though firm rule of Anastasius, appears to have reduced to a minimum the most flagrant abuses, whilst his studied parsimony, which led to the accumulation of large reserves,[1] must have lessened the severity of fiscal oppression. The latter advantage was extended into the reign of Justin, and, while Justinian was dissipating the great funds left by his uncle's predecessor,[2] his reputation for benignancy was not imperilled by rapacity in collecting the tributes. Soon after his accession, however, to undivided power, he found himself without other resource than the property of his subjects for the supply of his financial requirements. Then the maintenance of the exchequer assumed the highest importance in his eyes, and every conceivable device for swelling the revenue was resorted to, while little or no regard was paid to the equity of the means employed.[3] As an inevitable result all the worst features of the Byzantine political system underwent an exacerbation during the first few years of Justinian's reign. The species of effectivity demanded by the Emperor induced the rise of the most unscrupulous persons to high office; a statesman became the equivalent of an extortioner, and the native venality of the governing class showed exuberant throughout all its grades. Assured of the Emperor's favour as long as he could be noted for his
- ↑ See p. 162.
- ↑ Jn. Lydus (De Magistr., iii, 51) confirms the statement of Procopius (Anecd., 19) that the immense savings of Anastasius were dissipated during the reign of Justin. He supplies a reason, viz., that the Emperor and his nephew were averse to bearing hardly on their subjects. There seems, however to have been a sinking fund kept up under the name of Anastasius, which continued to exist as a small reserve; Jn. Ephes. (Smith, Oxford, 1860), p. 358.
- ↑ "He spared no expense, still less did he spare the property of his subjects"; Zonaras, xiv, 6.
