Byzantine Administration
Three principles underlay the administrative reform of Diocletian: the separation of civil from military functions; the formation of small provincial units; and the scalar
structure which deepened on the interposition of the vicar of a diocese and the praetorian prefect between the provincial governor and the emperor. This system
lasted unchanged for three and a half centuries. The few unimportant alterations that were made were in harmony with its spirit.

Justinian introduced certain reforms that pointed in a new direction. He combinined some of the small provinces into large units, undermining the scalar system by
doing away with some of the dioceses and vicars, and placing in some cases military and civil authority in the same hands. The chief aim of Diocletian in his general
reform had been to secure central control over the provincial governments; the object of Justinian in these particular reforms was to remedy corruption and
oppression.

These changes, some of which were soon cancelled, would hardly in themselves have led to a radical change; but they prepared the way for an administrative
revolution, brought about by stress of external necessities. In the 7th century all the energies of the Empire, girt about by active enemies, were centerd on war and
defence; everything had to give way to military exigencies; and a new system was gradually introduced which led ultimately to the abolition of the old. The change
began in Italy and Africa, at the end of the 6th century, where operations against the Lombards and the Berbers were impeded by the friction between the two co-
ordinate military and civil authorities (masters of soldiers, and praetorian prefects).

The military governors were made supreme with the title of exarchs, "viceroys"; the civil authority was subordinated to them in case of collision, otherwise remaining
unaltered. The change is an index of the dangerous crisis through which these provinces were passing. In the East similar circumstances led to similar results. The
Saracen danger hanging imminent over Asia Minor imposed a policy of the same kind.

And so before the end of the 7th century the Empire was divided into six great military provinces, three in Europe and three in Asia: (1) Exarchate of Africa, (2)
Exarchate of Italy, (3) Strategia of Thrace, (4) County of Opsikion ( - obseguium), including Bithynia, Honorias,. Paphlagonia, parts of Hellespontus and Phrygia, (5)
Strategia of the Anatolikoi, most of west and central Asia Minor, (6) Strategia of the Armeniakoi, eastern Asia Minor. In addition to these there was a naval
circumscription, (7) the Strategia of the Karabisidnoi (from Kapafios, a vessel), including the southern coastland of Asia Minor, and the Aegean.

The lands of the old prefecture of Illyricum were not included in the system, because this part of the Empire was then regarded as a lost position. On the contrary,
here military powers were committed to the Prefect of Illyricum, whose actual sphere extended little beyond Thessalonica, which was surrounded by Slavonic tribes.

The Eastern changes, perhaps initiated by Heraclius, but probably due mainly to Constans II, did not interfere with the civil administration, except in so far as its
heads were subordinated to the military commanders. But Leo III, who as a great administrative reformer ranks with Augustus and Diocletian, did away with the old
system altogether. (1) Reversing Diocletian's principle, he combined military and civil powers in the same hands. The strategos or military commander became also
a civil governor; his higher officers (turmarchs) were likewise civil functionaries. (2) The scalar principle disappeared, including both the vicars and the praetorian
prefect of the East (some of whose functions were merged in those of the prefect of the city); no authority interposed between the strategoi and the emperor. (3) The
new provinces, which were called themes (the name marks their military origin: thema = corps), resembled in size the provinces of Augustus, each including several
of the Diocletian divisions.

This third and last provincial reform has, like its predecessors, its own history. The list of themes in the 11th century is very different from that of the 8th. The
changes were in one direction - the reduction of large provinces by cutting off parts to form smaller themes, a repetition of the process which reduced the provinces
of Augustus. Hence the themes came to vary greatly in size and importance. Leo himself began the process by breaking up the Anatolic command into two themes
(Anatolic and Thracesian). The principle of splitting up was carried out systematically by Leo VI (who was also responsible for a new ecclesiastical division of the
Empire).

The development will be exhibited by a list of the themes in tha middle of the 10th century. A- Asia: l Opsikion, (2) Optimaton, (3) Paphlagonia, (4) Bukellarianl = old
Opsikion; (5) Anatolic, (6) Thracesian, (7) Samos (naval), (8) Cappadocia, (9) Scleuciaj = old Anatolic; I(10) Armcniac, (n) Colonca, (12) Sebastea, (13) Charsianon,
(14) Chaldia, (15) Mesopotamia = old Armeniac; (16) Cibyrrhaeot, (17) Aegean (Dodekanesos). B. Europe: (1) Thrace, (2) Macedonia, (3) Strymon, (4)
Thcssalonica, (5) Hellas, (6) Peloponnesus, (7) Nicopolis, (8) Dyrrhachium, (9) Longibardia, (10) Cephallcnia, (11) Cherson.

It is interesting to note that up to Leo VI the district between Constantinople and the wall of Anastasius formed a separate theme or government, entitled the Wall or
the Ditch; Leo VI united it with the theme of Thrace.

In the central administration, the general principles seem to have remained unchanged; the heads of the great administrative bureaux in Constantinople retain the
palatine character which belonged to most of them from the beginning. But there were many changes in these offices, in their nomenclature and the delimitation of
their functions. There are great differences between the administrative corps in the 5th, in the 10th and in the 15th centuries. It is conjectured that, along with his
provincial reform, Leo III made a rearrangement of the central bureaux; the abolition of the Praetorian Prefecture of the East entailed; in itself, modifications. But
minor changes were continually being made, with the following tendencies: (1) Increase in the number of ministers directly responsible to the emperor, (a)
subordinate offices in the bureaux being raised to the rank of independent ministries; (b) new offices being created and old ones becoming merely titular. (2)
Changes in nomenclature; substitution of Greek for Latin titles. (3) Changes in the relative importance and rank of the high officials, both civil and military.

The Prefect of the City controlled the police organization and administration of justice in the capital; he was vice-president of the imperial court of justice, and, when
the office of Prefect of the East was abolished, he inherited the functions of that dignitary as judge of appeals from the provinces. But the pracjectus vigilum,
commander of the city guards, who was subordinate to him, became an independent officer, entitled Drungary of the Watch, and in the 11th century superseded him
as vice-president of the imperial court. It is reported that in the last years of the Empire the Prefect of the City had no functions at all; but his office survived in the
"city prefecture," of the Ottomans, in whose organization there were many traces of Byzantine influence.

1
Instead of the Quaestor of the Sacred Palace, whose duty was to draft the imperial laws and rescripts, there was in the 9th century a quaestor who possesses
certain judicial and police functions and was far lower in the hierarchy of rank. It has been supposed that the later quaestor really inherited the duties of another
officer, the quaesitor, who was instituted by Justinian. In the latest period the quaestor, if he still existed as a name, had no functions.

The Master of Offices, who supervised the bureaux in the palace and was master of court ceremonies, also performed many functions of a minister of foreign affairs,
was head of the imperial post (cursus), and of the corps of agentes in rebus or Imperial Messengers. This ministry disappeared, probably in the 8th century, but the
title was retained as a dignity at all events till the end of the 9th. The most important functions, pertaining to foreign affairs, were henceforward performed by the
Logothete of the Post. In the 12th century this minister was virtually the chancellor of the Empire; his title was changed to that of Great Logothete by Andronicus II.

The two financial ministers, comes sacrarum largitionum and comes rei privatae, continued to the end under the title General Logothete. Anastasius added a third,
the Count of the Sacred Patrimony, but he was afterwards suppressed. But in the 9th century both these ministers were inferior in rank to the Sacellarius, or private
pursekeeper of the emperor. Besides these there was a fourth important financial department, that of the military treasury, under a Logothete.

The employment of eunuchs as high ministers of state was a feature of the Byzantine Empire from the end of the 4th century. It was laid down as a principle (AD
900) that all offices are open to them, except the Prefecture of the City, the quaestorship, and the military posts which were held by "Domestics." There were then
eight high posts which could only be held by eunuchs, of which the chief were the parakoimOmenos and the protovestiarios (master of the wardrobe).

An emperor who had not the brains or energy to direct the affairs of the state himself, necessarily committed the task of guiding the helm to some particular minister
or court dignitary who had gained his confidence. Such a position of power was outside the constitution, and was not associated with any particular office; it might be
held by an ecclesiastic or a eunuch; it had been held by the eunuchs Eutropius and Chrysaphius in the reigns of Arcadius and Theodosius II respectively. This was
the position, for instance, of Stylianus, the father-in-law of Leo VI. Most of the emperors between Basil II and Alexius Comnenus were under the influence of such
ministers.

The orders of rank (which must be distinguished from titles of office) were considerably increased in later times. In the 4th and 7th centuries there were the three
great classes of the illustres, spectabiles and clarissimi; and above the illustres a small, higher class of patricians. In the 9th century there was an entirely different
system; the number of classes being largely augmented, and the nomenclature different. Instead of epithets like illustres, the names are titles which had designated
offices; "patrician " alone survived. The highest rank was now (1) the magistral; then come the patricians in two classes: (2) proconsular patricians, (3) respectable
patricians; below these (4) protospathanoi; (5) dyshypatoi {bis consoles); (6) spatharokandidatoi; (7) spatharioi; and other lower ranks. Particular ranks do not seem
now to have been inalienably attached to particular offices. The strategos of the Anatolic Theme, e.g., might be a patrician or only a protospathar. Whoever was
promoted to one of these ranks received its insignia from the emperor's hand, and had to pay fixed fees to various officials, especially to the palace eunuchs.

In the provinces ordinary justice was administered by judges who were distinct from the governors of the themes, and inherited their functions from the old provincial
governors of Diocletian's system. In Constantinople higher and lower courts of justice sat regularly and frequently. The higher tribunals were those of the Prefect and
the Quaestor, before whom different kinds of cases came. Appeals reached the emperor through the bureau of Petitions; he might deal with the case immediately; or
might refer it to the imperial court of appeal, of which he was president; or else to the special court of the Twelve Divine Judges, which was instituted by Justinian.