the popular, but even in the legal computation. The value of a
tributary head must have varied, according to many accidental, or
at least fluctuating circumstances; but some knowledge has been
preserved of a very curious fact, the more important, since it
relates to one of the richest provinces of the Roman empire, and
which now flourishes as the most splendid of the European
kingdoms. The rapacious ministers of Constantius had exhausted
the wealth of Gaul, by exacting twenty-five pieces of gold for
the annual tribute of every head. The humane policy of his
successor reduced the capitation to seven pieces. ^179 A moderate
proportion between these opposite extremes of extraordinary
oppression and of transient indulgence, may therefore be fixed at
sixteen pieces of gold, or about nine pounds sterling, the common
standard, perhaps, of the impositions of Gaul. ^180 But this
calculation, or rather, indeed, the facts from whence it is
deduced, cannot fail of suggesting two difficulties to a thinking
mind, who will be at once surprised by the equality, and by the
enormity, of the capitation. An attempt to explain them may
perhaps reflect some light on the interesting subject of the
finances of the declining empire.
[Footnote 178: Godefroy (Cod. Theod. tom. vi. p. 116) argues with
weight and learning on the subject of the capitation; but while
he explains the caput, as a share or measure of property, he too
absolutely excludes the idea of a personal assessment.]

[Footnote 179: Quid profuerit (Julianus) anhelantibus extrema
penuria Gallis, hinc maxime claret, quod primitus partes eas
ingressus, pro capitibusingulis tributi nomine vicenos quinos
aureos reperit flagitari; discedens vero septenos tantum numera
universa complentes. Ammian. l. xvi. c. 5.]