by Hughes, Ian
Attila advanced as far west as the city of Orleans, which was besieged. This was the farthest that any of the nomadic tribes were ever to penetrate; even the Mongol Empire was never to pierce this far into Europe. But upon the approach of the imperial alliance, the Huns fell back to the Catalaunian Plain near Troyes. The battle that followed determined the fate of Europe. Victory to the Huns would have left large areas of the west under the Hunnic yoke, with unknown ramifications for the present day. As it was, a close victory for the Romans forced the Huns to retire, although the Visigothic king, Theodoric, perished in the battle. The Huns withdrew to the Hungarian plain.
This was not quite the end of the story. Attila, realising that he could not take Gaul if the Visigoths remained hostile, decided to strike at Italy after all – possibly assuming (correctly) that the Visigoths would not leave their homes to fight for a foreign country. He invaded Italy in 452, sacking Aquileia and capturing Milan. However, a meeting with Pope Leo I followed and, surprisingly, Attila again returned home to Hungary. It is possible that his retirement was caused more by fear of disease, or possibly due to reports reaching him of eastern Roman troops attacking his homelands, than by anything said by the Pope. Whatever the reason, he never repeated his attacks. The following year he died after celebrating his marriage to a new wife.
The threat from the Huns rapidly receded. Their empire passed to Attila’s sons, but they did not have the ability to maintain it. In 454 the Hunnic subjects, led by the Gepids, revolted and defeated their masters at the Battle of the Nedao. The Hun empire rapidly disintegrated and, rebuffed in their attempts to blackmail the eastern empire in the Balkans, the Huns finally retreated to the Russian steppe.
However the end of the west was in sight. In 454 the Emperor Valentinian III killed Aetius in person. The emperor was in turn killed by Petronius Maximus on 16 March 455, Petronius becoming emperor on 17 March. In the confusion surrounding these events, the Vandals moved swiftly and in late May of the same year they sailed from Africa and sacked Rome. Due to his cowardice during the attack, Petronius was killed by the Roman citizenry as he fled. With the west in confusion, the Vandals quickly proceeded to annex Tripolitania, Sardinia and the Balearics.
In the meantime, the Visigoths had slowly consolidated their rule. In 451 their king, Theoderic I, had been killed fighting alongside Aetius at the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains, yet when Euric came to the throne only fifteen years later he expanded his realm, incorporating most of southern Gaul and the greater part of Spain – except for the Sueves and the Basques – during his long reign (466-84). Despite some unsettled legal fictions, the western emperor now only controlled Italy and Sicily.
Paradoxically, with the death of Attila, the west could envisage a recovery, but this would probably take more than the resources of Italy and Sicily alone. However, action was needed and it was decided to attack the weakest and most easily-recoverable area under barbarian control. Furthermore, the barbarians in question had recently sacked Rome. In 461 the latest western emperor, Majorian, with his magister utriusque militae, Ricimer, attempted the reconquest of Vandal Africa. The army was sent via the land route through Spain and a fleet was mobilised to transport the army across the Straits of Gibraltar. Unfortunately, the fleet was destroyed by the Vandals, the attempt failed and Majorian himself was later killed, allegedly on the orders of Ricimer.
Shortly thereafter, Anthemius, an eastern general distantly related to the House of Constantine, was made emperor upon the recommendation of Leo I in Constantinople. A second attempt upon Africa was now launched with massive eastern aid. In June 468 a fleet of 1,100 ships and up to 30,000 troops anchored near Cape Bon, a short distance from Carthage. However, the Vandal fleet arrived and sent in fireships to disrupt the Romans. In the ensuing chaos, some ships were set on fire, some collided and others were attacked by the Vandals. It was the end of the second attempt to reconquer Africa, as the survivors scattered and the idea of a joint venture was never resurrected.
When Ricimer died in 472 another general, Gundobad, took his place as magister utriusque militae. But Gundobad seems to have recognised that things were never going to be the same again, and when his father died he left Italy to become a king of the Burgundians alongside his brothers.
At this late stage the collapse of the west was clearly visible and this fact was now acknowledged. In 474 the Vandals were recognised as independent by the new eastern emperor Zeno, and in 475 the Visigothic kingdom of Toulouse was so powerful that the western emperor, Julius Nepos, confirmed the Visigoths in the territories in their possession.
With Gundobad gone, Ecdicius briefly became magister utriusque militae before he was forced to yield by Nepos, who gave the post to Orestes. This proved to be a mistake, since Orestes gathered the troops in Italy and forced Nepos to retire to Dalmatia. Orestes then made his own son, Romulus Augustulus, emperor.
Unfortunately, army pay was now in arrears and the troops, mainly composed of Germanic recruits and mercenaries, petitioned Orestes concerning their upkeep. When this was ignored, they declared their leader Odovacar as the new magister utrimque militae. Orestes was killed and, in lieu of pay, land was distributed to the troops. Odovacar then sent a message to the Emperor Zeno, asking that he be made patricius and pointing out that the west no longer needed an emperor, since Zeno could easily fulfil that task. Zeno’s response was so worded that it could cause no offence to Nepos in Dalmatia, still legally emperor, whilst granting Odovacar the powers he requested. Consequently, in 476 Odovacar deposed the last recognised western Roman emperor, Romulus Augustulus. However, in a strange scene of clemency, Romulus was not killed but granted an annual income of 6,000 solidi and he retired to live at Castellum Lucullanum, near Naples in Campania.
Odovacar now attempted to stabilise his position. He regained full control of Sicily by paying tribute to the Vandals, and on the death of Nepos in 480 he annexed Dalmatia. Despite these gains, he was forced to cede Provence to King Euric of the Visigoths, who was now far more powerful than the western emperor.
The final stages in the disintegration of the western empire had now almost been reached. Spain was in the hands of the Visigoths, the Sueves and the native Basques. In Gaul, the expansion of the Franks under Clovis caused the destruction of the Kingdom of Soissons (the creation of a revolted Roman general, not officially part of the empire) in 486, whilst in 507 Clovis drove the Visigoths out of Gaul and into Spain. Between the Franks in Gaul and the Goths in Italy lay the independent kingdom of the Burgundians. In Africa and the western Mediterranean, the Vandals ruled their maritime empire.
Meanwhile, large groups of Goths had been settled in the Balkans. As part of the peace treaty which followed their devastation of Illyricum, the child Theoderic the Amal had been sent to the court of Constantinople as a hostage at the age of eight. He was forced to pass ten years in the capital before he was released and returned to the Balkans, finally rising to take control of the Goths. At this time there were two rival groups of Goths in the Balkans, those led by Theoderic and another led by Theoderic Strabo (the Squinter). When Strabo died in 481, the two bands coalesced to form a formidable army, strong enough to threaten the eastern empire’s control of the area. In 483 they came to terms with the Emperor Zeno, but later devastated Thrace and even threatened Constantinople. Finally, Theoderic reached an agreement with Zeno. It was decided that he would invade Italy and oust Odovacar from his rule.
Entering Italy, Theoderic beat Odovacar in battle on the River Adige. As a result, Odovacar fled to Ravenna and political and military manoeuvring then ensued, until on 11 August 490 Theoderic won a second victory on the River Addua, near Milan. Odovacar retreated to Ravenna once more, where he was besieged. A peace treaty was made between the two leaders, but on 15 March 491 they both attended a banquet where Theoderic killed Odovacar with his own hand.
Theoderic now set about establishing his power. With regards to the barbarian kingdoms around him, he adopted a policy of moderation and establi
shed a network of marriage alliances. He himself married Audufleda, sister of the Frankish king, Clovis, whilst one of his daughters, Theodegotha, married the Visigothic king, Alaric; the other daughter, Ostrogotho, married Sigismund, son of Gundobad of the Burgundians. In addition, in 491 he married his sister Amalafrida to King Thrasamund of the Vandals, ensuring a cessation of the Vandal occupation of, and attacks upon, Sicily. Theoderic was now a relative of all of the major barbarian powers settled on once-Roman soil.
By promoting toleration between his own Gothic Arian followers and the Catholics, he ensured the support of the Pope and the Catholic Church for his rule and,finally,in 497 the Senator and ex-Consul Festus completed his mission to the imperial court at Constantinople, and the Emperor Leo granted his support for Theoderic. With his patchwork of marriage alliances and diplomacy, Theoderic had established himself as the central power base in the west, a position he strove to retain until his death in 526, the year before the accession of the Emperor Justinian.
The East
In contrast to the confusion and chaos in the western half of the empire, the events of the eastern half (excluding the Balkans) up to the accession of Justinian are fairly easy to reconstruct and understand.
Dealing first with the employment of barbarian officers and generals, the situation reflected that of the west until the rise to power of the Goth Gainas. Gainas and his rival, Tribigild, were attempting to gain supreme power in Constantinople. Finally, Gainas secured imperial support from the Emperor Arcadius and subsequently forced Tribigild to submit. He then subjected the emperor and Constantinople to what amounted to a reign of terror. The horror lasted until 400, when the citizens of the city rose up and killed Gainas, going on to massacre 7,000 Gothic troops.
This did not end the power of ‘barbarians’ in the eastern army. By 457 Aspar, an Alan, had risen to military power and become virtual ruler of the east. The Emperor Leo I enrolled Isaurians from the mountainous regions of southeastern Anatolia as a counter to the Germans. He also promoted the Isaurian Zeno, with whom he replaced Aspar when he had him murdered in 471. The Germans in the army deserted and joined the Goths in the Balkans, so enhancing Gothic power. In 474 Leo died and Zeno inherited the empire. He it was that sent the enlarged Gothic army under Theoderic to invade Italy.
The final crisis in non-imperial attempts to control the throne came in the reign of Anastasius, Zeno’s successor. The Isaurians, who had been enrolled as a counter to the Germans, themselves led an uprising. However, this was crushed by Anastasius, which freed the capital from foreign control and seems to have been decisive in maintaining the freedom of the east from the domination of barbarian generals.
In terms of defence, the vast majority of the eastern frontier needed little in the way of a strong military presence. Egypt and the Arabian provinces had the advantage that their frontiers rested upon deserts. Although later the Bedouin and Arabic tribes would unite under the banner of Islam and conquer all of the territories up to Asia Minor, in the time leading up to the age of Justinian the tribes were disunited and unable to mount anything other than minor border raids. As a consequence, both the Persians and the Byzantines adopted the same method with regard to the Arabic tribes: they attempted to persuade those tribes with whom they had influence to unite and attack the opposition. This resulted in each of the major powers having as their allies one major tribal grouping, the Byzantines’ being the Ghassanids, the Persians boasting the Lakhmids. In reality, these alliances cancelled each other out, leaving the frontiers relatively quiet and unthreatened.
The main burden in the southern desert regions bordering Egypt and the trade routes around Arabia was diplomatic and financial rather than military. Justinian and his predecessors concentrated most of their efforts on Nubia, Ethiopia and Himyar. By shrewd political manoeuvring the Byzantine emperors managed to keep open the trade routes that crossed the Indian Ocean and traversed the Red Sea before arriving in Egypt. The continued revenue this maintained was a welcome boost to the imperial treasuries, especially as the overland silk routes were now in the hands of barbarians such as the Huns, who could use this fact to their own advantage. However, as a consequence of the physical safety of their eastern and southern frontiers, the armies in these provinces slowly lost most of their military attributes and became in effect simple military policemen.
To the northeast, bordering the Black Sea, the Byzantines did have some trouble with the peoples of the Caucasus Mountains. On the whole this consisted of minor raids by peoples such as the Tzani (who were subdued during the reign of Justinian), but this frontier needed to be relatively heavily defended since tribes and nations from beyond the Caucasus Mountains could cross the passes and sweep down into the plains. An example of this is when the Huns devastated large areas of Persian and Roman territory in the year 395.
However, the main enemy in the east was the Persians. In relations with the Sasanid dynasty the eastern Roman emperors were dealing with a political entity with many of the same internal tensions and problems as they had themselves inherited. Furthermore, the Persians had a far greater imperial history to look back on.
Unfortunately, the politics, policies and wars of the Persian frontier have tended to be either ignored or relegated to the footnotes by modern western historians, with the emphasis being on the Byzantine Empire in general, and Justinian in particular. Although this trend is now being redressed, there is still a long way to go.
Persia is usually portrayed as the enemy of Rome, a threat that remained constant and needed to be neutralised. It is interesting to note the claim of modern historians that Sasanid Persia was far more aggressive than its Parthian predecessor had been. The Sasanids are viewed as being intent on reconquering the lands ruled by the ancient Achaemenid Empire between the sixth and fourth centuries BC. This included most of Asia Minor and the Aegean, now part of the eastern Roman Empire. Yet despite their claims, they made no attempt to seize these areas on occasions when the Romans were weak.
For example, following the disastrous defeat and capture of Valerian in 260, the Persians were content with raiding Syria (where they sacked Antioch) and Cappadocia. The strength of the forces they employed may also have been overestimated, since they were surprised and defeated as they returned home by the army of Palmyra, hardly a state of international military power. A similar case occurred when in 363 the Emperor Julian was defeated and killed. His successor Jovian was forced to make humiliating terms to extricate himself and the remains of his army from the ruin, yet the Persians were content with the territory and bases in Mesopotamia that they received. There was no ensuing invasion to make maximum capital of explicit Roman weakness.
Still, given their earlier claims to the Achaemenid Empire, it would appear strange that they give the impression that they were content with their achievements and did not aspire to further accretions of territory. This is probably due to such claims being made for two reasons. Firstly, being a dynasty founded by Ardashir as recently as 226, the kings were likely to be eager to focus attention upon a common external enemy and away from internal affairs. There was no better way to achieve this than appeal to historical sentiment concerning the ancient Achaemenid dynasty. Secondly, an aggressive stance would help to strengthen their initial diplomatic activity with the Romans. An aggressive attitude might cause anxiety in the Roman capital and so make them hesitate before invading Persia whilst the Sasanids secured their new kingdom.
These condsiderations highlight the fact that modern perceptions concerning Romano-Persian relations tend to be extremely simplistic, and lack an in-depth historical basis. Political relations between the Romans and the Persians were not always hostile. An example of this concerns the Hunnic attack of 375 already mentioned. The Darial Pass in the Caucasus Mountains had been the main route followed by the Huns, and the pass was in Persian-controlled territory. Therefore, the two powers agreed that the pass needed fortification and a permanent garrison to prevent a recurrence of the raid. The Persians built a
nd manned the fortifications, but the Romans agreed to cover a large part of the ensuing costs. Although a rare occurrence, the example does give notice that relations between Rome and Persia were often more complex than appears at first glance.
The same is also to a great extent true of the Romans. Although some of their greatest generals, such as Trajan and Septimius Severus, had managed to capture the Persian capital and were in a position to enforce their will, on the whole they do not seem to have seriously contemplated the conquest of either the entire Persian Empire or any significant proportion of it, being content with smaller gains of easily-digested territory.
Nor should it be forgotten that the Persians had long frontiers in the east that were constantly under threat. For example, in 440 the White Huns had destroyed the Kushans and proceeded to terrorise eastern Parthia, their attacks culminating in the death of King Peroz in 484. Furthermore, they too were prone to civil wars, even after Varham V neutralised much of the internal strife by conceding many of his royal prerogatives in 421. Around the year 484, shortly before the reign of Justinian, there was a civil war between Peroz’s sons, Kavad and Zamasp.
With this in mind, it is easy to come to the conclusion that what Roman emperors desired from Persia was a relatively-strong buffer state that was easy to negotiate with, protecting Rome from barbarians further east. Most of the time Rome needed to focus upon the Rhine and Danube frontiers and would prefer it if Persia was similarly preoccupied with events on her other frontiers. Whenever Persia became too strong and posed a threat, the Romans gathered an army, invaded, and attempted to reduce the Persians to their acceptable role. What the Persian kings wanted was a Rome that would not be strong enough to dictate terms but which would always be there as an external threat to help unite their kingdom. There was also little chance that the Persians could conquer Rome, since Roman military might far outweighed their own.