Administrative Development in the Kingdoms and Principalities of the Near East under the Aegis of Rome

Abstract

This thesis examines the administrative impact of dynastic rule in the Roman Near East. It compares administrative practice under kings and princes with the provincial administration that eventually followed. By contrasting these two manifestations of Roman imperialism, it conceptualises dynastic rule as a distinct form of governance and evaluates its role within the context of Roman imperialism in the East.

Previous scholarship has maintained that dynastic rule was an intermediate stage in the development of Roman provincial territory. According to this interpretation, kings and princes, either consciously or unconsciously, were maintained in order to affect particular changes on the territories under their control, making them more suitable for direct rule. This study provides a critical evaluation of this influential perspective.

The thesis thus consciously moves away from the study of kings and princes and focuses on the study of kingdoms and principalities. Each chapter deals with a different administrative activity essential to governance in the Roman world – political organisation, arbitration and enforcement, and taxation – and first considers practices under kings and princes before contrasting these with the provincial administration that followed. The study concludes that dynastic rule was, by its very nature, heterogeneous; kingdoms and principalities were organised and governed in a variety of different ways. By highlighting the contrasts between different kingdoms and principalities, on the one hand, and between dynastic and provincial rule, on the other, this thesis demonstrates that no single process of development can encapsulate the history of kingdoms and principalities in the Near East.