Page:Municipal Administration in the Roman Empire (1926, Abbot and Johnson, municipaladminis00abbo).pdf/32

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

PRAEFECTURAE, FORA, VICI, CASTELLA,


ments come from Africa, so that a description of the organization of the saltus based on them applies strictly to that region, although the same system in its general outlines probably prevailed in other parts of the empire. The growth of great estates is closely connected with the policy which Rome adopted in dealing with the ager publicus. The land of a conquered people passed automatically under Roman ownership. Some of the cultivated land might be used as the site of a colony, some turned back to the natives in return for a rental. As for the uncultivated land, capital was needed for its development, and it was occupied to a great extent by rich Roman landlords. Under this system immense estates came under the control of private owners both in Italy and the provinces. This was particularly true of Africa, of which Pliny tells us that in Nero's time sex domini semissem Africae possidebant, cum interfectir eos Nero princeps[1]. The early emperors, as one may infer from Pliny's remark, saw clearly the political and economic danger with which this situation threatened the government and society, and set themselves to work to remove it[2]. The land must belong to the state. This change in ownership was accomplished partly by way of legacies, but in larger measure through confiscation. The land became again public land, to be administered henceforth by the emperor, and by the time of the Flavians most of the great estates had become crown-lands[3]. They were too large to be made the territoria of neighboring cities. They were therefore organized on an independent basis, and with the formation of the saltus a new and far-reaching principle as introduced into the imperial system. Hitherto Rome had made

    the Rescriptum Philipporum ad colonas vici cuiusdam Phrygiae, found in 1897 in Phrygia (no. 141). Cf. also nos. 122 and 142. Information concerning the system followed on each of these imperial domains may be found in the commentaries on the inscriptions mentioned.

  1. N.H. 18. 6. 35.
  2. Cf. Rostowzew, Gesch. d. röm. Kol. 378.
  3. Rostowzew, op. cit. 379.

[ 16 ]