earticle

영어

Thanks to about 70,000 lead seals discovered in ancient byzantine empire’s territory and now conserved at many museums or national libraries in European countries, the studies on the Byzantine bureaucracy have been considerably developed over the past half century. Seals provide important information on byzantine administration and imperial elites. This article's aim is to illuminate not only the identities of civil bureaucratic elites but also their role in the imperial administration by examining the information of the lead seals. For this purpose, the analyses were carried out on the names, dignities, functions and public careers of six logothetes of génikon, or minister of general Treasury during the period between the second half of 7th century and the first half of the 9th century. Firstly, the titles of patrikios or protospatharios, held by most ministers of general Treasury either on the seals or in the literary sources show the high position of the dignitaries integrated into the new imperial hierarchy in the 7th-9th centuries. So we can understand on this evidence the high relationship of the title holders with emperors at the Court during the same period. Especially, the hallmark of the monk (monachos), held by the minister of general Treasury, Theodotos in 694/695 make us understand the key financial post of general Treasury used to be attributed to the most faithful servant at the inner circle of the emperor's men to assure imperial authority and security. Secondly, the personal name or surname held by the ministers of general Treasury, George Syros and Sisinnios show the dignitaries’ origin of Syrians and Armenian family whose ancestors would have been immigrated to the imperial territories before their sons or grand sons were recruited in the new emerging bureaucracy. However the title of different nature, apo hypaton, held by the first minister of general Treasury Paulos makes sure that the financial key post could be also attributed to dignitaries issued from the old senatorial families. In evidence, we can understand the openness of byzantine civil bureaucracy based on the personal competence and loyalty to the emperors during the same period. Due to the absence of the dignitaries’ family names on the seals of the same period, we can’t estimate how much the civil bureaucratic families were so influential on the whole aristocratic society during the same period but the appearance of some family names in the literary sources, like the Monomachos or the Triphyllios, to which the contemporary ministers Niketas and Sisinnios could belong, make us guess the origin of the new aristocratic families and their solidarity developing from the second half of 8th century. Finally, another viewing point of analysis is on the career stages of some ministers of general Treasury who were or could be nominated not only to the financial posts but also to the military commander in chief. It seems that simultaneous or alternative exercise by some high dignitaries of different type of fiscal and military functions authorized the byzantine government to finance the new provincial Army (themata) in keeping the whole budget of payments of imperial elites during the crisis of Arabs invasions in the 7th-8th centuries. So we can understand on this assumption the flexibility of Byzantine fiscal administration well adapted to the military organization and the way in which Byzantine empire was able to survive in the same period of economic and military crisis.