Dr. David Gwynn

You need the tax collection to pay for the army. It's always worth remembering one key thing that sets the Roman Empire apart from the later medieval kingdoms. The Roman Empire of Diocletian had a standing army of around 400,000 men. No one's coming near that figure in a thousand years later because it's got a tax system to pay for it.

You need the tax collection to pay for the army. It's always worth remembering one key thing that sets the Roman Empire apart from the later medieval kingdoms. The Roman Empire of Diocletian had a standing army of around 400,000 men. No one's coming near that figure in a thousand years later because it's got a tax system to pay for it.

But that meant dividing the provinces, so making individual provincial blocks smaller and easier to control, trying to reorganize the financial system, not always successfully, and making the tax collection a combination of money and kind.

But that meant dividing the provinces, so making individual provincial blocks smaller and easier to control, trying to reorganize the financial system, not always successfully, and making the tax collection a combination of money and kind.

But that meant dividing the provinces, so making individual provincial blocks smaller and easier to control, trying to reorganize the financial system, not always successfully, and making the tax collection a combination of money and kind.

So collecting taxes in food, for example, because if you're collecting taxes to pay and supply the army, you can just recruit the supplies and send them to the army. And the tax system, provincial system Diocletian put in place is still there under Justinian. Indeed, Justinian in the 6th century is the first emperor to significantly consider trying to revise it.

So collecting taxes in food, for example, because if you're collecting taxes to pay and supply the army, you can just recruit the supplies and send them to the army. And the tax system, provincial system Diocletian put in place is still there under Justinian. Indeed, Justinian in the 6th century is the first emperor to significantly consider trying to revise it.

So collecting taxes in food, for example, because if you're collecting taxes to pay and supply the army, you can just recruit the supplies and send them to the army. And the tax system, provincial system Diocletian put in place is still there under Justinian. Indeed, Justinian in the 6th century is the first emperor to significantly consider trying to revise it.

Exactly. It was clearly a solid structure. I mean, did it work brilliantly? No. Tax collection will always have the problem that people don't want to pay taxes, and it's not that the Roman Empire was ever some massive bureaucratic machine. By a famous older estimate, the Chinese Empire, same rough period, same rough size, had 10 times as many bureaucrats as the Roman Empire did.

Exactly. It was clearly a solid structure. I mean, did it work brilliantly? No. Tax collection will always have the problem that people don't want to pay taxes, and it's not that the Roman Empire was ever some massive bureaucratic machine. By a famous older estimate, the Chinese Empire, same rough period, same rough size, had 10 times as many bureaucrats as the Roman Empire did.

Exactly. It was clearly a solid structure. I mean, did it work brilliantly? No. Tax collection will always have the problem that people don't want to pay taxes, and it's not that the Roman Empire was ever some massive bureaucratic machine. By a famous older estimate, the Chinese Empire, same rough period, same rough size, had 10 times as many bureaucrats as the Roman Empire did.

The Roman emperors rely on their local aristocracies to do a lot of the heavy lifting of administration. So it's not that it isn't a flawed system. It definitely is. But it did seem to work remarkably well. And the proof is the Tetrarchs did stabilize the frontiers. They campaigned successfully in every direction. The Tetrarchy, as a division of power, is inherently unstable.

The Roman emperors rely on their local aristocracies to do a lot of the heavy lifting of administration. So it's not that it isn't a flawed system. It definitely is. But it did seem to work remarkably well. And the proof is the Tetrarchs did stabilize the frontiers. They campaigned successfully in every direction. The Tetrarchy, as a division of power, is inherently unstable.

The Roman emperors rely on their local aristocracies to do a lot of the heavy lifting of administration. So it's not that it isn't a flawed system. It definitely is. But it did seem to work remarkably well. And the proof is the Tetrarchs did stabilize the frontiers. They campaigned successfully in every direction. The Tetrarchy, as a division of power, is inherently unstable.

Four emperors are going to come into conflict eventually. But they delivered stability at the end of that period of crisis. And Constantine, who's actually the destroyer of the Tetrarchy, is the beneficiary, in a sense, of that stability. After Diocletian stands down, the Tetrarchy's instabilities come to the fore.

Four emperors are going to come into conflict eventually. But they delivered stability at the end of that period of crisis. And Constantine, who's actually the destroyer of the Tetrarchy, is the beneficiary, in a sense, of that stability. After Diocletian stands down, the Tetrarchy's instabilities come to the fore.

Four emperors are going to come into conflict eventually. But they delivered stability at the end of that period of crisis. And Constantine, who's actually the destroyer of the Tetrarchy, is the beneficiary, in a sense, of that stability. After Diocletian stands down, the Tetrarchy's instabilities come to the fore.

You end up with a rolling series of civil wars until Constantine, who's originally hailed emperor in York in the year 306, It takes him until 324 to win the last of the great civil wars. And then from 324 to 337, Constantine sole rules the entire empire. He's reunited the whole thing. And what he simply does is keep Diocletian's political taxation systems rolling.

You end up with a rolling series of civil wars until Constantine, who's originally hailed emperor in York in the year 306, It takes him until 324 to win the last of the great civil wars. And then from 324 to 337, Constantine sole rules the entire empire. He's reunited the whole thing. And what he simply does is keep Diocletian's political taxation systems rolling.

You end up with a rolling series of civil wars until Constantine, who's originally hailed emperor in York in the year 306, It takes him until 324 to win the last of the great civil wars. And then from 324 to 337, Constantine sole rules the entire empire. He's reunited the whole thing. And what he simply does is keep Diocletian's political taxation systems rolling.