DOCSLIB.ORG

CHAPTER Introduction As Was Suggested in the Introduction To

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CHAPTER Introduction As Was Suggested in the Introduction To CHAPTER 5 Introduction As was suggested in the introduction to chapter four, this chapter should begin with the words Per hos dies interea (4.12), which introduce Valens’ refusal to admit the Greuthungi within the borders of the empire. The Thervingi, who had earlier received permission to cross the Danube, were at the mercy of the Roman generals, Lupicinus in particular, who exploited their lack of provisions and forced them to pay extortionate prices for food. This prompted them to consider rebellion against the Romans, whereupon Lupicinus ordered them to move further inland, calling upon Roman troops to keep the situation under control (§1–2). While these soldiers were busy supervising the Thervingi, the Greuthungi in their turn saw their way clear to cross the Danube and to pitch camp on the south bank of the river (§3). Lupicinus invited Fritigern and Alavivus, leaders of the Thervingi, to a banquet within the walls of Marcianopolis, but forbade their kinsmen, who wanted to buy provisions, to enter the city. This led to skirmishes between the inhabitants of Marcianopolis and the Goths, in the course of which a large number of Roman soldiers lost their lives. When this was reported to Lupicinus in the banquet hall, he gave orders that the Gothic body-guards, who were waiting outside for their leaders, should be killed (§4–6). At this critical moment Fritigern claimed that the only way to prevent a massacre was to allow him to calm his people down. To achieve this he was permitted to leave the city and join his people. But from this moment on he proceeded to lead them into war against the Romans. The Goths roamed the Thracian diocese ravaging the countryside and murdering the inhabitants (§7–9). Lupicinus, after hasty and ill-considered preparations, decided to make a stand against the Goths near Marcianopolis. The Romans, however, were no match for their frenzied opponents. Many o cers and men met their death and standards fell into the hands of the barbarians. Only a few managed to escape. One of them was the general Lupicinus, who behaved like a coward and ed from the battle eld (§9). The second half of this chapter (§11–17) consists of a short, but very important digression. It is one of the few passages in which Ammianus gives his reader an insight into his thoughts about the future of Rome. 82 commentary Without in any way belittling the gravity of the Gothic invasion, which was to culminate in the defeat at Adrianople, he protests against those who, because of their ignorance of history, think that this was the worst disaster ever to have befallen the empire. He reminds his audience of earlier invasions, from which Rome, after initial losses, had recovered, and which had led to the near or total annihilation of the invaders, in chronological order Cimbrians and Teutons, Marcomanni and Quadi, and Goths. The message of the digression is clear: history proves that Rome can overcome the worst defeats, but only if its citizens mend their decadent ways and are willing to unite in the cause of defending their country. As Lenski, 1997 has argued, this digression is not Ammianus’ spontaneous reaction to the Gothic invasion, but rather a considered response to the diferent views of other authors, both pagans and Christians, about the causes of and possible remedies for the defeat at Adrianople. Ammianus’ efort to put Rome’s present plight in a historical perspective is reminiscent of the approach taken twenty years later by Orosius at the prompting of Augustine. Both Ammianus and Orosius point to the historical facts, which show that there are plenty of precedents for the dangerous situation in which the empire found itself after Adrianople in 378 and the capture of Rome in 410. But whereas Orosius’ agenda in defending the Christians against their pagan adversaries and predicting a glorious future for a Christian empire is clear, Ammianus does not ofer any rosy illusions, but gives his readers a stern warning not to give in to despair, but to return to their ancient values and unite in the battle for the future of the urbs aeterna. 5.1 At vero Thervingi iam dudum transire permissi prope ripas etiam tum vaga- bantur For the combination at vero see TLL II 1009.50–1010.19 and Kroon, 1995, 311–312 and 365. It is a favourite expression of Cicero, who uses it 74 times. In the Res Gestae it occurs only here and in 29.6.18 at vero ubi tem- pestas mollivit (p. 248). In both cases at vero marks a contrast, here between the Greuthungi, who were refused admittance within the empire (31.4.13), and the Thervingi, who had iam dudum been allowed to cross the Danube (31.4.5). The latter, although the emperor had granted them permission to settle in parts of Thrace (ibid.), were still roaming close to the river banks, but etiam tum ‘still (at that time)’ prepares the reader for the disastrous events to come. See for the personal passive permissi ad 20.2.5 (p. 19). dupliciimpedimentoastricti,quodducumdissimulationeperniciosanec victui congruis sunt adiuti et tenebantur consulto nefandis nundinandi commerciis The two reasons why the situation of the Thervingi proved to be a dead.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bullard Eva 2013 MA.Pdf
    Marcomannia in the making. by Eva Bullard BA, University of Victoria, 2008 A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS in the Department of Greek and Roman Studies Eva Bullard 2013 University of Victoria All rights reserved. This thesis may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means, without the permission of the author. ii Supervisory Committee Marcomannia in the making by Eva Bullard BA, University of Victoria, 2008 Supervisory Committee Dr. John P. Oleson, Department of Greek and Roman Studies Supervisor Dr. Gregory D. Rowe, Department of Greek and Roman Studies Departmental Member iii Abstract Supervisory Committee John P. Oleson, Department of Greek and Roman Studies Supervisor Dr. Gregory D. Rowe, Department of Greek and Roman Studies Departmental Member During the last stages of the Marcommani Wars in the late second century A.D., Roman literary sources recorded that the Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius was planning to annex the Germanic territory of the Marcomannic and Quadic tribes. This work will propose that Marcus Aurelius was going to create a province called Marcomannia. The thesis will be supported by archaeological data originating from excavations in the Roman installation at Mušov, Moravia, Czech Republic. The investigation will examine the history of the non-Roman region beyond the northern Danubian frontier, the character of Roman occupation and creation of other Roman provinces on the Danube, and consult primary sources and modern research on the topic of Roman expansion and empire building during the principate. iv Table of Contents Supervisory Committee .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Reviewso G I C a C a R P a T H I C281 a Vol
    A C T A A R C H A E O L REVIEWSO G I C A C A R P A T H I C281 A VOL. XLIX, 2014 PL ISSN 0001-5229 REVIEWS Rastko Vasic, Die Halsringe im Zentralbalkan. Vojvodina, Serbien, Kosovo und Mazedonien, Prähistorische Bronzefunde 11:7, Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart 2010, 70 Seiten, 44 Tafeln; ISBN 978-3-515-09678-2. The monograph Die Halsringe im Zentralbalkan by Rastko Vasic is already his fourth scholarly contribution, published in the now respected Prähistorische Bronzefunde (PBF) series. His earlier studies addressed the subject of sickles1, brooches2 and dress pins3. Every one of them was the first monographic study of a given type of object in the central Balkans. This is true also of the study made by Rastko Vasic of neckrings from Vojvodina, Serbia, Kosovo and Macedonia. Given the extremely complicated political situation in the region and the fact that the materials, even if analysed, were published in different countries and languages, the study of neckrings must have run into quite a few obstacles. If only for this reason, the great labour put in by Rastko Vasic only to assemble his materials to this and to earlier monographs is worthy of recognition. Incidentally, the study under review is the seventh to be published in the PBF series dedicated to neckrings and neck ornaments. The earlier works concerned addressed the materials from south-western Germany4, Greece5, Slovakia6 and Poland7. Still, as noted earlier, this is the first work to discuss the materials from central Balkans. It might be more accurate to stress that this is the first contribution on some regions of the Balkans which have been overlooked here so far.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER SEVENTEEN History of the German Language 1 Indo
    CHAPTER SEVENTEEN History of the German Language 1 Indo-European and Germanic Background Indo-European Background It has already been mentioned in this course that German and English are related languages. Two languages can be related to each other in much the same way that two people can be related to each other. If two people share a common ancestor, say their mother or their great-grandfather, then they are genetically related. Similarly, German and English are genetically related because they share a common ancestor, a language which was spoken in what is now northern Germany sometime before the Angles and the Saxons migrated to England. We do not have written records of this language, unfortunately, but we have a good idea of what it must have looked and sounded like. We have arrived at our conclusions as to what it looked and sounded like by comparing the sounds of words and morphemes in earlier written stages of English and German (and Dutch) and in modern-day English and German dialects. As a result of the comparisons we are able to reconstruct what the original language, called a proto-language, must have been like. This particular proto-language is usually referred to as Proto-West Germanic. The method of reconstruction based on comparison is called the comparative method. If faced with two languages the comparative method can tell us one of three things: 1) the two languages are related in that both are descended from a common ancestor, e.g. German and English, 2) the two are related in that one is the ancestor of the other, e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • The Crossing of the Danube and the Gothic Conversion , Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, 27:3 (1986:Autumn) P.289
    HEATHER, PETER, The Crossing of the Danube and the Gothic Conversion , Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, 27:3 (1986:Autumn) p.289 The Crossing of the Danube and the Gothic Conversion Peter Heather MMIANUS MARCELLINUS provides a detailed account of the re­ A lations between the Emperor Valens and the Goths during the period 367-378. But essentially because Ammianus does not mention it, there has been much controversy over the date of a Gothic conversion to Christianity ascribed in other sources to the reign of Valens. Equally, because the historians Socrates and So­ zomen link a civil war among the Goths to the conversion, it has also been unclear when this split might have taken place. It will be argued here that the primary accounts found in Socrates, Sozomen, and Eunapius can be reconciled with the secondary ones of Jordanes, Theodoret, and Orosius to suggest a Gothic conversion in 376. Fur­ ther, combined with Ammianus, they strongly indicate that Christian­ ity initially affected only elements of one Gothic group, the Tervingi, and was part of the agreement by which Valens allowed them to cross the Danube and enter the Empire in 376. It also becomes clear that the split too affected only the Tervingi, and occurred immediately before the crossing and conversion. This reconstruction in turn highlights the Huns' role in overturning the established order in Gothic society: their attacks first divided the Tervingi, who were unable to agree on an appropriate response, and prompted the larger group to seek asylum in the Empire and accept conversion to Christianity.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER ONE — Aspects of Political and Social Developments in Germania and Scandinavia During the Roman Iron Age
    CHAPTER ONE — Aspects of Political and Social Developments in Germania and Scandinavia during the Roman Iron Age 1.1 Rome & Germania 1.1.1 Early Romano-Germanic Relations It is unclear when a people who may be fairly labelled ‘Germanic’ first appeared. Dates as early as the late Neolithic or early Bronze Ages have been suggested.1 A currently popular theory identifies the earliest Germanic peoples as participants in the Jastorf superculture which emerged c. 500 bc,2 though recent linguistic research on early relations between Finno-Ugric and Germanic languages argues the existence of Bronze-Age Germanic dialects.3 Certainly, however, it may be said that ‘Germanic’ peoples existed by the final centuries bc, when classical authors began to record information about them. A fuller analysis of early Germanic society and Romano-Germanic relations would far outstrip this study’s limits,4 but several important points may be touched upon. For the Germanic peoples, Rome could be both an enemy and an ideal—often both at the same time. The tensions created by such contrasts played an important role in shaping Germanic society and ideology. Conflict marked Romano-Germanic relations from the outset. Between 113 and 101 bc, the Cimbri and Teutones, tribes apparently seeking land on which to settle, proved an alarmingly serious threat to Rome.5 It is unclear whether these tribes 1Lothar Killian, Zum Ursprung der Indogermanen: Forschungen aus Linguistik, Prähistorie und Anthropologie, 2nd edn, Habelt Sachbuch, 3 (Bonn: Habelt, 1988); Lothar Killian, Zum Ursprung der Germanen, Habelt Sachbuch, 4 (Bonn: Habelt, 1988). 2Todd, pp. 10, 26; Mark B.
    [Show full text]
  • Gothic Introduction – Part 1: Linguistic Affiliations and External History Roadmap
    RYAN P. SANDELL Gothic Introduction – Part 1: Linguistic Affiliations and External History Roadmap . What is Gothic? . Linguistic History of Gothic . Linguistic Relationships: Genetic and External . External History of the Goths Gothic – Introduction, Part 1 2 What is Gothic? . Gothic is the oldest attested language (mostly 4th c. CE) of the Germanic branch of the Indo-European family. It is the only substantially attested East Germanic language. Corpus consists largely of a translation (Greek-to-Gothic) of the biblical New Testament, attributed to the bishop Wulfila. Primary manuscript, the Codex Argenteus, accessible in published form since 1655. Grammatical Typology: broadly similar to other old Germanic languages (Old High German, Old English, Old Norse). External History: extensive contact with the Roman Empire from the 3rd c. CE (Romania, Ukraine); leading role in 4th / 5th c. wars; Gothic kingdoms in Italy, Iberia in 6th-8th c. Gothic – Introduction, Part 1 3 What Gothic is not... Gothic – Introduction, Part 1 4 Linguistic History of Gothic . Earliest substantively attested Germanic language. • Only well-attested East Germanic language. The language is a “snapshot” from the middle of the 4th c. CE. • Biblical translation was produced in the 4th c. CE. • Some shorter and fragmentary texts date to the 5th and 6th c. CE. Gothic was extinct in Western and Central Europe by the 8th c. CE, at latest. In the Ukraine, communities of Gothic speakers may have existed into the 17th or 18th century. • Vita of St. Cyril (9th c.) mentions Gothic as a liturgical language in the Crimea. • Wordlist of “Crimean Gothic” collected in the 16th c.
    [Show full text]
  • Calendar of Roman Events
    Introduction Steve Worboys and I began this calendar in 1980 or 1981 when we discovered that the exact dates of many events survive from Roman antiquity, the most famous being the ides of March murder of Caesar. Flipping through a few books on Roman history revealed a handful of dates, and we believed that to fill every day of the year would certainly be impossible. From 1981 until 1989 I kept the calendar, adding dates as I ran across them. In 1989 I typed the list into the computer and we began again to plunder books and journals for dates, this time recording sources. Since then I have worked and reworked the Calendar, revising old entries and adding many, many more. The Roman Calendar The calendar was reformed twice, once by Caesar in 46 BC and later by Augustus in 8 BC. Each of these reforms is described in A. K. Michels’ book The Calendar of the Roman Republic. In an ordinary pre-Julian year, the number of days in each month was as follows: 29 January 31 May 29 September 28 February 29 June 31 October 31 March 31 Quintilis (July) 29 November 29 April 29 Sextilis (August) 29 December. The Romans did not number the days of the months consecutively. They reckoned backwards from three fixed points: The kalends, the nones, and the ides. The kalends is the first day of the month. For months with 31 days the nones fall on the 7th and the ides the 15th. For other months the nones fall on the 5th and the ides on the 13th.
    [Show full text]
  • Tacitus, Germania, 98 CE Tacitus Was Probably Born in 56 Or 57 CE in Northern Italy Into an Equestrian (Minor Noble) Family. He
    Tacitus, Germania, 98 CE As to the Germans themselves, I think it probable that they are Tacitus was probably born in 56 or 57 CE in Northern Italy into an indigenous and that very little foreign blood has been introduced either by equestrian (minor noble) family. He had quite a successful career in invasions or by friendly dealings with neighbouring peoples. For in former Roman public service, holding both military and civil offices, culminating in becoming the proconsul of the Roman province of Asia, 112-113 CE. He times it was not by land but on shipboard that would-be immigrants wrote a several literary and historical works, many of which criticize faults arrived; and the limitless ocean that lies beyond the coasts of Germany, and in Roman society by comparing them to others. Germania is not a travel as it were defies intruders, is seldom visited by ships from our part of the story, nor even a personal account. Instead, Tacitus drew upon earlier writers, and possibly talked to contemporaries who had been there to world. And to say nothing of the perils of that wild and unknown sea, who compile an ethnographic and geographical description of Germania would have been likely to leave Asia Minor, North Africa, or Italy, to go to (which includes parts of present-day France and Germany), especially the Germany with its forbidding landscapes and unpleasant climate - a country customs and culture of the various tribes who lived there, whom the Romans generally called “barbarians.”1 that is thankless to till and dismal to behold for anyone who was not born 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Catalyst for Warfare: Dacia's Threat to the Roman Empire
    The Catalyst for Warfare: Dacia’s Threat to the Roman Empire ______________________________________ ALEXANDRU MARTALOGU The Roman Republic and Empire survived for centuries despite imminent threats from the various peoples at the frontiers of their territory. Warfare, plundering, settlements and other diplomatic agreements were common throughout the Roman world. Contemporary scholars have given in-depth analyses of some wars and conflicts. Many, however, remain poorly analyzed given the scarce selection of period documents and subsequent inquiry. The Dacian conflicts are one such example. These emerged under the rule of Domitian1 and were ended by Trajan2. Several issues require clarification prior to discussing this topic. The few sources available on Domitian’s reign describe the emperor in hostile terms.3 They depict him as a negative figure. By contrast, the rule of Trajan, during which the Roman Empire reached its peak, is one of the least documented reigns of a major emperor. The primary sources necessary to analyze the Dacian wars include Cassius Dio’s Roman History, Jordanes’ Getica and a few other brief mentions by several ancient authors, including Pliny the Younger and Eutropius. Pliny is the only author contemporary to the wars. The others inherited an already existing opinion about the battles and emperors. It is no surprise that scholars continue to disagree on various issues concerning the Dacian conflicts, including the causes behind Domitian’s and Trajan’s individual decisions to attack Dacia. This study will explore various possible causes behind the Dacian Wars. A variety of reasons lead some to believe that the Romans felt threatened by the Dacians.
    [Show full text]
  • Harttimo 1.Pdf
    Beyond the River, under the Eye of Rome Ethnographic Landscapes, Imperial Frontiers, and the Shaping of a Danubian Borderland by Timothy Campbell Hart A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Greek and Roman History) in the University of Michigan 2017 Doctoral Committee: Professor David S. Potter, Co-Chair Professor Emeritus Raymond H. Van Dam, Co-Chair Assistant Professor Ian David Fielding Professor Christopher John Ratté © Timothy Campbell Hart [email protected] ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8640-131X For my family ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Developing and writing a dissertation can, at times, seem like a solo battle, but in my case, at least, this was far from the truth. I could not have completed this project without the advice and support of many individuals, most crucially, my dissertation co-chairs David S. Potter, and Raymond Van Dam. Ray saw some glimmer of potential in me and worked to foster it from the moment I arrived at Michigan. I am truly thankful for his support throughout the years and constant advice on both academic and institutional matters. In particular, our conversations about demographics and the movement of people in the ancient world were crucial to the genesis of this project. Throughout the writing process, Ray’s firm encouragement towards clarity of argument and style, while not always what I wanted to hear, have done much to make this a stronger dissertation. David Potter has provided me with a lofty academic model towards which to strive. I admire the breadth and depth of his scholarship; working and teaching with him have shown me much worth emulating.
    [Show full text]
  • A Millennium of Migrations: Proto-Historic Mobile Pastoralism in Hungary
    Bull. Fla. Mus. Nat. Hist. (2003) 44(1) 101-130 101 A MILLENNIUM OF MIGRATIONS: PROTO-HISTORIC MOBILE PASTORALISM IN HUNGARY Ldsz16 Bartosiewiczl During the A.D. 1st millennium, numerous waves of mobile pastoral communities of Eurasian origins reached the area of modern- day Hungary in the Carpathian Basin. This paper reviews animal exploitation as reconstructed from animal remains found at the settlements of Sarmatian, Avar/Slavic, and Early ("Conquering") Hungarian populations. According to the historical record, most of these communities turned to sedentism. Archaeological assemblages also manifest evidence of animal keeping, such as sheep and/or goat herding, as well as pig, cattle, and horse. Such functional similarities, however, should not be mistaken for de facto cultural continuity among the zooarchaeological data discussed here within the contexts of environment and cultural history. Following a critical assessment of assemblages available for study, analysis of species frequencies shed light on ancient li feways of pastoral communities intransition. Spatial limitations (both geographical and political), as well as a climate, more temperate than in the Eurasian Steppe Belt, altered animal-keeping practices and encouraged sedentism. Key words: Central European Migration, environmental determinism, nomadism, pastoral animal keeping Zoarchaeological data central to this paper originate from Data used in this study represent the lowest common settlements spanning much of the A.D. 1st millennium denominator of the three different
    [Show full text]
  • 72 *Arcadius (383-408) (East) 73 *Magnus Maximus
    375 Huns absorbed Greuthungi (Ostrogoths) 408 Huns captured Castra Martis (Romania) 431 Battle: Aetius/Salian Franks (France) 376 Tervingi (Visigoths) crossed Danube 408-413 Constantinople's landside wall built 431 1st Council of Ephesus (Nestorianism) 376 some Greuthungi crossed Danube 408-410 Alaric's 2nd Invasion of Italy [2/2] 431 Battle: Aetius/Norici (Noricum) 376-378 Valens Second Gothic War [5/6] 408 Stilicho executed 431-534 Vandal Kingdom (North Africa) 376 Battle: Marcianopolis (Bulgaria) 408.09-12 Alaric's first siege of Rome 431 Raid: central Hispania (Suebi) 377 Battle: Ad Salices (Bulgaria) 77 Constantine III (409-411) (W) 432 Battle: Vandals/Empire (Africa) 378.05 Battle: Argentovaria (France) 78 Constans II (409-411) (W) 432-439 Africa diocese overran by Vandals 378.08.09 Battle: Adrianople (Thracia) 409 Vandals, Alani, Suebi entered Hispania 432 B: Gaiseric/Bonifacius+Aspar (Algeria) 378 Siege: Constantinople (Thracia) 409 Battle: Alaric/Valens 432 Battle: Aetius/Salian Franks (France) 71 *Theodosius-I (379-395) (Eall) 409.10-11 Alaric's second siege of Rome 432 Battle: Ariminum (Italy) 379-382 Theodosius' Gothic War [6/6] 409 Siege: Ravenna (Italy) 432 Treaty: Suebi (Hispania) 380 Greuthungi settled in Pannonia 409-411 Usurper: Maximus of Hispania [1/2] 434 Battle: Vandals/Aspar (Africa) 380 Battle: Macedonia 410.08.24 Alaric's sack of Rome 434 Huns under Rua devastated Thrace 380 Edict of Thessalonica (Nicene Creed) 410 Romans abandon Britannia 434-469 Hunnic Empire 381 Council of Constantinople (Nicene 411 Conference of Carthage (Donatism) 434-453 Attila the Hun Creed) 411 Siege: Arles (France) 434 Huns settled in Pannonia (Hungary) 382 Treaty: Fritigern and the Tervingi 411-413 Usurper: Jovinus (Mainz) 435 Foundation of Constantinople University 382 Tervingi settled in Moesia Inferior 411-415 Ataulf (Visigoth) 435 Vandals took Mauretanias & Numidia 383-408 Stilicho 411-418 Silingi Vandals: Hispania Baetica 435 Treaty: Attila (Huns) 396 Battle: Greuthungi defeated 411-418 Alani: H.
    [Show full text]