hey may come in the end to ruin industry, and weaken all the
public resources to such an extent as to render a nation incapable of
defending itself. But a very little consideration must be sufficient to
show that it was not, in the case of Rome, the increase of the taxes
taken as a whole, _but the decline in the resources of those who paid
them_, which rendered them so oppressive. If, indeed, the national
establishment of the Roman empire had gone on increasing as it advanced
in years, until at length their charges became excessive and crushing to
industry, the theory would have been borne out by the fact, and afforded
perhaps satisfactory explanation of the phenomenon. But the fact was
_just the reverse_. The military establishment of the Roman empire was
so much _contracted_ as it advanced in years that whereas it amounted to
450,000 men in the days of Augustus, in those of Justinian it had sunk,
as already noticed to 150,000.[6] So far were the forces of Rome from
being excessive in the later stages of the empire or disproportioned to
an empire still, after all its losses, holding so large and fair a
portion of the earth under its dominion, that on the other hand they
were miserably small; and the disasters it underwent were mainly owing
to the government of the Caesars never being able to equip an adequate
army to repel the attacks of the barbarians. The force with which
Belisarius reconquered Africa and recovered Italy, never mustered
_seventeen thousand men_; and the greater part of his successes were
achieved by _six thousand_ legionary followers. It was not the weight of
the national establishments, therefore, but the diminished resources of
those who were to pay them, which really occasioned the destruction of
the empire.
There are two other facts of vital importance in considering the real
causes of the gradual decay and ultimate ruin of the dominion of the
legions.
The first of these is, that the extent of the decay was, in the latter
stages of Rome, _very unequal_ in the different provinces of the empire;
and that while the central provinces, and those in the neighbourhood of
the metropolis, were in the most wretched state of decrepitude, the
remote districts were _in the highest state of affluence and
prosperity_. This important fact is abundantly proved by unquestionable
authority, and it sheds a flood of light on the real causes of the ruin
which ultimately overtook them all.
The state of agricultur
|