Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 20.djvu/806

Rh 782 ROME [HISTOE SECTION II. HISTORY OF THE ROMAN REPUBLIC IN THE MIDDLE AGES. The history of the Roman republic during the Middle Ages has yet to be written, and only by the discovery of new documents can the difficulties of the task be com- pletely overcome. Although very different in its origin, the Roman republic gradually assumed the same form as the other Italian communes, and with almost identical institu- tions. But, owing to the special local conditions amid which it arose, it maintained a distinct physiognomy and character. The deserted Campagna surrounding the city checked any notable increase of trade or industry, and prevented the establishment of the guilds on the solid footing that elsewhere made them the basis and support of the commune. There was also the continual and oppressive influence of the empire, and, above all, the presence of the papacy, which often appeared to absorb the entire vitality of the city. At such moments the commune seemed annihilated, but it speedily revived and reasserted itself. Consequently there are many apparent gaps in its history, and we have often extreme difficulty in discovering the invisible links connecting the visible fragments. Even the aristocracy of Rome had a special stamp. In the other republics, excepting Venice, it was feudal, of German origin, and in perpetual conflict with the popular and commercial elements which sought its destruction. The history of municipal freedom lay in this struggle. But the infiltration of Teutonic and feudal elements broke up the ancient aristocracy of Rome, and left it at the mercy of the people. Then the popes, by the bestowal of lucrative posts, rich benefices, and vast estates, and, above all, by raising many nobles to the purple, introduced new blood into the Roman aristocracy, and endued it with increasing strength and vitality. Always divided, always turbulent, this irrepressible body was a continual source of discord and civil war, of permanent confusion and turmoil. Amidst all these difficulties the commune struggled on, but never succeeded in long preserving a regular course or administration. What with continual warfare, attacks on the Capitol, and consequent slaughter, pillage, and in- cendiarism, it is no wonder that so few original documents are left to illustrate the history of the Roman republic. Nor have chroniclers and historians done much to supply this want, since, in treating of Roman affairs, their atten- tion is mainly devoted to the pope and- the emperor. Nevertheless we will attempt to connect in due order all the facts gleaned from former writers and published records. The removal of the seat of the empire to Constantinople effected a radical change in the political situation of Rome ; nor was this change neutralized by the formation of the weak Western empire soon to be shattered by the Germanic invasions. But we still find Roman laws and institutions ; and no sign is yet manifest of the rise of a mediaeval municipality. The earliest germ of one is seen during the barbarian invasions. Of these we need only enumerate the four most important, those of the Goths, The Byzantines, Lombards, and Franks. The Gothic rule Goths, merely superposed upon the Roman social order a Teutonic stratum, that never penetrated beneath its surface. The Goths always remained a conquering army ; according to the German custom, they took possession of one third of the vanquished territory, but, while forbidding the Romans to bear arms, left their local administration intact. The senate, the curiae, the principal magistrates, both provin- cial and municipal, the prefect of the city, and the Roman judges enforcing the enactments of the Roman law were all preserved. Already, under the empire, the civil power had been separated from the military, and this separation was maintained. Hence there was no visible change in the constitution of the state. Only, now there were con- quered and conquerors. All real and effective power was on the side of brute force, and the Goths alone bore arms. In every province they had their comites, or heads of the army, who had judicial power over their countrymen, especially in criminal cases. Here then was a combina- tion of civil and military jurisdiction altogether contrary to the Roman idea. Nor can it be denied that the comites, as chiefs of the armed force, necessarily exerted a direct or indirect influence on the civil and administrative power of the provinces, and especially upon the collection of the imposts. The civil arm, being virtually subordinate to the military, suffered unavoidable change. Notwithstanding the praise lavished on Theodoric, the kingdom founded by him in Italy had no solid basis. It was composed of two nations differing in race and traditions and even in religion, since the Goths were Arians and the Romans Catholics. The latter were sunk in degeneracy and cor- ruption ; their institutions were old and decrepit. It was necessary to infuse new life into the worn-out body. This was difficult, perhaps impossible ; and at any rate Theodoric never attempted the task. Little wonder then if the Gothic kingdom succumbed to the Byzantine hordes from Constantinople. The wars of Belisarius and Narses against the Goths lasted twenty years (535-555 A.D.), caused terrible slaughter zantil and devastation in Italy, and finally subjected her to ru Constantinople. In place of a Gothic king she was now ruled by a Greek patrician, afterwards entitled the exarch, who had his seat of government at Ravenna as lieutenant of the empire. In the chief, provincial cities the ruling counts were replaced by dukes, subordinate to the exarch ; and the smaller towns were governed by military tribunes. Instead of dukes, we sometimes find magistri militum, apparently of higher rank. The praefectus praetorio of Italy, likewise a dependant of the exarch, was at the head of the civil administration. The pragmatic sanction (554), promulgating the Justinian code, again separated the civil from the military power, which was no longer allowed to intervene in the settlement of private disputes, and, by conferring on the bishops the superintendence of and authority over the provincial and municipal government, soon led to the increase of the power of the church, which had already considerable influence. The new organization outwardly resembled that of the Goths : one army had been replaced by another, the counts by dukes; there was an exarch instead of a king; the civil and military jurisdictions were more exactly defined. But the army was not, like that of the Goths, a conquer- ing nation in arms ; it was a Grseco-Roman army, and did not hold a third of the territory which was now probably added to the possessions of the state. The soldiery took its pay from Constantinople, whence all instructions and appointments of superior officers likewise proceeded. In Rome we find a magister militum at the head of the troops. The Roman senate still existed, but was re- duced to a shadow. Theodoric had left it intact until he suspected it of hostile designs and dealings with the Byzantines, but then began to persecute it, as was proved by the wretched fate of Boetius and Symmachus. Never- theless the senate survived, added the functions of a curia or municipal council to those of a governmental assembly, and took part in the election of the pope already one of the chief affairs of Rome. So many senators, however, were slaughtered during the Byzantine war that it was com- monly believed to be extinct. The pragmatic sanction, conferring on senate and pope the superintendence of weights and measures in Italy, is a convincing proof to the contrary, although, in the general chaos, now that