The text comes to us through four manuscripts, now at Oxford, Paris,Vienna and Munich respectively. The last named is of the sixteenth century, the other three of the fifteenth. The four are exact copies, even in form, of a manuscript once preserved at Spires, but lost in the latter part of the sixteenth century. This Spires manuscript contained several other documents besides the Notitia Dignitatum, one of them known to be of the year 825. Thus the earliest possible date for the Spires MS. is fixed, and its palaeographic form, reproduced in the four copies mentioned, shows that it was written not later than the eleventh century.
The Notitia Dignitatum has preserved for us, as no other document has done, a complete outline view of the Roman administrative system in early fifth century. The hierarchic arrangement is displayed perfectly. The division of prefectures, dioceses and provinces, and the rank of their respective governors is set forth at length. The military origin of the whole system appears in the titles of the staff officers, even in those departments whose heads had, since the time of Constantine, been deprived of all military command.
Prefixed to the accounts of some eighty-seven of the chief offices are insignia. These were probably emblazoned on the codicils, or commissions of these officers, and they are illustrative of the dignities and duties of those to whom they were assigned.
Those of the pretorian prefects display a book of mandates reposing on a richly covered table, and flanked by four tapers; also the four-horse chariot and a pillar with the portrait of the emperor or emperors. The insignia of military commanders show the distinctive shields of the several bodies of troops under them. The insignia of the master of the offices in the West are reproduced on p. 28.
A few illustrative examples
This translation gives practically everything of prime importance in the text. The spheres of work and the staffs of the chief officials have been given in full. Omissions are always indicated in the translation, as where lists of troops, after a few illustrative examples, are summarized, without giving the names and locations of the various organizations. From the list of minor officials, of whom there are a considerable number of the same rank, one has been selected as typical of the rest, as, e. g., one duke, one count, one consular, in each half of the empire.
The matter of translation was somewhat difficult, owing to the lack of precedents, especially in the case of the staff officers. The lexicons for the most part say of any one of these designations that it was “the title of a high official of the later empire.”
This is true, but not sufficient for the purposes of this book. A careful study of the functions of these officials, as disclosed in the Theodosian Code, and as commented on by Boecking (see bibliography), has made possible a more exact, if somewhat arbitrary, rendering. An English word which fully expresses the Roman function is, in many cases. hard to find. Sometimes the translation is only approximate, and requires a note.
In general, the effort is made to retain the Roman flavor of the original, and not to translate the official terms of the empire by modern ones which might convey a false implication. For instance, it has been thought better to say -count of the sacred bounties” rather than ” chancellor of the exchequer,” or “grand treasurer,” and “provost of the sacred bedchamber rather than “grand chamberlain.”
In this extext footnotes, marked with *, have been moved from the foot of pages to the end of sections.
Read More about After Justinian
