfere in the affairs of a free city and even revoke its freedom by unilateral act, but an appointment such as that of Maximus was something of a novelty and rather shocking to Pliny's susceptibilities. He was given wider powers than those of merely overseeing the city finances, but he stands alone in his period: similar functions were exercised by the later officers known as correctores. The better known curatores reipublicae or civitatis also first come into prominence under Trajan, and pending further evidence he must be given responsibility for the institution. The majority of contemporary instances belong to Italy, in whose welfare he had a particular interest; in the provinces the governors were no doubt given instructions to take their own steps, and for Bithynia we can see the results, but Trajan's appointments occur at least in Gaul and the system spread rapidly throughout the empire, though in imperial provinces it was rare. The purpose of the institution was to prevent cities getting into debt through over­building or municipal corruption, and the degree of interference exercised at first was probably small. If it were successful the gain to the Empire would be great, though only indirectly: and the dangerous uses to which the system was later put could not have been foreseen. It marked, however, a further step on the road to paternalism, the implications of which Trajan, whose letters show him solicitous for urban independence, probably did not clearly understand.

Among further innovations, the duties of C. Julius Proculus as leg. Aug. p. p. region. Transpadanae are obscure but the probable date of his appointment suggests a connection with the Dacian War; and he seems to have found no successor. From the title held by C. Avidius Nigrinus in Achaea the province seems to have been removed, like Bithynia, from senatorial to imperial control, perhaps as a result of the experiment with Maximus. About 114 the procurator of Thrace was replaced by a senator of praetorian rank, the jurist P. Juventius Celsus, and the change persisted. An obvious explanation lies in the outbreak of the Parthian War, but no doubt the progress in civilization of Thrace, especially fostered by Trajan, also warranted a rise in its provincial status. The annexation of Armenia caused the division of the Galatian-Cappadocian complex: henceforward Cappadocia and Armenia Minor were detached and formed a separate unit with Armenia Majors.

The tendency already manifest under the Flavians for knights to replace freedmen in control positions in the civil service reached a further stage under Trajan. In his reign appears the first equestrian a rationibus, in the person of L. Vibius Lentulus, who held the office before 114; this man also appears to be the earliest known equestrian procurator monetae and procurator a loricata, the first of which posts he must have held in the nineties. Another new equestrian office was the procurator aquarum; early in the reign the post was still held by freedmen. The process of transference from tax farming to direct collection of the vectigalia was further developed and perhaps completed: but in their essentials these reforms belong to Flavian initiative.

In the real business of government, senatorial debates had little share; Trajan was master, but the most absolute autocrat needs good subordinates, and inscriptions tell us much about the personnel of Trajan's administration. As he worked hard himself, so he expected his intimate friends to do and numerous careers of the time, as of Cornutus Tertullus, Minicius Natalis, Pompeius Falco or Numisius Sabinus, show almost continuous employment in the imperial service. Nor were Orientals excluded from high positions; C. Antius A. Julius Quadratus of Pergamum was legate of Syria from about 101, Claudianus of Xanthus, the first senator from Lycia, commanded leg. II Traiana probably in the East, while C. Julius Berenicianus Alexander, the descendant of a  King Alexander admitted to the Senate by Vespasian, was perhaps a legionary legate in the Parthian campaign; C. Julius Quadratus Bassus, honoured in Pergamum, served on Trajan's staff in both the Dacian and Parthian Wars, and rose to be one of the most distinguished men in the State. It is possible, too, that both Ti. Claudius Livianus, praefectus praetorio for the greater part of the reign and throughout both Dacian and Parthian wars, and C. Claudius Severus, governor of Arabia from II, were of Asiatic Greek descents.

Above this circle of hard-working administrators stood the particular intimates of the Princeps. First of these was L. Licinius Sura, thrice consul, a fellow Spaniard and contemporary, who had stood by Trajan in Germany and throughout the Dacian wars. His great riches, and the Emperor's confidence, earned him enemies, whom his patronage of Hadrian did nothing to appease; but their attempt to estrange Trajan from him was a failure. His death about 110was an evil day for Rome; he possessed great influence and he alone could have dissuaded the Emperor from the Parthian campaign; had he lived he would have seen the adoption of Hadrian placed beyond all doubt. Next to Sura and probably among his enemies mentioned by Dio came the three consulars A. Cornelius Palma, L. Julius Ursus Servianus and L. Publilius Celsus, who were as jealous of his influence with Trajan, as they certainly were of the rise of Hadrian. All three had given the Emperor distinguished service and were rewarded with second consulships, and two at least with triumphal statues in his Forum. It is not indeed fanciful to see in Trajan's unwillingness to proceed to a formal adoption of Hadrian a reluctance to offend this powerful group. There were thus divided parties round the throne; and the succession of Hadrian brought matters to a head. Servianus certainly survived—though he was put to death by Hadrian in 136, in his ninetieth year—and was honoured with a third consulship, the highest honor a private citizen could obtain under the empire; but Palma and Celsus were executed in 118 and their fate was shared by Avidius Nigrinus and Lusius Quietus, who had no doubt belonged to their faction.

The career of the Moor Quietus illustrates Trajan's readiness to favor a competent man whatever his origins: but it is probable that his impetuousness was a dangerous influence in the Emperor's later years when his hold of himself was less steady. The political sympathies of Q. Sosius Senecio are less well known: he was a patron of literature and the friend of Pliny and Plutarch; his father-in-law was Julius Frontinus, and his son-in-law Pompeius Falco, after a distinguished career under Trajan, was further promoted by Hadrian. Senecio then probably belonged to the party of Sura and Hadrian, which one may characterize as pacific and perhaps opposed to the Parthian wars, in opposition to the aggressive policy urged by the faction of Palma and Quietus. Still less certain is the position of L. Neratius Priscus whom Trajan was even said to have destined as his successor: he was, however, primarily a lawyer and with Juventius Celsus a leader of the Proculian school; and he was among the judicial counsellors of both Trajan and Hadrian. It is possible that his influence lay in this direction rather than that of politics. It is difficult to estimate the share of these different men in shaping the policy of Trajan's principate; and in view of his own strong character we are justified in calling it the Emperor's own. One thing is certain—the influence of Sura, and it is perhaps to his death that we should attribute the deterioration of the last years.