It should go without saying that in the pre-industrialized society of the later Roman empire the major source of private wealth and public revenue was the land. Although we do not know precisely how or when the annona militaris became a state tax – since it originated in the late second century as a levy or requisition of corn for the use of the army – by the fourth century it was the principal instrument by which the state raised revenue. It had perhaps become so in the third century as a means of raising quick funds from the countryside by various claimants to the empire at a time when paying off the armies was their main avenue to legitimacy. By the fourth century, however, it was neither a special requisition, nor particularly burdensome, nor necessarily paid in kind. But the name underlines the important fact that taxation was, as ever in the Roman economy, largely devoted to army pay and that it came for the most part from the profits of the land.

RURAL PRODUCTION

Rural production, therefore, was a central concern of the state, and it is for this reason that we cannot rule out the possibility that most of the fiscal legislation was aimed in that direction. Taxation, however, is a delicate fiscal instrument which can either stimulate production or kill off the goose that lays the golden egg. While there is some evidence to suggest that land may have suffered from heavy-handed bureaucratic exploitation, we are now less inclined to believe that over-taxation was a general problem in the later empire. For instance, even though Diocletian imposed a land tax on Italy for the first time since the second century B.C., Aurelius Victor, who was a contemporary senator and our sole source, makes no complaint about its effect, despite the fact that some marginal land probably went out of use.