Tag: Review

Review: The Gothic War, Rome’s Final Conflict in The West

~ Liam Greenacre ~ Leave a comment

This post shall review Torsten Cumberland Jacobsen’s 2009 book, which is titled ‘The Gothic War: Rome’s Final Conflict in the West.’

I must admit a certain deficiency in knowledge with regards to the Gothic War. Mostly, I know about the Ostrogothic Kingdom during the reign of Theoderic the Great, but not after his death. Therefore, it made sense to me to try and find a secondary text that discussed the conflict. Jacobsen’s popular and mainly narrative account is such a suitable introduction.

The book starts by providing the context of the Gothic War. It covers events such as Justinian’s conquest of Africa and the Nika Uprisings. It therefore describes the beginning of Justinian’s so-called ‘reconquests’ of the Western Roman Empire. According to Jacobsen, the stabilisation of the Imperial borders after the chaotic events of the fifth and fourth centuries allowed this focus on reclaiming lost territories. It is notable that the author presents the wars with a ‘reconquest’ viewpoint. This is at odds with Arnold who effectively claims that Theoderic’s Ostrogothic Kingdom was essentially the Roman Empire restored. The introductory chapter also introduces Procopius, who was secretary to Belisarius, one of the main generals during the wars in Italy. Procopius’ History of the Wars is the main source for Jacobsen’s book and it is heavily quoted throughout. The next chapter provides the Ostrogothic context, after the chapter on the Eastern Roman Empire. It discusses early Gothic history and their earlier wars with the Romans. Furthermore, it describes their conversion to Arianism, as well as making other introductory points. The third chapter looks at Theoderic in Italy, including events such as his conquest of Italy from Odoacer, alongside giving a small glimpse into his reign. Interestingly, Jacobsen also writes ‘Theoderic was perhaps the most civilised barbarian the former Western Roman Empire would ever see.’ This would align with the view that Theoderic’s reign was not a period of darkness for Italy and the other possessions of the Ostrogoths. Although, Jacobsen still falls short of calling the kingdom ‘Roman’.

After discussing the early chapters of the text, it is worth highlighting how Jacobsen treats Gothic ‘ethnicity’. Firstly, he does not see it as static, biological and unchanging. In fact, he states ‘ethnicity in a tribe was fluid’ and ‘to be a Goth or to be part of the Gothic confederation was more a question of attitude than a question of race and ethnicity’. The author certainly does not fall into the trap of approaching ethnicity in a outdated manner. A second point to be considered is how Jacobsen describes the early Gothic migrations as ‘a gradual aggregation’ under the name ‘Goth’. There were apparently no great wars or single large migrations. A further noteworthy point regarding ethnicity is also raised later in the text, when the author describes how Goths and Romans often switched sides due to low morale. ‘Gothic’ or ‘Roman’ identities were not pivotal in the theatre of war, with loyalty to particular generals being more important.

After looking at the Gothic and Eastern Roman context, the book switches to a narrative of mainly military events. This is no surprise given the title of the book and its aims to provide a detailed account of the sixth-century Gothic War. Jacobsen initially writes about the early stages of the war, such as the Sicilian campaign and the Siege of Neapolis. He then discusses the deposition of Theodahad as King of the Ostrogoths and his replacement by Vitigis. After this, the first Siege of Rome is described in-depth. The treatment of this siege is particularly notable for how the author covers every minuscule particular of it. The Gothic attempt to retake Rome from Justinian’s armies was however disastrous with Vitigis only setting a full blockade of the city late during the course of the siege. The Goths, a recurring theme throughout the war, were not adept with regards to sieges and they preferred pitched battles instead. The next chapters describe the campaign for Ravenna and its eventual fall to the Romans. The attempts to siege or take certain settlements in Italy, such as Mediolanum and Ancona, are also covered in these chapters. The Roman campaign for Italy and its initial successes are therefore adequately described.

Next, the book switches to contextual events outside of Italy. It especially looks at events in Africa, such as the uprisings there as well as conflicts with the Moors, while also examining affairs on the eastern frontier with Persia as well. Jacobsen is keen to show here, as he does throughout the text, that Italy and the Gothic War cannot be viewed in isolation. The Late Antique world was heavily connected, especially throughout the Mediterranean. No part of it can be understood in isolation. This important point is reinforced by the author’s continuous description of events involving the Franks, who periodically intervened in the conflict between the Eastern Roman Empire and the Ostrogoths.

It is clear from Jacobsen’s work, that the accession of Totila to the throne in 541, following the death of Eraric, marked a transition point in the war for Italy. Totila, unlike Theodahad, Vitigis and Eraric, managed to recover large portions of Italy for the Ostrogoths. Therefore, revitalising a cause that at one point had appeared lost. Following on this, the book details the second and third Sieges of Rome, as the Goths and Romans kept on exchanging blows. The accounts of these engagements are not as in-depth as the first one, but they nevertheless provide an insight into how siege warfare was conducted during the Gothic War. Subsequent to these chapters, another change of fortunes in the war is described, with the Romans on the advance again. Their march forward, as covered by Jacobsen, culminated in a battle at Taginae which was a disastrous defeat for the Goths. This battle effectively marked the end of the war for the Goths and so a full account of it is given. Gothic resistance did not collapse after Taginae, for example Teia succeeded the slain Totila to the throne, but it did end any hopes of a Gothic victory. Therefore, the history of the Ostrogothic Kingdom came to a crushing end.

One thing I believe worth noting in this review is how Jacobsen approaches certain historical figures. Belisarius, the Roman general, is shown to be a pivotal figure in Justinian’s attempts to conquer the Western Empire. Jacobsen writes ‘there would have been no wars of Justinian if Belisarius had not been available.’ and he compares the Roman general to figures such as Caesar and Hannibal. Totila is also highly praised, not surprising given his successful military campaigns. ‘He won almost all his battles’ and was ‘a wise politician’ according to the author. However, what is particularly interesting is Jacobsen’s treatment of the Emperor Justinian and his project in the West. His empire may have been enlarged by his wars, but ‘the provinces of the West may have been a liability rather than an asset’ due to the fact that they required soldiers from the East to guard them and also because they yielded insufficient revenue for their own defence. Furthermore, Justinian’s victories were only temporary. Roman Spain was attacked by the Visigoths, Africa by the Moors, and Italy by the Lombards. The portrait given of Justinian is therefore not completely favourable, unlike the accounts of Belisarius and Totila.

‘The Gothic War, Rome’s Final Conflict in the West’ also contains a number of appendices describing the structure of the opposing armies. One source used to do this is the Notitia Dignitatum, which contained a list of all military units in the empire. It therefore highlights the changes in Roman military set-up between the third and sixth centuries. Furthermore, Jacobsen writes about the different types of troops available, as well as logistics, recruitment and other practical factors. The appendix also looks at the Goths, it covers matters such their infantry and cavalry, while also reinstating the polyethnic nature of their army. It combined people, following the defeat of Odoacer, who were part of the Western Roman army as well Rugians, Sueves and Scirians, among others. Jacobsen therefore repeatedly shows that the war was not simply between Goths and Romans surrounding Italy, but rather that there were deserters on both sides, as well as allies from other ‘barbarian’ peoples in the two armies. Overall, the appendices are a welcome addition to the book, as Jacobsen somewhat forfeits analysis of military tactics, throughout the main narrative. The appendices successfully fill in this gap. Finally, a chronology of events is provided towards the end, it offers a helpful reminder of some of the important dates in the war.

To conclude, Jacobsen’s ‘The Gothic War, Rome’s Final Conflict in The West’ offers a good account of the series of military events it describes. Narrative is often used in favour of analysis, but the appendices help to counterbalance this. The author also makes some nuanced points regarding Gothic ethnicity and its relation to the war. Meanwhile, its approach to certain personas, like Belisarius and Justinian, is interesting and thought-provoking. The reminder to place the Gothic War in the context of the world of Late Antiquity is also well made. Therefore, to summarise, if one is looking for a text that describes the war in-depth then Jacobsen’s book is a good option.

Review: Theoderic and The Imperial Roman Restoration

~ Liam Greenacre ~ Leave a comment

Was Theoderic the Great considered as a Roman emperor by his subjects? Did the early sixth century see a revival within the Roman Empire? These are the central arguments in Johnathan Arnold’s 2014 book ‘Theoderic and The Roman Imperial Restoration.’ This post will review this work and assess how successfully it makes these points.

Arnold’s evidence mainly comes from Ennodius and Cassiodorus, so he starts his argument by introducing their major works. In particular, Ennodius’s Life of Epiphanius and Panegyric on Theoderic, as well as Cassiodorus’ Variae. These chapters, in part one of Arnold’s book, serve as useful introductions. As I already have a degree of knowledge about the Variae, I found the section on Ennodius more helpful. However, this was not due to the fault of the author, the chapter on Cassiodorus was still serviceable enough, even if it is not the most expansive account. Part one also establishes some other key components of Arnold’s thesis. It introduces the idea that the fifth century saw a period of decline within the Roman Empire- which is pivotal when arguing Theoderic’s reign saw a period of revival. This period of decline was not just under the rex Odovacer, who deposed Romulus Augustus, but had been endemic to a series of leaders throughout the past century. Whereas, Arnold also discusses the extent to which the categories of Roman and Barbarian were becoming conflated during this period. For example, Ennodius, at times (though not always), saw the barbarian Ricimer as more civilised and arguably more Roman than the Eastern Roman Anthemius during their conflict with each other. Part one thus acts as an introduction to Cassiodorus and Ennodius, while also sowing the seeds of some of Arnold’s later arguments.

Part two of ‘Theoderic and the Roman Imperial Restoration’ further elaborates Arnold’s discussion. In particular, the first chapter of this section discusses Theoderic’s relationship with the Eastern Empire, as well the titles used by Theoderic. The latter topic is especially interesting, the terms for a ruler of the Western Empire had to some degree lost their meaning. Theoderic did not need to be called Imperator to be considered as a emperor, over titles such as rex and princeps were still suitable. Theoderic often employed the latter as, according to Arnold, it evoked images of the ‘glory days’ of the first century, when the emperors were considered as first citizens in a republic. The section on terminology is thought-provoking addition to Arnold’s argument, as it denounces the idea one had to be called ’emperor’ in order to be recognised as one. In terms of Theoderic’s relationship to the Eastern Empire, Arnold suggests ‘Theoderic promoted the traditional idea of imperial and unity and fraternity with the East, yet staked a claim to the West’s separate existence as one of two Roman republics.’ Naturally, he also altered his portrayal of the Eastern Empire depending on whether he was in contact with them or alternatively Italo-Romans. Part two of Arnold’s work focuses on Theoderic’s imperial image, in particular it consults the visual sources available to do this. Apart from the possible absence of wearing a diadem, Theoderic, according to Arnold, presented himself in a way that Italo-Romans would expect of an emperor. It sections such as these it can sometimes feel like Arnold is in danger of overstretching the evidence, in particular surrounding his Imperial image, however thankfully Arnold’s study is reflexive enough to avoid this.

The first chapter of part three of Arnold’s work firstly analyses Gothicness and its role in the Roman Empire. This section was especially interesting for me, due to the fact that my undegraduate dissertation argued for the irrelevance of ethnicity in Ostrogothic Italy. Nevertheless, Arnold argues that there was indeed a distinction between Goths and Romans under Theoderic, but also that Gothicness became just another form of Romaness available. In other words, Goths were not seen as ‘barbarian savages’ most of the time, but as representing martialism and old Roman virtues. They were symbols of the revival of old Roman values. The next chapter focuses on Theoderic’s Greek upbringing and education and how this might have made his life easier in Italy (even if still occasionally alienated some Western Romans). Arnold also covers Theoderic’s Amal descent in this chapter and discusses how this was also used to legitimise his rule and helped the idea of revival.

The next section focuses on how the province of Liguria and the city of Rome both saw a revival under Theoderic. These areas had suffered heavily during the period of decline already mentioned. Liguria also needed attention due to the damage caused by the war between Odovacer and Theoderic, which meant its loyalty to Theoderic may have been precarious. By consulting the Life of Epiphanius again Arnold describes how Theoderic gained the support of this region. He also discusses the improvements Theoderic made to a number of northern cities such as Verona, Como and Parma. In the chapter on Rome, Arnold emphasises how the city had been neglected by his recent emperors, with the capital either being Ravenna, Milan or Pavia. The city was thus graced with an extended Imperial visit in 500, which Arnold describes in some detail, while he also mentions a number of restoration projects in The Eternal City. Furthermore, to these points, Arnold also shows how Theoderic showed respect and deference to the Senate, therefore fitting in with his ideology of being a princeps or first citizen of a Roman republic.

The final section in ‘Theoderic and the Roman Imperial Restoration’ focuses on the Ostrogothic reconquest of Gaul. This is a welcome addition, as there is not much in the secondary literature on this subject. However, it is a shame that Arnold does not cover Theoderic’s other additions to his ’empire’ in this section, but this is somewhat understandable due to the little amount of information on them in the primary sources. The first chapter focuses on Italo-Roman attitudes to Gaul and how these manifested in a number of ways. These included old stereotypes, such as of the province being more ‘barbarian’ than Italy to more positive images based on their literary culture. The last chapter of this section focuses on the actual conquest of Gaul and how Theoderic gained the loyalty of his new subjects in his new province. It therefore also mentions some of the new administrative structures put in place as well, such as a Prefect of Gaul and a vicar.

Overall, ‘Theoderic and the Roman Imperial Restoration’ is a solidly argued and nuanced book. At times it might risk overemphasise or even sometimes the opposite, but overall its discussion is very convincing and elaborate. It therefore seems we may need change how we see the fall of the Western Empire, with it no longer ending in 476 with the deposition of Romulus Augustus. As Arnold puts it ‘there was no need for Justinian to restore the Western Empire: Theoderic had already done so.’

Review: Signs and Meanings, World and Text in Ancient Christianity

~ Liam Greenacre ~ Leave a comment

This post will review R.A Markus’ 1996 book ‘Signs and Meanings: World and Text in Ancient Christianity’. Based on two lectures he gave in 1995, it also contains a number of chapters that build on these. The focus throughout the book is on Late Antique semiotics and biblical hermeneutics and the extent to which these shaped contemporary writers hermeneutics of experience.

The first chapter ‘World and Text 1: Augustine’ focuses on Augustine’s biblical hermeneutics and discusses the extent to which he allows an allegorical interpretation of scripture in his different texts. It also introduces a number of key ideas that are pivotal to understanding Markus’ arguments. It discusses the difference between interpretation and exegesis and introduces the idea of textual communities. Exegesis is the activity of commentating on a text, whereas interpretation is the wider activity of interpreting experience or a worldview ‘in the light of the scriptural text.’ The latter is in contrast to interpreting a text based on one’s experience of reality. A textual community can be defined as a group with a shared language for communication. According to Markus ‘particular languages create particular communities; and special languages within these create sub-communities, or sub-cultures’. Pivotal to the rest of the book, a community may also be created through a joint understanding of the scripture and the meaning it ascribes to the world. It is through these concepts that Markus discusses how interpreting scripture can affect one’s hermeneutics of experience.

The second chapter tackles Gregory the Great and a shift that occurred in interpreting scripture and the world. For Gregory the process by which texts assigned meaning to the world ‘was telescoped into a simpler, more direct act of perception’, when compared with the Augustinian process. The chapter also covers the two authors’ differing views regarding exegesis, covering ideas like the spiritual sense of the text and allegory again. The third chapter of the book delves more into Augustine’s semiotic theory. The space dedicated to it is welcome because Augustine commentates quite heavily on signs and often alters his theory from work to work, as shown by the differences Markus notes between De Magistro and De doctrina Christiana. The chapter also discusses the role of the Hellenistic tradition, different types of signs and symbols and the role of the Interior Teacher in helping to decipher meaning. The Interior Teacher ‘is Christ dwelling in the mind’ who ‘can teach by at once displaying to the mind the reality to be known’ and provide ‘the language for its understanding’.

The next chapter, ‘Signs, Communication and Communities’ expands on some of the ideas Markus introduced earlier regarding textual communities. Furthermore, he notes Augustine’s comments on the limits of communities. Our many languages will always restrict us to moving within a limited variety of communities, therefore also restricting the boundaries of attainable meaning as well. Likewise, the fact that words in the scripture can have several meanings in the scripture means different communities can exist on different levels. One who understands the meaning of the word ‘ox’ would be a participant in a primary community of English speakers. However, one who understands its additional meaning in its scriptural context would also be a member of a secondary community. In this chapter, Markus also covers how communication is necessary for a community and further adds to his discussion on Augustine’s semiotics. The final chapter of the book is titled ‘Augustine on Magic’. This differentiates between religious and Christian miracles and how they are set apart from ‘demonic’ magic communities. It is one of the few instances in the book where Markus focuses on a community outside of a scriptural context.

Overall, ‘Signs and Meanings: World and Text in Ancient Christinaity’ is a fascinating read. However, its paltry size, of 146 pages, means the reader is often left wanting and with more questions than answers. For example, Markus often refers to modern theorists, like Ricoeur and Peirce, but no comparison between them and Late Antique writers is made. Markus states that is not the point of his work and that is fair, but one cannot help think that there might be some interesting comparisons to be made between them. Furthermore, one wonders how Markus’ ideas regarding textual communities might be applied practically by historians. Could you use Augustine’s semiotics and hermeneutics to understand his and other contemporary texts or do his theories change too much to allow this? Could one read a textual description of experience and look for signs that scripture is influencing interpretation of the world? The book certainly raises a number of interesting research avenues that could be pursued.

On the other hand, ‘Signs and Meanings’ also acts as a useful primer by introducing Augustine and Gregory’s ideas regarding scriptural interpretation.The discussion surrounding the idea of textual communities is also highly nuanced, even if it could have been developed further. However, because the book is based on two lectures given by the author in 1995, the lack of expansion in certain areas is understandable.

To conclude, ‘Signs and Meanings: World and Text in Ancient Christianity’ is an interesting and thought-provoking read, that raises many fascinating possibilities along the way.