Roman Civil Serive

Was there a Roman civil service?
The term ‘civil service’ as we know it encompasses a huge range of different offices for the government. Individuals are typically employed based on professional merit and proven credentials. They also rarely encompass anything related to the military. But was this the case in Ancient Rome? This is what I will answer through looking at the various civil bodies and the evidence of these I hope to build a coherent view of the offices held within Rome and whether this can be considered a civil service. There were many offices under the Roman Empire, but was this a coherent system as we see the civil service?

There were various roles within the Roman state working directly for the emperor in the management of the Empire; can this be considered a civil service? I believe so; but our view and interpretation of this may be different to how they actually operated. Currently bodies of officials make decisions based on a framework that has been implemented and authorised from a deciding figure. In our case the prime minister, for Rome the Emperor it would be shallow to think that the Emperor did not take political and social advise from advisors but unlike modern day Britain one man had the power to make the final decision. My point here is, that though we give it the same title the reality of its implication maybe entirely different.

It is only when we get to the end of the Republic that we begin to hear more regarding the civil services, through Cicero in his letter to Quintus and Sulla’s law on the twenty quaestors which we know about through the iconography, along with the inscriptions that appear throughout the imperial period.

One aspect of the Roman administration system that we would deem integral to a civil service was the cursus honorum, which was the framework for the order of public offices held by those progressing through Roman politics. This was only one route through political life – it is just the one, which is most commonly discussed. But the Roman system was a mixture of military and senatorial rank that had a minimum age requirement for each position. There was also a time element attached to each office and supposed gaps between them; this was however frequently ignored for specific individuals. There were also Aediles , they were responsible for who overseeing public buildings and gardens along with the organising of public events. Most importantly in my opinion, they took charge of roman water supply, food supply and acted as judges – all fundamental elements of a successful empire. So clearly this was an important office, not an area that would have been left in the hands of the inexperienced – which many magistrates were. Whereas the aediles were career professionals who had a full understanding of the processes and what was required from the role.

There was no upper age limit for the positions those who reached the higher offices were usually in the later stages of life and could be why some were allowed deputies to aid in their role. These seconds-in-commands or assistants effectively had the position without the years of work to progress to the office. Something that could be what these lower clerical levels could have progressed to.

Through looking at the different positions that were held by individuals we get a much better idea of the system as a whole. These sub level positions illuminate areas of concern for the Emperor through having a specific office dedicated to these ‘at risk’ areas. There were so many different levels of the civil service it would be tedious to detail all of them.
Magistrates are the first people that we think of when considering the Roman system. There were many subcategories of the system and those who worked for the magistrates such as the ministry. The ministri were the servants of the magistrates but were more commonly referred to as the Appariterea, as their job was to carry out the commands of the magistrates, there were many positions within this very broad title. All official administration of the provinces had to be conducted in Latin and therefore interpres were required. Pliny tells us that there was up to one hundred and thirty interpreters for the Roman merchants and enabled business to take place in Dioscurias. The Appariterea received various privileges for being part of such a body but there was also a class system in place. One of these roles was that of the Stator’s who attending the magistrates in the Provinces. A very specific role, for the carrying of letters and messages the fundamental form of communication for the Empire. Their role was later changed by Severus to be the responsibility of the soldiers.

Another administrative roles within the Roman Empire, was the cofactor, responsible for collections – mostly dealing with servants of the publicani or taxes, and the revenue from auctions. The Accensi focussed on several Roman magistrates. These men summoned the people to the assemblies and courts. A more mundane task of theirs was the announcement of the third, sixth and ninth hour, this seems absurd to us, but the plebs presumably would have had no way of knowing the time other than these announcements without access to a sun dial – which I very much doubt were regularly available throughout the city.

We learn a lot about the legal system that was in place in Rome through these offices such as with the carnifex who was the executioner in Rome. The carnifex never executed citizens; he was only responsible for slaves and foreigners, with citizens being punished in another manner. There was also the prelude to execution the carnifex was responsible for torture. This is one of the few offices that I have looked at which actually has several negatives associated with it such as not being able to reside within the city, but having to live near the area called Sessorium – the place where the slaves were punished. Some believe that they were also the prison guards from the passage from Plautus.

These positions were not taken to achieve fame and recognition for their work – that was for the magistrates. Only one name has survived Gnaeus Flavius; he was a scribe who eventually became and aedile in 304BC. From his career as an aedile we can see some of the organisation of the system and status of these individuals. Unlike their Greek counterparts Roman scribers there were considered experts in their career and served their life to their position, due to the length of service they could be considered more knowledgeable than the magistrates who were replaced on an annual basis.

There were servi publici in Rome who worked on small clerical schemes, in particularly the priestly colleges. More consideration and importance was placed on those who were employed. It is during the imperial period that we hear about the sub-clerical groups of the civil service such as medici, architecti, haruspices and pullarii – we know that these positions existed but unlike other positions we know little in regard to there organisation. Such levels of the system continued long into the imperial period under the old and new magistrate positions.
There are a few whose roles changed depending upon where they were residing. The Lictors for example was more of a ceremonial office within Rome, but in the provinces the Lictors could be highly influential and according to Cicero able to accumulate large fortunes. There were also viators who had almost the same role as the Lictors, though they mainly dealt with the senators. It is not unlikely that the ancient writers confused the two due to their similarity. Much like us confusing two of our offices, which we don’t fully understand, the intricate levels – mainly as these technicalities are of no concern to us. Lictors were appointed originally by the plebs but later on they were predominantly freedmen – presumably freedmen of the magistrate that they previously served.
Much like the modern civil service this level was very much based in the pencil pushing of the state the next level from this was the clerical – and deemed much more respectable than the lower levels. Cicero implies that the scribae succeeded the equestrian tribune, it is also claimed that these scribes upon completing their service were presented with a gold ring.
Our evidence for the organisation of the services comes primarily from the imperial inscriptions that we have. There were also many sub categories of each area of work. There were panels called decuria for each of the areas of the government. The decuriae are consider the place where magistrates would recruit their staff. Pliny details his selection of a scriba through lot suggesting that this was the way that was commonly implemented and resonates from the republican period. This however is disputed through Cicero writing for Verres’ who scriba followed him through his political career suggesting that his employer chose him rather than being selected by lot. Though care is taken by Cicero in informing us about the membership of the ordo scribarum and being part of the decuria. Then there were also offices, which encompassed various roles such as the praecones who were criers – much like our town criers or auctioneers; this was their main responsibility to announce the goods, the time and place of the sale. The actual authorisation of the sales was down to the magister. The praecones had many other roles, from calling for silence to the summoning of the accused in a trial. Though their office was largely regarded as dishonest – which says a lot about just how dishonest it was when all the offices had a level of dishonesty to them. In the imperial period it was an incredibly profitable position to hold, this maybe due to the bribes they received to be considered dishonest.
The logistics of this system are fairly complicated to understand, the apparitores were not in continuous employment; but they did have a continuous salary from the Aerarium. Though the places on these panels were purchased,
Cicero is rather cynical in regards to this claiming that anyone can rise through the rank just due to cash flow rather than merit. But was this the case? The exact workings of the system is not fully known, it appears to works through nomination. Once in place they could not be replaced, unless they behaved in a manner unfitting - such as is described by Plutarch about the experience of Cato whilst quaestor. The fact that these places were purchased suggests that the posts were highly lucrative, this despite the official salary being rather small. Why would they pay for them there was no social gain or merit, indicating that this was regular supplements possibly through specific benefits and privileges – such as a kickback. Such a benefit could not have been considered an ‘official perk’ for obvious reasons, but due to the open nature of the record from Cicero it was clearly open policy and there were possibly much profitable unrecorded kickbacks taking place.

It was not just the place on these kickbacks but sometimes the position itself. Positions of importance were sometimes even purchased from their previous owners. So much so that by the 6th Century some offices were officially being put up for sale. The one, which we know of, is the sacra scrinia. The proximus was available for 250 solidi those eligible for the position was determined by social position, in specific order of this they were asked as to whether they were able to pay, if not then it passed to the next eligible in the line.
There was apparently no fixed price for these offices until Justinian introduced a fixed rate – with the exception of the three senior officials who were able to sell their offices for a price, which they deemed acceptable. What is clear from the laws that Justinian introduced that many of those who were aspiring to hold these positions did not possess the necessary cash to purchase them, they often resorted to borrowing money. There were technicalities in place for such borrowing – if the borrower died prematurely before the repayment of the loan then the debt was passed onto the successor. Clearly the system was open to abuse and corruption, officials not attending to their offices were subject to penalties.

A common opinion is that the magistrate was the one who controlled every element singlehandedly, something that is just not true. He had a huge support system in place through the various offices. Much like our Mayors they are more of a figurehead. The fact that this is recorded as a single event shows just how rare an event this was, than actually responsible for the intricate running of each individual department. Plutarch details the experience of Cato when quaestor who actually researched his role and dictated to the scribae quaestorii rather than just authorising their decisions. Inevitably the magistrates would have learned a great deal from those whom they effectively employed, even from the sub-clerical levels of the system there was a vast amount of knowledge.

In terms of epigraphic evidence our largest collection comes from the imperial period, they are either dictate the careers of selected individuals or the activities of the decuriae. This shows that the system as a whole seemingly continued unchanged from the Republic. However, this is the first time that we start to hear of other grades such as geruli. These grades continued until at least the sixth century.

It was in the Imperial period when the administration increase ten fold that they had to introduce new positions – imperial slaves and freedmen to assist in the running on the empire; they formed the official of the provincial governors. There seems to be a continuous supply of bodies to fulfil these positions, it is thought that the slaves were families from the recurrence of specific names such as Agrippianus and Pallantianus. The later centuries there is an abundance of those born into the emperor’s service. We know this from the number of tombstones along with the records of those who were manumitted the number of imperial slaves is relatively few in comparison. Therefore there was very little expense involved in the recruitment of the slaves. Even when these slaves were freed there was still a client / patron relationship – the patron retained certain claims on his services along with a claim on the inheritance they left. This no doubt greatly aided the expense of the Emperor.

The service also developed in another way, through the implementing of the soldiers to the traditional staff duties. It seems to be a development of a process from the late republic where elite soldiers were allied with the person in command. Such as we see with Mark Anthony and Julius Caesar. In the provinces soldiers were also serving as librarii or adiutores. The office of the officia seems to have mainly been concerned with policing and judicial duty. Unlike our modern civil service Rome’s incorporated the military, it is commonly thought that Diocletian implemented this. Though clearly there were already areas that were concerned with the military such as the praetorian prefects and the provincial governors.

There seemed to be a very limited opportunity for progression within the system, everything was based on seniority. Due to an increase in the numbers of those working it could take a lifetime to progress through each stage. This seemed to be a concern for the Emperors throughout the ages and could be why forced retirement was implemented. This could however have been to combat a much more serious issue – those in the office going senile.

There were many perks to working in this system and the pay was one of them - not so much the standard rate but the continuity of it not matter what the work, bit like job security for us. There were also the additional benefits that came from the office. The sportulae was collected from one another along with the public. There was a charge on everything from letters of appointment and judicial processes. These tariffs were brought under control by Justinian something that has not survived to us. John Lydus tells us of how this drastically cut down the earning potential of certain offices. Constantine even referred to these as ‘tips’. Inevitably the government conceded to this practice and instead of trying to prevent it they decided to simply regulate it.

The system that has been looked at here may seem corrupt and poorly managed but it did serve a purpose in allowing such minimal corruption it seems to have acted as a check against larger corruptions further up the political chain. The officia who worked permanently in these positions often would have had a much greater understanding of the system and the role than the magistrate who held the official role. They also had much less fiscal motivations than the magistrates themselves.

The officium were effectively wielding as much control as the governors for enforcing and obeying the law, implement fines. The main thing to remember is that it was a system than constantly changed the offices and the standard rules remained but through time and the way they were managed resulted in a change in the success of the east compared to the collapse of the west.

There clearly was a large amount of administration taking place throughout Rome. Though can we consider this a civil service as we do? In my opinion yes, from the offices that have been looked at it is clear that there was an infrastructure and interconnectivity between them all. There may be a civil service as we see it but it does differ greatly to how we would operate one today the open inclusion of bribes means that it is not a fool proof system and there certainly is no grand plan in place more continuous answers to questions which have arisen. This could be why there were so many different and yet incredibly similar positions within the system. From what I have read and understood there was a civil service in Rome and it operated on large scale – though variations developed within it with time and the split in the Empire.

Bibliography

Anthon, C. (1851) A manual of Roman antiquities, Harper & Brothers

Brennan, C. (2000), The Praetorship in the Roman Republic, Volume 2, Oxford University Press

Butler, S. (2002), The Hand of Cicero, Routledge

Harlow, M. Laurence, R. (2002), Growing Up and Growing Old in Ancient Rome: A Life Course Approach, Routledge.

Johnson, A. Coleman-Norton, P. and Bourne, F. (2003), Ancient Roman Statutes‬: A Translation With Introduction, Commentary, Glossary, and Index,‬ The Lawbook Exchange.

Jones, H. M. (1949), ‘The Roman Civil Service (Clerical and Sub-Clerical Grades)’, The Journal of Roman Studies, Vol. 39, Parts 1 & 2 pp. 38-55

Loewenstei, K. (1973),The Governance of Rome, Springer.

Rüpke, J. (2011) A Companion to Roman Religion, John Wiley & Sons

Rüpke, J. & Richardson, D. (2011) The Roman Calendar from Numa to Constantine: Time, History, and the Fasti, John Wiley & Sons

Schiller, A. (1978), Roman Law: Mechanisms of Development, Walter de Gruyter

Weaver, P. (1972), Familia Caesaris‬: A Social Study of the Emperor 's Freedmen and Slaves, Cambridge University Press

Westermann, W. (1955), The Slave Systems of Greek and Roman Antiquity, American Philosophical Society

--------------------------------------------
[ 1 ]. Johnson, 2003, 67
[ 2 ]. Loewenstei, 1973, 55
[ 3 ]. Harlow, 2002, 106
[ 4 ]. Schiller, 1978, 186
[ 5 ]. John Lydus, III 9
[ 6 ]. Rüpke, J. 2011
[ 7 ]. Val. Max. II.2
[ 8 ]. Cicero, De Divinat. II. 64; Pliny, Natural History XXV. 2; Livy XXVII.43
[ 9 ]. Pliny, Natural History VI.5
[ 10 ]. Justinian, Cod. 12. 52-9
[ 11 ]. Cicero, ad Fam II.17, 19
[ 12 ]. Dig.4.6
[ 13 ]. Horace, Sat. I.6.85
[ 14 ]. Cicero, Pro. Rab. Post. 11
[ 15 ]. Anthon, 1851, 122
[ 16 ]. This was also the responsibility of the lictors who had to inflict the punishment on those who were condemned Livy II.5 & VIII.7
[ 17 ]. Cicero, Pro. Rab 5
[ 18 ]. Plaut. Galb. 28
[ 19 ]. Plautus, Rud. III.6.19
[ 20 ]. Rüpke & Richardson 2011, 44
[ 21 ]. Westermann 1955, 74
[ 22 ]. Cicero, Verr. II.27; III.28, 54; I37
[ 23 ]. Frontinus, de aqu. 100
[ 24 ]. Brennan, 2000, 666
[ 25 ]. Cicero Verr., v, ii8 ff
[ 26 ]. Cicero, De Senect, 16
[ 27 ]. Livy, II. 55
[ 28 ]. Tacitus, Ann. XIII. 27
[ 29 ]. Cicero, Verr. III, I82.
[ 30 ]. Cicero, Verr. III I84
[ 31 ]. Butler, 2002, 141
[ 32 ]. ILS 18945, 1898, 1926, 2748, 9036
[ 33 ]. Ep. iv. I2
[ 34 ]. Cicero, Verr. III. 187
[ 35 ]. Cicero, Verr. III. 184
[ 36 ]. Hor, Ars Poet, 419.
[ 37 ]. Suet, Tib, 11; Suet. Jul.84; Livy XXVI.15
[ 38 ]. Cicero, ad Fam. VI.18
[ 39 ]. Juvenal, III.157 & VII. 6; Martial V.56.11 & VI.8.5
[ 40 ]. Cicero, Verr. III. I84
[ 41 ]. Plutarch, Cato Mirnor, I6
[ 42 ]. Cicero, Verr. III. 182
[ 43 ]. Cicero, Verr. III 181 -tells of Cicero’s horror at a 4% kickback on the price of frumentum emptum
[ 44 ]. Just. Cod. III XXVIII
[ 45 ]. Just. Cod. XII xix
[ 46 ]. Ibid XII & XIX; Just. Nov. 35
[ 47 ]. Ibid VIII, XIII
[ 48 ]. Just. Cod. XII, XVII
[ 49 ]. Plutarch, Cato Minor, I6-I8
[ 50 ]. ILS 366, 504, 1534, 1909, 1940, 5021
[ 51 ]. Just. Cod. XI. 14
[ 52 ]. Weaver, 1972, 125
[ 53 ]. Histories, IV. 48
[ 54 ]. Caesar, BC, I.75 & III.88
[ 55 ]. ILS 2392, 2424
[ 56 ]. Lactantius, de mort. 31
[ 57 ]. Just. Cod. VIII, VII
[ 58 ]. Just. Cod. VI, XXVI
[ 59 ]. Ibid I, XXVII, I
[ 60 ]. Just. Cod. III. II.
[ 61 ]. John Lydus III.25
[ 62 ]. Just. Cod. XXI.
[ 63 ]. Just. Cod. Xi, XXX

Bibliography: Anthon, C. (1851) A manual of Roman antiquities, Harper & Brothers Brennan, C Butler, S. (2002), The Hand of Cicero, Routledge Harlow, M Johnson, A. Coleman-Norton, P. and Bourne, F. (2003), Ancient Roman Statutes‬: A Translation With Introduction, Commentary, Glossary, and Index,‬ The Lawbook Exchange. Jones, H. M. (1949), ‘The Roman Civil Service (Clerical and Sub-Clerical Grades)’, The Journal of Roman Studies, Vol. 39, Parts 1 & 2 pp. 38-55 Loewenstei, K Rüpke, J. (2011) A Companion to Roman Religion, John Wiley & Sons Rüpke, J Schiller, A. (1978), Roman Law: Mechanisms of Development, Walter de Gruyter Weaver, P Westermann, W. (1955), The Slave Systems of Greek and Roman Antiquity, American Philosophical Society -------------------------------------------- [ 1 ]. Johnson, 2003, 67 [ 2 ] [ 3 ]. Harlow, 2002, 106 [ 4 ] [ 15 ]. Anthon, 1851, 122 [ 16 ] [ 32 ]. ILS 18945, 1898, 1926, 2748, 9036 [ 33 ] [ 55 ]. ILS 2392, 2424 [ 56 ]