<論説>オリエンス管区総監ルキアノス処刑事件 : ローマ帝国の東西分裂期における官僚の権力基盤

Abstract

ローマ帝国がビザンツ帝国へと変貌してゆく過程のなかで、皇帝は「市民のなかの第一人者」(princeps) から超越的な絶対者たる「専制君主」(dominus) へとその性格を変えたが、この皇帝権力の変質は、必然的に皇帝を支える帝国の統治構造すなわち官僚たちの権力基盤の変質をも結果することになる。しかしながら、この変質の過程にはなお明らかでない部分も多い。そこで本稿は、三九五年早春、真夜中のアンティオキア市において発生したオリエンス管区総監ルキアノス処刑事件を取り上げ、この事件のなかで展開される皇帝や官僚たちの相互関係を、政治過程や社会的背景を含む当時の時代状況を踏まえつつ考察することによって、ローマ帝国とビザンツ帝国の挟間に位置する四世紀末において、官僚の権力基盤が、皇帝を頂点とするパトロネジから、各々の官僚の個人的資質へと変化したことを明らかにした。それは、個人主義をその特質の一とするビザンツ世界への変質過程の一端を示すものである。

Lucianus (PLRE 1=LVCIANVS 6) was executed in early spring 395 A.D. by Rufinus (PLRE 1= Flavius Rufinus 18) praefectus praetorio Orientis, the praetorian prefect of the East. Lucianus became comes Orientis, the prefect of Oriens, in 393 A.D. According to the description by Zosimus - a historian in the later fifth or early sixth century who is our only source of information about the execution of Lucianus, Lucianus gained this position by yielding up to Rufinus the most valuable of his possessions. Having governed the diocese of Oriens, Lucianus was praised for his leadership, justice, moderation, law-abiding nature and many other virtues. However, one day, he rejected an illegal demand by Eucherius (PLRE 1 = Flavius Eucherius 2) the granduncle of the young emperor Arcadius, and Eucherius complained to the emperor. Arcadius then declared Rufinus responsible for Lucianus' actions, as the former was the latter's patron, and this statement by the emperor infuriated Rufinus. As a result, Rufinus rushed to Antioch, where Lucianus resided, and having entered the city in the middle of the night immediately executed him. This incident has long been interpreted as an example of the close relationship between emperors and bureaucrats in the Later Roman Empire - the so-called patronage or patron-client relationship. In fact, patronage is generally considered one of the most characteristic social practices that tied important individuals to one another in the Early Roman Empire. In the Early Empire, the emperor stood at the top of these patron-client networks as Princeps. On the other hand, in the Byzantine Empire, the successor state of the Roman Empire, the emperor existed as the sole superior and absolute ruler, or dominus. The different character of the two types of 'Roman' Emperors indicates one of the remarkable transformations of the Roman to the Byzantine Empire. It also signifies important changes in the governmental structure of the Later Roman Empire in the form of a transformation of the basis of the authority of the bureaucrats who supported the emperors. However, the process involved in this change in the Later Roman Empire has not been adequately analyzed. In this article, I analyze this process of change by focusing on the relationships between emperors and bureaucrats, such as that seen in the incident mentioned above, with a careful and in-depth consideration of the political and social circumstances surrounding them. In addition to reconfirming the chronology of this incident, my analysis first makes clear that the patronage between the emperors and bureaucrats in the Later Roman Empire was not as important as has been considered by many scholars. Furthermore, with regard to this incident, the patronage of the emperors hardly functioned as the basis of bureaucratic authority. The execution of Lucianus therefore cannot be regarded as a typical example indicating the close relationship between emperors and bureaucrats. Secondly, by carefully studying contemporary literary sources --Zosimus, Libanius (the rhetor), and Symmachus (the senator)-- it is evident that the most important factors forming the basis of influence and authority of the bureaucrats were their personal qualities. Contemporary writers emphasized the excellent personal qualities of the bureaucrats in their writing, as in the cases of Rufinus and Lucianus. This fact shows that the dominant factors determining the source of the power of the bureaucrats in the Later Roman Empire were their personal qualities and good character, rather than the patronage of the emperors. Although individualism is said to have been one of the significant characteristics of the Byzantine world, my analysis from this point of view will surely be highly suggestive in grasping the process of change from the Roman to the Byzantine Empire.