Academic literature on the topic 'Stilicho'

AbstractIt has been frequently asserted that the western Roman supreme commander Stilicho’s neglect of the Transalpine provinces during the usurpation of Constantine III contributed to his eventual downfall in 408. Stilicho’s fatal flaw, in this recurring opinion, seems to have been a desire to annex eastern Illyricum for which he sought to employ Alaric. In a volte-face, he then wished to use Alaric as the leader of the western field army that was supposed to bring down Constantine. The aim of this article is to advance several notes of critique on this narrative that has had a long life in Stilichonian scholarship. Instead it will demonstrate that a) the threat of Constantine has been overestimated, b) Stilicho had no designs on annexing eastern Illyricum, c) he had a military strategy ready against Constantine that was sound and in tandem with earlier civil wars, and d) that the intended role of Alaric during this enterprise has been misunderstood. Nevertheless, Stilicho’s military strategy in 408 proved to be fundamentally corrosive towards his hitherto carefully built-up political capital. Olympius, the architect of his demise and his precise knowledge of Stilicho’s army preparations, as befitted the magister officiorium, provided the former with the perfect material to fabricate stories of Stilicho coveting a throne while neglecting the west. This set in motion the plot that ultimately brought down Stilicho.

The most important factors responsible for development of an impressive ca­reer of Flavius Stilicho were: his family ties with Theodosians’ dynasty, the way he reorganized the Roman army, military victories, how he drummed up senate’s support for his political aims and the balanced policy of using and stopping the barbarian tribes. Protecting emperor Honorius, cooperating simultaneously with pagan and Christian fractions in the senate, achieving military success and de­fending borders of the Roman Empire against barbarians raids, Stilicho de facto was reigning the state in the name of his son-in-law, Honorius. Paradoxically, the same factors contributed to the downfall of the master-in-chief in 404-408 A.D. The conflict with his wife, Serena, and his son-in-law, Honorius, the mutiny in the army called-up by the reforms of Stilicho, some disagreements with the senate caused by the case of Melania the Younger and compensation for Alaric and, at last, the invasion of barbarian tribes on Gaul in 406 A.D. destroyed the carefully built career of Flavius Stilicho. He didn’t decide to keep his high rank by trigge­ring off a civil war, what differed him clearly from his followers, Flavius Aetius and Flavius Ricimer.

One of the best known (and best preserved) of late-antique ivories is what is generally known as the Stilicho diptych, kept in the tesoro of the cathedral at Monza. It represents a military man with a spear and shield on one panel, and, on the other, a high-ranking woman holding a flower above the head of a small boy, not more than 10 years old; he stands between them wearing a chlamys and holding the codicils of office in his left hand (fig. 1). Ever since the basic article by C. Jullian more than 130 years ago, it has been generally accepted that the only candidates who fit this description are the western magister utriusque militiae Stilicho (d. 408), his wife Serena, the niece and (according to Claudian) adoptive daughter of Theodosius I, and their son Eucherius, appointed to the office of tribunus et notarius in (probably) 395/6.

Two Latin poets of late antiquity, Claudian and Sidonius Apollinaris, included in their verse panegyrics short descriptions of diplomatic journey to Persia. The first mentioned the mission of Stilicho himself in “Panegyric on the consulate of Stilicho” (400 AD), whereas the latter described the mission of Procopius, father of the honorand in the “Panegyric on the consulate of Anthemius” (468 AD). Since Sidonius was in many ways imitator of Claudian, these pieces show a great deal of similarity both in content and form (especially in wording). However, closer scrutiny enables us to discover some differences in the treatment of Oriental topics as well as in general attitude to the praised heroes. Such an analysis allows us an insight into the image of Iranian world created in the Roman poetry as well as the question of sources used by late Latin poets. This paper can be also treated as a small contribution to the discussion on Sidonius’ imitation of Claudian poetry.

Eutropius, eunuch who became the consul of the Roman Empire in 399 AD under Arcadius, is a villain of Claudius Claudian’s invective In Eutropium. Argumentation in this piece is based on many negative topoi employed in the earlier Roman poetry. In doing this, the poet makes a particular use of stereotypes connected with the East, by dint of which he can attribute these features to the Eastern Roman Empire (epitomised by Eutropius) and – at the same time – to show that the right Roman virtues are fostered in the Western Roman Empire, controlled by the poet’s patron, Stilicho.

AbstractThis study sets about to analyse the complex relations between rhetoric and reality by examining the use of traditional material, both rhetorical and mythological, in the group of nuptial poems written by Claudian in 398 A.D., and to show across the political and religious dimensions of these poems, how the use of topoi in the representation of the present proves to be both mirror and mask of reality. One finds that, in the political domain, Claudian, in consonance with imperial ideology, holds up a lofty mirror to the court and uses rhetorical topics to hide the shadowy aspects of the situation of the western empire controlled by Stilicho; in the religious domain, the poet ignores completely the Christian aspect of this marriage, unlike certain other late authors of epthalamic works, and anchors his poetry strongly in pagan tradition.

The two ivory tablets in Paris and London, dating from late antiquity and forming parts of one diptych (Plates 1, 2), have been convincingly placed in their stylistic setting by the scholar to whom this article is dedicated. With other works in ivory from about A.D. 400 and with the Rothschild cameo, they form a ‘classicistic’ group, some manufactured in Rome, some in Milan. The cameo probably refers to the marriage in A.D. 398 of the young Emperor Honorius to Maria, daughter of Stilicho. We may assume that the diptych under consideration here also has reference to an aristocratic wedding, although its iconography is quite different. It shows not the portrait of a bridal pair, but two female figures, hitherto regarded as pagan priestesses. It is not these figures, but the tabulae ansatae at their heads that give support to the hypothesis that the diptych was made on the occasion of a marriage between the two families named on the tablets, the Symmachi and the Nicomachi. Matrimonial unions between members of the pagan aristocracy in officially Christian Rome may not only be presumed, but in the case of the Nicomachi and Symmachi may be actually shown to have happened. The following observations would seem to provide appropriate reinforcement for reference to a wedding on iconographic grounds.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Indiana University, Dept. of History, 2004.
Title from PDF t.p. (viewed Dec. 8, 2008). Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 66-04, Section: A, page: 1460. Chair: Leah Shopkow.

L’influence du genre épique se manifeste à travers plusieurs biais dans l’œuvre, apparemment hétérogène, de Claudien. Le poète se présente clairement comme uates, héritier d’Homère, d’Ennius et de Virgile – mais revendique une matière historique et non plus mythologique. La langue témoigne également d’une forte influence du genre épique, que ce soit dans le lexique ou l’emploi de la comparaison homérique. La reprise de motifs, parfois déformés ou renouvelés, confirme cette influence : thème guerrier, songes, présages, prodiges, prophéties, jeux… Si la morale héroïque est plus malmenée, concurrencée par les valeurs chrétiennes, l’univers épique se trouve encore actualisé à travers les figures divines et mythologiques qu’on peut appréhender au moyen d’une lecture typologique. La somme de ces éléments formels est au service d’un propos épique, poétique et politique, célébrant Roma aeterna et Natura. Il apparaît ainsi que l’écriture épique est le dénominateur commun à l’ensemble du corpus, et que les carmina maiora méritent d’être considérés comme une épopée politique
There is a clear epic vein in Claudian's apparently heterogeneous work, and it appears in a variety of ways. The poet clearly considers himself to be a uates, an heir to Homer, Ennius and Virgil, even though his subject matter is historical, not mythological. The language he uses is also strongly influenced by that of the epic genre, as exemplified by the use of a specifically epic lexicon and the resort to homeric similes. The way he builds on and renews traditional epic motifs (battle scenes, dreams, omens, miracles, prophecies, games ...) reveals the influence of the epic genre on his writings as well. Even though the ethics of heroism are undercut by the rise of Christian values, the divine and mythological figures that can be broached trough a typological reading are proof enough that the world of the epic is still very much present. All these elements contribute to a work that celebrates Roma Aeterna and Natura and is all at once epic – poetic and political. It thus appears that the epic vein is what unifies the corpus, and that the carmina maiora should be read as a political epic

Cette thèse a comme objectif de démontrer combien Alaric et ses Goths étaient Romains dans pratiquement toutes les catégories connues sur leur compte. Pour ce faire, l’auteur a puisé dans les sciences sociales et a emprunté le champ conceptuel de l’éminent sociologue Pierre Bourdieu. À l’aide du concept d’habitus, entre autres choses, l’auteur a tenté de faire valoir à quel point les actions d’Alaric s’apparentaient à celles des généraux romains de son époque. Naturellement, il a fallu étaler le raisonnement au long de plusieurs chapitres et sur de nombreux niveaux. C’est-à-dire qu’il a fallu d’abord définir les concepts populaires en ce moment pour « faire » l’histoire des barbares durant l’Antiquité tardive. Pensons ici à des termes tels que l’ethnicité et l’ethnogenèse. L’auteur s’est distancé de ces concepts qu’il croyait mal adaptés à la réalité des Goths et d’Alaric. C’est qu’il fallait comprendre ces hommes dans une structure romaine, au lieu de leur octroyer une histoire et des traditions barbares. Il a ensuite fallu montrer que la thèse explorait des avenues restées peu empruntées jusqu’à aujourd’hui. Il a été question de remonter jusqu’à Gibbon pour ensuite promouvoir le fait que quelques érudits avaient autrefois effleuré la question d’Alaric comme étant un homme beaucoup moins barbare que ce que la tradition véhiculait à son sujet, tel que Fustel de Coulanges, Amédée Thierry ou encore Marcel Brion. Il s’agissait donc de valider l’angle de recherche en prenant appui d’abord sur ces anciens luminaires de la discipline. Vint ensuite l’apport majeur de cette thèse, c’est-à-dire essentiellement les sections B, C et D. La section B a analysé la logistique durant la carrière d’Alaric. Cette section a permis avant tout de démontrer clairement qu’on n’a pas affaire à une troupe de brigands révoltés; le voyage de 401-402 en Italie prouve à lui seul ce fait. L’analyse approfondie de l’itinéraire d’Alaric durant ses nombreux voyages a démontré que cette armée n’aurait pas pu effectuer tous ces déplacements sans l’appui de la cour orientale. En l’occurrence, Alaric et son armée étaient véritablement des soldats romains à ce moment précis, et non pas simplement les fédérés barbares de la tradition. La section C s’est concentrée sur les Goths d’Alaric, où on peut trouver deux chapitres qui analysent deux sujets distincts : origine/migration et comparaison. C’est dans cette section que l’auteur tente de valider l’hypothèse que les Goths d’Alaric n’étaient pas vraiment Goths, d’abord, et qu’ils étaient plutôt Romains, ensuite. Le chapitre sur la migration n’a comme but que de faire tomber les nombreuses présomptions sur la tradition gothe que des érudits comme Wolfram et Heather s’efforcent de défendre encore aujourd’hui. L’auteur argumente pour voir les Goths d’Alaric comme un groupe formé à partir d’éléments romains; qu’ils eurent été d’une origine barbare quelconque dans les faits n’a aucun impact sur le résultat final : ces hommes avaient vécu dans l’Empire durant toute leur vie (Alaric inclus) et leurs habitus ne pouvaient pas être autre chose que romain. Le dernier chapitre de la section C a aussi démontré que le groupe d’Alaric était d’abord profondément différent des Goths de 376-382, puis d’autres groupes que l’on dit barbares au tournant du 5e siècle, comme l’étaient les Vandales et les Alamans par exemple. Ensemble, ces trois chapitres couvrent la totalité de ce que l’on connait du groupe d’Alaric et en offre une nouvelle interprétation à la lumière des dernières tendances sociologiques. La section D analyse quant à elle en profondeur Alaric et sa place dans l’Empire romain. L’auteur a avant tout lancé l’idée, en s’appuyant sur les sources, qu’Alaric n’était pas un Goth ni un roi. Il a ensuite analysé le rôle d’Alaric dans la structure du pouvoir de l’Empire et en est venu à la conclusion qu’il était l’un des plus importants personnages de l’Empire d’Orient entre 397 et 408, tout en étant soumis irrémédiablement à cette structure. Sa carrière militaire était des plus normale et s’inscrivait dans l’habitus militaire romain de l’époque. Il a d’ailleurs montré que, par ses actions, Alaric était tout aussi Romain qu’un Stilicon. À dire le vrai, mis à part Claudien, rien ne pourrait nous indiquer qu’Alaric était un barbare et qu’il essayait d’anéantir l’Empire. La mauvaise image d’Alaric n’est en effet redevable qu’à Claudien : aucun auteur contemporain n’en a dressé un portrait aussi sombre. En découle que les auteurs subséquents qui firent d’Alaric le roi des Goths et le ravageur de la Grèce avaient sans doute été fortement influencés eux aussi par les textes de Claudien.
This thesis hopes to demonstrate how Alaric and his Goths were Romans in virtually all that is known about them. To do this, the author has drawn from the social sciences to take the conceptual scope of the eminent sociologist Pierre Bourdieu. Using the concept of habitus, among other things, the author has tried to argue how Alaric’s ‘habits’ were similar to those of the Romans of his time. Naturally, the reasoning was spread over several chapters and on several levels. That is to say, it was first necessary to define the concepts popular at this time to "tell" the History of the Barbarians in Late Antiquity. We have to think here of terms such as ethnicity and ethnogenesis. The author has distanced himself from these concepts he thought ill-suited to the reality of the Goths and of Alaric. We should understand these men in a Roman structure, instead of granting them a History and/or barbaric traditions. He then had to show that the thesis explored avenues which have remained understudied until today. He had to start with Gibbon and work his way up the erudite chart while promoting the fact that some scholars had previously touched on Alaric as a man much less barbaric than the tradition was promoting, such as Fustel de Coulanges, Amédée Thierry and Marcel Brion. It was therefore important to validate the research angle by first acknowledging the place of these great scholars. Then came the major contribution of this thesis, that is to say essentially the sections B, C and D. Section B is focusing on the logistical side of Alaric’s story. This section have foremost allowed to demonstrate clearly that we are not dealing with a band of revolted brigands : the travel of 402 in Italy alone proves this fact. The detailed analysis of the routes taken by Alaric during his many trips demonstrates that the army could not have done all these movements without the support of the eastern court. In that case, Alaric and his army were truly Roman soldiers and not just the barbarous federated people of the tradition. Section C focus on Alaric's Goths where one can find two chapters covering two distinct areas: Origin/Migration and Comparison. It is in this section that the author attempts to support the hypothesis that the Goths of Alaric were not really Goths but rather Romans. The chapter on migration had the goal to break down many assumptions about this gothic tradition that scholars like Wolfram and Heather are still trying to defend. The author argues to see Alaric's Goths as a group formed from Roman elements; to know if in fact any of them was of barbarian stock is irrelevant to the end result : these men had lived in the Empire throughout their entire lives (Alaric included) and their habitus could not have been anything other than Roman. The last chapter of Section C showed without any doubt that the group of Alaric was firstly deeply different from the Goths of 376-382, but then also from other groups that are said to have been barbarians at the turn of the fifth century, as were the Vandals and Alamanni for example. Together, these three chapters cover the totality of what is known about the group of Alaric and offers fresh interpretation following the last trends in social sciences. The section D is for its part an in-depth analysis of Alaric and his place in the Roman Empire. The author has demonstrated above all, relying on sources, that Alaric was not a Goth nor a king. He then analyzed the role of Alaric in the power structure of the Empire and came to the conclusion that he was one of the most important men of the Eastern Empire between 397 and 408, while still being totally dependant on that structure. His whole military career up to 397 was unassuming and was part of the Roman military habitus of the time. He also showed that by his actions, Alaric was also as Roman as Stilicho. To tell the truth, apart from Claudian, nothing could tell us that Alaric was a barbarian and was trying to destroy the Empire. The bad image of Alaric is liable only to Claudian alone : no contemporary writer did draw such a dark portrait of him. It follows that subsequent authors who made Alaric the king of the Goths and the destructor of Greece must had followed Claudian as well.

Chapter 6 explores the dramatic events spurring Melania and her entourage to leave Rome in advance of the Gothic sack of the city in August 410. After the death of Melania’s father in perhaps 405 or 406, Melania and Pinian went to a suburban property to begin their renunciations. Goths advanced into Italy starting in 401; from 407 onward, Alaric demanded ransom money and goods to prevent his attack on the city. Serena, wife of Stilicho and a member of the imperial court, had arranged with the emperor for court officials to assist the couple with the divestment of their property. When both Stilicho and Serena were killed, Melania and Pinian lost a major source of protection. The emperor Honorius dawdled in meeting Alaric’s requests, and Roman senators resisted parting with their wealth to pay the ransom. The Roman city prefect perhaps attempted to confiscate the couple’s property in order to pay the ransom but was killed in a riot over the bread supply. The extreme difficulty of divesting themselves of their possessions is clearly on display (Serena herself had claimed that she could not afford to buy their Roman mansion), as is the fierce opposition of their relatives, especially Pinian’s brother. The sack of Rome elicited various responses from Christian and pagan writers.

The courts of Theodosios’s two young sons, Honorius in the West and Arkadios in the East, were dominated by various powerful advisors—Stilicho, Rufinus, and others. Legislation against dissident Christians and those who clung to traditional worships accelerated. Jewish religion remained licit for those born Jews. Laws pertaining to Jews mostly affirmed Jewish rights to be free from violence, while hinting at threats to those rights. Various laws pertaining to the Jewish patriarch in Palestine, his subordinates, and his authority may reflect alliances between the patriarchs and persons at court. One or more patriarchs may have tried to extend their influence further into the diaspora, with mixed results. Laws reiterated that eligible Jewish men, like non-Jews, must fulfill the onerous obligations of decurions. A law targeting “Hheaven-fearers” is probably wrongly understood as evidence for non-Jews who adopted only some aspects of Jewish practice (sometimes called “God-fearers”). Evidence for Jewish converts remains modest.

Chapter 2 describes the Roman Empire in the fourth and early fifth centuries and important emperors of the period. Among imperial reforms was the introduction of a new form of coinage, the gold solidus. The chapter introduces the emperor Honorius’ important general of the western imperial troops, Stilicho, and his wife, Serena, who will figure in Melania and Pinian’s attempts at divestment. It describes the life of cities in that era, especially the city of Rome, and the role of Christianization in changing its urban landscape. Rome’s inhabitants were dependent on food brought from elsewhere and distributed to them by a system called the annona; disruption of the supply could lead to food riots, one of which plays a role in the couple’s attempts to divest. The building of churches and martyr shrines in and around Rome, importantly spurred by the emperor Constantine and his family in the early fourth century, later often became a cooperative venture between bishops (especially Damasus) and local elites. The cult of Saint Lawrence plays a significant role in the life of Melania: at his shrine or church, Pinian was persuaded to adopt a life of ascetic renunciation with her.