SWPS - University of Social
Sciences and Humanities
in Warsaw (Poland)
De concussionibus
advocatorum sive apparitorum.
About tax collectors
extortion
SUMMARY: 1. Introduction. – 2. The competences of fisci advocatus. – 3. The historical, economic and political background of
the issuing of four constitutions. – 4. Analysis of individual constitutions. – 5. Final conclusions. – Bibliography. – Abstract.
1. – Introduction
The issue of clerical abuse in ancient Rome (concussio) and modern cases of this phenomenon,
which web portals quite often report, are inherently linked to well-organized
public administration systems. This negative side of public management in ancient
Rome was already evident in the Republican period. In order to combat this
phenomenon, many acts and regulations were passed at Plebeian Council[1],
the document issued by prudentes[2]
were implemented as well as many constitutions were created during the empire.
Fragments of four of them are preserved in the Theodosian
Code in book 8 under the title 10. Nowadays, one can point to a large number of
Romanist studies on this topic[3].
The purpose of this study is not to show the history
of legislative or institutional measures to combat clerical abuse. Also, it is
not to describe the phenomenon itself or possible cases of abuse, which I have
already done in an earlier study from almost 10 years ago[4].
I would like to analyze only the fragments of the
four constitutions, which were included in the Theodosian
Code, placed under the title De concussionibus advocatorum sive apparitorum (C.Th. 8.10).
Three of these fragments were then repeated in the Justinian Code under the
title De lucris advocatorum
et concussionibus officiorum sive
apparitorum (C. 12.61,1-3).
To a large extent, fragments of these constitutions rarely
become a subject of Romanist studies. Already in the introduction to this
study, it should be noted that Romanists and historians generally treat the
fragments of those constitution contained in this title as general norms for
clerical abuse or lawyers. Meanwhile, these provisions were addressed only to
one of the Roman province which was Africa. J. Wiewiórowski
believes that these constitutions are of a legal and administrative nature,
giving the province governor a legal basis to combat the greed of tax
collectors and lawyers[5]. However, he does not specify which
lawyers would be involved in this case.
In my opinion, the fragments of the constitution found
in book 8, titles 10 of the Theodosian Code were
selected in terms of clerical abuses committed by advocatus
fisci and other senior officials. This is
indicated by the specification of advocatus fisci used in the first constitution. In the second
constitution, there is a term scholasticis,
which was used in the late empire to refer to lawyers, including those working
for the tax office[6]. This is the main reason for my interest
in the fragments of the constitution placed under title 10, book 8 of the Theodosian Code.
2. – The competences of fisci advocatus
The competence of advocatus
fisci office created during the reign of Emperor
Hadrian was evolving[7]. Originally, the task of advocatus fisci was
to represent the tax office in inheritance lawsuits or bona vacantia belonging to the tax office. Already, at the
end of the classical period, the competence of advocates fisci
was very broad and covered all matters in which the interest of fiscus occurred. As a rule, these were disputes that
were settled by the courts. In the Justinian times, however, the solution was
maintained that advocatus fisci accompanied the delator
in a lawsuit in which the interests of the tax office had to be defended. There
is no doubt that advocatus fisci could take legal action in defence of the fiscal
interests, even in the case of delator’s absence.
In civil proceedings to which fiscus
was a party, already during the reign of Marcus Aurelius, the participation of advocatus fisci was
mandatory.
D. 49.14.7 (Ulp. l. 54 ad ed.): Si fiscus alicui status controversiam faciat, fisci advocatus adesse debet. Quare si sine fisci advocato pronuntiatum sit, divus Marcus rescripsit nihil esse actum et ideo ex integro cognosci oportere.
Until the reign of Marcus Aurelius, the participation
of advocates fisci in trials involving fiscus was optional or, at most, compulsory in disputes
concerning bona caduca. Aurelius, in his
rescript, introduced the obligation of attendance of his legal representative
in all types of court proceedings, where the tax office would be a party. Over
time, advocates were competent to collect treasury receivables also from
other titles, such as acquiring the property of persons sentenced to exile or
sentenced to death due to committing an act classified as crimen maiestatis[8].
The absence of advocatus
fisci in proceedings involving fiscus resulted in its absolute invalidity and,
consequently, ineffectiveness of the court judgment. In this case, the
institution restitutio in integrum was used and the proceedings had to be
conducted from the beginning[9].
Taking action by advocates fisci
were most often inspired by delatores, i.e.
people who reported on citizens’ unpaid obligations towards of the treasury[10].
According to A. Agudo Ruiz,
the legal position of avocatus fisci in the structure of the imperial administration
was clearly different in the period before and after Constantine. In the first
of these periods advocatus fisci was appointed directly by the emperor. In the
second period, the right to appoint these officials was divided between the
emperor and the governors of the provinces - praeses,
vicarii or rectores
provinciarum[11].
This means that advocatus fisci not only appeared in the center,
whether in Rome or Constantinople, but also performed their functions in the
provincial administration.
Some changes also took place in 452, when Valentinian began appointing candidates for the office of avocatus fisci from
lawyers placed on the list known as matricula.
Those lists were the result of the creation of lawyers' corporations at that
time, in the form of colleges or associations of officials employed in the
imperial administration. However, the main task of avocatus
fisci remained to represent the interests of the
tax office in civil proceedings initiated by delators.
Thus, avocatus fisci
appeared as a defender of the rights and legal interests of the tax
authorities.
3. – The historical,
economic and political background of the issuing of four constitutions
The common denominator for the fragments of the four
constitutions issued in the period covered almost 100 years (from 314 to 412),
and placed under the title De concussionibus advocatorum sive apparitorum, was an attempt to remedy the difficult
political and economic situations that arose during this period in one of most
important Roman provinces, i.e. in Africa Proconsularis[12]. These constitutions contain various normative
solutions directed against the forcing of unlawful benefits by lawyers or
municipal and provincial officials.
One of the characteristics in the case of abuse committed
by officials was their actions to achieve certain benefits for fiscus or for themselves - animus lucri faciendi. Therefore,
not only the motif was important, but also how they worked. An official wanting
to gain an advantage, was taking the actions affecting the will of a potential
victim that he or she would be willing to agree to the impoverishment in order
to enrich the other person.
The preserved constitutions were addressed to the
province of Africa. They were published in the years from 314 to 412. During
this period, the province was experiencing a huge economic and political
crisis. This crisis intensified at the turn of the 4th and 5th centuries, when
Africa ceased to be the main supplier of grain to Rome and later also to
Constantinople. Finally, after the loss of Byzacena
to the Vandals and after Genzeryk's occupation of
Carthage, the grain deliveries from Africa were practically cut off.
J. Kolendo and T. Kotula write that during this period there was an
irreversible fall of cities, including degradation of city officials, the fall
of the middle class and artisan. There were also the increasingly frequent
invasions of barbarians[13].
The deteriorating financial situation of the Roman
state caused numerous negative behaviours of state officials. And so Comes
of Africa ordered the requisitioning of grain and camels to the local people
for the army. Often, ordinary soldiers committed arbitrariness and robberies.
Officials were guilty of misconduct, including those who served as advocatus fisci by
misusing their powers.
In the face of this difficult situation for the
province of Africa, the Emperor Honorius issued a number of constitutions
reducing the amount of tax. Thus, the fiscal burden was increased for other provinces,
especially for Gaul[14]. By granting tax reduction for Africa,
the emperors wanted to ensure their fidelity while facing the Alaric's
invasions[15].
4. – Analysis of individual
constitutions
The first of the four discussed constitutions was
published by Constantine the Great on 8th November 314 in Trier. It was
addressed to the proconsul of the province of Africa Proconsularis.
C.Th.
8.10.1 Imp.
Constantinus a. proconsuli
Africae. Si
quis se a ducenariis vel centenariis ac praecipue fisci advocatis laesum esse cognoscit, adire iudicia ac probare iniuriam non moretur, ut in eum qui convictus fuerit competenti severitate vindicetur. Dat.
VI id. nov. Treviris, acc.
XV kal. mart. Carthagine Constantino a. IIII et Licinio
IIII consulibus. (314 vel
315 [immo 313] nov. 8).
The preserved fragment of Constantine's constitution
concerned three groups of officials related to the organization and functioning
of the tax administration in the province. These are ducenariis,
centenariis and advocatus
fisci. They were part of the tax apparatus, which
was part of the clerical apparatus cantered around the province governor, who
was the representative of the emperor[16]. Officials employed in this sector of
administration are divided into ducenarii, centenarii and sexagentarii.
Each of these clerical groups was assigned with the specific competences, which
were subject to various modifications over time[17].
In turn, advocatus fisci
in the provincial governor's office served as the legal representation of tax
office in the court cases in which the interest of the imperial treasury
existed.
The tasks of ducenarii
and centnarii also included collecting taxes
from the inhabitants of the province[18]. They were often entitled to recover
outstanding tax liabilities resulting from tabularius
civitatis[19]. In cases where the claims against the
tax office became disputable, these proceedings required the presence of advocatus fisci.
Unfortunately, for different kind of abuses involving excessive tax demands or
extortion of unauthorized benefits to officials themselves were very common
procedures. The excessive demands may also have been the result of errors in
determining the amount of tax. Hence, Diocletian ordered the burning of fiscal
documents containing outstanding debts to the tax office. The idea was that on
the basis of the same documents it was not possible to claim the same amounts
which had already been settled or were time-barred[20].
Constantine decided that if a citizen were to be
harmed (lessum esse)
by acts carried out by ducenariis and centenariis or by advocatus
fisci, the citizen should immediately bring an
accusation to the court and prove the truth of the charges. The preserved
passage does not describe any specific clerical activities that could be
considered as the harm to a citizen.
The encouragement from the emperor addressed to those
harmed by the unlawful actions of tax officials was aimed not only at
eliminating clerical irregularities, but also at restoring a positive image of
the state or emperor in the eyes of the inhabitants of the African province.
The next Constantine's constitution was addressed to Eubulides, a governor of the province of Africa. It
concerned the clerical abuses committed by tax collectors (officialis)
and lawyers (scholasticis). In the mid-4th
century, the term scholasticus was often used
to refer to lawyers. In this case, linking this term to the term used to
designate fiscal officials suggests that the constitution was about advocatus fisci.
C.Th. 8.10.2 Imp. Constantius
a. Eubulidae viro clarissimo vicario Africae. Praeter sollemnes et canonicas pensitationes multa a provincialibus afris indignissime postulantur ab officialibus et scholasticis, non modo in civitatibus singulis, sed et mansionibus, dum ipsis et animalibus
eorundem alimoniae sine pretio ministrantur. Nec latet mansuetudinem
nostram saepissime scholasticos ultra modum acceptis honorariis in defensione causarum omnium et annonas et sumptus accipere consuesse, quibus, tantis conmodis fulti itinere, suam avaritiam
explere nequeunt. Provinciales itaque cuncti iudices tueantur nec iniurias inultas transire permittant. Dat. III kal. iul. Leontio
et Sallustio conss. (344 iun. 29).
The first sentence of the above text refers to the
collection of ordinary and regular taxes (pensitationes).
In the 4th century, normal property tax was vectigal,
later referred to as tributum[21]. As a rule, these were monetary
benefits, but often also benefits in kind, especially when it came to ensuring
the provisioning of Roman legions. Already under Emperor Caracalla,
such taxes were referred to as annuae pensitationes. Since Diocletian's time, it has become a
common form of taxation[22].
The obligation to collect taxes rested on the provincial
officials employed in the provincial governor's office, i.e
officialis and scholastici.
The first term is a general term and meant officials regardless of their
function but in connection with the collection of taxes. The second meant
lawyers, which only confirms that it was about advocatus
fisci involved in the processes in which the tax
office was involved.
The subject of this constitution was the
implementation of sanctions for abuse of tax collection in the African
province. The extortion of officials was not only manifested in excessive
burdens imposed on individual cities (non modo in civitatibus singulis) but
above all in harming individual citizens, probably those richer. In particular,
it was a free (sine pretio) use of animals for
public purposes contrary to the provisions of Roman law.
The second part of the constitution deals sensu stricte with
the fraud committed by lawyers. The manifestation of abuse on their part was
the collection of excessive remuneration (ultra modum)
or the acceptance of various material benefits (annonas
et sumptus accipere).
In view of all these abuses of officials, the
provincial governors, as well as judges, should ensure that such impudent (insultas) irregularities do not go unpunished.
Constantine, therefore, did not indicate any specific sanction that should be
imposed on the official in the event of his abuses in connection with the
collection of taxes. Thus, the province governor or the judges received fairly
wide discretion to impose penalties according to the type and extent of the
abuse. It was, therefore, an abstract norm of law, but directed only to one of
the Roman provinces[23].
The next constitution is authored by two emperors,
i.e. Arcadius and Honorius. It was released on 31st December 400 in Milan and
was addressed to Pompeianus, proconsul of the
Province of Africa.
C.Th. 8.10.3 Impp. Arcadius et Honorius aa.
Pompeiano proconsuli Africae. Quotiens compulsor arguitur in depraedatione convictus, non consulta clementia
nostra. Poenam subeat legibus competentem. Dat. prid. kal.
ian. Mediolano Stilichone et Aureliano conss. (400 dec. 31).
The disposition of a legal norm enshrined in a
preserved fragment of the constitution concerns the manner of action of the
person collecting the tax (compulsor). No
specific type of officials has been identified. Thus, the legal norm contained
in this passage applies to every tax collection officer. The sanction of the
legal norm applies to those officials who collect taxes with the violation of
the law. The term depraedatio used in the text
means robbery, looting, but also an absolute tax collector. Rather, it should
be assumed that this was not the last case.
The preserved fragment of the constitution does not
specify possible cases that could fall under such behaviour. Therefore, it
should be assumed that the assessment and qualification of the act depended on
the judge who was to decide the complaint about the action of the tax
collector.
The preserved fragment of the constitution also
contains a sanction. First of all, a convicted tax collector could not count on
the grace of the emperor - non consulta clementia nostra. In practice, this meant that the
convict could not appeal, and the appeal, using modern terminology, was ex officio
rejected. There were also no specific penalties that could be imposed against
such a tax collector. In general, it was only stated that these were to be
penalties provided for in other acts. It is therefore a typical provision
referring to other legal acts. However, it is impossible in this study to analyze the legal provisions of the turn of the 4th and 5th
centuries regarding penalties imposed on officials with paying special
attention to tax collectors[24].
The last constitution, whose fragment retained the
title De concussionibus advocatorum
sive apparitorum, was
addressed to Eurachio, the proconsul of Africa. The
emperors - Honorius and Theodosius were the authors of this constitution. The
constitution was issued on 8th August 412.
C.Th. 8.10.4 Impp.
Honorius et Theodosius aa. Euchario proconsuli Africae. Universa
compulsorum genera ex Africanis provinciis
constituimus esse pellenda, his videlicet restitutis, quae forsitan per temeritatem sustulerant. Dat.
VI id. aug. Ravenna dd. nn.
Honorio VIIII et Theodosio
V aa. conss. (412 aug. 8).
The emperors decided that all tax collectors (compulsores) who had committed extortion should be
expelled from the province of Africa. This legal norm applied to all officials
convicted of extortion even in the past. The economic and political situation
probably continued to deteriorate during this period, and this was overlapped
by the dishonest behaviour of members of the Roman administration. In order to
relieve the excessive burdens imposed on the local population, as well as to
build a positive image of the Roman emperor, it was decided to expel all tax
collectors convicted of extortion[25].
5. – Final conclusions
Abuse of various officers is a universal and timeless
phenomenon. They occur where there are extensive structures of public
administration. Often this phenomenon is associated with various political,
economic or social crises. This was also the case in ancient Rome. The Theodosian Code contained fragments of four constitutions
issued by various emperors in the 4th and 5th centuries. The common ground of
these constitutions was their publication for the province of Africa. At that
time, the province was experiencing an economic crisis caused by structural
changes in the economy at the time, resulting from a decrease in the demand for
grain and a threat to the invasions of barbarian peoples.
The fight against the abuse of tax collectors and
lawyers (advocatus fisci)
serving in the service of the governor of Africa was the common subject of
these constitutions. These abuses varied in nature, ranging from taxation
beyond measure, free use of private animals for public or personal purposes,
and finally there were cases of unlawful appropriation of private property by
tax collectors.
The purpose of the constitution was to combat these
negative phenomena and to restore not only legal order, but also to build a
positive image of the emperor or the Roman authorities in the province. Directing
these constitutions to the provinces of Africa also shows that already in the
4th century there was a fairly big problem of extortion authorized by tax
collectors with a lot of support from lawyers serving the province's governor.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Agudo Ruiz A., El advocates fisci en
derecho romano, Madrid 2006;
Badian E., Lex Acilia repetundarum, The American Journal of Philology vol.
40, no 4, 1954, 374-384;
Cerami P., Il controllo finanziario in diritto romano, In:
Studi in Onore di Gaetano Scherillo. II,
Milano 1972, 767-802;
Fishwick D., On the origins
of Africa Proconsularis,
Antiquités Africaines, 29, 1993, 53-62.
Génaux M., La corruption, avant la lettre: la vocabulaire de la déviance publique dans l’ancien
droit pénal, IURA 81, 2003, 15- 32;
Kamienik R., Ucisk podatkowy i
nadużycia ze strony administracji rzymskiej w ostatnich wiekach Cesarstwa,
Roczniki Lubelskie 14, 1971, 9-38.
Kłodziński K., Działalność
administracyjna ‘Officium a rationibus’ w świetle ‘Epistula ad Saepinum’,
Zeszyty Prawnicze 17.1, 2017, 5- 32;
Kolendo J., T. Kotula, Z problematyki
rozwoju miast w rzymskiej Afryce, Przegląd Historyczny 67/2, 1976,
69-179;
Kołodko P., “Lex Calpurnia de
pecuniis repetundis” I jej znaczenie dla ewolucji rzymskiego prawa karnego,
Zeszyty Prawnicze UKSW 11/1, 2011, 137-161;
Kotula T., Studia nad problemem afrykańskiej annony, Przegląd Historyczny 49/1, 1958,. 1-20;
Licandro O., In magistratu damnari. Ricerche sulla responsabilità dei magistrati romani durante l’esercizio delle funzioni, Torino 1999;
Liebenam W., Stadtverwaltung im Römischen Kaiserreiche,
Leipzig 1900;
Nicolet C., Les loi judiciares et
les trinunoaux de concussion. Travaux recentes et directions de recherches, In: ANRW I.2Berlin 1972, 197-214.
Perelli L., La corruzione politica nell’antica Roma. Tangenti, malversazioni, malcostume, illeciti, raccomendazioni, Milano 1994;
Pikulska-Radomska A., Rzymskie tributum
jako instrument polityki międzynarodowej, In: F. Longchamps de
Berier, R. Sarkowicz, M. Szpunar (red.), Consul est iuris et patriae
defensor. Księga pamiątkowa dedykowana Andrzejowi Kremerowi,
Warszawa 2012, 167-173;
Raggi L., La restittutio in integrum nella cognitio extra ordinem. Contributo allo studio dei rapporti tra patrimonio pretorio e diritto imperiale in età classica, Milano 1965;
Sawicki P., Służby skarbowe w starożytnym Rzymie okresu dominatu, Białystok 2018, praca doktorska, nieopublikowana.
Sitek B., Crimen concussionis.
Przestępstwo korupcji w prawie rzymskim i w polskim prawie karnym. In:
Ochrona bezpieczeństwa i porządku publicznego w prawie rzymskim,
Lublin 2010, 219-230
Sitek B., Delationes fiscales. O społecznym obowiązku zawiadomienia o przestępstwie lub wykroczeniu skarbowym z perspektywy historycznej. In: E. Kozerska, P. Sadowski, A. Szymański (red.), Pacta sunt servanda – nierealny projekt czy gwarancja ładu społecznego i prawnego? Kraków 2015, 155-168.
Sitek B., In dubio magis contra fiscum est respondendum (D. 49.14.10), Studia Prawnoustrojowe 27, 2015, 55-62;
Venturini C., Concussione e corruzione, origine romanistica di una problematica attuale. In: Studi in onore di A. Biscardi, vol. VI, Milano 1987, 133-157;
Warmington B. H., The North-African Provinces from Diocletian
to the Vandal Conquest, Cambridge 1954;
Wiewirówski J., Sądownictwo
późnorzymskich wikariuszy diecezji, Poznań 2012;
Żyromski M., Praefectus
Classis: the Commanders of Roman Imperial Navy during
the Principate, Poznań
2001.
Abstract
The fragments of four constitutions from the 4th and
5th centuries, placed under a common title in the Justinian Code are the
subject of this study. The element connecting these constitutions was combating
the phenomenon of clerical abuse, including lawyers (advocatus
fisci) in Africa, which was one of the major
provinces. The aim of the study is to show methods to combat the negative
phenomenon in the imperial administration in order to build a positive image of
the emperor as a good and caring landlord. The research hypothesis that
underlies this study is the claim that the abuse of public officials is a
timeless phenomenon. The result of the study is to show the ways and means of
the Emperor's response to these abuses.
Keywords: roman law, tributum, abuse
of public officials, advocatus fisci.
[Per la pubblicazione degli articoli della sezione “Tradizione Romana” si è applicato, in maniera rigorosa, il procedimento di peer review. Ogni articolo è stato valutato positivamente da due referees, che hanno operato con il sistema del double-blind]
[1] There are many such acts. The two most important of them that come from the republican period are: Lex Calpurnia de pecuniis repetundis from 149 BC. P. Kołodko, “Lex Calpurnia de pecuniis repetundis” i jej znaczenie dla ewolucji rzymskiego prawa karnego, Zeszyty Prawnicze UKSW 11/1, 2011, 137-161; Lex Acilia repetundarum from 123 BC. It was a plebiscite on the basis of which immunity was imposed for officials performing public tasks. However, after leaving office they could be held liable to double the value of misappropriated things. Cic. Verr. 1.17.51. See: E. Badian, Lex Acilia repetundarum, The American Journal of Philology vol. 40, no 4, 1954, 374-384; O. Licandro, In magistratu damnari. Ricerche sulla responsabilità dei magistrati romani durante l’esercizio delle funzioni, Torino 1999, 121-127, 266-272.
[2] Roman lawyers did not produce a separate work
dedicated solely to issues of clerical abuse. However, these issues were raised
on other occasions, e.g. Ulpian L. 5 qu. (D. 47.13.1) or Macer
l. Primo pub. Judica. (D. 47.13.2). There are also
numerous cases of clerical abuse described in non-legal literature, e.g. Cic. Ad Att.
5.21.7;
[3] See: M. Génaux, La corruption, avant la lettre: la
vocabulaire de la déviance publique dans l’ancien droit pénal, IURA 81,
2003, 15- 32; L. Perelli, La corruzione
politica nell’antica Roma. Tangenti,
malversazioni, malcostume, illeciti, raccomandazioni, Milano
1994, 131-193; C. Venturini, Concussione e corruzione, origine
romanistica di una problematica attuale. In: Studi in onore di A. Biscardi,
vol. VI, Milano 1987, 136; C. Nicolet, Les loi judiciares et les tribunaux de
concussion. Travaux recentes et directions de recherches. In: ANRW I.2
Berlin 1972, 197-214.
[4] B. Sitek, Crimen concussionis. Przestępstwo
korupcji w prawie rzymskim i w polskim prawie karnym. In: Ochrona
bezpieczeństwa i porządku publicznego w prawie rzymskim, Lublin
2010, 219-230.
[5] J. Wiewirówski, Sądownictwo późnorzymskich
wikariuszy diecezji, Poznań 2012, 141.
[6] Lawyers in municipal administration also performed
similar functions. See: W. Liebenam, Stadtverwaltung im Römischen Kaiserreiche,
Leipzig 1900, 300-301.
[7] Spart. (Script. Hist. Aug.) Hadr. 20,6: fisci advocatum primus instituit. A. Agudo Ruiz, El advocates fisci en derecho romano, Madrid 2006, 37. Ealier, the protection for fiscusa in court cases was provided by procurator patrimoni caesaris based on sc. Caludianum (Svet. Claud. 12). It was so in the provinces. In Rome to Nerva, this function was performed by a special praetor (Plin. Paneg 36 i).
[8] C. 9.18.9; 6.24.1; Svet. Aug. 34.
[9] B. Sitek, In dubio magis contra fiscum est respondendum (D. 49.14.10), Studia Prawnoustrojowe 27, 2015, 55-62; L. Raggi, La restitutio in integrum nella cognitio extra ordinem. Contributo allo studio dei rapporti tra patrimonio pretorio e diritto imperiale in età classica, Milano 1965, 339.
[10] B. Sitek, Delationes fiscales. O społecznym
obowiązku zawiadomienia o przestępstwie lub wykroczeniu skarbowym z
perspektywy historycznej. In: E. Kozerska, P. Sadowski, A. Szymański
(ed.), Pacta sunt servanda – nierealny projekt czy gwarancja ładu
społecznego i prawnego? Kraków
2015, 155-168.
[11] A. Agudo Ruiz, El
advocates fisci, cit., 12.
[12] The term Africa Proconsularis
comes from the time of Octavian Augustus. See:. D. Fishwick, On the
origins of Africa Proconsularis, Antiquités africaines, 29, 1993,
53-62.
[13] J. Kolendo, T. Kotula, Z problematyki rozwoju miast w rzymskiej Afryce, Przegląd Historyczny
67/2/1976, 175; B. H. Warmington, The
North-African Provinces from Diocletian to the Vandal Conquest, Cambridge
1954, 30.
[14] See:. R. Kamienik, Ucisk podatkowy i nadużycia
ze strony administracji rzymskiej w ostatnich wiekach Cesarstwa, Roczniki
Lubelskie 14, 1971, 17.
[15] Idem, 29.
[16] D. 1.18.4. (Ulp. l. 39 ad ed.).
[17] The ducenariis and centenariis
offices were usually held by persons of the equic
state. CIL VI 1598. The ducenariis was a tax
official who earned more than 200,000 sesterces annually. In turn, the centenariis was a tax official earning more than
100,000 sesterces annually. These officials have been known since the time of
Hadrian. K. Kłodziński, Administrative
activity of 'Officium a rationibus'
in the light of 'Epistula ad
Saepinum', Zeszyty Prawnicze 17.1, 2017, 25; M. Żyromski,
Praefectus Classis: the
Commanders of Roman Imperial Navy during the Principate,
Poznań 2001, 30-38; P. Sawicki,
Treasury Service in Ancient Rome of the Dominate Period, Białystok
2018, 156, doctoral dissertation, unpublished.
[18] CTh. 11.7.9.
[19] CTh. 11.7.1.
[20] CTh. 11.26.2. See:. P. Sawicki, Służby
skarbowe, cit., 16.
[21] It is not clear from the text whether it was tributum sol or tributum
capitis. However, it can be assumed that the
general formulation of these taxes in the constitutional text syntax to state
that they were both types of taxes. See: P.
Cerami, Il controllo finanziario in diritto romano, In: Studi in Onore
di Gaetano Scherillo. II, Milano 1972, 782;
A. Pikulska-Radomska, Rzymskie tributum jako instrument polityki
międzynarodowej, In: F. Longchamps de Berier, R. Sarkowicz, M. Szpunar
(red.), Consul est iuris et patriae defensor. Księga
pamiątkowa dedykowana Andrzejowi Kremerowi, Warszawa 2012, 167
[22] Termin annuae pensitationes występuje już w
tablicy z Brigetio The term annuae pensitationes already appears in
the table from Brigetio. AEp 1У37, no 232. See:. T. Kotula, Studia
nad problemem afrykańskiej annony, Przegląd Historyczny 49/1, 1958,
14.
[23] This constitution has also found its place in the Justinian
Code, but it has been significantly amended. C. 12.61.2: Imperator Constantius. Praeter sollemnes et canonicas pensitationes multa a provincialibus indignissime postulantur ab officialibus et scholasticis non modo in civitatibus singulis, sed et mansionibus, dum ipsis et animalibus eorundem alimoniae sine pretio ministrantur. It is
already a constitution addressed to all Roman provinces.
[24] A fragment of this constitution has also been
preserved in the Justinian Code C. 12.61.3.
[25] A fragment of this constitution has not been
preserved in the Justinian Code.