CRISTO RAUL.ORGREADING HALL"THIRD MILLENNIUM LIBRARY" |
 |
BLESSED BE THE PEACEFUL BECAUSE THEY WILL BE CALLED SONS OF GOD |
 |
EARLY CHRONICLERS OF ITALY.
DECLINE
OF HISTORY WITH THE DECLINE OF ROME — ITS REVIVAL IN THE TIME OF THE GOTHS —
CASSIODORUS — HIS HONOURS AND THE POLITICAL TENDENCY OF HIS WORKS — HIS LOST
HISTORY OF THE GOTHS AND THE “LIBRI EPISTOLARUM VARIARUM”— COMPENDIUM BY THE
GOTH JORDANIS OF THE HISTORY OF CASSIODORUS — THE DIVISIONS BETWEEN ROMANS AND
GOTHS FOMENTED AT CONSTANTINOPLE — GOTHIC WAR NARRATED BY PROCOPIUS OF CAESAREA
— MERITS AND IMPORTANCE OF THIS AUTHOR — MINOR WRITERS.
In the decline of Rome, and the
slow dissolution of Latin unity, not only was all national feeling and life
destroyed, but also the art—almost the will—of writing history was lost. The
old world was dying in the West, and with it were fading away the last gleams
of the old civilization. The grand inspiration of Livy, and the powerful
utterances of Tacitus, had ceased ages before, and gradually every spring was
drying up, so that in the fifth century the story of that dark and uncertain
period must be laboriously sought for among the few writers with whom we still
meet, and who, with the exception of Ammianus Marcellinus, were not generally
historians even in name. Prudentius, Claudianus, Rutilius Numatianus, St. Jerome and the principal fathers of the
Church—such are the insufficient sources to which the historical student of
this age must turn; and the reason for this is not far to seek. Where public
life languished, it was natural that the records of the life itself should
languish also. And while history was dying out among the natives of Italy, it
could not spring all at once into life among the first invaders. To them the
art was wanting, nor could the wish to turn the
living traditions of their songs into history come to them naturally, unless
they first learnt this art in Italy, or at least found someone among the
vanquished disposed to write the narrative of their deeds. But for this end, it
was necessary first that vanquished and victors should commingle and learn to
feel in common, so that while one brought new blood and energy to the enervated
country, the other infused into these new elements what remained of former
learning. Such a commingling was not to be expected in the case of the first
invaders who swept down from the Alps rather for rapine than for conquest, but
appeared for a moment to be possible with the Goths; and it is indeed in their
time that the devotion to past memories temporarily revives, and that, so to
speak, the narratives and historical documents of the Middle Ages begin.
Certainly
of all the German nationalities the Goths were the most open to civilizing
influences, and most capable of assimilating Latin culture and of identifying
themselves with the old races among whom they had come down, while bringing
into them new and salutary elements of vitality. Even today the German language
has to refer for its origin to the Gothic translation of the Bible left by Ulphilas, and to the fragments of a harmony of the Gospels.
A strong people of distinct originality, they could not, after their long
contact with the Latin and Greek nations, neglect such rich intellectual
traditions, nor treat with contempt the exquisite creations of classic art and
the legislative wisdom which in the Justinian code presented a synthesis of the
work of many ages. And if the Goths were capable of appreciating the traditions
of antiquity, these traditions, on the other hand, had still life enough in
them to command the respect and admiration of their vigorous foes. If a strong
nation could ever have been formed out of the two elements, the Roman and the
barbarian, it could only have happened with the Goths, and at that time. The
majesty of the Empire still survived, and still the Latin element was so strong
as to offer the barbarians more hope of union than of conquest. Later, after
many struggles, after long and disastrous wars, impoverished, exhausted, and
depopulated, while her Grecian rulers thought less of defending her than of
satisfying their greed, Italy had grown powerless, and the new invaders
regarded with contempt what remained of the old authority and the old
civilization of Rome. But it was different during the Gothic period, and the
reign of Theodoric (a.d. 493-526) shows a continual desire to unite the German and Roman elements, and
to join the two people in a common brotherhood of feeling and of thought
Cassiodorus, who held the highest offices of the State during a very long part
of the Gothic dominion—from the reign of Theodoric to that of Vitiges—directed
all his efforts towards this object, and did all that lay in his power to root
firmly in the soil this new kingdom. “What we aim at, with God’s help, is that
our subjects should lament the not having come sooner under our rule.” These
words which Cassiodorus puts into the mouth of Theodoric, seem to express a
fixed purpose, and to explain whither his actions tended.
And
while he was at the head of public affairs, his literary labours were conceived in the same spirit, and assisted him in this object. He may well
be said to have represented his age in letters as well as in politics. The
court of Theodoric had become a centre round which
the survivors of the ancient civilization clustered, and there many works
originated which carried on the memory of this culture into the Middle Ages. And
in truth the school of the grammarians—Donatus, Macrobius, Marcianus Capella—finds its descendants about this
time in Priscianus and Cassiodorus, whose confused
style and obscure and inflated Latin was to win the admiration of a later age.
The Aristotelian philosophy owed much of its influence on mediaeval thought to
the greatest scholar then living, Severinus Boetius,
a man of noble character, made famous by his misfortunes and by the book which
he wrote under their inspiration. The old pagan learning was never destroyed,
notwithstanding the complete victory of Christianity; and these men, by christianizing it to a certain extent, made it more
acceptable to later generations. Nor were the Goths altogether strangers to
this intellectual movement, for some of them in the court of Ravenna allied
themselves to the learned Romans, and followed their studious example. The
existence of the Gothic philosophers, Athanarid, Hildebald, and Marcomir, has not
been established with certainty, although they are mentioned in an ancient document;
but there is no doubt that Theodatus, a relation of Theodoric and later himself
king of the Goths, was much given to philosophical studies, and styled himself
a follower of Plato. The high-minded and unfortunate Queen Amalasuntha had an amount of culture rare for her time and in her sex, and we shall
presently have occasion to speak of the Goth Jordanes, who fortunately made a
compendium of the history of the Goths by Cassiodorus, the history itself
being lost.
Magnus
Aurelius Cassiodorus, born in Samnium, of a noble family, and early initiated
into public life, sided with those of the Roman patricians who thought it
advisable that their country should cast in its lot with the barbarians, and
thence form a kingdom, to which the twofold element might insure unity and
strength. During the reign of Odoacer (A.D. 476-493) he held various public
offices, and Theodoric not only confirmed him in them, but raised him to the
highest dignities and entrusted to his care the most important State questions.
We have already said how the writings of Cassiodorus, which have a direct or
indirect historical aim, are in accord with his public life, and are all calculated
to draw closer the bonds of brotherhood between Romans and Goths. Indeed, he wrote
a short chronicle with the special object of glorifying Theodoric; but this
work, full of inflated praises, is a very poor thing, and consists only of a
chronological sketch badly put together and full of errors, which have been
pointed out and severely commented upon by Theodor Mommsen. On the other hand
his history of the Gothic people, divided into twelve books, appears to have
been a work of much greater value, and to have been more in harmony with the
learned and scholastic tendencies of that day. But this work was soon lost, and
we can only judge of it, and that but imperfectly, from the compendium of
Jordanes. The spirit of this history is sufficiently indicated by the words
with which the King Athalaric announced to the Roman Senate the appointment of
Cassiodorus as Prefect of the Praetorium. “Not only,” he says, “has Cassiodorus
magnified his present lords, but going backwards he has extended his inquiries
into the ancient cradle of our race, discovering from his researches in documents
what was hardly any longer remembered, even by the hoary traditions of our old
men. He brought forth the kings of the Goths from the oblivion wherein they lay
in the remote hidingplaces of antiquity. He established the illustrious
lineage of the Amali, proving clearly that our race
has been royal for seventeen generations. He made the origin of the Goths part
of Roman history, collecting as it were into one garland the hardy plants which
he found dispersed throughout the fields of literature. Consider how much affection
he showed you in praising us, by teaching that your prince’s family had been
distinguished from remote ages, and that as you were always held to be noble,
so you should be ruled over only by an ancient race of kings.” Here we see
clearly the political aim of the book. To the Roman whose pride in his
country’s history increased as its power diminished, it was desirable to show
that these barbarians who had come down from the North to divide the land with
him were also of noble extraction and could boast of a glorious history. For
this end, says Wattenbach, did Cassiodorus employ all
his learning. “It had long been easy to believe that the Goths and Gaetae were all one people, but no one had yet tried to
demonstrate the relationship. This was done by Cassiodorus. He wove together
the special historical recollections of the Goths, and the contents of their
ballads, with what he found about the Gaeti in Greek
and Roman records; and because the Greeks constantly called both Goths and Gaeti Scythians, he brought in the whole of the primitive
history of the Scythians and did not hesitate to call the Amazons also Goths.
In the same way the Amali ” (this was the name of
Theodoric’s family), “whose greatness was celebrated in the Gothic Sagas, were
represented as being the immediate descendants of Zamolxis and Sitalkes, and the Romans were left to find some
consolation in this for the bitterness of a foreign yoke.”
We
have quoted above some words addressed to Cassiodorus by the Kings Theodoric
and Athalaric. These words written by Cassiodorus himself are contained in a
collection of letters which, during his public life, he was called upon to
write in the names of the sovereigns whom he served. This collection is divided
into twelve books, and the letters being addressed principally to important
personages or to great institutions of the State, may be said to contain in
order all the acts of government by which the Gothic kings and their ministers
regulated public affairs in Italy until the beginning of the reign of Vitiges.
Their importance for Italian history is incalculable. The lost history of the
Goths could not itself have given such clear evidence as to the moral and
political conditions of the Italians, or as to the relations existing between
them and their invaders, nor could it have given so much information with
regard to the life of that day and the state of men and things. Such documents
speak to posterity with an eloquence which mere contemporary history can never
reach. Thus when Theodoric announces to the Roman Senate the elevation of
Cassiodorus to the dignity of Patrician, and praises his merits and those of
his ancestors, we may from his words infer the respect still felt for the name
of Rome, and the Roman point of view from which the Gothic king regarded the
invasions of Attila :
“But
what we most especially desire is that the light of dignity should shine upon
your assembly.... For the father of this candidate [Cassiodorus] was associated
with the Patrician Aetius for the assistance of the Commonwealth.... He was
sent, and not in vain, to Attila as ambassador. He regarded him without alarm
whom the Empire feared, and heeded not, being shielded by the truth, those
terrible and threatening faces, nor hesitated to reply to the arguments of him
who, seized by I know not what fury, seemed to seek the dominion of the world.
He found the king severe, he left him pacified.... He sustained by his courage
those who were timid, nor were those imagined to be unwarlike who were
represented by such ambassadors. He brought back a peace which had been
despaired of.”
And
these other words very clearly establish what were the judicial conditions of
the two nations united under Theodoric’s sceptre, as
well as giving a true though sad picture of the degenerated manners of the
Roman nobility. In one of those tumults which a bad habit introduced from
Constantinople rendered frequent in the party strifes of the amphitheatre, a patrician of the name of
Theodoric and the consul Importunus had acted
unjustly to some of the populace who belonged to the party opposed to them in
the games, and caused one of them to be killed. Cassiodorus, speaking in the
person of the king, wrote about it to the magistrate in the following severe
and resolute manner:—
“If
we moderate the manners of foreign nations who are under our law, if all that
is associated with Italy must submit to Roman law, how much more should the
capital of the State show greater reverence for the laws, since the grace of
dignity should shine as an example of moderation? For where can a modest spirit
be found, if violent acts disgrace the nobles? ... But lest the gossip of the
populace should offend distinguished men, some account must be kept of this
presumption. If anyone impudently use injurious language against a most
reverend senator when he is passing, let it be held a crime to have preferred
speaking evil to speaking well. But who can insist on serious manners at a
spectacle? Those who go to the circus are not Catos.
Whatever is said there by the people in their gaiety should not be regarded as
abusive language. It is the place which excuses a certain excess. And if their
garrulity is patiently borne, it will be found to be an honour to the princes.”
Temperate
and generous words which are in harmony with these others, addressed to the
Senator Sunivadus, sent by King Theodoric into
Samnium to settle some disputes between the Romans and Goths :
“Enter
therefore the province of Samnium. If any dispute has arisen between any Roman
and the Goths, or between any Goth and the Romans, thou shalt decide upon it
with due consideration of the laws, nor can we permit that those shall live
under an unequal law whom we wish to protect with a single judge. Thou shalt
therefore decide on both sides what is just, for he who merely thinks of equity
must not respect persons.”
It
was, therefore, with good reason that Theodoric praised Cassiodorus for having
made his reign famous by introducing integrity of conscience into the court,
and profound tranquility among the people. Here, at the entrance of the Middle
Ages, we feel still in the letters of this last of Roman statesmen, that the
ancient order of things is not yet extinct, and that there is still some life
and vigour left in Roman civilization. And in truth
no civilizing element is neglected in them. As in the maintenance of the Roman
laws, so also we see a constant watchfulness for the preservation of the
monuments and works of art scattered throughout Italy. In these letters we find
him at one time intent on recovering for the public enjoyment a bronze statue
stolen at Como; at another, on restoring the baths of Spoleto, or on
rebuilding dilapidated aqueducts, or on sending to Ravenna the columns and
marbles lying unused in Rome which might serve to adorn new monuments there,
since the degenerate condition of art was unfavourable to new ornamental work. In one letter to Boetius there is honourable mention made of music, while in
another addressed to the same there is interesting evidence of the condition of
mechanical studies at that time, and from this latter are made the following
extracts :—
“So
the lord of the Burgundians has earnestly begged of us to send him a clock
worked by water flowing under the wheel, and which is also marked by the whole
light of the great sun, as well as the workmen for putting it up. So that what
we are daily accustomed to, may, if they can obtain this thing of delight which
they ask for, seem to them a miracle.... The mechanician is, if we may say so,
almost an associate of nature, disclosing what is hidden, altering what is
manifest, playing with miracles, imitating so well that the imitation is not
suspected but is supposed to be genuine. Thou wilt prepare for us, therefore,
this aforesaid clock as soon as possible, because we know that thou art
specially expert in these matters, in order that thou mayest become known in
that part of the world whither otherwise thou couldst not reach. So may foreign nations recognize through thee that we have such
distinguished men of science as are read of. How often they will not be able to
believe what they see! how often they will think that the truth is but a
deceptive dream! And when they have recovered from their astonishment, they
will not dare to think themselves our equals, when they know that we have wise
men who invent such wonders”.
It
is painful, however, to find Theodoric staining the glory of his reign in his
last years by cruelly putting to death this very Boetius so glorified in this letter, as well as his illustrious father-in-law,
Symmachus. Perhaps this unjust sentence is a sign that the Roman patriciate was
beginning to separate itself from the Goths, and that the agreement between
the two nationalities was less easy than had been hoped at first. Unfortunately
the official letters of Cassiodorus can throw no light upon this, and the absence
of positive historical data obliges us to content ourselves with hypotheses.
At any rate, whatever turn events may have taken, and whatever may have been
the spirit of the Roman nobles, Cassiodorus was faithful to his ideas of
reconciliation, and at the death of Theodoric he remained in his post near Amalasuntha, who reigned for some years in the name of her
son Athalaric, then a child. During this regency the divisions between the
Goths and Romans grow more evident, especially touching the education of the
young king, which the principal Goths wished should be free from any literary
tendency, and entirely devoted to bodily exercise and warlike arts. In the
mean while the imperial Government at Constantinople added to the flame, and
by encouraging these discords between the two races, as also those of the Goths
among themselves, hoped to be able to take advantage of them in order to
recover the Italian provinces. After the death of the young Athalaric, his
mother, Amalasuntha, reigned for some time by herself;
but neither her great intelligence, nor the fact of her being Theodoric’s
daughter, could save her from the suspicions of the Goths, so that at one
moment finding herself in danger she entered into treaty with the Emperor
Justinian with the object of escaping from Italy and seeking an asylum at
Constantinople. Afterwards, however, flattering herself that she might thus
retain her hold upon the throne, she gave her hand in marriage to Theodatus, a
cousin of her own and a descendant of the Amali, who
had formerly been her enemy, but whom she hoped to conciliate by associating
him in the kingdom. Theodatus, a mean and cowardly man, as soon as he had ascended
the throne, confined Amalasuntha in an island of the
lake of Bolsena (Vulsinium)
and there afterwards had her murdered. He reigned alone for some time, but
finding his position a precarious one, and desirous above all of leading a
quiet life, he offered to give up the kingdom to Justinian, asking in exchange
riches and peaceful honours on the Bosphorus. But when the Goths perceived that their cowardly
king had betrayed them, they deposed him, and overtaking him as he was escaping
to Ravenna, stabbed him to death. Then lifting Vitiges, one of their valiant
warriors, on their shields, they proclaimed him king; and Cassiodorus, who
during all these events had remained in office, wrote in the name of the new
king the following letter, which we quote at length because it seems to us like
a trumpet-call, ushering in the fateful and adventurous war which was at hand.
“Vitiges
the king to all the Goths. Although every good fortune is to be considered as a
gift from the Deity, nor is there any good thing but we know that it comes
direct from Him, yet more especially we should refer the source of royal dignity
to superior judgments, which have ordained whom He would that His people should
obey. Hence, rendering gratefully most humble thanks to Christ, the Author of
all things, we announce that the Goths’ own kinsmen, amidst drawn swords, and
according to the manner of our ancestors raising us on their shields, have
conferred on us with God’s approval the kingly dignity, that arms might bestow
that honour to which war had already given a claim.
For behold I was elected not in secret chambers, but in the midst of the open
camp; I was sought not with delicate discourse of flatterers, but with clashing
trumpets, that the Gothic people, roused by such sounds to the desire of native valour, might find a martial king to reign over them.
And indeed how long could men of valour, brought up
amidst raging wars, endure a prince whose fame was insecure, however much he
might presume on his prowess? It follows necessarily that the reputation which
a nation enjoys depends on the leader whom it has deserved to have. For, as you
may have heard, I came, called forth by the danger of my kinsmen, to share with
them all a common fortune; but they would not allow me to be merely their
general, seeing as they did that an experienced king was wanted. So that you
are responding to the intentions first of Divine grace, and then of the Goths,
inasmuch as you have made me king by your unanimous votes. Lay aside,
therefore, all fear of injury, all suspicion of loss; fear no harshness from
us. We who are experienced in war have learnt to love valiant men. Add to this,
that I have been a witness to the exploits of each of you. For it is not
necessary that I should be told of your deeds by any one, since I, the
companion of your labours, know them all. The arms of
the Goths are not to be broken by any change in my promises. All that we do
shall be for the national good : we shall have no private predilections, and we
promise to pursue all that may do honour to the royal
name. Finally, we promise that in everything our government shall be such as
it should be for the Goths after the illustrious Theodoric, a man so singularly
and successfully adapted for the cares of a kingdom that each prince may justly
be considered illustrious according as he is seen to follow his counsels.
Hence he should be credited as a relation of his who is able to imitate his
deeds. And therefore, while you continue diligent for the advantage of our
kingdom, be reassured as to its internal administration, by the help of God.”
This
letter, and one addressed by Vitiges to Justinian announcing his election, and
exhorting him to peace while showing no fear of war, are the two last important
letters to be found in this collection by Cassiodorus; and it appears to us an
instructive sign of the times to find none addressed to the Roman Senate. It is
not quite certain at what time Cassiodorus gave up public life, but it is
commonly supposed to have been on the fall of the kingdom of Vitiges, and after
the first great defeat of the Goths. Taking, however, into account both the
abrupt cessation of his letters and the finding no mention of him in the
histories of Procopius, as well as the new political tendency, we think it
probable that he retired even earlier, disheartened, and having lost all
confidence in a good understanding between the Goths and Romans, which would
nevertheless have been necessary at that time for the preservation of the
Gothic kingdom. At any rate, he had about the year 540 given up the world, and
withdrawing to the Abruzzi, near Squillaci, he
founded there a monastery (Monasterium Vivariense), where he passed the rest of his life in
peaceful solitude and literary occupations. There, in addition to the works he
had already composed, he had a history of the Church compiled and translated;
and in the ninety-third year of his age, he himself wrote a treatise on
orthography for the use of his monks, on whom he had laid the obligation of
copying books. We have no record of the year in which he died, but he may have
lingered on to see the new invasion of Italy by the Lombards, and his life may
have closed amid calamities from which he had vainly tried to preserve his
country, by encouraging the foundation of a Gothic-Roman kingdom.
If
such was the aim of Cassiodorus, the same may be said of the Goth Jordanes, who
seems also to have held that the safety of the Goths lay in their union with
the Romans under the rule of the Amali—Theodoric’s
descendants. Jordanes belonged to a noble Gothic family, connected
by relationship with the Amali. His grandfather had
been notary and chancellor to the king of the Alani, Candac in Mesia, and he also was a notary before embracing
an ecclesiastical career. Like Cassiodorus, and perhaps in imitation of him, he
is often as a writer elaborate and sententious, but like him also, he was under
the influence of the same ideal, and Stahlberg has clearly shown that he saw no
other hope but that for the future of his nation. On that account he not only
took no part in the struggle which followed between the Goths and the Empire,
but seems rather to have sympathized with the Greeks than with his own
countrymen. His very relationship with the Amali and
the traditions left by Theodoric, who, while maintaining his independence,
showed himself respectful towards the Empire and a friend of the Romans,
naturally led Jordanes to side with a party which looked with little favour on the ideas prevailing in his day among the Goths.
For it is certain that about that time there was a party among the Goths, which
regarded as a misfortune the fall of the Amali dynasty, and the separation from the Romans. To this party Jordanes belonged.
In various parts of his compendium, he mentions the child Germanus, who,
according to him, should have ruled the destinies of the two nationalities
united in one. And this explains why in his work he hardly mentions Totila,
whom he of course regarded as a usurper. It also appears certain that he wrote
his book, not in Italy but at Constantinople, where he was one of those who
accompanied Pope Vigilius in his exile from the year
547 until 554. This also explains why he was not able to have the history of
Cassiodorus before him while he was making his compendium of it, and was
obliged to trust entirely to his memory. He tells this himself in the preface,
and it appears that he compiled it for the convenience of the Pope and his
followers, and on this account he narrates at more length the ancient history
of the Goths; and his value as a source of Italian history is diminished by his
alluding but briefly to contemporary events. Jordanes is also the author of a
book entitled De regnorum succession, or De breviatione chronicorum,
which is worth little and compiled principally from Florus. Wattenbach has already observed that what gives most
value to Jordanes is his historical point of view, according to which the Roman
Empire, linked through successive ages with the generations of the Old
Testament, is destined to endure throughout all time till the end of the world.
Besides this conception of the universality of Rome, we find in him a special
importance as the representative of that Gothic party which desired to throw in
their lot with the Romans, and endeavoured to create
a mixed nationality.
To
give an idea of the style of Jordanes we add here, in a note, a fragment which
may prove interesting to the reader; it is a portrait of Attila:
“A
man born into the world for the devastation of nations, and for the terror of
all countries, feared everywhere from the formidable reputation in which, I
know not by what chance, he was generally held. For he was haughty in his gait,
casting his eyes round him in all directions, so that his power might be
apparent even from the boastful motions of his person; a lover indeed of war
but moderate in action, strong in counsel, gracious to suppliants and
benevolent to those once taken into his confidence ; short of stature, broad
shouldered, with a large head, small eyes and thin beard; his hair was
sprinkled with white, his nose was flat, his complexion dark,—all indications
of his origin. And although it was his character to be confident in great
undertakings, still his assurance was increased by the discovery of the sword
of Mars, always held sacred by the Scythian kings, and the finding of which on
the following occasion is thus related by the historian Priscus : Once a
certain shepherd, he says, saw one of his herd limping, and not understanding the
cause of its injury, he followed carefully the traces of blood, and came upon a
sword which the heifer had accidentally stepped upon while grazing, and digging
it up he immediately carried it to Attila, who was greatly rejoiced by this
present, for in his ambition he considered that it conferred on him the kingdom
of the world, and that success in war was assured to him by the sword of Mars.”
But
this party had fallen for ever with the dynasty of the Amali,
and henceforth every tie between the two races was severed. The Emperor
Justinian, seeing that all his negotiations were in vain for regaining Italy
peacefully, prepared to reconquer it with the sword. Belisarius, already famous
for his victories over the Vandals in Africa, was sent into Italy, and while
Theodatus was still reigning (535-536) became master of Sicily and Naples. When
Vitiges was raised to the throne, he retired to Ravenna, not feeling himself
perhaps strong enough to withstand the first shock of the Greek army, and
Belisarius took advantage of this to seize immediately upon Rome. Here begins
in truth the heroic period of this war, one of the most memorable ever fought.
Vitiges collected all the Gothic forces, and with an army of about a hundred
and fifty thousand men, marched from Ravenna to Rome, which he besieged. But
through his perseverance and military talents, Belisarius was able to make a
successful resistance, and, after an obstinate struggle and indescribable
sufferings from famine and pestilence, Rome was relieved from this the first
siege of the war, and the strength of the Gothic army was greatly exhausted.
But the war continued throughout Italy. Everywhere there were battles and
sieges, cities taken and retaken. From Milan to the neighbourhood of Rome the country was devastated, the harvests destroyed, and hence over a
large track of Italy a distressing famine decimated the people (a.d. 537,
538). The war was continuing with all its evils, when a Frank army of about a
hundred thousand men came down unexpectedly from the Alps like a cloud of
locusts, and scattering round them devastation, fire, and rapine, overran a
great part of Italy, and returned by Liguria laden with spoils. Shortly
afterwards Ravenna, besieged by the Greeks, was obliged to surrender, and
Belisarius, taking Vitiges with him as a prisoner, returned to Constantinople,
after having refused the offer of the Italian kingdom from the Goths (a.d. 540).
These then chose for their king, first Ildibald, then Eraric, who were both assassinated after reigning but
a few months. Their successor was a hero, Totila, who, having collected and
disciplined what forces remained, succeeded quickly in regaining almost the
whole of Italy, except Ravenna and Rome, by taking advantage of the discords
among the Greek captains left behind by Belisarius. This great general, being
then sent back to Italy, began the struggle afresh, but, being short of
soldiers and besieged at Ravenna, he could not as he wished go immediately to
the assistance of Rome, which was closely surrounded by the Goths, and when he
later made great efforts to do so they were fruitless. Rome in the meantime
resisted for long, in spite of famine and every kind of suffering, but at
length fell into the hands of Totila. When the Gothic king had made himself
master of the city, and had probably recognized that he could not defend
himself successfully within its vast circumference, he dismantled the walls,
and having driven out all the citizens, he left it completely deserted and
marched southwards. Belisarius lost no time in reoccupying the city, and
notwithstanding its ruined condition was able to defend it against repeated
assaults, while a desultory war continued throughout Italy (547). In
consequence of palace intrigues, Belisarius was recalled to Constantinople, and
again Grecian influence waned in Italy. Totila again took possession of Rome,
and advancing on Sicily succeeded in occupying it also; while the Franks,
taking advantage of the weakness of both Greeks and Goths, made another descent
to spread havoc through Venetia and Liguria (548-552). Narses, then chosen
general-in-chief for the war in Italy, improved the prospects of the Greeks,
who, after a successful naval battle with the Goths in the Adriatic, were able
to raise the siege of Ancona. Then reinstating themselves in Corsica,
Sardinia, and Sicily, they continued to wander fighting over the whole of
Italy, until, the two armies arraying all their forces against each other at Tagina in Umbria, the Goths were totally routed after a
hard fight, and Totila was killed (552). The Goths replaced their fallen hero
by another, and elected King Teias at Pavia, while the Greeks accomplished
other undertakings in the south, took Rome, and laid siege to Cuma, where the Goths kept their treasure under the guard
of Aligern, the brother of Totila. The new king,
Teias, then gathering together what still survived of the Gothic army, and
marching from Pavia through almost the whole of Italy, arrived at Nocera, at
the foot of Vesuvius ; and there was fought the last decisive battle, in which
the Goths were completely and finally subdued, and Teias found a death which
deserved to be held in remembrance.
We
should have no contemporary account of this heroic war unless Procopius, who
took part in all the wars conducted by Belisarius, had fortunately left us a
narrative of it. On that account we have recalled this war to our readers’
minds, and given this brief statement of the events treated by the Greek
historian before entering on a more special mention of him and his work.
From
Caesarea in Palestine, where he was born, Procopius came to Byzantium in the
time of the Emperor Anastasius, and soon attracted the attention of the
Government by his remarkable talent and learning. Justin the Elder, in a moment
of great difficulty for the Empire, when the Persians were carrying on the war
against the Greeks with success, appointed Procopius as counsellor to Belisarius.
Later Justinian wished him to remain in that capacity during the wars in Africa
and Italy, in which he rendered excellent service to the State in various
missions, and was of much use to the great captain of the Empire. When
Belisarius was recalled after the subjugation of Africa, Procopius remained
behind with Solomon, who had succeeded Belisarius in the command of the army,
and was commissioned to establish firmly the authority of the Empire there,
which, owing to the rapidity of the conquest, was not thoroughly secured. He
has himself given us an account of his doings in Persia, Africa, and various
parts of Italy; nor can he be accused of boastfulness in speaking of himself.
His useful services, though of secondary importance, were well rewarded; and
after being inscribed among the senators, he rose, in the thirty-fifth year of
Justinian’s reign, to the high dignity of Praefect Urbis. About that
time he had already written his histories, and published all except the last
book, which he called Anecdota, but which is
better known by the name of Historia Arcana. In this book, which was not
published till after the death of Justinian, many palace intrigues are revealed
which place the imperial court in an unfavourable light; and Justinian the emperor and his wife Theodora, who before ascending
the throne was, as is well known, an actress in the circus, more especially
suffer in this Historical Arcana, which, disclosing vices unmentioned in
the previous books, has caused doubts to be entertained of the truthfulness of
Procopius. Justinian’s reign, however, was no less remarkable for its vices
than for its virtues, and so offered a wide field for descriptions which, while
differing, might nevertheless be truthful; moreover this is not the place for
examining these accusations, nor the defence made for
Procopius. Putting aside the Historia Arcana, which has no direct reference to
Italy, as well as the accounts of the wars carried on by Belisarius in Africa
and Persia, we need only examine that part of his history which refers
specially to the Gothic war. What he says on this subject is doubly valuable,
both because, at the side of the great commander, he took a personal part in it
all, and also on account of the great impartiality he shows in treating of the
Goths, for whom he often expresses a sincere admiration which does him credit.
As an eyewitness he describes with telling effect, not only that disastrous
war which lasted eighteen years, but also the train of evils which it involved,
and he indicates clearly the condition of utter exhaustion and weakness in
which Italy was left at the end of that struggle. A Greek writer in a period of
decadence, it is very apparent that his book was written at Constantinople and
not at Athens; and his style as well as his language suffered from the poverty
of the age, and is very far from the simple purity of the ancients.
Nevertheless it is wanting neither in vigour nor in colouring, and his book, very superior to contemporary
Latin literature, is a model of good taste when compared to the writings of
Cassiodorus. When he describes the famine which desolated the whole of Italy,
and the maladies which ensued and destroyed so many more of its inhabitants, he
finds colours in which to depict it that are dark and
terrible in their distinctness, and such as were needed to tell the story of
the famished wretches who wandered about in search of corpses wherewith to
satisfy their hunger. The very brevity with which he narrates the death by
famine of fifty thousand peasants in Picenum alone (the Marche), and of many
more who died in the parts beyond the Ionic Gulf, is very forcible, and gives a
clear idea of the low ebb to which the resources of Italy must have fallen
during that war, and of how exhausted the country was at the end of it. If
space had permitted, we should willingly have given this passage, but we must
content ourselves with the following short description of another famine which
devastated Rome during one of the many sieges which occurred at that period:
“In
the meantime the famine enduring and increasing grew into a great evil, and
suggested strange sorts of food repugnant to nature. First of all Bessas and Conon, who were the chiefs of the garrison in
Rome (and who happened to have a large quantity of corn stored up within the
walls of the city), having kept back what was wanted for the soldiers, sold the
rest for large sums to the wealthy Romans; for the price of a medimnus (a measure of about twelve gallons) was seven gold
pieces. But those whose means did not allow of their spending so much on food,
paid a quarter of this price for a medimnus of bran
and ate it, while necessity made it taste to them most sweet and dainty. And an
ox which the soldiers of Bessas took in a sally, was
sold to the Romans for fifty gold pieces. But any Roman who had a dead horse or
anything else of the kind, was accounted very fortunate, inasmuch as he could
luxuriate upon the flesh of the dead animal. But all the rest of the people
lived only on the nettles which grew in great quantities everywhere on the
walls and ruins of the city. And that the pungency of the plant might not sting
their lips and throat, they boiled them well first before eating them. While
therefore the Romans had gold coins they bargained with them, as has been said,
for wheat and bran; but when these came to an end, they carried their household
goods to the market, and exchanged them for each day’s food. But at last, when
neither the emperor’s soldiers had any more corn to sell to the Romans, there
remaining only a little for Bessas himself, nor the
Romans had anything left to offer in exchange, they all had recourse to the
nettles. But as this food did not suffice for them, and they had not even of it
as much as they could eat, their bodies gradually wasted away. And their colour having soon become livid made them look exactly
like spectres. And many while walking and still
chewing the nettles between their teeth, suddenly fell to the ground dead. And
many others, impelled by starvation, destroyed themselves, when they could no
longer find either dogs or rats or other living things to feed upon. And there
was one Roman, the father of five children, who surrounded him, dragging at his
garments and imploring him for food. But he, neither lamenting aloud nor
letting his confusion be seen, but hiding away his misery with great strength
of mind, desired his children to follow him as if he would give them food. And
when he reached the bridge over the Tiber, having put his cloak to his face and
covered his eyes with it, flung himself into the river in the sight of his
children and of all the Romans who were present. Afterwards the imperial
governors, having extorted more money, gave as many Romans as wished for it
permission to escape whither they would. So only a few remaining behind, all
the rest rushed off in haste wherever they could. And most of them died on
their journey either by sea or land, their strength being already quite exhausted
by famine. And many were taken by the enemy and killed. For to this condition had
fortune brought the Senate and people of Rome.”
The
avarice of the Greek captains, Bessas and Conon, who
meanly took advantage of the scarcity of provisions in order to enrich
themselves, is not passed over in silence here by the Greek writer, and further
on he reproaches them with it in severe terms. On the
other hand, in sharp contrast with this baseness of the Greeks, we find the
conduct of Pope Pelagius, who interceded in dignified language with the
conqueror Totila for the lives of the Romans, against whom the Goths on
entering the city began to act with great cruelty. To this Totila agreed,
taking possession, however, for himself and his Goths, of the ill-gotten
treasures of Bessas; and at the same time all the
patrician houses were pillaged:
“And
thus it happened to the other Romans and Senators, and more especially to Rusticiana, the wife of Boetius and daughter of Symmachus, who had always given all her substance to the needy,
that they had now to beg bread and the other necessaries of life from their
enemies, clothed in the garb of slaves or peasants. For they went round
knocking at the doors of the houses, asking for food, nor was it regarded by them
as a disgrace. And the Goths insisted that Rusticiana should be put to death, accusing her of having bribed the Roman officers to
destroy the statues of Theodoric, in order to avenge the murders of her father Symmachus
and of her husband Boetius. But Totila would not
allow any injury to be done her, and saved from outrage both her and all the
other women, for which moderation he received great praise.”
We
see from this touching incident, in which Procopius does honour both to Totila and to the last remains of the Roman nobility, what serenity of
judgment he possessed, as well as the quality, so precious in an historian, of
being able to seize on facts in their true proportions, and to place them
before the reader in such a manner that they give a fair general idea of the
conditions of the period described. We think, however, that his good and bad
qualities as a writer are all represented in the following account of the
decisive battles fought at the foot of Vesuvius, with which Procopius concluded
his history of the Gothic war:
“At
the foot of Mount Vesuvius there are springs of good water, and a river called
Draco flows from them, which passes very near to the town of Nocera; and the
two armies were encamped on the opposite sides of this river. But the Draco,
though it contains but a small quantity of water, is not fordable either by
horsemen or foot soldiers, for it contracts its bed into a narrow space, and
breaks away the ground on either side to a considerable depth, so that its
banks are very steep. Whether this results from the nature of the ground or of
the water I do not know. And the Goths, having seized on the bridge and
encamped close to it, placed wooden towers on it, and various machines,
including what they called ballistra, in order that they
might from the top of them wound and harass the enemy. For, as I have said, it
was impossible to come to hand-to-hand combat on account of the river which was
between, so that both for the most part attacked, each other with missiles,
approaching as near as they could on their respective banks. A few single
combats did take place, when some Goth occasionally crossed the bridge to
challenge fight. And so the two armies spent the space of two months. But
thence the Goths were masters of the sea, near which they were encamped, and
could hold out as long as their ships brought them the necessary provisions.
Afterwards the Romans took the enemies’ ships by the treason of the Goth who
was in command of the whole fleet, and also innumerable ships from Sicily and
the rest of the Empire came to their assistance. At the same time Narses,
placing wooden towers on the bank of the river, succeeded in entirely subduing
the spirit of his antagonists. But the Goths, having lost heart and being
pressed for want of food, escaped to a mountain near, called by the Romans in
Latin the Mons Lactis. Thither the Romans could not pursue them on account of
the badness of the ground. But soon the barbarians began to repent having gone
up there, for provisions were still scarcer, so that they could by no means
feed either themselves or their horses. Therefore they, thinking it more
desirable to die in battle array than by slow starvation, came down when the
enemy were least expecting it, and made a sudden attack upon them. The Romans
withstood them as they were, not ordering themselves according to their
captains, or companies, or places, nor arranged in any sort of order among
themselves, but defending themselves against the enemy with all their might,
each man where he happened to be. Then the Goths, having left their horses,
formed into a deep phalanx with their faces all turned to the enemy, and the
Romans seeing this also left their horses, and all drew up together in the same
array.
“And
here I shall describe a battle very remarkable, both in itself, and in the
courage displayed so clearly by Teias, who proved himself second to none of
those whom we call heroes. And the desperate condition in which they found themselves,
urged on the Goths to valour; while the Romans,
although they saw that they were desperate, opposed them with all their might,
being ashamed to give way to those whom they had already beaten : so that both
attacked with great impetuosity those nearest to them, these seeking death, the
others glory. And the battle beginning early in the morning, Teias, defended by
his shield and brandishing his spear, stood with a few others in a conspicuous
position before the phalanx. When the Romans saw him, they thought that if he
fell the whole line of battle would be more easily broken up, so that all who
claimed to be courageous, and they were many, banded together against him, some
thrusting their spears at him, some hurling them against him. But he, hidden
behind his shield, received all the spears on it, and then suddenly falling
upon them destroyed many. And when he saw that the shield was full of the
spears sticking in it, he handed it to one of his shield-bearers, and took
another. Thus he continued to fight for a third part of the day, and then his
shield being transfixed with twelve spears, he was powerless either to move it
at will, or to beat off his attackers. But he merely called in haste to one of
his shieldbearers, without quitting his post or stepping back as much as an
inch, or allowing the enemy to advance, and without turning round or covering
his back with his shield, or standing sideways; but he stood with his shield
as if fastened to the ground, dealing death blows with his right hand, with his
left keeping all at a distance, and calling by name on' his shield-bearer. And
when the latter brought him a shield, he immediately changed for it the one he
held which was heavy with spears. In the meantime it happened that his breast
was uncovered for a short moment, and a javelin chanced to hit him then, and killed
him instantly. And some of the Romans fastened his head to a pike and carried
it about, showing it to both armies—to the Romans that they might be
encouraged, to the Goths that, losing all hope, they might cease from the war.
Yet not on this account did the Goths give up fighting, although they knew for
certain that their king was dead. But when it grew dark, both separating passed
the night in their armour, and rising early the next
morning drew out again in the same order, and fought until nightfall, neither
giving way to the other, nor turning nor losing hold for a moment, although
many were killed on both sides, but they stuck to their work, being infuriated
against each other. For the Goths well knew that they were fighting their last'
battle, while the Romans thought it beneath them to be beaten. At last the
barbarians, sending some of their chief men to Narses, told him that they were
persuaded that they were contending against God, for that they felt His power
set against them ; so that, comparing this truth with what had happened, they
wished now to change their minds, and desist from the struggle, not, however,
so as to obey the emperor, but to live independently together with some of the
other barbarians. And they asked that the Romans should let them retreat in
peace, and not grudge them reasonable treatment, but should give them, as
maintenance for their journey, all the money which they each had stored in
their castles in Italy. And when Narses was deliberating on this, John, the
son of Vitalianus, advised that this request should
be granted; and that they should not continue to fight with men prepared to die,
nor put further to the proof a valour which resulted
from despair of life, and which was equally disastrous to those who showed it
and to those who encountered it. ‘For it should suffice,’ he said, ‘to wise men
to be victorious; wanting too much is likely to turn out prejudicial to both
parties.’ This counsel pleased Narses, and they agreed that those who were left
of the barbarians, after collecting their own possessions, should immediately
clear out of the whole of Italy, and should on no account fight any more
against the Romans. In the meantime about a thousand of the Goths, leaving the
camp, proceeded to the city of Pavia and the countries beyond the Po; and Indulph, whom we have already mentioned, was among those
who led them. But all the rest confirmed by oath what had been agreed upon.
Thus the Romans took Cumae, and all the other places, and this was the end of
the eighteenth year of the war with the Goths, which was written by Procopius.”
The
whole history of this age is contained in Cassiodorus and Procopius, but there
are some other writers who also deserve to be mentioned. Agathias continued, also in Greek, the history of Procopius, with a narrative of the
later exploits of Narses, and may be consulted with advantage touching the last
events of the Gothic war after the death of Teias. Marcellinus Comes has left
us a dry Latin chronicle, which, beginning in the time of Theodosius, extends
to that of Justinian (a.d. 379-558); but, notwithstanding its dryness, it has a value especially for the
chronology of certain facts, with regard to which something also may be
extracted from the chronicle of Marius Aventicensis.
Far
superior to these, both for interest and importance, is Magnus Felix Ennodius, bishop of Pavia. Of a noble and doubtlessly
Gallo-Roman stock, he seems to have been born at Milan, and certainly lived
there as a child. He was bound by ties of blood or friendship to all the first
men of his time—to all those most distinguished either by learning or birth. He
was married and had one child, but later he and his wife left the world for the
religious life. After becoming deacon, Ennodius remained in that rank for a long time, till he was raised to the dignity of
bishop of Pavia, where he died about the year 521. He had a great reputation
in his day as a rhetorician, and wrote, both in his own name and in that of
others, an immense number of orations, letters, and epitaphs for which he was
very famous. But his principal fame originated from a panegyric in honour of Theodoric, and a book in defence of Pope Symmachus. The panegyric, written as far as we can judge about 507 or
508, was probably recited either at Ravenna or Milan. It is a writing in the
worst possible taste, containing all the defects of the style of Cassiodorus,
without his redeeming qualities. Its historical value is owing to the absence
of other documentary evidence rather than to any intrinsic importance of its
own, and is inferior to his letters or to his life of St. Epiphanius, bishop of
Pavia. The letters written chiefly to the great men of his time contain 'much
valuable information for the students of that epoch. The life of St.
Epiphanius is the portrait of a wonderful character—of a man entirely
dedicated to works of charity, and especially to the ransom of those whom the
barbarians, in their incursions, carried off with them as slaves far away from
their country. Besides this interesting portrait, it gives us a vivid picture
of the troubled and disastrous age immediately preceding the Gothic times, to
which, bad as they were, still worse were to succeed.
CHAPTER II.SAD CONDITION OF ITALY IN THE EARLY PERIOD OF THE LOMBARD INVASION — GREGORY THE GREAT — COLLECTION OF HIS LETTERS — THEIR GREAT IMPORTANCE FOR THE HISTORY OF ITALY — THE BOOK OF DIALOGUES — THE EDICT OF ROTHARI — THE “ORIGO LANGOBARDORUM” AND MINOR WRITINGS UP TO PAULUS DIACONUS — HIS LIFE — HIS WORKS AND ESPECIALLY HIS HISTORY OF THE LOMBARDS.
|
