Th. 380, 385, 388, 390). In the later period of Constantine's reign we meet four-John Kurkuas, Kosmas, Romanos Saronites, and Romanos Musele (ib. 443). It seems to follow from Cer. 24 that in that period the number of μ. was less than twelve. The text is τῇ τάξει τῶν τε μαγίστρων καὶ ἀνθυπάτων ἤγουν τῶν φορούντων τοὺς δώδεκα χρυσοϋφάντους χώρους. This shows that there were not enough magistri to wear the twelve lôroi, and that some of the anthypatoi were chosen to make up the number (the other anthypatoi appeared with the patricians as a second velum). There is another piece of evidence which may tell in favour of the conclusion that there was a period in which the magistri were two in number. The repetition ὁ μάγιστρος, ὁ μάγιστρος in the text of Philotheos, 7272, would be explained if we may assume that it was taken from an older klêtorologion compiled at a time when there were two magistri. με Two seals published by Schlumberger call for notice. One, of Isaac, πατρίκιον καὶ μάγιστρον, he ascribes to sixth-seventh century (Sig. 563); the other of John, τатρiкių кai μaylo]rpo, to eighthninth century. It seems probable that both seals date from the period when μ. still designated an office and not an order of rank, and that Isaac was simply magister officiorum. John, if his seal is as late as Schlumberger thinks-not earlier I suppose than the middle of the eighth century-belongs to the period when there were only two magistri, and when the dignity had not yet been made an order of rank like the patriciate. To sum up. Before the end of the reign of Leo III the office of magister officiorum had been transformed; his special functions had been transferred to the Logothete of the Course, and other ministers ; and he was elevated to the position of head of the Senate and the ministerial world, representative of the emperor in his absence, &c. The dignity was conferred dià ẞpaßeíov, for life. He was called simply ¿ μáyιστpos (as the μ. τŵv leíwv ¿pp. is usually termed by Theophanes). Perhaps at the same time, or perhaps soon afterwards, a second μáylorpos was instituted, and the first was distinguished from him as о πрштоμάуισтроs. This innovation was introduced before A. D. 768. ὁ πρωτομάγιστρος. I conjecture that the institution of the second μ. is to be connected with the imperial absences from the city. On such occasions the presence of the μu. in Constantinople was necessary, but the emperor may have found it inconvenient not to have a μ. in his moving court. (Observe that in the Tepi Taέ. the emperor is accompanied by μáуισтρо, 48518.) This second μ. would be on such occasions μ. ÈK μάγιστροι, πроσάлоν-the expression which Theophanes uses of the μ. of ἐκ Artavasdos (415). In the reign, probably, of Michael III, the dignity of μ. began to be conferred on more than two; and thus the μáyɩσтρol came to form a small order of rank. Within that grade the two μάγιστροι (τῆς πολιτείας) continued to function; and in the case of Stylianos Leo VI revived the original title μáyloтpos Tŵv ¿ppikiwv. In the middle of the tenth century, if we can trust Liutprand (Antapodosis, vi. 10)1—I am not quite confident that we can—there were as many as twenty-four magistri. (15) ζωστὴ πατρικία. We have no material for determining the date of the origin of this title. The earliest (worn Tатрıкíа,2 of whom we hear on good authority, is Theoktiste, the mother of the Empress Theodora (Cont. Th. 901). Antonina, according to the author of the Пárpia (ed. Preger, p. 254), was (worn of Theodora (sixth century); but there does not seem to be any contemporary confirmation of this statement. The ζωστὴ πατρικία was the only lady who was πατρικία in her own right, and the title might be translated, mistress of the robes.' The elaborate ceremony for conferring the dignity is described in Cer. i. 50: it probably dates from the ninth century, and possibly from the joint reigns of Michael II and Theophilus, when, we may suppose, Theoktiste was invested. (16) κουροπαλάτης. In the early part of the fifth century curapalati was the title of officials of spectabilis rank, who were subordinate to the Castrensis, and whose duties seem to have concerned the material condition of the imperial palace. See Not. Dig., Or. 17. 5; C. Th. xi. 18. 1 (probably A. D. 412, see ed. Mommsen). At the court of Theodoric we find a curapalati of spectabilis rank, but apparently not in the officium of a castrensis (there seems to have been no castrensis at Ravenna): Cass., Var. 7. 5. There is some reason for supposing that in the course of the fifth century at Constantinople a new curapalati was instituted, independent of the castrensis, and at least equal in importance to him. For in the reign of Justin I the granddaughter of a certain Nomos (or Oninos), a patrician, married the king of the Lazi, and Nomos is described as aπò κоνрожаλат@v.3 It 1 Four magistri are mentioned under Constantine VII in Cont. Th. 443. Some of them were stratêgoi. 2 (worn must mean cingulo donata (Combefis, and Reiske, ii. 166), not ornatrix as Ducange thought. One seal of a (worŋ (Maria Melissene), of the Commenian epoch, is published by Schlumberger, Sig. 607; she is simply (., not . . 3 Chron. Pasch. 613, Theoph. 16821; cp. John Mal. 413. is not at all probable that an ordinary curapalati would have been created a patrician unless he had risen to some higher office, and in that case he would have been designated by that higher office. I infer that in the time of Anastasius, at latest, there existed a high official, entitled Curapalati, to be distinguished from the earlier subordinate curapalati (who was one of several). If this conclusion is right we can the more easily understand the action of Justinian, who, towards the end of his reign, exalted the dignity and gave it a new significance by conferring the title upon his nephew Justin. The title was taken to mean that Justin was marked out to be the successor to the throne, and the dignity evidently did not involve any of the functions connoted by the name. Through jealousy, perhaps, Justinian did not care to create his nephew a Caesar, but кovpoñadárŋs was interpreted as equivalent. This is expressly said by Corippus (in laud. Just. i. 134 sqq.): par extans curis, solo diademate dispar, After this, and till the tenth century, the title curapalati, кovρoñaλárηs, was only bestowed on a relative of the emperor: and the patriarch Nicephorus (7) describes the post as τὴν μετὰ βασιλέα πρώτην αρχήν (i. e. of course, when there was no Caesar). From the nature of the case it was, like Caesar, only occasionally conferred. The following is a list of the коvρожаλáraι till A.D. 900: Leo VI conferred the title on the Iberian king Adranases (De adm. imp. 199); it had been more than once in earlier times bestowed on Iberian princes. In the tenth century Nicephorus II created his brother Leo a кovρoñáλaτηs; in the eleventh the title was no 1 May the idea of this dignity have been derived from Persia? Cp. Theoph. Sim. 3. 18. 12. 3 A seal of Artavasdos is extant, Sig. 249 'Αρτανάσδῃ πατρ[ικίῳ] κουρ[οπαλάτῃ] καὶ κόμ[ιτι] τοῦ θεοφ[υλάκτου] β[ασιλικοῦ ὀψικίου]. longer confined to relatives of the Emperor (cp. the seals in Schlumberger, Sig. 490 sqq.). A ceremony for the creation of a kuropalates is described in Cer. i. 45, p. 229 sqq. When this description was first written down there were two emperors, one of whom was still a boy (ô μkpós). It may be conjectured that it refers to the creation of Michael by Nicephorus I and Stauracius. At the end of the chapter there is a notice to the effect that a kuropalates can be created ev rê lòi by the Basileus, without a public ceremony. I conjecture that Bardas was thus invested, and that this additional notice dates from the reign of Michael III. (17) νωβελήσιμος. In the third century nobilissimus was the standing epithet of the title Caesar which the emperors conferred on natural or adopted sons (Mommsen, Staatsrecht, ii.3 1141 and note). In the fourth century we find Jovian creating his child-son Valerian a voßeλíoiμos, but not Caesar; the epithet becomes an independent title (Philostorgius 8. 8). In the fifth century Constantine, the tyrant' of Britain and Gaul in the reign of Honorius, creates his eldest son, Constans, Caesar, and his second, Julian, vwßeλíorios (Olympiodorus, fr. 12). Honorius created his child-nephew, Valentinian, nobilissimus (ib. 34), and afterwards V. was invested as Caesar at Thessalonica before he was crowned Augustus at Ravenna (ib. 46). Nobilissimus is thus a title lower than Caesar, but confined to the emperor's family. Justinian 1 introduced the new title of kuropalates to do duty for nobilissimus or Caesar, but in the eighth century Constantine V revived the dignity of vwßeλnoos. In A.D. 768 he created his νωβελήσιμος. second and third sons Caesars, and his fourth voßeλíσiμos (Theoph. 444): afterwards also his fifth son (ib. 450,): and the sixth received the same dignity from Leo IV (ib.). A description of the ceremony performed on the first of these occasions is described in Cer. i. 44 (the mention of two Caesars proves this, as Diehl has shown). As to the insignia there is a discrepancy between Cer. and Theoph. The latter says that the voß. was invested with a χλαΐνα χρυσῆ and ὁ στέφανος. In Cer. 229 we read that his xλaμús is not purple like that of the Caesar but KóкKIVOS, and στέφανον οὐ περιτίθεται. Philotheos says that the insignia are χιτὼν ἐξ ἁλουργίδος χρυσόθετος καὶ χλαμὺς καὶ ζώνη. It is clear, then, that Theoph. has made two mistakes; he has confounded the xλaîva 1 He seems himself to have borne the title under his uncle; cp. Marcellinu sub A. D. 527. Women sometimes received the dignity, e.g. Galla Placida, C. 1. L. 15, 7153. or χλαμύς with the tunic which was χρυσόθετος, and he erroneously supposed that the voßeλnoos was crowned like the Caesar. (18) Καίσαρ. For the Caesar title, as a promise of succession under the Principate, see Mommsen, Staatsrecht, ii.3 1140. After Justinian's reign we find it conferred on Tiberius by Justin II; on Germanus and Maurice by Tiberius II; on Constantine junior by Heraclius; on David and Marinus by Heraclius; on Christophorus and Nicephorus by Constantine V; on Alexios Musele by Theophilus; on Bardas by Michael III. The only case I know (later than the third century) of the elevation to this rank of one who was not a near relative (by birth, adoption, or marriage) of the emperor is that of Patricius, son of Aspar, who was created Caesar by Leo I. From Theodosius I it was the invariable practice of the emperor, if he had a son, to create him a colleague (Basileus and Augustus). Hence the title Caesar was rarely conferred. Justin II and Tiberius II conferred it to mark out their successors, but after Maurice it was only conferred on persons who might, in certain events, succeed. Heraclius and Constantine V bestowed it on younger sons; Theophilus on a son-in-law; Michael III, who was childless, on an uncle. The ceremony which accompanied the elevation of the sons of Constantine V is described in Cer. i. 43. C. OFFICES (αἱ διὰ λόγου ἀξίαι). The administrative officials are grouped by Philotheos in seven classes: I. στρατηγοί, ΙΙ. δομέστικοι, ΙΙΙ. κριταί, IV. σεκρετικοί, V. δημοκράται, VI. στρατάρχαι, VII. various (ἀξίαι εἰδικαί) ; and it will be convenient to take them in his order. The use of the term oppikiáλtot, which frequently occurs in his pages, has not, so far as I know, been precisely explained. But he supplies the material for determining its denotation. In early times officiales seems to have been applied only to the members of the officium of a minister, but not to the minister himself. The Master of Offices, or the Count of the Sacred Largesses, would not have been called an officialis. In the time of Philotheos, it was applied to the ministers as well as to their subordinates.1 And it was applied to all the functionaries holding office or command, with the exception of the orparnyol. This can be proved from the following passages. στρατηγοί. 1 Speaking of the posts in the staffs and bureaux of the high officials, Philotheos (716) says that these dignities καὶ αὐτὰ ὀφφίκια ὀνομάζονται. |