Full text of "The Master of the Offices in the Later Roman and Byzantine Empires"

See other formats

Google

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project

to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the

publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web

at |http: //books .google .com/I

^T^HE volumes of the University of Michigan Studies
are published by authority of the Executive Board
of the Graduate School of the University of Michigan.
A list of the volumes thus far published or arranged
for is given at the end of this volume.

3fy-

HUMANISTIC SERIES

VOLUME XIV

ASPECTS OF ROMAN LAW AND

ADMINISTRATION

PART I. THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

3/2
£>&6

^•ni^y^o

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY

mw TOKK • BOSTON • CHICAGO • DALLAS
ATLAKTA • SAM mAMCISCO

MACMILLAN ft CO., Uurm

LONDON • BOMBAY • CALCUTTA

THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, Ltd.

THE

MASTER OF THE OFFICES

IN THE

LATER ROMAN AND
BYZANTINE EMPIRES

ARTHUR Ef Rf BOAK

UNIVERSmr OF MICHIGAN

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY

LONDON: MACMILLAN AND COMPANY

I9I9

All rigbtt reserved

Set up and etoctiocypcd. Published Much, 1919.

Jffcfeiiit Wnm

J. 8. OiuhiDf Co. — Berwick A Smith Co.

Norwood, Mmm., U.S.A.

PREFACE

The following study of the Master of the Offices is an attempt
to throw more light upon the intricate administrative system ob-
taining in the Later Roman and Byzantine Empires through a
detailed treatment of the history and scope of one particular office.
It is a development of work done in connection with a doctoral
thesis on the Roman Magistri, some of the results of which are
incorporated in the first chapter.

For directing his attention to the Late Roman and Byzantine
field of historical research, as well as for constant guidance and
suggestion in the preparation of this monograph, the writer's
special acknowledgments are due to Professor W. S. Ferguson, of
Harvard University. He is further under great obligation to
Mr. William H. Murphy, of Detroit, whose generosity has made
the publication of this study possible.

ARTHUR E. R. BOAK.
Ann Arbor, Michigan,
April, 19 1 8.

▼u

CONTENTS

Introduction :

Historical Significance of the Master of the Offices
Sources and Literature

PACS
I

Chapter I. The Roman Magistri:

i. Masters who were Magistrates of the Roman Republic ... 7
ii. Masters who were neither Public Officiab nor Officers of Colleges,

but who had a Recognized Position in Commercial and Social

Organizations 7

iii. Masters whose Functions were Primarily Religious ... 8
iv. Masters who were Officials in the Civil Service of the Roman

Empire 13

V. Masters who were Officials in the Military Service of the Roman

Empire 15

Chapter II. The Administrative System of the Roman Empire from

THE Time of Constantine I : The Offices of the Palace . . 17

Chapter III. The History of the Mastership of the Offices:

i. The Establishment of the Office

ii. The Mastership from 337 to 600 a.d

iii. The Mastership in the Byzantine Empire to the Latin Conquest in

I ZO^ AtU* ...a......

Chapter IV. The Competence of the Master of the Offices:

i. The Master of the Offices and the Palace Guards .

ii. The Master of the Offices and the Ofiaa Palatina

iii. The Master of the Offices and the Agentes in Rebus

iv. The Master of the Offices and the Cursus Publicus

V. The Master of the Offices and the Mensores .

vi. The Master of the Offices and the Scrinia
vii. The Master of the Offices and the State Arsenals .
viii. The Master of the Offices, the Ltmites^ and the Dtues

ix. The Master of the Offices and the Imperial Consistory
X. The Ceremonial Duties of the Master of the Offices

xi. The Officium of the Master of the Offices

xii. The DotnesHcus of the Master of the Offices .
xiii. Characteristics of the Mastership ....

24
49

63
68

74
80

98
100
104

105

X CONTENTS

PAGS

Chapter V. The Titles, Honors, and Privileges of the Master of
THE Offices:

i. The Roman Period no

ii. The Byzantine Period 117

Bibliography :

i. Greek and Latin Texts 127

ii. Modern Works 128

Appendix A:

References to Magistri in Roman Literature and Inscriptions 131

Appendix B:

i. The Masters of the Offices to the reign of Michael III . .148
ii. The Byzantine Masters 151

Index 155

THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

INTRODUCTION

I. HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE MASTER OF THE

OFFICES

The Master of the Offices interests the student of the gov-
ernment of the Later Roman Empire, and invites his close
attention, for various reasons.

First, no parallel to this officer can be found among the
government ministers of modern states, and even among those
of the Empire itself the Master of the Offices occupied a singular
position ; for while the other great officers of state controlled
branches of the administration easily definable and possessing
some essential unity, his sphere of activities was made up of an
aggregation of various powers which brought him into touch
with the most diverse functions of the government.

The Mastership of the Offices, too, had a long and interesting
history, extending over the period from the reconstruction of
Diocletian until the Latin conquest of Constantinople. From
a comparatively inconspicuous beginning, by a series of additions
to its competence, it became one of the most honorable and
influential of the civil offices of the Empire. Then its power
began to decline as it had arisen : one after the other its active
functions were transferred to new offices, and, finally, it ceased
altogether to be an administrative office, and remained solely as
a title of honor. Thus arose the grade of dignitaries bearing /

the title of Master simply, no longer that of Master of the Offices.
This was the final stage in the history of the Mastership.

Not only is the story of this office interesting in itself but the
study of its development also illustrates, through a concrete ^^

B I 1/^

2 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

example, many of the important changes that affected the char-
acter of the imperial Roman administrative system as a whole,
and gives one an insight into the detailed working of that vast
governmental machine.

II. SOURCES AND LITERATURE

The chief contemporary sources of information regarding the
Master of the Offices are the Codes of Theodosius II and
Justinian, with the Novellae^ of Theodosius II, Valentinian III,
Majorian and Justinian, which afford the best aid in reconstruct-
ing the historical development of that office up to about the
middle of the sixth century a.d.

A list of the departments of the administration under the
control of this Master at the end of the first quarter of the fifth
i century is preserved in the catalogue of the officials of the
Empire known as the Notitia Dignitatum, compiled in its
present form by about 425 a.d.^ The Notitia also gives the
organization of the Master's personal office at the same period.
Equally important information regarding the Master of the
Offices in the Gothic Kingdom of Theodoric in Italy in the first
part of the sixth century is afforded by the formula magisteriae
dignitatis, contained in the Variae of Cassiodorus, dating from
537 A.D. A brief and somewhat confused sketch of the growth
of the Mastership up to the time of Justinian is given in the
De magistratibus imperii Romani (nepl ap^Siv rfj^ 'Fca/iai^ov
TToXiTctas) of Johannes Lydus, written in 551 a.d. The Kletoro-
logion of Philotheus, a list of the imperial dignitaries and
functionaries at the end of the ninth century, prepared in 899,
gives the position of the Masters, at that time forming an order of
rank, among the dignitaries of the Empire, and the inaugural
ceremony to this grade as well as its distinctive insignia. For
the part played by these Masters in the various ceremonies of the
Byzantine court in the tenth century, and also for considerable
information regarding similar duties of the Master of earlier
centuries, we are indebted to the De Ceremoniis ("Efc^ccrts r^s
^axnXeiov rct^cois) of Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus (912-58).

^ The editions of the Novellae, as of other works frequently cited, are indicated in the
Bibliography, pp. 127-129.

* Mommsen, Hermes^ vol. 36, pp. 544-47.

INTRODUCTION 3

In addition, incidental references to Masters of the Offices,
which are useful in throwing light upon the character and scope
of the Mastership, are found throughout the literary material in
general, chiefly, as might be expected, in that of a historical
character, which has survived from the pericxl between the
opening of the fourth and the close of the twelfth century.

Of modern works which, directly or indirectly, are useful for
the study of the Mastership of the Offices, the oldest is Gotho-
fredus's edition of the Theodosian Code' with its learned com-
mentaries. The work of other early commentators has been
summed up and superseded by Bocking in extensive notes to
his edition of the Notitia Dignitatum (1839-53).

Karlowa's Romische Rechtsgeschichte (vol. i, 1880), Schiller
in the second volume of his Geschichte der romischen Kaiser zeit
(1887), and J. S. Reid's chapter on the "Reorganization of the
Empire" in the Cambridge MediiBval History (vol. i, 191 1) offer
the most satisfactory general surveys of the functions of the
Master of the Offices at the height of his power. More valuable
for the close study of this office are the contributions of Otto
Seeck in his Geschichte des Untergangs der antiken Welt (vol. 2,
1 901) and his article comites in the Pauly-Wissowa Real-
encyclopadie der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft (vol. 4, 1901).
These have the merit of offering the most satisfactory view of the
origin of the Master's office and of putting it in its proper rela-
tion to the general reorganization of the court and the adminis-
tration at the opening of the fourth century.

Upon the position of the Mastership in the Gothic Kingdom
of Italy and in the Eastern Empire at the close of the fifth and
the first part of the sixth century much light is thrown by
Mommsen's Ostgothische Studien (1889-90). As important for
the later history of the Mastership as the works of Seeck for the
earlier period is J. B. Bury's Imperial Administration in the
Ninth Century (191 1), which shows clearly the steps by which
the Mastership was changed from an administrative office to an
honorary title of rank, and indicates the general tendencies at
work within the Empire which were responsible for this evolution.

What is still lacking is a complete history of the Mastership
that will cover the whole period of its existence and trace clearly,

^ First published at Paris, in 1549.

4 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

so far as is possible, in their proper chronological order, the
various stages of its development and its decline, showing the
connection between these changes and the general tendencies
which aflfected the administration as a whole. Ancient as well
as modem historians recognized that the powers of this office at
its height were the result of a long period of growth, but the
tendency has been to neglect the stages of the process and con-
sider only its results. The works of Seeck and Bury supply the
necessary corrective for two distinct epochs. It is the aim of this
study to treat the entire history of the Mastership in the spirit
of these historians.

CHAPTER I

THE ROMAN MAGISTRI

The word magister contains the idea of superior power. It is
probably a derivative from magis^ and is applicable to that one of
any group of individuals who has more authority than the rest.^
Paulus * says that it was given as a title to persons " to whom is
entrusted the special superintendence of affairs, and who, above
the rest, owe diligence and care to the business of which they are
in charge." The verb magistrare contains the same idea, being
equivalent to mocUrare or regere et temperare? Magister never
had the force of dominus^ *lord,' which contains the idea of pos-
session. It was this simple yet wide meaning of the word magis-
ter, so closely akin to that of our own Master, that permitted its
adoption as an official title in practically all branches of Roman
public and private life.

The office of a Master was called a magistratus, * magistracy,'
or, more usually, a magisterium, 'mastership.'* The antonym of
magister is minister, and both have their corresponding feminine
forms, magistra, * Mistress,' and ministra^

Under the Roman Republic, at least in historic times, magister
was but sparingly used as a title of political officials, although its

^ Qui magis ceteris potest, Varro, De lingua latina, 6, 83 ; magister, maiar in statione,
Isid. 10, 170; cf. Paul. Epit,, 126, 152 M. Magister is a Latin word not appearing in
Greek until after the Roman conquest, and then as a borrowed term, in the forms /ukyurrtp,
fAdyurrpoi (the regular spelling), and fjuiyumap ; cf. Forcellini, Lexicon ; Stephanus,
Thesaurus linguae Graecae ; Du Cange, Glossarium mediae et infimae Graecitatis, The
older Latin form was magester (Quint, i, 4, 18).

^ Digesta, L, 16, 57.

* Paulus, he, cit. It also appears in the form magisterare,

^ Magistratus, CJ.L, I, p. 43, epistula consulum de BacchanaUbus ; Paulus, £pit.^
126 M. Magisteria, id., 152.

' Minister, Isid. 10, 170.

6 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

abstract magistratus was the regular term used to designate both
the ordinary political office itself and the holder of such an office,
who derived his power from popular election, or its substitute, co-
optation/ Mommsen * thought that magister was not used of the
public magistrates because the word originally denoted a single
person endowed with superior authority and, consequently, was
less suited than the abstract magistratus to officials organized on
the collegiate principle. But the fact is that, as Mommsen admits,
we find colleges of Masters in vici^ po^gi^ municipia and other cor-
porations, which shows that there is nothing inherent in the
meaning of the word that conflicts with the idea of coUegiality.
Perhaps the explanation is that when Roman political thinking
required a general term for magistrates, magister was already too
commonly employed in other spheres to make its use convenient
here. In the bureaucracy of the Empire the title Master appears
much more frequently than under the Republican regime. How-
ever, in both periods the appellative Master, owing to the neces-
sity of avoiding confusion in the case of a title capable of such
wide application, was always accompanied b^ some qualifying
epithet, as, for example, Master of the Horse {magister equitum)
or Master of the Census {magister census); so that the whole
phrase, and not the word Master alone, formed the title of the
office. Only in the late Byzantine Empire, when the title of
Master was restricted, first to one office, and then to members of
an order of rank, did it dispense with such qualification.

In the other spheres of Roman life, social, religious, and com-
mercial. Master as a title was in widespread usage. Festus* says
that there were Masters, not only of the liberal arts, but also of
rural districts, of associations, and of villages or city quarters.
The various uses of the word " president " may oflfer an English
analogy.

It will facilitate a survey of the Roman Masters to divide them
into several groups, based upon the character of the offices which
they held, and, to a certain degree, corresponding chronologically
to the extension of the use of Master with an official significance.
Therefore the following general classification is suggested :

* Paul. Epit.y 126 M. ; Mommsen, Romisches Staatsrecht, vol. i, p. 8.

* Loc, cit,y A. I. Varro's explanation, De ling, lot, 5, 82, is impossible.

* Paul. Epit,y 126 M. : Magistri non solum doctor es artium sed etiam pagorum, soci-
etatum, vicorum, equitum dicuntur^ quia hi magis ceteris possunt.

THE ROMAN MAGISTRI 7

Masters who were Magistrates of the Roman Republic.
Masters who were neither Public Officials nor Officers of Colleges,
but who had a recognized position in Commercial and Social
organizations.
Masters whose functions were primarily religious :

Masters who were not Officers of Colleges, but who formed a College
themselves, acting on behalf of a community in a public capacity.
Masters who were Officers of Colleges.
Masters who were Imperial Officials in the Civil Service of the Roman

Empire.
Masters who were Imperial Officials in the Military Service of the
Roman Empire.

We shall now proceed to a dicussion of the Masters who fall
within each of these categories and thus establish the relation of
the title Master of the Offices to other official titles in which the
word Master occurs.

I. Masters who were Magistrates of the Roman Republic

These Masters may be dismissed with a very brief mention.
They were only two in number, namely, the Master of the People
{magister populi) and the Master of the Horse {jnagister equituni).
In historic times the name of Master of the People no longer
appears, but has been supplanted by that of Dictator. On the
contrary, the Master of the Horse persisted until the abolition of
the Dictatorship in 44 b.c. These two titles, however, show that
the use of Master to denote an official of state was probably as
old as the Roman Republic itself.

II. Masters who were neither Public Officials, nor Of-
ficers OF Colleges, but who had a Recognized Position
IN Commercial and Social Organizations

In this rather miscellaneous section have been grouped such
Masters as were not civil or military authorities of the state or of
municipalities, or religious officials bearing a public character or
serving in private associations, but nevertheless occupied positions
which, in common usage and in the eyes of the law, authorized
them to bear that title.

All the titles of this class, with the possible exception of the
Shopmaster {magister tabemae), were in current usage during the
republican epoch and date from a period so far back of the earliest
records which we have of their presence that it is impossible to
determine just when they came to be generally employed. How-

8 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

ever, as can be seen by a glance at the appended list, the various
titles represent a wide range of interests — legal, social, educa-
tional, commercial, and agricultural. And, since the presence of
regular official titles indicates a certain degree of order and regu-
larity in the conduct of affairs, one must place the introduction of
these Masters at a time when Rome had attained a sufficient stage
of material and cultural advancement to require the systematic or-
ganization of the various activities of her citizens. Thus the
Master in Bankruptcy (magister auctionis) is the fruit of consider-
able legal experimenting with bankruptcy cases; the School-
masters (ludimagistrt) presuppose a fairly widespread demand for
elementary education ; the Master of the Companies of publicani
{magister societatis) is the product of a well-developed system of
tax farming ; the Master of the Herd {magister pecoris) and the
Taskmaster {magister operum) can only have appeared with a
well-organized and widely extended system of ranching and farm-
ing on a large scale, i.e. with a great territorial expansion of the
state; while the Shipmaster {magister navis) is a figure which
doubtless first arose after the appearance of Rome as a world
power and mercantile factor in the Mediterranean basin, in a period
subsequent to the unification of the Italian peninsula.

Thus the presence of each of these Masters indicates a con-
siderable advance in the power and material resources of the
Roman state and points to a period far removed from the origins
of civic development, a fact not necessarily true of the public ofr
ficials, the Master of the People and the Master of the Horse,
who probably antedate all the Masters mentioned here.

The following are the Masters who may be included in this
group :

1 . Magister auctionis^ Master in Bankruptcy.

2. Magister bibendi, Toastmaster.

3. Ludimagistriy Schoolmasters.

4. Magister namsy Shipmaster.

5. Magister operum, Taskmaster.

6. Magister pecoris, Master of the Herd.

7. Magister societatis. Company Master.

8. Magister tabernae, Shopmaster.

III. Masters whose Functions were Primarily Religious

This is by far the largest class of Masters. It includes all those
whose chief duties were connected with the performance of certain
religious rites, no matter what organization or combination of in-

THE ROMAN MAGISTRI 9

dividuals they represented in this capacity, and who had, therefore,
a priestly character.

However, the position occupied by these Masters will be seen
more clearly if we distinguish two types of Masters within the
general class under consideration. The organization of the various
groups of Masters who fall within the class has been adopted as
the basis of this subdivision, because the Masters themselves, and
not the cults which they directed, interest us here. Therefore,
they have been classified in two groups, Masters who, like the
Roman magistrates, themselves formed a college, and Masters who
were officers within larger colleges of which they were members.
It happens that the Masters of the first subdivision, without excep-
tion, at the same time bore a public character as the representatives
of political units recognized in the Roman governmental system ;
while the second group embraces Masters who, thanks to their
presence in public priestly colleges, possessed in some measure
this public character, and others, again, who lacked it entirely.

We shall now consider a little more closely the Masters of
each of these subdivisions.

I. Masters who were not Officers of Colleges^ but who formed a
College themselves^ acting on Behalf of a Community in a
Public Capacity

Such Masters existed in Rome, in Italy, and throughout the
provinces of the Roman Empire, and were present in the various
coloniae, municipia^ viciy pagi^ fora^ and castella^ as well as in the
conventus and cannabae of Roman citizens, which lay outside the
Roman municipal system.

However, the Masters in these several political units were not
all organized in like fashion nor possessed of identical powers.
Indeed, in no two forms of communal organization do the colleges
of Masters present exactly the same features, with the exception of
the Masters of the Shrines {magistri fani) in the colonies and
other municipalities. Two characteristics, nevertheless, were
common to all and determine their place in this classification;
namely, their collegiate organization and the religious nature of
their functions. The latter might or might not be combined with
duties of a purely secular character, which, however, did not over-
shadow the religious side of the office. Furthermore, these sacral
functions were exercised by the Masters as representatives of the

10 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

whole of the members of the body politic to which they belonged
— their canton, village, ward, city, etc., — and in this sense the
Masters were public officials.

The scope and importance of the secular powers of such Mas-
ters varied according to the stage of political development attained
by the community to which they belonged; more definitely, ac-
cording to the number and character of the magistrates officiating
there. Thus we find Masters in a barrack village {vicus canna-
bensis), in the absence of regular magistrates, assuming the part
of representatives of their community in all respects where it was
called upon to act as a unity. A similar position was taken by the
Masters in the Roman conventus on Delos, who were nothing
more than Masters of Shrines,^ while, in fully developed munici-
palities, such were merely the curators of particular shrines and,
apparently, had no secular duties whatever. This latter type of
Masters appeared also in cantons and villages, forming secondary
colleges with strictly religious functions, even when other colleges
of Masters stood at the head of the community.

The early development of such colleges of Masters is older
than our records. We meet the system in operation in the second
century B.C. ; we see it adopted in the municipal organization of the
following century, then in full bloom under the Principate ; in some
cases it persisted after the reforms of Diocletian and Constantine.

The following is the list of Masters of this group:

1 . Magistri pagi, Masters of the Canton or District.

2. Magistri via\ Masters of the Village or Quarter.

3. Magistri municipii. Municipal Masters.

4. Magistri castelli^ Masters of the Caste! lum.

5. Magistri curiae^ Masters of the Curia.

6. Magistri faniy Masters of the Shrine.

7. Magistri Fundi and Magistri Saltus, Masters of the Estate and Masters of the

Domain.

2. Masters who were Members^ and at the Same Time OjfficerSy
of Colleges, whose Membership included Others than the
Masters themselves.

These Masters differ from those of the preceding group in
being the official representatives, not of some community organized .
on a political basis, or an administrative division of the same, but
of a corporation or society, whether religious or secular. Here the

^ Reference may be made to my article, Magistri in Campania and Delos, published
in Classical Philology^ vol. 10 (191 5), pp. 25-45.

THE ROMAN MAGISTRI ii

Masters themselves did not constitute the college, although often
they may be said to have formed a college within a college, but
were officers for the remaining members, whose number varied
according to the character of the respective associations.

This class of Masters includes on the one hand Masters of
colleges intrusted with the performance of public cults, and on
the other Masters of other religious and secular colleges.

a. Masters of Colleges intrusted with the maintenance of

Public Cults

Among the colleges which were responsible for the main-
tenance of the public cults (sacra pudlica), in Rome and else-
where throughout the Empire, we have to distinguish priestly
and non-priestly organizations. The priestly colleges were those
in which all of the members were priests, as in the college of
the pontiffs or that of the quindecemvirs. The non-priestly
colleges included the remaining religious colleges of the group
in question, in which the only true priests were those annually
elected from among the ordinary lay members, as, for example,
in the colleges of the Mercuriales.*

This difference in the constitution of the two sorts of colleges
brought with it, as would naturally be expected, a corresponding
difference in the position and functions of the Masters in the
respective classes. Here, however, it will be sufficient to indicate
the titles of the Masters belonging to the colleges of each sort.

The following Masters belong to the priestly colleges :

1. Magister Fratrum Arvalium^ Master of the Arval Brothers.

2. Magister Haruspicum^ Master of the Haruspices.

3. Magister Collegii Lupercorum^ Master of the Lupercal College.

4. Magister Pontificunty Master of the Pontiffs.

5. Magister Quindecemvirum Sacris FaciundiSy Master of the Quindecemvirs.

6. Magister Saliorum, Master of the Salii.

7. Magister Sodalium Augustalium Claudialium, Master of the Augustan and Clau-

dian Sodales.

The Masters of the non-priestly colleges were :

I Magistri Augustales^ Masters of the Augustales.

2. Magistri Capitolinorum^ Masters of the Capitolini.

3. Magistri Ceriales, Masters of the Ceriales.

4. Magistri Martini,, Masters of the Martini.

5. Magistri Mercuriales, Masters of the Mercuriales.

6. Magistri Collegii Minervae^ Masters of the College of Minerva.

7. Magistri Herculanii, Masters of the Herculanii.

* Cf. Wissowa, Religion und Kultus der Romer, p. 404, n. 7.

12 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

b. Masters of other Religious and Secular Colleges

Here are grouped in one section the Masters of all colleges,
religious, funerary, social, professional, or of any other character,
which differ from the religious colleges of the preceding class in
not being charged with the maintenance of a public cult. It is
not necessary to make separate categories for the Masters of the
several varieties of colleges included in this section, because the
organization of all these colleges was the same in its general
features, and the position held by the Master was alike in each ;
and also because, in many cases, it is extremely difficult to deter-
mine under which category a particular college falls.^ The desig-
nation of these colleges as privata has been avoided, following the
example of San Nicolo,^ who points out the inexactness of the
use of this term with reference to many of the Roman cor-
porations.

Mistresses, in place of Masters, are found in colleges whose
members were women only, and in others where a considerable
number of the female sex were enrolled they appear in company
with Masters. In many colleges there were Ministers, minisiri,
who acted as the assistants of the Masters ; also attendants of the
other sex, ministrae^ occupying a corresponding position with
regard to the Mistresses.

In general, it may be said that, while the Masters of these
colleges regularly acted as a board of annually or quinquennially
elected Presidents exercising a general supervision over all the
activities of their respective corporations, their most characteristic
duties were in connection with the celebration of the particular
cult which was the focus of the life of their institution. From
this consideration they may justly be regarded as Masters whose
functions were primarily religious.

For a list of these Masters and their colleges, which would be
too long to be duplicated here, one may refer to Appendix A, or
to the third volume of Waltzing's Corporations Professionelles.

* Cf. Mommsen, De collegiis et sodaliciis Romanorum ; Schiess, Die romischen collegia
funeratica ; Liebenam, Rotnisches Vereinswesen ; Waltzing, Les corporations professio-
nelles chez les Rontains ; cf. also Ruggiero, Dizionario Epigraphico, vol. 2, pp. 340 ff. ;
Kornemann, Pauly-Wissowa Realencycl.y vol 4, pp. 386-88.

* Aegyptisches Vereinswesen, vol. i, p. 2 ff.

THE ROMAN MAGISTRI 13

IV, Masters who were Officials in the Civil Service of

THE Roman Empire

The Masters who were officers in the civil service of the
Roman Empire included: Masters who were in the service of
the Financial Administration; Masters who were the chiefs of
the Central Secretarial Departments; the Master of the Audi-
ences and the Master of the Offices.

I. Masters who were in the Service of the Financial

Administration

This group comprises Masters and Vicemasters {promagistri)
who were imperial revenue officers in the period of the Early
Principate, as well as Masters who were officials of the Fiscus
and the Res Privata during the period of transition in the third
century and after the reorganization of Diocletian and Constantine.
From the Early Principate we have record of the following
Masters and Vicemasters : the Master and Vicemaster of the five
per cent Inheritance Tax {tnagister, promagister xx hereditatium),
the Vicemaster of the Inheritances {promagister hereditatium)^
the Vicemaster of the Port Dues {promagister portuum), and the
Vicemaster of the Grain Rent {promagister /rumen ti mancipalis).

That branch of the imperial finances known as the Privy Purse
{res privata), which from the time of Septimius Severus denoted
the personal property of the Emperor, numbered among its officials
several bearing the title of Master. These were the Master of the
Privy Purse {magister privatae rei) and the Masters of the Privy
Purse in the provinces {magister privatae rei Africae, Aegypti et
Libyan, and the magister aeris sive privatae rei in Pontus and Asia).

The Fiscus, the treasury into which flowed the revenues that
accrued to the Emperor in his official capacity as head of the
state, also had some Masters in its service; namely, the Master
of the Imperial Accounts {magister summarum rationum), the
Masters of the Linen Wardrobe {magistri lineae vestis), and the
Masters of the Private Wardrobe {magistri privatae).

2. Masters who were the Chiefs of the Central Secretarial

Departments

Here belong the Masters of the Scrinia, or bureaus, through
which the official correspondence of the central administration
was conducted. The list of these Masters is as follows :

14 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

1 . The Master of the Memoria {jmagister memoriae) .

2. The Masters of the Latin and Greek Correspondence {magistri epistularum lati-

narum et graecarum) .

3. The Master of the Petitions (magister libellarum),

4. The Master of the Sacred Inquests {magister sacrarum cognitionum),

5. The Master of the Imperial Schedules {magister dispositionum) ,

In addition to these Masters of the Scrinia, we must place
here the Master of the Census {magister censuum, census) and the
Master of the Records {magister studiorum).

3. The Master of the Audiences and the Master of the Offices

The Master of the Offices {magister offvciorum), who forms the
subject of this essay, will receive detailed consideration in the
following chapters. The Master of the Audiences {magiste^
admissionum) was one of his subordinates and had no inde-
pendent sphere of action.

Among the civil officials of the Empire the title of Master
makes its appearance towards the end of the first century a.d. It
was then used as the title of certain officials employed in connec-
tion with the raising of the revenue, which at that time was being
removed from the hands of private contractors and placed under
imperial control. Other officials engaged in this same service
had the title of Vicemaster. It seems clear that these titles were
taken over into the imperial offices from the private corpora-
tions of tax-collectors, societates publicanorum^ at the same time
that the government assumed the responsibility for the raising of
taxes. By the end of the second century these Masters and
Vicemasters had disappeared, probably owing to a reorganization
of the procuratorial system.

In the third century appears another group of Masters. The
title was then used of the officials in charge of the various depart-
ments {curae, officia^ scrinid) of the imperial administration cen-
tered at the capital. These Masters were not new officers, but
merely the older ab admissionibus, a censibus^ a cognitionibus, ab
epistulis, a libellis, a memoria^ and a studiis under new names.
This can be seen at a glance from the transitional form of their
titles, such as magister ab admissione, magister a censibus, and
magister a libellis. It was probably under Diocletian, prior to
297 A.D., that these titles took their final forms.

It is perhaps impossible to say why the title of Master was

THE ROMAN MAGISTRI 15

chosen for these bureau chiefs. One might think that the Masters
of the priestly colleges, in which there was usually only one such
official, furnished the model. But it was probably the general
adaptability of this title, as indicating the one who assumed the
direction or leadership in any field, that determined its adoption
here.

Meanwhile the Masters had made their reappearance in the
financial administration. In the course of the third century the
director of the res privata became tnagister {sacrae) privatae^ and
the assistant of the chief of the fiscus was called tnagister sutntna-
rum rationum. Both these titles disappeared before the close of
the reign of Constantine I, and from then until towards 350 a.d.
the supervisors of the res privata in the provinces enjoyed the
title of magistri {rei) privatae. In this branch of the administra-
tion the title of Master was probably used in imitation of the
practice in vogue in the secretarial departments.

In the course of the fourth century there were appointed in
the Eastern Empire the minor officers known as the Masters of
the Linen Wardrobe, magistri lineae vestis^ and Masters of the
Private Wardrobe, magistri privatae {vestis). At the same time, in
both East and West, the Master of the Sacred Inquests disappeared
through the merging of his bureau with that of the Master of the
Petitions. Contemporary, also, is the abolition of the office and
Mastership of the Records {tnagister siudiorum).

The Masters of the Scrinia disappeared in the West upon the
establishment of the Gothic Kingdom in Italy, and, in the East,
after the reign of Justinian they were known by their Greek
titles only.

The date of the creation of the Mastership of the Offices and
that of its disappearance will be discussed in the following pages.^

V. Masters who were Officials in the Military Service

OF the Empire

In the Roman armies of the Principate there were several
officers of low rank who were called Masters. We know of a
Master of Artillery {tnagister ballistarius), a Master of the Cohort
{tnagister cohortis), a Master of the Horse {magister equituni), a

^ Further details relative to the Masters in the Imperial Civil Service are given in
Roman Magistri in the Civil and Military Service of the Empire^ by A. E. R. Boak,
in Harvard Studies in Classical Philology^ Vol. XXVI (191 5), pp. 73 fF.

i6 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

Riding Master {magister kampi), and a Master of the Numerus
{magister numert). In the Later Empire we meet with another
of these subordinate Masters, the Master of the Camp {magister
castrorum).

However, it was during the Later Empire that the title Master
came to denote once more, as in the republican epoch, officers
clothed with the highest military command. This use of the
Mastership was revived by Constantine I, probably in imitation
of the Republican Mastership of the Horse. These military
Masters at first had the specific titles of Master of the Foot
{magister peditum) and Master of the Horse {magister equituni).
But from the middle of the fourth century they began to be
designated Masters of the Horse and Foot {magistri equitum et
peditum)^ Masters of Both Services {magistri utriusque militiae),
and finally as Masters of the Soldiers {magistri militum). In
the East, from the time of Theodosius I, no further distinction
between the infantry and cavalry commands was made, but in the
West, officially at least, the difference was maintained.

Originally there were but two Masters of the Soldiers for the
whole Empire. However, their number increased with the tend-
ency of the rulers to divide the Imperial authority between two
or more partners. Upon the definite separation of the Empire
into two parts, in 395, there were five Masters of the Soldiers in
the East and three in the West. Under Justinian at least two
new Masterships were created.

These military Masterships disappeared by the end of the
seventh century, owing to the loss of the Western part of the
Empire to the barbarians, and the civil and military reorganiza-
tion in the East.^

From this brief survey of the use of the title Master among
the Romans, it will now be possible to approach the study of the
Master of the Offices with a better understanding of the title itself
and also of its position relatively to that of similar titles borne by
both public and private officials.

^ For a detailed treatment of these magistri militunt, cf. the paper Roman Magistri^
previously cited.

CHAPTER II

THE ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEM OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE FROM
THE TIME OF CONSTANTINE I: THE OFFICES OF THE
PALACE

The rivalry between the Senate and the Princeps for the
control of the administration of the Roman world, which was the
outgrowth of the dualism created by Augustus, and which per-
sisted throughout nearly three centuries, by the fourth century
A.D. had resulted in a complete victory for absolutism. The
Senate had seen the spheres of government once under its con-
trol pass, one by one, into the hands of the Princeps and his
officers, until finally, although it still continued to exist, that
body, formerly so powerful, could claim no control whatever over
the affairs of state.

Not only had the position of the senate as an organ of gov-
ernment completely changed, but its character also had been
radically altered. The senatorial order was now a privileged
class, comprising practically all the holders of important public
offices, while the actual assemblies of the senate were composed
chiefly of the highest officers of state. Thus the senate was
made up of imperial officers and ex-officers. This development
naturally removed all distinction between equestrian and senato-
rial offices; while the contrast between the equestrian and the
senatorial cursus konorum gave place to one between the purely
military and the purely civil careers.

The republican assemblies had long since ceased to be sum-
moned, and such of the republican offices as still continued to
be filled had lost all political power and had become merely
honorary posts in the gift of the ruler.

The government of the Later Roman Empire was thus an
undisguised absolutism. This conception of the position of the
Emperor found formal expression at first in the deification of

i8 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

Diocletian and his co-rulers, and later in the claim of his suc-
cessors to govern by the will of God. The use of the diadem,
and the attribution of the adjectives sacer and divinus not only
to the imperial personage but to all that belonged to him, were
further outward manifestations of absolute power.

The Emperor was the sole possessor of legislative and execu-
/tive authority. Consequently, all the public officials were his serv-
1 ants, — appointed by him, owing allegiance to him alone, deriving
\from him their authority, existing to enforce his ordinances and
^sponsible to him for the way in which they fulfilled their duties,
he number and power of this official class are among the out-
standing features of the governmental organization of the Later
Roman Empire. The vast system of state officials, radiating
from the administrative centres and permeating all the provinces,
was a veritable millstone hung about the necks of the unhappy
provincials, upon whom lay the double burden of supporting the
army and the civil list.

The enormous increase in the number of the officials in the
Later, over that in the Early, Empire was partly due to the desire
of the emperors to prevent the rise of usurpers, and secure the
peaceful succession to the imperial throne in a definitely settled
fashion. Accordingly, no office was to be left so powerful that
it could be made the basis of an attempt at an insurrection. The
provinces, following a policy already initiated under the Princi-
pate, were divided and subdivided into smaller units until they
numbered about one hundred and twenty, in place of the forty-
five of Hadrian's time. No longer was civil and military
authority held by the same officer, and accordingly a large num-
ber of purely military posts was created.

Besides the greater number of officials required for the new
administrative districts and the new military commands, a further
increase in the ranks of the civil service was due to the extension
of the central administrative bureaus developed from those of the
older regime, and to the creation of a series of household officers
in charge of the imperial palace. The appointment of these
latter officers was the result of the organization of the imperial
court on a scale commensurate with the dignity of the autocratic
sovereign, who thereby exalted himself above his subjects and by
almost impenetrable barriers checked access to his person. The
pomp and splendor of the court, its elaborate ceremonies and the

THE ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEM 19

employment of eunuchs in the personal service of the ruler, betray
oriental, probably Persian, influences.

The administrative organization of the Roman Empire was^
essentially bureaucratic in character : that is to say, the greater
part of the business of state was conducted through a series of
departments controlled by offices or bureaus centred at the
court and having representatives in the various administrative
districts of the Empire. It was in these departments that the
great army of government officers and their subordinates were
employed. This bureaucratic organization, although the result
of a development continuous throughout the first three centuries,
received its definite form and dated its power from the reigns of
Diocletian and Constantine, the two Emperors who cast the
Roman system of government into the form which it kept from
the beginning of the fourth to the end of the sixth century.

To secure efficiency in the working of this complicated gov-
ernment machine the minor officials in the several departments
were regularly placed under the orders lsu6 dispositione) of those
having wider spheres of action. Thus a system of graded sub-
ordination was established, whereby the control was ultimately
concentrated in the hands of a group of the highest civil and mili-
tary officials, about ten in number, who were directly in touch
with the Emperor and responsible to him alone. These were the
heads of the army and of the administrative, judicial, and financial
organs of the state ; and alongside of them, because of their position
at the head of similarly organized departments, may be placed the
officers in control of the management of the imperial estates and
of the imperial household. .^

True to the principle of mistrust towards its servants, however,
the imperial government did not always clearly define the spheres
of competence of the several official groups, believing that from
this cause rivalries and jealousies would arise, through the officials
spying upon and hampering one another, to the advantage of the
throne. Further, direct communication between the subordinates
of the great ministers and the Emperor was often provided for,
and, finally, by a highly developed system of state espionage the
ruler kept watch upon the actions of his officers. However, in
spite of the precautions taken to insure an honest and efficient
administration, the actual result of the development of this elabo-
rate bureaucratic system was the erection of an almost impassable

20 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

obstacle between the Emperor and his subjects. Neither did
their complaints reach his ears, nor were his ordinances for
their relief eflfective, because the officials cooperated with one
another to conceal their misdemeanors and to enrich themselves
at the expense of the provincials.

Within official circles, in addition to the administrative subor-
dination, there was established a strict hierarchy of rank, based
upon the classification, into a number of grades, of all the official
posts in the imperial service. This gradation was due, on the one
hand, to the development of an oriental court life with its elaborate
ceremonial demanding a fixed order of precedence among those
present at imperial audiences, and, on the other, to the growth in
the number and importance of the public officials, which of itself
necessitated a classification of the various official posts from the
point of view of rank. All officials occupying posts of sufficient
importance became members of the senatorial order and were
styled clarissimi. Among these a narrower circle of higher offi-
cials formed the class of the spectabiles^ and a still more exclusive
order, comprising only the heads of the various departments of
government, was that of the illustres. Subsequently, under Jus-
tinian, a still higher grade, that oi gloriosusy was created.

Among the different offices belonging to the same class a
definite order of precedence was established. The official posi-
tions which conferred such titles of rank upon their holders were
called dignitates. The great demand for admission to these rank
classes, which entitled their members to various privileges, caused
the conferment of honorary dignitates; the titles of official posts
with their appropriate rank but without the duties of office.
These honorary dignities were conferred as rewards for past
services, as indications of favor, or even in return for a monetary
consideration.

Besides these classes, defined in terms of official rank, there
existed two orders or titles of rank, which were of a somewhat dif-
ferent character from the preceding as they were not altogether
dependent upon any fixed office. These were the Patriciate and
the Comitiva. The former, created by Constantine I in imitation
of the older Patrician order, although not attached to any definite
official post, was granted solely to the highest dignitaries; it was
conferred for life, and gave precedence over all officials except the
functioning consuls. The latter order, which was given a new

THE ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEM 21

meaning by Constantine, became a title of honor attached to some
public offices, or conferred as a reward for service or for favor.
In certain cases, with a suitable adjunct, it designated a definite
office, such as ' Count of the Sacred Largesses,' or Minister of
the Treasury, comes sacrarum largitionum. There were three
grades of Counts {comites) — Counts of the First, Second, and
Third orders — distinguished according to the importance of their
official position^

The sharp distinction, already referred to, made between the
civil and the military careers, gave rise to a division of the offices
of state into the two classes of militares and civiles. The functions
of these two classes were strictly separated. Thus in the provinces
where troops were stationed the civil and the military authority
were no longer united in the hands of the provincial governor
{praeses, corrector, tudex) ; he was now restricted to the oversight of
the civil administration, while the military command was exercised
by a dux or comes ret militaris. On the one hand, the civil
governors were subordinated to the Vicars {vicarii) of the thirteen
dioceses into which the provinces were grouped, and to the Pre-
torian Prefects, who presided over the highest appellate jurisdiction,
with the exception of that of the court of the Emperor himself, and
who likewise controlled the raising and distribution of the taxes
paid in natural products. On the other hand, the military
governors were under the Masters of the Soldiers (magistri milt-
turn), the newly-created commanders-in-chief, who were them-
selves subject to the Emperor alone. c^ L.

-.v»-^'

The centraiization of the administration, which hay b ee n
briefly ouflmed ateve, was intimately bound up with the working
of the consistoriumy the Imperial Consistory or Council of State.
This was mainly composed of the Ministers at the head of the
various departments of the administration. These were the
Minister of Finance, known as the Count of the Sacred Largesses
{comes sacrarum largitionum), who controlled the revenues of
state apart from those which passed into the hands of the Prefects:
the Minister of Crown Lands, called the Count of the Privy Purse
{comes rerum privatarum), who administered the imperial property
and who was now a public official, since the importance of the im-
perial domains and the almost complete identification of the ruler
with the state had made the management of his revenues a matter
of public business : the Quaestor, who was the Emperor's adviser

22 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

in legal and judicial matters: and the Master of the Offices
{magister officiorum), the subject of this study.

In attendance upon the Consistory were also without doubt the
Prefect whose seat of government was at the Capital, and the
Grand Chamberlain f^praepositus sacri cubiculi). Since they
were permanently attached to the court, the administrative center
of the Empire, these offices were called dignitates palatinae^ to
distinguish them from those official posts which kept their holders
in the provinces. Other dignitates palatinae were the Counts of
the Body Guard {comes domesticorum equitum and comes domes-
tic orum pedi turn) y the Steward of the Household {castrensis scuri
palatii), and the Chief Eunuch of the Bed-chamber {primicerius
sacri cubiculi)y who was a subordinate of the Grand Chamberlain.
To these must be added the four imperial Secretaries — the First
Secretary {magister memoriae), the Secretary for Correspondence
{magister epistularum, magister epistularum graecarum), the Secre-
tary for Petitions {magister libellorum), all of whom were engaged
in receiving or transmitting the correspondence of the central
government; and, from the middle of the fourth century, the
Secretary of the Imperial Schedules {magister, later comes, dis-
positionum).

In addition to the holders of these important posts, there was
attached to the court a great host of subordinates employed in
the civil administration of the Empire or in the management of
the palace. These functionaries in general were known as
officiates. Among them must be reckoned the Corps, or schola,
of the agentes in rebus, who served in various capacities as
imperial messengers or secret service men ; also the tribuni and
notarii, clerks employed in the Consistory, and the advocati,
lawyers assigned to the various tribunals.

Moreover, each one of the palace dignitaries mentioned above
was aided in the performance of his duties by a staflf of clerks,
who constituted his officium. Under the Principate, such clerks
had been freedmen or slaves. Now, however, they were freemen,
for as in the new regime the person of the Emperor was exalted
above the persons of his subjects, so those engaged in his service
were no longer upon the same level as the servants of other men,
but the very fact of their presence in the imperial offices was a
guarantee of their freedom.

Since Diocletian had virtually transformed his palace into a

THE ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEM 23

moving camp, these clerks and all others in the palace service
had been given a military organization, with a system of promo-
tion, insignia, and special privileges copied from those of the
army. Their service itself was called a militia. Serving for
long periods in the one office they made possible regularity and
continuity in the routine administration of their department in
spite of the frequent change of their chief. The lowest grades
of these palace servants included such as performed menial
service at the court, from the ushers {admissionales) to the torch-
bearers {lampadarii\ grooms, and others whose duties were of
the same general character.

Nor did the palace lack its regular soldiery. These were the
Palace Guards, the seven scholae scutariorum et gentilium^ 3500
strong, who had been established by Constantine to take the
place of the disbanded Pretorian Guard. These Scholarians
belonged to the regular army, the militia armata, but, as a rule,
did not serve away from the court.

^ Such were the officials and servants who were attached to the
imperial court, which served as the administrative centre of the
Empire. And it was at this court, among the dignitates
palatinae, that the Master of the Offices played his role.^

^ Surveys of the official positions in the Empire are to be found in the Noiitia
Digmtaiumy the Variae of Cassiodorus, and the De Magistraiihus of Lydus.

For a detailed treatment of the governmental organization of the Later Empire, cf.
Grenier, Vempin byzantin^ vol. 2 ; Hodgkin, Italy and her Invaders^ vol. i, pt. 2,
chap. 12 ; Karlowa, Rdmische Rechtsgeschichtey vol. i« pp. 828 ff. ; Reid, Cambridge Medi-
€tval History y vol. i, chap. 2; Schiller, Geschickte der rdmischen Kaiser zeii^ vol. 2,
p. 101 ff. ; Seeck, Geschichte des Untergangs dtr antiken Weltj vol. 2, pp. 52-109, Hof
und Provinzen,

CHAPTER III

THE HISTORY OF THE MASTERSHIP OF THE OFFICES

The history of the Mastership of the Offices may be divided
conveniently into three periods: the establishment of the office
under Diocletian and Constantine ; the period from the death of
Constantine, in 337 a.d., to the close of the sixth century ; and the
Byzantine period, to the Latin conquest in 1204 a.d.

I. The Establishment of the Office

The date of the establishment of the office of magister officuh
rum is unknown, and the record thereof, as well as the names of
its first holders, had passed into oblivion when Johannes Lydus
wrote his De Magistratibus Populi Romania about the middle of
the sixth century.^ The earliest Master of the Offices then known
was Martinianus, who held that post under Licinius at the close of
the latter's reign (307-324 a.d).* This Martinianus was evidently
the one called by Zosimus* the chief of the palace official with the
explanation that the Romans styled this personage the Master of
the Offices. During his final struggle with Constantine, Licinius
created Martinianus Caesar, but the latter, upon the defeat of
Licinius in 324 a.d.,^ was captured and executed.^

However, constitutions of the Theodosian Code record that at
this time there were Masters of the Offices under Constantine in
the West, where Heraclianus was tribunus et magister officiorum

^ Mtpi apx*»^y ^^5 *Pci>/imW TroXiTctas, written in 551 A.D. When the title tptagister offi-
ciorum is used in the Historia Augusta it refers to the magistri scriniorum of the third
century.

2 Lydus, De Mag., 2, 25.

' Zosimus, 2, 25 : i7yc/uu>va ra>v Iv tq avX-j raitiov ovra fuLyurrpov rovrw o^^t#cta>v
KoXowri 'Vtofixuoi.

* For the date of the battle of Chrysopolis, September 18, 324, sec Jouguet, Stances de
tAcacUmie des Inscriptions, Bulletin, 1906, pp. 231-236.

^ Zosimus, 2, 28.

HISTORY OF THE MASTERSHIP OF THE OFFICES 25

in 321,^ and Proculianus likewise tribunus et magister officiorum
in 323.^ Upon his victory over Licinius, Constantine appointed
Palladius as his Master of the Offices, and the list of his successors
in this office down to the time of Lydus was found by the latter in
the work of Petrus upon this magislerium?

The earliest epigraphic record of a Master of the Offices is
much later; it is found in an inscription in honour of Flavius
Eugenius, who had been magister officiorum under Constans in
346 a.d/

Now from these notices we see that there were Masters of the
Offices at the court of each of the two Augusti, Licinius and
Constantine, before the latter reunited the Roman world under
one ruler, and, consequently, it does not seem likely that Constan-
tine was the creator of this office. And further, when we consider
that it was Diocletian who effected the organization of the palace
service on a military basis, as a militia, and that the title tribunus^
which the early Masters of the Offices bore, is of a purely military
character at this period, the evidence seems to point to his having
established the office in question.*^

The precise character of this office at the time of its creation
is just as uncertain as the date of its establishment. Naturally,
therefore, various views have been advanced on this point

Mommsen^ thought that possibly Diocletian or Constantine
had appointed an official to preside over the consistorium and had
given him a vicarius in the person of the vicarius a consiliis
sacrisy and that these two offices subsequently developed into
those of the Quaestor Sacri Palatii and the Master of the Offices,

* Codex Theodosianus^ XVI, 10, i.

* Codex Theodosianus, XI, 9, i .

* Lydus, De Mag., 2, 25 : IlaAXa&ov fjAyurrpcv rrj^ avX^ ^x^iporoviTO'cv. roc? Sc ifut-
fiOfuyoi^ Toxs ^^c^9 firj dyvcnjaxa fwyunpov^ opx^^ ^/jmjv dpWKa irpoi St&urKoAtav Ilrrpos
. . ., Sc* wv avro9 ctti tov Xcyo/iAevov fjuoLyumfpiov Avtypcalmro. The reference is probably
to a part of the Ilepi ttoXjltuoj^ Karao-rao-ecu^ of Petrus the Patrician, a work of which only
fragments have survived ; cf. Krumbacher, Geschtchte der byzanttnischen LitercUur, p. 236.

^Dessau, Jnscriptiones Latinae Selectae, 1244: FL(avio) Eugenio v(iro) c(laris-

Simo), EX PRAEFECTO PRAETORIO, CONSULI ORDINARIO DESIGNATO, MAGISTRO OFFICIO-
RUM OMNIUM, COMITI DOMESTICO ORDINIS PRIMI OMNIBUSQUE PALATINIS DIGNITATIBUS

FUNCTO, OB EGREGIA Eius IN REM PUBLiCAM MERITA ; ctc. For the date of his master-
ship, cf. Athanasius, Apologia ad Constaniinum, c. 3 ; cf. also C, I. L, VI, 1721.

' Seeck, Geschtchte des Untergangs der antiken Welt, vol. 2, pp. 89-90.

^ De C. Caelii Saturnini titulo, Memorie deW Instituto di corrispondenza archeo-
logica, 1865, p. 298 ff. The suggestion here made is followed by Cosenza, Official Positions
after Constantine, p. 55.

26 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

respectively. The objection to this view is that it does not aflford
an adequate explanation of the early character of the Masters
office, as will appear later; and, further, that the nature of the
duties of the vicarius a consiliis sacris is too hypothetical for any
connection to be evident between them and the duties subse-
quently performed by the Master of the Offices. Moreover, the
title of the latter does not suggest a development from that of the
vicarius.

Schiller^ has advanced the view that the Mastership of the
Offices developed out of a superintendency of the four palace
scrinia, presided over by the magistri memoriae^ magistri libel-
lorunt^ magistri epistularum and magistri dispositionum. With
this suggestion Karlowa ^ agrees, arguing that the close connection
between the spheres of duty of the several scrinia would neces-
sitate a common chief to supervise their activities. The title
magister officiorum {palatinorum) naturally, then, would be given
to the chief of these officia palatina. This explanation of the
origin of the office obviously contains a certain element of truth ;
for the supervision of the work of these secretarial departments
was among the earliest of the duties of the Master of the Offices.
However, it is evident that no theory on this subject will be
adequate which does not account for the whole of the early title
tribunus et magister officiorum.

Accordingly Schiller's alternative explanation^ is preferable,
in which he derives the Mastership of the Offices from the senior
tribunate of the cohortes praetorianae. This is substantially the
opinion of Seeck,* who believes that the Master of the Offices had
the title of tribunus because he was placed by Diocletian over the
several corps of the court attendants who were given a military
organization {militia) and was himself an officer of the soldiers
attached to the palace. As these various divisions of the palace
servants were styled officia, the origin and meaning of the title
magister officiorum are apparent.

Accepting this explanation as the one that best accords with
what little is known of the early development of the office, we
may picture to ourselves the establishment of the Mastership of

^ Geschichte der romischen Kaiserzeity vol. 2, p. loi.

2 Romische Rechtsgeschtchte, vol. i, p. 831.

' Op. cii.y vol. 2, p. loi.

* Geschichte des Untergangs der antiken JVe/t, vol. 2, pp. 89-90.

HISTORY OF THE MASTERSHIP OF THE OFFICES 27

the Offices as having taken place in the following way. Diocletian,
having eflfected his reorganization of the offi^ciales of the palace
on a military basis, found it advisable to have a single officer in
control of and responsible for their discipline, their matriculae
or rolls, admission to and dismissal from service, order of seniority,
regular promotion, uniform, and the like. Accordingly, he nomi-
nated to this post the senior tribune of the Pretorian Guard and
gave him the additional title of magister officiorum to express his
powers of supervision over the subordinates in the several officia.
It is not clear why the term magister was employed in the new
title, but it has already been noted that the heads of the scrinia
were called Masters and it was, in fact, under Diocletian that
their titles became fixed in the forms magister memoriae^ magister
libellarum^ etc., which correspond exactly with that of magister
officiorum. At this time, too, there were numerous other magistri
at the court, for the title was one which, with an appropriate
qualification, could be employed readily for officials with widely
differing functions.^ When, after the battle of Saxa Rubra in
312 A.D., Constantine disbanded the remnant of the Pretorians,^
and formed in their place the new palace guards,^ known as the
Scholarians, each of the scholae was commanded by a tribunusy
and the senior officer of this rank probably was the Master of the
Offices.

However, one cannot claim for the Master of the Offices
authority over all the officiates of the palace, for it is fairly certain
that those immediately under the orders of the Praepositus Sacri
Cubiculi or Grand Chamberlain, — namely the cubicularii and
silentiariiy as well as those at the disposal of his subordinate the
Castrensis^ the cooks, bakers, and pages, and those engaged in
works of construction and repair at the court, — did not come
under the Master's control in any way until a later date.* The
same holds true of the officiates in the departments of the Sacred
Largesses and the Private Accounts, who were at all times
subject only to the Counts at the head of these branches of the

* Harvard Studies in Classical Philology , vol. XXVI, 191 5, pp. 112-114.

* Zosimus, 2, 17. * Seeck, op, ctt., vol. 2, p. 42.
^ Ammianus Marcellinus, 20, 2, 5.

* That part of the Notitia Digniiaium which dealt with these offices unfortunately
has not been preserved. For a reconstruction see Bocking, Noiitia Dignitaium, vol. 2,
I^. 293-301. On the castrensiaui cf. Seeck, Pauly-Wissowa ReaUncyclopcuOe der klass.
AUertumswissenschaft^ vol. 3, p. 1774 ff.

28 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

financial administration.^ But we may attribute to the Master
authority over those ojfficta which we know from the Notitia
Dignitatum to have been sub dispositione eius at the beginning
of the fifth century, except in so far as they can be shown to have
been placed in his charge at a date subsequent to the establish-
ment of this office.

Thus, at this early period, in the opening years of the reign
of Constantine I, the Master of the Offices was in command of
the seven scholae of the palace guards, supervised the work of
the chiefs of the secretarial bureaus {scrinia) and the discipline
of those employed there, was in charge of the court ushers or
offictum admissionumy and likewise had under his orders various
corps of palace servants, such as the mensores, * quarterers,' and
lampadarity * torchbearers.' But attention must be called to the
fact that many of the palace officia were not subject to the orders
of only one of the great officers of the court. It was quite
possible for them in the execution of one part of their duties to
be directed by one, in performing another part to be supervised
by a second, of these functionaries. Thus from constitutions of
321 2 and 323^ which refer to the Master's receiving corre-
spondence relating to the damage of a public building and a
report which gave rise to a legal decision, we may safely assume
that at this time he was in charge of the general correspondence
conducted by the scrinia. Yet it is probable that the Quaestor
also in certain cases could command the services of the employees
of the scriniuy for he subsequently had this right.* However, the
relations between the Master of the Offices and other officials,
whose spheres of action touched his own, will be considered in
detail in a following chapter. The Master of the Offices himself,
whose position, as we have seen, was in the beginning a com-
paratively humble one, did not from the first have charge of an
independent department of the administration, under the super-
vision of the Emperor alone. Certainly, so far as the command

* Codex TheodosiamiSy VI. 30, 4, 379 = Codex JustinianuSy XII. 23, 4; id, 23, 12,
(Theodosius and Valentinian) .

* Codex Theodostanus, XVI, 10, ly , . . de tactu amphitheatri . . .y de qua ad
Heraclianum tribunum et mag(istrum) officiorum scribseras.

■ Codex Theodosianusy XI, 9, i : litter ae missae ad Proculianum tribunum et mag-
(istrum) officiorum continent quorundam provincialium mancipia cd>ducta pro pignore
sub officio retineriy . . ., atque haec mancipia neque dominos solutis debit is recepisse neque
alios comparassey veritos ne haec rescinderetur distr actio,-

* Notitia Dignitatum or, XII, occ, X.

HISTORY OF THE MASTERSHIP OF THE OFFICES 29

of the palace guards is concerned, he was subordinate to the
Pretorian Prefect, and it is fairly safe to assume that in general
the Master was under the orders of the latter.^

Although, as we are warranted in believing, the foundations
of this office were laid by Diocletian, it remained for Constantine
to make it a great and influential position. Such development is
to be explained in connection with radical changes made by
Constantine in the organization of the administration. One of
the results of these innovations, as Seeck ^ has pointed out, was
the appearance of two groups of officials, the one military and the
other civil, caused by the assignment of definite and permanent
spheres of action to certain comites, who bore the general title
of comes, with a specific title derived from the duties which they
performed. The new military offices were those of comes et
tnagister equiium, comes et magister peditum, comes domesttcorum
equilum, and comes domesiicorum peditum. The civil comites
were the comes et quaestor sacri palatit, the comes et magister
ojfficiorum, the comes sacrarum largitionum, and the comes rerum
privatarum.

The reason for this creation of new offices, and change in the
rank and competence of offices already existing, was the change
made in the Pretorian Prefecture. Up to this time the Prefects
had functioned for the Empire as a whole, and had been the chief
military as well as the highest administrative and judicial officers.
But when Constantine appointed his sons Caesars and placed them
in authority over parts of the Empire while they were yet children,
he had to entrust the actual work of administration to Prefects,
who accompanied each of the young Caesars.^ Thus the way was
paved for the creation of the four Prefectures, of Gaul, Italy,
lUyricum, and the Orient, with definite boundaries; an arrange-
ment which was completed under Constantine's successors. This
resulted in the separation of the office of Pretorian Prefect from
the person of the ruler, and its association with specific adminis-
trative districts. At the same time the Prefects were deprived of
military authority, lest those who administered the districts of the
young princes should be tempted to use their powers to secure the

* Cf. Lydus, De Mag,, 2, 10 : Avay Ktf yeyovt rov virap\oy firjKeri /uv rvjq avXxj^ • . .

2 Pauly-Wissowa, ReaUncyclopddie, vol. 4, p. 632, s. v. comites,

* Seeck, op, cit.^ vol. 2, pp. 64 fF., 83.

30 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

throne for themselves. The command over the military forces of
the Empire was divided among the new group of military comitcs^
who were directly under the orders of the Emperor.^

Not only was the Prefecture thus weakened by division and
the loss of the right of military command ; it was also at this time
shorn of considerable civil authority. The fundamental reason for
this, as in the case of the deprivation of military power, was doubt-
less the desire to lessen the Prefect's influence. A contributory
cause may have been that the assignment of Prefects to those por-
tions of the Empire which were allotted to the Caesars perma-
nently separated the former from the centre of the administration,
the court of the Augustus,^ and therefore the supervision of the
officia palatina was no longer regarded as an essential part of a
Prefect's duties. Consequently, a successor to his functions in
this sphere had to be found. Under such circumstances, it was
only natural that the Master of the Offices should become inde-
pendent of the Prefect's supervision and receive control of the
branches of the administration which were conducted directly
through those officia palatina that were already in part under his
charge.

Accordingly, Lydus quite correctly connects the great increase
in the power of the Master of the Offices with the weakening of the
Prefecture, iu saying that the control of the court passed into the
hands of the Master at the same time that the magistri militum
succeeded to the military command of the Prefects.'* It is true
that Lydus mentions only one Prefecture, that of the Orient, and
misunderstands the reason for the Prefect's presence there, which
was that the Orient formed one of the administrative divisions of
the Empire which Constantine entrusted to his young Caesars, in
this case to Constantius.* However, he justly emphasizes the rise
of the magistri militum and the Master of the Offices at the ex-
pense of the Prefect ; and also it seems that he believed that, as
has been suggested, the separation of the Prefect from the person

^ Zosimus, 2, 33 ; Lydus, De Mag,, 2, lo ; 3, 40 ; Seeck, op, cit,, 83 ff.

* Evidence for this is that, from 318 a.d., the Pretorian Prefects begin to appear as
frequent recipients of imperial constitutions. Seeck, Rheinisches Museutn^ vol. 49, p. 213.

' De Mag., 2, 10 . . . dvaym; ycyove toy VTrap)(Ov fivjKfri fuv rrj^ avkrjs koI ra>v iv oirXoC9
&PXUV SvvdfA€f$Wy rrj^ fjikv rep kcyo/iiyif fuiyurTpi^ wapahoBtunj^, rCtv Sc roi9 3ipn KaToaraBtun
orpanfyots CKrc^urwv, t^ 8c dvaToX.rp^ Trpos tq kotw 'Aauf^ koI oau ravn/s, SioiKOvvTa to
Xonnv T7JS (ivaroX^9 XprnkrHiuv vnapyw ; cf. 3, 40.

* Seeck, op, ctt., vol. 2, p. 69; Pauly-Wissowa, vol. 4, p. 1045 f.

HISTORY OF THE MASTERSHIP OF THE OFFICES 31

of the Augustus had to do with his loss of control over the
palace administration.

The greater importance of the Master's office caused a corre-
sponding elevation in the rank of its holder, who was now no longer
tribunus but comes et tnagister officiorum. That is to say, the
position of Master of the Offices became one of the regular and
definite spheres of competence assigned to a comes, as was the case
with the magisterium militum. This change in title also marks
the transformation of the office from one of a semi-military character,
expressed in the title tribunus, to an essentially civil post.^

The date of the enlargement of the Master's functions, and his
elevation to the rank of comes, is not recorded but may be fixed with
considerable certainty. The earliest record of a Master who was
a comes dates from 346 a.d.^ and the combination comes et magister
officiorum first appears in a constitution of 357 a.d.* However, as
we have pointed out, there are good reasons for believing that
these changes were accomplished by 325 a.d. The Master of the
Offices in 362 appears as one of the comites who were permanent
members of the consistorium, together with the Quaestor, the
Count of the Sacred Largesses and the Count of the Privy Purse,
with whom he was equal in rank, although taking precedence over
the two Counts.* Since comites with the functions, although not
with the ultimate titles, of these other officials can be traced back
to 325, it is only reasonable to suppose that the Master of the
Offices ranked with them at that date. As the latter, however, was
still a tribunus in 323,*^ it must have been between this date and
325 that he was made a comes, for which change a convenient
opportunity would have been afforded by the reorganization of the

* Seeck, Pauly-Wissowa, vol. 4, p. 632 ; Geschichte des Untergangs dcr antiken Welt,
vol. 2, pp. 77, 90. There is a certain parallel between the change of title in the case of the
Master of the Offices and of the comes sacri stabulu The latter was first tribunus s. s.,
ranking as a tribunus of a schola palatina (Amm. 14, 10, 8 ; 20, 2, 5), later he received
the comitiva ardinis primi {Codex Theodosianus, VI, 13, i, 413) and was indifferently comes
or tribunus s. s. (Dessau, Inscr. Sel. 1277, 1278), until finally the title of tribunus was
discarded {Codex Just. XII, 11, i), cf. Pauly-Wissowa, vol. 4, p. 632. The parallel is not
perfect, for the change in the Master^s case was much more rapid and indicative of an im-
portant accession of power.

^Dessau, Inscriptiones Selectae, 1244: magistro officiorum, comiti domestico ordinis
prtmt.

■ Codex Theodosianus, VIII, 5, 8 : et ad Musonium clarissimum virum comitem et
magistrum officiorum referri.

* Codex Theodosianus, XI, 39, 5 ; VI, 9, i ; VI, 30, i ; 4; IX, 14, 3, etc.
^ Codex Theodosianus, XI, 9, i.

32 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

Empire following the defeat of Licinius on September i8, 324 a.d.^
If this hypothesis is accepted, the first comes to fill the ofiice of
magister officiorum would be the Palladius whom Constantine
made his Master of the Ofiices after reuniting the Empire.^ This
Palladius had acted as Roman ambassador on a diplomatic mission
to the Persian court in the time of Galerius Maximian, and was
therefore a person of considerable importance, worthy to be a
member of the consistory and hold the Mastership of the Offices
with its newly extended sphere of competence.

For the Master of the Offices now ceased to be dependent in
any way upon the Pretorian Prefect, and became one of the eight
great ministers whose administration was under imperial super-
— vision only. Accordingly, the Master becomes the commander-
in-chief of the scholae palatinae, no longer subject to the Prefect's
orders. In like manner, in his control of the secretarial bureaus
he is free from the latter's authority. It was probably at this
time, too, that the corps of imperial despatch bearers, the sc/iola
agentum in rebus, came under the immediate direction of the
Master of the Offices.* Seeck* believes that it was under Con-
stantine that the Master of the Offices also assumed control of
the government arsenals {fabricae\ which had previously been
centred at the court in the hands of a subordinate of the Prefect,
the praepositus fabricarum ( .^). However, the first clear proof
that the Master directed the administration of the arsenals comes
from the year 390 a.d.,* although it must be admitted that in the
interval we have no indication that the Prefect was active in this
sphere. On the other hand nothing marks the transfer of this
power to the Master.

Thus, at the close of the reign of Constantine the Great, the
office of the magister officiorum was constituted essentially as it
was at the time of the compilation of the Notitia Dignitatum,
shortly before 425 a.d.^ Perhaps the sole important extension of
the powers of the Master in the meantime was the supervision of
the use of the cursus publicus or State Post, although his
authority in various respects required, and underwent, further
definition in relation to that of other officers of state.

1 Cf. p. 24, n. 4. ^ Lydus, De Mag., 2, 35.

■ Lydus, De Mag., 2, 25 ; cf. Codex Theodosianns, 1,9, i .

* Pauly-Wissowa, vol. 6, p. 1928, s. v.fabricae; cf. Lydus, /. c.

* Codex Theodosianus, X, 22, 3. ® See p. 2.

HISTORY OF THE MASTERSHIP OF THE OFFICES 33

It only remains to say a few words with regard to the number
of magistri officiorum in the Empire up to the end of the reign of
Constantine I. We have seen already that in 324 a.d., when two
Augusti, Constantine and Licinius, ruled the Empire, each had
his Master of the Offices.^ We may, therefore, consider it most
probable that this was the arrangement from the establishment of
the office, and that the number of the Masters of the Offices
correspond to that of the Augusti. So when Constantine became
sole ruler in 324 there was but one Master, who was at his court.^
Nor when Constantine appointed his sons as Caesars is there any
evidence that they had Masters of the Offices in their immediate
service.

II. The Mastership from 337 to 600 a.d.

From the time of Constantine until the end of the reign of
Justinian the Master of the Offices continued to be one of the
important administrative officials of the Empire, and the char-
acter of his office remained essentially the same, although his
sphere of activity was considerably enlarged.

As we have seen, before the concentration of the imperial
power in the hands of Constantine the Great the number of
Masters of the Offices in the Empire probably was equal to
the number of Augusti, and from this time until the death of
Constantine there was, accordingly, only one Master. However,
upon his decease, in 337 a.d., the imperial authority was again
divided, this time among three Augusti. Each of these had his
own administrative functionaries, among them his Master of the
Offices, if we may draw this inference from the previous custom
and the fact that Magnentius, who overthrew Constans and took
the title of Augustus in 350 a.d., appointed his own Master of
the Offices. His choice was Marcellinus, who had been Count
of the Sacred Largesses under Constans and had actively sup-
ported the usurper.^ But in 353 a.d. there was again but a single
ruler of the Roman world, Constantius, and the officials of his
former partners and rivals in power had disappeared. However,
in 351 Constantius himself had raised his nephew Gallus to the
dignity of a Caesar and appointed him to govern the Orient, with

* Codex Theodosianusy XVI, 10, i ; XI, 9, i ; Lydus, De Mag., 2, 25 ; Zosimus, 2, 25.

* Lydus, De Mag.y 2, 25. « Zosimus, 2, 42 ; 43 fin. ; 46, 3.

34 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

residence at Antioch.^ There Gallus had his own court and
palace officers, among whom was a Master of the Offices.^ In
354 Gallus fell a victim to the suspicions of Constantius and his
establishment was consequently dissolved.^ Not much later, in
355, his brother Julian was made Caesar and sent to Gaul,^ where
he too had his own Master of the Offices. Pentadius, who held
that post when Julian assumed the title of Augustus in 360, was
despatched by him to announce this usurpation to Constantius,^
and a little later the latter nominated a certain Felix as Julian's
Master of the Offices, only to find that Julian had already pro-
moted to this office Anatolius, who had been his magister libello-

From 361 to 364 there was a brief period with only one
Augustus for the whole Empire, and no Caesar to share in the
administration. But from 364 to 395 there were regularly two
Augusti, one governing the East and the other the West. In 364
the two were Valentinian and Valens, and each had a Master of
the Offices under his orders, Ursatius under Valentinian in the
West and Euphrasius with Valens in the East/ The same con-
ditions prevailed under their successors until, with the practical
division of the Roman Empire in 395, the duplication of the
whole administrative system, as it appears in the Notitia Digni-
tatum^ became permanent, and henceforth the presence of a
Master of the Offices in each half was a necessity.

Turning now to consider the functions which the Master of
the Offices exercised during the period in question, we find that
the first extension of his powers occurred during the rule of Con-
stantius and Constans (340-50 a.d.). Then it was that the Over-
seers of the State Post {curtosi cursus publici) were appointed
from the corps of the agentes in rebus^ instead of from the memo-
riales and othtr palatini as previously.® Thus the control of the
use of the cursus publicus was transferred from the Prefects to
the Master of the Offices. This change was accomplished before

^ Zosimus, 2, 45.

^ Ammianus, 22, 3, 3 : ^ Palladium primum ex magistro officiarum in Britiannos
exterminarunt suspicione tenus insimulatum quaedam in Galium composuisse apud Con^
stantium^ dum sub eodem Caesare officiarum esset magister.

' Zosimus, 2, 55. ^ Ammianus, 15, 8, i ; 13 ; Zosimus, 3, 2.

* Ammianus, 20, 8, 19. « Ammianus, 20, 9, 5 ; 8.
^ Ammianus, 26, 4, 4 ; 5, 7 ; 26, 7, 4 ; 10, 8.

• Codex Theodosianusy VI. 35, 2 (319) ; Gothofredus, Paratit, to Codex Theodosianus,
VI, 29.

HISTORY OF THE MASTERSHIP OF THE OFFICES 35

350, as we learn from an inscription from Thermae Selinuntiae,
which dates between 340 and 350 and records a ducenarius agens
in reb{us) et p{rae)p(psitus) cursus publici} However, the respec-
tive powers of the Prefects and the Master in regard to the Post,
especially relative to the right of issuing passes {evectiones), were
not clearly defined until the end of the century.^

It was likewise under Constans that the inscription to Flavins
Eugenius* was set up, which attributes to him the title of magister
officiorum omnium. Omnium seems here to be an exaggeration,
for, as has been pointed out, at this time the Master of the Offices
did not have under his authority those classes of palace attendants
which were under the orders of the Praepositus Sacri Cubiculi or
the Castrensis. As we shall see, the Master acquired jurisdiction
over them in the next century.

It was likewise somewhere about the middle of the fourth cen-
tury that the Master of the Offices became practically a Minister
for Foreign Afifairs; that is to say, his office was the regular
medium of communication between the Roman Emperor and
foreign potentates. The origin of this development of the Mas-
ter's functions was his direction of the court audiences, through
his subordinates the admissionales. All admissions to the impe-
rial presence, even in the case of Roman senators, were in this
way controlled by him.* So it was naturally the Master of the
Offices who received the ambassadors from other peoples, and it
was through him that they were able to communicate with the
Emperor or obtain an audience. In 365 the ambassadors of the
Alemanni were greatly ofifended by their treatment at the hands
of the Master, and, magnifying the insult, withdrew to stir up
war.* Proofs of the Master's activities in this sphere are more

* CJ,L. X, 7200; cf. Codex Theodosianusy VI, 29, i (355) ; 2 (357).

^ Lydus, De Mag,^ 2, 10 ; Seeck, Pauly-Wissowa, vol. 4, p. 1859.

^Dessau, Inscr.Sel. 1244: FL(avio) Eugenio v(iro) c(larissimo), ex praefecto

PRAETORIO, CONSULI ORDINARIO DESIGNATO, MAGISTRO OFFICIORUM OMNIUM, COMITI
DOMESTICO ORDINIS PRIMI OMNIBUSQUE PALATINIS DIGNITATIBUS FUNCTO, OB EGREGIA
EIUS IN REM PUBLICAM MERITA: HUIC DD. NN. CONSTANTIUS VICTOR AC TRIUMFATOR

SEMPER Augustus et Julianus nobilissimus Caesar statuam sub auro in foro divi
Traiani, quam ante sub divo Constants vitae et fidelissimae devotionis gratia
meruit, adprobante ampussimo senatu sumptu publico loco suo restituendam
censuerunt.

^ NotUia Dignitatum or, XI, occ. IX ; Ammianus, 15, 5, 18 ; Athanasius, Apologia ad
Constant iunij c. 3 ; Cassiodorus, Vartae^ 6> 6; Seeck, Pauly-Wissowa, vol. i, p. 382, s. v.
admissionales,

' Ammianus, 26, 5, 7.

36 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

numerous from the succeeding centuries,^ but there is no
reason to doubt that by this time the Roman precedent had been
established, in virtue of which their ambassadors to the Per-
sian court in 579 a.d. declined to declare their business to any
one but the official who corresponded to the Roman Master
of the Offices.^ Such duties as these necessarily involved the
handling of considerable correspondence in foreign languages
and consequently the staff of the Master included a number of
official interpreters, the interpretes diversarum gentium of the
Notitia^

In the history of the relations between the Prefect of the
Orient and the Master of the Offices at Constantinople the pre*
fecture of Rufinus deserves especial mention. Lydus^says that
"the power of the prefecture was diminished until the time of
Arcadius, the father of Theodosius the Younger, under whom it
happened that Rufinus, called the Insatiate, who was his Prefect,
aimed at a tyranny, but failed in his purpose to benefit the state,
and utterly ruined his office. For the Emperor thereupon deprived
it of its military authority, then of the supervision of the arsenals,
and of the State Post, and all the rest of the powers, of which the
so-called Mastership is composed."

Taken literally, this statement implies that it was after the
fall of Rufinus, in 395 a.d., that the Master of the Offices received
the command of the Scholarians, with the control of the arsenals
and of the State Post. However, we have already seen that the
Master exercised all these powers by the middle of the fourth cen-
tury; hence the statement of Lydus is, to say the least, confusing.
But there must have been some reason why he connected the
career of Rufinus with the dissolution of the Prefect's power, and
the corresponding growth of the power of the Masters. Rufinus

^ Priscus, Frag, t^ Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum, vol. 4, p. 77 ; Cassiodorus,
Var. 6, 6; Lydus, De Mag,^ 2, 26; Corippus, In laudem Justini^ 3, 233.

2 Menander, Fr, 52, Fragmenta Historiorum Graecorum^ vol. 4, p. 256 : fjuayicrrfH^
KaSa rovrov KoXaviri 'PcoftaiOi.

• Notitia Dignitatum or, XI ; occ, IX, omnium gentium ; Priscus, loc, cit,y ota S^ rlav
re diy/cAxa<^p(i>v koX €pfirjv€U}v koI crrpariisyriav rutv Afufn r^v PaxriXtuiv ((ivXoKrjv inr avrov

TaTTO/ACVWV.

* De Mag,^ 2, 10-3, 40 : Siccrvpi; 8< ovScv yftrov ^ 1^9 ^X$^ Svvaarcia a;(p4 twv 'ApKaStov
rov irarpo9 0co$ocrtov roZ viov Katpw, i^ ov o~ufi)3e/9i;Ke Pov<^rvov rov iiriKkrjv oxdpcoTov, 09
tfv V7rap)(oq avrcp, rvpawiha ficAcri/o-avra r<A) fjikv (Tkottov wrkp XvcrircXccaf ratv koivIov iKirtativ,
C19 pdpaOpcv 8< r^v ^P^Ci^ Karapplil/ta. avriKa fikv yap 6 jSacriXeis t^ iK twv oirXcuv icrxw
6.<fHup€iT(u rrjv ApxVVf ^^1^ "rrj^ tcuv \fyop.€viav <f>aPpiKiav ocovei OTrXxyfrouStv ^^povrihof^ rrj^ T€
Tou mjfioaiov Opofiov koI irao^ crcpas, 8t* wv to Xvyoyucvov (rwcony fjuxytartpiov.

HISTORY OF THE MASTERSHIP OF THE OFFICES 37

had been Master of the Offices under Theodosius I,^ was promoted
by him to the Prefecture in 392,^ and, upon the death of that Em-
peror in 395, as praefectus praetorio Orientis was left in practical
control of the government in the eastern half of the Empire where
the young Arcadius was but a nominal ruler. However, his rivalry
with Stilicho, the western regent, and the jealousy of others at the
court of Arcadius, led to his murder in that very year.* It is pos-
sible that Rufinus, aiming to establish his influence more firmly,
subordinated the Mastership to the Prefecture, giving to the latter
the powers which it had exercised before the reforms of Constan-
tine i. Naturally, upon his fall the Master's Office would have
regained its independence and the Prefecture would have been
again reduced to the position which it had prior to 395, while its
holders would be regarded with greater suspicion because it had
formed the basis of the power of the late Minister. This is a pos-
sible explanation for the view of Lydus that at this date there was
a sudden increase of the Master's sphere of duties, to the detriment
of the Prefecture.

Towards the end of the fourth century the corps of the decani
was added to the list of officia of palace servants. They were ser-
vitors of very low rank, being door-keepers and messengers in the
service of the women of the imperial household/ These decani^
like other brigades of court attendants of similar character, were
placed under the orders of the Master of the Offices.'^

From a consideration of the Notitia Dignitatum it is evident
that up to about 425 a.d. the Masters of the Offices in both halves
of the Empire exercised practically the same administrative func-
tions.* The Notitia of the Occident, however, mentions the can-
cellariiy as one of the officia under the Master's authority, whereas
they do not appear in that of the Orient. The cancellarii were
attendants performing services in connection with the exercise
of judicial functions by the higher magistrates in whose service
they stood. However, those mentioned here were in the immedi-

* Codex Theodosianusj X, 22, 3 (390) ; Zosimus, 4, 51 : yAywrpoi tcov cv r^ avX^

^ Codex TheodosianuSy VIII, 6, 2 ; Ambrosius, Ep, 53, Rufinus ex magistro officiorum
foetus est in consulatu praefectus praetorio.

■ Zosimus, 5, I ; 7; Seeck, Geschichte^ vol. 5, pp. 267-9, 273-9.

* Seeck, Pauly-Wissowa, vol. 4, p. 2246.

• Codex Theodosianus, VI, 31, i (year 416).

• Notitia Dignitatum, or. XI : occ. IX.

38 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

ate service of the Emperor, and so were classed with the other
palatini. This corps of imperial cancellatii was probably estab-
lished early in the fifth century. A possible explanation why they
appear in the Western and not in the Eastern Notitia is that the
former may here, as in some other instances, present a somewhat
later phase of the administrative organization than the latter.^
However, it may be that there was really no corresponding body
of imperial cancellarii in the East, since there is no reference to
them, although such officials were found in the office of the Pre-
fects, and other high functionaries.*

As the list of those who were sub dispositione magistri offici-
orum in the East makes no mention of the cancellarii^ so that in
the West lacks the mensares and lampadarii which the former
contains. This discrepancy can only be explained as an error
of omission, for lampadarii were found at the Western court and
were under the Master of the Offices.^

In the year 443 a.d. the Master of the Offices in the Orient
received an addition to his sphere of duties that did not fall to
the lot of the Western Master. This was the inspection of the
condition of the troops and defences on the frontiers of the Orient
and the preparation of an annual report thereon.* The Master
of the Offices was selected for this purpose in the hope that a
more accurate report on such matters would be presented by one
who was not a military officer and who would, therefore, have little
personal interest in the duces ; for the duces were responsible for
the condition of the limites. And the Master was the most logi-
cal civil official for this duty, as the corps of the agentes in rebus^
or the imperial secret service, was under his orders, and, as a per-
manent member of the consistoriunty he came directly into contact
with the Emperor himself.

It was also during the fifth century that the Master of the
Offices acquired considerable judicial authority, so that eventually
his jurisdiction extended over practically all the officiales of the
palace and over others who had not the same intimate connection
with the Master as an administrative officer. A characteristic of
the organization of the Later Roman Empire was that the magis-
trate was the general judge of his officiales in both civil and crimi-

* Seeck, Pauly-Wissowa, vol. 3, pp. 1457-8.

'^ Codex Justinianus, 1, 51 : de adsessoribus et domesticis et canceUariis iudicum ; Lydus,
De Mag.y 3, 36. * NovelUu Valentinianiy III, 30 (450).

* Novellae Theodosiiy 24.

HISTORY OF THE MASTERSHIP OF THE OFFICES 39

nal cases, and that from his decisions there was no appeal.^ There
was, consequently, nothing unusual in the Master exercising juris-
diction over all those to whom he sustained the relation of admin-
istrative chief. However, the full judicial powers of the Master
of the Offices were acquired more slowly than his civil authority
and did not always coincide with the latter. It is probable that
the Master began to exercise some jurisdiction over the various
officia which stood under his orders as soon as they passed under
his control. Nevertheless, at first, their members could be com-
pelled to answer charges in other courts than that presided over
by the Master. But gradually the privilege was granted them of
defending themselves in his court only; and the other tribunals
ceased to have jurisdiction over them.

The first notice of the exercise of judicial functions by the
Master of the Offices occurs in a report of Symmachus, then Urban
Prefect, dating from 384 or 385,^ from which it is evident that at
that time the Master had some judicial authority over the stratores,
and hence, we may infer, over all the officia palatina. However,
the Master's jurisdiction does not seem to have been exclusive at
that early date.

Apparently the Master first exercised this exclusive judicial
authority over the Scholarians, whose commander he was, and
who could be summoned before no other tribunal than his, as is
implied in a constitution of 443.* By this same constitution the
decanty whom we have met already as the Master's subordinates
in other respects, were placed in similar fashion entirely under
his jurisdiction.*

However it was not until the reign of Leo I (457-74) and his
successors Zeno (474-91) and Anastasius (491-518) that there was
a marked extension of the Master's judicial functions. During
this period he became sole judge of other classes of functionaries
who had long been under his authority and also of the employees
in various departments which, up to this time, had been free from
his control. In addition, military officers and their subordinates,

^ Beth mann-H oil weg, Der romische Civtlprozessj vol. 3, 139.

* Symmachus, Relationes^ [io]> 38-

* Codex Justinianus, XII, 26, 2 : Ad exempium itaqtu devotissimorum schdarium
nuUi licere memoratos (i.e. decanos) ad aliud judicium tr ether e . . . praecipimus,

* Nostrae pietatis famulationibus adhaerentes decanos non oportet pro desiderio
pulsantium ad alia protrahi judicia^ sed viri illustris tantum magistri qfficiarum observare
examen.

40 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

and, in some cases, ex-officials of high rank came under the
jurisdiction of the Master of the Offices. Leo and Anthemius
(467-72) extended the Master's exclusive jurisdiction over the
cubicularii^ the fabricenses in Constantinople,^ and the schola
sacrae vestis? to whom were soon afterward added the agentes in
rebus '^ and the duces ^ with their subordinates, apparitores, limu
tafiei^ and castrorum praepositi^ on the frontier of the Empire
in the East. Under Leo II (Nov. 473-Nov. 474) and Zeno certain
officia of ministeriam were given the protection of the court of
the Master of the Offices,^ and Zeno granted the silentiarii the
same privilege.^ This latter Emperor also placed the honorary
viri illustres, resident in Constantinople, in special instances
under the Master's judicial authority.® Finally, Anastasius put
the members of the four sctinia ^ in possession of the same judi-
cial privileges as the ministeriani, and from constitutions of
Justinus and Justinian^® it may be inferred that the adjutores of
the Quaestor were upon an equal footing with the scriniariu

Among these various classes of officiates^ who are thus ex-
pressly mentioned as subject to the jurisdiction of the Master
of the Offices, the sckolares, decani^ fabricenses, agentes in rebus
and scriniarii were his subordinates in an administrative sense
also, and this was the basis of his judicial authority over them.
However, the cubicularii, silentiarii, and schola sacrae vestis^^ were
under the orders of the Praepositus Sacri Cubiculi, while the
ministeriani were the subordinates of the Castrensis, and hence
in other respects beyond the control of the Master of the Offices.
Why, in spite of this, they were placed under his jurisdiction, is
best explained by the constitution dealing with the silentiarii}'^

^ Codex Justinianus, XII, 5, 3.

^ Op. cit., XI, 10, 6 : Eosy qui inter fabricenses sacrae fabricae sociati sunt, etc.

» Op. cit. XII, 25, 3. * Op. cit. XII, 20, 4 (Leo).

• Op. cit. XII, 59, 8 (Leo).

• Op, cit. XII, 25, 4 : sacro ministerio nostra deputatos^ quorum officio singillatim
brevis subter adnexus continet. The brevis is unfortunately lost.

' Op. cit. XII, 16, 4. « Codex Justinianus, III, 24, 3 (485-86).

• Codex JustinianuSy XII, 19, 12. ^° Codex Justinianus, XII, 19, 13; 14.

" This schola is to be distinguished from the officials of the sacra vestis who were under
the comes sacrarum largitionum ; cf. Bocking, Notitia Dignitatum, vol. 2, pp. 298, 337.

^^ Codex Justinianus, XII, 16, 4: Ne ad diver sa tracti viri devoti silentiarii judicia
sacris abstrahi videantur obsequiis, jubemus eos, qui quemlibet devotissimorum silen-
tiariorum scholae vel ejus uxorem civiliter vel etiam criminaliter pulsare maluerint,
minime eum ex cuiuslibet alterius judicio nisi ex judicio tantummodo viri excellentissimi
magistri officiorum conveniri.

HISTORY OF THE MASTERSHIP OF THE OFFICES 41

From this we learn that the offictales of the Praepositus and the
Castrensis were liable to prosecution in the court of the Master
only, because the former functionaries lacked judicial authority
and if summoned to appear before outside tribunals their subor-
dinates were liable to be withdrawn for too long a time from the
performance of their duties at the palace.

The same reason may have been partially responsible for
granting the Master exclusive jurisdiction over his own subordi-
nates. Such arrangements were of course very much to the
advantage of the members of the various departments affected by
them, and these included practically all the palatini, with the
exception of the subordinates of the Count of the Sacred Largesses
and the Count of the Privy Purse, who by a constitution of Theo-
dosius II and Valentinian III (425-50) were granted the privilege
of answering charges, except in a few specified cases, in the courts
of these comites alone.^

In the case of the duces and their office staff and orderlies
(apparitores), as well as the commanders of garrisons {castrorum
praepositi) and border militia {limitanei) under their orders, the
exercise of judicial powers by the Master of the Offices obviously
grew out of his duty of inspecting the Eastern frontiers. For the
limites under his supervision, which are mentioned specifically in
the constitution of 443, are described in Justinian's Codex in gen-
eral terms as those subject to his jurisdiction.^ This was contrary
to the practice that military officers should not exercise jurisdic-
tion over civilians, nor the ordinary civil judges over viros milt-
lares^ and the Master was thus an exception in that members of
both services were under his authority in this respect. Previously
these duces and limitanei had been under the jurisdiction of their
military superiors, the magistri militum^ and the latter still
retained some judicial power over them, although the nature of
this power is not clear.* This extension of the jurisdiction of the

* Codex JustinianuSy XII, 23, 12: Viros devotos palatinos non oportere in hac regia
urde apud virum illustrem praefectum urbis litigare compelli, nisi de aedificatione domorum
et servitutibus et annonis orta videatur causa ; in aliis vero causis tarn pecuniariis quam
criminaUbus apud viros iUustres tantummodo comites suos respondere,

* Codex JustinianuSy I, 31, 4: super omni Umite sub tua jurisdictione constitutor cf.
Novellae Theodosianai, 24. • Codex Justinianus, I, 29, i (386-7).

* Cf. Harvard Studies in Classical Philology y vol. XXVI, p. 148.

* op, cit. ; Codex /ustinianus, XII, 59, 8 : illustribus scilicet ac magnificis viris magis-
tris militum consuetudine ac potestate, si qua cut limites cdiquos Orientis Tkrcuiarum et
lUyrid ex longp tempore hactenus obtinuit^ reservata.

42 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

Master of the Offices may, therefore, be regarded as an encroach-
ment upon that of the Masters of the Soldiers, with the aim of
bringing the control of the frontiers and their garrisons more
strictly under the supervision of the court. Later, under Anasta-
sius, when the duces were placed in command of the detachments
of the central field army {praesentales numeric in the diocese of
the Orient, these troops remained under the jurisdiction of the
magistri militum praesentales^ which was exercised directly or
through the courts of the duces} However, Justinian ordered that
all appeals coming from the court of a dux {ducianum judicium)
should be decided by the Master of the Offices and the Quaestor
of the Palace, acting conjointly.^

The illustres in Constantinople, who at times were subject to
the Master's jurisdiction, were those known as the honorariiy i.e.
those who had received the patents {codicilli) of an office entitling
them to the Illustrissimate without their actually having filled
such a post. Ordinarily, such illustres were under the jurisdiction
of the Pretorian and Urban Prefects, but by a special order of the
Emperor they could be brought before the court of the Master of
the Offices."

The Master of the Offices in the Occident certainly did not
exercise jurisdiction over the duces of the Western Empire, owing
to the strict subordination of these to the magister peditum prcLe-
sentalis^ and perhaps his office remained unaffected by the enact-
ments regarding this sphere of the Master's duties subsequent to
the death of Anthemius, although in other respects his jurisdic-
tion in the Ostrogothic Kingdom probably was the same as that
of the Master in the Orient.^

Indeed, since the organization of the court and the adminis-
tration of Theoderic was thoroughly Roman in character — for
the Romans the Empire might still be said to be in existence in
the West — it is not surprising to find the officials at the Ostro-
gothic court in Ravenna holding the same titles and exercising
the same functions as those who formerly officiated under the
Roman Emperors in the West and were still functioning in the

^ Codex Justinianusy XII, 35, 18 (492).
'^ Codex JustinianuSy VII, 62, 37 (529).

' Codex Justintanus, III, 24, 3, par. 2 : quotiens tamen ad eius judicium specialis nostrae
fiietatis emanaverit jussio.

* Mommsen, Aetius^ in Hermes^ vol. XXXVI, pp. 537 fF.

* To be inferred from Cassiodorus, Variae, 6, 6.

HISTORY OF THE MASTERSHIP OF THE OFFICES 43

East/ Thus we see that the Master of the Offices under The-
oderic holds a position almost identical with that of the officials
bearing the same name at the courts of Anastasius, Justin, and
Justinian.*^

Only in a few points has the sphere of the Master's activities
undergone any change. The control of the arsenals and their
employees in Italy had been restored to the office of the Pretorian
Prefect,^ perhaps with the object of obtaining more efficient con-
trol by a better concentration of authority. To offset this loss of
power the Master of the Offices might point to an extension of his
authority in regard to the State Post, of which the maintenance,
as well as the use, was under his supervision in the West.* Fur-
ther, the Master of the Offices under the Ostrogoths had the
power to appoint at his discretion peraequatores victualium for
Ravenna.** These were officers whose duty it was to fix the price
for articles of consumption offered for sale in the city/ The Mas-
ter likewise named a judge to settle disputes arising in connection
with their activities/ It seems probable that this phase of
municipal administration was placed in the hands of the Master
because at Ravenna there were no officials corresponding to the
praefecti annonae, or even the Urban Prefects, of Rome and Con-
stantinople, who would have had such matters under their care.
Furthermore, when the seat of the Mastership, along with the
centre of the administration, was transferred from Rome to Ra-
venna, the Master of the Offices at times appointed a deputy with
the title of vices agens to represent him in Rome.® Such an
official is attested for the year 533.*

From this historical survey it will be clear that the office of
magister officiorum remained essentially the same in character

* Cassiodorus, Var.^ passim] Mommsen, Ostgothische Studien, Neues Archiv^ vol. 14.
1899; Dumoulin, Cambridge Medictval History^ vol. i, pp. 441-5. Cf. Anonymus Valesii^
60 : {Theodoricus) militiam Romanis sicut sub principes esse praecepit,

' Casssiodorus, Variae^ 6, 6. ■ Op* cit,, 7, 18, 19.

* Cassiodorus, Variae^ 6, 6, 3 ; 5,5.

* op. cit.y 6, 6 : Peraequatores victualium rerum in urbe regia propria voluntate con-
stituit,

* Defined by DuCange, Glossarium mediae et infimae Latinitatis : qui rebus venalibus
pretium indunt ac indicunt.

' Cassiodorus, loc. cit. : et tam necessarian rei iudicem facit. ipse enim gaudium
popuUy ipse nostris temporibus praestet ornatum quando tales viros copiae publicae prae-
ftcii, ut plebs querula seditionem nesciat habere satiata,

* Mommsen, Neues Archiv, vol. XIV, p. 463.

* Cassiodorus, Variae, 11, 4; n, 5 ; 12, 25.

44 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

from Constantine to Justinian, although its sphere of administra-
tive duties was slightly enlarged and it acquired new powers in
the exercise of judicial functions. The Master of the Offices like-
/ wise maintained his rank among the dignitates palatinae and the
other high officials of the empire. This will be apparent from a
consideration of the several classes of dignitaries to which the
Master was successively admitted. And in this connection there
should be borne in mind the dominant tendency in the organiza-
tion of the hierarchy of rank of the Later Empire. This was to
extend previously established grades of rank to include ever wider
circles of officials and thus depreciate their worth, while, in com-
pensation, new and more exclusive classes with fresh titles of rank
were created for the higher offices.

The Master of the Offices as one of the comites consistoriani^
or standing members of the imperial consistorium} was a comes
primi ordints^ and consequently authorized to bear the title of
comes, so that his full official designation was, as we have seen,
comes et magister officiorum. This form appears frequently in
imperial constitutions and elsewhere throughout the fourth and
the greater part of the fifth century.' However, as the word
comes was merely a personal designation of rank and did not form
an integral part of the Master s official title, as came to be the case
with the comes sacrarum largittonumy and because the holder of
the Mastership was ipso facto a comes, the comitiva was frequently
ignored, even in official documents.* This neglect of the comitiva
extended to all similar offices, and became more frequent as that
dignity was rapidly extended to officials of very low rank; and,
finally, to practically all who were exempt from the municipal
munera, although it long continued in vogue for high military
officials in the West.*^ From the last quarter of the fifth century
it is no longer found among the titles of the Master of the Offices.
It is probable that the first of the graded classes of the digni-

* Ammianus, 15, 5, 12 ; Codex Theodosianus, VI, 30, i, and 4; VII, 8, 3, cf. VI, 9, i ;
and IX, 14, 3 ; Cassiodorus, Var., 6, 6, 2 ; Mommsen, Neues Archiv, vol. 14, p. 445 ; Seeck,
Pauly-Wissowa, vol. 4, p. 645.

2 Dessau, /nscr. Select,^ 1244 ; Mommsen, loc, cit. ; Seeck, /oc. cit,

* The earliest instance of this full title is Codex Theodosianus^ VIII, 5, 8, (357) ; the
latest, Codex Just inianus, XII, 55, 4 (474).

* Thus Hilarianus appears as comes et magister in Codex Justinianus^ XII, 19, 10 (470)
and XII, 55, 4 (474), but as magister only in I. 23, 6 (470) and XII, 59, 9 (id?) ; Mommsen,
Neues Archiv^ vol. 14, pp. 510 f.

* Seeck, Pauly-Wissowa, vol. 4, pp. 635-6.

HISTORY OF THE MASTERSHIP OF THE OFFICES 45

taries to which the Master belonged was the Perfectissimate, which
in the early years of the reign of Constantine I still included civil
officials of high rank. At least a comes, evidently in charge of the
administration of the res privata, was 2i perfect is simus in 319,^ and,
as we shall see, the Master of the Offices, although taking prece-
dence over th^ Counts of the financial administration, regularly
belonged to the same order of rank. However, when the eques-
trian career was abolished, presumably after the defeat of Licinius
in 323, the Perfectissimate was conferred upon lower grades of
officials, and the Clarissimate was for a long time the sole order of
rank for the highest officers.^ Consequently the Master became a
vir clarisstmus? In 372, the Master of the Offices, along with
the Quaestor and the Counts of the Sacred Largesses and the
Privy Purse, was given precedence over the proconsuls,^ evidently
because of the increasing importance of these comites consist oriani,
owing to their close proximity to the Emperor. By 378 the Mas-
ter had become a vir spectabilis^ and not long afterwards, by 385
at the latest,* had attained the highest of the orders of rank exist-
ing at that time, the lUustrissimate, to which the other comites
consistoriani were admitted at about the same time.^

Shortly before this, in 380, a constitution of Gratian and
Theodosius granted to the ex-Masters, together with the ex-
Quaestors and the ex-Counts of the Sacred Largesses and the
Privy Purse, the same honorable reception on official occasions
that the ex-Prefects enjoyed.®

* Codex TheodosianuSy X, 8, 2 ; virum perfectissimum comitem ei amicum nostrum.
The Nemesianus, v. p, com, larg. of XI, 7, 5 (345), is a subordinate official, and not the chief
of the sacrae largitiones. Hirschfeld, Die Ranktitel der ropnischen Kaiserzeit^ Sitzungzsbe-
richi der Berliner Akad,y 1901, p. 593; Mommsen u. Meyer, Codex Theodosianus, vol. i,
pp. CLXXXviii, ecu.

'^ Hirschfeld, op. cit., 588, 593.

* The earliest instance of a Master with this title is in 357, Codex TheodosianuSy VIII,
5, 8 ; but references to magistri officiorum prior to 350 are very rare and the first constitution
addressed to one dates from 362 {Codex Theodosianusy XI, 39, 5).

* Codex Theodosianusy VI, 9, i ; Eorum honores, qui sacrario n(os)tro exploraia sedu-
iitate oboediunt, hac volumus o(bser)vatione distingui, ut quaestor atque officiorum m{agis)'
ter nee non duo largitionum comites proconsula{rium) honoribus praeferantur.

* Codex Theodosianusy VIII, 5, 35 : spectabilis viri officiorum ftiagistri.

* Symmachus, Relationes, 34, 8 ; 38, 4 ; 43, 2.

' Hirschfeld, op. cit., p. 599 f., who rightly refuses to accept Codex Theodosianus^ VI,
9, 2 as implying that these officials were viri illustres in 380. The attribution of illustris
to a Master in Codex Theodosianus, VIII, 5, 22 (365) is certainly an error.

* Codex Theodosianus, VI, 9, 2 : Qui exquaesturae honor e aut efficaci magis{te)rio
aut comitiva utriusque aerarii nostri attonito sp{len)dore vigueruntj adclamatione

46 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

Whenever the Master of the Offices is given the combined
title of vir clarissimus et illustris^ the clarissimus is to be
regarded as the general title of rank of the senatorial order to
which the bearer belonged, while the illustris denotes the special
grade of rank conferred by the particular office, the Master-
ship.^

Within the order of the Illustrissimate there were several
grades. Of these the first was composed of the Prefects, the
Magistri Militum and the Grand Chamberlain; the second com-
prised the Master of the Offices and the other comites consis-
toriani? Under Valentinian III and Marcian (450-55) the
Master of the Offices and the Quaestor seem to have formed a
second clalss of illustres by themselves, while the Counts of the
Treasury made up a third grade.'* However, under Zeno^
(474-91) and Anastasius^ (491-518) the latter were again in
the same class as the Master. In another constitution of Zeno
a Master was designated as excellentissimus^ and before the
middle of the fifth century the title magnificus^ began to be
applied to the holders of this office. However, these new titles
do not imply new orders of rank, for excellentissimus was applied
quite generally to the highest officials without special reference
to a grade of dignity, and magnificus was only used of illustres^
either alone or in the illustris et magnificus?

In 535 the Master of the Offices appears as a member of the
recently established order of the gloriosissimi, a higher rank than
the illustres, along with the Prefects, Magistri Militum, Quaestor,
and Grand Chamberlain.^® This was the last and highest grade
of dignitaries created before the Byzantine period. At this time
also the adjective sacer was employed with greater frequency to

excipiantur solita^ n(ec) praetereantur ut mcogniti atque^ ui non aequand{i) (i[)lisj
qui gesserint praefecturas, sed eo observentur c{ul)tu omni coetu omnique conventu.
^ Symmachus, Relaiiones, {y^tZW 34^^^ 3^* 4i 43» 2.

• Koch, Die byzantinischen Beamtentitel von 400 bis 700, p. 12.

• Codex Theodosianusy VI, 7, 8 ; VI, 8, i ; VI, 9, i ; JuUian, Daremberg et Saglio,
Dictionaire des AntiquiUs grecques et roniaines, vol. 3, p. 385 f.

• Codex Justinianusy XII, 40, 10. * Op, cit., X , 32, 64.

• Op. cit., X, 32, 66 (497-499). ' Op. cil.j XII, 16, 4.

® Novellae Theodosii, 6, (438), viri inlustris atque magnifici magistri officiorum ;
Codex /ustinianusj XII, 20, 4: (Leo) viri fttagnifici magistri officiorum \ op, cit. Ill, 24, 3
(485-86), viri magftifici.

• Cf. Koch, Byzantinische Beamtentitel^ 43, 51.

^® Novellae Justiniani, 2, (535) ; lA^fin. (535) ; Edictum Justiniani^ 8, i (548) ; JuUian,
Daremberg et SagVio, vol. 3, p. 388 ; Koch, op. cit., pp. 43, 65.

HISTORY OF THE MASTERSHIP OF THE OFFICES 47

designate persons or things immediately connected with the
Emperor; a usage that applied to the officia of the palace.
Hence the full title of the Master of the Offices was gloriosissi-
mus magister sacrorum officiorum^ in Greek, ivho^oraro^ fidyurrpo^:

Moreover, the Masters of the Offices, who were actually
exercising, or had exercised, the functions of this office, like the
Consuls, Prefects, and Magistri Militum, might receive the
patriciate, the most coveted honorary title of the Empire.^

The order of precedence among the great ministers of the
Empire, as established in the course of the fourth century, is pre-
served in the Notitia Dignitatum^ and was maintained with but
little alteration while these offices themselves endured. Naturally
those offices forming the higher took precedence over those form-
ing the lower grades of rank. Thus in the Notitia the Master of
the Offices is ranked below the Prefects, the Magistri Militum,
and the Grand Chamberlain, yet he is placed above others in the
same grade as himself, namely the Quaestor and the Counts of
the Sacred Largesses and the Privy Purse.^ However, there was
practically no distinction in the ranking of the Master and the
Quaestor, as will be seen at once from the way in which now one
and now the other took precedence.^ In the constitutions of 362,^
372,^ and 380^ the Quaestor is given the priority, but in others of
409^ and 415^ this order is reversed. However, in 416^® the
Quaestor again takes precedence; and, although in the Notitia
he stands below the Master, he retains this precedence at the
time of the compilation of the Theodosian Code (438).^^ The

^ ATovellae Justinianiy 2 (535) ; 85 (539) ; Edictum Justiniam, 8, i (548).

* Codex Justinianus, XII, 3, 3 : Nemini ad subltmen patriciatus honorem^ qui ceteris
omnibus anteponitur^ adscendere liceaty nisi prius aut cousulatus honore potiatur aut prae-
fecturae praetorio vel lUyrici vel urbis administrationem aut magistri militum aut magistri
officiorum^ in actu videlicet positus^ gessisse noscatur^ ut huiusmodi tantum personis sive
adhuc administrationem gerendo seu postea liceat {quando hoc nostrae sederit maiestatt)
patriciam consequi dignitatem (Zeno) ; an example is Hermogenes, magister sacrorum
officiorum et patricius, Novellae Justinianiy 10 (535).

^Notitia Dignitatum or. i, occ. i ; Hirschfeld, Ranktitel der romischen Kaiserzeity
p. 599, thinks that the high position of the Grand Chamberlain was due to the influence
of Eutropius, who held that post under Arcadius.

* Of. Mommsen, Neues Archiv, vol. 14, p. 454.

* Codex Theodosianus, XI, 39, 5. • Codex Theodosianus, VI, 9, i.
' Codex TheodosianuSy VI, 9, 2 = Codex Justinianus, XII, 6, i.

* Codex Theodosianusj XI, 18, i. • Codex Theodosianus^ I, 8, i.
^* Codex Theodosianusy VI, 26, 17.

^* Codex Tkeodosianus, I, ///. 18, 9 ; cf. VI, 9 rubric = Codex Justinianus y XII, 6.

48 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

same situation prevails in 440-41,^ but in 485-86^ the Master
has the seniority. In the West under Theoderic both Euge-
nites^ and Cassiodorus^ were promoted from the Quaestorship
to the Mastership, but yet in his Formulae Cassiodorus gives the
precedence to the former office.^ In the East under Justinian,
Trebonian held both offices at once^ and under Justinus II Ana-
stasius had the same twofold powers.^

The examples cited show how slight was the distinction in
rank between the two offices in question. Seeck ® has sought to
prove that at the beginning of the fifth century there was a defi-
nite period during which the Master took precedence over his
fellow-official, but Mommsen * has pointed out that the evidence
does not support his contention. However, from the fact that,
as has been noticed, the Mastership and not the Quaestorship
qualified its holder for the patrician dignity,^® we may conclude
that towards the end of the fifth century the former had come to
be regarded as the more honorable office. This view is supported
by the mention, in Justinian's Edict of 548, of the Mastership
immediately after the Prefecture and before the magisterium milt'
tufHy^^ although there is no proof that it had permanently gained
precedence over the latter. On the other hand, both the Master
and the Quaestor now ranked above the Grand Chamberlain,*^
who in the Notitia stood next to the Magistri Militum.

The Master of the Offices, as clarissitnusy spectabilis or illus-
trisy was of senatorial rank, but it was only after the expiration of
his term of office that he took his place as a member of that order.*^

And so, at the middle of the sixth century, the Master of the
Offices not only held one of the most influential positions in the
imperial administration, but also in rank was one of the highest
dignitaries of Roman officialdom.

^ Codex Justinianusy XII, 8, 2.

* Codex JustinianuSy III, 24, 3 ; so also XII, 40, 10 (450-5).

* Cassiodorus, VaricUy i, 12 ; 13. * Op. cit.y 9, 24.

* op, cit.y 6, 5 ; 6.

* Novellae Justinianu 33 : illustris magister officioruvi et quaestor sacri palatii (536).
' Corripus, Panegyr. in Justinutn, pr. : gemino honore quaestor et magister.

^ Quaes t tones de notitia dignitatum^ p. 12.

* Neues Archiv^ vol. 14, p. 464. ^^ Codex Justinianus, XII, 3, 3.

" Edictum Justinianiy 8, i. ^^ Codex JustinianuSy III, 24, 3 (485-6).

^* Id., qui magistri officiorum vet quaestor is officio functus aut sacri nostrae pietatis
cubiculi praepositus post depositam administrationem senatorio ordini sociatus est; cf.
L^crivain, Le sinat romainy p. 63.

HISTORY OF THE MASTERSHIP OF THE OFFICES 49

III. The Mastership in the Byzantine Empire to the Latin

Conquest, in 1204 a.d.

Granted that the division of history into periods is an arbitrary
convention and that there is an unbroken line of continuity in the
constitutional development of the Roman Empire from Augustus
until the Latin conquest of Constantinople in 1204 a.d., and per-
haps even longer, it must nevertheless be acknowledged that the
period between the death of Justinian (565) and the accession of
Heraclius (610) wrought changes of such importance in the Roman
Empire of the East that afterwards it bore a decidedly new char-
acter. This fact will justify the use of the term Byzantine to
designate that period of its history which extends from the revival
following the collapse of the Justinian organization to the final
dissolution of the Empire.^

Partly responsible for the altered tone of the new epoch was
the loss of almost all the Latin-speaking provinces, which earlier
had been under the imperial authority, and the consequent over-
whelming preponderance of the Greek element in the Empire.
As a result of this, Latin by the end of the sixth century had
ceased to be the official imperial language;^ and although the
citizens of the Empire continued to be called Romaioi, this title
had lost its original significance.^

The change in the official language brought about a corre-
sponding change in the titles of the offices of state which had
been created while Latin was yet the imperial tongue, and which,
consequently, had Latin names. These titles had now to be
expressed in Greek. For this purpose a Greek word, which in
significance corresponded to the original Latin title, was often
employed. Frequently, however, when such an equivalent was
not ready to hand, the Latin form was simply written in Greek
characters. Thus, while the Prefect was henceforth 6 cTrapx^^,
the Master of the Offices became 6 /laytorpo? rSiv fiaorikLKwv
6(f)(f>LKi(ov^; or, more simply, 6 iiayiarpo^y 'the master,' since the

^ Gelzer, Abrisz der byzatUinischen Kaisergeschichte, in MUller's Handbtich der klass-
ischen Alter tumsivissenschaft, vol. IX, i, pp. 909, 946; Bury, Later Roman Empire^
vol. 2, pp. 67-68 ; Baynes, Cambridge Mediaeval History^ vol. 2, p. 263 ; Pemice, Vim-
peratore Eraclio, p. 222.

* Bury, Later Roman Empire, vol. 2, p. 166.

* Op, cit,y p. 171.

* Mansi, Sacrorum conciliorum collectio, vol. XI, pp. 209, 217.

50 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

titles of the other magistri were not merely transliterated, but
translated, in the new official terminology.

Moreover, not only were the titles of officials altered in this
way, but the administrative system itself was fundamentally
changed. The older system, with its small group of "great
ministers," who were directly responsible to the Emperor and
under whom the other administrative officers were ranged in a
system of graded subordination," was definitely abandoned under
the Heraclid dynasty in the seventh century. In its place arose
a new order, perfected by the ninth century, in which there was
practically no hierarchy of office, only one of rank; in which,
moreover, the administration was entrusted to some sixty officials,
each of whom was directly responsible to the sovereign. This
change had been made possible by the great diminution of the
territorial extent of the Empire, and had been carried out, (i) by
a reorganization of the provincial administration, whereby the
older dioceses and provinces gave place to new units of organiza-
tion called themes — a change which was accompanied by the
disappearance of the magistri militum and the Pretorian Prefects ;
and (2), by the breaking up of the great central ministries into
the various departments of which they had been composed, so
that each of these now became an independent office.^

For a time, however, the Master of the Offices remained un-
affected by these changes; he appears with unaltered title, and
apparently in the full enjoyment of his former powers, as late as
the reign of Constantine IV (668-85).^ But before the end of
the reign of Leo III, the Isaurian (717-40), the greater part
of the administrative functions of the Master had been transferred
to several officials, some of whom had once been subordinates of
the Master but had later been given an independent sphere of
administration,^ The chief of those among whom the functions
of the Master were divided were the Logothete of the Post {koyo-
dcTTjs rov Spo/Ltov), the Domesticus of the Guard (So/icotiko? riov
(rxoXo)^), the Quaestor, the Secretary of Petitions, 6 iirl rStv Scrj-
trco)!', and the Master of Ceremonies, 6 iiri rfj^ KaraoTdactos*

The office of the Logothete of the Post originated in that of

^ Bury, Imperial Administration in the Ninth Century^ British Academy Supplemen-
tary Papers, I (191 1), pp. 19-20.

* Op^ cit,, p. 91, where there is a list of references to Masters of the seventh century.

' Bury, op, cit.y p. 32. Bury also (pp. 29-31) gives a list of the known instances of
the occurrence of the title magistros from 718-9 to 886-8 a.d.

HISTORY OF THE MASTERSHIP OF THE OFFICES 51

the curiosus cursus publici praesenialis, a member of the Masters
qfficiunty who first acquired the title of Logothete in the eighth
century. This official now took charge of the State Post, and,
with it, of the diplomatic duties which the Master had exercised,
such as the correspondence with foreign powers and the reception
of ambassadors.^

The Domesticus of the Guard probably developed from the
domesticus who appears earlier in the service of the Master of
the Offices.^ The title So/icotiko? rSiv a\oKS}v appears as early
as 759,' and its bearer may possibly have been in command of
the Scholarians, as the subordinate of the Master of the Offices,
by 624.* However, in the eighth century the Domesticus was
the chief in command of these guards, free from any subordination
to the Master.

The Quaestor, to some extent at least, had always controlled
the activities of the scrinia. It is not surprising therefore to find
that when the Master of the Offices ceased to supervise the Sec-
retaries, apTLypa<f>eL<:, who were the magister epistolarum and
tnagister libellorum in Greek guise,^ these should have been
finally placed under the Quaestor alone.^

The Secretary for Petitions, o iiii rSiv Sajoretop, however, who
was formerly the tptagisier memoriae, the highest in rank among
the Masters of the scrinia, had had his charge raised to the
dignity of an independent administrative bureau.^

Finally, the Master of Ceremonies, 6 iTtl t^9 KaTaaraa-ca)?,
whose function is defined by his title and whose office seems to
have originated in that of the comes (once magister) dispositionum,
chief of the scrinium dispositionum and a subordinate of the
Master of the Offices,® likewise had been freed from the control
of a superior official and had acquired the direction of the court
ushers {ojfficium admissionum), who had been at one time also sud
dispositione magistri officiorum^ Possibly the functions involv-

* Bury, op, cit,, p. 91.

8 Ammianus, 30, 2, 10- 11 (374). Bury, op. cit.,^. 50, thinks that the domesticus was
possibly the same as the adjutor who was at the head of the Master's officium i^Notitia
Dignitatum or, XI, 41 ; occ. IX, 41). This may ultimately have been the case, but orig-
inally the two offices were quite distinct; cf. Seeck, Pauly-Wissowa, vol. 5, pp. 1296 fF.

* Theophanes, 684. * Chronicon Paschali ; Bury, op, cit.y p. 50.

* Bury, Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, vol. XXI, pp. 23-9 ; Imperial Ad-
ministration, pp. 74-5. • Bury, Imperial Acbninistration, p. 76.

' Op, cit,, pp. 76-7. 8 Cf. Harvard Studies, vol. XXVI, p. 99 f.

* Notitia Dignitatum or, XI, 16, 17 ; Bury, op, cit,, pp. 1 18-19.

52 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

ing the supervision of the court ceremonial were among those
which remained longest with the Master of the Offices.

Nevertheless, although the magistros of the eighth century,
without administrative and judicial functions, presents such a
different appearance from the magister officiorum of the sixth,
this is not due to the creation of a new Mastership but to the
radical changes which have altered the character of the old office.
This Bury ^ has proved by pointing out that, first, the magistri
militum and the magistri scriniorum did not have the title
magistros in Greek, while the Master of the Offices of earlier
times appears in Theophanes usually simply as 6 /laytorpo? ; sec-
ondly, the part which the Master plays in the eighth century is
that of the Master of the Offices in his role of " Master of Cere-
monies " ; thirdly, in the court functions described in the de caere-
moniis? and dating from an earlier period, the magistros acts as a
Master of Ceremonies, which fact seems to supply the link be-
tween the Master of the Offices of the seventh and the Master
of the eighth century ; and fourthly, in the old ceremonial at the
appointment of a Master,^ the latter was placed "at the head of
the creKperov,'' which seems to imply that he held the highest rank
at the imperial audiences. This ceremony dates from the time
when there was only one Master, whose position thus seems to
accord with that of the earlier official of the same name. Finally,
in the Novels of Leo VI (886-912), Stylianos, father-in-law and
minister of that Emperor, is expressly called Master of the Offices,*

However, in the eighth century this Master, whose title regu-
larly lacked the addition rwv o^^^iKuav, since he had lost control
of the officia of the palace, was also known as the First Master
o itpSno^; iidyurrpo^:.^ This usage implies that at that time there
was more than one Master at the Byzantine court, and indeed,
such was the case. For there had appeared a second Master,
whose presence is first clearly noticed in the account of the eleva-
tion of the sons of Constantine V to the rank of Caesar in 768
A.D.,* where Magistri are mentioned in the plural and form a rank
(velum, firjkop) distinct from the Patricians. Of these Masters

^ op. ctt.j pp. 30-1. 2 De Caer,, i, 68, 70.

* Dg Caer,, i, 46, 233: jcai l(rTrj(nv avrov 6 irpaiiroaiTtK cis icc^aX^v tou acKpirov
iwdvta irdvTiav rcov irarpucitav. I^cicperov corresponds to the older consistorium,

^ ^SrvAxavf rf irtpKfMVtardrif (or vircp^vcorarcp) fiayioTpif ra>v Sciwv offufMUfav
(ATav, I, 1 8, etc. Cf. Bury, ofi. cit.^ p- 31)- ^ De Caer,, i, 43, 224.

^ De Caer.y i, 43.

HISTORY OF THE MASTERSHIP OF THE OFFICES 53

the one who was called 6 fidyLorpo^y^ or 6 irpwro^ fidyLorpo^,'^ had
a more elevated position than his associate.

The reason for the establishment of a second Mastership,
according to Bury,^ may possibly be found in the imperial absences
from the capital. The presence of the original Master was re-
quired, as we shall see, in the city, and as the Emperor probably
desired to have a Master in his moving court a second Master was
appointed. Originally, this latter position may not have been a
permanent office, but one created for special occasions only.
Later, however, the two Masters were in office at the same time.
The second Master, Bury^ would identify with the fidyiarpo^: cic
irpocrdmov mentioned by Theophanes in connection with the re-
bellion of Artavasdos in 741.^ However, I am inclined to think
that this is an erroneous conclusion. Bury clearly intimates that
it was the second Master who accompanied the Emperor during
his absences from the city. But the term Ik irpoawnrov, which
corresponds to the Latin vices agens, implies that the Master thus
described was the deputy of the Emperor, and, therefore, the one
left in Constantinople to direct affairs there. This duty, as we
shall see, was later performed by the official known as 6 /laytorpo?.
And, as a matter of fact, Theophanes, /layiorpo? Ik irpoadmov in
741, had been left in the capital when the Emperor Constantine V
went to Asia.* Consequently, we must conclude that cic Trpocramov
was a term applied to the First Master, who acted as a sort of
Viceroy, or that it was the First Master who accompanied the
Emperor, while the other remained in the city, a conclusion which
would conflict with the custom of the following century.^

In the eighth century the Mastership was no longer an annual
office but was conferred for life upon holders of the patrician
dignity.® But it had not yet become a mere title of rank, for it
involved the performance of certain duties. The Master who was
at the head of cr^Kperov^ i, e., the Trpon-oiidyLarposy was the leading

1 D^ Caer,y 219, 9 ; 220, 4.

^ De Caer,y 224, 5-13. This appears as irpuyrofmyurrpoi in Philotheos, 781, 11.

* Imperial Administration^ p. 32. * Op, cit.y loc. cit,

* Theophanes, 639, 3. For the chronology, cf. Bury, Later Roman Empire^ vol. 2, pp.
425, 451. Bury here makes the Master in question a magister milUum in praesentij but in
his Imperial Administration he has apparently abandoned this interpretation as incorrect.

* Theophanes, 639 : 'ApTa/3a3o9 8c ypa^t irpo^ ®€0<f>d}njy rov warpuaov kku fmyurTpov
itcwpoaiaina ovra iv rg troXct. ^ IIcpi raf ccov, 504, 5o6J(83 1 A. D.) . * De Caer, , i , 46, 235 .

^ De Caer.y 233, 13; cf. Genesius, 83, 17: o vpSrra 4^€piiiv Mayov^A. iv /iaycorpoif
(under Theophilus) .

54 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

member of the senate.^ During the absence of the Emperor from
the capital, as late as the ninth century he shared in the direction
of the government with the Chamberlain and the Urban Prefect,
as we learn from the document called irepl rwv fiacnXiKS^v ra^^ihUav}
Upon such occasions the administration was entrusted to a com-
mittee of three, of whom the Chamberlain acted as the represent-
ative or vicar of the Emperor (6 StcTro)^), officiating wherever the
presence of the latter or his aller ego was necessary, while the
Master and the Prefect supervised the administration in general.
At this time it was the Chamberlain who held the Emperors
power Ik Trpoorcanovy as the Master had done in the previous cen-
tury.

This arrangement, usual in the ninth century, had apparently
been discarded in the tenth, since it is described as ro irakaiov
€0o<: in the work just referred to. Recollecting the ceremonial
duties of this Master, which have been noted previously, we may
say that the position which he held was more honorable, although
less onerous, than that of the earlier Master of the Offices.

The second Master shared in the ceremonial duties of the first,
as is evidenced in the account of the ceremonial at the creation
of a Patrician, probably dating from the time of Michael III
(842-67),^ and when the Emperor made offerings in St. Sophia,*
he also had administrative duties to perform.^ This additional
Mastership was created before 768,^ and its establishment, as has
been noted, was the cause of the employment of the title irpSyroq
lidyLorpos to designate the senior office.

The number of Masters continued to be limited to two during

^ Theodore of Studion, EpistulcSy 76 (a.d. 821 ?) : t^s avyKXiiTov irpuyro^Spov.

^ Appendix toD^ Caer.y i (Bekker), 504, 4: iifjXBfv ^ Avyovora airo t^s iroXcco? «u
o 8tciro)v Cfvv T«J fiayCarpi^ koI tw hrdpxia rrjq troXccos icat cv ry iroXct avyKkriTOi amura ;
506, I ; 6 fAoytarpo^ koI 6 Sccircov mu 6 Hirapxoi r^s ^toAccds, 831 A. D. ; 503, 6; 6 roivw
ivairofuiva^ fi€rh. rov paytarpov jcou tov iirdpxovj 6 koa Sccitcdv rrfv €k irpoaunrov tov jSacriXccos
SovXctas ap\rfv Baavi/f ^v, 6 Trarpucios irpcuirwrtroi koI aaKcAAopto^, ica^a>9 ro TroAotov CKpa-
rci rois PanriXivinv 1$(k, iitp^ofifvov rov ^curcAccof iwl (^HXTfTorav rov irpoxirotrvrov iraptav
rrjv iavTov ^PXT^ CTrcKparciav, koI r<S payUrrpta koX rt^ iirdpxta rrfv rrj^ TroXircca? teal rov
Koivov TYfv Su}ucri<riv ', at the time of the expedition of Basil I against Tephrike, 871. On
the title of this work, cf. Bury, English Historical Rnnew^ 1907, p. 439.

^ De Caer.y i, 48, 245, 17-20; 248, 16, 21, 24; 249, 7; Bury, Imperial Administra-
tion, P' 3^'

* De Caer,y 2, 31.

' Theophanes Continuatus, 347, see below This passage does not refer to ceremonial
duties; cf. Bury, Imperial Administration, P« 3^'

• De Caer.y i, 43, see above.

HISTORY OF THE MASTERSHIP OF THE OFFICES 55

the rest of the eighth and the first decades of the ninth century.^
But in the reign of Michael III (842-67), their number seems to
have been increased. For a time, indeed, even under this Em-
peror, they were apparently still restricted to two,^ but it is possible
to trace at least three, and possibly six Masters appointed by him.^
These, with the Manuel who was Master after 842,** make a total
of seven during this reign, more than two of whom certainly held
the title of Master at the same time. Furthermore, in one of the
ceremonies dating from this epoch. Masters are mentioned in
such a way as to point unmistakably to the possibility of creating
several at once.^ For these reasons we may conclude that it was
Michael III who first transformed the Mastership into an order
of rank like the patrician dignity;^ whereas the honorary Master
of the Roman period had been illustris, with the specific title of
magister offictorum.

This conversion of the Mastership into an order of rank is to
be connected with the creation of the class of the avdvnaroL, higher
than that of the Patricians, likewise effected under Michael III;^
the change marks important innovations in the grades of dignities
made by that Emperor. Of these Masters two, the successors
of the earlier pair, apparently continued to have official duties.
Under Basil I, successor of Michael III, these were known as
" the two Masters of State " and were entrusted with the execution
of extraordinary missions.^ One of them also, as we have seen,
shared in the direction of the administration during the absence
of the Emperor from Constantinople.® Stylianos, father-in-law of
Leo VI, who appears under the title of /idyLorpo^ rtov Oeicjv 6<^<^t-
kUov,^^ was one of these Masters, enjoying the old title of the Mas-
tership, and, at the same time, the senior in rank of all the Masters,

^ Bury, op, cit., pp. 29 if., with a list of the references to Masters of these centuries.
Also Philotheos, 727, 3 : o fmyun-fUKf 6 fjuaiyurrpoi. Cf. Bury, of, a'/., p. 32.

' De Caer,, 2, 31 : Avafuraiv rtav Svo fmyurrpuiv*

'Certain are Petronas, Genesius, 97, 8: Basil, Genesius, iii, 19: and Leo Theoda-
takes, Nicetas, vita Ignatiiy in Mansi, vol. XVI, p. 237. Possible are Arsaber, Theopha-
nes Continuatus, 175 ; and Stephen and Bardas, ibid,

^ Theophanes Continuatus, 148, 13,

' De Caer., i, 26, 143 : ci fuv iceXcvei 6 jSao-iXcvs iroi^ai fmyiarpovSf etc. ; cf. Bury,
op. cii,, p. 30.

* In the ceremonies of the time of Michael III the Masters appear as an order like
the Patridans ; cf. Bury, op, cit,, p. 30. ^ Bury, op. cit.y p. 28.

* Theophanes Continuatus, 347, 6 : rocs Svcrl rrj^ iroAirctas /layioTpois, 347, 20, Tropcu-
TOVKiUi Sc T^ vwavpylav koI oc Xafurporaroi fmyurrpoi.

* w€pi ra^cctfv, 503, 6. ^^ JVovellae Leonis, VI. i, 18, etc.

56 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

as is indicated by application to him of 7rpon'OfidyL(rrpo<:^ which
here has the same connotation as irpayroTrarpiKio^?

For the early years of the reign of Constantine VII (912-58)
we know of four Masters,^ and of five in the later period of the
same Emperor's rule, all of them apparently in enjoyment of this
rank at the same time.** Still, the total number of Masters at this
epoch seems to have been less than twelve, for there were not
enough of them to wear the twelve golden Xoipoi at one of the
ceremonies dating from this period,^ and some of the avdviraroi
had to be associated with them for this purpose. Luitprand ^ says
that there were twenty-four Masters in Constantinople during
his visit there in 968, but that seems an almost incredible number
and his report arouses suspicion.'

In the tenth century there is no further evidence that any of
these Masters, as such, performed active administrative duties.
However, the Mastership was regularly conferred upon holders of
important offices, such as Leo and Bardas Phokas, who were
So/icoTiicol or;(oXaJi^,® and Romanos Saronites and Romanos
Mousele, who seem to have been Strategoi.* Those honored
with the Mastership are found, indeed, playing an active part in
the administrative and Inilitary spheres, but this is due to the
various offices or the special authority which they held in addi-
tion to the Mastership, and not because the title of Master
involved any special services of this nature, or qualified its holder
for them. It was therefore purely a dignity, and no longer an
office.

Among the eighteen titles of honor conferred by the Byzantine
Emperors at the close of the ninth century that of Master ranked
fourteenth in the ascending order, and the Masters formed the
highest class of dignitaries; the more honorable titles of Zoste
Patricia, Curopalates, Nobelissimus, and Caesar were rarely con-
ferred upon more than one individual at the same time; in
the case of the last, three at least, were usually reserved for

^ Vita Euthymiiy 3, 6.

2 Theophanes, 380, 291 ; cf. Bury, op. ctt.j p. 28.

' Theophanes Continuatus, 380, 381, 385, 388, 390; Stephanos, Johannes Eladas, Leo
Phokas; 413, and 417, Nicetas.

^ Theophanes Continuatus, 436, 459, Bardas Phokas ; 443, Johannes Kurkuas, Kos-
mas, Romanos Saronites, Romanos Mousele. ' De Caer,^ i, 24.

* AntapodosiSy 6, 10. "^ So, too, with Bury, op, cit,, p. 33.

* Theophanes Continuatus, 388 : 436.

* Theophanes Continuatus, 443 ; Bury, op, cit.y p. 32.

HISTORY OF THE MASTERSHIP OF THE OFFICES 57

members of the imperial family.^ This remained the status of
the Masters so far as we can trace the existence of this dignity.

By the tenth century the Mastership had become an hereditary
dignity in certain princely families who were vassals of the Byzan-
tine Empire. Such were the families of the princes of Armenia ^
and of Taran or Daran.^ Says Rombaud,^ " the court of
Byzantium distributed the brevets of its court dignities in the
valley of the Caucasus and Armenia, as later the court of St.
Petersburg has distributed the cordons of its orders." This was
a species of diplomatic flattery, destined to secure the loyalty of
the local chieftains to the Byzantine throne. The title of Master,
however, was only conferred upon sovereign princes and members
of their families. This conferment of the Mastership was accom-
plished by the decoration with the Master's robe of rank, as we
learn from the procedure in the case of Curcenios the Iberian,
who received his title from the Emperor Romanus.^

From the ninth and tenth centuries we have the names of the
following princes who received the Mastership in this way:
Pancratios, Curcenios, a second Pancratios, grandson of the
former, and Adranse, princes of Iberia;^ George, prince of
Abasgia ; ^ Apasacios, son of Symbatius, prince of Apachume ; ®
and Cricoricios or Gregory, prince of Taran.*

The same custom was followed in the eleventh century; in
this period the title of Master was often conferred upon foreign
princes as a reward for their submission to the authority of the
Emperor. Among those who received the Mastership for this
reason were Prusianos, the Bulgar, in 1017;^^ the son of George,
the prince of Abasgia mentioned above, in 1022;^^ Jobanesices,
ruler of Anium, under Constantine Monomachos,^* and Karikios,
under the same Emperor.^^

^ Philotheos, 708-12 ; Bury, op. cit,^ pp. 20-36.

* Schlumberger, Sigillographie de Vempire byzantin, p. 532.

^ De Caer.j i, 24, 138; Schlumberger, op, cit,y p. 533; Rombaud, Vempire grec au
dixiime sUcle^ p- 514- * Op, cit., p. 513.

* Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De administrando intperio^ 46, 208. Constans,
drungarius of the fleet, was appointed to bestow the ifmrioy fmyurrpdrofv.

* De adm. imp,, 46, 206-7. ' De adm, imp., 46, 206.

* De adm, imp,, 44, 191. • De adm, imp., 43, 185.

^® Cedrenus, II, 469, 24 : (Basil II) rovrovficv yuayurrfjov irL/irjaev ; cf. 483, 6 ; 487, 12.
^^ Cedrenus, II, 478 : ov fmyurrpov iroiijoxis 6 )3ao-iAev$ vwirfiolftv,
^^ Cedrenus, Ily 557^ 8 : 6 8^ rrj^ <Tvv€(T€iai tovtov d7ro3c^a/uicvo9 fmyurrpov tc rifi^.
^ Cedrenus, II9 559^ 6 : 6 fikv h rov PaxriKia iXBiw xot yAyurrpo^ rifirjOtC^,

58 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

The purely honorary character of the Mastership at this period
is clearly shown in the elevation to this dignity in 1028 of a cer-
tain Romanos, whom the Emperor Constantine VIII had caused
to be deprived of his sight. ^ Nevertheless it was an honor eagerly
sought for, to judge from the persistency that Erbebios, or Herve,
the Prankish mercenary in the Byzantine service, displayed in
trying to secure it from the Emperor Michael VI (1056-57).^

The last notices of the Mastership that I have been able to
discover date from the dynasty of the Comnenoi (1081-1185).
Anna Comnena mentions an Alan who was a Master under her
father, Alexis (loSi-iiiS),^ while two seals of the Magistrissa
Maria,"* and one of the Magister Christophoros,^ belong to the late
eleventh or early twelfth century. After the restoration of the
Byzantine power in the new kingdom of the Paleologoi (1265-
1453), the title does not appear among those of the court digni-
taries.® It is, however, probable that the title continued to be
used throughout the period between the death of Alexis Com-
nenos and the capture of Constantinople by the Latins in 1 204.

^ Cedrenus, II, 487 : avqyayt Sk kol cis to Xaiiirpov ra>v fiayurrpwv d^uDfia . . . 'PcD/ia-
vovy ov 6 K^ovaravTivoi . . . dircT^^Xoxrcv.

^ Cedrenus, II, 617, 2. Michael refused him, irapaxaXovvra yap icat ixercuorra r^s
Twv fAayurrpiav rifivj^ rv^civ.

* Alexias, 95 : '^Kpoaro ns rStv Xcyofici^ciiv, "AXava^ to yew?, fmyurrpiK rrjv ci^cav.

* Schlumberger, Sigillographie de r empire byzantin^ p. 532, nos. 8 and 9.

* Schlumberger, op. cii»y p. 463, no. i. ^ Codinus, De officits^ 7.

CHAPTER IV

THE COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

After following the history of the Masters of the Offices
through eight centuries, from the time of their establishment until
their disappearance, the next step is to consider, in somewhat
greater detail, the part which they played in the administration of
the Empire.

As we have seen, this Office was formed by the association, in
the hands of one minister, of various powers which brought under
his control most widely separated branches of the administration.
Consequently it is not easy to group these various functions and
powers into categories. It might be possible to classify them
under the heads " administrative " and " judicial," for the reason
that the Master's judicial powers were but an outgrowth from, and
an adjunct to, his administrative ; yet it is not practicable to make
such a distinction. We may freely grant that the administrative
functions of the Master of the Offices fell into two general groups,
according as they were concerned with the organization of the
palace or with the governance of the Empire as a whole ; never-
theless, the line between these two spheres of action cannot be
drawn too sharply, for a great deal of the business of imperial
administration was conducted through the officia palatina. For
example, in the cases of the scriniarii and the agentes in rebuSy it
would be difficult to distinguish between the authority which the
Master exercised over them as the person responsible for the main-
taining of order and discipline among the ojfficiales of the court,
and the use to which he put them as his agents in fulfilling his
duties as an imperial minister. Therefore, it seems most conven-
ient to study the Master s activities so far as possible in connec-
tion with the various officia^ or departments of the administration,
over which he, in any respect whatever, exercised control.

6o THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

I. The Master of the Offices and the Palace Guards

The essentially military character of the Mastership of the
Offices at the time of its creation has been previously emphasized ;
and although the military side of his functions was soon over-
shadowed by the civil, the Master preserved traces of the origin
of his office in retaining for a long period the command of the
palace guards.

It is probable that the Master of the Offices was in command
of the Scholarians from the time when they were instituted by
Constantine ^ to take the place of the Pretorian Guard, which he
had disbanded after the battle of Saxa Rubra (31 2).^ As tribu-
nus et magister the Master of the Offices was probably for some
time under the orders of the Pretorian Prefect, but with the reor-
ganization of his office and its elevation to the comitiva (c. 325),
in this respect as elsewhere the Master was subject to none but
the Emperor himself.^

These new palace guards comprised various corps or scholae;
they were so called because there was assigned to them a hall, or
schola, where they were to hold themselves in perpetual readiness
for service. They were distinguished from one another by dififer-
ences in equipment and personnel.* At first there were probably
five of these corps,^ but by the opening of the fifth century there
were seven in Constantinople and five in Rome.^ Each of the
corps numbered 500 men, so that the total strength of the Schola-
rians at Rome was 2500, and at Constantinople 3500,^ until Jus-
tinian, when co-Emperor with Justinus, raised the number of
those at the Eastern capital by the addition of four new scholae,
or 2000 men.^ These latter were called supernumeraries {xm^p-

* Codex Theodosianus, XI V, 17, 9; Mommsen, Hermes, vol. 24, p. 222.

^ Zosimus, 2, 17. • See above, pp. 29, 32 ; Lydus, De Mag,, 2, 10 ; 3 ; 40.

* Mommsen, Hermes^ vol. 24, pp. 222 f. * Mommsen, op, cit., 224.

* Notitia Dignitatum or, XI : Scola scutariorum prima, scola scutariorum secunda,
scola geniilium seniorum, scola scutariorum sagittariorum^ scola scutariorum clibanari-
orums scola armaturarum iuniorum, scola gentilium iuniorum ; occ. IX ; scolae scutariorum
pritna and secunda, armaturarum seniorum, gentilium seniorum, scutariorum tertia.

■^ Procopius, Historia Arcana, 24 : '^rtpoL arpaTiuyrai ovx ^crous rj Trcvreicoo'toc icai
TpiXT\i\uoL TO. i$ o,p\!j^ CTTi <f>vXaicg Tou iraXaTiov KaTcori^crav, ovcnrcp (r)(pXapuns koXowtiv ;
cf. Suidas, s. v. 'S,)(oXdpioi.

^ Codex Justinianus, IV, 65, 35 ; in undecim devotissimis scholis ; Procopius, Historia
Arcana, 24 : i^vtica roivw 'loiKrrivo? r^v PaaiXeuiv Trope Aa)3ev, ovtos 'Iovotivuivos ttoAAous
CIS TTfV rifirjv KaTta'TTja'aTo ravrrfv, . . . iirtl Sk rovrocs KaraXoyoi^ ov^cva evSctv to Xocttok
"jcrOero, crcpovs avrois cs ^crxiAiovs ivrtdtuccy, ovtnrtp inrtpapiBfwv^ ^xoXow.

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF. THE OFFICES 6i

dpidlioC)y and were afterwards disbanded by Justinian himself.^
However, it may be that the ranks of the Palace Guards were
again enlarged, for Lydus ^ gives their strength as ten thousand
horse and foot.

The Scholarians were classed as regular soldiers, belonging
to the annata militia^ and had all the privileges of such, but
received higher pay than the rest.* Hence enrollment in their
ranks was an honor highly esteemed and was at first granted only
to soldiers who had seen actual service, preferably to Germans ^
and, later, Armenians.® However, from the time of Zeno the
Isaurian, admission to these scholae was obtained no longer as
a reward of merit, but by favor, and finally by open purchase.''

This brought about a complete change in the character of the
guards, who were now merely an ornamental body, the members
of which had secured for themselves an easy berth for life.® They
had never been called upon to serve outside the capital, and were
so utterly unqualified to take the field that, as it is reported, when
Justinian threatened to send them on foreign service, they volun-
tarily secured exemption by a surrender of their pay.® At first
they had been in a real sense the guards of the palace, being on
duty day and night,^® but Leo seems to have transferred a large
share of these actual services to a corps of three hundred excubi-

^ Procopius, ibid.

^ De Mag.y 2, 24 : to yap fmyurrpoi 6<f><f>iKCtav ovofw. ov$cv ryrrov "^yovfuyov rcov avXi-
Kwv KoraXoyttiv ayffjuuv€i, iv oTs ^ re tinriic^ jcat 17 7r€(ofw.xK Svvafwi r^ jSocriXaas OttaptiToiy
ds fivpujvq frvyayofUvrj iroX€fjLurrdi. This number seems suspiciously large, and lacks
confirmation.

* Codex Justinianusy IV, 65, 35 : milites autem appellamus eos^ qui tarn sub excelsis
magisiris militum tolerare noscuntur tnilitiam quant in undecim devotissimis scholisj etc. ;
Agathias, 5' ' 5 • ovroc ^ orpariairai yukv ovopjaXiovrajL, koI iyytypdifxiTai rot9 r<tfv KoX^ytav

* Procopius, Histaria Arcana^ 24 ; cf. Suidas, s, v. 'SiXpXdpioi.

* Mommsen, Hermes^ vol. 24, p. 223.

* Agathias, 5,15; Procopius, Historia Arcana^ 24 : tovtous w. irportpov pkv dpurriv-
Svjv aTroXc^avrc? i$ ^Apfieviutv cs Tavrrjv ^ rrfv rifirjv ^yw ; cf. Suidas, he, cit,

^ Loc. cit,

^ Agathias, 5? ^ 5 ' ^^^*- ^ <>^ iroAAot doTiKot re koX fj^oBpoeifiavt^, tau pLovovy oT/tuu, l&yKov
Tou PaxTiXtiov €V€Ka icflu r^s cv raw 7rpoo8oft9 /A€yaAavx«as i$€vprfpL€voi ; Mommsen, op, cit,^
p. 225.

* Procopius, Historia Arcana, 24.

^° Agathias, 5, 15 : Ik rwv raypAnav iKtivutv, 01 cs to hiYfpj€pcv€iv tc jccu Scawicrcpevciv
cv Tig avXy av€K€Kpivro, ous Svf crxoAapiovs AvoKaXovaiv ; Procopius, Ve Bello Gothico, 4, 27 :
Twv CTrt Tov iraXariov ^vAa#c^9 rcray/ticvaiv Xoxmvy oucnrcp (r;(oXa$ ovofia{ou(rtv ; Historia
Arcanay 24 ; cf. Suidas, I.e. ; Rutilius Namatianus, Itinerariuniy I, 563 : Officiis regerem
eum regia teeta magister Armigerasqtu pii prineipis excubias.

62 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

tores, which he created.^ It was because the Scholarians had
thus ceased to be soldiers in the true sense of the word that they
were permitted to exist under the command of the Master of the
Offices at the Ostrogothic court at Ravenna,^ although under
Theoderic the Romans were excluded from the profession of
arms, which became a prerogative of the Gothic conquerors.

As commander of the Scholarians the Master had control
over their enrollment,^ discipline,* and promotion.* Enrollment
in the scholae was made by the Master, but only such recruits
were received as had been able to secure the imperial sanction
in the form of a warrant {probatoria), and the Master had to see
to the preparation of quarterly lists of the Scholarians, which were
to be placed on file so that their notitia might be kept up to date
and definitely known.®

The Master also exercised judicial authority over the Scho-
larians, their wives or widows, their widowed mothers, their
children, in so far as the latter were not under some other judicial
authority, and even their slaves, in both civil and criminal cases.^
The Scholarians, on the other hand, enjoyed exemption from pros-
ecution before any other than the Master s tribunal.^ This same
privilege was accorded in civil cases for the rest of their lives to
Scholarians who at the end of their time of service had obtained
the rank oi primicerius and the dignity of viri clarissimi comites?
However, in criminal cases, or those in which the revenues of
state were affected, these latter were subject to the jurisdiction
of the provincial governors, that the plea of special privilege

^ Lydus, De Mag,, i, 16: icot 6 Accuv ^ h PcuriXm irpu>ro9 roiis Xeyo/Acvov9 ^iconcovjSc-
rtopaq rStv iropcf d3<i>v tov iroAariov ^vXoxa? irpooTTcra/ievos TpuiKoai<ns fuonnnK iaTpdr€va€ ;
Mommsen, Hermes, vol. 24, p. 225.

^ Cassiodonis, Varitu, 6, 6 : ipse insoUntium scholarum mores procellos moderatioms
suae terminis prospere disserenai,

» Codex Justinianus, XII, 33, 5 ; I, 31, 5 (527)-

^ Cassiodonis, Variac, 6, 6; Codex Justinianus, XII, 29, i.

^ Codex Theodosianus, VII, i, 14 (394) ; this can only refer to the Scholarians, as
they alone among the viri militares were subject to the orders of the Master.

* Codex Justinianus, I, 31, 5.

' Codex Justinianusy XII, 29, 3 (Zeno) : Quotiens super causa civili vei etiam criminali
ex senteniia videlicet iudicii tui culminis, scholar es vel eorum conjuges, sive adhuc vivent
mariti sive post mortem eorum in viduitate constUtUae sunt, matresve eorum in viduitate
permanentes aut liberi, qui non specialiter cUterius iudicis iurisdictioni subiectam condi-
tionem sortiti sunt, et servi ad eos pertinentes conveniuntur.

* Codex Justinianus, XII, 26, 2 (443-4) : Ad exemplum itaque devotissimorum
sckolariorum nuUi licere tnemoratos ad aliud iueUcium trakere,

* Codex Justinianus, XII, 29, 2 (474).

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES 63

might not result in danger to the public interest.^ At all times
the Master might delegate his judicial authority over the Scho-
larians to other officials, such as the judges in the provinces.^

Each of the scholae had its own commander, at first a tri-
bunus^ later regularly a comes? who was naturally subordinate to
the Master of the Offices. Theophanes, for 554 a.d., mentions
that in that year the Scholarians mutinied against a comes who
was in authority over the whole guard/ Such an officer would
at that time have been a second in command to the Master of the
Offices. However, as there is elsewhere no trace whatever of
the presence of this comes^ we are obliged to agree with Bury^
that Theophanes misunderstood his source and that under the
Master were no comites except those in command of the separate
scholae.

By the middle of the eighth century the Master had been
relieved of his military authority over the Scholarians; a new
commander had been given them, the So/xcortico? rSiv axokSiVy whose
office had originated in that of the Domesticus of the Master.*

II. The Master of the Offices and the Officia Palatina

The term officia palatina^ in its widest sense, covers all per-
sons employed in the various branches of the court service, qui in
scuro palatio militant? Of these, such as were members of the
departments of the Counts of the Sacred Largesses and the Privy
Purse were in no way subject to the Master of the Offices.®

Among the rest, those who were engaged in rendering menial
services about the imperial person, i.e. all included under the
general name cubicularii^ were the subordinates of the Grand
Chamberlain ; * while those who performed similar duties in con-

* Codex fustinianus, XH, 29, 2 (474).

' Codex Justtnianusy XH, 29, 3, 3: Quotiens sane apud viros clarissimos provin-
ciarum moderatoresj ex deUgatione scilicet senteniiae tuae magnitudinisy contra viros
fortissintos vet eorum coniuges vet liberos vet servos cognitio ceUbretur,

' Codex Theodosianusy VI, 13, i = Codex Justinianus^ XH, 11, i : de comitihus et
tribufUs scholarum; Codex Justinianus^ XII, 29, i; Cons tan tine Potphyrogenitus, De
Caer.j i, 84*

* Theophanes, 366, 3 : lirav€<mi<mv ai axoXm rep KO/itfri avroiv.
^ Imperial Administration, p. 50, n. 2.

* Theophanes, 684 (767 a.d.) ; cf. p. 105 below.

^ Codex Justinianusy XII, 28, i ; 2. " Codex Justinianus, XII, 23.

* In later times Chamberlains, for the Augusta as well as the Augustus, had a prcupo-
situs sacri cubiculi. Codex Justinianus, XII, 5, 5 (Anastasius).

64 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

nection with the maintenance of the imperial household, ix.^ the
so-called castrenstani and mints terianiy were at the disposal of the
Castrensis or Steward of the Palace, later known as the Curo-
palates.^ In the execution of their duties therefore the cubicularii
were subject to the orders of the Grand Chamberlain and the
castrenstani to the Steward, while neither were in this respect
under the authority of the Master of the Offices. However, in
so far as matters of discipline were concerned, and also in ques-
tions relating to the organization of their officia, both these classes
of officiales palatini appear to have come under the Master's
supervision.^ It was for this reason that the Master had judicial
authority over them. As we have seen, in the course of the fifth
century this jurisdiction became exclusive; the members of these
officia receiving, like the Scholarians, the privilege of answering
all charges in the Master's court alone, to prevent any long inter-
ference with the performance of their regular duties which would
result from their being haled before outside tribunals. This
privilege was also extended in various cases to the families of
these officiales. Leo and Anthemius decreed that the cubicularii
of both the Emperor and the Empress should be prosecuted only
in the Master's court,** and the same rulers bestowed a like privi-
lege upon the members of the schola sacrae vestis, their mothers
and their wives, in both civil and criminal suits.^ In 474 this
right was extended to the ministeriani in general,^ and later Zeno

^ Notitia DignitcUum or, XVII ; occ, XV. The title curopalates gradually supplanted
that of castrensis in the course of the fifth century ; cf. Hartmann, Pauly-Wissowa, vol. 3,
pp. I 770-1.

^ Cassiodorus, Variae^ 6, 6 : Ad eum nimirum palatii pertinet discipUna ; Rutilius
Namatianus, i, 563: officiis regerem cum regia tecta magister; Codex Justinianus, XII,
33> 5) where the Master is instructed to prevent the same persons serving in several
officia or scrinia^ the duties of which were not closely related; cf. the title magister
officiorum omnium^ Dessau, Inscriptiones Selectae^ 1244.

* Codex Justinianusy XII, 5, 3 : Cubicularios tam sacri cubiculi mei quam venerabilis
Augustae, quos utrosque certum est obsequiis occupatos et aulae penetralibus inhaerentes
diver sa indicia obire non posse^ ab observaiione aliorum tribunalium liberamus^ ut in sub-
limiiatis solummodo tuae iudicio propositus adversus se excipiant actiones,

* Codex JustinianuSy XII, 25, 3: // qui in schola vest is sacrae militant vel matres
eorum vel uxores criminalem vel civilem litem contra se commovendam in nullo alio nisi in
sublimitatis tuae suscipiant examine,

* Codex JustinianuSy XII, 25, 4: Ante omnia nullius penitus alterius iudicis minoris
vel maioris sacro ministerio nostro deputatos, quorum officia singillatim brenn's subter
adnejius continet^ nisi a tuae dumtaxai magnitudinis sententiis conveniriy ut in nullo
penitus alterius iudicis foro pulsantium nisi in tuae tantummodo amplitudinis examine
praebeani aliquando responsum.

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES 65

forbade the prosecution of a silentiarius or his wife on civil or
criminal charges before any other judicial authority.^

It seems that the notarii, or court stenographers and secre-
taries, whose duties included the keeping of the record of pro-
ceedings in the consistorium and the care of the notitia dignitatum
et administrationum tarn militarium quam civilium^ formed an-
other group of officials whose activities did not fall under the
direction of the Master, but whose matricula came under his
supervision. At least such appears to be the implication of a
constitution of Zeno,^ addressed to a Master of the Offices, con-
taining regulations for the length of service of the notarii, their
order of seniority, and the honors bestowed on them at the expira-
tion of their term of service.

Further, the referendariiy who were appointed from the tribuni
notarii^ and whose duties it was to present petitions to the Em-
peror, to transmit imperial answers to the requests of officials and
to convey unwritten orders of the Emperor to judges both in the
capital and in the provinces,^ came under the supervision of the
Master to the same extent as the notarii themselves.*

A similar relation with the Master of the Offices may be
claimed for the schola of the stratores, whose services were em-
ployed in connection with the selection of horses for the imperial
stables.*^ The services of the stratores were also under the
Master's judicial authority, as we learn from a letter of Sym-
machus,® dating from 384-85, dealing with a case where a Master
had claimed for his jurisdiction a strator, whose appeal from
the court of the governor of Apulia was brought before the Urban
Prefect. This is the earliest reference to the exercise of judicial
functions by the Master of the Offices.

* Codex Just inianus^ XII, 16, 4: Ne ad diver sa tracti viri devoti silent tarii indicia
sctcris abstrahi videantur obsequiis^ iubemus eos qui quemlibet devotissimorum siientiariarum
scholae vel eius uxorem civiliter vel etiam crintinaliter pulsare maluerint^ mininu eum ex
cuiuslibet alterius iudicio nisi ex iudicio tantummodo viri excellent issimi magistri officiorum
canveniri,

* Karlowa, Romische Rechtsgeschichte, vol. i, p. 845.

* Codex Justinianusy XII, 7, 2. * De Caer.^ i, 86.

* Bury, Magistri scriniarum^ dvTiypaifnj^ and pe^pcv&iptoi. Harvard Studies in Clas-
sical PhilologVy vol. XXI,pp. 27-9. ^ Novellae Justinianiy 10 (535).

^ Codex Theocbsianusy VI, 31, i (365-73?) = Codex Justinianus^ XII, 24, i; Cod,
Theod.y VIII, 8, 4 = Cod. Just. XII, 59, 3; Ammianus, 30, 5; Gothofredus, Cod. Theod.y
vol. 2, p. 224.

* Relationes, [10], 38, 4 : Venatium, quern v. c. et inlustris officiorum magister iussercd
exfttberi, censui agenti in rebusy Decentio, quo prosequente venerate esse reddendum.

66 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

We now come to those officia which, not only in matters per-
taining to organization, discipline, and jurisdiction, but also in the
active execution of their duties, came to a greater or less extent
under the Master's direction. These officia comprised the agentes
in rebuSy the admissionales, the cancellarii, the decani, the lampa-
dariiy the mensores, and the scrinium memoriae, scrinium epistu-
larum, scrinium libellorum, and scrinium dispositionum.

The cuimissionalesy or officium admissionum, are placed at the
Master's disposal in the Notitia Dignitatum} They were a corps
of court ushers, which had developed under the Principate and had
been carried over into the Empire, where its importance was en-
hanced owing to the increased attention paid to the details of court
ceremonial.^ Its immediate chief was at first the magister cuimis-
sionum? who by the sixth century had acquired the title of comes
admissionum} This officium assisted the Master of the Offices in
the direction of the receptions and audiences, and must have been
subject to his jurisdiction as well as to his orders in general.

The cancellarii in the immediate service of the Emperor are
mentioned only in the Notitia for the Occident, as being under
the Master's orders.^ However, as has been noted,^ it is altogether
likely that there was a similar body under the Eastern Master.

The decani do not appear in either Notitia but their schola was
under the Master's supervision as early as 416,^ and in 434® (?)
they were made subject to the sole jurisdiction of his court.

The lampadarii are named in the oriental Notitia * only, but
a constitution of Valentinian 1 11,**^ 450 a.d., shows that in the West
their schola was wholly under the Master s control and that regu-
lations affecting its organization were issued in accordance with
his recommendations.

All these officia performed duties of so humble a character
that it would be impossible to expect a greater amount of infor-
mation regarding them in their relation to the Master of the
Offices. However, from the few notices that occur it is quite

• Notitia Dignitatum or, XI, 17 : occ, IX, 14.

2 Coiiex TheodosianuSy VI, 35, 3 (319) ; cf. Codex Justinianus, XII, i, 3 ; Seeck, Pauly-
Wissowa, vol. i, p. 382 ; Harvard StuiUes in Classical Philology, vol. XXVI, pp. no fF.

• Ammianus, 15, 5, 18 ; Codex Theodosianus, VI, 2, 23.
^ De Caer., i, 184: Koynrfi dS/irp^iwtav*

» Notitia Dignitatum occ, IX, 15. • P. 38.

^ Codex Theodosianus, VI, 33, i ; cf. Codex Justinianus, XII, 26, i.

• Codex Justinianus, XII, 26, 2. • Notitia Dignitatum, or, XI, 12.
*® Novellae ValentiniatU, 30.

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES 67

evident that both administratively and judicially they were
entirely under his control.

The scrinium dispositionum differed widely from the other
three scrinia both in the character of its activities and with
regard to the officials who directed them. Consequently it can
be given separate consideration. This bureau was organized
about the middle of the fourth century,^ and from its establish-
ment was probably under the control of the Master of the Offices,
as were the older j^rzw/a at that time. In the Notitia^ it appears
sub dispositione eius, and, like the other scrinia, was subject to his
disciplinary and judicial authority.^ The immediate chief of this
scrinium was originally called the magister dispositionum^ later
the com£s dispositionum^ but in rank he was only the equal of the
proximi of the other scrinia,^ There is no trace of this official
having an independent sphere of action, or of his being under the
authority of any other than the Master of the Offices.

The duty of the scrinium. dispositionum was to prepare the
program of imperial business and engagements, especially that
part of it which concerned the number and routes of the imperial
journeys, and possibly the lists of those to be summoned to court
receptions of various kinds.^ In the Byzantine period, the
official known as the 6 cttI ri}? icaTaoTao"€co9, who from the ninth
century played the part of a Master of Ceremonies at the court,
seems to have been the older comes dispositionum with a new title,
emancipated from the Master's control.® He was at that time
the superior of the dSfiyjvarovvdXLo^,^ who was probably the same as
the Ko/iri^ dS/xTjj/o-twcoi^,^® formerly also, as head of the officium.
admissionum, under the Master's orders.

There remain for consideration the agentes in rebus, the
mensores, and the scrinia sacrae memoriae, epistularum, and
libellorum. The question of their connection with the Master of

* The first mention is in Codex Theodosianusy VI, 21,6 (362).
2 Notitia Dignitatum or, XI, 16; occ. IX, 11.

' Codex Justinianus, XII, 19, 11 (Anastasius), cf. XII, 19, 7 (443-44), and other con-
stitutions concerning all the scrinia. * Codex Theodosianus, VI, 26, 2 (381).

* Codex Theodosianus, VI, 2, 23 (414). • Codex Theodosianus, VI, 26, 2 (381).

' Gothofredus on Cod. Theod., VI, 26, i ; Schiller, Geschichte der romischen Kaiser-
zeit, vol. 2, p. 103; Karlowa, Romische Rechtsgeschichte, vol. i, p. 836; Seeck, Pauly-
Wissowa, vol. 4, p. 647. * Bury, Imperial Administration, pp. 118-9.

* De Caer., 800, 8 ; 805, 4.

^^ De Caer., 386, 25. It is perhaps this comes who appears in Lydus, De Mag., 2, 17,
under the name of dS/uo-oriovaXios.

68 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

the Offices involves a somewhat lengthy discussion; separate
sections have therefore been assigned to them in this chapter.
In general, the Master's authority over these officia was very
similar to that which he exercised over those just mentioned, in-
cluding disciplinary and judicial powers as well as the direction
of a considerable part of their active duties.

We are now in a position to appreciate the meaning of Cassi-
odorus, when in his Formula of the Master's office ^ he wrote
with reference to the latter's control of the officia palatina : Tarn
multi ordines sine confusione aliqua componuntuTy et ipse sustinet
onus omnium quod habet turba discretum ; adding, in allusion to
his judicial authority over them, as well as over others, causarum
praeterea maximum pondus in eius audientiae finibus optima
securitate reponimus.

With the gradual diminution of his power in the course of the
seventh and eighth centuries ^ the Master saw the control of the
officia palatina transferred to other hands, until in the ninth
century he exercised no authority whatever over them.

III. The Master of the Offices and the Agentes in Rebus

The schola of the agentes in rebus was probably established
by Diocletian ^ to take the place of the so-called frumentarii of
the Principate, whom he had abolished,* although the earliest
notice of the Agentes occurs in a constitution of Constantine I,
dating from 319.^ TYi^ frumentarii "w^rt originally soldiers sent
into the provinces to supervise the transportation of grain for the
provisioning of the army {/rumentum militare), but had developed
into secret agents of the imperial administration, having also under
their care the cursus publicus or State Post.* These latter were
the duties that fell to the lot of the Agentes.

The schola of the Agentes was a large one. At first, appar-
ently, their number was not definitely limited, but could be aug-
mented at the pleasure of those in control as administrative needs

1 Variae^ 6, 6. ^ See pp. 50-53.

' Hirschfeld, Die Agentes in Rebusy Sitzungsberichte der Berliner Akademie^ '893,
p. 422.

* Aurelius Victor, Caesaresy 39, 44 : remoto pestilenti frumeniariorum gettere^ quorum
nunc agentes r^um simillimi sunt; Hieronymus, in Abdiam, i, Eos enim guos nunc
agentes in rebus vel veredarios appellant, veteres frumentarios nominabant ; Lydus, De
Mag,, 2, 26. * Codex Theodosianus, VI, 35, 3 fin.

• Fiebiger, Pauly-Wissowa, vol. 7, pp. 122 f.

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES 69

might require. However, the Emperor Julian, in the interests of
the provincials,^ reduced their number to seventeen. This restric-
tion probably was effective only until the end of his reign, for in
430 the authorized number, statuti, of Agentes on the roll of the
schola was eleven hundred and seventy-four.* In the time of
Leo ' it had been increased to twelve hundred and forty-eight, and
besides these there was a long waiting list of supemumerarii ready
to fill any vacancies that might occur in the ranks of the regulars.
The Agentes were looked upon as soldiers; they were dressed
and organized as a military corps, and were divided into five
grades, with regular promotion from the lowest to the highest."*

The supervision and direction of the Agentes at the outset
was certainly in the hands of the Pretorian Prefect, but under
Constantine it was transferred to the Master of the Offices,^
whose connection with this schola was maintained so long as he
continued to be an active administrative official. According to
the Notitia Dignitatum the Master had under his control both the
schola at the court and its deputies on special service elsewhere.*

At first, apparently, the Master controlled admissions to the
schola;'^ but in 399^ the sanction of the Emperor, which probably
had been ordinarily obtained before, became an essential requisite
for those who desired to be enrolled among the Agentes, and, once
granted, this permit could not be cancelled. However, the right
of nominating to the schola had been granted to certain officials
and to Agentes who had obtained the rank of princeps? This
privilege was not expressly revoked, but the nominations thus
made had now to receive the imperial approval. Neglect of the
regulation put into force in 399 probably caused Leo to reaffirm
the necessity of securing an imperial probatoria for admission to
service with the Agentes.^®

* Seeck, Geschichte des Untergangs der antiken Welt^ vol. 2, p. 103.

* Codex Theodosianus^ VI, 27, 23. • Codex Justinianus^ XII, 20, 3.

* Hirschfeld, op. cit,^ pp. 422 f. ; Seeck, Pauly-Wissowa, vol. i, pp. 776 f.

* Lydus, De Mag., 2, 10 ; 26; cf. pp. 29-34. The earliest proof of the Master^s con-
trol dates from 359 ; Codex Theodosianus^ I» 9» i •

* Schola agentum in rebus et deputati eiusdem scholae^ Notitia Dignitatum or. XI, occ. IX.
^ Cod. Theod.j I, 9, i (359) ; VI, 27, 3 (380) ; Seeck, Pauly-Wissowa, vol. i, p. 776.

* Cod. Theod.^ VI, 27, 11 : Consultissima definitione statuimuSy ut executionem agent is
in rebus inconsultis nobis nenw mereatur, concessatn vero quispiam revocare non audeat.

* Codex Theodosianusy VI, 27, 8 (396), not repeated in Codex Justinianus.

^® Cod. Just. J XII, 20, 3 fin. : Nemo autem sine divali probatoria, quam codices in sacro
nostro scHnio memoriae positi debeant inserendam accipere^ militaribus eiusdem devotissimae
sckolae stipendiis vel privilegiis pofiahn-.

!:
' I

70 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

The task of removing from the roll of the Agentes the names
of such persons as had illegally succeeded in having themselves
entered thereon, was upon several occasions undertaken by the
Master at the Emperor's orders.^ Such purgings involved the
right of dismissal by the Master, and apparently he possessed such
power until 415, when this privilege was withdrawn,^ and the right
of sanctioning dismissals as well as admissions was reserved for
the Emperor alone, and the Master required a special warrant
before removing any one from the schola}

The matricula, or accredited roll of the Agentes, was placed
by an imperial warrant under the care of the Master, whose duty
it likewise was to inquire into the degree of efficiency and as-
siduity possessed by the various members of the schola, so that in
conferring promotions and honors the preference might be
given to those who had exhibited the greatest industry and
capacity.^ Promotion within the schola was thus under his
supervision ; although advancement was regularly made on the
basis of seniority,^ there was an opportunity for preferment upon
the Master's recommendation. In exceptional cases promotion
out of the regular order might be made by special sanction of the
Emperor,* which was usually granted on the recommendation of a
majority of the schola} Such a recommendation was originally
required in the appointment of the adiutor of the Master, who
was regarded as the head of the schola^ but later the Master was
left freedom of choice subject to the imperial confirmation.*

^ Cod, Theod.y I, 9, i (359) : Universty qui indignis naialibus et conversatione deter'
rima ad sckolam agentum in rebus adspiraverunt vel translati sunt, cognoscente v. c, comite
et fnagistro officiarum vestro consortia secernantur, Qi, abo VI, 27, 17 (415) ; 18 (416) ;
23, I (430).

2 Cod, Theod,y VI, 27, 17 : Merito magnificent ia tua concessam sibi pridem a nostra
maiestate licentiam pro removendis his^ qtwrum consortia agentum in rebus schola labor abaiy
ad nostram denuo auctoritatem credidit revocandam, NuUi igitur posthac sine nostrae
maiestatis auctoritate discingendi agentem in rebus^ nulli eximendi pateat copia ; cf. Cod,
fust., XII, 20, 2. Seeck thinks that this constitution applied to the East only, and that the
Master had lost the right of dismissal in the West in 399 (Pauly-Wissowa, i, 777 on Cod,
Theod,y VI, 27, 11). However, in that year it was only ordered that the Master could not
reject a candidate for admission who had secured an imperial probatoria,

" Codex Theodosianusy VI, 27, 18.

* Cod. Theod.y I, 9, 3 (405) : Magnificentia tua matriculam scholae agentum in rebus
ex nostra auctoritate tractabit atque perficiet ; VI, 27, 23; Cod. fust,, XII, 20, 3 (Leo).

* Cod, Theod,y I, 9, i = Cod, fust., I, 3'> '5 ^^^' Theod,^ I, 9, 2 = Cod, Just, ^ I, 31, 2 ;
Cod, Theod.y VI, 27, 20; 21 ; 14 = Cod, Just. ^ XII, 20, i.

* Codex Theodosianusy VI, 27, 3 ; 7 ; 9 ; 19.

' Codex TheodosianuSy VI, 27, 4 ; 28, 8 ; 29, 4.

^Compare Codex TheodosianuSy I, 9, i and Codex JustinianuSy I, 31, i.

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES 71

There was evidently a considerable tendency to attempt to gain
undeserved promotion by the use of influence or other illegitimate
means, for numerous constitutions were published to check this
evil.^

The Master, being in control of the deputati of the schola, had
to see that the Agentes despatched on public business to the
provinces, or granted leave of absence for a fixed period, did not
overstay their time limit. ^

The general supervision of the schola, with the duty of enforc-
ing the imperial regulations regarding it and of making sugges-
tions for a more efficient administration, rested with the Master.^
His adiutor and subadiuvae might also be held responsible in
case of transgression of the rules of the sckola,^ These rules
were not always very strictly observed if we may judge from the
necessity which the Emperors felt of issuing edicts at frequent
intervals to enforce obedience to them. The honors and privi-
leges of the Agentes were likewise safeguarded by the Master
of the Offices.^

He also exercised judicial authority over them, and, from the
time of Leo,® all Agentes of the rank of ducenarius or centenarius,
while in the city of Constantinople, had the privilege of answering
all civil and criminal charges in the court of the Master or his
representative. This right was also extended to the subadiuvae,
who, however, lost it on the expiry of their term of office unless
they had attained the rank of centenartu But all centenarii
while in the provinces were subject to the regular judicial au-
thorities, unless they were entrusted with the performance of
public business.

Turning from the organization of the schola to consider its
activities, we find that a great part of these consisted in the exe-
cution of the Emperor's commands, the delivery of imperial docu-
ments, and the providing of escorts at the imperial pleasure. In
short, the Agentes might be called upon to undertake any service
that the Emperor desired to be performed. From their duties as

* Codex Theodosianusy I, 9, i and 2 ; VI, 29, 4; VI, 27, 14 = Codex /mtinianus, XII,
20, 1, etc. ^ Codex Theodosianus, VI, 27, 15 (412).

^ Codex Theodosianus, VI, 27, 23 (430): Cuncta, quae super agenium in rebus
militia or dine loco numero statuistiy amplectimur; Cod. Just., XII, 20, 3 (Leo).

* Codex Theodosianus, VI, 27, 3.

^ Codex Theodosianus, VI, 27, 20 (426); Codex Just inianus, XII, 20, 5 (Leo); 9
(Anastasius). ^ Codex Justinianus, XII, 20, 4.

72 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

despatch-riders they were sometimes called in Greek ayyeXxou^opot.
They had further to bring in reports on whatever occurrences or
conditions in the provinces appeared to them to be worth while
making known to the central government, thus playing the part
of an imperial secret service.^

It was also the Agentes who supplied the annual inspectors of
the public post, who, as deputati of this schola, came under the
immediate supervision of the Master of the Offices.^ The rela-
tion of these inspectors to the Master will be discussed in greater
detail in a subsequent section. The Agentes likewise provided
the Master with his special staff or offtciunty which will also be
given separate consideration.

From the highest grade of the Agentes, the ducenarii, were
selected the principes or heads of the officia both of the Prefects
and the most important civil governors in both the Orient and
the Occident, as well as of the military governors in the Orient'
In the Gothic kingdom of Theoderic in Italy the comites and
duces also received their principes officii from the officium of the
Master of the Offices,* in obvious imitation of the practice in the
Orient. In the case of officials of the rank of illustris, the prin-
cipes ceased to be members of the schola of the Agentes and came
completely under the authority of the officers over whose bureaus
they were placed. With the speciabiles, however, the principes
continued to be regarded merely as deputati of the schola and
remained to a certain extent under the supervision of the Master
of the Offices.*^ Through these principes the court could keep a
strict watch over the actions of the provincial governors and had
an official spy permanently in attendance upon each.*

Finally, the Agentes were at the Master's disposal for employ-
ment on any special mission which he desired to have undertaken.
An instance of this character was the despatch, in 384 a.d., of an
Agens by the Master of the Offices to the Urban Prefect to

* Seeck, Pauly-Wissowa, vol. i, pp. 778-9; Geschichte des Untergangs der antiken
PVelt, vol. 2, pp. 102-4.

' Codex Theodosianusy VI, 29, 2 ; Lydus, De Mag.y 2, 10.

* NotUia Dignitatum or, XXI-XXIX, XXXI-XXXVI ; occ. XVIII-XXIII ; Cod.
Theod.y VI, 28 = Cod, Just.y XII, 21, de principibus agerUum in rebus ; Novellae
Valentinianiy 28 ; Karlowa, Romische Rechtsgeschichte^ vol. i, p. 882.

* Cassiodonis, Variae, 7, 24; 25 ; Mommsen, Neues ArchiVy vol. 14, p. 504.
^Novellae Valentinianiy2^ (449) » Cod, Just. ,X\lj 21, 4; 6; 8 (484) : viros clarissimos

iiusdem scholae principes ; Mommsen, op. cit., pp. 475 ff.

* Seeck, op. cit.^ vol. 2, p. 96.

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES 73

demand the person of a strator who had been brought before an
ordinary court but who was claimed for the Master's jurisdiction.^

Thus it was through his position as chief of the Agentes that
the Master became in a certain sense the head of the imperial
intelligence office and, owing to his consequent possession of
the secrets of state, one of the most influential personages at the
court.

The peculiarly close relation between the Master and the
Agentes is evidenced by the name magtsieriani, which was given
to the members of this schola? and which appears frequently in
Greek as iiayioTpiavoi^ It would seem as though the whole
schola was regarded as forming a larger officium of the Master of
the Offices.^

It is questionable whether the Agentes were in existence in
the Ostrogothic Kingdom in Italy. Mommsen^ identified with
them the comitiaci or comitiani, who appear there as a special
corps for the execution of royal orders of various kinds. How-
ever, Seeck * has advanced good reasons for believing that these
comitiaci had their origin in the officiates of the comites et magistri
militum rather than in the Agentes of the Master of the Offices.
He points out that the title comes in the fifth century was
employed with ever increasing rarity by the magister ojfficiorum,
whereas it continued to be a favorite designation of the magistri
militum, and the important position which these Masters of the
Soldiery occupied at that time in the Empire of the West would
warrant their officiates assuming a position very similar to that
held by the Agentes in the East. If this latter view is accepted,
we must admit that the Agentes had been displaced altogether by
these comitiaciy as indeed seems probable, for the comitiaci were
in direct dependence upon the royal authority and not under the
Master's orders.^ Further, the creation of the distinctly Gothic
corps of the saionesy whose duties also corresponded to those of
the Agentes, might have removed the necessity for the contin-
uance of that schola,

^ Symmachus, Relationes^ [10], 38.

' Du Cange, Glossariunty s. v.; Seeck, Pauly-Wissowa, vol. i, p. 776.

• Lydus, De Mag., 3, 7 ; 12, etc. ; Du Cange, op. cit., loc. cii.

• Evidence lies in the regulations affecting the Agentes in the title di officio magistri
offUiorunty Cod. Theod., I, 9, i ; 2 ; 3 ; Cod. Just. ^ I, 31, i ; 2.

• Neues Archivy vol. 14, pp. 469-72. • Pauly-Wissowa, vol. 4, pp. 715-6.
' Seeck, op. cit., loc. cit.

74 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

In the Empire of the East the Agentes continued in the same
relations with the Master of the Offices until the eighth century/
but with his loss of control over the post and other branches of
the administration in that and the following century, his need of
an qfficium ceased, and his connection with the Agentes had no
further warrant. And the schola of the Agentes, at least under
its old name and organization, does not appear either in the
Kletorologion of Philotheos of the ninth century, or in the list of
Byzantine Court Offices compiled by Codinus Curopalates in the
twelfth.

IV. The Master of the Offices and the Cursus Pubucus

Up to the time of Constantine the Great, the cursus pudlicusy
or state post, an establishment created under the Principate for
the rapid conveyance of imperial despatches and persons travel-
ling on state business throughout the Empire, had been under the
supervision of officers cdW^dprae/ecit vehiculorum^ roughly ' Super-
intendents of stage service,' subject to the control of the Pretorian
Prefects. These praefecti vehiculorum were chosen from among
the memoriales and other palatini? But as early as the reign of
Constantius * they had been supplanted by praepositi cursus pub-
liciy who from the first were popularly known as curagendarii or
curiosi^ so called, Lydus ^ explains, because it was their duty to
inspect the eveclimies, or passes, which entitled their holders to
make use of the post service. This popular designation, curiosi,
had, by 381 at least, been adopted as an official title.^

Now i\it prae/ecii vehiculorum had been subordinates of the
Pretorian Prefects, but the curiosi were sent out from the corps
of the agentes in rebuSy and the members of any other officia were

^ Cf. the use of fmyurrpuivo^ as late as 705 A.D., by Constantine Porphyrogenitus,
De adm. imp.y c. 32. Cf. Hirschfeld, SUzungsberichte der Berliner Akademie, 1893, p. 440.

* Codex TheodosianuSy VHI, 5, 4, i (326) ; Seeck, Pauly-Wissowa, vol. 4, p. 1859.

* Gothofredus, Paratit. to Cod, Theod., VI, 29.

* C. /. L.J X, 7200 : DUCENARIUS AGENS IN REB(us) ET P(rae)P(ositUS) CURSUS PUB-

Lici (340-50) ; cf. Hirschfeld, op, cit,j 1893, p. 432 ; Cod. Theod^ VI, 29, 9.

* //, quos CHragenda{rt)os sive curiosos provincialium consuetudo appellate Cod'
Theod,, VI, 29, i (355).

* De Mag.j 2, 10 ; cf. Cod. Theod., VI, 29, 2 (357) ; 29, 8 =Just.j XII, 22, 2.
' Codex Theodosianusy VI, 29, 6; cf. VI, 29, 10 (412) ; 11 (414).

* C, I. Z.., X, 7200, quoted above ; Cod. Theod,^ VI, 29, 2 (357) : Agentes in rebus
in curis agendis et evectionibus publici cursus inspiciendis ; 29, 6 ; 29, 8 : Agentes in rebus
singulos per singulas provincias mi{tten)dos esse censemus.

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES 75

strictly forbidden to attempt to act in this capacity.^ And since,
as we have seen, the Agentes were under the direction of the
Master of the Offices, it followed that the supervision of the use
of the passes was now transferred from the Prefects' to the Master's
sphere of duties.^

The selection of the curiosi to be sent into the provinces was
directed by the Master of the Offices.^ They were chosen accord-
ing to seniority within the ranks of their schola and with the
approval of their fellows,^ were appointed on the anniversary of
the Emperor's birthday, and remained in this service for one year
only.* During this time they acted under the Master's order.^
In 357, two of these inspectors were despatched to each province,^
but later one was considered sufficient.^ However, this restriction,
which had been imposed in 395, was cancelled in 412,® and an older
custom was once more adopted, whereby an indefinite number of
curiosi Qov\^ be sent into the various districts where their presence
was required. But finally a return was made to the provision of
the edict of 395 limiting the number to one inspector for every prov-
ince,*® although it is uncertain at what date it was again enforced.

This limitation upon the number of the inspectors was prob-
ably intended to safeguard the interests of the provincials, whose
oppression by curiosi from the schola of the Agentes caused the
exclusion of the latter from Africa ^^ and Dalmatia.*^ However,
it may well be that the curiosi thus excluded from the provinces
mentioned were not curiosi cursus publici but curiosi litorum^^
members of the corps of the Agentes sent on special service to
various ports and harbors, for the name curiosi was used for
Agentes in other business than the supervision of the post.^'* In

* Codex Theodosianus^ VI, 29, 2 = Justimaniis, XII, 22, 2: ideoque solos agentes in
rebus in hocgenere iussimus obsequium adhibere et non ab alio penitus officio.

* Cf. Lydus, De Mag,, 2, 10 ; 26 ; 3, 40 ; also pp. 34-35 above.

* Codex Theodosianus, VI, 29, 6; 8. * Codex Theodosianus, VI, 29, 4 (359).
^ Op. cit.y Wly 29,6(381).

* Codex Theodosianusy VI, 29, 10 (412) : curiosis exviri inl{ustris) comitis et magis-
triofficiorum iudicio dirigendis. ' Cndex Theodosianus^ VI, 29, 2, i (357).

* Codex Theodosianus, VI, 29, 8 (395) : Agentes in rebus singulos per singulas pro-
vincias mi(tten)dos esse censemus. • Codex TheodosianuSy VI, 29, 10.

'^^ Codex Just inianus^ XII, 22, 4.

" Codex Theodosianusy VI, 29, 11 (414), extended by Novellae Valentiniani, 13, 7
(445) to Numidia and Mauretania Sitifensis. ^^ Codex Theodosianus, XII, (415)-

^^ So in Noifellae Valentiniani, 13, 7.

^* Hirschfeld, Sitzungsberichie der Berliner Akademie, 1893, p. 440. Hudemann,
Geschichte des romischen Postwesens^ P- 95* holds that they were curiosi cursus publici.

j6 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

support of this view it may be urged that the exactions which
caused the exclusion of the curiosi in question are hardly in
accord with the powers of those engaged in the service of the
state post, which since 395 ^ had been strictly limited to the in-
spection of passes.

The burden of supporting the establishment of the cursus
publicus fell upon the provincials of the districts which it trav-
ersed; in consequence, the oversight of its maintenance rested
with the provincial governors and their superior, the Pretorian
Prefect, and not with the Master of the Offices.^ In the Eastern
Empire this arrangement was still in force under Justinian,^ but
in the Ostrogothic Kingdom of Theoderic the Master of the
Offices had been made responsible for the condition of the postal
establishments,** and the money paid in fines for the abuse of
privileges in using the state conveyances was expended on their
maintenance through the officium of the Master.^ This new
system was rendered feasible by the comparatively small extent
of territory controlled by the Gothic Kings.

There was also another change introduced in the Gothic
Kingdom in connection with the control of the state post. As
was previously noted, it is highly probable that the Agentes no
longer existed in Italy at this date, and that the duty of inspecting
the passes had been transferred to royal saiones^ with due reserva-
tion of the customary rights of certain praefecti^ who may have
been deputed from the Master's office, although their position is
not clearly defined.

The right to make use of the state post, as has been said, was
granted by the issuing of evectiones or passes. In order to
prevent too heavy a burden being laid upon the provinces
responsible for the upkeep of the cursus publicus^ by allowing
an unduly great number to make use of this convenience, a limi-

* Codex TheodosianuSy VI, 29, 8 ; cf. Codex Justinianus^ XII, 22, 4.

* Cf. Codex Theodosianusy VIII, 5, and Codex JusiinianuSy XII, 50.

* Lydus, De Afag,y 2, 10; 3, 40; Codex Justinumus^ XII, 50.

* Cassiodonis, Variae^ 6, 6, 3 : Veredorum quin etiam opportunam velocitatemy
quorum status semper in cursu est, diligentiae suae districtione custodit^ ut sollicitudines
nostras, quas consilio iuvat, beneficio celeritatis expediat.

* Cassiodonis, Variae, 5, 5, 4 (523-26) : quam sumnuim protinus exactam, sicut iam
anterioribus edictis constitutum est„ per officium magisteriae dignitatis cursui proficere
debere censemus. The formula for the Pretorian Prefect has nothing relative to the upkeep
of the cursus publicus (Cass., op. cit.^ 6. 3, 511).

* Cassiodorus, Variae, 5, 5 (523-526).

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES 77

tation of the right to issue passes was necessary. This right
was a privilege highly prized, and the imperial government found
great difficulty in restricting it to reasonable limits, while yet
allowing those really justified in using the postal service to have
the power to do so. Not until the fifth century was the privilege
of granting passes definitely regulated.

The right to issue such passes was, of course, ultimately an
imperial prerogative. However, under Constantine I, it seems to
have been exercised independently by the Pretorian Prefect ^ and
other officials. Among the latter were the provincial governors,
who lost the privilege in 354.^ By 357 the Master of the Offices
was also in possession of this right,^ but, owing to the abuse of
the privilege, Julian, in 362, deprived all officials, except the
Pretorian Prefect, of the right to issue evectiones, although giving
to certain others the right to dispose of a definite number signed
by himself.^

Under the successors of Julian, however, there was once
more an extension of this privilege. In 364 the Urban Prefect
was given authority to issue passes in matters of state business,^
a right which he had lost again by 382 a.d. ;• and in 371 the
Senate obtained a like privilege for delegations proceeding to
and from the Emperor.^ By 365 the Master of the Offices was
acting as the imperial representative in granting evectiones^ and
in 378, along with the Prefect, he had the power in certain
cases of adding to the privileges in making use of the state
post which were specified in the individual passes.* Still in 382
the Emperor and the Prefect alone possessed the right to issue

* Codex Theodostanusy VIII, 5, 3 (326).

« Codex Theodosianus, VIII, 5, 5 ; cf. VIII, 5, 40 (382).

* Codex Theodosianusy VIII, 5, 9: sufficere namque posse confidimus^ quae isdem a
nobis vel magistri officiorum comitatus nostri jussis necessaria habUa ratione praebentur,

* Codex Theodosianusy VIII, 5, 12 (362).
» Codex TheodosianuSy VII, 5, 19.

* Codex TheodosianuSy VIII, 5, 40 ; more explicitly in Codex JusHnianus, XII, 50, 9.
T Cod, Theod. VIII, 5, 32 ; cf. Just, XII, 50, 6.

' Codex Theodosianus, VIII, 5, 22 : Praeterea illud adiungimuSy ut parhippum vel
avertarium nuUus (ucipiaty nullus inpune praesumat^ nisi eum nostrae serenitatis arbitrio
aliqua necessitate cogente vir inl{ustris) magister officiorum textui evectionis addiderit ;
cf. Seeck, Pauly-Wissowa, vol. 4, p. 1859.

* Codex TAeodosianus, VIll, 5, 35, i : Si tamen necessitas maior coegerit, super
sollemnem numerum iubemus admitti quos aut sacras litteras ferre constiterit aut habere
in evectionibus adnotatum, ut aliqua de causa instantius ire iubeantur^ quod vel spectabilis
inri officiorum magistri vel sinceritatis tuae litteris oportet adscribi.

yS THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

such passes,^ although it was not very long after this that the
Master of the Offices acquired the same authority as the Prefect,
which he enjoyed at the opening of the fifth century ^ and re-
tained for the future.

By this time, following the system inaugurated by Julian, a
definite number of passes had been granted to certain other high
officials to dispose of during their term of office.^ This was the
ultimate settlement of the question, and under Justinian the right
to give extra passes was limited to the sovereign, to the Prefect,
and to the Master of the Offices.* The same condition prevailed
in Italy under Theoderic, where the Master acted as the represent-
ative of the sovereign in this matter.*

The relations of the Pretorian Prefect and the Master of the
Offices in respect to the evectiones require further definition. It
seems that from 395 in the Eastern Empire the Prefect, although
possessed of the right to issue these passes, had to submit them
for approval to a representative of the Master of the Offices.
Says Lydus,^ speaking of the time of Rufinus:

" Since it was impracticable that the Prefect should have the
burden of maintaining the state horses and those in charge of them
throughout the provinces, while the control over and the adminis-
tration of these was in the hands of others, a law was promulgated
to the effect that the Prefect should indeed retain the care of the
cursus publicus, but that the senior of theyr«»^«/^r2V(/.^. Agentes),
who is at present called princeps, should continually be present in
the office of the Pretorian Prefect, and should actively scrutinize
and inquire into the reasons why many used the state post on the
authority of passes provided by the prefecture (for which reason
he was called curiosus, equivalent to nepUfyyoSj and not he alone,
but all those who superintended the state horses in the provinces),
while the so-called Master appended his signature to these evecti-

^ Codex TheodosianuSj VIII, 5, 40.

2 Notitia Dignitatum ^v. XI, magister officiorum ipse emittit ; omitted in occ. IX.

* Notitia Dignitatum^ passim ; Seeck, Pauly-Wissowa, vol. 4, p. i860.

* Codex Justinianusy XII, 50, 9 : ludicibus faciendae ei>ectionis copiam denegamus^ cum
id tantum nostro numini et tuae sedi nee non viro illustri magistro officiorum sit reservan-
dum, cum neque praefecto urbis neque magistris militum neque ducibus neque vicariis nee
cuiquam alii praeter memoratas duas potest ates hoc a nobis concessum sit,

' According to Cassiodorus {Variae, 6, 3, 3), the Pretorian Prefect evectiones simili
potestate (i.e. pro sua deliberatione) distribuit ; id. ibid., 6, 6^ per eum (the Master of the
Offices) nominis nostri destinatur evectio^ et isti principaliter creditur quam tarn necessa-
rium esse creditur ; cf. also 5, 5, 2. ^ De Afag.y 2, 10 ; 3, 40 ; cf. 3, 23.

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES 79

ones. And that this is so, one may learn from the constitution
itself, which although incorporated in the old Codex of Theodo-
sius, has been omitted in the new code."

This account agrees with what the same author has to say
regarding the regendarii in the Prefect's officium in the sixth
century : ^

" The regendarius is still said to be placed in charge of the
evectiones for the state post, but his functions are purely nominal,
for the Master of the Offices has taken over the full control of the
business."

This testimony must be credited for the time at which Lydus
wrote, and there seems to be no adequate reason for disbelieving
his statements with regard to the arrangements in force after 395,
even if the constitution to which he refers is not found in our
text of the Theodosian Code.^ We may attribute to this period
a reorganization of the post service with stricter centralization
of control,^ as a result of which the evectiones that the Prefect
issued had to be passed by a princeps from the Agentes and
countersigned by the Master of the Offices. This princeps was
the princeps of the Prefect's officium^ who was advanced to that
post from the schola of the Agentes.* Although Lydus calls him
variously irpSyro^ Ttav ^poviLtvTapitav^ Kovpiaxros,^ irpiyKii^ t^9
T<i^€co9 Tov jjLayioTpoVy^ and TrpiyKLxj^ t<ov /utaytoTptai/oJi/,^ this iden
tification is clear from the use of the title princeps^ which was not
applied to any member of the Master's officium^ and the account
of his relation to the cornicularius of the Prefect's office.^ It was
probably about the close of the fourth century also that the num-
ber of the passes annually allotted to the various administrative
posts was defined as in the Notitia.

^ De Mag., 3, 4 : p€y€v8dpioi Svb oi rov ^fffioatov hpofuov iOvvovrt^ ; 21 : 6 pcycv&Lpto?
Ur\ r^s ^povrt&>9 rcuv <rvv$rjfJLaiT<Dv tov ^fuxriov Bpofiov rtrayikivo^ m koI vvv Xcyercu fiev,
trparrti. 3c ovScv, roiv fULyurrpov Trjq avXrj^ rrjv oXrjv v<fHXofi€vov tov irpayparo^ i^ovaiav ;
cf. Notitia Dignitaium or. II, regerendarius. III id.

* So Hirschfeld, Sitsungsberichte der Berliner Akademie, 1893, p. 439, n. 7, against
Mommsen, Ostgothische Studien, Neues Archiv, vol. 14, p. 475, n. i. Codex Theodosianusy
VIII, 5, 35 (378), which Mommsen, in his edition of the Code, suggests is the constitution
mentioned by Lydus, does not agree in date or substance with the latter, and, further,
appears in part in Codex Just inianus, XII, 50, 8.

^ Hirschfeld, op. cit., I.e., would attribute this reform to Rufinus. But it is more likely
that this restriction upon the Prefect's power would come after his fall, as Lydus says, De
Mag., 3, 23. * Cf. p. 72, above. * De Mag., 2, 10 ; 3, 40.

• De Mag., loc. cit. ' De Mag.y,'^, 23. ' De Mag., 3, 24.
» De Mag, 3, 23-4.

8o THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

Evidence is not lacking of conflicts arising between the Pre-
torian Prefects and the Master of the Offices with regard to their
respective spheres of competence in connection with the cursus
publicus. As early as 357 a special constitution prohibited the
Prefect from granting passes to the Agentes, who were henceforth
to receive them only from the Emperor or the Master.^ And two
years later protection was given the Agentes, when serving as
curiost, from the judicial power of the Prefect, provided that they
acted as befitted their office.^ This division of control is further
emphasized by the requirement that persons using the post service
without a pass, or exceeding the privileges granted therein, should
be detained and reported both to the Prefect and to the Master.'
Under Justinian this provision was so far modified that only
offenders of rank were thus reported to the Master, while the
Prefect was empowered to deal alone with those of inferior status."*
In the officium of the Master, in addition to the curiosus cursus
publici praesentalis already mentioned, there were included, in the
inspectors of the state post throughout the provinces, the curiosi
omnium provtnctarum} Through these again, as well as through
the other Agentes, the Master of the Offices was the centre of an
espionage system stretching out from the capital to the furthest
corners of the Empire.

The Master continued to control the use of the state post until
the creation of the Logothete of the Post {\oyod4rr)^ rov hp6ixov\
whose office arose from that of the curiosus cursus publici praesen-
talisy and who became the head of an independent department of
the administration in charge of this portion of the Master's duties
during the eighth century.*

V. The Master of the Offices and the Mensorbs

From the time of Constantine I, the quartering of officers and
soldiers, on their way to and from the scene of active service, upon

1 Codex TheodostanuSy VllI, 5, 9.

^ Codex Theodost'anusy VI, 29, 3 ; d, Justinianusy XII, 22, 3.

« Codex TheodosianuSy VIII, 5, 8 (357).

* Codex Just inianusy XII, 50, 3 : Si quidem dignitate praeditus sit. de eius nomine at
prudentiam tuam et ad illustrem virum comitem et magistrum officiorum referri.

* Notitia Dignitaium or. XI, occ. IX.

* Bury, Imperial Administrationy p. 91. The state post was not abolished by Justinian,
but merely restricted in the Orient ; cf. Hirschfeld, Sitznngsberichte der Berliner Akademiey
1893, p. 440, n. I, against Hudemann, Geschichte der romischen Postwesensy 95, on Procopius,
Anecdotay 30 ; Lydus^ De Mag. 3, 61.

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES 8i

the inhabitants of the towns and districts through which they
passed, became a regularly established system. The same method
was used in obtaining quarters for the Emperor and his suite,
whenever he undertook a journey from his capital. This obligatory
reception of public servants by householders was called hospitium,
or hospitalitasy and the quarters furnished were known as metata.
The officials whose duty it was to prepare such quarters for the
Emperor and to indicate lodgings for the individual palatini ac-
companying him, as well as for other persons, were the mensores
or metatores} * Quartermasters.'

The mensores formed a schola at the palace, headed by a pri-
micerius who, after two years' service, was placed on the list of the
Agentes at the foot of the register.^ It is most likely that the
Master of the Offices was placed in charge of these Quartermasters
by Constantine I, at the time when his office received its great
increase of power. However, the earliest direct evidence of any
connection between them and the Master is found in a constitu-
tion of 368 or 373,^ instructing the Master to see that synagogues
were not occupied by those who had the right of hospitium. From
a constitution of 405,* we see that the organization of the schola
of the mensores was under the Masters supervision, and the
Notitia of the Orient* places it among the officia which were
subject to his commands. Although the occidental Notitia fails
to mention them, their status in the West was undoubtedly the
same as in the East.

As with other officials under his orders, the Master probably
exercised exclusive jurisdiction over the Quartermasters. His
authority over them remained undiminished in the Eastern Em-
pire under Justinian,^ but there is no trace of them in Italy under
the Gothic regime.

In supervising the work of the mensores, the chief care of the
Master of the Offices was to see that they did not demand more
than was authorized by law in making their assignments of hospi-
tia, and that they had regard for the exemptions that were granted
to certain officials, to the illustres, and to those engaged in specific

1 Gothofredus ad Cod. Theod, VI, 34, i ; Paratit. ad Cod, Theod. VII ; Cagnat, in
Daremberg et Saglio, vol. 3, pp. 302-303, s. v. hospitium.

* Codex TheodosianuSy VI, 34, i (405).

» Codex Theodosianus, VII, 8, 2 ; cf. Codex Justinianus, I, 9, 4.

* Codex Theodosianus, VI, 34, i ; cf. Codex Just inianus, XII, 59, 10.

» Notitia Dignitatum or. XI, 12. « Codex Justinianus, I, 9, 4 ; XII, 40, i, etc.

82 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

occupations.^ In this connection we may note that it was upon
the recommendation of the Master Aemilianus that in 400 a.d. the
fabricenses were relieved of the burden of kospitium}

In addition to his direction of the mensores, it was the Master's
duty to exercise a general oversight of the whole system of
metatay preventing, on the one hand, any unwarranted exactions
on the part of those entitled to the privileges of hospitium^ and,
on the other, forcing those who were subject to this service to
fulfil their obligations.'^ The authority which the Master of the
Offices exercised over the mensores formed a part of his general
powers as head of the officia palatina^ while the placing in his
hands of the supervision of the whole system of quartering gave
the central executive a further check upon the abuse of their
power by civil and military officials to the detriment of the
provincials.

VI. The Master of the Offices and the Scrinia

The three secretarial bureaus, known as the scrinia memoriae^
epistularum, and libellorum, which, in the Notitia^ are placed sub
dispositione magistri officiorunty were most probably under the
oversight of the Master from the time of the establishment of his
office, certainly from the date of the enlargement of its competence
under Constantine I.^

The Master exercised full authority over the organization and
administration of the scrinia. The number of the clerks in each
bureau, both of the statuti or regular employees and the super-
numerariiy the admission to the service among the statuti, and
the character of the duties to be performed by each of the latter,
were under his supervision/ The roll of each scriniunty with the
order of rank of its members, and all promotions were likewise
under his care.' The Master also maintained the privileges and
exemptions, judicial and otherwise, which the scriviarii enjoyed.

1 Codex Theodosianus, VH, 8, 3 (384) ; VH, 8, 14 (427) ; VII, 8, 16 (435) ; Codex Jus-
tinianusy XII, 40, 2 (398) ; XII, 40, 8 (400) ; XII, 40, 9 (444) ; XII, 40, 10 (Valentinian
and Marcian) ; XII, 40, 11 (Zeno). ^ Codex Just imanus, XII, 40, 4.

* Codex TheodosianuSy VII, 8, ^ met at is; Codexjusttaninus, XII, 40, id.

* Notitia Dignitatum or. XI, occ, IX. * Cf. Chapter III, pp. 26-28.

^ Codex Theodosianus, I, 30, 3 (392); Codex Justinianusy XII, 19, 7 (443-4); 9;
(470); 10 (Leo) ; II (Athanasius).

' Codex Theodosianusy VI, 26, 6 (396); 11 (397); 17 (416); cf. Codex JustinianuSy
XII, 19, 6. " Codex JustintanuSy XII, 19, 9 (Leo) ; 12 (Anastasius) ; 14 (Justiniis).

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES 83

He also exercised judicial authority over those serving in the
scrinia; at least from the time of Anastasius, neither they them-
selves, nor their parents, wives, children, nor even their slaves
and coloni residing in Constantinople, could be prosecuted on
civil or criminal charges except in accordance with a decision of
the Master.^

From among those serving in these scrinia the Quaestor
selected his aides {adiu tores)? In the East the number of these
adiutores had become fixed at twelve from the scrinium memoriae
and seven from each of the scrinia epistularum and libellorum,
whereas the total number in each of these bureaus was sixty-two,
thirty-four, and thirty-four respectively.^ However, this restriction
had been disregarded and the number of the Quaestor*s aides was
threatening to equal the total number of the employees in each
department, when Justinus took steps to reduce them to the
former number.^ The Master had to supervise this reduction
and prevent the recurrence of similar circumstances in the
future.* These adiutores of the Quaestor remained under the
jurisdiction of the Master.*

Unlike the scrinium dispositionum^ which, as we have seen,
was entirely at the disposal of the Master of the Offices, the
scrinia memoriae^ epistularum^ and libellorum performed only
part of their functions under his orders. The direction of their
services he shared with the Quaestor and the Magistri Scriniorum.

The titular head of each of the scrinia was a magister (di/rt-
ypa<f>evs)y who took his title from that department with which he
was associated, as magister memoriae, magister epistularum, or
magister libellorum; these officials were known collectively as the
Magistri Scriniorum.' The Masters of the Scrinia had formerly
been the active heads of their several departments, but after the
Principate had passed into the Empire they had lost control over
the personnel of these bureaus, having been in this respect super-

^ Codex Justinianus^ XII, 19, 12 (Anastasius) : In sacris scriniis militantes et
parentes aique uxores earum nee non liberos ex sententia tantummodo tuae celsUudinis
criminous et civiles intentiones agentium excipere iubemus^ insuper etiam colonos seu ad-
scripticios et servos eorum in hoc regia urbe degentes eodem beneficio potiri.

2 Notitia Dignitatum or, XII, Officium non habet, sed adiutores de scriniis quos
voluerit ; occ, X, /tabet subaudienies adiutores tnemariales de scriniis diver sis,

* Codex Justinianus, XII, 19, 10 (Leo).

* Codex Justinianus, XII, 19, 13, cf. 15, § i (527).

* Codex Just inianus, XII, 19, 15. • Codex JustinianuSj XII, 19, 14 (Justinus).
' Notitia Dignitatum or. XIX, occ. XVII ; Codex Justinianus^ XII, 9.

84 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

seded by the Master of the Offices, and therefore merely com-
manding their services for certain purposes. However, unlike
the scriniarii themselves, the Masters of the Scrinia were not
subordinates of the Master of the Offices.^

As the Quaestor, the Master of the Offices, and the Masters
of the Scrinia divided among them the control of the activities
of the scriniarii, it remains to see for what purposes each could
employ them.

First, then, let us consider the powers of the Masters of the
Scrinia. These had no private officium but, like the Quaestor,
had the right to draw aides from the scrinia to execute their
orders.^ With regard to the number of these aides we have no
information. The magister memoriae^ says the NoHtia^ adnota-
Hones omnes dictat et emiitit, et precibus resp<mdet; that is to say,
he saw to the putting into proper form the verbal comments of
the Emperor, which he despatched without the imperial signature.
He also answered requests, preces, from individuals, and himself
prepared these answers for the imperial approval, until Justinian *
put an end to his independent action in judicial questions and
placed him in this respect under the Quaestor's supervision. In
view of the lack of an exact modern equipment for the title
magister tnemoriae, on the basis of function and relation to the
other Secretaries, we may venture to translate it as First Secretary.

The magister epistularum, or Secretary for Correspondence,
dealt with the communications of legations from foreign states
and from civitates within the Empire, with requests for advice
from officials, and with certain petitions.* In the case of the
legations the magister epistularum was doubtless subject to the
supervision of the Master of the Offices, otherwise to that of
the Quaestor.

' ^ Karlowa, Romische Reckisgcsckickie^ vol. i, pp. 833 fT. ; Bury, Harvard Studies in
Classical Philology J vol. XXI, p. 24; cf. id. vol. XXVI, pp. loi ff.

^ Notitia Dignitatum or. XIX : officium autem de ipsis nemo habet^ sed adiutores elec^
tos de scriniis. In the N, D. occ, XVII this is lacking, perhaps accidentally.

• Or. XIX ; occ. XVII : respondet tamen et precibus,

^ Novellae Justinianij 114, i.

^ Notitia Dignitatum <7r. XIX : legationes civitatum, consuUationes et preces tractat ;
cf. occ. XVII. The activity of the magister epistularum graecarum^ who existed only in
the East, and who ecu epistolasy quaegraece soUnt emittiy aut ipse dictcU aut latine dictcUas
transfert in graecum (Notitia Dignitatum or. XIX), does not require separate comment
here. For the work of the magister epistularum see further Codex Justinianus, VII, 62,
32, 2 (440); 37 (529); 38 \td.)\ 63, 3 (518); Novellae Justinianiy 20 pr., where the
epistulares act under his directions.

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES 85

The Secretary for Petitions, magister libellorutny handled the
cases, cognttioneSy which were brought before the Emperor him-
self, and formulated independent rescripts in answer to petitions
entered in other courts.^ Here his work was subject to the
Quaestor's revision.

The Quaestor was the official through whom the Emperor
gave expression to his power as the source of law. The Quaestor
consequently formulated laws and edicts, as well as answers to
supplications requiring the imperial signature.^ In dealing with
supplications the Magistri Scriniorum, as we have seen, did most
of the preparatory work, which was subject to the Quaestor's
revision. The Quaestor had also the control of the laterculum
minus or register of the subordinate officials of the Empire. For
some time previous to 424 the magistri militum had usurped this
right, but in that year the preparation of the list, which included
the praepositi, tribuni^ and the praefecti castrorum, was restored
to the Quaestor.' Appointments to these offices were issued
through the scrinium memoriae, which for this purpose was at the
disposal of the Quaestor. This arrangement apparently con-
cerned the East only, while in the West the magister peditum
praesentalis continued to control the appointment of a great
number of such officials, as at the time of the compilation of the
Notitia.^ For the preparation of the documents involved in the
performance of his other duties the Quaestor, as we have seen,
had in his service assistants drawn from the three scrinia.

The task of issuing the probatoriae, or imperial warrants
entitling persons to be admitted to service in the various ^rm,
both at the capital and throughout the provinces, was distributed
among these three bureaus.* In this field the supervision of their
activities fell to the lot of the Master of the Offices.* It was
through the scrinia also that the notices of appointment were

^ Notitia Dignitatum ar.y occ.y cognitiones et preces tract at ; cf. Codex JustinianuSy
III, 24, 3 pr. ; VII, 62, 32, 4 ; Novellae Justinianiy 20, c. 9.

^ Notitia Dignitatum or. XII, occ. X, leges dictandaey preces; cf. Karlowa, Romische
RechtsgeschichtCj vol. i, p. 833.

* CocUx Theodosianusy I, 8, 2 = Codex Justinianus, I, 30, i : Totius minoris later culi
curam scias ad tuae sublimitatis solicitudinem pertinere, ita ut tuo arbitrio ex scrinio
fnemoricte totius minoris laterculi dignitates, hoc est praepasiturae omnesy tribunatus et
praefecturae castrorum iuxta consuetudinem priscam clementiae meat auctoritate deinceps
emittantur ; Codex TAeodosianus, I, 8, 3 = Codex JustinianuSy I, 30, 2.

* Notitia Dignitatum occ, XLII. * Codex Justinianusy XII, 59, 10 (Leo).

* Codex Justinianusy XII, 59, 9 (Leo).

86 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

issued to the higher officials in the government service, and here,
too, the Master was their superintendent, so that Cassiodorus ^
could say that no provincial judge was able to assume office with-
out the sanction of the Master of the Offices.

In summary, then, the Master of the Offices had charge of
the organization of the scrinia^ and also of a part of their func-
tions : the Masters of the Scrinia only commanded the services
of selected scriniarii for specific purposes in which their work
was generally subject to a revision by the Quaestor or the Master
of the Offices : while the Quaestor on the one hand monopolized
the services of a definite number of the clerks in each of these
bureaus, and on the other, in connection with the care of the
laterculum minuSy directed the action of the scrinium memoriae.
From this definition of the respective powers of these officers in
connection with the scrinia it is now clear why the Master of the
Offices was the recipient of imperial edicts regulating the rela-
tions of the Quaestor to the scriniarii^ and why it was at times
found convenient to unite these two offices in the hands of one
person.*

The connection of the Master and the scrinia was severed
during the reorganization of the administration in the Eastern
Empire in the seventh and following centuries. In the ninth
century the scrinia epistularum and libellorum with their magistri
or di/Ttypa<^€t9 appear to be completely under the control of the
Quaestor, while the magister memoriaey as the o cVl tS}v So^crecoi/,
had attained an independent sphere of actions in the matter of
petitions.*

VII. The Master of the Offices and the State Arsenals

Under Diocletian the control of the manufacture and dis-
tribution of weapons made in the state arsenals {fabricae) was
centred at the court under an official called the praepositus fabru
carum (?), a subordinate of the Pretorian Prefect.*^ Apparently

^ Cassiodorus, Variae^ 6, 6 : His enim laboribus aestimaiis potestatem maximatn huic
decrevit antiquitas^ ut nemo iudtcum per pravincias fasces assumeret^ nisi hoc et ipse fieri
decrevisset.

^As Codex Justinianus^ I, 30, 2 = Codex Theodosianus, I, 8, 3; Codex Theodosianusy
I» 30* 3 \ Codex Justinianusj XH, 19, 15.

' As Trebonianus in 536, NovelUu /ustiniam\ 33 ; Anastasius under Justinus H,
Corippus, Panegvr, pr, 30. * Bury, Imperial Administrationy pp. 75-77.

*Seeck, Pauly-Wissoway vol. 6, p. 1978.

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES Sy

under Constantine I this office disappeared, and the direction of
the arsenals was placed in the hands of the Master of the Offices.^
Lydus^ connects this transfer with the fall of Rufinus in 395,
although it had certainly taken place at an earlier date.^ The
correct interpretation of his statement probably is that Rufinus,
following the example of various pretenders to the imperial
throne,* during his brief period of power brought the fabricae
under his control by restoring the control over them to the pre-
fecture which he himself occupied, and that after his death they
were put once more under the Master's supervision.^ The earliest
constitution that points to the Master s exercise of authority in
this sphere dates from 390 a.d.®

This edict deals with the retirement and rank of the primicerii
fabricarum, the seniors among the employees of the several
arsenals, while subsequent constitutions of 398 ^ and 404,^ as well
as one of Leo and Anthemius,^ likewise show that the Master of
the Offices had authority over the corpus fabricensium, or heredi-
tary guild of armorers laboring in these fabricae. Matters of
discipline, restrictions upon their freedom of movement, their
relations with persons outside of their guild, and punishments
for engaging in forbidden occupations, were under the Master s
oversight. Consequently we find that it was upon the suggestion
of the Master of the Offices that the guild of the fabricenses was
held in corporate liability for the delinquencies of one of their
number.*®

Also, under Leo and Anthemius,** his jurisdiction over the
fabricenses, their wives, and their sons, who were considered as
serving in the ranks of the corporation, was made exclusive and
they could be prosecuted in his court alone.

This power the Master continued to enjoy in the East under

^ Seeck, op. cit. ; see chap. Ill, p. 32. ^De Mag., 2, 10 ; 3, 40.

' Codex TheodosianuSy X, 22, 3 (390). *Seeck, Pauly-Wissowa, vol. 6, p. 1926.

'Seeck, op, cit., p. 1928; cf. chap. Ill, p. 36.

^ Codex Theodosianus, X, 22, 3 = Codex Jtistinianus, XI, 10, 2.

' Codex Theodosianus, X, 22, 4 = Codex Justinianus, XI, 10, 3.

* Codex Theodosianusy X, 22, 5. • Codex Just intanusy XI, 10, 7.

'^^ No7.>ellae Theodosii, 6, 2 (438); cf. Codex Justtptianus, XI, 10, 5 : Universi itaque
velut in corpore uniformi uni decoctioni, si ita res tulerit, respondere coguntur, ut viri
inlustris et magnifici magistri officiorum suggestio nostrae cletnetUiae patefecit,

^' Codex Justitiianus, XI, 10, 6: Eos^ qui inter fabricenses sacrae fabricae sociati sunt
vel eorum uxores autfilios, qui it idem inter fabricenses militare dicentur^ non alibi pulsare
volentibus respondere praecipimis, nisi in iudicio tuae sublimitatis, ad cuius iurisdictionem
potest atemque pertinent.

88 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

Justinian,^ but in the Ostrogothic Kingdom it was restored to the
Pretorian Prefect.^

To assist him in the supervision of the arsenals and armorers
the Master had in his officium officials called subadiuvae /abri-
carum. Of these there were three in the East,^ and in the West
an indefinite number,^ in the early part of the fifth century. In
the East, under Leo, these subadiuvae constituted a separate
bureau, or scrinium, within the officium, to which there were an-
nually admitted for one year's service four Agentes of the rank of
prtncepsJ" This is evidently the same as the scrinium fabricen-
stum which appears under Justinian.®

In the Orient there were sixteen state arsenals for the manu-
facture of weapons of various kinds, of which four were in the
diocese of the Orient, three in the Pontic, one in the Asian, two
in the Thracian, and four in the Illyrian diocese.^ The Master
in the Occident, at the same period of the fifth century, controlled
twenty of these factories. They were located, five in Illyricum,
six in Italy, and nine in Gaul.®

However, the manufacture of arms was not made an imperial
monopoly until the time of Justinian, who in 539 • absolutely pro-
hibited the making of weapons by, or their sale to, civilians. This
regulation was to be enforced by the Master of the Offices. It
was his duty to appoint cartulartt, or 'keepers of records' of
the scrinium fabricensium, for whom five priores of the scrinium
were responsible ; to take depositions from iudices and their officia,
and from defensores and patres civitatis, that they would not aid
any one to do what was prohibited by this law ; and personally to
investigate contraventions thereof. The Master, furthermore, had
the duty of making this edict known in the capital and through-
out the provinces.^®

The transport of the manufactured weapons from the arsenals
to various points was also under the Master's care.^^ He notified

* Codex Justinianus^ VI, lo, de fabricensibus ; Novellae Jtistiniani^ 85, 3.

2 Cassiodorus, Variae^ 7, 18, 9. • Notitia Dignitatum^ or, XI, 34.

* Notitia Dignitatum^ occ, IX, 43.

* Codex Justinianusy XII, 20, 5 : Agentes in rebus ^ qui per ordinem consequi solent
principatus insignia, in unoquoque scrinio fabricarum et barbarorum quarternos subad"
iuvarum solicitudinem per annum dumtaxat integrum procedentes gradatim subire hac in
aeternum valitura lege decernimus. ® Novellae Justiniani. 85, 3.

' Notitia Dignitatumy or, XI, 18-39. * Notitia Dignitatum, occ. IX, 16-39.

* Novellae Justinianiy 39, 3. ^^ Novellae Justiniani, 3 ; 4.
** Codex Justinianus, XI, 10, 7.

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES 89

the Prefect's office of the quantity to be transported, and the
point of delivery, whereupon due provision had to be made by
that office for the conveyance of the material specified, by land or
sea, without delay, upon pain of a heavy penalty.^

The various fabricae were each under the immediate super-
vision of an official styled either praepositus or tribunus^ who
was evidently a subordinate of the Master of the Offices, but
whose relations to the latter are nowhere defined. These praepo-
siti and tribuni were among those who made up the laterculum
minusy which was under the care of the Quaestor;^ they may
have been nominated by him, or by the Master of the Offices,
subject, in any case, to the imperial approval.*

In connection with Xh^ fabricae for the manufacture of weapons
we have to consider imperial factories of another sort, those that
were engaged in the production of goods interwoven with gold,
pearls, and precious stones, which were reserved for the use of
the imperial family. Such manufactures were a state monopoly
from the time of Diocletian. The employees in these factories
were called barbartcariz.^ Under Valens, in the East, they
were given the duty of decorating with gold and silver the
helmets and shields of the soldiers,^ and for this reason they, like
the fabricensesy were placed under the control of the Master of
the Offices.^ In the West this transfer did not take place. To
aid in the management of the factories served by the barbaricariiy
the Master of the Offices had in his officium four assistants, called
subadiuvae barbaric artorunt?

VIII. The Master of the Offices, the Limites, and the

Duces

In the year 443 a.d. the Master of the Offices in the Eastern
Empire was intrusted with the duty of preparing an annual report
on the number of the soldiers {limitanei) on duty on certain of
the frontiers {liinites\ as well as on the condition of the fortified
camps and of the guard boats, which patrolled the river bound-

* Codex JustiniantiSy XI, 10, 7. ^ Seeck, Pauly-Wissowa, vol. 6, pp. 1927-8.

* Codex JustintanuSj I, 30, i (424) ; cf. p. 85, above.

* They do not appear among the praepositi and tribuni nominated by the tnagister
peditum praesentalis in the West, Notitia Dignitatumy occ. XLII.

* Seeck, Pauly-Wissowa^ vol. 2, pp. 2856-7.

* Codex Theodosianusy X, 22, i (324) . ^ Seeck, op, cit,
' Notitia Digniiatum, or. IX, 45.

90 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

aries. The limites specified were those of Thrace, Illyricum, the
Orient, Pontus, Egypt, Thebes, and Libya ; that is, practically all
the borders of the Eastern Empire.^ The report was to be de-
livered in the imperial consistorium during the month of January
on the Master's own initiative.^

Under Justinian this duty was still performed by the Master.
However, the frontiers which he then inspected are not specified,
but are simply referred to as all those placed under his jurisdic-
tion ; and the report is not assigned to any definite time nor place,
being given solely upon the Master's initiative.^ Still, the actual
care and repair of the fortified camps and guardboats, and the
command of the limitanei, remained in the hands of the duces
limitum, who were under the supervision of the magistri militum^

The reason which caused this inspection of the frontier de-
fences to be intrusted to the Master of the Offices may be gath-
ered from the general content of the edict of Theodosius 11.*^ It
was evidently the desire to obtain a credible report on the condi-
tion of the defences of the Empire through an official who was
not directly concerned with their construction, maintenance, and
garrisoning. This involved the use of an official of the civil ad-
ministration as a check upon military officers; and for the per-
formance of this task there was none more suitable than the
Master of the Offices, the director of the agentes in rebus. The
Master of the Offices in the Occident did not receive this power,
probably on account of the exceptional influence of the tnagister
peditum praesentalis at Rome.*

The right of the Master to inspect the limites led to the con-

^ Navellae Theodosii^ 24, 5 : Id autem curae perpetuae tut culminis credimus iniungen-
dunty lit tarn Thracici quant Inlyrici nee non etiam Orientalis ac Pontici limitis, Aegyptiaci
insuper Tkebaici Ubyci quentadmodum se militttm nutturus habeat castrorumqtu ac lu-
soriarum cura procedaty quotannis mense lannario in sacro consistorio significare nobis
propria suggestione procures, ^ Novellae Theodosii^ 24, 5.

* Codex Justinianus, I, 31, 4: Curae perpetuae tui cuhninis credimus iniungendum^ ut
super omni limite sub tua iurisdictione constitute, quemadmodum se militum numerus
habeat castrorumque ac clusurarum cura procedat, qtwtannis significare nobis propria
suggestione procuret,

* Novellae Theodosii, 24, i (cf. Codex Justinianus, I, 46, 4) : Imprimis itaque duces
limitum et praectpue^ quibus gentes quae maxinte cavendae sunt adpropinquant, in ipsis
limitibus comtnorari et milites ad proprium redigere nunterum, inminentibus magisteriis
potestatibtis diuturnisque eorunt exercitationibus inhaerere praecipimus,

* JVo7fellae Theodosii 24, 5 : ut uniuscuiusque tarn industria quam desidia nostris
auribus intimata, et strenui digna praetnia consequantur et in dissimidatores competens
indignatio proferatur,

* Cf. Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, vol. XXVI, pp. 124 f., 144 f.

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES 91

ferring upon him of judicial authority over their defenders. This
jurisdiction Leo made exclusive, removing the duces and their
apparitores^ the limitanei and the praepositi castrorum from the
jurisdiction of any other than the Master,^ subject only to the
respecting of certain indefinite privileges previously enjoyed by
the magistri militum in relation to the frontiers of the Orient,
Thrace, and Illyricum.

Justinian directed that all appeals coming from the court of a
dux^ no matter what the rank of the judge officiating there, should
be settled by the Master of the Offices and the Quaestor acting
together.^ For this reason the code of Justinian speaks of the
limites under the Master's jurisdiction.^

The Master's supervision of the frontiers did not survive the
reform of the military organization of the Empire and the creation
of the tfumes in the seventh century.

IX. The Master of the Offices and the Imperial Consistory

From about the year 325 a.d. the Master of the Offices was a
comes consistorianuSy that is to say a standing member of the con-
sisiorium, or Imperial Privy Council, which was composed of a
select number of the high administrative officers of the Empire, in
addition to extraordinary members summoned from time to time
as the occasion demanded; this consistory acted as a council of
state for the settlement of questions of policy beyond the compe-
tence of the various individual officials and as a high court of
justice on special occasions.*^ This participation in the highest
councils of the state added to the prestige and influence of the
Master's office, and the part which he played there reflected the
character of the various departments of the administration which
were under his control.

We have already made mention of one of the Master's duties
in connection with the conststortum, namely the obligation to

* CocUxJustinianuSj XII, 59, 8 : Viros spectabiles duces eorumque apparitor es nee turn
limitaneos castrorumque praepositos tantummodo ex sublimis tut iudicii sententia con-
veniri nee aliis subiacere iudicibus praecipimus: illustribus scilicet eu: magnificis viris
magistris militum consuetudine ac potestate, si qua ad limites aliquos Orientis Thraciarum
et Illyrici ex longo tempore hactenus obtinuit, reservata.

^ Codex Justinianusy VII, 62, 38 (529). » Codex Justinianus^ I, 31, 4.

*Cf. p. 31.

* Karlowa, Roemische Rechtsgeschichte^ vol. I, pp. 848 ff. ; Seeck, Pauly-Wissowa, vol.
4, p. 931 ; Reid, Cambridge Mediaeval Historyy vol. I, p. 48.

92 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

present there his annual report upon the condition of the frontier
defences of the provinces.^ Further interesting evidence regard-
ing the presence of the Master at the sessions of this Council is
afforded by the record of part of the proceedings of a meeting
called by the Emperor Julian, contained in a constitution of 362,
the prelude of which contains the words in consisiorio, adstante
Jovioy viro clarisstmo, quaes lore, Anatolio^ magistro offictaru{m\
Felice^ cont{iii) scurarum largitimium?

The Master of the Offices arranged all the imperial audiences,
both of private persons, of officials, and of ambassadors from for-
eign states, which were usually held in the canststarium. In this
he was assisted by the officium admisstonum, the corps of court
ushers {admissionales) with the magister admissionum at their
head, who were subject to his orders.^

Cassiodorus, whose formula of the Master's office * lays special
stress upon this aspect of his duties, informs us that it was he
who introduced the senators to the royal presence, and directed
them in their deportment and speech.^ It was the Master who
promised an audience, who granted admission to the consistorium^
and, as the morning star foretold the coming day, so he heralded
the prospect of seeing the royal countenance/

Persons to be presented might be actually introduced by an
ordinary admissionalisy or by the magister admissionum? In the
case of men of eminence, such as senators, the Master himself
might stand before the curtain {velum) of the council chamber
and usher in the favored individuals/ In this latter fashion the
Bishop Athanasius seems to have been brought before the
Emperor Constans in 346,* and the monk Constantius before
Theodosius II in 449.^^

• Novellae Theodosii^ 24, i ; 5 ; cf. Codex JustinianuSy I, 31, 4.
^ Codex Theodosianusy XI, 39, 5.

• Notitia Dignitatuffiy or. XI, 17 ; occ, IX, 14; sect. 2 above. * Variae, 6, 6.

• Cassiodorus, loc. cit. : Per eum senator veniens nostris praesentatur obtutibus ; ad-
nionet trepidum ; componit loquetitem ; sua quin eiiam verba solet inserere^ ut nos decenter
omnia debeamus audire,

• Cassiodorus, loc, cit. : Aspectus regi haud irritus^ promissor collocutionis nostrae,
gloriosus donator aulici consistorii^ quasi quidem lucifer ; nam sicut ille venturum diem
promittity sic iste desiderantibus vultus nostrae serenitatis attribuit,

^ Ammianus, 15, 5, 8 : per magistrum admissionum^ qui mos est honoratior^ accito.

• Valesius on Ammianus 26, 5, 7; Cassiodorus, Variae, 6, 6; De Caer., i, 87.

• Apolog. ad ConstatUinumy 3 : Svvarou Kat Evymos 6 ycvoftcvos fmyioTpo^ fAapTv-
prjaai ' avros yap cIoTi/KCi vpo rov p-i^Kov kol rjKOV€v airtp rfiiavfiev avrov, koI a^rep avros
Karrj^iov Acyctv ^/ia9- ^° Mansi, vol. 6, p. 821.

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES 93

Representatives of foreign countries were under the care of the
Master of the Offices from the time they crossed the Roman bor-
ders. He provided their escort, received and entertained them,
introduced them to the Emperor, gave them suitable presents,
and upon their departure provided them with a safe-conduct.^
Ammianus^ records that in 365 the ambassadors of the Alemanni,
having rejected as unworthy the gifts offered to them, were
treated with asperity by Ursatius, then Master of the Offices, and
withdrew to stir up war.

The poet Corippus ' has left a description of the introduction
of the ambassadors of the Avars into the presence of Justin II by
the Master in 566; and the Roman usage that legates should
declare the object of their mission to the Master of the Offices
first of all is indicated by the refusal of the Roman representatives
sent to the Persian court in 579 to deliver their message to any
one except that official whom the Romans styled the Master.^
Further, Priscus ^ relates that when, in 448, Theodosius II was
party to a plot to assassinate Attila, after corrupting one of the
latter s ambassadors, he sent for Martinalius, his Master of the
Offices, and informed him of the arrangements; the latter was
entitled, through his official position, to know them. The Master,
he says, " shared in all the Emperor s counsels, because he had at
his orders the Agentes, the interpreters, and the soldiers of the
palace guard," thus giving the grounds for the Master's presence
in the consistory, and his connection with the diplomatic relations
of the Empire.

The Ceremonial Book of Constantine Porphyrogenitus has
preserved an account of the procedure customary in the fifth
century at the court of Constantinople in the reception of
embassies from an Emperor in the Occident, who had not yet

* As Cassiodorus ( Variae^ 6, 6) phrases it : Per eum exteris genttbus ad laudem ret
publicae nostrae ordinatur humanitas, et nolentes redeunt quos merentes exceperii: per
eum quippe nobis legatorum quamvis festinantium praenuntiatur advenius,

2 Ammianus, 26, 5, 7.

* In laudem Justinty III, 231 if . :

Legates Avarum jussos intrare magister

Ante fores sacras divinae nuntiat aulae
Orantes sese vestigia sacra videre

dementis domini, quos voce et mente benigna
Iroperat admissi.

* Menander Protector, Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum^ vol. 4, p. 257, fr. 55.

* Frapnenta Historicorum Graecorum^ vol. 4, p. 77, fr. 7.

94 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

been acknowledged by the Emperor in the Orient ; it also sets
forth the custom followed in the case of embassies from the
Persian court.

On occasions of the former sort/ the Master had to provide
for the entertainment of the legates, receive them, and arrange for
their audience. If the legate were himself a Master of the
Offices, he was brought to the palace by the adiutor of the Master
at the court of Constantinople; otherwise by members of the
officium admtssio7tum. The legate or legates attended in the
hall of the Master (<txoXi7 tov /xayurrpov) in the palace until
the time of their reception. After the Eastern Emperor had
confirmed the appointment of his Western colleague, legates of
the rank of Prefect were placed upon an equal footing with the
Prefects in Constantinople, but those who were Masters gave
precedence to the Master in the East.^ This procedure was also
followed in the case of similar delegations from the Gothic Kings
of Italy.3

Prior to their farewell reception the Master of the Offices had
to prepare a list of presents for the legates and their attendants,
which, when approved by the Emperor, he turned over to the
Count of the Sacred Largesses to make ready. Finally, the
Master took any letters from the Eastern to the Western
Emperor and handed them over to the ambassadors, when they
came to take leave of him/

When a Persian legate visited Constantinople, the Master's
duties were still more onerous.* He had to send a representative
to the border city of the Empire, Nisibis, to greet him,,to present
a written or oral invitation to visit the capital, and to convoy him
on his way thither. The officiates of the duces in the provinces
traversed had to provide the requisites for the journey and a
record of these expenditures was kept in the bureau of foreigners,
scrinium barbarorum, which formed a part of the Master's
officium. As the legate approached Antioch he was met by one
of the Agentes sent by the Master to exchange courtesies.
Again, at Chalcedon, the Master had to have quarters ready for
him and his retinue, to send him an adjutant from the scrinium

^ De Caer., 1,87; 88.

^ De Caer,y i, 87 : o lirapxK roiv vftavnapiiav kcu 6 hrapxK T179 ff'oA.coif, Xoivov oSrati
8€;(OvTai ais ivrav^ ^vrcs hrap^m^ • • •> inu o fidyurrpo^ fura tov ftayCaTpov tov hrravOa
ir€pnraT€i • £>e Caer,^ i, 87 fin.

* De Caer.y i, 88. * De Caer.^ i, 89, 90.

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES 95

barbarorunt (oirrUov twv fiap/Sdpcov)^ to furnish the cost of his
sojourn there and offer him presents, and to send others to greet
him again and to inquire whether his journey had been made
pleasantly and without annoyance. A residence with due fur-
nishings had to be provided for the ambassador in Constantinople,
to the preparation of which the Count of the Private Purse or the
Saccellarius of the Emperor and the Urban Prefect made con-
tributions according to a written order from the Master.

To meet the legate on his arrival at the European shore the
Master sent horses from the imperial stables under the direction
of the Emperor's spathatius. When he reached his quarters the
Master again sent him greetings and presents. This greeting
was returned by a representative of the legate. The legate next
visited the Master himself, who received him with polite formali-
ties and later notified him through a subadiuva of his office of the
date set for his audience with the Emperor. In preparing for the
reception, the magister admissionum ascertained the Master's
pleasure with regard to the standard-bearers (XajSapifcnot) and
gave them their orders. The Master then received the legate
in his audience hall, asked about the number of presents that the
latter brought, and took a list of them, which he presented to the
Emperor. The candidati and their attendants, the admissionales^
the chartularii of the scrinium barbarorum, and the interpreters
took up their respective posts and executed their duties at the
Masters command. It was the Master who summoned the
legate to the consistorium. Later an evaluation of the presents
brought by the legate was made and given to the Master, who
used it in advising the Emperor as to the gifts to be made in
return.

At the Master's word the guard of the candidati was dismissed
and the legate awaited the Master in the latter's hall until he came
to close the interview. Subsequently, the Emperor signified to the
Master of the Offices that he was ready to grant another audience,
whereupon the latter notified the legate, received him, and intro-
duced him as before. Upon this occasion private gifts of the
legate were received through the Master, who also dismissed the
former at the close of the ceremony. Further, as the Emperor
thought best, he allowed the Master alone to discuss business of
state with the legate, or permitted other officials to do the same.

On account of his duties in connection with such embassies,

96 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

and likewise for the purpose of handling diplomatic correspon-
dence with foreign peoples, the Master of the Offices had in his
officium a body of interpreters, known as interpretes diversarutn
gentium} However, correspondence with legations coming
from within the Empire was transacted through the scrinium
epistularum}

The Master of the Offices himself was sometimes employed as
a Roman legate to foreign nations ; his position in the confidence
of the Emperor, and the influence which his office lent him in the
conduct of foreign affairs, rendered him well suited for such
missions. Thus, in 456, Euphemius, Master under Marcian, went
on an embassy to Gobazes, King of the Lazi in the Caucasus, and
persuaded him to make peace with the Romans.' In 522, Her-
mogenes, another Master, was a Roman representative at the
Persian court;* and ten years later Celer, also a Master, con-
cluded a peace for seven years with the same foe.^ In 555 and
562 Petrus, Master under Justinian, likewise negotiated treaties
with the Persians.* In 579, Tiberius sent his Master of the
Offices, Theodorus, as a legate* to Chosroes 11,^ and as late as
774 A.D. a Master named Petrus, in company with the Logothete
of the Post and the Domesticus, went on an embassy to make
terms with the Arabs.®

In addition to representing the imperial interests on diplomatic
missions, the Master of the Offices was appointed to undertake
other extraordinary services, for which his position in the con-
sistorium particularly fitted him. For example, in 360, Florentius,
Master under Constantius, was nominated one of the two officials
forming a commission to investigate the loss of Amida.* A little
later, Julian sent his Master, Pentadius, on a confidential mission
to Constantius.^*^ In exceptional cases a Master of the Offices was
even intrusted with a high military command, as when Justinian,

• Notitia DignUatunty <7r. XI, 52 ; omnium gentium^ occ, X, 46 ; cf. Priscus, Fragmenta
Historiorum Graecarum^ vol. 4, p. jj^ fr. 7 ; De Caer,^ i> 89. * Cf. p. 84 above.

' Priscus, o 12, p. 155, Bonn : oKrrc 8c Bdrtpov PaxriXeveiv, Topdiqvj rj rov avrov iratSo,
r^S Ko\.\L8oi, Kol tqB€ Xv&fjvai rov ttoAc/aov, Ev<^i;fuo$ icrrjyrjaxiTOj rrjv rov fiaytoTpau &€7r«iiv
dpX^v. * Theophanes, 276 Bonn.

• Procopius, De bello Persico^ 1,8.

• Theophanes, 370, Bonn : cf. Procopius, De bello Goihico^ 4? 1 1 ; Menander Protector,
Fragtnenta Historuorum Graecorum^ vol. 4, p. 207, fr. 11.

^ Menander Protector, Frag, Hist, Graec, vol. 4, p. 257, fr. 55 ; Theophylactus, 3, 15.

• Theophanes, 706, Bonn. • Ammianus, 20, 2, 2.
^ Ammianus, 20, 8, 19.

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES 97

in 532, sent his Master Celer as one of the four generals in com-
mand of the forces destined for the relief of Amida/ and later
appointed Hermogenes to a joint command with Belisarius.^

It is also probable that the exercise of judicial functions by the
Master in special cases, where honorary illustres resident in Con-
stantinople were concerned,^ was due to his presence in the
consisiorium.

The importance and influence, in the state, of the position
occupied by the Master of the Offices, is further illustrated by the
prominent role that he carried at the accession and inauguration
of the Emperors Leo I (457), Leo II (474), Anastasius (491), and
Justin I (518), accounts of which, are to be found in the Cere-
monial Book.^ In the latter instance,^ upon the death of Anas-
tasius, who did not leave an Empress surviving to nominate a
successor, and who had neglected to make such a nomination
himself or to take a colleague during his lifetime, the first persons
notified were the Master, Celer, and the Commander of the
excubitores, Justinus. The former convened the Scholarians and
the candidati; the latter the regular soldiers, tribunes, vicarii and
officers of the excubitores, and each announced the need of choos-
ing a new Emperor. In the meeting of the senate which followed
Celer played a leading part ; his exhortation to the dignitaries is
the only one preserved, and it was this body that finally nomi-
nated Justinus.

Even after the Master's office had lost its immediate control
over the various departments of the administration, it continued
to be one of the great offices of state, whose holder assisted in the
imperial councils and in the general government of the Empire.
In such capacity under Theophilus and Basil I the Master
officiated as one of the three dignitaries who conducted the
government during the absence of the Emperor from the capital.
His associates upon such occasions were the Viceroy (6 Scen-cyi/),
who was regularly the Praepositus, and the Urban Prefect*
These duties remained the longest with the Mastership; even
after it had become an order of rank, as late as the reign of Basil
I, the two Masters, who still performed some duties as the

^ Procopius, De bello Persico, 1,8.

2 Procopius, /?/. cit.y i, 13: ^m^Ko/n/o-cov rov (rrparov; cf. MUller, Philologus^ 1912,
p. 107. « Codex Justinianusy III, 24, 3.

* De Caer., i, 91 ; 92 ; 93 ; 94. * De Caer.y i, 93.

• De Caer.y appendix (ircpi ra^coiv) 503, 504, 506, Bonn ; cf. p. 54 above.

98 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

Emperor s advisers, were accordingly known as the " Masters of
the State." ^

The duties of the Master in connection with the introduction
of officials to the imperial presence, as well as in receiving and
presenting foreign ambassadors, passed to the Logothete of the
Post, whom we find performing them in the tenth century.^

X. The Ceremonial Duties of the Master of the Offices

The position of the Master of the Offices as commander of
the Palace Guards and director of the various corps of palace
servants, especially that of the court ushers, who, as we have
seen, were under his orders, naturally rendered him responsible
for the part which they played at the various court ceremonies
where their presence was required. Hence he came to assume
control over the ceremonial on such occasions, and to take over
the function of a Master of Ceremonies. This is clearly indicated
in the account given by Corippus' of an audience in the palace
where, upon the Emperor's command, the various corps of
officiates palatini took up their respective positions according to
the Master's orders.

A large part of the ceremonial duties fell to the lot of the
Master in connection with the audiences held in the council
chamber {consistorium), where delegates from foreign peoples,
senators, and other persons, who for various reasons were accorded
an official interview with the Emperor, were received. The
Master's share in such proceedings has been amply illustrated in
the discussion of his duties in connection with the Consistory and
requires no further comment here.

There were other official ceremonies, however, at which the
Master had a similar part to play. One of these was the inaugu-

^ Theophanes Continuatus, 5, 99 : roi$ Sixrt rrj% iroXxTua^ fiayiarpoi^y whom the
Emperor desired to intrust with the direction of the survey of lands which had become
ownerless, and their reassignment.

^ De Caer.y i, 24, 138 Bonn; 2, 3; 2, 15; 2, 47 ; Luitprand, Historiay 6, 2: im-
percUor non voce sua, sed per logothetamy cum legatis loquitur,

• In laudem Justini, III, 162 if. :

Omata est Augusta domus, iussuque regentis
Acciti proceres omnes, schola quaeque palati est
lussa suis adstare locis. lamque ordine certo
Turba decanorum, cursorum, in rebus agentum,
Cumque palatinis stans Candida turba tribunis
£t protectorum numerus mandante magistro.

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES 99

ration of a new Emperor, regarding which the book On Ceremo-
nies has preserved several notices. From it we learn that at
the induction of Leo I the Master of the Offices, Martialius, and
the archbishop of Constantinople, Anatolius, were the two chief
personages.^ At the coronation of Leo II, also, the Master had
a prominent part; with the assistance of certain Patricians, he
introduced the Caesar who was to be crowned.^ The Master, like-
wise, had charge of the introduction of Anastasius upon the occa-
sion of his assumption of the imperial title.^

The prominent role assumed by the Master Celer in connec-
tion with the choice of a successor to Anastasius, in 518, has
already been discussed.* We know further that at Justin's inaugu-
ration it was the duty of the Quaestor, or of Celer himself, to read
the address of the new Emperor to the people; but the former
was absent from the ceremony, and the latter had in the meantime
suffered an attack of gout, so that some member of the Bureau of
Petitions, scrinium libellorum^ had to take his place.^ In the
account given of the coronation of Leo II the Master of the
Offices is mentioned along with the consul ordinarius as an
eponymous official ; * in that of the coronation of Justinian he is
the only official mentioned in connection with the dating of the
event.^

Further, in the sixth century the Master had important cere-
monial duties to perform at the appointment of officers to higher
posts, or at their admission to the imperial service, especially when
they were under the orders of the Master himself, as in the case
of the comes admissionum ® or candidati?

The general functions of the Master of the Offices as a Master
of Ceremonies gradually passed to the Praepositus and to the
officer known as the 6 litX T179 icarcurrcurecys, or Master of Ceremo-
nies. To the transitional stage of this process is to be attributed
the procedure recorded for three functions in the De Ccurimoniis.

* De Caer,, i, 91 ; they alone, of all the dignitaries, are mentioned by name.

2 De Caer,j i, 94. ^ De Caer,y i, 92. * See p. 92 if. above.

* De Caer. i, 93.

* De Caer., i, 94 : -nj o(lv irpo ^Kavhrrt KokavhSiV ^€K€fiPpiiav Iv virariJji Acovro? rtnf
fUKpov, fjLayi<TTpov ovToq Ev(rcj3tov.

^ De Caer., i, 95 : rfj ovv Tcroprj; rov 'AirpiAiov /ii/vos tvSc, ftayloTpcv ovroq Tarui-
vou. The prominent position thus given to the Mastership may be due to the partiality
of the Master Petrus with whom these accounts originated, and whose work on this office
has been referred to before ; cf. Lydus, De Mag., 2, 25.

« De Caer,, i, 84. • De Caer,, i, 86.

lOO THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

The first of these is the appointment of a Caesar,^ and dates from
a time when there were several Masters, forming a grade of digni-
taries.^ Here the Praepositus and the First Master (6 irpSnof;
ftayurrpos) are charged with the duty of introducing the future
Caesar. The second case is that of celebrations held in the
Golden Hippodrome,^ and the third that of the races held on the
anniversary of the foundation of Constantinople.* The role of
the Master is the same in both cases. In admitting the senate
and the ex-Prefect to their places the Emperor gave the signal to
the Praepositus, who nodded to the Master, who in turn signalled
to the Master of Ceremonies, cirl T179 icaTaaTcurccy9, who summoned
the dignitaries. In these latter instances, however, it was the
Praepositus and the Master of Ceremonies who really had charge
of the arrangements of the celebrations; the share of the Master
of Offices was now purely nominal, a relic of his former importance.
In later ceremonies of the ninth and tenth centuries the Mas-
ters take no active part whatever.

XI. The Officium of the Master of the Offices

The Master of the Offices, like the other important administra-
tive officials, had his officium. This was an office staff of clerks,
/secretaries, and the like, who kept the Master in touch with the
1 various departments of the palace and the administration that were
\ under his control, aiding him in the work of supervision; they
also assisted him in the performance of the general duties that fell
to his lot.

According to the Notitia ^ the officium of the Master in the
Orient was composed of the following officials, who were chosen
from the sckola of the Agentes in Rebus :
An Aide, adiutor.

Two Assistant Aides, subadiuvae adiu tores.
Three Deputies for the Arsenals, subadiuvae fabricarum.
Four Deputies for the Textile Factories, subadiuvae barbari-

cariorum.
A Resident Inspector of the State Post, curiosus cursus pub-
lici praesentalis.

^ De Ca^r.y i, 43. * PrjXov a, rots /iaytbrpous.

• De Caer., i, 68. * De Caer., i, 70.

^ Notitia Dignitatum or, XI, 40 : Officium autem suprascripti viri illustris magistri
officiorum de scola agentum in rebus est ita.

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES lOi

Inspectors, curiost, throughout all the provinces.

Interpreters of various nations.
The same source gives the officium of the Master ii) the Occident,
likewise recruited from among the Agentes, as follows: ^

An Aide, adiutor.

Assistants to the Aide, subadiuvae adiutoris.

Deputies for the different Arsenals, subadiuvae fabricarum
diversarum.

One Resident Inspector of the State Post, curiosus cursus
publici in praesenti.

Inspectors, curiosi^ for all the provinces.

Interpreters of all nations.
In addition to the above-mentioned officials each officium had a
number of clerks for the performance of office work of vari-
ous kinds, who were under the direction of the adiutor and
subadiuvae.

The adiutor^ or Master's aide, was in control of the officium^
and likewise of the whole schola of the Agentes,* which in a certain
sense might be regarded as a larger officium. His position corre-
sponded to that of the principes in the other officia. The adiutor
was selected among the Agentes of the rank of ducenarius^ by the
Master himself, but his appointment was subject to the imperial
confirmation.* Originally, the whole schola of the Agentes was
called upon to testify as to his fitness for the post, but later this
formality was dispensed with.* Upon his retirement he took rank
with the vicarii^ and at the end of the fifth century was a claris-
simus'^ when in the active service.

The scrinium of the adiutor^ that is the body of clerks at his
disposal, is also mentioned, and in such terms as to indicate that

^ Notiita Dignitatum occ. IX, 40.

^ Codex Theodosianus^ 1, 9, i (359) : Adiuior praeterea^ in quo totius scholae status it
magistri securitas constituta est,

^ Codex Justinianus^ XII, 21, 5 (440-441).

^ Codex Theodosianus, I, 9, i : Adiutor praeterea^ • • • » omni schola testimonium
praebentey idoneus probitate morum ac bonis artibus praeditus nostris per magistrum ob-
tutibus offeratur^ ut nostro ordinetur arbitrio; cf. Cod. Just, i, 31, i ; Cass. var. 6, 6, 8.

•Compare Codex Theodosianus, I, 9, i with Codex JustinianuSj I, 31, 1, where the
phrase omni schola etc. is omitted.

^ Codex Justinianus^ XII, 21, 5 : Eos^ qui or dine transcursa militia post ducenam ad
desideratum principis pervenerint gradum aut adiutores viri ilhistris magistri officiorum
extiterint, cum inter honoratos coeperint numerari, vicarianae dignitatis tituUs decorari
censemus.

' Codex Justinianusj XII, 19, 12 (Zeno) ; XII, 29, 2 (474) ; C. /. L. VIII, 989.

102 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

it had charge of the documents relating to cases brought against
the scriniarii who were under the Master s jurisdiction.^

It was the adiutor who, as Bury^ thinks, subsequently
developed into the domesticus scholarum^ the officer that later
superseded the Master as commander of the Scholarians. How-
ever, this point will be discussed more fully in connection with
the domesticus of the Master.

The subadiuvae adiutores? or adiutoris^^ were the aides of the
adiutor and probably assisted him in the general direction of the
office. In the ceremonial followed in connection with the recep-
tion of a Persian ambassador at Constantinople it was one of
these subadiuvae whom the Master sent to notify the legate of
the time set for his audience.*

The subadiuvae fabricarum^ as their name indicates, were
occupied with the business arising from the Master's control of
the arsenals. In the early fifth century there were three of them
in the office of the Eastern Master,^ but apparently a greater
number in the West.^ Later, however, the number in the East
was increased ; for under Leo ® four subadiuvae from the highest
class of the Agentes were annually chosen for a year's service in
the scriniunt fabricarum. Evidently the scrinium fabricarum
consisted of these subadiuvae and the clerks under their orders.
In 539 it still formed part of the Masters officium, and the latter
was then directed to appoint chartularii therefrom to investigate
contraventions of the edict forbidding the manufacture of arms
by private persons, while five seniors {priores) of the scrinium
were responsible for the acts of these deputies.®

The four subadiuvae barbaricariorum in the Orient occupied
a position closely corresponding to that held by the subadiuvae
fabricarum. They assisted the Master in the supervision of the
imperial factories for the making of goods interwoven with gold,
pearls, and precious stones, in which the workmen were styled
barbaricarii. From the time of Valens such factories in the

^ Codex Just inianusy XII, 19, 12, 3. ^ Imperial Administration^ p. 50.

* Notitia Digttitatum or. XI, 42-3. * Notitia Dignitatum or, IX, 42.

* De Caer.^ i> 89. • Notitia Dignitatum or, XI, 44.
' Notitia Dignitatum occ. IX, 43.

* Codex JustinianuSy XII, 20, 5: Agentes in rebusy qui per ordinem consequi solent
principatus insignia^ in unoquoque scrinio fabricarum et barbarorum quaternos suh-
adiuvarum sollicitudinem per annum dumtaxat integrum proced' tes gradatim subire hoc
in aeternum valitura lege decernimus,

® Novellae Justiniani, 85, c. 3 ; cf. p. 88 above.

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES 103

Orient had been under the direction of the Master of the Offices
along with the arsenals.^ One of these subadiuvae acted for the
diocese of the Orient, one for Asia, one for Pontus, and the fourth
for Thrace and Illyricum.^ Under Leo there was a Bureau of
Foreigners, scrinium barbaroruniy to which four subadiuvae were
annually detached from the Agentes in the same way as to the
scrinium fabricarum? It is a question whether these are to be
identified with the subadiuvae barbaricariorum. This problem is
not simplified by the fact that there is considerable confusion in
the texts between barbari and barbaricarii}

There is little further information with regard to the scrinium
barbarorum. An edict of, Theodosius 11,^ addressed to a Master
of the Offices, ordained that the scrinium barbarorum should pay
a fine of ten pounds of gold if it permitted senators, ducenarii or
centenarii of the Agentes to become domesticz of the comites
scholarum, or if it failed to give information regarding any
attempt on their part to gain such an appointment. Further, it
was the scrinium barbarorum which preserved the accounts of the
expenditures made for the conveyance of a Persian legate and his
suite from the eastern frontier to Constantinople,* and it was also
this scrinium that furnished the optio or adjutant to the Persian
legate upon his arrival at Chalcedon.^ Finally, cartularii of the
scrinium barbarorum were in attendance under the Master's
orders at the audience granted the legate,^ where they acted in
conjunction with the magister admissionum and the interpreters.

From this I think we may conclude that, owing to the close
connection between the scrinium barbarorum and the Master of
the Offices, evidenced by the passages cited, and the appointment
of the subadiuvae of this scrinium from the Agentes in the same
way as those of the scrinium fabricarum, the scrinium barbaro-
rum formed a part of the Master's officium. However, in view of
the fact that this scrinium does not appear to have anything to
do with the work of the barbaricarii, but rather acts as a bureau
of records for Various statistics, we cannot identify the subadiuvae
barbaricariorum of the Notitia with members of this scrinium^

* See above, p. 89. « Notitia Dignitatum or, XI, 45-49.
' CotUx Jiistinianusy XII, 20, 5.

* Cf. Bocking, Notitia Dignitatum^ vol. i, p. 245.

* Novellae Theodosii, XXI, 2 (441). • De Caer.^ i, 89, 400 Bonn.
' De Ca^r.^ i, 89, 401. * De Caer,^ i, 89, 404, 405.

* Cf. Seeck, Pauly-Wissowa, vol. 2, p. 2857.

104 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

unless we suppose that they had later received a sphere of duties
differing widely from those which they originally performed.
The probabilities are, therefore, that some time after the com-
pilation of the Notitia a new scrinium^ that in question, was
added to the officium of the Master.

The Inspector of the Post at the Court — the curiosus cursus
publici praesentalis^ or in praesenti^ — evidently had charge of
the passes for the State Post issued in the Master s officium^ and
probably of those issued in the name of the Emperor also ; for the
title praesentalis seems to suggest his connection with the imi>e-
rial person. The other Inspectors of the Post, those despatched
throughout the provinces, the curiosi per ontnes provincias ' or
omnium provinciarumy^ whose duties have been explained else-
where,^ were likewise reckoned as forming part of the Master's office.

Lastly, there were the interpreters for the foreign peoples
with whom the Empire entered into official contact,* who were
of assistance to the Master in his conduct of diplomatic corre-
spondence or personal negotiations with foreign governments or
their representatives.^

The members of the Master's officium, upon the expiration of
their term of service, were accorded the rank of princeps, taking
precedence over those from the offices of the Pretorian and the
Urban Prefects.® This general statement is exclusive of the
adiuioTy whose special honors have been mentioned.

This office staff gradually broke up, as the various depart-
ments, in the direction of which they had assisted the Master,
passed from his hands into those of others ; it disappeared entirely
when the Master ceased to be an active administrative official.

XII. The Dombsticus of the Master of the Offices

Besides the members of his Staff, officium, the Master of the
Offices had in his service an officer called a domesticus. Such

^ Notitia Digniiatum or, XI, 50. * Notitia Dignitatum occ. IX, 44.

* Notitia Dignitatum <7r. XI, 51. ^ Notitia Dignitatum occ, IX, 45.

* Sec p. 74 ff. above.

* Notitia Dignitatum or. XI, 52 : interfiretes diver sarum gentium ; occ. IX, 46 :
omnium gentium.

' Prisciis, Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum, vol. 4, p. 77, fr. 7 ; De Caer., i, 89.

* Cassiodorus, Varuu, 6, 6, 7 : Officium vero eius tanta genii firaerogativa decoratur,
ut militiae perfunctus muneribus ornetur nomine principatus miroque mode inter praetori"
anas cohort es et urbanae praefecturae fnilites videantur invenisse pripnatum.

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES 105

domestici were found in the staff of practically all the high civil
and military officials. In the Notitia these domestici are not
given a place in the offices of their chiefs nor are they mentioned
at all, probably because, being appointed at the pleasure of their
superiors, they were regarded theoretically as holding no official
position, but as acting in an entirely personal relation to the offi-
cial who employed them.^ However, by the reign of Valentinian I
the domestici had attained an official status, and subsequently
considerable legislation was required to regulate their position
and powers; and their failure to appear in the Notitia may be
due to the fact that the cancellarius or some other member of the
officia filled the position of domesticus?

The first mention of the domesticus of the Master of the
Offices is for the year 374,^ when he appears as the confiden-
tial agent of the Master. In the Orient, we can trace this
official well into the seventh century,* now with the Greek title
So/xe(mK09 ToS fLayiarpov. This Domesticus accompanied the
Emperor Heraclius on an expedition to the East, and Bury*
plausibly infers that the Scholarians went along under his com-
mand, while the Master remained in Constantinople. Conse-
quently, when we find that in the eighth century the Scholarians
were under the command of an officer called the 8ofi6aTiico9 rSiv
axokwv,^ who was not a subordinate of the Master of the Offices,
the natural conclusion seems to be that when the latter lost
control of the palace guard this command was transferred to
his domesticus, who received a corresponding elevation in rankJ

XIII. Characteristics of the Mastership

Our examination of the various spheres of competence which
went to make up the Mastership of the Offices reveals the power
and influence of that office, but at the same time makes clear the
difficulty of comparing it with any administrative office in other
states, ancient or modem. The view of Lydus,® who, looking at
the power of the Master of the Offices as commander of the palace
guards, saw in him a revival of the Master of the Horse of the

^ Seeck, Pauly-Wissowa, vol. 5, p. 1296. * Seeck, op. ctt,y pp. 1296-7.

' Ammianus, 30, 2, lo-ii. ^ 624 A.D., Chranicon PaschaUj 724 Bonn.

^ Imperial Admimstration, p. 50. * Theophanes, 684 (767 a.d.).

^ Bury suggests (pp, cii,, p. 50) that the Domesticus may have been the same as the
adiutor of the Master. Originally these two positions were quite distinct, but later it is
possible that they were filled by the same individual. * De Mag , 2, 24.

io6 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

early regal period of Rome, is pure fantasy; and the difficult}'
which modern writers find in choosing a title to translate that of
the Master is further proof of the uniqueness of his position.

A few of these attempts at correlation may be mentioned.
Hodgkin ' thinks that a combination of the ofHces of the principal
Secretaries of State of Great Britain, united with that of a Private
Secretary to the Sovereign, would correspond closely with the
functions of the Master of the Offices. Serrigny ^ views him as a
ministre de la police generate, acting as a guard over the other
ministers. Again, Bouche-Leclercq ^ translates Master of the Of-
fices hy prevbt de palaisy and Schiller* uses a corresponding term,
Oberhofmarschall, which, in turn, is not very different from Mad-
vigs Reichshofmeister.^

Although there does not seem to have been any definitely es-
tablished cursus honorum necessarily preceding the holding of
the Mastership of the Offices, still from the official careers of some
of the Masters known to us, which may be regarded as typical
examples, one can infer the general nature of the official training
which was a prelude to the appointment. Naturally this was of a
civil and not of a military character, as may be clearly seen from
the list of offices filled by the two Masters whose careers are most
fully known, Flavins Eugenius, Master in 346, and Cassiodorus,
Master between 523 and 527. Prior to his Mastership, Eugenius,
as an inscription**' shows, had been employed in the various
subordinate offices about the palace ; Cassiodorus held in succes-
sion the following posts: Conciliarius of the Pretorian Prefect,
Quaestor, Corrector of Apulia and Bruttium, Consul Ordinarius,
Master of the Offices, and Pretorian Prefect.'

In the fourth century Masters of the Offices were often chosen
among those who had filled secretaryships and clerkships, even as
members of the staff of other officials. Thus Anatolius^ was pro-
moted from the Secretaryship of the Petitions, Felix,* Leo,^**

^ Italy and her Invaders^ Vol. I, 2, p. 6io. ^ Droit public romatn, p. 87.

" Manuel des Institutions romaiftes, p. 165.

* Geschichte der romischen Kaiserzeit^ Vol. 2, p. loi.

'' Verfassunt^ des romischen Staates^ vol. I, i, p. 587.

'''Dessae, Inscriptiones Select ae^ 1244; FL(avio) Eugenio, v(iro) C(larissimo), ex

PKAKFICCTO PRAETORIO, CONSULT ORDI.VARIO DICSICiNATC), .MAGISTRO OFFICIORUM OMNIUM,
COMITI IJOMESTICl) ORDINIS PRIMI OMNIHUSQUR PALATINIS DIGNITATIBUS FUNCTO, CtC.

"^ Monumefita Germaniae Historical Auctores Antiquissimi^ vol. XII, pp. x-xi.
** Amniianus, 20, 9, 8 (360), libeliis respondens. * Ammianus, 20, 9, 5 (360).

^<^ Ammianus, 28, i, 12 (368).

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES 107

Syagrius^ and Johannes^ from notarii; and Remigius^ from a
clerkship in the office of a ntagister militum.

At this time the Mastership might be a step to a provincial
governorship of the highest rank, as in the case of Ampelius,* who
was advanced from it to become Proconsul of Asia, Proconsul of
Africa, and Pretorian Prefect. Later, however, probably from the
time that the comites consistoriani were given equal rank with the
proconsuls,^ any such appointments preceded the Mastership, as
we have seen in the case of Cassiodorus.

Frequently Masters were promoted from the Ministry of Fi-
nance, as in the case of Hadrianus,* Macedonius,^ and Palladius,*
who had been Counts of the Sacred Largesses before being made
Masters of the Offices. It is also true that the reverse order was
sometimes followed, and that ex-Masters were made Counts of the
Sacred Largesses,® but this was not at all usual and doubtless
ceased as the mastership became increasingly important.

In the fourth and fifth centuries the Consulate usually fol-
lowed the Mastership, if we may judge from the following
instances : Eugenius, Master in 346, and then consul ordinarius
designatus ; ^° Rufinus, Master in 390, and Consul in 392 ; ^^
Nomus, Master in 443-4, Consul in 445 ; ^* Opilio, Master in
449-50, Consul in 453;^* and Vincomalus, Master and consul
designatus in 452." But even at this time the Consulship some-
times preceded the Mastership,** and in the following century it
was, as a rule, held first, as for example, by Cassiodorus^* and
Hermogenes.*^

^ Ammianus, 28, 2, 5 ; 9 : Cod. Theod, 1, 1 5, 10 (379) . ' Zosimus, 5, 40 ; Sozomenos, 9, 8.
^ RcUionalis adparitoris armarum niagistri^ Ammianus, 15, 5, 36; 27, 6, 36; 27, 9, 2
(368) . * Ammianus, 28, 4, 3 (before 369) .

^ Codex Theodosianusy VI, 12, i (399).
* Codex TheodosianuSy V, 14, 35 ; VI, 26, 1 1 .
' Codex TheodosianuSy XI, 30, 39 ; Severus, Sacra Historian 2, 48.
^ Codex Theodosianusy IV, 13, 8, 9 ; X, 24, 3.

*So Felix under Julian, as recorded by Ammianus, 20, 9, 5 ; 23, i, 5.
^° Dessau, Inscriptiotus SeUctae^ 1244; see above.

^^ Codex Theodosianusy X, 22, 3 ; I, 29, 7 and 8 ; cf. Seeck, Geschichte des Unter gangs
der aniiken Welt, vol. 5, p. 268.

^^ Codex JustinianuSy I, 31, 4 ; Novellae Theodosti, 24, 25.

*• Novellae Valentiniani^ 28, 30. " Mansi, vol. 7, p. 497 ; 505.

" An example is that of Valerius, metier and ex consuU ordinarius ; Codex Theo-
dosianus, VII, 8, 16 (435). *® See above, p. 106.

" Master and ex-Consul in 535, Novellae Justinianij 2. However, if this is the same
Hermogenes who was Master in 533 {Codex Justinianus^ V, 17, 11), he may have been
Consul and Master at the same time.

io8 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

As the Quaestorship and the Mastership were offices of prac-
tically equal rank in the hierarchy of Roman officials, the hold-
ing of the one was not a preliminary step to holding the other.
In the sixth century, indeed, these two offices were at times
placed in the hands of one person, as we have seen in the
cases of Trebonian^ and Anastasius.^ However, at the same
epoch, in the Gothic Kingdom in Italy, Eugenes^ and Cassiodorus*
both held the Quaestorship before the Mastership of the Offices.

Once the Mastership had been put in possession of the
greater part of the power that it eventually wielded, it tended to
become the regular prelude to a Prefecture; promotions were
made directly from the former to the latter office as early as the
middle of the fourth century. So it was with Florentius,^
Siburius,® Syagrius,^ Hadrianus,^ Anthemius,^ and Cassiodorus,^®
Pretorian Prefects, and Theodotus ^^ and Aemilianus,^^ Urban
Prefects. With Eugenius^* and Rufinus,^* the Consulate inter-
vened between Mastership and Prefecture.

As a rule, then, we may conclude that a Master of the
Offices had had a considerable official experience previous to
attaining this position, and might reasonably look forward to a
still higher office. Nevertheless it is probable that in many cases
no strict rules for promotion were observed, and influence and
ability had much to do with obtaining the Mastership. So when
Cassiodorus^ boasted that he had obtained his position by merit
and not through the influence of wealth, he implied that the
opposite sometimes occurred. And we know that Petrus, a
lawyer of Constantinople, without official position, was rewarded

^ Novellae Justiniani^ 23 (536). Trebonian's career is instructive. He was an
illustris with the rank of a Master in active service in 528 {Codex JustinianuSy de novo
codice, i) ; in 530 he was Quaestor {id,^ I, 17, i) ; in 533 he was Master and ex-Quaestor
(fV/., ly 17, 2 pr,) ; finally, in 536, he held both Mastership and Quaestorship {Novellae
Jusiiniani, 23). * Corippus, Panegyr, Pr,, 30 (565).

* Cassiodorus, Variae, i, 12 and 13. ^ See p. 106.
^ Ammianus, 20, 2, 2 (360).

* Codex Theodosianusy XI, 31, 7 ; cf. Monumenta Germanuu HUtoricay vol. VI,
auctores antiquissimiy p. cxxxi.

^ Codex Theodosianus, I, 15, 10; XI, 30, 38 (380).

* Codex TkeodosianuSy VI, 27, 11 ; II, 8, 24 (400).

* Codex TheodosianuSy XVI, 4, 4 ; VII, 10, i (405).
^0 Cassiodorus, Variae^ 9, 24, 25 (533).

" Codex TheodosianttSj VII, i, 14: VI, 28, 5 (395).

^* Codex TheodosianuSy I, 9, 3 ; XV, i, 44 (406). ^* Dessau, op. cit,y 1244.

^* Codex TheodosianuSy I, 29, 7 ; VIII, 6, 2 ; see above. " Variae^ 9, 24.

COMPETENCE OF THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES 109

by Justinian with this office, in recognition of his astuteness dis-
played on a diplomatic mission to Italy.^

The Mastership, like the Quaestorship, was, strictly speaking,
an annual charge,* but apparently there was no limit placed upon
the number of times that it could be held by the same person.^

^ Procopius, De bello Goth,, i, 3, 6-8 ; 2, 22 : Historia Arcana, 16.

* L^crevain, Le ShuU Romain^ P* 67 ; cf. Appendix B.

* Hadrianus was Master from 397 to 399 {Codex Theodosianus, VI, 26, 11 ; 27, 11) ;
Helio was Master from 414 {Codex Theodosianus, XIII, 3, 17) to 427 {Cod, Theod,, XIII,
3, 18), and, notably, Peter the Patrician was Master from 539 to 565 (Procopius, Historia
Arcana^Q, 16; De BeUo Gothico, 4, 11 ; Novellae Justiniani^ 123 ; 137). See Appendix B.

CHAPTER V

THE TITLES, HONORS, AND PRIVILEGES OF THE MASTER OF

THE OFFICES

I. The Roman Period

We have seen how, during the first three centuries following
its establishment, the Mastership of the Offices gradually in-
creased in influence and dignity, with the result that it succes-
sively entitled its holders to higher and more exclusive titles of
rank, until they had passed through all the gradations of rank in
the Later Empire, from the Perfectissimate to the Gloriosissimate.
And we have found that, during the first two of these centuries,
the Masters of the Offices received the distinction of the comitiva^
which in the highest of its three grades had become attached to
this, as well as to other imperial dignities. In a preceding chapter ^
we traced the different stages in the elevation of the Mastership
through the various grades of rank, and it will be unnecessary to
review the same facts again here ; it will be sufficient, after a con-
sideration of the privileges and honors that at various times fell
to the lot of the Masters, to append lists of the known examples
of the use of the several titles pertaining to these classes, which
furnish the basis for the conclusions already presented. The
same plan will be adopted in regard to the comitiva, the connec-
tion of which with the Mastership has been amply discussed.^

The incumbents of the magisterial dignity, tot titulis claram^
tot insignibus opulentam? enjoyed the right to use the title and
insignia of the special order of rank to which their office at any
time gave admission. Likewise they were in possession of the
numerous privileges and exemptions to which the members of
these orders were entitled.

The emblems of the Master of the Offices, insignia viri il-
lustris ntagistri officiorum^ which appear in the Notitia Dignita-
tum^ and which may be called the Master's official seal, were

* Chapter III, pp. 44-47. * Pp. 29, 31, 44.

' Cassiodorus, Variae, 6, 6, 8. * Or. XI, occ. IX.

TITLES, HONORS, AND PRIVILEGES in

inscribed on the codicils containing his appointment^^ which was
couched in the language of Cassiodorus s formula magisteriae
dignitatis. These emblems consist of the following parts arranged
within a square border. At the top, a draped table, upon which
is depicted a liber tnandatorum, adorned with the portrait {imago)
of the Emperor or Emperors. Below is the word fabricae,
underneath which are grouped seven ^ round shields ; alongside of
and beneath these were various types of offensive and defensive
weapons and armor. The legend fabricae and the weapons
have obvious reference to the Master's control of the arsenals,
while the seven shields with their varied blazonry represent the
seven scholae of the palace guards.

Along with the codicils there was given to the Master of the
Offices an official guide or set of instructions {mandata) issued by
the Emperor to guide him in the conduct of the business of his
office. This constituted the liber mandatorum represented in the
Master's insignia.^

For the issuance of his diploma of appointment and his
mandata, in all probability the Master of the Offices, like other
officials,* had to make a donation {consuetudo, sportula), at first
voluntary, but later obligatory, and of a definite amount, to the
clerks of the bureau whose duty it was to prepare such documents.
In the case of the Master, the recipients of these gratuities were
probably the chartularii sacri cubiculiy the primicerius nota-
riorum, his adiutor and his laterculenses.^ Further, upon the re-
ceipt of such an appointment it was the custom for the bene-
ficiary to express his gratitude by suitable gifts to the Emperor
and Empress.®

We have no information regarding any special robes of office

^ Cf. Bocking, (/ber die N^otitia Dignitatum tUriusque imperii^ p. 97. Justinian
translated insignia by avfiPoXa or vapaairjfJuiTa r^ ^PX7^ ^ ^^^ koAov/aci^ocs koi&xcAAocs*

^ The Notitia Dignitatum or. has only six shields, but one is obviously lacking ; cf.
Bocking, Notitia Dignitatum^ vol. i, p. 234. Further differences between the oriental and
occidental insignia are that the former has the imago of one Emperor only, while the latter
has the imagines of two, and that the weapons depicted in each are not of the same types,
nor arranged in the same way.

* Karlowa, Romische Rechtsgeschichte^ vol. i, p. 869; cf. Novellae Justiniani^ \t pr,\
24, 6 (referring to the appointment of provincial iudices) : non solum eis praebere magis-
tratus insignia in his qui vocantur codicilli, sed etiam inscribere modum secundum quern
regant administrationem^ qtuu ante nos legislatores mandata principis appeUabant,

* Codex Justinianus, I, 27, i, 19; 2, 36; NoveUae Jnstiniani^ 8, notitia; 2^ /in.

* Bocking, if ber die Notitia Dignitatum, p. 97 ; Karlowa, Rofnische Rechtsgeschichte^
vol. I, p. 869. • Karlowa, op. cit., p. 870 ; Bocking, op. cit.

112 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

which the Master wore during this period. Still we know that
upon the occasion of the procession of the Emperor Heraclius to
the church of St. Sophia on January i, 639 a.d., a function de-
scribed in the De Caerimoniis^ the Master Eustathius and four
patricians wore the toga^ which, from being the characteristic
dress of Roman citizens, had evidently become the robe of state
of certain high officials and dignitaries of the Eastern court. In
any case an essential part of the Master's official regalia was the
cingulum.

The conferment of the cingulum, or belt of office, was of
greater significance in promotions to the Mastership, as to other
official posts, than the granting of the codicils. The cingulum
had originally been the symbol of military service, but under the
Later Empire it denoted employment in the civil administration
as well. The conferment of this cingulum was so essential a
feature in the investiture of such officials, and its use was so
characteristic of the tenure of office, that eventually cingulum
came to be employed in official language as synonymous with
magistratus or o^pxfl?

From 441 A.D.,' and probably from the time the Masters
office admitted its occupant to the class of the illustres, it was the
custom to elevate a deserving official to the lUustrissimate by the
conferment of an honorary Mastership, which did not involve the
performance of the duties appertaining to that position. This
honorary Mastership, again, might be conferred in two grades,
distinguished by the possession of the right to wear the cingulum,
or the lack of it.

In consequence, all the illustres who had the title of Master
of the Offices were not of the same rank. The highest was the
Master pro tempore in office. He was classed with the illustres
in actu positi, or administratores, officials like himself in active
service. Next in order came those who had gone into retirement
after having held the Mastership. Such were called illustres
honorati.

Then came those who had been awarded both the cingulum
and the codicils of the Mastership without being called upon to
undertake its burdens. Such appointments were really retirements,
with the rank of the office that the recipient might have next

^ De Coir,, 2, 28. * NoveUae Justiniani, 24, 2 ; etc.

' Codex Justinianus, XII , 8, 2.

TITLES, HONORS, AND PRIVILEGES 113

attained if he had remained in active service. The Mastership
was thus awarded to printicerii of the tribuni notarii^ but with
the special provision that they should rank as if they had actually
held the Mastership; that is, as honorati. Usually, however,
Masters of this type belonged to the illustres vacantes, who
might, if called upon subsequently to undertake the active
administration of the Mastership, be classed among the adminis-
tratores.

Finally, there were Masters who received the codicils without
the cingulum. These too were on the retired list, and belonged
to the class of illustres hanorarti. In each of the last two classes
a distinction was made between those who had received the
insignia, or diploma, of their rank at the hand of the Emperor,
and those to whom these emblems had been merely despatched.
The former in each case were ranked above the latter. Within
each of these classes of illustres the Masters ranked according to
the position which, as we have seen, the Masters in actu positi
took among the high officials of the Empire. Those who were in
active service took precedence over all honorati, and these in turn
over all vacantes and honorarii. However, illustres vacantes with
the title of Master did not take rank above all honorarii, but only
above such as had attained the same or a lower dignity. Among
Masters of the same class the seniority was decided according to
the time of their respective appointments.^

The Masters of the Offices as clarissinti, spectabiles, or illus-
tres were members of the senatorial order,* and enjoyed all the
special privileges and exemptions which were accorded to sena-
tors as a body, as well as to the members of these classes of rank.
The most important of such advantages fell to the lot of the
Masters in connection with the lUustrissimate. These included
freedom from certain obligations to the fiscus; exemption from
the necessity of furnishing recruits and horses to the army, of
performing curial munera in provincial towns, and of furnishing
the regular hospitium to officers and soldiers; and also the right

^ Codex Justinianus, XII, 7, 2, 5 (Zeno) : Hoc etiam adiciendo, ut primicerius post
depostiam publicam numerorum sollicitudinem^ ac si tpsam gessisset administratiofiem,
cuius consequitur dignitatem, magistri officiorum pro antiqua consuetudine infulas
sortiatur, omnibus vacantibus quamvis tempore praecedentibus praeponendus.

^ Codex Justinianus, XII, 8, 2. Cf. Jullian in Daremberg et Saglio, vol. 3, pp. 386 f.;
Karlowa, op, cit., vol. i, pp. 870 f.

* L^crevain in Daremberg et Saglio, vol. 4, p. 1 197, s. v. senatus.

114 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

to pass on their titles and privileges to their wives and children,
as well as an exceptional position before the law both in the
matter of the courts before which they could be summoned and
in the penalties to which they were subject. Furthermore, when
the clarissimi and the spectabiles were relieved of the necessity of
residing at the capital, active membership in the senate was
practically confined to the illustres} In regard to the obligation
of furnishing quarters to troops, we are told specifically that the
Masters of the Offices, and the Quaestors, were allowed to have
one residence and the half of another immune from this burden
during their lifetime, and that their heirs could claim exemption
for one house.^

In addition to the title of his office and that of his order of
rank, the Master of the Offices received many other honorable
and complimentary appellations. Conspicuous among these was
the term frater amantissime^ used as a form of address to their
Masters by the Western Emperors about the middle of the fifth
century.^ Along with other notables in the fifth and early sixth
centuries, the Master of the Offices was sometimes accorded the
titles of excellentissimuSy^ vir excelsus^ and sublimissintMS^ which
did not denote any definite rank but were attributed to high offi-
cials in general. Again, titles suitable to the Master himself
were used with reference to his office, as in the phrase illustris
sumntitas magistri^ or to the place where his authority was
exercised, as in the application of sublimis to his iudicium?

Furthermore, in official communications from the Emperor,
the Masters were entitled to a series of substantive forms of
address, which were very much the same as those used towards
other officials of the rank of illustres.^ These forms are arranged
below in alphabetical order.

^ Jullian in Daremberg et Saglio, vol. 3, pp. 387 f., s. v. illustres,

* Codex Justtmanus,X\ly 40, 10 (Valentinian and Marcian) : Magistri vero officiarum
vel quaestores unam semis domum suam quoad vixerint habeant hospitium onere libertam :
heredes vero eorum praedicti unam ah hospitibus iure defendant,

^ Flegeti /(rater) a{mantissime)^ N'ovellae Theodosii, 21 (441) ; Nomus, id. 24 (443),
25 (444) ; Opilio, Novellae Valeniiniani, 28 (449) , 30 (450).

* Codex Justinianus, XII, 16, 4 (Zeno) ; I, 31, 5 (527).

* Codex JustinianuSy I, 17, 2 (533).

^ Codex JustinianuSy VII, 62, 38 (529).
' Codex Theodosianusj VI, 10, 4 (425).

* Codex Justinianus, XII, 59, 9.

* Cf. Karlowa, Romische Rechtsgeschichte^ vol. I, p. 871 ; Koch, Bysantinische Be-
amtentitel^ p. 124; Harvard Studies in Classical Philology ^ vol. XXVI, pp. 139 f.

TITLES, HONORS, AND PRIVILEGES 115

I. Amplitudo, '' Your Greatness ''

Amplitudo tua appears twice in constitutions of the fifth century.

Novellae VaUntiniani^ 30 (year 450).
Codex JustinianuSy XII, 25, 4 (474).

2. Auctoritas, ** Your Worthiness "

Iliustris auctoritas tua is used with considerable frequency, especially in the
West, towards the end of the first half of the fifth century. The Greek form,
17 vwtpXMifjLirpoTdrrf tad luyaXw^vtfi axfScyria <nj (iilustrissima et magnifica auctoritas
tua) appears in the (uta of the Council of Chalcedon.^

Codex TTieodosianus, VI, 27, 23 (year 430).
Novellas Theodosii^ 24 (443) ; 25 (444).
Novellae Valentiniam^ 28 (449) ; 30 (450).

3. Celsitudo, " Your Highness "

Tua celsitudo (^ o^ virtpoxn) is employed from about the middle of the fifth
century until well into the sixth.

JVoifellae Theodosii^ 21 (year 441).

Codex Justinianus, XII, 19, 12 (Leo); XII, 20, 3 (id.); XII, 29, 2 (474).

Novellae Justinianiy 85 (539).

4. Calmen, '' Your Eminence '*

Culmen tuum (^ o^ virtpoxn) is in use during the same period as tua celsitudo.

Novellae Theodosii^ 21 (year 441), cf. Codex Justinianus, I, 31, 3 ; 24 (443), cf.

Codex JustinianuSj I, 31, 4.
Codex Justinianus, XII, 29, 3 (Zeno) ; XII, 19, 12 (Anastasius) ; I, 31, 5 (527).

5. SminentiA, '' Your Eminency "

Eminentia tua appears in the early sixth century.

Codex /ustinianuSj XII, 19, 12 (Anastasius).
Novellae Justinianif 10 ep. (535).

6. Gloria, " Your Glory "

The Greek equivalent of tua glofia, 17 cr^ iyhoianii, is found in a constitu-
tion of 565.

Novellae Jus tinianiy 137 cp.

7. MagnificentU, '' Your Magnificence "
Magnificentia tua is used at the opening of the fifth century.
Codex Theodosianus, I, 9, 3 (year 405) ; VI, 27, 17 (415).

8. Kagnitado, <' Your Grandeur ''

Magnitudo tua occurs throughout the fifth and early in the sixth centuries.

Novellae Theodosii, 25 (year 444).

Codex /us timanus, XII, 25, 4 (474) ; XII, 29, 3 (Zeno) ; XII, 19, 12 (Anastasius) ;
XII, 19, IS (527).

* Mansi, vol. 7, p 500: p. 505 (year 45')-

ii6 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

9. SinceriUs, " Your Honor "
One example of sinceritas tua comes from the fourth century.
Codfx Theodosianus^ VIH, 5, 22 (year 365).

10. Sublimitas, " Your Loftiness "

Sublimitas tua is the most common of these designations in constitutions
addressed to the Master of the Offices, being used throughout the whole of the
fifth and the early part of the sixth centuries. In Greek, like celsitudo and culmetiy
it is rendered by xnrtpoxjy which also translates emimntia and seems to have no
preferred Latin equivalent.*

Codex TheodosianuSy VI, 27, 18 (year 416).
Novellae TTuodosiani, 21 (441); cf. Codex JusHnianus^ I>3i> 3.
Novellae Valentiniani^ 28 (449).

Codex JustinianuSy XI, 10, 6 (Leo and Anthemius) ; XI, 10, 7 (id.) ; XII, 5, 3
(id.) ; XII, 20, 3 (Leo) ; XII, 25, 4 (474) ; I, 31, 5 (527); XII, 19, 15 (527).
Novellae Jus tiniani, 2 ep. (535); 14 ep. (id.)

It remains to present in chronological order the examples of
the use of the titles of the several orders of rank to which the
Mastership of the Offices at various times admitted its holders.
These titles were cotneSy vir clarissitnus^ vir spectabilis^ vir magni-
ficus or magnificentissimuSy and vir gloriosus or gloriosisstmus.

I. Comes, "Count"

Dessau, Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae, no. 1244, magister officiorum omnium comes

domesHcus ordinis primi (year 346).
Codex Theodosianus, VIII, 5, 8 (357); I, 9, i (359)? ^X, 38, 11 (410); VI, 29,

10 (412); VI, 33, I, cf. Codex JustinianuSj XII, 26, i (416); I, 8, 3, cf.

Codex JustimanuSj I, 30, 2 (424); VII, 8, 15 (430).
Novellae Theodosii^ 21, cf. Codex Justinianus^ I, 31, 3 ; XII, 29, i (441).
Codex Justinianus, I, 24, 4 (444).
Mansi, vol. 6, p. 821 (449).
Codex JustinianuSy XII, 5, 3 ; XII, 25, 3 (Leo and Anthemius) ; XII, 19, 10

(Leo) ; XII, 25, 4 (474).

2. Vir ClariMimiw, "The Honorable"
Codex TheodosianuSy VIII, 5, 8 (year 357) ; I, 9, i (359).

3. Vir SpecUbiUs, "The Respectable"
Codex TheodosianuSy VIII, 5, 35 (year 378).

4, Vir lUnstris, " The Illustrious "

Symmachus, RelationeSy 34, 8 v. c, etinlustris; 38, 4 ; 43, 2 (year 384-5).

Marcellus, De medieamenhs, tit {post 395).

Codex JustinianuSy I, 55, 8 (409).

Codex TheodosianuSy VI, 29, 10 (412); VI, 26, 17 (416); VI, 27, 20 (427).

^ Koch, BysafUinische Beamientitely p. 124.

TITLES, HONORS, AND PRIVILEGES u;

NavelUu Theoaosii^ 6, illustris et magnificus (438).

Codex Justinianm, VII, 63, 4 (440); XII, 21, 5 (440-1); XII, 26, 2 (443-4?);

I, 51, II (444).
Marini, Papiri^ 82, illustris et magnificus (489).
Corpus Inscriptianum Latinarum, VIII, 989 (V-VI cent).
Cassiodorus, Variaey i, 12 (507-11); i, 13 (507-11).
Codex Justinianus^ XII, 50, 3 (Justinian) ; XII, 50, 9 (id.).
Novellae Justinianiy 23 (536).
Mansi, vol. 8, p. 11 18 (536).

5. Yir Magniflciia or ICa^ificeiitisamus (ficyaXoirpcir«iniaro«), <' The Magnificent"

Mansi, vol. 6, p. 821 (year 449) ; vol. 6, p. 564 ; p. 940 ; p. 993 ; vol. 7, p. 97,
pp; 185 ff., tnagnificefUissimus et gloriosissimus, Greek /xcyaXoir/icirccrraroc koI
ivhoio/Taroi (451)-

Codex /ustinianusy XII, 20, 4 (Leo) ; III, 24, 3, 2 (485-6) ; I, de novo codice (528).

The use of gloriosissimus in conjunction with magnificentissimus in 45 1 ante-
dates the creation of the special class of the gloriosissimiy and occurs only in the
acta of the Council of Chalcedon.

6. Yir Gloriosus or Glorioeissimus (cvSoforaros), '* The Glorious "

Mansi, vol. 6, pp. 564, 940, 993 ; vol. 7, pp. 97, 185 ff. (year 451) ; on the use

of gloriosissimus at this date, see above.
Novellae Justiniani, 2 pr. (535), 10 pr. (id,).
Mansi, vol. 8, p. 817 (531).
Mansi, vol. 8, p. 11 18, p. 11 19 (536).

NoveUiu JusHnianiy 79, ep. (539) ; 82, i (id.), 85 pr. (id.) ; 123 pr. (546).
Historiens des Gaules et de le France {Boquet)^ vol. IV, p. 85 (588).
Chronicon Faschale^ year 626.
Mansi, vol. 11, p. 209, p. 217, pp. 221 ff. (680).

II. The Byzantine Period

Besides the administrative changes that mark the transition
from the Roman to the Byzantine Period, there are also changes
in the character and organization of the court ceremonial which
reflect the current interpretation of the constitutional position of
the Emperor. Justinian succeeded in reestablishing the cult of
the deified Emperor, a revival of the old emperor worship dis-
guised under a Christian name ; he instituted, and the Byzantine
Emperors further elaborated, the ceremonial which accorded
with such an assertion of absolutism. In this theory of state,
justly called " Caesaropapism," of which the motto was "a single
God, a single Empire," the Emperor was the vicar of God upon
Earth, the equal of the Apostles and the head of the Church,
who governed for Christ and with Christ.^

^Hesseling, Essai sur la civilization bysantine^ 1907, pp. I74ff.

ii8 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

As a natural consequence, the Emperor became the centre,
not only of the political, but also of the religious, life at the capital.
Herein we find the explanation of the peculiar character of the
court ceremonies of this epoch, described for us in so great detail
in the De Caeremoniis of Constantine Porphyrogenitus. It was
a truly " pontifical " life that the rulers of Constantinople led in
the midst of chants, processions, parades, and rhythmic acclama-
tions, which, in the palace "guarded of God," constituted the
order of ceremonies that regulated each of their acts and the
countless changes of their gorgeous costume.^

In the performance of these ritual obligations the Emperor was
accompanied by the dignitaries and, officials resident in the capi-
tal, marshalled in a fixed order according to their titles of rank.
Their raiment, position, and actions upon each public occasion
were as rigorously prescribed as those of the Sovereign himself.
Under such conditions it will be readily seen that during the
Byzantine Period the honors and privileges of the Mastership
were chiefly connected with the part which those of this grade
of dignity played in the ceremonial life of the palace.

In the course of the ninth century the Mastership became one
of the dignities bestowed for life by the conferment of certain
insignia (at Sta fipafi^uav a^lax).^ On account of the high rank
of the Mastership among the dignities of the Empire, holders of
this title naturally belonged to the senatorial order {ol avyKkifn-
KoC) in its wide sense, in contrast with the senate as a small^ body
of officials actively assisting in the counsels of state.' They also
belonged to the smaller group of senatorial dignitaries known as
ol npoeXeva-i^iialoi.,^ those entitled to appear in the imperial cortege
on the occasion of public processions.^ And with these latter,
they, in company with certain other court officials, formed the
group of dignitaries known as the apxovres rov Aav<rtaico5.* The
Masters also belonged to the oi vno KafindyLov, the wearers of the

* Diehl, ktudes byzantines^ pp. io8 if.

^ Philotheos, 707 : oTriKcc aira^ &8o/iCKU ov&ifuac dvaorpc^avrac.

' De Caer,y i, i : oi 8c fuiyurrpot kou dv^viraroi kou oi Aociroi (nryicXiTriKOi ; 20 ; 24 ; 2, 6 :
ficra Tc Twv fmyurrpwv koI irarpixiW koI twk XoiTnav t^ avytcXT^ov : Bury, Imperial Ad-
ministration^ yj if. * Philotheos, 707.

* Bury, Imperial Administration^ P- 23.

^ Philotheos, 787 : kou yivercLi 1; ^lavofirj us fjuovovs Tins dp^ovras rdv Aavo'tcucov, olbv
CIS fjuayiarpovs, trptwrnxriTovs, AvOvirdrovs, etc. The Lausiakon was one of the edifices of
the palace, Bury, op, cit., p. 23.

TITLES, HONORS, AND PRIVILEGES 119

kampagion, which included practically all the high dignitaries
and many of the officers of the court, that is, all entitled to wear
this particular style of shoe as part of their official uniform.^
Classes like these, as may be readily seen from their designations,
existed for ceremonial purposes only.

We have seen how the rank gradations of the illustres^ gloria-
sissimi, and the like, of the later Roman period disappeared
before the new honorary orders of the Byzantine epoch. Hence
we no longer find in use the older adjectival titles of rank, which
the Masters had previously enjoyed. The changed position of
the Mastership itself, which from an office had become one of the
honorary orders, would have prevented their employment even if
they had not fallen into disuse. However, as late as the reign of
Leo VI, the Masters were called cf^Soforarot {gloriostssimiy with-
out any special degree of rank being thereby indicated, and at the
same time Stylianos was addressed as o ir€puf>avdcrraTo^, or 6 virtfh
^vdaraTo^ ludyarrpo^,^ phrases in which the adjectives are purely
personal compliments.

The De Caeremoniis has preserved accounts of two types of
ceremonies for the conferment of the dignity (afta, rcfti;) of the
Mastership. The earlier of these dates from the time when
there was only one Master, and is, therefore, prior to the middle
of the eighth century.* Here we have the procedure followed in
case the Emperor ordered that a Master be appointed on the
occasion of a procession to St. Sophia. At the palace* in the
presence of the Patricians and the whole senate, the Praepositus
conducted before the Emperor the Patrician chosen for elevation
to the Mastership. Upon him the ruler conferred an embroidered
robe {frrtxapiucfv) and a belt ()3aXriSu>i^). He was then led away,
to be reintroduced shortly afterwards, clad in his new insignia,
and then placed ''at the head of the sekreton^ above all the
Patricians.**

The latter type of ceremony,^ of a time when the Mastership
had become an order of rank, was probably that in use in the

1 PhOodieos. 757: 4«'Aiwf Tovf Inh MMftMrnyt^ iwmrrm^ ^^n"^^ rift ^^ymJjfr^ Iwm
r€ fmym-ptm^^ etc ; 759, noiv wwo ampmytw wmrrmt, cJor p m i mr r f rn m^ etc : <£ 76^ I-
CL Burj, ^. dt^ pp. 58 £. Oo the kampof^^ see De Caer,, 2. 40. 6^9,

< PliilodieM, 710: ^ TM^ Mo^^^ritrw^ I'^'n^P^ *ii^ Tbe V^tnoam. wen
wrptfiXfVTm (s/nfaMn), id.

* A^audUe^ Lemus VL i. 18, etc : cf. Bary^ op. cH^ p. 31.

• ne Ca^r.^ i. 46. 231-33. ' De C4ter^ i. 46. ryk-^ - i- ^^

I20 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

tenth century. An appointment in this fashion might be made
on any ordinary Sunday {Kvpiaio) nayavrj)^ and then it took place
in the con sis tor turn} There, in the presence of the whole body
of senators, arranged according to their orders of rank, the Prae-
positus presented the Patrician selected for promotion, and the
Emperor conferred upon him the robe and belt of his new rank.
As in the older ceremony, the newly appointed Master was then
led away by the Praepositus, soon to reappear wearing his new
decorations, and to take his place at the head of the sekretan of
the Patricians. At the conclusion of the ceremony the Master
went to the apartment of the palace called the Indoi, put on a
purple cloak (o-ayibi/ a>a\Qiv6v) over his robe and departed for his
own house, as far as which, if it happened to be in the neighbor-
hood of the palace, he was escorted by the various grades of
dignitaries, the Foot Guards of the Domestici and the Schola-
rians, the soldiers of the Watch, the Stotrapiot, and the Decani.
If he lived at a distance the dignitaries were excused from this
exhibition of respect, which, however, the others were still obliged
to manifest.

A similar promotion to the Mastership might also occur on
the occasion of a festival, as, for example. Candlemas.^ Here the
procedure was practically the same as that just described, except
that the Master of Ceremonies, 6 Irii T179 KarcurTcurcco^, played the
role of the Praepositus in introducing the candidate for promotion.
The escort to the Master's house was also the same as in the
preceding ceremony. These promotions might take place else-
where than in the consistortum, for, in connection with the account
of the reception of a foreign envoy,' mention is made of a tricli-
nium {jpiKkivoi) in which appointments to the Mastership were
made/

In all of these ceremonies the essential feature was the con-
ferment of the insignia of the Mastership — the robe and the belt.
These insignia were called fipafi^la, and hence the Mastership
was classed among the at 8ta fipafieuop a^iax. Philotheos ^ gives
the insigne (fipafieiov) of this rank as follows: a white tunic

1 De Caer.f i, 46. ^ Df Caer,, i, 26. » De Caer,^ 2, 15, 573 ; 578.

^ De Caer.f lac, cit. : 6 rpuckjLvo^, iv <p kcu to ica/AcAavKioK tarrarai k/u 6L fiayurrpoi
ytyvovToi.

' Philotheos, 710-1 1 : ;(ira)v Xcvko9 wv xpvcrov^vroc, kcu iinafu^ ;(pvo'ora)3Aos, Kal ^tavrf
itpfULTivri KOKKivoi ^K XiOwv TCfuW KocoafitjfJMnfj, TjTis Xcycroi j3aXrt&K, iwl t€v Kovaurropiov
iK /SocriAix^s X^'P^ cirt&^Soroi.

TITLES, HONORS, AND PRIVILEGES 121

embroidered with gold, a cloak with a golden border, and a scarlet
leather belt studded with precious stones: all conferred by the
Emperor's hand in the consistory. The whole ceremony is evi-
dently a development from that of the conferment of the cingulum
in the preceding period. However, as the Mastership is no longer
an office, the codicils and the liber mandatorum do not now accom-
pany the outward badge of rank.

In addition to this, their regular uniform on official occasions,
at certain specified ceremonies the Masters were required to wear
special attire. Thus we find regulations laid down for their dress
at the audiences held at the daily opening of the palace on Sun-
days and on week-days, and for the occasion of their return to
court after an absence on public or private business.^ Probably
at the functions where they appeared with the so-called loroi
(XJlpot) the Masters presented their most gorgeous appearance.
These l5roi were golden scarfs, twelve in number, worn by the
Masters, or, if there were fewer than twelve Masters, by them
and by a number of Proconsuls or other dignitaries and officials
sufficient to bring the total up to twelve, on particularly solemn
occasions. Such occasions were the procession to St. Sophia,^
Christmas,' and Easter.* However, the loroi might also be worn
on extraordinary occasions, as at the reception of the envoys of
Amerimnes, who had come from Tarsus in 917 to negotiate for
the exchange of captives and the conclusion of peace.^

The explanation of this custom of the wearing of the loroi is
given in the De Caeremoniis in connection with the description
of the Easter ceremonial,* and also alluded to in Philotheos.^
The loroi worn by the Masters and the Patricians symbolized
the entombment of Christ ; their golden decoration suggested the
glory of his resurrection. Thus arrayed, the Masters and the

1 De Ciur.y 2, i.

* De Caer.y l, i, 24 : koI tUripxtrajL o TrpaiirwnTOiy irp<nropcvdficvoc rg rdiu rwv fiayi-
€rrpw¥ Kfu dvOvwdrdiVf ^yow rStv fftopovyrtav rois SiiiSiKa )(pv(rov^vT<ns Xa>pov9<

* Philotheos, 742 : imyC<rrpav^ Svo, dv^viraTous irarpixwws frrparrjyovq 1^, PovXydpots
f^Xms ^vOf 6<f><f>iKUiXiov^ iuro r^ rav (TTparuariKOv Xoyo^crov ra^c<i>¥ Kal jcararr^pov Suo,
irpoi TO (rwavaKXrfirivai rw fiatriXu cis ttjitov rrjs dwoarakucfj^ BtaStKoBoi.

* De Caer.y 2, 40, 637 ff. : to fuv ir€pil3€l3X,rj<r0ai Xcopovs rots fjuayurrpovs kcu Trarpucuns
€v TQ tofyratrifu^ 4/^P? ''V^ dt'ooreurcois Xpurrav rev 0cou i^fuuv ; Philotheos, 766 : tovs fuv
fAayurrpov^f dvOvwdrov^ koI trarpuciov^, rov^ Xu>povc rjfKfM.to'/Uvov^ fura twk ^xxrit^v avrtav
OwpoKiwv Kol fjLovov, LoroI, probably differing in some respects from those now under
consideration, were sometimes carried by other dignitaries and officials ; cf. De Caer,, i,
50 ; 2, 28. * De Caer.f 2, 15, 574. • De Ciur.^ 2, 40.

^ Philotheos, 742, see above.

122 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

Patricians represented the twelve Apostles ; the Emperor, as far
as was humanly possible, represented the Lord. Upon these
occasions, in addition to the loroi, the Masters and Patricians
carried staffs (<riccirata) in the form of a cross, to symbolize the
triumph of Christ over death, and also what were popularly called
ro/ioi av^^iKaKia^y parchments inscribed with the Christian doc-
trines, which they, in the character of disciples, bore before the
Emperor. Further, the wrapping of their legs in linen and their
wearing of golden sandals was emblematic of the death and glori-
fication of Christ. All these insignia were believed to have had
their origin in those of the victorious Roman proconsul when
rendering an account of his achievements to the consuls upon his
return to the city.^

The loroi, and the other vestments that the Masters wore
with them, apparently did not belong to these dignitaries, like
the insignia of their order, but were supplied to them for the
particular ceremonies. These articles were kept in store in the
Church of the Lord,^ where, in the time of Constantine VII, there
were stored fifteen loroi woven with gold, an equal number of
short-sleeved tunics of the same material to match, and twelve
breastpieces (daipaicia) to go with the loroi.* Besides these there
were twenty-five colored cloaks with tassels and a golden border,^
to be worn by Masters, Proconsuls, and Patricians.

Upon their inauguration into their new order of rank it was
customary for the Masters to distribute various gratuities
(crwi^^ctat) .'^ The Master of Ceremonies, 6 eirl 7^9 icarcurracrcco^,
received the Kafiia-iov, a sort of cloak, from the new Master of the
Offices, who also had to entertain the Praepositi and the other
Masters ; to all of them he made gifts in the form of articles of
apparel. Furthermore, he was obliged to make a monetary
donative to these dignitaries and to various court officers, the
total of which was double that distributed by a Patrician on

^ De Caer.^ 2, 40, 638-9. * o voos rtxv Kvpcov, De Caer.y 2, 40 ; yf«., 41.

' De Caer., 2, 41 : Atapoi )(pvaxnj^yToi ic. KovTOfLavucia xpvtrov^vra rwv avrStv
\iapwv ipf' &u}pdKui Ttjjv avTwv \iopiov ip'. One is tempted to see in the gold pectorals,
published and described by Mr. Walter Dennison in vol. XII of this Series of Studies (pp.
109-117, 121-127 with plates i, vi, vii, xii, xiii) an example of these ^<i>pa#cia. However,
on the basis of the evidence at hand, this identification cannot be maintained.

^ )(Xavihui ^ow&ira )(poafia xpv<roTa)3Aa.

* Philotheos, 711 : SiSwn awi^Otuiv rcjJ rrjs KaTOoraorcftis to Kafuatv avrou, rots Sk
vpairroo'CTOi^ koI fwyurrpoi^ (rwcoTiarcu irap€)(iDV avrot? kox Sofiara ifuinW . avvT^Otiav Sk
roi9 vpaiirwriToii koX /iaytcrrpocs xoi AocTroiS rrjv rov irarpuciov &irX^v awfjSeuiv irap€X€i*

TITLES, HONORS, AND PRIVILEGES 123

similar occasions.^ The drpucXii/cu, or officers in charge of the
kletorologton, the court invitation list, were entitled to receive a
gratuity of twenty-four milaresia from the newly decorated
Master.^ These obligatory presents, distributed among the
Praepositi, the Master of Ceremonies and the other officials who
functioned at the ceremony of the Master's inauguration, in
addition to the older members of the same order, are a develop-
ment of the consuetudines which, as we have seen, magistrates
and dignitaries of the Later Roman period regularly donated to
the various officials through whose hands the documents relative
to their appointments passed. However, we have no mention of
gifts presented at this time to the Emperor and Empress as a
token of gratitude for the honor conferred.

On the other hand the Masters themselves were entitled to a
number of largesses and perquisites, such as we have noted
already upon the appointment of a new Master. At the annual
celebration of the festival of the Brumalia in the month of
November a generous purse (airoicdfi/Sioi/), part of which fell to
the share of the Masters, was distributed by the rulers among
their dignitaries and officials. In the time of Leo VI,^ and
earlier, the donations were as follows: on the day of the Senior
Augustus, twenty pounds of gold; on the day of the Junior
Augustus, ten pounds ; and on the day of the Augusta, another
eight pounds.

Later, under Constantine VII, a single largess of fifty pounds
was made on the day of the Senior Augustus in the name of his
partner on the throne, and of the Empress.^ The largest shares
of these donations were received by the Masters individually, and
by the few dignitaries and officers who were classed with them
for this occasion:*^ their portions were twice as large as those
allotted to the Proconsuls.* In addition, at the same festival,
each of the Masters who were guests at the imperial table re-
ceived from the Emperor's hands a second largess of one hundred
and sixty milaresia, and some silk goods of a special make/

Similarly, on the anniversaries of the coronation of the Au-
gusti (<rT€^Lfiop), and of their advancement to Autocratores or

^ Cf. Philotheos, 710.

* Philotheos, 787 : ircpc <rvv7j$€ia^ rS^v dLprwcAiWiiv . wpofiaXXofuvrf^ yap {oKm^s ^
fiayurrpov, 5t Sonu avrocs i$ iKoarcv avroiv icaSdirai, k^.

■ Philotheos, 782 ; De Caer,, 2, 18, 606. * De Caer., 2, 18, 607.

• Philotheos, 784. « Philotheos, 785. ' De Caer,, 2, 18, 607.

124 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

Senior August! {avroKparopia),^ largesses were distributed. On
these occasions the beneficiaries were the so-called apxopT€^ rm
AawriaKov, to whom, as has been pointed out previously, the Masters
belonged.^ Further, whenever the Masters accompanied the Em-
peror on his journeys from the capital, they, along with the others
of his retinue, were entitled to a definite allowance of wine, supplied
by the imperial Apothecarius.^ Then, too, they and the Patricians
together with the Praepositi and other officials, ate at the imperial
table.^

Whenever it was the custom for the Emperor to entertain at
banquets the prominent officials and dignitaries present at the
capital, the order according to which these should be invited and
seated was determined by a guest list, or Kletorologion.^ Such a
guest list is that compiled in 899 a.d. by Philotheos, the imperial
atriklinesy whose duty it was to supervise " the ceremony of im-
perial banquets in the palace, to receive guests and arrange them
in order of precedence." ® From this Kletorologion we see that at
such banquets the Masters were accorded a place corresponding
with the dignity of their position among the orders of rank of the
Empire.

As a rule, the Masters were not included among those who
were actually seated at the same table with the Emperor/ but
headed the list of the other guests who sat at the general table.®
However, on the second day of the celebration of the Brumalia, in
the time of Leo VI, Masters who were relatives of the Emperor
sat at the table of the Senior Augustus, while the rest were as-
signed to that of his colleague.* Under Constantine VII the
Masters, with other dignitaries and officers, were placed with the
Emperors at a table prepared for about sixteen persons.^"

The various festivals, the celebration of which involved the
entertainment of the Masters and other official guests at the
palace, are enumerated in the Kletorologion.^^ The most im-
portant of these were Christmas, Candlemas, Easter, and the
Brumalia.

It was a privilege as well as an obligation for all the Masters,
like those enjoying other similar titles of honor, when in Constan-

^ Cf. Reiske, Ad De Catr., 2, 33. * Philotheos, 787.

• ircpl ro^ccDV, 364, 484-5. * ircpl to^ccdv, 472. * De Caer., 2, 18, 603.

• Bury, Imperial Administration^ p. 11 . ' Philotheos, 727-8.
•Philotheos, 730. ^ De Caer., 2, 18, 604. ^^De Caer.^ 2, 18, 603.

"Philotheos, 741-754; 782: cf. De Caer.y 2, 18, 602 ff.

TITLES, HONORS. AND PRIVILEGES 125

tinople to appear in the insignia of their rank at all the public
ceremonies in which the Emperor and his retinue participated.
These ceremonies included coronations and anniversaries of the
Emperors, promotions of ministers, officers, and dignitaries, and
festivals and processions in commemoration of various events of
religious or political importance. The list of these functions, with
the order of ceremonial at each, is given in the De Caeremoniis
of Constantine Porphyrogenitus. Here it will be sufficient to re-
fer briefly to the part taken by the Masters on such occasions.

When the dignitaries of the court were arranged in order of
precedence, the Masters regularly formed the first rank or velum
(B17X01/ a)^ as they were the holders of the highest title of honor
enjoyed by several persons at the same time. Sometimes, how-
ever, it might happen that the bearer of one of the higher titles
participated in the procession of dignitaries. In that case he
formed the first velunty as did the Curopalates at the elevation of a
Nobilissimus, while the Masters made up the second.* Again, it
was at times convenient to arrange the cortege in larger groups,
and for this purpose the Masters were united with those of in-
ferior rank in one velum?

An inevitable result of the establishment of the several grades
of dignity, such as the Mastership, the Proconsulship, and the
like, was that the distinctions in rank thus created should not
be confined to men alone but should be extended also to the
wives of those who attained the respective titles. Accordingly
we find the wives of officials and dignitaries ranked in various
groups corresponding to the grades that their husbands had at-
tained, and receiving titles derived from those conferred upon the
men. In this way arose the titles of /xayurrpura-at, Trarpticicu, and
other derivatives of the same character. The bearers of these
titles were in a different position from the Trarpticiat ^oxrrai, who
had this dignity conferred upon them directly, whereas the former
depended for their position upon the rank of their husbands.

When the Empress participated in any of the public functions
and was attended by the ladies of the court, these latter were
arranged in ranks corresponding with those of the Emperor's cor-
tege. The first velum was made up of the narpucLau ^oxrra^ while

^ De Caer.y 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, etc.

' De Caer.y i, 44 : firfXciy a\ KovpmraXaryjv ; firjXw pfy fwyurrpovi.

^ De Caer.j 1,9, 66.

126 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

the Magistrissai formed the second.^ The celebration of the
Feast of Pentecost,^ that on the occasion of the birth of a son
to the Emperor,' and certain irregular occurrences, such as the
reception of Elga, Princess of Russia,^ were functions at which
the ladies of the court formally participated, forming -a sekreton^
graded like that of the officials and dignitaries.

As was to be expected, the ladies who owed the rank which
they held to the position of their Ijjisbands, lost their honorary
title upon the death of the latter, although they still continued
to have an honorable recognition at court ; upon official occasions
they were placed after all those whose husbands were of senatorial
rank.*

'^De Caer.j l, 9, 67, fi^Xw a, warpucias {oKrras : Pfjkw p'f fmyurrpuw.

^De Caer,, i, 9. *Di Ca^r,, 2, 21, 216. ^Vt Coir., 2, 15, 596.

*De Caer.y 2, 21.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

For the convenience of the reader the editions of ancient authors cited, and of
the modern works most frequently referred to, are here noted.

I. Greek and Latin Texts

AgAthiat, Historic^, Carpus Scriptarum Historitu ByzanHnae, Recensuit B. G.

Niebuhr. Bonn, 1828.
Athanatiat, Apologia ad imperaiarem Constanttnum. Patrologia Graeca^ vol. 25.

Edidit J. P. Migne. Paris, 1857.
Ammkuiat Marcellinot, Rerum Gestarum libri qui supersunt. Edidit V. Gardt-

hausen. Leipzig, 1874. Edidit C. V. Clark, vol. i, Berlin, 1910.
Cattiodonis Senator, Varicu, Monumenta Germaniae Historiaey Atutores anH-

quissimiy vol. 12. Recensuit Th. Mommsen. Berlin, 1894.
0«orgiiis Cedrenus, Compendium historiarum a mundo condito usque ad imperatorem
Isaacum Comnenum, Corpus Scriptorum Historiae ByzanHnae, Recensuit
Bekker. Bonn, 1838.
Qiroiiicon Paachale, Corpus Scriptorum Historuu ByzanHnae, Recensuit Dindorf.

Bonn, 1832.
CoUectioiis, Codex Theodosianus, Edidit Gothofredus-Ritter. Leipzig, 1736.
Thtodosiani libri XVI cum consHtuHonibus Sirmondianis et leges navellae ad
Theodosicmum perHnentes, Ediderunt Th. Mommsen et P. Meyer. Berlin,
1905.
Corpus Juris CiviHs, II. Codex JusHnianus, Recognovit P. Krtiger. Berlin,

1906. III. Novellae. Recognovit Scholl-Kroll. 1895.
Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum, Edidit C. Mttller. Paris, 1841-83.
Leonis VI Novellae: Jus Graeco-Romanum^ vol. III. Edidit 2^chariae von

Lingenthal. 1857.
Papiri DiplomaHci, Edidit G. Marini. Rome, 1805.
Sacrorum Conciliorum CollecHo, Edidit J. D. Mansi. Florence, 1759-98.
Anna Comnena, Alexicu, Corpus Scriptorum Historuu ByzanHnae, Recensuit

Schopen. Bonn, 1839.
Conttantiniis Porphyrogenitna, De caeremoniis aulae ByzanHnae, Corpus scripto-
rum Historiae ByzanHnae. Recensuit Bekker. Bonn, 1829.
De administrando imperio. Id. 1840.
Corippoa, Libri qui supersunt, Monumenta Germaniae Historiae, Auctores

antiquissimi^ vol. 3, 2. Recensuit Partsch. Berlin, 1879.
Inacripdona, Corpus InscripHonum LcUinarum, Berlin, 1863 ff.

InscripHones LcUinae Selectae, Edidit Dessau. Berlin, 1892 ff.
J^diannea Lydua, De magistratibus populi Romani, Edidit R. WUnsch. Leipzig,

1903-

127

128 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

NotiHa Dignitatum, Edidit £. Booking. With notes. Bonn, 1839-53. Edidit

O. Seeck. Berlin, 1876.
Philotheut, KUtorologian. Edidit J. B. Bury. British Academy Supplemental

Papers y I. London, 191 1. ^

Pro€Opiiis CaeaAiieiisit, Opera Omnia, Edidit Haury. Leipzig, 1905.
RntUius CUadius ITamatiAniis, De reditu sua, Edidit Muller. Leipzig, 1870.
Symmachoty Q, Aurelii Symmachi quae supersunt. Monumenta Germameae

Historiae, Auctores antiquissimi, vol. VI. Edidit O. Seeck. Berlin, 1883.
Theophanes, Chronographia, Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Bytantinae, Recensuit

J. Classen. Bonn, 1839.
Tlieophanea Continuatna, Chronographia, Id. Recensuit Bekker. Bonn, 1838.
Theophylactoa Simocatta, Historiae, Id. Vols, i and 2. Recensuit Bekker. Bonn,

1834. Vol. 3. Recensuit Blittner-Wobst. 1897.
Zoaimua, Historia Ramana, Edidit L. Mendelssohn. Leipzig. 1887.

II. Modern Works

Bethmann-HoUweg, M. A., Der rdmische Civilprozess, 3 vols. Bonn, 1865-66.
Bury, J. B., ^ History of the Later Roman Empire from Arcadius to Irene, 2 vols.

London, 1889.
Imperial Administration in the Ninth Century, British Academy Supplemental

Papers y I. London, 191 1.
Magistri scriniorum, irriypa^i^ and /k^cpcv&^^ioi. Harvard Studies in Classical

Philology y vol. XXI, 19 10.
Cagnat, R., HospiHum militare^ in Daremberg et Saglio, Diction$uure des Antiquites

grecques et romaineSy vol. 3, pp. 302 f.
Coaenza, M. E., Official Positions after Constantine, Columbia University Disser-
tation. 1907.
IHehl, Ch., Etudes byzantines, Paris, 1895.
Oelser, BL, Abrisz der bytantinischen Kaisergeschichte, I. Mttller's Handbuch der

klassischen Altertumswissenschafty vol. IX, pt. i. MUnchen, 1897.
Orenier, P., V empire byzantine: son evolution sociale et politique, Paris, 1904.
Heaaling, D. C, Essai sur la civilization byzantine, Paris, 1907.
Hirachfeld, Otto, Die Agentes in Rebus, Sitzungsberichte der Berliner Akademie der

Wissenschafty 1893 = Kleine Schriften^ pp. 624 ff. Berlin, 19 13.
Die Ranktitel der rdmischen Kaiserzeit, Sitzungsberichte der Berliner Akademie

der Wissenschafty 1901 = Kleine Schriften, pp. 646 ff.
Hodgkin, T., Italy and her Invaders, Vol. i. Oxford, 1892.
Jollian, C, IllustreSy in Daremberg et Saglio, DicHonnaire, vol. 3, pp. 385 f.
Karlowa, 0., Rdmische Rechtsgeschichte, Bd. I. Staatsrecht und Rechtsquellefi.

Leipzig, 1885.
Koch, P., Die byzantinischefi Beamtentitel von 400 bis 700, Jena, 1903.
L^crevain, Ch., Le senat romain depuis Diocletien, Bibliothkque des ecoles fran^aises

d'Athknes et de Rome^ vol. 28. Paris, 1888.
Mommsen, Th., ^^AW. Hermes^ vol. XXXVI, 1901, pp. 516 ff.

Das rdmische Milit'drwesen seit Diocletian, Hermes ^ vol. XXIV, 1889, pp.

195 ff. s= Gesammelte Schriften^ vol. 6 {Historische Schriften^ 3), pp. 206 ff.
Ostgotische Studien, Neues Archiv, vol. XIV, 1889, pp. 225 ff., 453 ff. ; vol.

XV, 1890, 181 ff. ^Historische Schriften^ vol. 3, pp. 362 ff.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

129

Pemice, A., LHmperatore EracHo. Firenze, 1905.

Rdd, J. S., The ReorganitaHan of the Empire, Cambridge Mediaeval History^ vol. i ,

chap. 2, 191 1.
Schiller, H., Geschichte der romischen Kaiserzeit 3 vols. Gotha, 1883-^7.
Schlnmberger, O., Sigillographie de Pempire byzaniin, Paris, 1884.
Seeck, 0., Geschichte des Untergangs der antiken Welt, 5 vols. Berlin, 1895-1911.
Quaestiones de Notitia Dignitatum, Berlin, 1872.
Pauly-Wissowa, Realencyclopddie der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft. Stuttgart,

1894 fi[. : Articles on AdmissionaleSy Barbaricarii^ Castrensiani^ Comitts, Do-

mesticuSf Fctbricae,

APPENDIX A

REFERENCES TO THE TITLE MAGISTER IN INSCRIPTIONS

AND IN LITERATURE

For the convenience of those who may wish to pursue the
subject further, the references to the Magistri in both the litera-
ture and the inscriptions are here brought together in a classified
list.

Magister Populi

Cicero, Definibus^ 3» 75 5 ^^ Ugibus^ 3, 9, and 3, 10 ; De republican i, 63.

Paulus Diaconus, Epitome FesHj p. 198 M.

Seneca, Epistulae^ 108, 31.

Varro, De Hngua laHna^ 5} 82.

Velius Longus, De orthographia^ p. 2234 P.

Magister Equitum

cll, i, 197 (133-118 b.c.); 198 (122 b.c.);
p. 287, xocvii (after 309 b.c.) ;

p. 288, xxix (after 296 b.c.) ; p. 448, anno 707 (47 B.C.) ;
p. 425 ff. = I', part I, p. 16 ff. {Fasti Consulates Capitolint) ;
pp. 633 ff . a I>, part I , pp. 345 ff . Here may be found a list of eponymous
and other magistrates, arranged by Mommsen ; cf. the list of the magistri
equitum given by Daremberg et Saglio, Dictionnaire des Antiquitis grecques
et romaineSf vol. 3, p. 1524.
NoHzie degVi Seavi di Antichitdy 1904, p. 9 (320-319 B.C.).

Magister Auctionis
Cicero, Ad Atticum^ i, 1,3, and 6, i, 15 ; Ad familiaresy 12, 30 ; Pro Quinetio,

CJ,L, I, 200, V. 57 (Lex Agraria of iii B.C.).
Digesta, XLVI, 8, 9 (here styled magister universitatis),
Gaius, InstitutioneSy 3* 79.
Quintilian, Institutiones oratoriae^ 6, 3, 51.

Magister Bibendi
Apuleius, Apologia^ 98.
Cicero, De Senectute^ 14, 46 : magisteria.
Martial, Epigrammatay 12, 48, 15 {magistri cenarum),

Varro, De lingua latina, 5, 122 ; Rerum humanarum liber y XX, apud Nonium
Marcellumy 142, 8.

131

132 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

Other designations of the magister bibendi are :

arbiter^ Horace, Carmina, 2, 7, 25 ;

rexy op. city 1,4, 18, and Macrobius, Saturnalia ^ 2, 1,3;

modiperator^ Nonius Marcellus, p. 142, 8;

strateguSy Plautus, SHchus^ 5, 4, 20.

LUDIMAGISTRI

Under this head are cited references to magistri iudi and other magistri
acting as professional instructors in any art or science. Figurative usages of the
title magister have not been included.

(Pseudo) Asconius, On Cicero ^ De divinationty 14 : magistri Iudi,
Augustine, ConftssioneSy 1,3, i : primi magistri,

Ausonius, Epigrammatay 28, i ; magister { philosophuu) \ 138, i and 3 : magister
(grammaticus),
EpistolaCy 4, 95 : magister {praeceptor).

Gratiarum Actio pro consulatUy §§31 and 32 : magister {praeceptor),
Idylliay 4, 3 and 26, and 5,2: magister {Judt) ; 4, 87 : magister {prcteceptor),
ProfessoreSy 3, i : magister (rhetor) ; 8, 9 : magister (grammaticus),
Praefatiunculaey 2, 29 : magistri (rhetores),
Boetius, Ars geometricay de ratione abaci: magister (^philosophic^).

De institutione musicay i, 33 : magister (id!).
Bulletin de la SocUti nationale des Antiquaires de France y 1891, p. 266: magister

(eloquenticU)y Hippo Diarrytus.
Cicero, De inventionCy i, 25, 35 : magistri artium liberalium,
De oratorCy 3, 23, 86 : magister (armorum.)
De senectutCy 5, 13 : magistri (eloquentiae),

9, 29, magistri bonarum artium.
De Senectute Philippicaey 2, 17, 43 : magister (Iudi),
Codex Theodosianusy XIII, 3, 5 (362 a.d.) = Codex Justinianusy X, 53, 7 : magistri

studiorum.
Columella, De re rustica, i,/r., 3, magister (placitae disciplinae),
4, 28, 2, magistri (rerum rusticarum),
12, 2, magister (chori canentium).
Corpus Glossariorum Latinorumy V, 604, 42 and 635, 54 : magister Iudi,

II, 126, 6 and 276, 12 ; also III, 25, 21, and 352, 4, and 455, 31, and 410,
57, and 514, 55 ; magister (ludiy ScScurxoXos);

III, 277, 30 : magister (iirff^rtf^y praeceptor),

CI J.. II, 5181, 1. 57, Metallum Vepascense (first century a.d.) : Iudi magistri,
III, p. 831, 7, L 66 (Edictum Diocletiani de pretiis rerum, 301 a.d.) : magistri

litterarum,
VI, 9529, Rome : m'\agister Iudi litt(erarii),
VI, 9530, Rome : ma'jgister Iudi.
VI, 9858, Rome (after 425 a.d.): magister eloquentiae,

VI, 10,008, 10,012, 10,013,10,015,10,017, Rome: magister (Judi ox artium
liberalium).

VIII, 12,418, Aquaeductus Carthaginiensis : magister iuris.

IX, 4226, Amitemum, mag(ister) Iudi,

APPENDIX A 133

X, 3969, Capua, magister ludi Htterarii.

X, 8387, Frusino, magister iuris,
Digesta^ L, 13, 1 : magi stri ludi lit terarii,

L, 5, 2, 8 : magistri (Judt),
Festus, Epitome Pauli^ 126 m : magistri (doctores artium),
Florus, Epitome^ 4, 2, 60 : magister {artium liberalium),
Aulus Gellius,. Nodes Atticae^ 19, 9, 2 : magister {docendis publice iuvenibus),
Historia Augusta^ Vita Aureliani^ 30, 3 : magister ad graecas litteras.

Vita Caracallae^ 1,8: magistri {praeceptores).

Vita Commodiy 1,7: magistri disciplinarum.

Vita Diadumeni, 8, magister {praeceptor).

Vita Heliogabaliy 16, 4: magister {praeceptor).

Vita Marciy 2,2: magistri ad prima elementa;

2, 7 : magister {praeceptor) ;

3, 5 : magistri {artium liberalium) ;

4, 9 : magister {pingendi) ;
16, 5 : magistri {philosophiae).

Vita Maximianorum Duorum, ^7) 3 ^ magister ad primam discipUnam,
Vita Taciti^ 6, 5 : magistri litterarii.
Horace, Carmina^ i, 18, 13 : magister {ludi) \

I, I, 14 and Sermones, 2, 3, 257 : magister {philosophiae),
Ars Foeticay 415 : magister {musicae),
Justin, Trogi Pompei^ Historiarum Philippicarum Epitoma, 16, 5, 13 : magister

{philosophiae),
Juvenal, Satirae^ 5, 122: magister {ludi).
Martial, Epigrammata^ 7, 64, 7 and 9, 68, i, and 10, 62, i : ludi magister,

I, 35, 2, and 5, 56, I and 84, 2, and 8, 3, 15 and 9, 29, 7 : magister

{ludi),
14, 80, I : magistri {ludi) ;
7, 67, 8 : magister {palaestrae) ;
I, 104, 10 and 2, 75, I : magister {exercitaior) ;

1, 42, 12 : magister {saltandt),
Persius, Satirae^ 3> 46 : magister {ludt) ;

4, I : magister {philosophiae).
Petronius, Satyricon, 3, 4 : magister eloquentiae ;

29 : magister {palaestrae) ;

99 : magister bonarum artium,
Plautus, Bacchides, 11. 152, 404, 439 and 566 : magister {praeceptor),
Prudentius, Peris tephanon^ 9> 40 : magister {ludi) ;

10, 89, 822 and 13, 2 : magister {doctrinae christianae),
Quintilian, Institutiones oratoriae, 2, i, 13 ; 2, 8, 7 and 10, 3, i : magister dicendi :

2, I, 3 : magister declamandi;
2, 5, 5 : magister eloquentiae;

5, II, 17 ; 5, 14, 32, and 12, 6, 7 : magister {eloquentiae) \

1, 2, II and 2, 4, 8: magister {praeceptor) ;

2, i7» 33 : magister {armorum) ;
12, I, 36 : magister {sapientiae) ;
10, 2, 6 : magister {cuiusquam ret).

134 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

Seneca, Dialogt, 2, 11,3: magister {iudi) ;

De benefidis^ 5, 25, 6 : ludi magister,
Suetonius, De grammaticis^ 23.

Tacitus, AnnaUsy 12, 8 and 14, 52 : magister {praeceptor)\
13, 66 : magistri (^praeceptores) ;
6, 20 : magister (artis Chaldaearum).
Historiae^ 4, 10 : magister {sapientiae) ,
Terence, Andria^ 1. 54 : magister {praeceptor).

Varro, Apud Nanium Marcellum^ p. 448 : magister (Judi or artium liberaUum).
Vegetius, Epitoma rei militarise 3 »/''•> ^i^d 3, magister armorum,
Virgil, Aeneis, 8, 515 : magister (praeeeptor),

5, 669, and 9, 172 : magistri {praecep tares),
Georgica^ 4, 283 : magister {rei rustieae),

Magister Navis

Ausonius, MoseUa^ 204.

Corpus Glossariorum Latinarum^ II, 126, 11 ; 356, 20, and 419, 21 ;

IV, 363, 8 and 9 ;

V, 114, 58.

CLL. XIV, 2028, Ostia.

Digesta, XIV, i, i, pr., 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 23, 24;

XIV, I, 4, 1, 3, and XIV, i, 5 pr., i ; also XIV, i, 7, and XIV, 2, 2 pr., 6, 7 ;

XIX, 2, 13, 2 ;

XXXIX, 4, 11,2.
Gains, Institutiones^ 4* 71-
Horace, Carmina^ 3i 6, 31.
Juvenal, Satirae^ 4, 45 ; 12, 79.
Livy, Ab Urbe Condita, 29, 25, 7.
Lucan, Pharsalia, 2, 696.
Martial, Epigrammata, 10, 104, 16.
Silius Italicus, Punica^ 4, 717.

Valerius Flaccus, Argonautica^ i, 18, and 382 ; 2, 391 ; 3, 109 : 4, 269 ; 8, 202.
Vegetius, Epitoma Rei Militaris, 4, 43.
Virgil, Aeneis, i, 115 ; 5, 176, 224, and 867 ; 6, 353.

Magister Operum

Columella, De re rustica, 1,8, 17 and 18 ; i, 9, i and 2.

Styled magistri singulorum qfficiorum, i, 8, 11, and 11, i, 27.

Magister Pecoris

Ausonius, Epigrammata, 5^» 5*

Cicero, In Verrem, 5, 7.

Columella, De re rustica, 7, 6, 9.

Livy, Ab Urbe Condi ta, i, 4, 6.

Servius, In Vergilii Aeneida, 7, 485.

Varro, De re mstica, i, 2, 14 ; 2, i, 23 ; 2, 2, 20 ; 2, 3, 8 ; 2, 10, 2 and 5, also 10.

APPENDIX A 135

Virgil, Aeneis^ 12, 717.
Eclogae, 3, loi.
GeorgUa, 2, 529 ; 3, 445.

Here follow references to other magistri, intrusted with the care and training
of animals.

Apuleius, Florida^ 12.

Metamorphosis^ 7, 27 ; 10, 17, also 23 and 35.
Boetius, De cansolaHane philosophiae^ 3, 2, 10.
Horace, Epistulae^ i, 2, 64.
Juvenal, Satirae^ 14, 246.
Martial, De spectacuiisy 10, i and 17, 3, and 18, i and 22, i.

Epigrammatay 14, 80, i.
Prudentius, Peristephanon^ ii> 91.
Silvius Italicus, Punica^ 4« 614.
Vegetius, Epitama ret miiitaris, 3, 24.
Virgil, Geargtca^ 3, 118 and 185.

Magister Societatis

Cicero, Ad Atticum^ S> i5i ^^^ 11, 10 {promagister).

Ad FamiliareSy i3» 9> 2, and 65, i {promagisier).

In Verrem^ 2, 70, 169 {promagister)^ 71, 173, and 74, 182; also 3, 71, 167
and 168.
Paulus Diaconus, Epitome Festi^ 126 m.

Magister Tabernae
Digesta, XIX, 2, 13, 4.
Paulus, Sententia€y 2, 8, 3.

Magister Pagi

Bulletin archeologique du Comite des Travaux historiqueSy 1894, p. 344, pagus

Thigillavensium (Hadrian) ; 1909, p. 78, Announa.
Calpumius, Ecloga^ 4, 125.
Corpus Glossariorum Latinorumy II, 126, 9.

C.LL, I, 801, 802, 804; XIV, 2105 ; VI, 32, 455 (Rome). All these inscriptions
are from the close of the first century b.c.

Ill, 7484, Ainan Chisi (Moesia Inferior) ; III, 7847, Micia (Dacia).

V, 4148, pagus Farracticanensis,

VIII, 5683, 5705, 19, 135, Sigus; 5884 {magistratus)y 19,199, Sila ;
6267-71, 6273-97, Phua ; 6339, Azelis ; 7070, uncertain pagus near Cirta ;
17257 (ss 10,833), 19S '^•i>-» 2ind 17,258, after 201 a.d., ZaUara;

18,896, 18,900, Thibilis.

IX, 726, Larinum ; 3046 (?), pagus Interprominus ; 3137 (= I, 1280), 3138
(= I, 1279), Lavernae; 3440, Petuinum ; 3521, Furfo; 4206, 4208, Septa-
quae; 5814, Montefano.

X, 814, 853, 1042, 1074 c, 924 {ministri), Pompeii; 3772 (= I, 571), 94 B.C.,
pagus Herculaneus.

XI, 1947, 1948, Perusia ; 3040, 4-3 B.C., pagus Stella tinus ; 3196 {et magister)^
Nepete.

136 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

XII, 5370, inter Narbanem et Tolosam.

XIII, 5, Consoranni ; 412, civitas Trebdhrum ; 604, Burdegala; i6*jo, pagus
Condate ; 2507, Ambarri.

Ephenuris Epigraphica^ 8, 474, conventus Capuae.
Notizie (Ugli Scavi^ 1899, p. 474 (magistrd)^ Liguria.
Paulus Diaconus, Epitome Festi, 126 and 371 M.
Recueil de la Societe archiologique de Constantim^ 1901, p. 162, Phua.
Siculus Flaccus, De condicionibus agrorum^ pp. 146, 164.

Mitteiiungen des deutschen archaeologischen Instituts^ Romische Abteilung, 19 14,
p. 130, Laira.

Magister Vici

Asconius, In Pisonianam^ 6.

Bulletin de la Societe archeologique bulgare^ I, 19 10, p. 116.

Bulletino Communale di Rotna^ 1888, p. 328, Rome.

Bulletino delF Instituo di Diritto Romano^ 1906, p. 115 {minis trt)^ 2 B.C., Rome.

Cicero, In Pisomm, 4, 8.

Corpus Glossariorum Latinorum, III, 298, 49 and 50; 525, 4.

CI.L. I, 1237, Puteoli.

IV, 60, Pompeii.

V, 1890, Concordia; 821 1, Aquileia.

VI, 1324, 23 B.C.; 2221 (I, 804), before 12 b.c. ; 33, 2 b.c ; 34, 3 b.c. ; 35,
45-46 A.D. ; 128, 6 B.C. ; 282, 4 A.D. ; 283, 7-6 B.C. ; 445, 446, 447 {ministti) ;
448, 4 B.C. ; 449, 450, 451, 452, 453, 454, 760, 761, 763, 764, 765, 767, 801,

802, 2222, 150 A.D. ; 975, 135 A.D., 2223, 2224, 2225, 2225 a, 2226, 2227,

2228 : Rome.
IX, 4120, Aequiculi ; 3435 {aediles), Peltuinum,

XI, 851, Mutina; 3585, Castrum Novum; 4798, 4815, 4821, Spoletum ;
6013, Sentinum; 6237, Fanum Fortunum ; 6359, 6362, 6367, Pisaurum.

XII, 5370, ad Narbonem.

XIII, 4310, vicus Bodatius ; 4316, ad Mogontiacum,

XIV, 2263, ager Albanus,

Curiosum Urbis Regionum^ XIV. Passim, After 357 a.d.
Ephemeris Epigraphicay IV, 746, 747, Rome.

VII, 12-77, Rome.

IX, 470, Castia; 685, ager Tusculanus,
Martial, Epigrammata, 10, 79.
Livy, Ab urbe condita, 34, 7,2.

Notizie degli Scavi di Antichitdy 19 14, p. 362, 70 a.d., Rome.
Notitia Regionum Urbis XIV. Passim. 334-337 a.d.
Paulus Diaconus, Epitome Festi, 126 and 371 M.
Urbs Constantinopolitana Nova Roma. Passim. 408-450 a.d.

Magister Vici Canabensium

Archaeologische Epigraphische Mitteiiungen aus Oesterreich-Ungam^ 8, p. 32,
Ktistendje.

APPENDIX A 137

CLL. Ill, 1008, Apulum ; 6162, 6166, 6167, Troesmis; 14,409, 14,412, vicus
TruUensium; 14,214, 26, vicus Ulmetus,
VII, 12, Regni; 333, Aurula; 346 (?), Old Carlisle.

Magister Conventus Vicani

C/.Z. II, 2636, Asturica; 2782, Clemia; 3408, Carthago Nova; 5007, ager
Olisiponensis.
Ill, 1533, Jonic; 1820, Narona; 3776, 3777, Nauportus ; 7536, near Toni.
V, 1829, 1830, Julium Caricum.

Magister Municipii
CJX, XI, 863, Mutina.

Magister Castelli
CLL, VIII, 6272, 6297, 6299, Phua; 6044, Arsacal; 9317, ad Tipasam,

Magister Curiae

C/.Z. VIII, 11,008, Hr Zian ; 14,683, 185 a.d., Smitthus.
Plautus, Auitiiaria, i, 2, 29, and 2, 2, 3.
(Pseudo) Asconius, In Verronianamj i, 8, 22.

Magister Fani
{a) In pagi of the ager Campanus

CLL, X, 3772 (=1, 571), 94 B.C.; 3774 (= 1,564), 112-111 B.C. ; 3775, 110B.C.;

3776-3777 (=1' 565)^ loS B.C. ; 3778 (= I, 567), 106 B.C. ; 3779 (= I»
566), 106 B.C. ; 3780 (= I, 568), 104 B.C. ; 3781 (= I, 569); 3782 (= I,
572), before 71 B.C.; 3783 (= I, 573), 71 b.c. ; 3784 (= I, 575); 3785
(= I, 574); 3786, 15 A.D.; 3787.

Ephemeris Epigraphicay VIII, 473, 474.

NoHzU degli Scavi, 1893, p. 164.

{b) In conventus vicani

CLL. II, 3433, 3434, Carthago Nova.

III, 1769, 1770, 1792, 1798, 1799, 1801, 1802, 1827 (?), Narona.
V, 1830, Julium Caricum.

XII, 5388, Tolosa.

{c) In the Roman conventus at Delos

Bulletin de Correspondance HelUnique^ I, p. 87, no. 36, ca, 100 B.C.

IV, p. 190, 97 B.C.
XXVI, p. 536, 112-111 B.C.

XXXI, p. 439, no. 30, 97 B.C., and p. 442, no. 33.

XXXIII, p. 493, no. 15, 113 B.C., and p. 496, no. 16, ca, 100 B.C. ; also p. 501,
no. 17, and p. 503, no. 18, 57-56 B.C.

XXXIV, p. 402, no. 53, 150-125 B.C., and p. 404, no. 54, ca, 100 b.c.
CLL, III, 7212 {^ BCH, VIII, p. 118); 7217 (= BCH. VIII, p. 97), ca,

150 B.C. ; 7218 (= BCH. I, p. 285), before 150 b.c. ; 7225 (= BCH, VIII,
p. 145) ; 7226 (= BCH, VIII, p. 186) ; 14,203* (= BCH, XXIII, p. 56).

138 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

(d) In municipalities
C./.Z, I, 1345, Cosmum Puerinum.

II, 5349, 128, lex Cohniae GetuUvae Juliiu, Urso.

V, 8251, 8258, Aquileia.

VI, 335, magister Herculis ; 30,888, niagisiri HercuHs, Rome.

IX, 1456, magistri Belloruu, Ligures Baebiani ; 1534, Beneventum ; 2362,
'^Z^Z^ 2365, magistri scurorum lunanis Augustae, Allifae.

X, 39i^» 3924* Capua; 4620, Culbuteria; 5388, Aquinum; 6073, magistri
lovis Optimi Maximi, Formiae.

XI, 6108, magistri Apollinis^ Forum Sempronii ; 2360, Cosa.

XII, 4525, Narbo.
XIV, 2982, Praeneste.

Magistrae Fani

C/.Z. V, 5026, Tridentum ; 8253, Aquileia.

X, 39, magistrae ProserpiruUy Vibo, and 651 1, Magistrae Aiatris Matutae^
Cora.

XI, 2630, Cosa ; 3246, magistrae Minervae^ Sutrium.
XIV, 2997, 3006, magistrae Matris Matutae^ Praeneste.

MiNiSTRi Fani

C.LL, III, 1967, 1968, 8690: ministri ad Tritanes, Salonae.
V, 3101, Vicita ; 5026, Tridentum; 8253, Aquileia.

VIII, 6961, ministri dei Satumi, Cirta.

X, 824-827, 3 to 58 A.D., ministri Fortunae Augustae^ Pompeii; 884^93,
ministri Augusti, Pompeii. Of the inscriptions recording ministri Augusti
the following are datable: 884, 25 B.C. ; 885-6, 14 B.C. ; 890, 2 B.C. ; 891,
I B.C. ; 892, 3 A.D. ; 895, 23 A.D, ; 898, 31 a.d. ; 899, 32 A.D. ; 901-2, 34 A.D.

XIV, 2982, Praeneste.
Notizie degti Scavi, 1902, p. 470, Corfinium.

Magister Larum and Magister Larum Augusti

C.LL. II, 2013, Singila; 2181, Adamuz; 2233, Corduba; 3563, Lucentum; 31 13,
Cabeza del Griego; 4293, 4297, 4304, 4306, 4307, 4309, 6106, Tarraco.
V, 792, Aquileia; 3257, 3258 (?), i B.C., Verona.

IX, 2825, Histonium; 423, Venusia ; 3424, Peltuinum ; 3657, Marsi Maru-
vium ; 6293, Caudium.

X, 773, Stabiae; 1582, i a.d., Puteoli ; 5761, 6 B.c; 5762, 2 B.C., Casinum ;
6556, 6557, Veletriae; 7514, Sardinia.

XI, 804, Bonnonia ; 2998, Viterbo.

XII, 406, 18-19 A.D., Massilia.

Ministri Larum and Larum Augusti

CLL. V, 3257, Verona.

IX, 3657, Marsi Maruvium.

X, 137, Potentia; 205, Grumentum ; 1269, Nola ; 3789 (= I, 570), 94 B.C.
and 3790, 26 B.C., Capua; 7953, Sardinia.

XIV, 3562, Tibur.

APPENDIX A 139

COMPETALIASTI AT DeLOS

Bulletin de Carrespondance HelUniquey XXIII, pp. 62, 63, 64, 99-98 B.C. ; 67,
94 B.C. ; 70, 93 B.C.
VII, p. 13, 97-96 B.C.

XXXI, p. 441, 98-94 B.C.
XXXIII, p. 505.

Magister Fundi

C.I.L, VIII, 11,217, fundus lubalHamnsis^ 295-305 a.d.

Magister Saltus
CJ,L, VIII, 10,570, saltus BurunitanuSy 180-183 '^•^•

Magister Fratrum Arvalium

BuUetino Communaky 191 1, p. 129 ff., 239 a.d.

CLL. VI, 970; 2023-2119, 14, 241 A.D. ; 32,379, 32,340, 32,344, 32,352, 32,374.
Cf. Henzen, Acta Fratrum Arvalium, and Gatti, Arvales in Di Ruggiero's

Ditionario Epigrafico^ vol. I, pp. 682 ff. The latter has a list of the

Masters and Vice-Masters.

Magister Haruspicum

C/.Z. VI, 2 161, Rome.
XI, 4194, Interamna.
XIV, 164, Ostia.

Magister Collegi Lupercorum

C.LL. X, 6488, Ulubrae.

XIV, 2105 (= I, 805), Lanuvium.
Notitie degli Scavi, 1898, p. 406.

Magister Pontificum

d,L, VI, 1422, after 212 a.d. ; 1700; 2120, 155 a.d. ; 2158, after 382 a.d., pro-
magistriy Rome.
X, 1 125, after Constantine \y promagister^ Abellinum.
VIII, 7115, and 7123, magistriy Cirta.

Magister XVvirum Sacris Faciundis

C.LL, I*, part i, p. 29.

VI, 32,323, 29 and 57, 17 B.C. ; 32,326, 6 ; 32,328, 15 ; 32,332, 2, 203-204 a.d.

X, 3698, 289 A.D., and 6422, 213 AJ>,y promagistri,
Monumentum Ancyranum^ 4, 36-37.
Pliny, Naturalis Historian 28, 2.
Tacitus, Annates J 6, 12.

Magister Saliorum

C.I.L. II, 3864, 3865, Saguntum.

VI, 2170, Alba.
Historia Augusta, Vita Aureliani, 4, 4.
Valerius Maximus^ Memorabilia, i , 1,9.

I40 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

Magister Sodalium Augustalium Claudialium
C/.Z. VI, 1985, 1986, and 1987, 213-2, 14 a.d. (= XIV, 2388-91).

Magister Augustales

CI.L, III, 862, and 912, Napoca.

V, 6775 and 6784, Alba Pompeia ; 7646 ager Saiusensis,

IX, 20, Lupiae ; 423, Venusia; 1048, ag^r Compsimus ; 5020, Hadria.

X, 1209, Abella; 1404 (?), Herculaneum ; 1055, Pompeii; 61 14, Formiae ;
7552 and 7601 (?), Carales.

XI, 1026, a, and 1029, Brixellum; 1061, Parma; 1604, 1606, 161 1, and
1614, a, Florentia ; 2631, Cosa; 3083, and 3135, Falerii; 3200, 12 B.C.,
Nepete; 4581, Carsulae.

XIV, 2974, Praeneste.

Magister Capitolinorum
C.LL, VI, 2105, Rome
X, 6488, Ulubrae

Magister Cerialium

CI.L. IX, 2835 and 2857, Histonium.

Bulletin Archaeologique du Comite des Travaux Historiques^ 1909, proc^s-verbaux,

pp. xvii, xviiiy Trinesia.
Comptes Rendus de PAcademie des Inscriptiones et Belles-LettreSy 19 10, p. 135 (near

Carthage).

Magister Martinus

Cicero, Pro Clitentio, iSi 43 (minisiri Martis).
CI.L. IX, 4068, a, and 4070, Carsioli.

Magister Mercurialis

CI.L. Ill, 1769, 1770, 1775, 1792, 1799, 1801, 1802, and i^i-j, IIIIIIII viri
tnagistri Mercuriales, Narona.

IX, 54, et A ugu stalls, Brundisium.

X, 1 152, Arbellinum, 1272, Augustalis, Nola ; 3773 (?), Capua; 4589 and
4591, Augustalis, Caratia.

XI, 141 7, Pisa.

Notizie degli Scavi, 190 1, p. 26, Augustalis, Viggiano in Bruttium.

Magister Herculaneus

CI.L. XIV, 3658, 3665, and 3681, et Augustalis, Tibur.
Notizie degli Scavi, 19 10, p. 298, Sora.

Magister Collegii Minervae
Suetonius, Vita Domitiani, 4, 4.

APPENDIX A 141

Magistri of Unofficial Religious and Funerary Colleges

Apollo and the Genius At^usti

CLL, IX, 804, Bonnonia.

Bacchus

CLL, X, 104 (= I, 196), Senatus Consultum de BacchartalibuSy 186 B.C., Ager

Teuranus,
Livy, Ab urbe condita^ 39, 18, 9.

Bona Dea

C.L.L. V, 759 (cf. 757, 8), and 762, magistraey Aquileia.

V, 5026, 2, Tridentum.

VI, 2239, Rome.

XI, 3866 and 3869, Capua.
XIV, 3437, Civitella.

Diana and Anfinous

C.L.L. X, 21 12, col. I, magisUr collegii ; col. 2, 8, and 14, magistri cenarum^
133-136, 6 A.D., Lanuviiun.

Genius of Pannonia Superior

C.L.L, III, 4168, 228 A.D., Savaria.

Hercules

C.L.L. Ill, 1339, Veczel.
IX, 3424, Peltuinum.
IX, 3907 (= I, 1 172) (?), Alba Fucens.

IX, 3857, Supinum.

JuppiUr Cernenus

C.L.L. Ill, p. 295 £., Alburnum Maius.

Juno

C.L.L. X, 202, magistral Grumentum.

' Mars Ficanus Augustus

C.L.L. XIV, 309, Ostia.

Mater Deum and Navis Salvia

C.L.L. VI, 494, Rome.

Mens Bona

C.L.L. I, 1237, Naples.

X, 472, Paestum.
X, 1550, Puteoli.

X, 5512, 6513, and 6514, Cora.
XIV, 3564, Tibur.

Mithras

C.L.L. V, 551 1, Lacus Verbanus.

VI, 47» 556* 7i7» 734» 1675, and 2151, Rome.

Minerva Medica (?)

Orelli, TnscripHorutn Latinarum SeUctarutn ColUcHo^ 2634, magister odariarius^
Rome.

142 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

Obsequens Dea

CLL, V, 814, magistra^ Aquileia.

SUvanus

C.LL, X, 444, valUs Silari superioris.

Silvanus Martins

Mitteilungen des archaeologischen InsHtutSy Romische Abteilung^ 1908, p. 37, 39 B.C.,
Cervetri.

Venus

C.LL, Illy 1963, 1969, and 197 1, magistracy Salonae.

Uncertain Colleges

CLL, III, 4150, Savaria.
V, 1890, Concordia.

V, 8750, magister primus de numero erolorum seniorumy Concordia.

VI, 813, Rome.

VI, 10,301, 10,303, 10,305, 10,306, 10,308, 10,310, 10,311, 10,312, 10,313,

10,314, 10,315, 10,316, 10,317, 10,318, 10,319, and 10,320, Rome.
IX, 1948, Perusia.

IX, 3359, Piuna.

X, 4847, 32 A.D., Venafrum.

XI, 715, magistraliSy Bonnonia.
XI, 141 7 {MercuriaUs f)y Pisa.

XI, 2132, Elusium.

XIV, 2847, 2870, 2883, 2894, and 3027, Praeneste.
Notiue degli Scaviy 1909, p. 312, no. 17, Rome.

Magistri in Collegia Domestica

CJ,L, II, 2229, Corduba.

VI, 188, 236, 4051, magisUrium, 6214, 6316, 6376, 8512, and 9409, Rome.
VI, 10,395, ,^A* of a college in Uti^famiiia Augustay 4 b.c.-i a.d., Rome.
VI, 8639, fasH officialium domus Augustaty 48-50, and 65-69 a.d., magistri

and magistracy Rome.
^T 3942) Capua.

X, 6638 (= I, p. y2*i)y fasti colUgii vemarumy 38-51 a.d., Antium.
X, 6679, Antium.

XII, 3356 and 3637, Nemausus.

XIII, 1550, Putaeni.

XIV, 3015, Praeneste.

Notiue degli Scaviy 1901, p. 99, and 1902, p. 56, Rome.

Magistri in Colleges of Artizans and Tradesmen

Aeditui

C.LL. XIV, 2637, Tusculum.

Aerarii
Bullctino communalc di Romay 1904, p. 49, Rome.

APPENDIX A 143

Apparitores

CI.L, VI, 9861, 9862, and 9863, magistri quinqiunnaUs^ Rome.

Aromatorii

CLL, VI, 384, ffuigistri quinquennaUs^ Rome.

Artifices

CLL. VI, 9927, Rome.

Centonarii

CLL, III, 4496, A, 243 A.D., Camutum.

V, 341 1, and 3439, Verona.

VI, 7861, and 7862, magistri quinquennaUs^ Rome.
XI, 970, Rhegium.

XI, 1354, 25s A.D., Luna.

XII, 2754, ager Volcarus,

Ctstartt

C.L,L, XrV, 2874, Praeneste.

Coques atrienses

C,L,L, XIV, 2875, Praeneste.

Coques Falisci

C,L,L. XI, 3078, Second century B.C., Sardinia.

Dendrophori

C.L.L, V, 7904, Nicia.
XIV, 309, Ostia.

Fabri and Fabri tignuarii

C.L.L, III, 3580, 201 A.D., Acquincum.
Ill, 1016, 1097 (?), Apulum.

III, 8086, Ratiaria, time of Severus and Caracalla.
Ill, 8819 and 14,243, Salonae.
V, 4489, Brixia.

V, 5310, magister officiortim colUgii fabrum^ and 5272, Comiun.

VI, 148 and 321, magistri quinquennaUs^ Ostia.
VI, 996, 7, and 9406, Rome.

VIII, 2690, Lambaesis.

IX, 5450, Falerii.
IX, 5754, Ricina.
XI, 126, Ravenna.

XI, 970, magistri fabrum et centonariorutn, 190 a.d., Regium Lepidum.

XI, 5816, magistri quinquennaUs^ Inguvium.

XII, 68, Salinae.

XII, 719 and 738, Arelate.

XII, 1 191, Vienna.

XIV, 5, 128, 160, 299, 370, 371, 374, 407, 418, 430, and 2630: magistri
quinquennaUs, Ostia.

XIV, 3009, magistri quinquennales, Praeneste.
Khoj 19 10, p. 496, Sarmizegetusa.
Notizie degU Scaviy 1903, p. 217, Novara.

144 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

Farmacopuli

CI.L. V, 4489, Brixia.

Fuliones, Foniani, Afagistri Fonds, Collegia Aquae

C./.Z. VI, 154, 123A.D. ; 155, 69A.D. ; 156, loSA.D. ; 157, 131 a.d. ; 158, 131,
40 A.D.; 159, 140 A.D. ; 160, 160 tf, 161, 162, 160 A.D.; 163, 165, 268,
57 A.D. ; 10,298, I ^, 2, 5, 8, 9, 15, and 17, Rome.
IX, 5450, Falerii.
XI, 4771 (I, 1406), magistri quinquennaUs^ Spoletum.

XIII, 8345, Colonia Agrippensium.

ClitHnarii et Topiarii
Bulk fine communaU di Roma^ 1902, p. 99, Tusculum.

Hastiferi

CI.L. XII, 1814, Vienna.

Horrearii

CI.L. VI, 108 and 246, Rome.

Incolae et Opifices

CI.L. XI, 621 1, Sena Gallica.

Lani

CI.L. VI, 167 and 168, Rome.

XIV, 2877, Praeneste.

LinHimes

CI.L. XI, 3209, Nepete.

Mercatores pecuarii

CI.L. XIV, 2878, Praeneste.

Mimiarii

CI.L. Ill, 3980, Siscia.

Navales
American Journal 0/ Archaeology^ 1908, p. 39, Praeneste.

Piscaiores et Urinaiores

CI.L. VI, 29,700, 29,701, and 29,702, Rome.

Synhod magna Psaltum

Bulletino CommunaU di Roma^ 1888, p. 408, Rome.

CI.L. X, 1589, Puteoli.
CI.L VIII, 7158, Cirta.

Retiarii
Sartores

Seaenici Latini

CI.L. XIV, 2299, Albanum.

Tibicines

CLL. VI, 3696 and 3877, magistri quinquennaUs^ Rome.

APPENDIX A 145

Utricularii

CLL, XII, 719, Arelate.
XII, 3351, Nemausus.

Viatores

CI.L, VI, 1933, magister trium dfcuriarum, and 1942 (= 7446), Rome.

Omnia Collegia
CI.L. V, 4449, qui magisterio eorttm functi sunt, Brixia.

Magistri Iuventutis, or Iuvenum

CJ,L, III, 4272, Brigetio.

V, 821 1, Aquileia.

IX, 4457 and 4520, ager Amitemius,

IX, 4545 and 4549, Nursia.

IX, 4691 and 4696, Reate.

IX» 4753 and 4754i vallis Catura.

IX, 4883, 4885, 4888, 4889, Trebula Mutuesca.

XI, 3938, Lucus Feroniae.

XI, 3215, Nepete.
Musee Beige, 1899, pp. 191-192, nos. 32-36, leaden tesserae of uncertain prove-
nance. No. 34 dates from the time of Nero.

Magistri Collegii Veteranorum

Archaeologische Epigraphische Mitteilungen aus Oesterreich-Ungarriy 1884, p. 76,

Carnutum.
CLL, III, 4496, a^ Carnutum.

IX, 3907 (= I, 1172), Alba Fucens.

MiNisTRi IN Religious and Funerary Colleges

College of Mens Bona

CI.L. X, 4636, Cales.

College of Mithras

CLL. XI, 5737, menesterium, Sentinum.

College of Saturn us

C./.Z. VIII, 6961, Cirta.

College of Venus

CI.L. VI. 32,468, Rome.

Collegium funeraticum

CI.L. VI, 10,311, Rome.

Uncertain Colleges

CI.L. V, 762, ministrae, Aquileia.
XIV, 2982, Praeneste.

MiNisTRi IN Colleges of Artizans and Tradesmen

Aerarii

Bulletino CommunaU di Roma^ 1904, p. 49, Rome.

146 THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

Cisiarii

CLL, XIV, 2874, Praeneste.

FtUUnes or ForUani

CLL, VI, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 163, and 165, Rome.

Magister XX Hereditatium
Wilmann, Lnscriptianes^ 1293, Lugdunum.

Promagister XX Hereditatium

C,L,L, VI, 1620, Rome. -

VIII, 20,684, Saldae.

IX, 5835, Auximum.

XI, 1326, Luna.

Promagister Hereditatium
C.L.L, XIII, 1810, Lugdunum.

Probiagister Frumenti Mancipalis, Promagister Portuum
C./.Z. Ill, 14,195, 4-13, Ephesus.

Magister Privatae

Note. — The principal literary references to this and to the following Masters
may be found in Roman Magistri in the Civil and Military Service of the Empire^
published in Harvard Studies in Classical Philology^ vol. XXVI (19 15), pp. 73 ff.
CL.L. Ill, 12,043 and 12,044 (= i3?o59)) 314 ^'^'j Crete.

VI, 1630, Rome.

VIII, 822, Turca.

Magister Privatae Egypti et Ltbvae
CL,L. Ill, 18, Alexandria.

Magister Summarum Rationum

CL.L. VI, 1618, Rome.
VIII, 822, Turca.

Magister Memoriae

CL.L. VI, 510, 376 A.D. ; 1764 and 8621, Rome.

XII, 1524, ager Vbcontiorum,

Magister Epistularum

CL.L. VI, 510, 376 A.D., Rome.

Ephemeris Epigraphica^ VII, 262, Thubursicum Bure.

Magister Libellorum

CL.L. VI, 510, 376 A.D., Rome.
X, 4721, ager Fakrinus.
XII, 1254, ager Vbcontiorum.

APPENDIX A 147

Magister Sacrarum Cognitionum

C.LL, V, 8972, Aquileia.

VI, 510, 376 A.D., Rome.

Magister Studiorum

C.I.L. VI, 1608, 1704, and 8638, Borne.
X, 47 2 1 , ager FaUrinus,

Magister Admissionum
C.I.L, XIV, 3457, Sublaqueum.

Magister Officiorum

C.LL, VI, 172 1 (= Dessau, InscripHatus Latitnu Selectae^ no. 1244), 355-360 a.d ,
Rome.
VIII, 989, Missua.
Dessau, InscripHones Latinae Selectae^ 9043.

Magister Ballistarius
CI.L, V, 6632, ager Navariensis.

Magister Cohortis
C/.Z. Ill, 10,307, Intercisa.

Magister Equitum
C/Z. V, 8278, Aquileia.

Magister Kampi
CI.L. VIII, 2562, Lambaesis, time of Alexander Severus.

Magister Numeri
C.LL, VIII, 21,568, Ala Milaria.

Magister Castrorum

C.L.L. VII, 268, Isurium, Fifth century, a.d.
VIII, 4354, 578-582, Ain Ksar.

Magister Militum

C.L.L. II, 4320, 598-590 A.D., Carthago Nova.

Ill, 88, 371 A.D., Arabia Petra ; 3653, 371 a.d., Salva ; 4668, 4669, and 4670,
Camutum ; 5670, a, 370 a.d., Fafina ; 6399, Salonae ; 10,596, 365-367 a.d.,
Salva ; 11,376, Carnutum (cf. Hirschfeld, KUine Schri/ten, p. 651, n. 3).

V, 8120, 3, Cremona; 8120, 4, about 525 a.d., Milan.

VI, 1188, 1189, 1190, 1731, 1732, 1733, 1734 (nos. 1731-1734 from 405-40S
A.D.), 31,914, and 32,050, 589 A.D., Rome.

VIII, loi, time of Justinian, Capsa; 259, time of Justinian, Sufes ; 1863,
time of Justinian, Themeste ; 4354, 578-582 a.d., Ain Ksar; 4677,
Madaura, and 4799, Gardianfala, time of Justinian.

IX, 4051, 398-408 a.d., Carseoli.

Dessau, LnscripHones Selectae Latinae^ no. 9217 « and ^, Rusguniae, Mauretania.

APPENDIX B

I. MASTERS OF THE OFFICES TO 700 a. d.

A.D.

321

Heraclianus

{Occ:),

323

Proculianus

(Occ,\

324

Martinianus

{Or,),

324

Palladius

346

Eugenius

{Occ,\

350-51

Marcellinus

{Occ),

350-54

Palladius

{sub Gallo
Caesare),

355

Florentius

{Or,),

{agens pro magistro officiaru\

359-360

Florentius

{Or.),

360

Pentadius

(sub Juliana
Caesare),

360

Felix

(.Occ),

360

Anatolius

iOcc),

362

id.

363

id.

365

Ursatius

(.Occ.),

365

Euphrasius

{Or.),

366

id.

Before 368 Ampelius

(.Occ),

368

Leo

(Occ.),

368

Remigius

(Occ),

370

id.

373

id.

374

Leo

{Occ),

375

id.

37610379

Siburius

(Oa.),

379

Syagrius

(Oa.),

380

Florus

(Or.),

381

id.

Codex Theodosianus^ XVI, lo, i.

Codex Theod,, XI, 9, i.

Aurelius Victor, Epitome, XLI, 6 ; Lydus,

De Mag., 2, 25 ; Zosimus, 2, 25.
Lydus, De Mag., 2, 25.
Athanasius, Apologia ad Constantinum,

3; cf. C.I.L. VI, 172 1.
Zosimus, 2, 43, 4; 46, 3 ; 47, 2.
Ammianus, 22, 3, 3.

Ammianus, 22, 5, 12.

Ammianus, 20, 2, 2 ; 22, 3, 6.
Ammianus, 20, 8, 19.

Ammianus, 20, 9, 5.

Ammianus, 20, 9, 8 ; Zosimus, 3, 29, 3 ;

30, 4.
Codex Theod., XI, 39, 5.

Magnus Carrhenus, Fragmenta Histori-
corum Graecorum, vol. IV, p. 5.

Ammianus, 26, 5, 7.

Ammianus, 26, 7, 4.

Ammianus, 26, 10, 8.

Ammianus, 28, 4, 3.

Ammianus, 28, i, 12.

Ammianus, 27, 9, 2 ; Codex Theod.,
VII, 8, 2 (?).

Ammianus, 28, 6, 8, and 30.

Ammianus, 29, 5, 2.

Ammianus, 30, 2, 10.

Ammianus, 30, 5, 10.

Monuvienta Germaniae Historiae, Auc-
tores Antiguissimi, VI, p. cxxxi.

Codex Theod., I, 15, 10; VII, 12, 2.

Codex Theod., VI, 27, 3 ; VIII, 15, 6.

Codex Theod., VI, 29, 6.

148

APPENDIX B

149

381

Palladius

(Ok),

382

id.

384

id.

382

Macedonius

(Occ),

386

Principius

{Occ),

389

Caesarius

{Or,\

390

Rufinus

(6>r.),

393

Theodotus

(6>r.),

394

id.

395

Marcellus

(6^r.),

395 (?;

) Hosius

((9r.),

396

id.

398

397

Hadrianus

{Occ,\

399

id.

404

Anthemius

{Or.),

405

Aemilianus

408

Naemorius

{Occ.\

408

Olympius

{Occ),

409

Johannes

{Occ,\

410

Gaiso

(Occ),

412

Namatius

(Occ),

414

Helio

(Ok),

415

id.

416

id.

417

id.

424

id.

424

id.

425

id.

426

id.

427

id.

430

Johannes

(Ok),

430

Paulinus

(Ok),

435

Valerius

(Ok).

441

Flegetius

(Ok),

443

Nomus

(Ok),

444

id.

Codex Theod,, X, 24, 3.

Codex Theod., VI, 27, 4.

Codex Theod,, VII, 8, 3.

Se varus, Sacra Historia, 2, 48.

Codex Theod., I, 9, 2.

Codex Theod., VIII, 5, 49.

Codex Theod., X, 22, 3 ; Lydus, De

Mag., 2, 10 ; 3, 40.
Codex Theod., VII, 8, 4.
Codex Theod,, VII, i, 14.
Codex Theod., VI, 29, 8 ; XVI, 5, 29 ;
De Medicamentis, tit.
Codex Theod,, VI, 27, 7.
Codex Theod., VI, 26, 6 ; 27, 8 ; 27,9.
Codex Theod., VII, 8, 5 ; X, 22, 4.
Codex Theod., VI, 26, 11.
Codex Theod., VI, 27, 11.
Codex Theod., XVI, 4, 4; VI, 27, 14;
, X, 22, 5.

Codex Theod., I, 9, 3 ; VI, 34, i.
400 A.D. (?) Codex Theod., VII, 8, 8.
Zosimus, 5, 32, 26.

Codex Theod. , XVI ,5,42; Zosimus, 5,35.
Sozomenus, IX, 8.
Codex Theod., IX, t^Z, ii.
Codex Theod., VI, 27, 15.
Codex Theod., XIII, 3, 17.
Codex Theod., I, 8, i ; VI, 27, 17.
Codex Theod., VI, 27, 18 ; 26, 17 ; 7^2)'> '•
Codex Theod., VI, 27, 19.
Olympiodorus, Fragmenta Historicorum

Graeeorum, vol. IV, p. 68, ch. 46.
Codex Theod., I, 8, 3.
Olympiodorus, F.H.G., vol. IV, p. 68,

ch. 46.
Codex Theod., VI, 27, 30.
Codex Theod., VII, 8, 14; XIII, 3, 18.
Codex Theod., VII, 8, 15.
Codex Theod., VI, 27, 3 ; Chronicon

Paschale, wrongly, 421 and 444.
Codex Theod., VI, 28, 8 ; VII, 8, 16.
Nove/lae Theodosii, 21. (Codex Just., I,

31,3 Phlegetius.)
Noveilae Theod., 24.
NoveUae Theod., 25 ; Codex Just., I, 24,

4. Undated : Codex Just., XII, 19,

7 and 8 ; 21,6; 26, 2.
449 (?) Priscus, F.H.G,, vol. IV, p. 97,

fg- 13.

ISO

THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

448

Martialius

(Or.),

449

Opilio

{Occ),

450

id.

451

Vincomalus

{Or.),

452

id.

Patricius

456 Euphemius

457 Martialius
Between

457 and 470

id. Euphemius

id. Johannes

470 Hilarianus
474 id.

Illyrianus
Longinus

474 Eusebius

475-477(0 Patricius
Between
474 and <
491 (Zeno) [

484 Johannes
492 Eusebius
497 id.

507-511 Eugenes
517 Celer

{Or),
{Or.),

(Or.),

(Or.),
(Or.),
(Or.),

(Or.),
(Or.),

{RegniGothia\
(Or),

S18

id.

520 Tatianus

{Or.\

522 Hermogenes

{Or.\

522-523 Boetius

{Regni Gothiciy,

524 Licinius

(Or),

523 to 527 Cassiodorus

{RegniGothict),

527 Tatianus

(Or),

After 527 Cyprianus

{Regni Gothict),

id. Petronius

(RegniGothici),

528(?)Theophilus

530 Hermogenes

(Or.),

532 id.

533 id.

Priscus, F.H.G., vol. FV, p. 77, fg. 7.

Noveilae Valfntiniani^ 28.

Nov f line Vai., 30.

Mansi, vol. V, pp. 97, 185 ff., 497, 500,

505-
Codex JustinianuSy 1, 3, 23 (Calch.) ; cf.

XII, 40, 10.
Priscus, F,H.G,y vol. IV, p. 102.
De Caer.y i, 91.
Codex Justf XII, 19, 9 ; 20, 3 and 5 ;

50, 22.
Codex Just., XI, 10, 6, and 7.
Codex Just, XII, s, 3 ; 25, 3 ; 59, 8.
Codex Justy\,2l,(i\ XII, 19, 10; 59, 9.
Codex Just, XII, 25, 4. Undated:

Codex Just, XII, 7, 2 ; 40, 11.
Codex Just, XII, 29, 2. De Caer,, i, 94.
Candidus, pp. 474, 475, Bonn.

Codex Just,, XII, 40. II.
Codex Just, XII, 29, 3.

Codex Just, XII, 21,8.

Codex Just,, I, 30, 3.

Codex Just, II, 7, 20. Undated : Code.

Just,, XII, I, 18 ; 5, 5 ; 10, 2 ; 19, 11.
Cassiodorus, Variae, 1,12, and 13.
Codex Just., IV, 29, 21.
Procopius, De bello Gothico, i , 8.
DeCaer,, i, 93. Undated; Codex Just,,

XII, 19, 12.
Codex Just., ^11, 19, 14.
Theophanes, p. 276, Bonn.
Ananymus Vaiesti, 14, 85.
Codex Just., XII, 33, 5.
Variae; cf. M,G,H,, XII, pp. x-xi.
Codex Just,, I, 31, 5 ; XII, 19, 15.
De Caer., i , 95. Undated : Codex Just,,

XII, 19, 14.
Anonymus Valesii, 14, 85.
Praescriptio libelli Cassiodorani de stirpe

sua.
Codex Just., I de Justiniani codice confir-

mando, 529 a.d., ex tnagister.
Procopius, De bello Persico, i, 13.
Codex Just, V, 17, II.
Chronicon Paschale ; Codex Just, I, 3,

53 ; V, 17, II ; VII, 24, I ; IX, 13,

I ; XI, 48, 24.

APPENDIX B

151

533 Trebonianus (Or,)y

534 id. (Ok),

535 Hermogenes (Or.),

536 Trebonianus (Or.),
539 Basilides (Or,),

539^0565 Petnis (Or.),

565 Anastasius (Or.),

579

Theodorus

(Or.),

S88

id.

(Or.),

626
VI-VII

r^pntiirv

Bonus
Isaac

(Or.),
(Or.),

Codex Just, I, 17, 2 pr.

Codex Just, \, de emendations Codicis
Justiniani ; I, de novo codice, 528 a.d.:
magisteria dignitate inter agentes deco-
ratus.

Novellae Just,, 2 \ 10; 138.

Novellae Just., 23.

Novellae Just., 85 ; Chronicon Paschale,
dnni 532, irocfov rov romiy t€v fjutyiarpov
'£p/Aoycvov9 ^v KfovcrravriVov irdAct.

Procopius, Historia Arcana, 16 ; 2?^
^^/ii? Gothico, 4, 1 1 ; De Caer., I, 84,
rubric; Noi'eliae Just., 123, 546 a.d.;

i37» 565 A.D.

Corippus, Panegyr, in laudem Justini,
11, pr. 30.

Theophylactus, 3, 25. Menander Pro-
tector, F.H.G., vol. IV, p. 257, fr. 55.

Historiens des Gaules et de la France
(Boquet), vol. IV, p. 85.

Chronicon Paschale.

Schlumberger, Sigillographie de PRm-
pire byzantin, p. 563.

II. MASTERS OF THE OFFICES IN THE BYZANTINE EMPIRE

Leo III (717-740),

Nicetas Xylinites, Master,
Constantine V (740-775),

Theophanes,

Petros,

Leo IV (77S-779)»

Petros,
Constantine VI (779-797),

Petros,

Michael Lachanodrakon,
VIII-IX Centuries,

Johannes,
Nicephorus I (802^11),

Theoktistos,
Stauricius (811),

Theoktistos,
Michael 1(811-813),

Theoktistos,
Michael II (820-829),

Christophoros,

Stephanos,

Irenaios,

Theophanes, p. 400.

Theophanes, p. 415.
Theophanes, p. 442.

Theophanes, p. 456.

Theophanes, p. 464.
Theophanes, p. 468.

Schlumberger, Sigillographie, p. 563.

Theodore of Studion, Epistulae, i, 24.

Theophanes, p. 492.

Theophanes, p. 500.

Genesius, p. 35.

Theodore of Studion, Epist, 2, 76.

Ps. Simeon, 622.

152

THE MASTER OF THE OFFICES

Theophilus (829-842),
Alexios Musele,
Manuel Arroenios,

Theophilus-Michael III (842-867),
Arsaber,
Stephanos,
Bardas,

Manuel Armenios,
Basil,

Petronas,
Theodatakes,

Basil I (867-886),

Manuel,

Theodores,
Leo VI (886-912),

Stephanos,

Stylianos,

Katakalon,

Theodatakes,
Stylianos,

Erikorikios,
Aspasakios,

Constantine VII (912-958),
Stephanos,
Johannes Eladas,
Leo Phokas,
Nicetas,
Bardas Phokas,
Johannes Kurkuas,

Kosmas,

Romanos Saronites,
Romanos Mousele,
Pankratios,
Kurkenios,

Pankratios II,
Adranse,
Georgios,
David,

Theophanes Continuatus, p. 108.
Genesius, p. 73 ; Theophanes Cont.,
p. 148.

Theophanes Cont., p. 175.

Genesius, p. ^^,

Theophanes Cont., p. 238 ; Genesius,

p. 1 1 1 .
Genesius, p. 97.
Nicetas, Vita Ignatii, in Mansi, vol. XVI,

P-237-

Theophanes Cont, p. 307.
Mansi, vol. XVI, p. 309.

Theophanes Cont., p. 354.
Theophanes Cont., p. 354.
Theophanes Cont., p. 359 ; De Adminis-

trando ImperiOy ch. 45, p. 199.
Theophanes Cont., p. 361.
Vita Euthymii, 3.
Notfellae Leords VI, i and 18.
Schlumberger, Sigiilographie, p. 553.
De Administrando Imperio^ ch. 43, p. 185.
De Administrando Imperio^ ch. 44, pp. 191,

Theophanes Cont., pp. 380, 381, 385, 388,

390-

Theophanes Cont., pp. 413, 417.
Theophanes Cont, pp. 436, 459.
Theophanes Cont., p. 443 ; De Adminis-
trando Imperio, ch. 45, pp. 200, 204.

Theophanes Cont., p. 443.

De Administrando Imperio^ ch. 45, p. 204.
De Administrando Imperio^ ch. 46, pp. 206-

208, 210-213.
De Administrando Imperio, ch. 46, p. 207.
De Administrando Imperio^ ch. 46, p. 207.
De Administrando Imperio, ch. 46, p. 206.
De Administrando Imperio^ ch. 46, pp. 212,

213.

APPENDIX B

153

Basil II (963-1025),

Nicephoros Uranos,

Prusianos,

Gregorios,

Michael,
Romanus III (1028-1034),

Prusianos,

Romanos Skleros,

Michael,

Basiliskos,

Demetrios,
Michael IV (1034-1042),

Apolaphar,

Georgios Maniakes,

Skleros,
Constantine IX (i 042-1 055),

Basileios Theodoreanos,

Jobanesices,

Karikios,

Michael,

Constantinos Arianites,

Isaac Komnenos,

Katakalon Kekaumenos,
Theodora (105 5- 105 7),

Isaac Komnenos,

Aaron Ducas,

Michael,
Constantine X (1059-1067),

Basileios Apolaphos,

Nicephoros Botaniates,
Michael VII (1067-1078),

Nicephoros Briennios,

Eutathios,
Alexios I (1081-1118),

Unnamed Magistros,
XI-XII Centuries,

Christophoros,

Maria (magistrtssa),

Cedrenus, II, p. 454.
Cedrenus, II, p. 468, 469, 483.
Cedrenus, II, p. 478.
Cedrenus, II, p. 481.

Cedrenus, II, p. 487.
Cedrenus, II, p. 487.
Cedrenus, II, p. 488.
Cedrenus, II, pp. 501, 502.
Cedrenus, II, pp. 503.

Cedrenus, II, p. 514.
Cedrenus, II, pp. 541, 545.
Cedrenus, II, p. 547.

Cedrenus, II, p. 553.
Cedrenus, II, p. 557.
Cedrenus, II, p. 559.
Cedrenus, II, p. 565
Cedrenus, II, pp. 596, 597, 601.
Cedrenus, II, p. 615.
Cedrenus, II, p. 615.

Cedrenus, II, p. 620.
Cedrenus, II, p. 628.
Cedrenus, II, p. 634.

Johannes Scylitza, p. 654.
Johannes Scylitza, p. 654.

Johannes Scylitza, pp. 693, 694.
Johannes Scylitza, p. 701.

Anna Comnena, p. 95.

Schlumher get, Sigt7/ogrqp/uf, p. 463, no. i.
Schlumberger, Sigillographie^ p. 532, nos.
8 and 9.

INDEX

adiutOTy of magister officiorum, pp. 70, 71,

100 ff.
adiuioresy of Quaestor, pp. 40, 83.
d5/ii}ivovi>dXiot, see comes admissionum.
Administration, after Constantine I, p. 17;

in Byzantine Empire, p. 50.
admissionaUs {officium admissionum), pp. 28,

3S»5^^»92ff-
Adranse, of Iberia, Master, p. 57.

advocati, p. 22.

Aemilianus, mag. off., pp. 82, 108.

agenUs in rebus, pp. 22, 32, 34» 35» S^. 40» 59.

68 ff., 90, 100 ff.
dryaXia06pot, agentes in rebus, p. 72.

Alemanni, p. 35.

Alexius I, Comnenus, Augustus (1081-1118),

p. 58.
Ampelius, mag, off,, p. II 7.
amplitudo tua, p. 1 15.
Anastasius, Augustus (49'-Si8), pp. 97. 99-
Anastasius, mag, off,^ p. 108.
Anatolius, mag. off., pp. 34. 92. 106.
Anthemius, Augustus (467-472), pp. 39. 4©.

43. 46, 64, 87.
Anthemius, mag. off., p. 108.
dy^^aroc, see Proconsuls.
drrc7pa^ett, magistri scriniorum, pp. 83, 86.
Aposacios, of Apachume, Master, p. 57.
dvoKb/ifitow, purse, p. 123.
Apothecarius, p. 124.
apparitor es, of duces, pp. 40, 41, 91.
Arcadius, Augustus (395*408), pp. 36, 37-
i^px^^^ ^o^ Aavtf-iairov, pp. 1 1 8, 1 24.
Armenia, princes of, p. 57.
Arsenals, see fabricae, fabricenses.
Athanasius, bishop, p. 92.
drpiffXir^t, pp. 123, 124.
Attila, King of Huns, p. 93.
auctoritas, tua, p. 1 15.
d^lo, of mastership, p. 119.
d{(ai, aX d(d pfia^Uaw, pp. 1 1 8, lao.

fiakrlSiov^ p. 119.
barbaricarii, pp. 89, 102 ff.

Basil I, Augustus (867-886), pp. 55, 97-

/S^Xor, see velum.

Bouche-Leclercq, author, on Mastership of

Offices, p. 106.
ppap€io¥, p. 120.
Bury, J. B., author, on Byzantine Masters, pp.

52 ff.;
on fidyiarpot ix Tpoffiinrov, p. 53.

Caesar, title of rank, p. 56;

conferment of, p. 100.
Caesaropapism, p. 117.
cancellarii, pp. 37, 38.
candidati, pp. 95, 97, 99-
cartularii or chartularii :

of sacrum cubiculum, p. Ill;

oi scrinium barbarorum^ pp. 95, 103;

of scrinium /abricensium, pp. 88, 102.
Cassiodorus, on ceremonial duties of Master of
Offices, p. 92;

career of, pp. 106 ff.
castrensiani, p. 64.
Castrensis, pp. 22, 27, 40.
Celer, mag. off., pp. 96, 97. 99-
celsitudo tua, p. 1 1 5.
cenUnarii, of agenUs in rebus, p. 71.
Ceremonies, of Byzantine court, pp. 118 ff.
Chamberlain, Grand, see praepositus sacri

cubiculi,
Christophoros, Master, p. 58.
cingulum, of mag, off., pp. 1 12 f.
Clarissimate, p. 45.
Clarissimus, pp. 20, 46, 101, 1 16;

et illustris, p. 46;

ciarissimi comites, p. 62.
codicilli, p. 42.
comes admissionum, pp. 66, 67, 99;

see also magister admissionum.
comes consistorianus, p. 91 ;

comites consistoriani, pp. 44, 45» 46. 107.
comes dispositionum, pp. 22, 5i» 67;

see mag. dispositionum,
comes domesticorum, p. 22;

comes d, equitum, p. 29;

comes d, peditum, p. 29.

155

156

INDEX

comes et magister equUum^ p. 29;

et mag. off., pp. 29, 44, 116;

£t mag, peditum, p. 29;

et quaestor^ p. 29.
r^m^j primi ordinis, p. 44.
^-<79i^j rei militarist p. 21.
comes rei privatae, pp. 21, 27, 29, 31, 41, 45,

46, 47» 63. 95.
^^i»^i sacrarum largitionum, pp. 21, 27, 29,

31, 41, 44, 45, 46, 47, 63, 94, 107.
comites, pp. 21, 29, 31, 62;

of scholae paiatinacy pp. 63, 103.
comitiaciy in Ostrogothic Italy, p. 73.
comitiva, pp. 20, 44, 1 10.
Comnenoi, dynasty of, p. 58.
consistorium, pp. 21 if., 25, 38, 90, 98 ff., 120.
Consistory, see consistorium.

Constans, Augustus (337-3So)» PP- 33f 34f 35»

92.
Constantine I, Augustus (306-337), pp. 17, 20,

24, 25, a8, 29, 32, 33, 37, 44, 45, 60,

68, 74» 77. 80, 81, 82, 87.
Constantine IV, Augustus (668-685), p. 50.
Constantine V, Augustus (740-775), p. 52.
Constantine VII, Augustus (912-958), pp. 2,

96, 93. «23 fi-
Constantine VIII, Augustus (1025- 1028), p. 58.
Constantine IX, Monomachus, Augustus (1042-

*o55)» P- 57-
Constantius, Augustus (337-361). PP- Z3* 34f 96.
consuetudoy p. ill;

coHsuetudines, p. 1 23.
Consulate, p. 107.
Corippus, poet, on embassy of Avars, p. 93;

on audience in the palace, p. 98.
Count, of the Body Guard, see comes domestic
corum ;
of the Privy Purse, see comes rei privatae;
of the Sacred Largesses, see comes sacrarum
largitionum.
cuhicularii, pp. 27, 40, 63, 64.
ctdmen tuum, p. 115.
curagendariif p. 74.
Curcenios, of Iberia, Master, p. 57.
curiosi, cursus publici, pp. 34, 35, 74 ff., loi,
104;
litorum, p. 75.
curiosus cursus publici praesenialis, pp. 100,
104;
in praesenti, pp. 10 1, 104.
Curopalates, pp. 56, 125.
cursus puhlicus, pp. 32, 34 fi., 74 ff.

decani, pp. 37, 39, 40, 66, 120.
deputati, of agentes in rebus^ pp. 71 ff.

dignitaies, p. 20;

palatinae, pp. 22, 23, 44.
Diocletian, Augustus (284-305), pp. i, 18, 25,

86,89.
domestici, in general, p. 105;

of comites scholar um, p. 103.
domesticiy imperial guards, p. 120;

see also comes domesticorum.
domesticus^ of palace guards, pp. 50, 51, 56, 63,
102, 105;

of mag, off,, pp. 51, 63, 102, 104-105;

bofufTTiKbt rCav <rxoXi^r, see domesticus of
palace guards.
ducenarii, of agentes in rebus, pp. 7 1 ff.
dux, p. 21 ;

dtues, pp. 38, 40, 41, 42, 89 ff.

E
Embassies :

from Emperor in the West, pp. 93 f.;

from Gothic kings, p. 94;

from Persian king, pp. 94 f.
eminentia tua, p. 115.
Eugenes, mag, off,^ p. 108.
Eugenius, Flavius, mag. off,, pp. 25, 35, 106,

107, 108.
Euphemius, mag, off,, p. 96.
Euphrasius, mag, ^., p. 34.
evectiones, pp. 35, 74 ff".
excellentissimus, pp. 46, 114.
excelsus, vir, p. 1 14.
excubitores, p. 97.

fabricae, pp. 32, 86 ff., 102, 103, ill.
fahricenses, pp. 82, 86 ff. ;

see also fabricae,
Felix, mag, off., pp. 34, 40, 106.
Florentius, mag. off,, pp. 96, 108.
formula^ magisteriae dignitatis , p. 1 11.
frater amantissime, p. 1 14.
frumentarii, pp. 68, 78.

Galerius, Augustus (305-311), p. 32.
Gallus, Caesar (355 ""3554). PP- 33? 34-
George, of Abasgia, Master, p. 57.
gloria tua, p. 1 15.
gloriosi, p. 20.

gloriosissimus, -1, pp. 46, 47, 1 1 7, 1 19.
Gratian, Augustus (367-383). P- 45-
Greek titles, in Byzantine Empire, pp. 49 ff*.
Gregory, of Taran, Master, p. 57.

Hadrianus, mag, off,, pp. 107, 108.
Heraclianus, tribunus et mag. off,, ^,24.

INDEX

157

Heraclius, Augustas (610-641), pp. 49, 105.
Hermogenes, mag, off,, pp. 96, 97, 107.
Hodgkin, aathor, on mag. off., p. 106.
honorarii, illustres, pp. 42, 1 13.
kospitaiitas, p. 81.
hoipitium, p. 81.

illtntrii, pp. 90^ 40, 43, 46, 8l> Iiaff. ;

illustris vir, pp. 116, 1 17;

et magnificus, p. 46;

hoHorarii, pp. 97, 1 13;

honorati, p. 1 12;

III actu positi, p. 1 12;

vacanUs, p. 1 1 3.
Interpreters, pp. 36, loi;

interpretes diversarum gentium, p. 96.
indicium, ducianum, p. 42.

Jobanesices, of Anium, Master, p. 57.

Julian, Augustus (361-363), pp. 34, 69, 77, 92,

96.
Justinian, Augustus (527-565), pp. 40, 43, 44,

48, 49, 78, 80, 81, 88, 90, 91, 96, 97, 99,

117.
Justinus I, Augustus (518-527), pp. 40, 43, 83,

07»99.
Justin us II, Augustus (565-578), p. 48.

KayLvdyiov, pp. I18 f.;

ol inrh Kafiwaylop, id.
Karikios, Master, p. 57.
Karlowa, author, on origin of Mastership of

Offices, p. 26.
AUtorologion^ 'invitation list,' p. 123;

of Philotheos, p. 124.
jr6^ii}f d5fii7Mrt6rctfr, see comes admissionum.

L
Xa)3apii^<rt<M, p. 95.
lampadarii, pp. 38, 66.
Largesses, Sacred, see G)unt of.
IcUerculum, minus, pp. 85, 89.
Leo I, Augustus (457-474). PP- 39» 40. 61, 64,

87, 88, 97, 99, 102, 103.
Leo II, Augustus (474). PP. 40^ 97. 99-
Leo III, the Isaurian, Augustus (71 7-740), p. 50.
Leo VI, Augustus (886-912), pp. 52, 55, 123,

124.
Leo, mag. off., p. 106.
iider mandalorum, pp. in, 121.
Licinius, Augustus (310-324), pp. 32, 33.
limitanei, pp. 41, 89 fi.

limit es, pp. 38, 89 ff.

Logothete, of the Post, pp. 50, 51, 80, 98.

loroi, a decoration, p. 56;

use and significance of, p. 121.
Xwpot, see loroi.
ludimagistri, p. 8.
Luitprand, author, on the number of Masters,

p. 56.
Lydus, Johannes, author, on decline of Prcto-
rian Prefecture, pp. 30, 36, 37, 87;

on character of Mastership of Offices, pp.
105, 106;

on curios i, p. 74;

on n'cciiones, pp. 78, 79;

on regendarius, p. 79.

Macedonius, mag. off., p. 107.

magister, * Master,' meaning and use of, pp. 5, 6.

magister admissionum, see Master of the Audi-
ences.

magister dispositiontim, see Master for the
Schedules.

magister epistularum graecarum, see Master
of Correspondence.

magister epistularum latinarum, see Master of
Correspondence.

magister libellorum, see Master for Petitions.

magister memoriae, see Master of the Memoria.

magister militum, see Masters of the Soldiers.

magister officiorum, see Master of the Offices.

magisteriani, p. 73.

magistri, see Masters.

fxayiarpiapolj p. 73.

fiaylo'Tpiaa'ai, wives of Byzantine Masters, pp.
125, 126.

fidyitrrpos, see magister, Master.

fidyiffrpoi, 4k Tpocdnrov, p. 53.

yuiyuFTftot, 6, see Master of the Offices.

fidyiffTpot, 6 TrpG>ro%, pp. 52 ff., lOO.

Magnentius, Augustus (35^-353). P- 33-

magnificeniia tua, p. 115.

magnificentissimus, see magnificus,

magnificus, pp. 46, II 7.

magnitudo tua, p. 115.

mandata, magistri, p. III.

Marcellinus, mag. off,, p. 33.

Marcian, Augustus (450-457).

Maria, magistrissa, p. 58.

Martinalius, mag. off.^ p. 93.

Martinianus, mag. off., p. 24.

Master, title at Byzantine court, pp. 52, 53;
conferred for life, p. 53;
title in imperial civil service, pp. 14, 15.

Master of the Audiences, pp. 13, 14, 66, 67, 92,

95» '03-

158

INDEX

Master of Ceremonies, pp. 51, 67, 99, 100, 120,

122, 123.
Master (Secretary) of Correspondence, pp. 14,

22, 51, 84.
Master of the Memoria (First Secretary), pp.

14, 22, 26, 27, 51, 84.
Master of the Offices :

adiutor of, pp. 70, 71, 100 ff.;
authority of, over :

adfnissionaieSt pp. 28, 35, 51, 66;

agentes in rtius, pp. 32, 38, 40, 59, 66,
68 ff.;

apparitores ducuniy pp. 40, 41 ;

cancellariif pp. 37, 38, 66;

castrfnsiant, p. 64;

cohorUs praetorianae, p. 25 ;

cubicuiariif pp. 40, 64;

cursus publicus, pp. 32, 34, 35, 43f 5^ 74 ff.;

decani, pp. 37» 39» 66;

duces iimifum, pp. 40, 41, 89 ff".;

fahricae and fabricenses, pp. 32, 40, 43,
86 ff.;

illuslres (viri), p. 40;

iampadarii, pp. 28, 38, 66;

limites and limUanei, pp. 38, 41, 89 ff. ;

mensores, pp. 28, 38, 80 ff.;

militares (viri), p. 41 ;

ministeriani^ pp. 40, 41, 64;

notarii, p. 65;

officia palatina, pp. 39, 59, 63 if., 68;

officialese pp. 38, 40, 41, 59, 64;

palatini, pp. 40, 41 ;

peraequatores victualium, p. 43;

praepositi castrorum, pp. 40, 41 ;

referendariif p. 65;

schola sacrae vestis, pp. 46, 64;

scholae and Scholarians, pp. 28, 51, 60 ff.;

scrinia and scriniarii, pp. 28, 40, 51, 59,
66, 82ff.;

scrinium dispositionum^ p. 67;

silenHariif pp. 40^ 65 ;

State Post, see cursus publicus ;

stralores, i>p. 39,65;
in Byzantine Empire, pp. 49 ff.;
character of office, pp. 59, 105 ff. ;
competence of, pp. 59 ff. ;
cursus honorum of, pp. 106 ff . ;
establishment of, p. 25 ;
functions of:

ceremonial duties, pp. 35, 51, 52, 92 ff.,
98 ff.;

in consistoriumy pp. 22, 31, 38, 44, 91 ff.;

judicial, pp. 38 ff., 68;

Greek title of, pp. 49, 50;

historical significance of, p. i ;

history of, pp. 24 ff.;

insignia of, pp. 1 10 ff . ;

functions of — continued:

military origin of, p. 60;

as Minister for Foreign Affairs, pp. 35, 36;

number of, pp. 33, 34;
officium of, pp. 72, 100 ff.;
in Ostrogothic Kingdom, pp. 42, 43, 62;
rank of, pp. 44 ff. ;

clarissimus, pp. 45, 113, 114, 116;

clarissimus el illustris^ p. 46;

comes, pp. 29, 30, 44, 60;

comes coHsistorianuSy pp. 44, 45;

excelUntissimus, pp. 46, 1 14;

^rfw«f, pp. 46, 47;

has honors of ex-Pretorian Prefects, p. 45 ;

illustris, pp. 45, 112 ff., 116 ff.;

magnijicus, pp. 46, 117;

one of dignitatis palatinae, pp. 23, 44;

masters of the soldiers, pp. 46, 48;

perfectissimus, p. 45 ;

precedes Proconsuls, p. 45 ;

a senator, p. 48;

spectabilis, pp. 45, 113, 114, 116;

tribunus, pp. 24 ff., 60;
relation of, to :

castrensis, pp. 40, 41 ;

comes {magister) admissionum, p. 67;

comes dispositioHum, p. 67;

comes rei privatae, pp. 41, 46, 47;

comes sacrarum largitionum, pp. 41, 46,

47;
praepositus sacri cubiculi, pp. 35, 40, 41,

47» 48;
Pretorian Prefect, pp. 29, 30, 31, 34, 35 ff.,

42, 43, 46 ff., 78 ff., 108;
Quaestor, pp. 42, 46 ff., 83 ff*., 91, 108;
Urban Prefect, pp. 42, 43;
sources for study of, p. 2;
term of, p. 109;
titles, honors, and privileges of, pp. 1 10 ff. ;

see also rank of;
vices agens of, p. 43.
Master (Secretary) for Petitions, pp. 14, 22, 26,

27, 51, 85.
Master (Secretary) for the Schedules, pp. 14,

22, 26.
Masters : .
chiefs of secretarial bureaus, pp. 13 ff. ;
in civil service, pp. 13 ff. ;
in commercial and social organizations, pp.

7»8;

in 6nancial administration, p. 13;
in military service, pp. 15 ff.;
magistrates of the Republic, p. 7;
primarily religious, pp. 8 ff.
Masters, Byzantine :
ceremonies at appointment of, pp. 119 ff.;
constitute first velum^ p. 125;

INDEX

159

Masters, Byzantine — continuid:

disappearance of, p. 58;

donations received by, pp. 123, 124;

dress and insignia of, pp. 120 ff.;

functions of, pp. 54f 55?

gratuities dispensed by, pp. 122, 123;

honors and privileges of, pp. 1 17 ff. ;

later purely honorary, pp. 56, 58;

number :
in VIII Cent., pp. 52, 53;
in IX Cent., p. 55 ;
in X Cent., p. $6;

order of rank and position among dignitaries
of court, pp. 55, 56, 118, 125;

vassal princes as, p. 57.
Masters, of the Scrinia, pp. 13, 14, 15, 28, 83 (f.
Masters, of the Soldiers, magistri militum, pp.
16, 21, 30, 41, 42, 46, 47, 50, 90, 91 ;

in the Presence, praesentales, pp. 42, 85, 90.
Masters, ' of the state,' p. 98.
mensores, pp. 80 ft.
me/a/a, pp. 81 ff.
me/a/ores, pp. 81 ff.

Michael III, Augustus (842-867), pp. 54, 55.
Michael VI, Augustus (1056-1057), p. 58.
minis/eriani, p. 40.
Mommsen, author :

on Master and Quaestor, p. 48;

on origin of Mastership of Offices, p. 25 ;

on use of magister and magistratus^ p. 6;

Nobelissimus, pp. 56, 125.

Nomus, mag, off,, p. 107.

Hotarii {tribuni), pp. 65, 107.

Notitia Dignitatum, compilation of, p. 65.

date of, p. 2.
Humeri^ praesenialeSy p. 42.

6 dt/rwr, see Viceroy.

6 kirX T%% KaToffrdfftufty see Master of Ceremonies.
6 iwl tQp dei^o'ewr, see Master for Petitions.
cfida (paiatina), pp. 26, 30, 37, 59, 64.
Ojfida/es, pp. 22, 27, 40, 41, 59;

paiatini^ p. 64;

offiHum, pp. 22, 28, loi ;

adiuioris, p. loi ;

admissioHum, p. 28;

of Mag. off.f pp. 100 ff.
Opilio, mag. ^., p. 107.
Orders, of rank, pp. 20, 56.

Palace Guards, see scholae.
F^eologi, dynasty of, p. 58.

Palladius (i), mag. off.^ p. 25;

first comes et mag., p. 32;

(2) mag. off., p. 107.
Pancratios (i)» of Iberia, Master, p* 57<

(2) grandson of (i), Master, p. 57.
Patricians, p. 55 ;

creation of, p. 54;

elevation to Mastership, pp. 119, 120;

wearers of loroi, pp. 121 ff.
Patriciate, pp. 20, 48.
varplKtai, p. 125;

T. ^iacral^ p. 1 25.
pectorals, p. 122.
Pentaditts, mag. off.., pp. 34, 96.
per a equator es victualium, p. 43.
Perfectissimate, p. 45.

Peter, the Patrician, work on Mastership of
Offices, p. 25 ;

see Petrus (i).
Petrus, (i) = Peter the Patrician, mag. off., pp.
96, 107, 108.

(2) mag. off., p. 96.
Philotheos, atriklims, p. 124.
Phokas, Bardas, Master, p. 56.
Phokas, Leo, p. 56.
praefecti annonae, p. 43;

/. castrorum, p. 85;

/. vehicuiorum, p* 74*
praepositi castrorum, pp. 40^ 41, 85;

p. fabricarum, pp. 32, 86, 89.
praepositus sacri cubiculi, pp. 22, 27, 40, 41,
46, 47. 54. 55. 63. 64, 97, 99, 100, 119,
120, 122, 123.
praeiorianae cohortes, pp. 26, 27.
Prefect, Pretorian, pp. 29, 30, 46, 47, 48, 50,
74 ff., 86, 108;

of the Orient, p. 37.
Prefect, Urban, pp. 54, 77, 95, 97. »o8.
Prefecture, Pretorian, defined, p. 29;

weakened, pp. 30, 36, 37;

abolished, p. 50.
Pretorians, see praetorianae cohortes.
primicerius, rank of, p. 62;

/. notariorum, p. ill;

/. sacri cubiculi, p. 22.
principes, agentes in rebus, heads of officio, pp.

72,79-
princeps, of agentes in rebus, p. 69.

Priscus, author, on mc^. off., p. 93.

probatoria, pp. 62, 85.

Proconsuls, (i) provincial governors, p.

45-
(2) Byzantine order of rank, pp. 55,

121 ff.

Proculianus, tribunus et mag, off., p. 25.

TpoeXevcrifiaibt, o2, p. 118.

Prusianot, a Bolgar, Master, p. 57.

i6o

INDEX

Quaestor :

quaestor sacri palatii^ pp. 21, 25, 28, 29, 31,

40, 42, 45 flf., 50, 51, 83 ff., 91, 108;
comes et qutustor^ p. 29.

refer endariif p. 65.

regendarius, p. 79.

Remigius, mag. off.^ p. 107.

Romaioi, p. 49.

Romanos, Mousele, Master, p. 56.

Romanos, Saronites, Master, p. 56.

Romanos, Augustus (919-945), p. 57.

Rombaud, author, on Byzantine court dignities,

P-57-
Rufinus, fnag, off,, pp, OrUntis, pp. 36, 37, 78,

87, 107, 108.

S
Saccellarius, p. 95.
0'a7ior, dXiT^ti^r, p. 120.
saiones, Ostrogothic, pp. 73, 76.
Schiller, author, on Mastership of Offices, pp.

26, 106.
schola, of agenies in rebus, see agenUs;

schola sacrae vestis^ pp. 40, 64.
scholae, palaHnae, pp. 32, 40, 51, 60 ff., 97, 1 1 1 ;

scholae scutariorum et gentilium, pp. 23, 27,
102, 120.
Scholarians, see scholae.
scrinia, pp. 26» 82 ff.
scriniarii, pp. 40, 59, 82 ff.
scrinium fabricarum {fabricensium), pp. 82,
102.

scrinium barbarorum, pp. 94, 95, 102 ff.

scrinium epistularum, p. 96.

scrinium libellorum, p. 97.
Secret Service, see agentes in rebus.
Secretary, First, see Master of the Memoria;

for Correspondence, see Master of the Corre-
spondence;

for Petitions, see Master of Petitions;

for the Schedules, see Master for the Schedules.
Seeck, O , author :

on comites of Constantine I, p. 29;

on comitiaci, p. 73;

on Master and Quaestor, p. 48;

on origin of Mastership of Offices, p. 26.
ffiKperop, pp. 52, S3, 119, 126.
Serrigny, author, on Mastership of Offices,

p. 106.
Siburius, mag. off,, p. 108.
si/entiarii, pp. 27, 40.
sinceritas tua, p. 116.
spatharius, p. 95.
spectabilis, vir, p. 116.
sportula, p. III.

State Post, see cursus publicus ;

overseers of, pp. 34 ffl, 68.
arhffiiMv, coronation anniversary, pp. 123, 124.
Steward of the Household, see Castrensis.
ffTtxdpiop, p. 119.
Strategoi, p. 56.
stratores, pp. 39, 65, 73.
Stylianos, mag. off., pp. 52, 55.
subadiuvae, adiutoris, pp. 71, 95, 100, loi, 102;

subadiuvae barbaricariorum, pp. 89, lOO, 102;

subadiuvae fabricarum, pp. 88, 100 ff.
sublimissimus^ p. 114.
sublimitas tua, p. 116.
vvyKkjiTiKol, p. 118.
vvrfiSeia^ gratuity, pp. 122 ff.
Syagrius, mag, off., pp. 107, 108.

Taran, princes of, p. 57.

Themes, p. 50.

Theoderic, Gothic king, pp. 42, 43, 76, 78.

Theodorus, mag. off., p. 97.

Theodosius I, Augustus (383-395), p. 45.

Theodosius II, Augustus (408-450), pp. 36,

4«. 90, 92. 93. 103.
Theodotus, mag. off,, p. 108.
Theophanes, fAdyiorpot ix irpoailbwov, p. 53.
Theophilus, Augustus (829-842), p. 97.
BvpdKia, * pectorals,' p. 1 22.
Tifi^, of Mastership, p. 1 19.
Trebonianus, quaestor, mag off,, p. 108.
Tribuni, clerks, p. 22 ;

commanders oi scholae palatinae, pp. 27, 63;

tribuni fabricarum, p. 89;

tribuni notarii, pp. 22, 65 ;
tribunus, et mag. off., pp. 24ff., 60.

bwtfioxflt ^ v'fit see celsiiudo, culmen, sublimitas.
Ursatius, mag. off., pp. 34, 93.

Valens, Augustus (364-378), pp. 41, 46, 89.
Valentinian I, Augustus (364-375), pp. 34, 105.
Valentinian III, Augustus (425-455), pp. 41,

46, 66.
velum, pp. 52, 125.
vicarii, of dioceses, p. 21 ;

subordinate officers, pp. 97, lOl .
vicarius a consiliis sacris, p. 26.
Vicars, of dioceses, see vicarii.
Viceroy, p. 97.
Vincomalus, mag. off., p. 107.

Zeno, the Isaurian, Augustus (474-491), pp.

39, 46, 61, 64, 65.
Zoste Patricia, p. 561

University of Michigan Studies

HUMANISTIC SERIES

Geneiml Editors : FRAIICIS W. KBLSET and HSNRT A. SANDERS

Size, 22.7 X 15.2 cm. 8°. Bound in cloth

Vol. I. Roman Historical Sources and Institutions. Edited
by Professor Henry A. Sanders, University of Michigan.
Pp. viii-l-402. $2.50 net.

CONTENTS

1. The Myth about Tarpeia: Professor Henry A. Sanders.

2. The Movements of the Chorus Chanting the Carmen Sae-

CULARE : Professor Walter Dennison, Swarthmore College.

3. Studies in the Lives of Roman Empresses, Julia Mamaea:

Professor Mary Gilmore Williams, Mt. Holyoke College.

4. The Attitude of Dio Cassius toward Epigraphic Sources:

Professor Duane Reed Stuart, Princeton University.

5. The Lost Epitome of Livy : Professor Henry A. Sanders.

6. The Principales of the Early Empire : Professor Joseph H.

Drake, University of Michigan.

7. Centurions as Substitute Commanders of Auxiliary Corps :

Professor George H. Allen, University of Cincinnati.

Vol. II. Word Formation in Provencal. By Professor Ed-
ward L. Adams, University of Michigan. Pp. xvii-l-6o7.
$4.00 net.

Vol. III. Latin Philology. Edited by Professor Clarence
Linton Meader, University of Michigan. Pp. vii -I- 290.
$2.00 net.

Parts Sold Separately in Paper Covers:

Part L The Use of idem, ipse, and Words of Related Mean-
ing. By Clarence L. Meader. Pp. i-iii. ^0.75.

Part n. A Study in Latin Abstract Substantives. By Professor
Manson A. Stewart, Yankton College. Pp. 113-78. ^0.40.

Part in. The Use of the Adjective as a Substantive in the
De Rerum Natura of Lucretius. By Dr. Frederick T. Swan.
Pp. 179-214. ^0.40.

Part IV. Autobiographic Elements in Latin Inscriptions. By
Professor Henry H. Armstrong, Drury College. Pp. 215-86.
$0.40.

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY

Publishers 64-66 Fifth Avenue New York

University of Michigan Studies — Continued

Vol. IV. Roman History and Mythology. Edited by Pro-
fessor Henry A. Sanders. Pp. viii -I- 427. $2.50 net.

Parts Sold Separately in Paper Covers:

Part I. Studies in the Life of Heliogabalus. By Dr. Orma
Fitch Butler, University of Michigan. Pp. 1-169. J>L25 net.

Part II. The Myth of Hercules at Rome. By Professor John
G. Winter, University of Michigan. Pp. 171-273. ^0.50 net.

Part III. Roman Law Studies in Livy. By Professor Alvin E.
Evans, Washington State College. Pp. 275-354. $0.40 net.

Part IV. Reminiscences of Ennius in Silius Italicus. By Dr
Loura B. Woodruff. Pp. 355-424. ^0.40 net.

Vol. V. Sources of the Synoptic Gospels. By Rev. Dr.
Carl S. Patton, First Congregational Church, Columbus, Ohio.
Pp. xiii H- 263. $1.30 net.

Size, 28 X 18.5 cm. 4to.

Vol. VI. Athenian Lekythoi with Outline Drawing in
Glaze Varnish on a White Ground. By Arthur Fair-
banks, Director of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.
With 15 plates, and 57 illustrations in the text. Pp. viii + 371.
Bound in cloth. $4.00 net.

Vol. VII. Athenian Lekythoi with Outline Drawing in
Matt Color on a White Ground, and an Appendix:
Additional Lekythoi with Outline Drawing in Glaze
Varnish on a White Ground. By Arthur Fairbanks.
With 41 plates. Pp. x -h 275. Bound in cloth. $3.50 net.

•

Vol. viii. The Old Testament Manuscripts in the Freer
Collection. By Professor Henry A. Sanders, University of
Michigan. With 9 plates showing pages of the Manuscripts
in facsimile. Pp. viii -I- 357. Bound in cloth. $3.50 net.

Parts Sold Separately in Paper Covers :

Part I. The Washington Manuscript of Deuteronomy and
Joshua. With 3 folding plates. Pp. vi -1-104. ^1.25.

Part II. The Washington Manuscript of the Psalms. With i sin-
gle plate and 5 folding plates. Pp. viii -h 105-357. ^2.00 net.

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY

Publishers 64-66 Fifth Avenue New York

University of Michigan Studies — Continued

Vol. IX. The New Testament Manuscripts in the Freer
Collection. By Professor Henry A. Sanders, University
of Michigan. With 8 plates showing pages of the Manu-
scripts in facsimile. Pp. ix -I- 337. Bound in cloth. $3.50 net

Parts sold separately in Paper Covers :

Part I. The Washington Manuscript of the Four Gospels.
With 5 plates. Pp. vii -h 247. ^2.00 net.

Part II. The Washington Fragments of the Epistles of Paul.
With 3 plates. Pp. vii, 249-337. ^1.25 net

Vol. X. The Coptic Manuscripts in the Freer Collection.
By Professor William H. Worrell, Hartford Seminary
Foundation.

Part I. A Fragment of a Psalter in the Sahidic Dialect.
The Coptic Text, with an Introduction, and with 6 plates show-
ing pages of the Manuscript and Fragments in facsimile.
Pp. xxvi +112. ^2.00 net.

Part II. A Homily of Celestinus on the Archangel Gabriel
AND A Homily of Theophilus on St. Mary Theotokos, from
Manuscript Fragments in the Freer Collection and the
British Museum. The Coptic Text, with an Introduction and
Translation, and with plates showing pages of the Manuscript
in facsimile. i^In preparation.^

Vol. XI. Contributions to the History of Science. {Parts
I and II ready ^

Part I. Robert of Chester's Latin Translation of the Algebra
OF Al-Khowarizmi. With an Introduction, Critical Notes, and
an English Version. By Professor Louis C. Karpinski, Univer-
sity of Michigan. With 4 plates showing pages of manuscripts
in facsimile, and 25 diagrams in the text. Pp. vii + 164. Paper
covers. ^2.00 net.

Part II. The Prodromus of Nicolaus Steno's Latin Disser-
tation ON A Solid Body Enclosed by Process of Nature
within a Solid. Translated into English by Professor John G.
Winter, University of Michigan, with a Foreword by Professor
William H. Hobbs. With 7 plates. Pp. 165-283. Paper
covers. $1.30 net.

Part III. Vesuvius in Antiquity. Passages of Ancient Authors,
with a Translation and Elucidations. By Francis W. Kelsey.
Illustrated.

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY

Publishers 64-66 Fifth Avenue New York

University of Michigan Studies — Continued

Vol. XII. Studies in East Christian and Roman Art. By
Professor Charles R. Morey, Princeton University, and Pro-
fessor Walter Dennison, Swarthmore College. With 67
plates (10 colored) and 91 illustrations in the text. Pp. xii
+ 173. $4.75 net

Parts sold separately :

Part I. East Christian Paintings in the Freer Collection.
By Professor Charles R. Morey. With 13 plates (10 colored)
and 34 illustrations in the text Pp. xii -h 87. Bound in cloth.
^2.50 net

Part II. A Gold Treasure of the Late Roman Period from
Egypt. By Professor Walter Dennison. With 54 plates and 57
illustrations in the text Pp. 89-173. Bound in cloth. ^2.50 net.

Vol. XIII. Documents from the Cairo Genizah in the
Freer Collection. Text, with Translation and an Intro-
duction by Professor Richard Gottheil, Columbia University.
{In Preparation.)

Vol. XIV. Aspects of Roman Law and Administration.

Part I. The Master of Offices in the Later Roman and
Byzantine Empires. By Arthur E. R. Boak, University of
Michigan. Pp. x -h 160. Paper covers. |!i.oo net

SCIENfTinC SERIES

Size, 28 X 18.5 cm. 4^ Bound in cloth

Vol. I. The Circulation and Sleep. By Professor John F.
Shepard, University of Michigan. Pp. x-l-83, with an Atlas
of 83 plates, bound separately. Text and Atlas, $2.50 net.

Vol. II. Studies on Divergent Series and Summability. By
Professor Walter B. Ford, University of Michigan. Pp. xi-h

193- $^'SO.

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY

Publishers 64-66 Fifth Avenue New York

University of Michigan Publications
HUMANISTIC PUBLICATIONS

Size, 22.7 X 15.2 cm. 8°. Bound in cloth

The Life and Works of George Sylvester Morris. A
Chapter in the History of American Thought in the
Nineteenth Century. By R. M. Wenley, Litt.D., LL.D.,
D.C.L., Professor of Philosophy in the University of Michi-
gan. Pp. XV -I- 332. $1.50 net.

"This book is from many points of view one of the most interesting . . . that has
appeared for many a day. It is a tribute from one great philosophical teacher to another, his
predecessor. . . . For its true scholarship and its loftiness of thought, as well as for its minute-
ness of research and exceeding carefulness of statement, the book must rank high among
biographies." — Professor F. H. Foster, in T!ke Bibliotheca Sacra,

" Dr. Wenley has given us a most interesting and instructive account of one of his
predecessors in the Chair of Philosophy in the University of Michigan. . . . We owe a deep
debt of gratitude for the great pains he has expended on what has obviously been a labour of
love. The way in which he has traced the philosophical development of his predecessor is
masterly." — Professor John Watson, in Tlie QueetCs Quarterly.

" A more exhaustive biography, and we may add a more appreciative one, has rarely
been written. . . . One can onlv say that of all the good fortunes that could befall such a man,
the greatest is to have so worthy, eminent, and loyal a biographer. . . . Indeed, it is so good
that the name of Morris will always be associated with that of Wenley. The book ought to
inspire others who have the now rather dwindling faculty of appreciation, to give us similar
memoirs of James, Royce, Miinsterberg, Charles Pierce, and perhaps we might add, William
T. Harris." — President G. Stanley Hall, in The American Journal of Psychology.

" It is impossible to read the book — and it is very readable — without feeling that Pro-
fessor Wenley is peculiarly fitted to be its author. It is not only the fine qualities of style and
ripe knowledge of men — these one would expect from a writer of Professor Wenley's reputa-
tion — but the remarkable personal sympathy with every phase of spiritual experience through
which Morris passes, which especially impresses the reader. Rare glimpses of the biographer's
own personality reveal a kindred spirit, who not only appreciates, but is one with his subject,
because he has himself passed through the fire. This personal penetration is dominant, and
produces a living artistic unity rare in literature ; so that the book is no mere biographical
study, but a living drama, a true Odyssey of the spirit" — The Dial^ Chicago.

** The highest praise that can be bestowed on a book like this is that it gives dignity and
ideal value to the commonplaces of our university life, — making of the election of courses a
sacrament and of the giving of lectures in dingy recitation rooms moments in the evolution of
a significant Weltanschauung. Such a tribute may be honestly paid to Professor Wenley's
narrative. It rises to the nobility of its subject. One reads it with a growing appreciation of
Michigan's contribution to thought, and turns the last page reluctantly, feeling that through
the biographer's art he has for a time come into intimate contact with one of the intellectual
forces of the nineteenth century, — has seen the world of ideas take a forward step under the
impulse of one of our own clan — a citizen of no mean city." — Professor F. N. Scott, in 751^
Michigan Alumnus.

" Professor Wenley's admirable account has a value not only for the alumni of Michigan
but for a wider circulation. ... In the task of giving Morris his personal and intellectual
setting the author has been remarkably successful in reproducing the spirit and motives of
New England thought and life in the middle of the nineteenth century. . . . The author, the
many former students of Professor Morris, the University of Michigan, and teachers of philos-
ophy are to be congratulated upon Professor Wenley's painstaking research and sympathetic
interpretation." — Professor J. H. Tufts, in The International Journal of Ethics.

" The work is a biography in the sense of an interpretation of a life, in relation to that
larger intellectual life in which the personality of Professor Morris . . . functioned. None
but perfect work might be expected from the author. The degree of success with which he
has accomplished his task is reflected in the words of President G. Stanley Hall, of Clark Uni-
versity, who regards the book as the best biography ever written of any American thinker. . . .
Unquestionably such work should be undertaken only by eminent men who have the large view
so needful for the proper setting of a great life." — Michigan History Magazine.

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY

Publishers 64-66 Fifth Avenue New Toik

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "The Master of the Offices in the Later Roman and Byzantine Empires"

See other formats