Present-day historians seem to feel more comfortable discussing the ‘rise’ of this or that, because there is absolutely no risk in this vocabulary of anyone being criticized or any negative value judgement being made; rather the reverse—everybody is being awarded a reassuring pat on the back. This is I think the main problem with the new way of looking at the end of the ancient world: all difficulty and awkwardness are smoothed out into a steady and essentially positive transformation of society. The Germanic invaders are peacefully accommodated into the Roman provinces, and the culture of Rome slowly evolves into new forms. Nothing ever goes badly wrong—in this vision of the past, there are no serious downward turns or abrupt changes, let alone complete ruptures; rather, everything moves forward along a level plain, or even on a slightly rising trajectory.21
I confess that I find this limiting; but, more importantly, I think it does not fit the evidence, and fails to reflect accurately what happened in the western half of the empire. In my opinion, the fifth century witnessed a profound military and political crisis, caused by the violent seizure of power and much wealth by the barbarian invaders. The native population was able, to some extent, to adapt to these new conditions, but what is interesting about this adjustment is that it was achieved in very difficult circumstances. I also believe that the post-Roman centuries saw a dramatic decline in economic sophistication and prosperity, with an impact on the whole of society, from agricultural production to high culture, and from peasants to kings. It is very likely that the population fell dramatically, and certain that the widespread diffusion of well-made goods ceased. Sophisticated cultural tools, like the use of writing, disappeared altogether in some regions, and became very restricted in all others.
My worries about the new Late Antiquity, however, go deeper than a concern that it is so restricted by its religious focus as to be deceptively wrong. I also think there is a real danger for the present day in a vision of the past that explicitly sets out to eliminate all crisis and all decline. The end of the Roman West witnessed horrors and dislocation of a kind I sincerely hope never to have to live through; and it destroyed a complex civilization, throwing the inhabitants of the West back to a standard of living typical of prehistoric times. Romans before the fall were as certain as we are today that their world would continue for ever substantially unchanged. They were wrong. We would be wise not to repeat their complacency.
APPENDIX
From Potsherds to People
Pottery plays a major part in my account of the Roman and post-Roman economies; and indeed in any scholarly discussion of early economic history that takes archaeological evidence seriously. In these few pages I explain how it is that we can deduce so much from mute potsherds about both the production and the diffusion of ceramics. As with most areas of the Roman and post-Roman economies, the available written evidence is negligible, so it is from the excavated objects themselves that we have to reconstruct the nature of production and distribution.
Pottery is an archaeologist’s dream (or nightmare), because it survives in such large quantities. Pottery vessels are very easy to break, and so get made and discarded in quantity; but their individual broken sherds are highly durable, and usually emerge from the ground in perfect condition. Furthermore, the only common way of recycling pottery fragments is as hard core, and this does not destroy their original form (whereas the recycling of objects in metal, glass, or stone generally involved melting them down, or reworking them). Potsherds have been uncovered in their millions, and on almost all archaeological excavations are much the commonest artefact discovered. It is a reasonable supposition that, somewhere in the soil, almost all the pottery vessels ever made survive in fragments, waiting to be excavated and studied.
Potsherds are not only common; they are also exceptionally rich in the information they contain. Because the precise make-up of clays varies, according to the geology of the extraction sites, and because the design of pots from one region to another also varies, individual potsherds can very often be accurately provenanced (in other words, attributed to a specific place of production). They can also be dated, because designs not only varied geographically, but also changed through time. Sometimes these changes were dramatic—as when, at the end of the first century BC, Roman potters moved from using a black gloss on their tablewares to a red one—but normally it was a much more subtle process, manifested in relatively minor alterations in shape and design. Much laborious and meticulous work by scholars, working from datable deposits, has established tight chronologies for some types of pottery. Tablewares of the Roman period, which were peculiarly susceptible to changes in fashion, can sometimes be dated to within a very few decades.
Because pottery can be provenanced and dated, and because it is such a common find, it is often possible to show changing patterns of importation to a specific site, as the proportion of vessels from particular regions swells or declines (Fig. A.1). Information from a single sample or site should always be questioned; but when, as increasingly happens, many excavations produce concordant patterns, these begin to look reliable. Painstaking work, charting the occurrence of particular types of pottery vessels on different sites, can even allow us to begin speculating intelligently about mechanisms of distribution. Fig. A.2, for instance, shows the known find spots of a type of mortarium (a grinding- and mixing-bowl, used in the preparation of food), made in Colchester within the period AD 140–200. There are two clearly distinct concentrations of these finds. The northern one consists of mortaria discovered along the Hadrianic and Antonine walls, and must represent vessels purchased or requisitioned by the army (and probably taken by sea up the east coast). By contrast, the pattern of distribution within an arc around Colchester looks commercial, falling off with growing distance, and hence transport costs, from the place of production—with the lesser cost of water-borne transport perhaps accounting for some of the outlying finds (for instance, in Kent and in the Thames Valley). The work of hundreds of archaeologists, excavating and publishing a large number of widely scattered sites, has slowly put together a complex and convincing economic picture.
A.1 The changing origin of the wine-amphorae (and hence of the wine) that arrived at Rome’s port, Ostia, between 50 BC and AD 600. Italian products, initially dominant, fade out steadily, except for a late surge of amphorae arriving from southern Italy.
A.2 Two different markets: the diffusion of mixing-bowls made in Colchester in the second century AD. The lozenge is Colchester itself.
Finally, like all artefacts, potsherds contain within themselves many indications of the level of skill and technology involved in their manufacture. In particular, the quality of a potsherd’s clay (and of any decorative glazes or slips) tells us how carefully these primary materials were selected and prepared, while marks of wheel-turning and decoration tell us about the precise processes of building up the vessel (for instance, if it was hand-shaped, or made on a slow or fast wheel, and whether it was further worked when half-dry). Finally, much can be deduced about the firing of the pot from the appearance and consistency of its core and from the look and feel of its surface finish. This point can be made more clearly than by any number of words by a simple comparison of the Roman pottery illustrated in Figs. 5.5, 5.6, and 7.9 (at pp. 99, 101, and 161), with that of early Anglo-Saxon times in Figs. 5.7 and 5.10 (at pp. 105 and 119).
All in all, pottery is probably as helpful and informative an artefact as any that exists (except objects that also carry inscriptions, such as coins); while its abundance renders it quite unique in the archaeological record. No other product is so readily available, nor so open to sophisticated comparative analysis. Pottery may be tedious to excavate and process, and it may not be thrilling to read about, but it is a gold mine of information.
CHRONOLOGY
376
Goths, fleeing the Huns, cross the Danube into the eastern empire.
378
The Goths crush the army of the eastern empire at the battle of Hadrianopolis, kill
ing the eastern emperor, Valens.
391
The emperor Theodosius issues laws against anyone who performs pagan sacrifice.
401
Goths, led by Alaric, enter Italy from the Balkans.
402
Alaric and the Goths are driven out of Italy by the western commander, Stilicho.
405–6
A Germanic army, led by Radagaisus, invades Italy and is eventually defeated at Fiesole, near Florence.
406
On the last day of the year, Vandals, Sueves, and Alans cross the Rhine into the Roman empire. Much of Gaul is ravaged between 407 and 409.
407
The Roman armies of Britain and northern Gaul support an imperial usurper, Constantine III. Imperial control of Britain is thereafter very tenuous, and the island is increasingly subjected to raids and invasions by Irishmen, Picts, and Anglo-Saxons.
408
The Goths, under Alaric, re-enter Italy from the Balkans. The western imperial commander, Stilicho, is murdered with the connivance of his emperor, Honorius.
409
The Vandals and others cross the Pyrenees from Gaul into Spain.
410
The Goths, under Alaric, capture and sack the city of Rome.
411
The Iberian peninsula is partitioned between the Vandals, Alans, and Sueves.
412
The Goths, having failed in an attempt to reach Sicily and Africa by sea, leave Italy for Provence.
419
The western Goths (the ‘Visigoths’) are settled by treaty with the imperial government in south-western Gaul (Aquitaine).
429
The Vandals cross the Straits of Gibraltar into North Africa.
420s and 430s
Emergence of a Hunnic empire, north of the Danube.
439
The Vandals capture Carthage, establish a kingdom, and begin a period of sea-raiding across the Mediterranean.
441
The Huns capture the Balkan fortress town of Naissus.
447
The eastern emperor agrees to pay the Huns a yearly tribute of 2,100 pounds of gold.
around 443
The Burgundians are settled by treaty with the imperial government near Lake Geneva.
451
The Hunnic army, under Attila, is defeated in Gaul at the battle of the Catalaunian Fields by an army of Romans and Visigoths.
452
The Huns invade Italy and sack the great north-eastern city of Aquileia.
453
Death of Attila, leading to the slow dissolution of Hunnic power.
455
Second sack of Rome—by the Vandals, who arrive by sea from Carthage.
456 onwards
The Visigoths extend their power over Spain. By the end of the century, they control almost the whole Iberian peninsula.
468
Defeat of a combined attempt, by the eastern and western emperors, to recapture Africa from the Vandals.
476
Romulus Augustulus (the last emperor resident in Italy) is deposed by the Germanic general Odoacer, who sets himself up as king. Thereafter there is only one Roman emperor—that of the east, resident in Constantinople.
around 480
The Frankish king, Clovis, begins to extend his power in northern and central Gaul.
489–93
Theoderic the Ostrogoth captures Italy from Odoacer, and replaces him as king.
507
The Franks, under Clovis, defeat the Visigoths at the battle of Vouillé, and establish their control over most of Gaul. At around the same time, Clovis is converted from paganism to orthodox Catholic Christianity.
526
Death of Theoderic in Italy; his death begins a period of dynastic instability for the Ostrogoths.
533
An East Roman army, under orders from the emperor Justinian, defeats the Vandals and captures their African kingdom. This is incorporated into the eastern (or ‘Byzantine’) empire.
535
Byzantine armies invade Ostrogothic Italy, beginning a war that will last almost twenty years.
540
The Persians invade Syria and sack Antioch, reopening a period of intense warfare between the Byzantine and Persian empires.
541
Bubonic plague appears in Egypt and slowly spreads throughout the Roman world.
553
The Ostrogoths in Italy are decisively defeated, and Byzantine rule over the peninsula is established.
568–72
The Lombards invade Italy, and establish a kingdom centred on Pavia; but they fail to capture much of Italy, including Rome and Ravenna (which remain in Byzantine hands).
582
The Avars, with their Slav allies, capture the Byzantine city of Sirmium, near the Danube frontier. This event begins a long period of great insecurity in the Balkans and Greece. In 582 Athens is also captured and sacked.
587
The Visigoths, under their king Reccared, convert from Arian Christianity to the orthodox Catholicism of their Spanish subjects.
597
Gregory, bishop of Rome, sends a mission under Augustine to convert the pagan Anglo-Saxons of Britain.
603
A major war breaks out between the Persian and Byzantine empires.
611
The Persians capture Antioch, and, in the following year, push deep into Asia Minor, modern Turkey.
626
Constantinople is besieged by Avar and Persian armies.
629
The great war with Persia finally ends, in Persian defeat.
633
Arabs, newly united under the banner of Islam, begin the conquest of the Byzantine Levant.
636
Arab power over the Levant is confirmed by their victory over the Byzantines at the battle of the River Yarmuk. By 646 the Arabs also control all Egypt.
during the 640s
The Arabs begin raiding deep into Asia Minor, the Aegean region, and Africa.
674–8
The Arabs blockade Constantinople.
698
Carthage and the province of Africa fall to the Arabs.
711
An Arab army enters Spain, and begins the successful conquest of almost the whole peninsula.
716–18
Second Arab blockade of Constantinople.
732
A Muslim army, raiding into Francia from Spain, is defeated by the Frankish king, Charles Martel, near Poitiers.
768
Accession of the Frankish king Charles, known to posterity as ‘Charlemagne’.
800
Charlemagne is crowned emperor in Rome, the first western emperor for over 300 years.
NOTES
Chapter 1. Did Rome Ever Fall?
1. Edward Gibbon, Autobiography of Edward Gibbon as Originally Edited by Lord Sheffield (Oxford, 1907), 160.
2. From the ‘Introduction’ to William Robertson, The History of the Reign of the Emperor Charles V: With a View of the Progress of Society in Europe, from the Subversion of the Roman Empire, to the Beginning of the Sixteenth Century (London, 1769).
3. I explore the rise of the new Late Antiquity in much greater depth in the forthcoming Festschrift for Wolf Liebeschuetz, edited by John Drinkwater and Benet Salway.
4. P. R. L. Brown, The World of Late Antiquity: From Marcus Aurelius to Muhammad (London, 1971).
5. P. R. L. Brown, ‘The World of Late Antiquity Revisited’, Symbolae Osloenses, 72 (1997), 5–30, at 14–15.
6. Late Antiquity: A Guide to the Post-Classical World, ed. G. W. Bowersock, Peter Brown, and Oleg Grabar (Cambridge, Mass., and London, 1999), ix.
7. Bernard Cornwall, The Winter King (Harmondsworth, 1996).
8. See, above all, Averil Cameron, ‘The Perception of Crisis’, in Morfologie sociali e culturali in Europa fra Tarda Antichità e Alto Medioevo (Settimane di studio del Centro italiano di studi sull’ Alto Medioevo, 45;
Spoleto, 1998), 9–31, at 10.
9. The papers that were given at the European conferences are gradually appearing in print, published by Brill.
The Fall of Rome: And the End of Civilization Page 20