Lecture from week 11 of the Later Roman Empire module at the University of Liverpool, given on 7th December 2012.

1. BARBARIANS AT THE
GATES, BARBARIANS IN
THE ARMY
The Belgrade cameo, 4th century: Constantine in pose of
Alexander riding over barbarian corpses
Dr Jamie Wood - CLAH266 - Week 11

2. Structure
 Barbarians in the Roman imagination
 German and barbarian identity
 Barbarians in the 3rd century
 Converting the barbarians
 A case study: The Goths
 Break
 The Army: discussing the reading

3. Tacitus, Germania (1st C CE)
W hat, according to Tacitus, were the defining characteristics of
German social, political and military life?
‘The Germans themselves I should regard as aboriginal, and not mixed at all with other
races through immigration or intercourse. […] For my own part, I agree with those who
think that the tribes of Germany are free from all taint of intermarriages with foreign
nations, and that they appear as a distinct, unmixed race, like none but themselves. […]
They choose their kings by birth, their generals for merit. These kings have not unlimited
or arbitrary power, and the generals do more by example than by authority. If they are
energetic, if they are conspicuous, if they fight in the front, they lead because they are
admired. But to reprimand, to imprison, even to flog, is permitted to the priests alone,
and that not as a punishment, or at the general's bidding, but, as it were, by the mandate
of the god whom they believe to inspire the warrior. […] About minor matters the chiefs
deliberate, about the more important the whole tribe. Yet even when the final decision
rests with the people, the affair is always thoroughly discussed by the chiefs. They
assemble, except in the case of a sudden emergency, on certain fixed days, either at
new or at full moon; for this they consider the most auspicious season for the transaction
of business. […] When they go into battle, it is a disgrace for the chief to be surpassed in
valour, a disgrace for his followers not to equal the valour of the chief. And it is an infamy
and a reproach for life to have survived the chief, and returned from the field. To defend,
to protect him, to ascribe one's own brave deeds to his renown, is the height of loyalty.
The chief fights for victory; his vassals fight for their chief. If their native state sinks into
the sloth of prolonged peace and repose, many of its noble youths voluntarily seek those
tribes which are waging some war, both because inaction is odious to their race, and
because they win renown more readily in the midst of peril, and cannot maintain a
numerous following except by violence and war.’

4. Traditional Roman views of barbarians
 Barbarians
 Are multiple
 Are situated outside the empire
 Are described in stereotypes
 Are defeated by good emperors and overcome bad
emperors
 Are used to attack/ denigrate other Romans
Salvian of Marseille (440s) savages Roman
 E.g.
society: less just, less fair, more sinful, even than the
barbarians
 Are Rome’s “other”, against which it defines itself

5. German identity
 Tacitus’ idea of ‘Free Germany’: entire male
population participating in decision-making
 Adopted by later scholars as model of barbarian
society
 Problem 1: how can we use 1st C text to describe later
situation?
 Problem 2: Tacitus was comparing German ‘freedom’
to Roman ‘tyranny’ under the empire: not objective

6. Barbarian identity
 Concepts of Roman-ness and Barbarian-ness are
neither fixed nor objective
 They are fluid – a state of mind
 Guy Halsall: ‘Ethnicity is multi-layered, flexible, cognitive
(a state of mind) and situational (deployed in situations
when it is advantageous).’
 Helps explain how Romans could act (or be depicted as
acting) as barbarians, esp. usurpers, rebels, bandits

7. Barbarians in the 3rd century
 Late 2nd and 3rd C: larger confederations exert greater pressure on Rome
(e.g. wars of Marcus Aurelius, Severus, 3rd C crisis):
 Alamanni (‘All Men’) – south-west Germany
 Franks (‘the Fierce People’) – middle and lower Rhine
 Saxons – north Germany
 Picts (‘the Painted Men’) – north Britain
 Goths (‘the Men’) – eastern Carpathians and lower Danube.
 3 types of kingship proposed:
 War leader
 Sacral kingship
 Judges
 Created by the Romans?
 Politically: wealth/ diplomacy/ military experience (archaeology – Roman badges of
office)
 Historiographically

8. Converting the barbarians
 After conversion of Constantine,
Romans began to try to convert
barbarians too
 Reign of Constantius II important
 He is (and later 4th C emperors are) Arian,
so most barbarians are Arian too
 Reasons
 What a Christian Roman Emperor should
do?
 An act of diplomacy?
 Building alliances
 Demonstrates Roman dominance (baptism)

9. Converting the Goths (340s?)
‘This Ulfilas, then, was the leader of this pious
band which came out from among the Goths,
and became eventually their first bishop. […] he
took the greatest care of them in many ways,
and amongst others, he reduced their language
to a written form, and translated into their vulgar
tongue all the books of holy Scripture, with the
exception of the Books of Kings, which he
omitted, because they are a mere narrative of
military exploits, and the Gothic tribes were
especially fond of war, and were in more need
of restraints to check their military passions
than of spurs to urge them on to deeds of war.
But those books have the greatest influence in
exciting the minds of readers, inasmuch as they
are regarded with great veneration, and are
adapted to lead the hearts of believers to the
worship of God.’ (Photius, Ep ito m e , 2.5)

10. The Goths – a very brief introduction
 Possible origins in Scandinavia
 Speak Gothic, a Germanic language
 Migration to Danube frontier/ southern
Russia by 2nd century CE
 Many different Gothic groups
 2 ‘supergroups’ emerge
 Visigoths (west Goths) – mid 4th century –
under Roman influence
 Ostrogoths (east Goths) – early 5th century –
under Hunnic influence

11. Early Roman influence on Goths
 Goth as Roman soldiers
 Inscriptions on eastern frontier
from 3rd C
 Roman religion
 Goths convert to Arianism
 But this is a marker of belonging
not difference
 Roman material culture
 Roman coins and pottery
throughout ‘Gothia’

12. Goths as barbarian
enemies of Rome
 ‘Gothicus’: a common
victory agnomen of
emperors
 E.g. Claudius II
Gothicus (268-270)
 Column of the Goths
in Constantinople
(right):
 FORTUNAE REDUCI
OB DEVICTUS
GOTHOS (‘To
Fortuna, who returns
by reason of victory
over the Goths’)

13. Goths as enemies
…in 410

14. Goths & Romans within the Empire
 Enter empire under treaty late 4thC;
often ally with Romans
 But: Adrianople (378); sack Rome (410)
 Fight as Roman fo e d e ra ti (federate
troops) against
 other barbarians
 usurpers
 bandits
 Gothic leaders demand Roman
generalships
 Receive subsidies from the empire
 Demand lands within the empire

15. Orosius on Gothic federate troops
at Battle of Frigidus (394)
 ‘And so the civil war was
ended by the deaths of
these two men, apart from
the 10,000 Goths who, it is
said, were Theodosius’
advance guard and were
completely wiped out by
Arbogastes. But to lose
them was a gain and their
defeat was a victory.’
 Paulus Orosius, Se ve n Bo o ks o f
His to ry a g a ins t the Pa g a ns , 7.35.19

16. Gibbon on revolt of the Goths in 395
W hat, according to Gibbon, motivated the barbarians (= Goths) to
revolt against the Romans?
 ‘The barbarian auxiliaries erected their independent
standard, and boldly avowed the hostile designs which
they had long cherished in their ferocious minds. Their
countrymen, who had been condemned by the
conditions of the last treaty to a life of tranquillity and
labour, deserted their farms at the first sound of the
trumpet, and eagerly resumed the weapons which
they had reluctantly laid down. The barriers of the
Danube were thrown open; the savage warriors of
Scythia issued from their forests; and the uncommon
severity of the winter […]’
 Edward Gibbon, The His to ry o f the De c line a nd Fa ll o f the Ro m a n Em p ire , (1776–
89), chapter 30

17. Orosius on Athaulf (r. 410-415)
‘he was accustomed to relate that at first he earnestly
had wanted to obliterate the name of Rome and
make the Romans’ land the Goths’ empire in both
word and deed, so that there would have been […] a
G o thia where there had once been a Ro m a nia and
that he, Athaulf, would now be what Augustus Caesar
had once been. But when, after long experience, he
has proved to himself that, because of their wild
barbarism, the Goths were completely unable to obey
the law […] he chose at least to seek for himself the
glory of having restored and extended the Roman
Empire by the might of his Goths and, since he could
not be her supplanter, to be remembered by posterity
as the author of Rome’s renewal.’ (Paulus Orosius, Se v e n Bo o ks o f
His to ry a g a ins t the Pa g a ns , 7.43.5-6

19. (Visi-)Goths in Gaul
 Take on imperial roles
 pass laws
 respect property rights
 hold church council
 respect Catholic religion
 Local aristocracy accept their rule
 Goths collaborate to appoint Gallic
senator Eparchius Avitus as Western
Roman Emperor (455-456)
 Gallo-Roman nobles (Catholics) fight
and die for Alaric II (an Arian) against
the Frankish king Clovis (a Catholic) in
507

20. Anti-Gothic sentiment in southern
Gaul
 “Why – even supposing I had the
skill – do you bid me compose a
song dedicated to Venus the lover
of Fescennine mirth, placed as I
am among long-haired hordes,
having to endure German speech,
praising oft with wry face the song
of the gluttonous Burgundian who
spreads rancid butter on his hair?”
 Sidonius Apollinaris Ca rm e n 12.1

21. (Ostro-)Goths in Italy
 Politics:
 Depose Odoacer, who had
deposed the last Western
Roman Emperor
 Develop c ivilita s ideology:
cooperation between Gothic warriors and
Roman civilians
 Make alliances with nobles
 Some join Ostrogoths to resist
(successful) Byzantine reconquest
attempts under Justinian in 530s-550s
 Religion:
 Support rather than persecute
church; in collation of classical and
patristic learning

22. Isidore of Seville on the Goths (625)
W hat, according to Isidore, were (a) the defining characteristic(s) of the
Goths and (b) their main achievement(s)?
 ‘All of the peoples of Europe feared them. The barriers
of the Alps gave way before them. The Vandals,
widely known for their own barbarity, were not so
much terrified by the presence of the Goths as put to
flight by their renown. The Alans were extinguished by
the strength of the Goths. The Suevi, too, forced into
inaccessible corners of Spain, have now experienced
the threat of extermination at the hands of the Goths
[...]. Subjected, the Roman soldier now serves the
Goths, whom he sees being served by many peoples
and by Spain itself.’
 Isidore, His to ry o f the G o ths , ‘Recapitulation’, 68-70

23. (Visi-)Goths in Spain
 But, c o ntra Isidore…
 Politics:
 Imperial roles:
 Build cities and repair infrastructure
 Intermarry with Hispano-Roman
nobility
 King Theudis (mid 6th C) marries
Roman noblewoman;
 revoke earlier laws against
intermarriage
 Religion:
 Convert to Catholicism (587/9)
 Cooperate with Catholic bishops

25. THE ARMY (1)
 In groups, discuss Lee,
‘The Army’
 How did the late Roman
military differ from the
early imperial system?
 What does Lee say about
the ‘barbarization’ of the
late Roman military?
 What does Lee say about
the effectiveness of the
late Roman military?

26. Differences from early imperial
army
 Increased specialisation
 Smaller units and indivual army size reduced
but an overall increase in the size of the whole
army
 Field armies (c o m ita ne ns e s ) and frontier
defence forces (lim ita ne i) – old army had just
been legions
 Praetorian guard replaced by s c ho la e – elite
troops

27. ‘Barbarization’ of the late Roman
military
 Army couldn’t recruit enough troops so they
had to rely on barbarians
 More of a career choice than an enemy taking
over – lots of barbarians rising through the
military
 Means that the term barbarisation is legitimate
 Very little evidence that barbarians were
disloyal or fled during battle

28. Effectiveness of late Roman army
 Soldiers brought economic benefits; constituted a
considerable market and steady income
 Ammianus does not support the view that the
army deteriorated
 Some abandoned battles and panicked, but this
happened throughout Roman history – no overall
growth in later empire
 Army got a bad press – it was not in decline
 Vicious circle – provinces lost meaning less
resources and fewer potential recruits = more
reliance on barbarians

29. THE ARMY (2)
 In groups, discuss the source
extracts on your handout,
answering the following questions:
 What were the positive and negative
impacts of the army on the late
Roman world?
 What do these sources tell us about
the relationship between the army
and society in the later Roman
Empire?

30. 1. Government aren’t making the army an appealing career
choice
2. Militarisation of society – army used for civilian purposes
such as tax collection
3. Soldiers becoming arrogant -> controlling pay agenda
4. Veterans leave service with respect in local city
5. Billeting -> soldiers living-in with families changes social
makeup

31. Summary
 Barbarians & army = prime reasons for fall of
empire?
 Stereotypes of barbarians are strong in Roman sources
and much scholarship
 Easily leads to idea that barbarians want to overthrow Rome
 But more likely that they wanted to become part of Roman
order: barbarians as Romans not barbarians vs. Romans
 Army, along with bureaucracy, predominant institution
within later Roman empire
 Not necessarily as ineffective as once thought
 Integral part of society
 Barbarians do play a big role, especially in West

32. Final class
 When: Monday 10th December
 Where: CYPS-209
 For more on the army, there are some
excellent maps and other materials here:
http://usna.edu/Users/history/abels/hh381/late_rom