Stilicho: The Vandal Who Saved Rome

by Ian Hughes

  The army had taken losses at both Pollentia and Verona, but the gaps were now being filled by the Gothic ‘deserters’. The result was that Stilicho’s army became relatively more powerful. Ironically, however, it was now no longer a tool with which to complete the destruction of Alaric. To ask the new Gothic recruits to attack men that less than a week before had been their comrades-in-arms was to invite disaster. It would be impossible to tell Gothic ‘friend’ from Gothic ‘foe’, and it would be hazardous in the extreme to assume that the Goths recently enrolled would not change sides half way through the battle. Such an occurrence would be a catastrophe.

  Instead, Stilicho had to revert to using threats and political pressure to force Alaric to retire. Fortunately, the recent defeat and the loss of manpower meant that Alaric was no longer in a position to resist and he retired to Pannonia (Illyricum). As an added bonus for Stilicho, once Alaric had been defeated and been forced to withdraw to a small area under Roman jurisdiction, the loss of face meant that he had little chance of receiving reinforcements for his depleted forces. It was clear that Alaric now needed Stilicho more than Stilicho needed Alaric.90

  On the other hand the fact that Alaric was settled in Pannonia and Noricum is also usually overlooked. As was noted in Chapter 3, Pannonia and Noricum were crucial for the defence of Italy.91 The fact that Stilicho felt secure enough to allow Alaric to settle there as a Western official attests to his belief both that Alaric had been severely defeated, and to the fact that Alaric could be trusted. Over the next five years Alaric repaid this trust by refusing to take advantage of Stilicho, even during the invasion of Italy by Radagaisus.

  There is one more aspect to the nature of Stilicho’s victory that is usually glossed over. The fact that Stilicho had allowed Alaric to escape resulted in ‘passionate undercurrents’ in Roman society.92 The traditions of the Empire declared that barbarian generals were to be fought and crushed completely, not allowed to escape and then employed as military officials. Furthermore, Stilicho’s victory would have been compared unfavourably with events that had occurred only two years before in the East. In 400 the East had expelled Gainas and massacred his men in traditional Roman fashion. When contrasted with Alaric’s escape, Stilicho’s victory lost a little of its sheen. Furthermore, it will have been at this time that doubts began to be expressed concerning his methods of dealing with barbarians, doubts that were to grow in the succeeding years.

  Chapter Eleven

  The West and the Invasion of Radagaisus,

  402–406

  Conditions in the West

  Throughout the late-fourth and early-fifth centuries the nature of many areas of the Western Empire changed dramatically. The main source for these changes is archaeology, but unfortunately archaeology does not provide exact dates which can be tied into a chronological narrative, merely outlining changes that evolved over a period of more than a century. As a result, it is impossible to connect events in the archaeological record directly to Stilicho, yet it is necessary to comment upon them so that a clearer understanding of Stilicho’s difficulties and resultant policies will emerge.

  Over the previous centuries the Empire had admitted large numbers of barbarians to the Empire, dividing them amongst interior provinces and slowly absorbing them into the citizenry. During the course of the late-fourth and early-fifth centuries a process that had begun long before began to accelerate; barbarians were admitted to the frontier provinces and allowed to settle there in return for military service. The detail of the process need not concern us here, but the impact that it had upon the nature of the Empire needs clarifying.

  The ‘Germanic’ frontier

  From an early date emperors began to look at the possibility of employing Germanic tribes already in situ to defend the Empire. As an example, Constantine (306–37) had enrolled Burgundians, Alans and possibly Sueves as federates.1 Furthermore, large numbers of Franks had entered the Empire during the confused period prior to Julian’s appointment as Caesar in the West in 355. It would appear that Julian recognized their occupation of previously Roman territory on condition that they remained within the allotted areas and defended these against attack from outside the Empire.2 It is likely that this decision had the added benefit of releasing at least some of the troops defending the area for service during Julian’s impending civil war. He almost certainly retained these men under his personal command for the ill-fated attack upon Persia.

  The precedent was followed by Stilicho. After the campaign of 396 along the Rhine it would appear that the Frankish tribes again acknowledged Roman authority and agreed to maintain the peace, guarding the northern frontiers and allowing Stilicho to remove yet more troops to reinforce the Italian army. In this manner conditions on the lower Rhine and sections of the upper Rhine and Danube in effect ceased to function as traditional frontiers and meaningful boundaries. As more Germans were admitted or simply moved in, it is likely that the sense of insecurity amongst the Roman population grew. The result was that those who could migrated into the interior, so leaving more land untilled and untaxed.3 The protection for those citizens still living in these areas was the Germans living in their villages nearby.4

  The changes were easily justifiable and included a realistic assessment of the modest threat posed by the Germanic tribes in situ on the Rhine.5 Yet despite the fact that the change was a sensible short-term measure, the effects were, despite their gradual nature, dramatic. The Roman troops that had previously defended the frontiers were withdrawn, being sent to defend weak frontiers or, more commonly, swell the armies of the emperors during the invasions and civil wars of the later fourth century.6 The villa economy along the frontiers, however, had relied upon the demand for goods from the army. The withdrawal of the army resulted in the villas losing their main market. Archaeology shows villa agriculture to be on the retreat along the upper Rhine and Danube from as early as the mid-fourth century.7 As the process of troop relocation accelerated, the economic damage to the frontier regions grew.

  It was not only the villas that suffered from the economic loss of the army. The Germanic tribes living along the frontiers would have augmented their incomes, when circumstances allowed, by trading their surplus food with the imperial forces. Furthermore, the more affluent army officers would have provided an ideal market for the Germanic craftsmen who at this time were producing ornamental items such as brooches of intricate design (see Plate 27). Without these sources of income, and in the knowledge of why they had been lost, it is possible that the Germanic tribes not settled as foederati saw the opportunity for small-scale plunder across the frontier. Although not severe enough to merit attention at court or mention in the sources, these raids will have helped to reinforce the feeling that the border regions had been forgotten by the Empire. As an added difficulty, Stilicho’s concentration on events in Italy and Illyricum may have resulted in his neglect of the traditional Roman policy of subsidy and alliance in the territories immediately behind the frontiers. As a consequence, these areas became unsettled, and demonstrate ‘considerable change and instability’ in the archaeological record.8

  Not only did the frontiers lose their economic viability as time passed, they also lost the secondary function of villa life: the imposition and example of Roman values that had earlier transformed ‘barbarian’ territories into Romanized provinces. As a result, not only were the frontier provinces now defended by Germanic settlers with little loyalty to Rome, the Empire had lost the main means of Romanizing the new settlers.

  Gaul

  There was to be a further blow to the provinces of northern Gaul. It is probable, but by no means certain, that during Stilicho’s regency fundamental changes took place in Gaul that lasted until the end of the Empire. These involved the movement of the capital of the praefectus praetorio Galliarum from Trier in the north to Arles in the south, a change prefigured by the court of Valentinian II (375–392) being based at Vienne, south of Lyon.9 The change is known to have happened at some time between 3
95 and 418, and included an intermediate stage when the praefectus praetorio Galliarum returned to Lyon, the old capital of Gaul. Although it is certain that the mint at Trier closed shortly after the suppression of Eugenius in 394, this does not necessarily mean that the capital moved at the same time.

  17. Stilicho and the West.

  If the change was made during the regency of Stilicho, the most likely date for the change would be following the expulsion of Alaric from Italy in 402.10 The episode had shown that Italy was now vulnerable and it was clear that the routes between Milan and Trier were becoming less and less secure. As a result, it would have suited Stilicho to have the praefectus praetorio Galliarum relocate to a place nearer to Milan. It is possible that Stilicho recognized the potential difficulties arising from the move, since it would appear that he also created a ‘Gallic Council’ – possibly a deliberate recreation of the ‘old high-imperial council of the Three Gauls’ that had represented all of the northern Gallic provinces and which had also been based in Lyon. The move didn’t have the morale effect required, since the council was not called to meet much before 407, after which events ensured that the council withered away.11

  The effect of the change on northern Gaul will have been slow to show itself, but have become increasingly dramatic over time. In a similar manner to the presence of the army, the court had had an economic and cultural impact, especially upon the areas around Trier – as was also the case with all of the imperial capitals. Now that the praetorian capital had moved, taking with it the attendant bureaucrats, local produce would have had a diminished market, so reducing the need for large-scale supply by local villas around Trier.

  As villas became economically redundant, their owners removed to the south of Gaul where markets were still to be found.12 These changes tie in with the archaeological record, which shows that around this time most towns and rural centres in northern Gaul (north of the Loire) were in decline, especially to the east of Paris. Furthermore, the same downturn is echoed in trade patterns and in the quality and variety of pottery production.13 However, this decline varied in intensity, with larger, more important centres such as Trier remaining viable longer than other urban centres.

  Politically, the move was extremely damaging to northern Gaul. As the court of Honorius and Stilicho remained in Italy from 395, it is clear that the senators of the north would slowly lose much of their power as the Senates of southern Gaul and Rome gained influence in Milan. Yet the blame for the process should not be laid entirely at the feet of Stilicho and his successors. Gratian’s tutor Decimus Magnus Ausonius of Bordeaux gained much influence and prestige at court from the mid-360s. From this time at the latest the court became dominated by men drawn from Aquitania and southern Gaul.14 Therefore, the removal of the capital from Trier to the south should also be seen as a natural consequence of their domination.

  As an unfortunate by-product, these changes demonstrated that northern Gaul was no longer central to the politics of Rome. There is no doubt that to the aristocracy of northern Gaul – and of Britain beyond – the move reinforced the idea that they were unimportant in the eyes of the emperor and that they were becoming increasingly marginalized when it came to political and military inclusion within the Empire. The result was the beginning of a change of loyalties. Local landowners began to realize that they were paying their taxes to an emperor who did not then provide for their defence. Many began to ask for protection from local Germans rather than the distant emperor. It was easier, more effective and probably cheaper for the landowners to pay a sum to the local German ‘king’ than their taxes to the emperor, since in many cases the Roman army was either not present or had insufficient numbers to fulfil their role of local defence. Loyalty to the emperor began to decline and new loyalties, either to local magnates or to the German tribesmen who actually defended the Empire, began to be formed.

  The bacaudae 15

  Nowhere can the change of loyalty be seen more clearly than in the rise of the bacaudae. The sheer volume of uprisings in Gaul and Spain, possibly from as early as the second century onwards, is surprising, and is often overlooked by historians analysing the Fall of the West.16 The first uprising under the name bacaudae was c.283–4, when Gallic peasants rebelled against their treatment.17 The ferocity of the uprising is implied by the fact that the new emperor, Diocletian (284–305), was compelled to appoint Maximian as his co-ruler with specific responsibilities for putting down the revolt. Although repressed – both on this and on later occasions – the bacaudae would re-emerge throughout the course of the late Empire and remain a factor in imperial control of Gaul and Spain.

  Originally, it would appear that the bacaudae were risings of peasants in Gaul and Spain against the excessive taxes they were being forced to pay. This would especially be the case at times such as 283–4 when the Empire was unable to defend them from outside attack. As time passed the uprisings began to include men of higher class, such as doctors and the lower gentry. They also began to spread, with bacaudae even being found in the Alps between Gaul and Italy. This latter may have been a further factor in the decision to move the seat of the praefectus praetorio Galliarum from Trier to Arles.

  Although probably still focused upon grievances over taxes, the fact that later risings included men from the middle classes reinforces the idea that in some areas of the West loyalty to the emperor and the Empire was eroding and that local allegiances were beginning to evolve as a replacement.

  Yet these dramatic changes in loyalty were slow to evolve and are only easily perceived in hindsight. Despite the negative, long term effect of the changes, it made sense both for Stilicho and for the Gallic senators to move the Gallic capital nearer to Milan, where each would be able to exert more influence on the other. Despite Symmachus’ influence and his endorsement of Italian individuals, under Stilicho the aristocracy of Aquitania and southern Gaul maintained a strong presence at court. As these individuals included most of the richest men in the West, the change in location of the capital of the prefecture was a necessary evil as without their support Stilicho would be hard pressed to survive.

  Britain

  The difficulty with the defence of Britain would always be one of access. It was always a relatively straightforward task to march an army to the channel, but the logistics of transporting a sizeable force across the sea was a rather daunting affair, especially when transporting horses. Therefore, the defence of the island remained, for the most part, in the hands of troops permanently stationed there. Yet when the need arose, it was still feasible to send troops to help the islanders, as when Theodosius the Elder was sent to restore order in the province in the fourth century.

  Fortunately, the same logistical difficulties applied to Germanic raiders. The need to rely on boats resulted in overseas attacks being raids of various strengths rather than attempts to secure land for settlement. Therefore, the only serious threat would come from the tribes to the north of Hadrian’s Wall. As a consequence, on the whole the island was left to defend itself.

  This relative security enabled the British to undergo something of a ‘golden era’ in the fourth century, with large, expensive villas being built. Unlike the situation in Gaul, although a proportion of the army was withdrawn to the continent, the majority appear to have remained in the island, supplying a market for the goods produced by the villas. Yet even here there appears to have been a decline in the late fourth century. This was probably due to the removal of one very large market for goods produced in the province: the garrisons along the Rhine. It was actually easier to transport goods, especially grain, along the rivers of England, across the Channel and then up the Rhine, rather than to use overland continental routes to supply garrison troops along the frontier. This was a long-standing contract with the merchants supplying the ships and therefore not the same logistical problem as transporting troops. When troops began to be withdrawn from the Rhine frontier, and especially when their place was taken by Germanic tribes who relied on growing the
ir own food, the markets withered and the villas ceased to be economically viable.

  As the markets slowly collapsed it became obvious that the emperor was no longer greatly concerned about the safety and defence of Britain. The withdrawal of troops and their failure to return resulted in the aristocracy in the island questioning whether the Empire was fulfilling the functions for which Britain paid its taxes. As a consequence, throughout the fourth century there is a history of governors and generals being acclaimed emperor in the island and crossing to the continent to make good their claim. Unfortunately, the majority of them lost their wars and the troops that they had taken with them were either killed or absorbed by the victorious emperor. Either way, again the defences of the island were weakened. Despite the fact that Stilicho appears to have repulsed a Pictish invasion in the early years of his rule, the transferral of the court from Milan to Ravenna and the removal of the praefectus praetorio Galliarum from Trier to Arles almost certainly left the British feeling isolated and unprotected. Frustration again began to grow in the province.

  Other areas

  The decline in villa and urban life outlined above is echoed in the archaeology of the Prefecture of Illyricum, including Noricum and Pannonia, with one distinct difference: overall, the process was much slower than in the West, although some areas seem to have declined quicker than others.18 This is almost certainly due to some areas giving easy access to Italy, and so being maintained by the Western emperors as one of the main defences of their dwindling regime, whilst others helped to supply the new-built city of Constantinople with the goods and services it needed. However, in Spain and Africa the old system appears to have continued unaffected. This is mainly due to the fact that Spain was practically untroubled by outside threat. More importantly, Africa remained the main supplier of foodstuffs to Rome and so maintained high economic output with a concomitant adherence to the Roman lifestyle that was to last beyond the Vandal conquest until annexation by Islam in the seventh century.