reveals how sudden, complete, and economically important such a step could be. The inhabitants of these estates, through the hierarchy of procurators and
bailiffs which separated them from the Emperor, had very much the same opportunities-or lack of them-for appeal and petition as ordinary provincials did
through the governor.
It was natural that the administrators of imperial property should derive their titles from republican practice. But procurator remained a term of private
law, and it will have sounded very strange to Roman ears to call the governors of public provinces by it. This practice, introduced for small equestrian
provinces by Claudius, is a striking departure from the scrupulously traditionalistic tact of the Augustan constitutional changes. These governors had
previously quite correctly been called praefecti. At times, too, other officials with the innovative title appear in other departments of the government as
assistants to senators in their public capacities-in the various concerns of the urban administration of Rome, for example, and as financial assistants of the
legates of the provinces to which the princeps as proconsul had to delegate governors (the 'imperial' provinces).
The change is of great importance because it made it possible for there to grow up from these domestic origins over the following two centuries what we
may call a procuratorial service, in which there was available to men of equestrian rank a series of important governmental posts in the provinces and in
the city of Rome, in charge of a great variety of imperial concerns, from the control of whole provinces to the running of mines, and as the assistants of
senatorial functionaries. In the end there were, at any one time, some 170 of these posts, and it is here that Rome's administrative excellence, that elusive
beast, used to be located. It is clear, however, that these posts did not constitute a hierarchical sequence linked by a regular promotion pattern, and that the
holders of them needed no more expertise, knowledge, devotion, professionalism, or talent than their senatorial colleagues. Jurisdiction and financial
watchfulness was what was expected of them too, not a serious businesslike approach different in kind from what was expected of a noble magistrate. A
procurator of an Alpine district describes his job as 'the supervision of the law and the carrying out of the interests of the emperors' (CIL XII. 103). These
posts were much less important as means of increasing the efficiency of imperial rule than as a way of incorporating in the life of government the upper
classes of the provinces. Through these posts social advancement was obtained, and this secured the loyalty of the powerful men of the Empire. This
cannot be overstressed: it was the ability to incorporate, not administrative excellence, that was Rome's greatest Art of Government.
Who the equestrian procurators were, and where they came from, therefore mattered. What they did mattered less. Recognition of this has sent the hunt for
the supposed Roman bureaucracy into other fields. 'The description "imperial civil service" better fits the freedmen and slaves of Caesar', says a recent
scholar. Here again the republican senator's dependence on his slaves and freedmen sets the precedent. The familia of Augustus and his successors
acquired enormous power. Under Claudius and Nero in particular their influence with the princeps became notorious. The principal freedmen used titles
derived from their principal occupations-secretary for letters, or for accounts, and the like-which became so closely associated with the Emperor that it
was considered treasonable for others to use them in their households. In reaction to the hostility shown to these men, the posts they had held gradually
became the preserve of men of equestrian status; but the household-the familia Caesaris-remained highly influential. Two flattering poems of Statius
(Silvae 3. 3 and 5.1) give us an idea of their possible concerns, and we get further information from some 4,000 inscriptions, mostly recording simply the
title of the slave or freedmen. These titles, intricate, technical, and specific, seem to give support to the bureaucratic view. But the hostility to the freedmen
raises a doubt; it seems that the Emperor was not free to delegate important matters to his freedmen without infringing public opinion. It therefore seems
appropriate to look more critically at what the familia Caesaris actually did. It is clear that they acquired a mastery of technical information. Augustus left
a list of 'names of freedmen and slaves from whom accounts could be obtained'. Some freedmen are praised by courtiers like Statius for this. Another is
described on his epitaph as 'occupied throughout his life with the utmost attention to the interests of the imperial palace' (at Formiae: ILS 1583). But this
devotion to duty does not entail administrative professionalism, and the importance and quantity and nature of business handled by a freedman
administrator need have been no different from that dealt with by a senator or equestrian in public office.
The administrative jobs which they did were, however mundane, like those of their superiors, generally to be described under the heading litterae. Their
copying, writing, recording, and transmitting of information was important: as an expert on the subject says, 'the tabellarii (secretaries) were without doubt