Co-rulers. In 363, Emperor Julian died in the Persian campaign. The troops elected Jovian, the head of a detachment of his bodyguards, as the new ruler of the empire. He hastily made peace with the enemy, giving the Persians all the conquests of his predecessor, and returned to Roman borders, but soon died suddenly at the age of 33. The army chose one of the military leaders, Valentinian, as his successor. After a short time, he began to think about choosing a co-ruler: the eastern and western halves of the empire were already sufficiently isolated, their borders were under threat almost everywhere, and it was simply impossible for one emperor to cope with all the tasks that had to be solved every day.
Therefore, despite the warnings of those dignitaries with whom he consulted, he appointed his brother Valens, taking control of the West, as Augustus (ruler) of the East. He, not possessing special military talents, inevitably had to live up to his high rank and, in particular, conduct military operations on the Danube border against new restless neighbors, the Gothic tribes. But soon part of a vast tribal union, called the Visigoths, fleeing from the ferocious Huns who descended on the Black Sea region from the east, sought refuge within Roman borders. Valens allowed some Gothic tribes, seeing them as new taxpayers and warriors, to settle south of the Danube and ordered officials to allocate places for settlement and take care of supplying their new subjects with food.
The reason for the discontent is ready. However, local authorities did everything to ensure that indignation broke out among the Goths. The weapons that the Goths were supposed to hand over after crossing the Danube were left to them in exchange for bribes. But for the food that they should have received for free, they were demanded to pay and were soon forced by starvation to sell their families and themselves into slavery. Driven to despair, the Goths rebelled and marched on Constantinople. They were joined by a mass of fellow tribesmen who crossed the Danube without asking Roman permission. In the first clashes, scattered Roman detachments were defeated, hordes of barbarians flooded Thrace. Their path was marked by robberies and murders. But they also had supporters, mainly from among the slaves, who pointed out where and what they could profit from, and where there were fortifications that were better to bypass.
The Emperor is preparing for war against the Goths. Having learned about the uprising of the Goths, Emperor Valens hastened to make peace with the Persians, with whom he was at war. He then left Antioch, his seat in the East, and, gathering troops from the eastern provinces, which were left defenseless, went to Constantinople. Met with reproaches from the townspeople, he did not linger there and preferred to advance to meet the enemy. Having reached Adrianople, Valens ordered the army to set up a fortified camp and began to await news from the West: he sent a request for help in advance to his nephew Gratian, the ruler of the western half of the empire. He set out to join the eastern army, making a successful expedition along the way against the German Alamanni tribe and forcing them to sue for peace. Gratian sent ahead Richomer, one of his highest commanders, who arrived safely at Valens' camp and brought him a letter from his nephew. Gratian asked the emperor to “wait a little and not rush randomly into cruel dangers alone.”
Military Council. After this news, Valens convened a council of war. Opinions were divided: of the two commanders of the ground forces, one, Sebastian, recently arrived from the West and appointed chief of infantry, insisted on immediate entry into battle. His words had special weight because he (the only one of the council participants) already had experience in successfully conducting military operations against the Goths. Shortly before this, while Valens was preparing the army for war, Sebastian received orders to select 300 people from each legion and with these forces began a successful guerrilla war against the enemies scattered throughout Thrace. He managed to completely defeat one of the Gothic detachments in the vicinity of Adrianople as a result of a sudden night attack: “He inflicted such a defeat on the Goths that almost everyone was killed, except for a few who were saved from death by the speed of their feet, and he took from them a huge amount of booty, which was not neither a city nor a spacious plain could contain."
Valens does not want to share glory with Gratian. However, Sebastian's opinion, encouraged by easy success, was not shared by everyone. “Some, following the example of Sebastian, insisted on immediately entering into battle, and the commander of the cavalry named Victor, although a Sarmatian by origin, but a leisurely and cautious person, spoke out, having received support from others, in the sense that he should wait co-ruler, that by adding help to himself in the form of Gallic troops, it would be easier to crush the barbarians, who were blazing with an arrogant consciousness of their strength.However, the unfortunate stubbornness of the emperor and the flattering opinion of some courtiers prevailed, who advised acting as quickly as possible in order to prevent participation in the victory , - as they imagined it, - Gratian."
Letters from ready. Having learned about the approach of Valens with the main forces of the Roman army, the leader of the Goths, Fritigern, hastened to gather in one place, 15 Roman miles from Adrianople, all the Gothic detachments that had previously been blithely engaged in robberies. At the same time, he sent a Christian priest to the Romans as an ambassador (there is an assumption that it was Ulfilas, who converted the Goths to Christianity). The historian Ammianus Marcellinus writes about this episode: “Having been kindly received, he presented a letter from this leader, who openly demanded that he and his people, driven out of their land by the rapid raid of wild peoples, be given Thrace to inhabit, and only that, with all livestock and grain, and he pledged to maintain eternal peace if his demands were met.
Moreover, the same Christian, as a faithful man initiated into the secrets of Fritigern, conveyed another letter from the same king. Very skilled in tricks and various deceptions, Fritigern informed Valens, as a man who was soon to become his friend and ally, that he could not restrain the ferocity of his countrymen and persuade them to terms convenient for the Roman state, otherwise than if the emperor will immediately show them at close range his army in combat gear and the fear that the name of the emperor evokes will deprive them of their disastrous military fervor. The embassy, as very ambiguous, was released with nothing."
It is quite possible that the Gothic leader, making his proposals, was quite sincere: ultimately, after very dramatic events, the Goths agreed to approximately the same peace terms. However, Valens did not agree to this, and events began to rapidly develop in a different direction.
The leader of the Goths temporarily retreats. The Emperor of the West, Gratian, advanced with the vanguard of his troops along the Roman military road. It walked along the left bank of the Danube, then turned to the right and, through the territory of modern Serbia, past Philippopolis (modern Plovdiv in Bulgaria), along the Maritsa River to Adrianople (modern Edirne in Turkey) reached Constantinople. The Goths could try to separate both Roman armies by standing between them. However, Fritigern, and this reflected his undeniable strategic talent, on the contrary, left this road free and retreated to the east, to the city of Kabyle (modern Yamboli). The fact is that otherwise he would have been at risk of a simultaneous Roman attack on the Goths from both sides, while it would have been difficult for him to forestall the enemy attack - the Romans had not yet forgotten how to build fortified camps, which the Goths did not know how to storm. Thus, it was necessary for Fritigern to provoke Valens into battle before Gratian approached. If the outcome of the battle was unfavorable for the Goths, the road for retreat remained clear for them.
Valens makes the final decision. When Valens and his troops began to advance along the Maritsa valley towards Gratian, towards Philippopolis, he was suddenly informed that Gothic cavalry had appeared in the vicinity of Adrianople, i.e. in the rear of his army. The emperor immediately turned back and reached Adrianople without interference: it turned out that the Gothic horsemen who appeared on the road were just reconnaissance.
However, the situation has now become more complex. The Goths were able to cut off Valens' communications, through which food was supplied to the army. In addition, they began to plunder that part of Thrace that extended all the way to Constantinople - this rich area had not until then been affected by the war and was a source of supply for both the capital and the troops. Apparently, this circumstance, and not at all envy of the military glory of his young nephew, prompted Valens to finally decide to fight. In addition, he was informed that the number of Goths did not exceed 10 thousand people. The forces of the Romans are unknown to us, but we can safely assume that they were much greater than those of the enemy, otherwise the decision of Valens, who had every opportunity to sit outside the walls of Adrianople until Gratian arrived, is completely illogical.
The Roman army sets out on a campaign. At dawn on August 9, 378, the Roman army, leaving the baggage train in a camp under the walls of Adrianople, taking with them nothing but weapons, set out to meet the Goths. The march under the scorching rays of the sun, along rocky and uneven roads, continued for many hours, until about two o'clock in the afternoon the scouts reported that they saw enemy carts, which were placed in a circle so that an improvised fortification was formed. By that time, Valens’s army was already languishing from hunger and thirst, but there was no time or opportunity to satisfy them: the Romans began to deploy into battle formation.
Deployment of the Romans into a battle line. As far as can be judged from the rather unclear description of ancient authors, Valens preferred the traditional battle formation: cavalry on the flanks, infantry in the center. However, due to the nature of the terrain, it was necessary to move the cavalry of the right wing forward, ready for the camp, to place the infantry behind it, in reserve, and to stretch the cavalry of the left wing, which was trotting along several roads to the scene of action, in the direction of the enemy as individual units approached.
The Goths enter into negotiations. The spectacle of the Romans deploying into battle formation, accompanied by the clanging of weapons and the impact of shields against each other to intimidate the enemy, was impressive. The Goths, trying to delay the start of the battle, because their cavalry had not yet arrived, they again offered peace. But the appearance of the ambassadors did not inspire confidence in the emperor and he demanded that noble Goths be sent for negotiations. Fritigern continued to play for time and sent his personal representative to Valens, who, on behalf of his leader, set a condition for hostages. If it was fulfilled, the Gothic leader promised to keep his fellow tribesmen in obedience, who “started a wild and ominous howl as usual” (i.e., a battle song) and were eager to fight.
Valens, like his senior commanders, finding himself face to face with the enemy, did not seem eager to start a battle at any cost. In any case, “this proposal of the feared leader met with praise and approval.”
Brave Richomer. When one of the dignitaries, who was ordered to go to the Goths with general approval, refused, because... He had already been captured by them and escaped from there; Richomer volunteered to become a hostage, “considering such a thing worthy and suitable for a brave man.” The commander put on all the signs of his dignity and went to the Goths, but did not have time to reach their location: “He was already approaching the enemy rampart when archers and scutarii, from the Roman army, in a hot onslaught, went too far forward and started a battle with the enemy: how They moved forward at the wrong time and desecrated the beginning of the battle with a cowardly retreat.” Richomer had to return without completing his mission.
Battle. Thus, the Battle of Adrianople was started by the Romans, namely by the light infantry of the center rushing forward, whose disorderly attack was easily repulsed by the Goths. Immediately after this, the returning cavalry of the Goths and their Alan allies entered the battle: “Like lightning, it appeared from the steep mountains and swept through in a swift attack, sweeping away everything in its path.” The cavalry attack was supported by the rest of the Gothic army, which attacked the Roman infantry. For some time the Romans withstood this onslaught: “Both formations collided like ships with their noses locked together and, pushing each other, swayed like waves in mutual motion.” The left wing of the Romans pushed the enemy back to the Gothic camp, but this partial success was not supported by the rest of the cavalry; A counterattack by the Goths followed, as a result of which the Romans on this flank were overturned and crushed.
The bulk of the Roman infantry, as a result of being surrounded by enemy cavalry and attacked by enemy infantry from the front, found itself squeezed into a small space. “In this terrible confusion, the infantrymen, exhausted from stress and danger, when they no longer had enough strength or skill to understand what to do, and most of the spears were broken from constant blows, began to rush with only swords at the dense detachments of enemies , no longer thinking about saving their lives and not seeing any possibility of leaving. The high sun rose scorched the Romans, exhausted by hunger and thirst, burdened with the weight of weapons. Finally, under the pressure of the barbarian force, our battle line was completely disrupted, and the people turned to the last means of salvation in hopeless situations: they ran randomly wherever they could."
Roman losses. In this battle, the Romans lost two-thirds of their army in killed and captured. The emperor himself went missing. Some details of the story of his disappearance make one suspect that the matter was not without treason. The information we know about the course of the battle does not in any way reflect the role of the emperor, who was supposed to lead the battle. In Ammianus we see him already on the battlefield, abandoned by his bodyguards and making his way to his own between the piles of corpses. “Seeing him, Trajan shouted that there would be no hope of salvation unless some unit was called in to guard the emperor abandoned by his squires. When a committee named Victor heard this, he hurried to the Batavian mercenaries located in reserve to immediately bring them for guard of the sovereign's person. But he could not find anyone and on the way back he left the battlefield." Thus, we see that the Roman reserve mysteriously disappeared, and the highest commanders simply fled (Victor was not the only one). It is also strange that during the battle Valens was apparently in battle formations, although none of the ancient authors mentions the emperor’s decision to personally take part in the battle.
The following explanation for these oddities has been proposed. It is known that Valens was an Arian, i.e. accepted faith not according to the official rite, but according to another, which was considered incorrect, heretical, unacceptable. And his highest military leaders were opponents of Arianism, i.e. they believed as prescribed by the official church. When the first generals sent against the Goths returned defeated, they told him to his face that their misfortune was due to the fact that the emperor did not profess the correct faith. When Valens himself set out from Constantinople, some priest demanded that he return the church buildings to the true believers in the Trinity, threatening that otherwise the emperor would not return alive from the campaign. Thus, some of those close to him in the confusion of the battle could make sure that Valens did not survive this day.
German horseman in battle with
Roman legionnaires
Versions of the death of Valens. Two versions of the death of the emperor have been preserved. There were rumors that late in the evening Valens, who was among the ordinary soldiers, was mortally wounded by an arrow and soon gave up the ghost. His body was not found, and there was no one to look for him: while gangs of Goths robbed the corpses of those who fell on the battlefield for many days, neither local residents, nor even more so the fleeing soldiers, risked appearing there.
According to another story, the wounded emperor was discovered by several palace servants and taken to a nearby village house. Having barricaded the doors and laid Valens on the second floor, they began to bandage him. At this time the Goths surrounded the house. When they began to fire from above, they, in order not to waste time on the siege, simply burned the house with everyone in it. Only one person managed to jump out the window and was immediately captured. “His message about how the matter happened plunged the barbarians into great grief, since they lost the great glory of taking the ruler of the Roman state alive. That same young man, who later secretly returned to ours, spoke about this event like this” (Ammianus).
Be that as it may, the circumstances of Valens’ death were not specifically investigated. The funeral oration for him and his dead army was composed by Libanius, the most famous speaker of that time, when the impressions of the battle were still fresh. His words are difficult to reconcile with both the character of Valens and the course of the battle, but they cannot be denied generosity.
New attempts are ready. After their victory, the Goths tried to besiege Adrianople, but were repulsed. From its walls they headed to Constantinople, but there they were unsuccessful. Then they moved back and, meeting no resistance anywhere, scattered throughout the Balkan provinces right up to the very borders of Italy.
The meaning of the battle. The Battle of Adrianople played a fatal role in Roman history not because the Romans suffered colossal losses - they could, if desired, be replenished at the expense of the eastern provinces, famous for their wealth and populated by millions of people. The main problem was different: this battle showed that henceforth the emperors stopped counting on the Roman troops themselves. Even if the army of Valens, which, according to the historian of that time Ammianus Marcellinus, by the way, a professional military man, “inspired confidence in itself and was inspired by the spirit of battle,” for the most part died on the battlefield, then in the future it was considered more advisable to rely to mercenary barbarian troops led by their own leaders. This, according to the English historian, quickly led to the fact that “while the unreliable sword of the barbarians protected the empire or prepared new dangers for it, the last sparks of military genius were finally extinguished in the soul of the Romans.”
Alaric and brutally plundered.
Visigothic Kingdom Aquitaine Vandal Kingdom vandalism has become a household name. Kingdom of Burgundy Sabaudia, A Anglo-Saxon- in 451 in the southeastern part of Britain.
Huns Catalaunian fields. The Huns led by Atilla, nicknamed "By the scourge of God"
Fall of the Roman Empire. IN 476 German Odoacer Romulus Augustulus
The fall of the empire came
Didn't find what you were looking for? Use the search:
Ancient civilizations
In 410, an extremely significant event for the entire Mediterranean occurred. It went down in history as the capture of Rome by the Goths. At that time, the “eternal city” was no longer the capital of the empire. And the empire itself split into Western and Eastern. But Rome continued to retain enormous political weight. We must also not forget that for 800 years no enemy soldier had set foot on its streets. The last time this happened was in 390 or 387 BC. e., when the Gauls burst into the city. And so the “eternal city” fell. On this occasion, Saint Jerome of Bethlehem wrote: “The city that captured the whole world was itself captured.”
Background
The last emperor of a unified Roman Empire, Theodosius I the Great, died on January 17, 395. Before his death, he divided the once great power into 2 parts. The eastern one, with its capital in Constantinople, went to his eldest son Arkady. Subsequently, it began to be called Byzantium, and it existed for more than a thousand years, becoming the successor to the Roman Empire.
The western part went to the 10-year-old youngest son Honorius. The boy was assigned a guardian, Flavius Stilicho, who became the de facto ruler of the Western Roman Empire. But this state lasted only 80 years and fell under the onslaught of barbarians.
The Barbarians are Germanic tribes who were in constant contact with the Roman Empire for 400 years. As a result of this, they acquired certain cultural skills, they had their own craft production, but most importantly, they learned to competently conduct military operations.
The barbarians included the East Germanic tribes or Goths. They consisted of 2 branches - the Ostrogoths and the Visigoths. They played a decisive role in the fall of the Western Roman Empire and the emergence of medieval Europe. Under Emperor Theodosius, they were allocated lands in Thrace and Dacia in the Balkans. These lands were under Roman sovereignty and had the status of autonomy.
Lecture 13: The Barbarian Invasion and the Collapse of the Roman Empire
It was assumed that the Goths would provide military protection to these territories.
However, Theodosius the Great died, the empire fell apart, and the scattered tribes united into a single force. In 395, they chose a king, who became one of the main leaders, Alaric I. He is more often called the leader of the Visigoths, rather than the Goths. The Visigoths are the western branch of the Goths, and it was these people who made up the bulk of the subjects of the newly-made king. But he also had other peoples subordinate to him, who also belonged to the Gothic tribes.
Having concentrated sole power in his hands, Alaric began to pursue an aggressive policy towards both Roman empires. He moved at the head of his army to Greece, where he destroyed and devastated many cities. Flavius Stilicho, who commanded the still united Roman forces, tried to resist him. But Emperor Arkady did not like this initiative. He concluded an agreement with Alaric, and he turned his attention to Italy.
At the end of 401, the Goths found themselves on the lands of the Apennine Peninsula. Stilicho came out to meet them with his legions. Military operations took place in the Po Valley in northern Italy, and this campaign ended extremely unsuccessfully for the Goths. The Romans could have destroyed the invaders, but they let them go, making them allies.
For Stilicho, the barbarians were needed to be used in the political struggle with the Eastern Roman Empire. He wanted to annex Illyria (the western part of the Balkan Peninsula) to his state, and intended to make the Goths the main striking force in this military campaign.
However, the capture of Illyria was thwarted by the invasion of Italian territory by barbarians under the command of Radagais. In 406 they were defeated, but the very next year Flavius Constantine from Britain tried to usurp imperial power. He captured a large region in Gaul and demanded that Honorius recognize him as emperor.
All these internal turmoil had a negative impact on Stilicho's alliance with Alaric. The latter commanded an army that subsisted on plunder. And here we had to sit and wait since 403 for the Western Roman Empire to solve its internal problems. This could not continue further: Alaric would simply be replaced by another king.
In 408, the Goths captured the Roman province of Noricum and demanded monetary compensation for so many years of inaction. But Stilicho was no longer able to resolve this conflict. Emperor Honorius, who by this time had noticeably matured, intervened. In Stilicho, he saw a real threat to his power, and therefore, relying on part of the aristocracy, he decided to put an end to his guardian.
In August 408, Stilicho was arrested and executed, accused of treason. After this, many of the barbarians who settled in the lands of the empire after the alliance of Alaric with Stilicho were killed and their property plundered. Having learned about this, the Goths decided to move on Rome and capture the “eternal city.”
It must be said that by that time Rome was no longer the capital of the empire. In 402, Ravenna became it and remained in this capacity until 476, when the Western Roman Empire ceased to exist. But the “eternal city” retained its primary position and was considered the spiritual center of Italy. Its population was 800 thousand people, which was a lot at that time.
The Goths burst into Italy and quickly marched, without stopping anywhere, towards Rome. In October 408, they were already under the walls of the city and surrounded it, isolating it from the outside world. Honorius settled in Ravenna, carefully fortifying his capital, and Rome was left to the mercy of fate.
Honorius - first emperor of the Western Roman Empire
Disease and famine began in the big city, and the Roman Senate was forced to send ambassadors to Alaric. He set a condition: to give up all the gold, silver, household items and slaves. The Romans asked: “What remains for us?” To this the formidable conqueror replied: “Your lives.” The city agreed to these demands; pagan statues, which were an integral part of the greatness of the former capital, were even melted. Having received everything they needed, the Goths lifted the siege and left. This happened in December 408.
After the siege of Rome was lifted, a time of troubles began in Italy. Alaric feared only Stilicho, but he was executed, and therefore the king of the Goths felt like master of the Apennine Peninsula. In such a situation, the most reasonable thing for Honorius was to ask for peace. He entrusted the negotiations to the patrician Jovius.
The conquering king demanded gold, grain, and the right to settle the lands of Norik, Dalmatia and Venice as tribute. Jovius decided to moderate the appetites of the Goths by playing on Alaric’s pride. In his letter to the emperor, he proposed that he be given the honorary title of commander of the Roman infantry and cavalry. But the emperor refused, which outraged the proud king. After this, he broke off the negotiations and marched on Rome a second time.
At the end of 409, the invaders besieged the city and captured Ostia, the main harbor of Rome. It contained large supplies of food, and the huge city was on the verge of famine. And then an unheard of event happened: the enemy, the invader, intervened in the holy of holies - the internal politics of the empire. In exchange for food, Alaric invited the Senate to choose a new emperor. The senators had no choice, and they clothed the Greek nationality Priscus Attalus in purple.
The newly made emperor, together with the king of the Goths, moved with a large army to Ravenna, where Honoria was hiding behind strong walls. In this critical situation, the legal ruler was saved by the Eastern Roman Empire. She sent 2 legions of selected soldiers to Ravenna. Thus, the military garrison of the capital of the Western Roman Empire strengthened, and it became impregnable.
Attal and Alahir found themselves in a difficult position, and political differences soon arose between them. The African province, which was the main supplier of grain to Rome, also played an important role. She refused to recognize Attalus as emperor, and the flow of grain to the “eternal city” stopped.
This caused food shortages not only among the Romans, but also among the barbarians. As a result, the invaders' problems began to snowball. To defuse the situation, the king was ready to strip Attalus of the title of emperor and send the regalia of power to Ravenna. After this, Honorius agreed to begin negotiations with the Goths.
Capture of Rome by the Goths in 410
The Emperor of the Western Roman Empire planned to meet with the king of the Goths in an open area 12 km from Ravenna. But this historic meeting did not take place. When Alahir arrived at the agreed upon place, the emperor was not yet there. But then a detachment of barbarians appeared under the command of Sara. This Gothic leader had already served the Romans for several years, leading a military unit consisting of Goths like himself.
The peace treaty was unfavorable for Sar, and he, with three hundred people loyal to him, attacked Alahir and his retinue. A felling ensued, in which several people died. The king of the Goths left the place of the failed meeting, and attributed the attack to the treachery of Honorius. After this, he gave the order to attack Rome for the third time.
To this day, it is unclear how the Goths captured Rome. The invaders approached the city and besieged it. At that time, the townspeople were already experiencing severe hunger, since there were no food supplies from the African province. Therefore, the siege did not last long. The Goths burst into the streets of the “eternal city” on August 24, 410.
The barbarians passed through the Salarian Gate, which was made in the Aurelian walls. But who opened these gates to the enemy is not clear. It is assumed that such an unenviable act was committed by slaves. However, they carried it out of mercy towards the townspeople dying of hunger. But be that as it may, the barbarians broke into the “eternal city” and plundered it for 3 days.
The capture of Rome by the Goths was accompanied by arson, looting and beating of the townspeople. Many of the greatest buildings were looted. In particular, the mausoleums of Augustus and Hadrian. They contained urns containing the ashes of Roman emperors. The urns were smashed and the ashes were scattered into the air. All the goods were stolen, the most valuable jewelry was stolen. The gardens of Sallust were burned. Subsequently they were never restored.
The people of Rome suffered greatly. Some were taken captive to receive a ransom for them, others were made slaves, and those who were no good for anything were killed. Some residents were tortured in an attempt to find out where they hid their valuables. At the same time, neither old men nor old women were spared.
At the same time, it should be noted that there was no massacre. Those residents who took refuge in the churches of Peter and Paul were not touched. Subsequently they settled the devastated city. Many monuments and buildings have also been preserved. But everything valuable was taken out of such buildings. After the capture of Rome by the Goths, many refugees appeared in the provinces. They were robbed, killed, and the women were sold to brothels.
The historian Procopius of Caesarea subsequently wrote that when Emperor Honorius was told that Rome was lost, he at first thought that they were talking about a rooster from the henhouse who bore such a nickname. But when the true meaning of the message reached the ruler, he fell into a state of stupor and for a long time could not believe that this had happened.
After 3 days, the Goths stopped plundering the “eternal city” and left it. Inspired by victory, they moved south, planning to invade Sicily and Africa. But they were unable to cross the Strait of Messina, as the storm scattered the ships they had collected. After this, the invaders turned north. But Alahir fell ill and died at the end of 410 in the city of Cosenza in Calibria. Thus, the main culprit in the capture of Rome by the Goths left the mortal world, and history dispassionately continued its course, only with different heroes and events.
Leonid Serov
STORMS ON THE EDGE
Back in 395, Emperor Theodosius I bequeathed to divide the Roman Empire between his sons. The eldest, Arkady, then inherited its eastern half with its capital in Constantinople. The younger, Honorius, received all the lands west of the Adriatic Sea, the capital of which he decided to make Ravenna.
Since then, the paths of the two parts of the Roman Empire began to diverge further and further. In the West, under the pressure of numerous barbarian tribes, the Roman state collapsed already at the end of the 5th century. Barbarian kingdoms took its place. In the East, even in the 6th century. strength was found for the rise under Justinian I.
However, in the 7th century. A new religion appeared in Arabia - Islam. Its adherents created a powerful power, depriving Byzantium of many of its possessions and subjugating vast territories from the Atlantic Ocean to the borders of China.
What important processes took place in Western Europe and the Middle East during the rise and prosperity of Byzantium?
How did the new religion, Islam, arise and spread?
§ 3. BARBARIAN CONQUERORS
1. The Great Migration of Peoples. In the IV-VI centuries. Many large and small tribes, for various reasons, left their native lands in search of new lands to settle. Historians call this time the era of the Great Migration. In Byzantium, the authorities dealt with crowds of dangerous aliens. Some were defeated in battle, others were paid off, others were given empty lands in the borderlands and forced to serve the emperor. But the rulers of the western part of the empire (Italy, Spain, North Africa, Gaul, Britain) increasingly lacked funds for border fortifications and troops. Meanwhile, dangerous attacks by barbarians became more frequent. The most persistent and dangerous were the populous tribes of the Germans who inhabited Northern Europe. The imperial army by that time itself consisted mainly of barbarians. They were ready to serve the empire for a good reward, but if they were not paid, they could easily turn into its enemies.
Roman border city. Lead medallion. Turn of the 3rd-4th centuries.
Shown here is the city of Moguntiak (now Mainz) on the banks of the Rhine.
What are city fortifications?
This often happened, for example, with the Germanic tribes of the Goths. In 410, Visigoth warriors led by their leader Alaric broke into the city of Rome and devastated it. The fall of Rome shocked contemporaries. After the sack of Rome, the Visigoths moved to the south of Gaul, where they created their own kingdom. Later they extended their power to the entire Iberian Peninsula.
Another Germanic tribe, the Vandals, traveled an even longer route. From the eastern borders of Germany they reached the Strait of Gibraltar, crossed to North Africa and settled in the vicinity of ancient Carthage. In 455, the Vandal fleet delivered their army to the walls of the Eternal City. The Romans surrendered the city without a fight, and for two weeks in a row the Vandals mercilessly plundered it.
The Saxons, Angles and Jutes landed in Britain. Roman Gaul was captured by the Franks. Other parts of the empire were occupied by the Burgundians, Suevi, Alamanni and other Germanic tribes.
The Great Migration of Peoples and the Formation of Barbarian Kingdoms
In the IV-V centuries. From the Black Sea steppes, the empire was attacked by eastern nomadic peoples - Alans and Sarmatians. The hordes of the Huns instilled the greatest horror in the Romans. The leader of the Huns, Attila, subjugated many tribes and in 452 launched a campaign against Rome. Only for a very large ransom did he agree to turn back.
The hilt of a Gothic sword. V century
Storming the city. Bone carving. V century
What do you already know about the Great Migration from the history of the Ancient World?
2. The emergence of barbarian kingdoms. In 476, the leader of the court squad of multi-tribal barbarians, Odoacer, deposed the last “Western emperor” - Romulus Augustulus and himself began to rule Italy. Now the entire western part of the former Roman Empire was divided between different barbarian leaders. Although many of them verbally recognized the supremacy of the Constantinople emperors, the empire in the west was, in fact, completely destroyed. Therefore, many historians consider 476 the year of the fall of the Western Roman Empire and the conditional border separating the era of the Ancient World and the Middle Ages.
In 493, the Ostrogoths conquered all of Italy. Odoacer was killed. Their sovereign Theoddrich the Great (see on p. 33) wanted to create a strong state by reconciling the Ostrogothic conquerors with the conquered Romans. Nothing came of it. When the Ostrogothic kingdom began to weaken under Theodoric's successors, Emperor Justinian I sent a large army to conquer it.
First, his army landed in North Africa and destroyed the Vandal kingdom. Another army took part of the coast of Iberia (Spain) from the Visigoths. But Justinian’s generals had to wage the bloodiest wars against the Ostrogoths in Italy.
During these wars, the city of Rome changed hands many times. Eventually the Ostrogoths were defeated. But Justinian's triumph was short-lived. In 568, new Germanic tribes - the Lombards - invaded from the north, because of the Alps. They were particularly savage and cruel. The Lombards subjugated the entire north of Italy, driving the Byzantines to the south of the Apennine Peninsula.
Trace on the map (p. 30) the routes of movement of the Germanic tribes, name the places of their new settlement and the creation of kingdoms.
3. Orders of the Germans. On the lands they occupied, the Germanic tribes established orders that were very different from the Roman ones. Slavery among the Germans was poorly developed, all fellow tribesmen were considered free people, each owned their own plot of arable land, and a considerable one at that, and they used meadows, forests, and reservoirs together.
The Germans had their own nobility: they believed that members of certain families had special valor and luck. It was from them that the leaders and elders of the tribes usually emerged. The leader was elected by a popular assembly, which brought together male warriors. The leaders obeyed the popular assembly and respected the customs of the tribe.
II. INVASION OF THE BARBARIANS
The Germans did not have a written language, so customs were not written down, but were stored in memory and passed down orally from generation to generation.
Initially, the Germans were pagans, they believed in the gods of thunder, war, and fertility. However, from time to time Christian preachers from the Roman Empire appeared in Germany and successfully preached the new faith. When the Germans began to settle on the lands of the empire, they found themselves surrounded by numerous Christians and quite quickly adopted Christianity themselves.
1. What signs of the primitive communal system were preserved by the Germans at the beginning of the early Middle Ages? What accelerated the transition of the Germans to civilization?
2. What consequences for the Germans should have resulted from their adoption of Christianity?
German warrior. Miniature. VII century
Detail of a military helmet with the image of a German ruler. VI-VII centuries
1. When and why did the Great Migration begin and what were its results?
2. Draw a time line in your notebooks. Mark on it the most important dates related to the history of the Great Migration and the emergence of barbarian kingdoms.
3. Using additional materials, prepare reports about the activities of the ancient Germans and their religion.
4. Determine which barbarian tribes’ names have been preserved in one form or another on the modern map of Western Europe.
THEODORIC OF OSTHROTH (493-526)
The powerful king of the Ostrogoths, Theodoric the Great, was remembered by both his contemporaries and descendants. Throughout the Middle Ages, in German songs and legends he was remembered with the deepest respect - under the name of Dietrich of Berne. (“Bern” in legends was the name given to the Italian city of Verona, where Theodoric loved to visit.)
As a child, Theodoric was taken hostage in Constantinople and spent about 10 years there, developing a lifelong respect for the culture of the Romans and Greeks. Later he became the leader of a large Ostrogoth tribe. The Constantinople Emperor Zeno instructed Theodoric to return Italy, which was in the hands of Odoacer, to the empire. (In fact, the emperor most wanted to remove Theodoric and his people away from the walls of Constantinople.) Theodoric defeated the troops of Odoacer, but after three years of siege he was still unable to take Ravenna. Having agreed with Odoacer on peace and joint governance of Italy, Theodoric killed him with his own hands at a feast a few days later.
1. Theodoric's Palace in Ravenna. Mosaic. VI century
2. Tomb of Theodoric in Ravenna. VI century
Theodoric respected the rights and property of the Romans. There was only one prohibition for them - to carry weapons. Theodoric granted privileges to the city of Rome, restored public buildings that had fallen into disrepair, and organized luxurious games in the Colosseum. Theodoric liked to emphasize that his kingdom was part of the Roman Empire and he ruled it on behalf of the Emperor of Constantinople. (In fact, the king did not allow any interference from Constantinople.)
The Ostrogothic ruler loved to surround himself with educated people. For some time, the Roman philosopher Boethius was in his great confidence. He even held the main post in Theodoric's government. However, Theodoric heard rumors about an impending conspiracy: the Romans were supposedly going to get rid of the Goths and, with the help of Constantinople troops, restore their power. Then the king executed many noble Romans, including Boethius.
Why did Theodoric, a barbarian by birth, respect the Romans and their culture and value scientists?
§ 60. Capture of Rome by barbarians
1. Division of the empire into two states. It was difficult to control a huge power from Constantinople. In different provinces, free farmers, colons and fugitive slaves rebelled. They were especially powerful in Gaul and North Africa. Roman troops suppressed the uprisings, but they broke out again. Barbarian tribes crossed the Rhine and Danube rivers, which served as the borders of the empire, and captured its regions one after another. In 395 AD e. the empire was divided into the Eastern Roman Empire and the Western Roman Empire.
2. The Goths are marching on Italy. A few years after the division of the empire, a terrible danger loomed over Italy. Dreaming of taking possession of the treasures of Rome, Alaric, the leader of the Germanic tribe of the Goths, moved his hordes to the Eternal City. All along the way from the Danube regions, where the Goths lived, to the Alpine mountains, many slaves and columns joined Alaric. They showed the Goths hiding places where the Romans, who fled in fear, hid weapons and bread.
In the foothills of the Alps, the path of the Goths was blocked by a Roman army. True, there were few Romans in it - most of the soldiers were Gauls and Germans. The army was commanded by the brilliant military leader Stilicho, a German from the Vandal tribe. He defeated the Goths, only Alaric managed to withdraw the cavalry from the battlefield. At that time, the cowardly and envious Honorius was the emperor in the West. During the days of the Gothic invasion, he holed up in northern Italy in the city of Ravenna, surrounded by powerful walls and swampy swamps.
Division of the Roman Empire and barbarian invasions.
3. Death of Stilicho. Honorius had no merit in the victory over the Goths. However, it was he who celebrated the triumph as if he were a great commander. Soldiers walked along the streets of Rome behind the emperor's chariot, carrying spoils of war and a statue of Alaric, chained. Honorius entertained the residents of the Eternal City by baiting animals and horse racing. Gladiatorial fights were no longer held: at the request of Christians, they were banned forever.
Stilicho. Drawing based on an ancient Roman image.
Meanwhile, Alaric gathered an army stronger than before and again marched on Rome. He was ready for peace, but demanded a huge ransom for it. Stilicho convinced Honorius that it was necessary to gain time and collect the required amount among the rich. Those close to the emperor were reluctant to part with their gold. When the danger had passed, they turned the emperor against his commander. They slandered that Stilicho was planning to seize supreme power in the Western Empire and conspired with Alaric: after all, they were both Germans!
Honorius believed the lie and ordered Stilicho to be executed. In vain he sought refuge in a Christian church. He was captured, declared an enemy of the fatherland and executed. And immediately the beating of Stilicho’s comrades began: the Germans in Roman military service, their wives and children. Outraged by the wild and senseless massacre, thirty thousand barbarian legionnaires ran over to the Goths, demanding to be led to Rome.
4. “The city to which the earth was subjugated has been conquered!” After the death of Stilicho, Alaric had no worthy opponents.
The invasion of the barbarians on the Roman Empire and its death - how it happened
He decided to lay siege to Rome. The mediocre and worthless Honorius again left Rome, leaving its inhabitants to their fate.
The Goths surrounded the city and took possession of the harbor at the mouth of the Tiber, where grain was delivered. Hunger and terrible diseases tormented the besieged. Many believed that in order to be saved, one must return to the faith of their ancestors and make sacrifices to the rejected gods. We remembered how several years ago Serena, the widow of Stilicho (she was a devout Christian), burst into the temple of Vesta and tore the necklace from the statue of the goddess. Superstitious people began to say that by doing this Serena had brought disaster to Rome. She was accused of allegedly calling on Alaric to avenge the death of her husband. Serena was doomed to death. However, neither the execution of a woman nor sacrifices to ancient deities could save Rome.
Fortress towers and gates in Rome.
The defeat of Rome by barbarians. A drawing of our time.
On an August night in 410 AD. e. slaves opened the gates of Rome to the Goths. The Eternal City, which Hannibal once did not dare to storm, was taken. For three days the Goths sacked Rome. The imperial palaces and houses of the rich were devastated, statues were broken, priceless books were trampled into the mud, many people were killed or captured. The capture of Rome made a terrible impression on the inhabitants of the empire. “My voice stopped when I heard that the city to which the whole earth was subjugated was conquered!” - wrote a contemporary.
After the sack of Rome, the Goths moved south with huge booty. On the way, Alaric suddenly died. A legend has been preserved about his unprecedented funeral: the Goths forced the captives to divert the bed of one of the rivers, and Alaric was buried at its bottom with untold riches. Then the waters of the river were returned to their channel, and the captives were killed so that no one would know where the great leader of the Goths was buried.
5. Fall of the Western Roman Empire. Rome could no longer resist the barbarians. In 455 AD e. it was captured again, this time by vandals. The city was plundered even more horribly than under the Goths.
The barbarian leaders now ruled both the western provinces and Italy itself. In 476 AD e. one of the German military leaders deprived the last Roman emperor of power. His name was Romulus, like the founder of the Eternal City. The Germans sent the signs of imperial dignity - a purple cloak and diadem - to Constantinople. By this they showed that the West does not need an emperor. The Western Roman Empire ceased to exist.
During the period of barbarian conquests, ancient1 culture, created on the basis of the achievements of the peoples of Hellas and Rome and widely spread throughout the empire, was declining. A new historical era was beginning, later called the Middle Ages.
1 Antique means “ancient” in Latin.
Test yourself. 1. What role did Stilicho play in the defeat of the Goths? 2. What did the court envious people accuse Stilicho of? 3. How did the Gothic leader Alaric take advantage of the execution of the Roman commander? 4. How did the Western Roman Empire fall? For what purpose did the Germans send the purple cloak and diadem of the emperor to Constantinople?
Work with the map “The Division of the Roman Empire...” (p. 290): what regions and countries were part of the Western Empire? Which ones are part of the Eastern Empire?
Work with dates. Calculate how many years the Roman state existed: from the founding of the City to the fall of the Western Roman Empire.
Describe the drawing“The defeat of Rome by the barbarians” (see p. 292). How do winners behave in Rome?
Think about it. In what cases can the words “vandals” and “vandalism” be used these days?
Let's summarize and draw conclusions
What changes in the position of Christians took place under Constantine?
Where and why did Constantine move the capital of the empire?
What two states and when was the Roman Empire divided?
Why did the capture of Rome by the barbarians shock the inhabitants of the empire?
Creation of barbarian kingdoms in the 5th century. The entire 5th century turned into a period of barbarian invasions of the empire. In 410, a significant event in ancient history took place, when Rome for the first time in many centuries was taken by the Visigoths, led by Alaric and brutally plundered.
The barbarians had no intention of destroying the empire, since they maintained reverence for the imperial power and did not imagine themselves outside of it. The barbarians sought to find their place in the empire, tearing it apart and thereby contributing to its future collapse.
In the Western Empire, policy towards barbarians developed in line with the direction begun by Theodosius, since all foreigners were now considered as federates, which happened out of necessity when the Romans came to terms with the creation of new state entities on their territory. The earliest of them was Visigothic Kingdom(418), originating in the southwestern part of Gaul, Aquitaine, and subsequently annexed the lands of Spain. The Visigoths built relations with the local population on a peaceful basis. Following, Vandal Kingdom was founded in North Africa in 429. The Vandals became famous for their cruelty, in particular, in 455 they took Rome a second time and subjected it to the most devastating, deliberate and even more terrible destruction, when cultural monuments were deliberately destroyed. Hence the word vandalism has become a household name. Kingdom of Burgundy originated in 443 in southeastern France, Sabaudia, A Anglo-Saxon- in 451
25. Rome and the barbarians. The onslaught of the barbarians and the fight against them
in south-eastern Britain.
Formally, the kingdoms’ dependence on Ravenna was expressed in the fact that the barbarians paid tribute and defended the interests of the emperor, but in reality only when they found it necessary. The empire was finally falling apart. It turned out to be impossible to return to centralized control, and if Diocletian, Constantine, and Theodosius still carried out reforms, now none of the emperors tried to turn back the wheel of history.
The only event that temporarily united the Romans and barbarians was the invasion Huns. The latter had long been part of the mercenary troops of Rome, but since the 40s of the 5th century. began to raid the Balkan Peninsula and even reached Gaul. As a result, the Huns became hated by everyone, so in 451 a coalition of military forces of the Romans, Franks, Burgundians, Visigoths and Saxons was created, which gave the Huns the famous battle on Catalaunian fields. The Huns led by Atilla, nicknamed "By the scourge of God", were defeated, and their advance to the west was stopped. However, the coalition turned out to be a temporary phenomenon caused by external danger, and therefore quickly collapsed.
Fall of the Roman Empire. IN 476 g. Commander of the Imperial Guard German Odoacer deposed the child emperor Romulus Augustulus (ironically, Romulus ended up again at the end of Roman history) and sent the royal regalia to the capital of the Eastern Empire, abolishing imperial power in the West.
476 marked the formal end of the Western Roman Empire, as well as the end of ancient history. It cannot be said that after this date the Middle Ages immediately began, since the division itself into the eras of the Ancient World, the Middle Ages and Modern History is imperfect, since it does not fully reflect all historical realities. The fall of the empire came the logical conclusion of the decrepit ancient society, which gradually passed through periods of birth, formation, development, maturity and decline. Having died, antiquity at the same time gave life to the Christian and cultural traditions of Europe.
⇐ Previous10111213141516171819
Didn't find what you were looking for? Use the search.
Barbarians and the fall of the Roman Empire
What must the mass of barbarians have experienced looking at the fattening empire? In all likelihood, the wealth of Rome only fueled the envy of the conquered and oppressed peoples. The world was inspired by the opportunity to become rich almost overnight by conquering Rome. The peace had been constantly disturbed before: either the battle with Carthage, or the war with Jugurtha, or the disturbances of the Germans, or events in the East, or a coup on the outskirts of China.
Warriors on guard
In this regard, it should be especially emphasized that the “great migration of peoples,” which so radically changed the fate of Europe and the world, as is known, began with the migration to the west of part of the Asian peoples (Hsiung-nu). In the II century. n. e. they left their original habitats and, moving west, began, like a powerful press, to squeeze out all the peoples living on the Eurasian continent. The process took more than one century, and after two and a half centuries they appeared on the European stage under the name of the Huns. However, the most curious thing is that processes similar to the “great migration of peoples” also took place in China. As sinologists note, in East Asia, starting from the 3rd century AD. e. a process similar to what happened on the borders of the Roman Empire is observed, namely: part of the Xiongnu (Xianbian, Di, Qiang, other closest neighbors of the ancient Chinese) began to move to the Central Chinese Plain. As a result, already in 308, i.e. a hundred years before the capture of Rome by Alaric and the emergence of the first “barbarian” state on the territory of the Roman Empire - the Kingdom of Toulouse, the leader of the Xiongnu Liu Yuan declared himself emperor, and his successor Liu Cong took three years later year, the capital of the Jin Empire and captured the Son of Heaven. These events led to the beginning of the mass migration of the ancient Chinese to the south, to the Yangtze basin. The tribes of the “southern barbarians” also began to move. In other words, it was the Asian tribes that served as a kind of detonator of the “big bang”, which noticeably changed not only the appearance of the population in the vast expanses of Asia and Europe, but also redrew the map of the world, making significant changes in the historical destinies of the most powerful Roman and Chinese empires. “Precisely because the “great migration of peoples” forced the ancient Chinese to experience this period of rebirth and change, between them and modern Chinese, in the words of K. A. Kharnsky, we find today approximately the same qualitative differences as between the ancient Romans and modern Italians "
In the province of Africa, which had experienced the unceremonious intervention of Roman moneylenders and financiers, a cunning and very intelligent Numidian ruler appeared. His name was Jugurtha. When the Romans divided Numidia into three parts (much like the Yankees did with Yugoslavia), Jugurtha united the country by force. True, at the same time he killed his co-heirs and Roman speculators and merchants. But by and large it was a battle for the independence of Numidia from Rome. In 113 BC. e. The Romans suffered a serious defeat from the Cimbri. Jugurtha took advantage of this, defeating the Romans at the Battle of Sutula (109 BC). The army capitulated, the Romans were “under the yoke,” and Rome was forced to conclude an agreement with him, in which he promised to clear Numidia of its troops. Of course, Jugurtha himself was far from an ideal person. He was characterized by deceit and cruelty. However, the amazing ease with which he bribed respectable senators showed how rotten Rome was. And when he was nevertheless defeated by the military leaders of Rome Caecilius Metellus and Gaius Marius (109 and 105 BC), brought to Rome and executed, the danger for Rome still did not disappear. The historian wrote in “The War with Jugurtha”: “Indeed, right up to the destruction of Carthage, the Roman people and the Senate conducted the affairs of the state amicably and calmly, there was no struggle between citizens for glory and dominance: fear of the enemy maintained good order in the city. But as soon as the hearts got rid of this fear, their place was taken by unbridledness and arrogance - success willingly brings them with it. And it turned out that the peaceful idleness that was dreamed of in the midst of disasters turned out to be worse and more bitter than the disasters themselves. The nobles little by little turned their high position into arbitrariness, the people - their freedom, everyone tore and pulled in their own direction. Everyone split into two camps, and the state, which had previously been a common property, was torn to shreds.” Something similar happened to the USSR, which was “torn to shreds” by greedy, insatiable creatures.
The Celts attack
It must be said that the Celts and Germans more than once inflicted terrible defeats on Rome. In 105 BC. e., November 6, at Orange, the Celts and Germans destroyed the Roman troops of Maximus and Caepio, as a result of which the road was opened for a powerful German-Celtic migration, representing a mass of 250,000 to 300,000 migrants, of which 80-100 thousand were combat-ready . The hope of a compromise with them loomed before Rome. Many tribes within the Empire needed contact with Rome and Roman culture. Therefore, they advocated some form of peaceful coexistence. Other Romans understood this.
The tribes wanted to gain a cultural identity. Their nomadic life was ending. Many people had a growing desire to live like human beings. As a result of communication with the Romans and their way of life and culture, they also had higher demands. Dio Cassius in one of the places of his “History”, speaking about the German tribe of the Cimbri, wrote: “Once, having hesitated so much, the Cimbri became very weak in spirit, and from this they became more lethargic and powerless in body and soul. The reason for this is that, living in houses (meaning their long stay in Romanized Spain and Northern Italy. - V. M.), they retreated from their previous way of life in the open air, used a hot bath instead of the previous bathing in cold water and began to gorge themselves on delicate dishes and local sweets, whereas previously they ate raw meat, and became drunk with wine. This completely destroyed their ardor and softened them physically, so that they could no longer endure labor, adversity, heat, cold, or wakefulness.” As a result of such cultural influence, the entire way of life of the tribes changed. In a work devoted to the development of trade and civilization, one author compared the peoples of Western Europe (Gauls, Spaniards, Germans, British) with the American Indians on the eve of their conquest by colonists from Europe. C. Day writes: "The fact that the modern Spaniards and French actually have a base of Latin culture is the most important evidence of Roman influence on the provincials." Among the then European tribes, plans arose to create some kind of common union. For example, Alaric, who captured Rome, sought to form a single German-Roman people, and his son Ataulf dreamed of transforming the Roman Empire into the Gothic Empire. But the roles in it had to be distributed taking into account the new balance of power in the region: Romagnia should become Gothia, Ataulf “must replace Caesar Augustus.” The question is: was Rome itself ready to share powers with others? Was you ready to accept Clodian’s formula: “We must drink from the Rhine and from the Orontes, for we are all one people”? Many Germans, in principle, wanted to become partners and allies of Rome. But the Romans, full of pride, most often treated the barbarians with hatred and contempt.
Captured Germans. Relief from Trojan's Column
Most of the historians and writers of Rome write about the Huns and other barbarians in rather offensive tones... Ammianus saw subhumans in the Huns and spoke about them like this: “They are so monstrously ugly and formless that they can be mistaken for two-legged animals or for stumps that are cut down in in the form of idols installed on the edges of bridges... Like unreasonable animals, they completely do not understand the difference between true and false.” Prudentius, who had previously declared that the peoples of the Empire were supposedly “equal and bound by a single name,” called the pagans stupid in his poems and wrote that “Rome stands in splendid isolation above the lands of the barbarians.” The poet Klodian ridiculed the Huns for their morals: for the fact that they are focused only on war, for the fact that they look like animals, and even for the fact that they marry Africans, as a result of which “a colored bastard will stain the cradle.” Who would remember the good ecumenical sermons of Paul: “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, there is neither slave nor free... you are all one in Christ Jesus.” All Roman politics, all sermons were lies.
Escorting German women by Roman soldiers
The Christian historian Orosius, who seemed to see the Germans as allies, nevertheless also could not contain his true feelings, realizing the full power of these barbarians, and therefore the need to indulge them and even fawn on them: “I looked at the Germans and realized that I must avoid them - they are destructive, flatter them because they are the masters, pray for them, although they are pagans; run away from them, because they lure you into a trap.” Most Romans found them difficult to bear. Some did not like the stench coming from them, others did not like their bodies covered in leather, others did not like their penchant for debauchery (whose cow would moo, but not a “Roman” one), the fourth did not like their tattoos, the fifth did not like their addiction to alcoholism. Fustel de Coulanges wrote that on the tombstones the barbarians seemed to glorify the Roman order. Nonsense. But in turn, the barbarians, oppressed by Rome for centuries, did not have good feelings towards him... For example, on a tombstone in Southern Gaul, two Germans admit in a sarcastic tone that their racial origin is part of the stain washed away by baptism. Rome condemned not only cohabitation, but even barbarian fashion was banned. For example, the Roman authorities prohibited the wearing of trousers and fur and leather clothing by barbarians (even slaves) in the capital and its environs, under the threat of lifelong expulsion and confiscation of property. True, Theodosius I was loyal to the German leaders, allowing the Visigoths to settle compactly within the Empire. But this was rather an exception, and happened much later.
Marriage. Antique bas-relief
Approximately the same situation developed with the Gauls, Germans, and other “barbarians” in the Roman Empire. The native Romans, even those Italics who a generation ago had themselves been slaves and freedmen, looked upon immigrants with barely hidden contempt. They didn’t like their habits, their language, or their “faces”... No racial assimilation (although something similar did take place over the years of contact between peoples) never actually happened. In any case, at the state level a completely different policy of separating the races was observed. The law of Valentian I and Valens (370 AD) discouraged intermarriage between Roman citizens and Germanic immigrants. Thus a racial wedge was driven into the grave of the peaceful union.
It is worth remembering the attitude of officials towards German immigrants. In the eyes of Roman officials and military leaders, they were not only second-class, but even third-class people. The Romans feed the starving Visigoths carrion in exchange for the return of their sons sold into slavery. Jordan writes: when the Gothic leaders, who settled in Thrace, saw that their warriors and people were suffering from hunger and poverty, they turned to the Roman generals Lupicinus and Maximus with a request to sell them food supplies (“open a marketplace”). They agreed, driven by a “damned thirst for gold.” Prompted by greed, the warriors began to sell them not only lamb or bovine meat, but “even dead meat - dog and other unclean animals, and at a high price.” It got to the point that any slave was sold for one piece of bread or ten pounds of beef. When there were no slaves or utensils, the greedy merchant, despite desperate need, demanded their sons. The parents of the young Goths were forced to sell even their children to the Romans, believing that it was better for them to be slaves of the Romans than to die of hunger. The Romans did not disdain even the most vile methods. Thus, the Roman military leader Lupicinus invited the Gothic prince Fritigern to a feast, assuring him of the warmest and friendly feelings. He, unaware of the deceit and treachery of the Romans, came to the feast with a small squad. While he was feasting in one room, in another the Romans tried to kill his squad. When Fritigern heard the desperate cries of his dying comrades, he drew his sword and rushed to their aid. Those, outraged by the Roman treachery, began to mercilessly beat the Romans.
J. Jordaens. Bean King Festival
Jordan writes: “That very day took with it both the famine of the Goths and the safety of the Romans... And then the Goths began, no longer as strangers and strangers, but as (Roman) citizens and masters, to command the landowners and keep all the northern regions in their power all the way to Danubium." Emperor Valens immediately sent an army to Thrace, but the Goths completely defeated the Romans. Valens himself fled and hid in some dilapidated house. Unknowingly, the Goths set it on fire, and the emperor was burned alive. Thus the Romans themselves fanned the flames of hatred.
Briton war chariot
Rome recruited the same Germans into military units and sent them to fight for the glory of the empire. Moreover, they were sent to the most dangerous and disastrous sites (Constantius III preferred to shed the blood of allies and Germans, not Romans). The Germans are brave warriors, and their maintenance was cheaper for Rome than its own soldiers. Naturally, they hoped for the gratitude of the country for their honest performance of difficult service. But when a Gaul and German asked for land, hoping to gain citizenship, he saw hostility and complete misunderstanding on the part of Roman officials. Given this attitude, it is not surprising that other Germans rejected Romanization and opposed serving in the armies of Rome. The experiment in federalizing the Empire ended in complete disaster. Rome could not and did not want to assimilate those whom it had previously allowed into its borders. And yet, penetrating into the borders of the empire, the crowds of barbarians who invaded or settled here involuntarily changed his face. There were more and more foreigners within the empire, not Romans... The power of the indigenous inhabitants of Rome was diminishing, like water receding after an unprecedented flood. Already under the North, in the Senate of Rome, people from the eastern provinces or Africa gained a numerical superiority over the natives of the West and the Italians. For the first time, Alexandria received a city council, and the main cities of the Egyptian nomes received a municipal structure. Emperor Septimius came from Africa. No one had anything against her, but putting a child of the desert at the head of the Italian country! Being an ardent admirer of Hannibal, he erected statues of the Carthaginian commander, the mortal enemy of Rome, everywhere. Emperor Elagabalus, a Phoenician, began to organize bloody orgies. He danced in front of the altar, made human sacrifices, choosing noble and beautiful boys throughout Italy for this purpose, as the hated Carthage once did. At the same time, Elagabalus took particular pleasure in using respectable senators who were in the position of slaves as servants.
A Roman cavalryman defeats a German. Tombstone
Faced with such an attitude towards themselves, the Germans and Burgundians, Gauls, Goths and Huns hated Rome with all their hearts and paid it back in the same coin. As a result, the tribes developed a desire to capture Rome and destroy this nest of wars, violence, hatred and robbery. The feelings of the peoples of Europe can be understood. For centuries, Rome captured and enslaved hundreds of thousands of people. Hoefling notes that in the 1st Punic War (264–241 BC) Roman troops took 75,000 prisoners, and in the 2nd (218–201 BC) – 30,000 the city of Tarentum alone. Thus, over five decades, from 200 to 150 BC. e., when Rome actually became a world power, it took 250,000 prisoners from the Hellenistic world. This is a huge figure for the ancient era. Successful military campaigns in Asia against Antiochus III of the Seleucid dynasty (189–188 BC) resulted in an influx of new slaves. For example, Lucius Aemilius Paulus (the conqueror of the Greeks, who planted Greek culture in Rome) sold after the capture of Epirus in 168 BC. e. 150,000 people, and after the victory of Marius over the Germans (in 102–101 BC), the Romans received new replenishments of living goods. Then everything went in a circle once and for all. So, when Caesar won victories in Gaul, he sold the Aduatuci people (53,000) into slavery, subjugating the Celtic Veneti tribe in Britain, he ordered the execution of the leaders, and actually took the entire people into slavery. After Caesar's Gallic Wars, the markets were flooded with half a million slaves. Hundreds of thousands of prisoners were also captured during the wars of the early Empire. It is not surprising that many of its inhabitants greeted the barbarians as saviors. Hundreds of thousands of “brutes” were needed to take revenge on the savage, greedy and cruel people. Long live the “barbarians”!
Death of a Gaul stabbing himself and his wife
It should apparently be mentioned one more reason, apparently important, which accelerated the death of the Roman Empire. The sense of proportion and caution began to betray Rome, which continued to seize more and more lands, subjugated the tribes, not caring that their motley mass was difficult to manage, hoping that it would be able to manipulate the people in the future. The Romans, however, managed to cope with the Gauls. Although they were strong, they were inferior to them in perseverance. They said about them: “In the first fierce attack they are more dangerous than men, in the first repulse they are weaker than women.” The Gauls considered service in the infantry to be unprestigious and preferred to serve in the cavalry. Their warriors were very fond of gold bracelets and rings, like women. Therefore, they were not serious opponents, although they were intimidating with their shaggy appearance. They lacked discipline and organization. Considering all of the above, it did not take much effort for the Romans to turn the Gauls into a kind of “cordon sanitaire.” The battle with the Helvetii was much more persistent and fierce. Caesar gives the following figures: in the battle of the Romans and the Helvetii, 258,000 Helvetii died, and 110,000 returned to their homeland. At the same time, he says that the majority of the dead were old people, women and children. Such is the illustrious Rome!
The economic oppression to which the Romans forced the vanquished was unbearable (countless fines, indemnities). All men from 14 to 65 years old were subject to the poll tax in Syria, and all women from 12 to 65 years old. Jews also had to pay large sums to Rome. In addition to the monetary tax, there was also a tax in kind. The population was obliged to supply Rome with livestock, dressings, and maintain all roads and postal stations in order. The result of such occupation was disasters (hunger, disease, pestilence, poverty). Eusebius paints a terrible picture of the famine that swept the East in 312 BC. e. Without at all exaggerating the tragedy of the poor people, Eusebius wrote: “... one measure of wheat was sold for 2,500 Attic drachmas. Countless people died in the cities, and even more in the villages, so that the lists of tax-paying people, until that time filled with numerous names of landowners, now consisted almost of nothing but blots, because almost all of those inhabitants were exterminated by hunger and infection. Some were forced to give rich people their most beloved things for a small amount of food; others, little by little, having lived through all their property, reached extreme poverty; others crushed small pieces of hay, ate indiscriminately harmful plants and died from disease... Others, dried up... could not stand on their feet and fell in the streets. And the people who seemed rich, having distributed many benefits, were eventually frightened by the crowds of petitioners and fell into a state of insensibility and hardness of heart, for they expected that they themselves would soon have to endure the same misfortunes as the petitioners. In city squares and streets, dead naked bodies, remaining unburied for many days, presented the saddest sight; and some of them were even devoured by dogs.” Imagine how the luxurious villas and crazy feasts of Rome were perceived by hundreds of thousands of unfortunate people under these conditions.
Roman sarcophagus. IV century BC.
And in vain Dion Chrysostomos, himself a wealthy landowner, persuaded the people that “stones and fire are not afraid of anyone” and that “the strength of the people lies in something else, first of all in reasonable behavior and justice.” A Pharisee, he could understand that the people do not have the strength to endure taxes, to bear the huge expenses for the maintenance of the Roman army, as well as for the maintenance of this entire pack of the emperor’s dignitaries.
Mithridates Eupator
Therefore, uprisings against Roman power almost always found support among the population. One of these wars of liberation was the war of Mithridates Eupator. He was a smart ruler and a brave warrior. He tried to win over to his side those who suffered from Rome. Having sent messengers to the Greek cities, he announced that, firstly, he would forgive them all public and private debts, exempting them from taxes for 5 years (however, this happened after the first victories over Rome, when huge riches, looted Rome). Secondly, he followed the advice of the Roman military leader Gaius Marius, which he gave him in response to Mithridates’ request to give at least some guarantees in the field of foreign policy. Gaius Marius uttered a phrase that our statesmen should also learn: “Either try to accumulate more forces than the Romans, or remain silent and do what you are ordered.” So he did. Thirdly, he realized that the peoples hated Rome with a fierce hatred. After all, even the Italics, who for many years unsuccessfully sought from Rome to grant them civil rights, finally, unable to bear it, rebelled and created their own state with its center in the city of Corfinium. They proposed an alliance to Mithridates. For unknown reasons, he refused them, although they could have become the best fighters of his army, because they served for many years in the ranks of the Roman army and knew the tactics and strategy of the Romans very well. But the fact that they came to the enemy of Rome already speaks volumes.
Vase of Mithridates
And when Mithridates gave a secret order to the governors to exterminate all the Romans and Italians living in Asia in one day, the inhabitants of the Asian cities did not even hesitate. They killed not only the main Roman culprits for their suffering - merchants, moneylenders and publicans, but even freedmen (women, children and slaves). Although let us remember that among the freedmen there were often the most cruel, ferocious oppressors. “In this case it was especially clear that Asia, not out of fear of Mithridates, but rather out of hatred for the Romans, committed such terrible acts against them,” wrote Appian. In this massacre, according to sources, a total of about 80,000 Romans died. Orosius wrote about the battle with Mithridates: “So Mithridates, king of Pontus and Armenia, after (he) planned to deprive the kingdom of Nicomedes, king of Bithynia, a friend of the Roman people, and was warned by the Senate that if he tried to do this, then brought upon himself a war with the Roman people, full of anger, captured Cappadocia and, expelling Ariobarzanes from there, went through the entire province with fire and sword. Then he struck Bithynia with the same scourge, driving out the kings Pylemenes and Nicomedes from it. Then, when he arrived in Ephesus, he ordered by a most cruel edict that all Roman citizens, no matter who were found throughout Asia, should be killed within one day, and this was done. It is in no way possible to convey or express in words what a multitude of Roman citizens were then killed, what was the grief for many provinces, what was the grief for those doomed to death, as well as for those who killed, when everyone was forced either to betray innocent strangers and friends, or experience the punishment (prescribed) for foreigners.” The degree of fierceness of the clash, the scale that the struggle against the Romans in Asia Minor took on, is evidenced by the fact that the battle lasted a quarter of a century (88–63 BC) and ended only with the death of Mithridates. As an example showing the true attitude of the conquered peoples towards Rome, we cite the words of the Persian prince Ormidza, who in 324 AD. e. fled to Constantine the Great. When asked how he liked Rome, he said that the only thing he liked there was that here, as he understood, people die. Let us add that all of Rome’s opponents – the great warriors Hannibal, Mithridates, Attila – fought to the death. What is this, no matter how the battle of civilizations. It can happen again – already in the 21st century!
E. Wolf. Amazons after the battle
Let us recall that the warlike Sarmatians also fought on the side of Mithridates. This tribe, close to the Scythians, spent their entire lives in the saddle, was an Iranian-speaking tribe and roamed the expanses of the Eurasian steppes. They conquered and displaced the Scythians, perhaps even subsequently merging with them, as a result of which the name “Scythia” disappears from the works of ancient writers and is replaced by “Sarmatia” (from the 3rd century BC to the 4th century AD. ). Herodotus places the Sarmatians east of the Don: “Beyond the Tanais (Don) River is no longer Scythian land: the first of the areas there belong to the Sarmatians, who, starting from Lake Meotia (Sea of Azov), occupy a space of 15 days’ journey to the north.” According to legend, the Sarmatians allegedly descended from the marriage of the Scythians with the Amazons of the Azov region.
The Sarmatians spoke the Scythian language, but it was distorted, because they had not yet fully mastered it. Echoes of that ancient language, according to linguists, can be found in the modern Ossetian language. Roman historians also provide information about the movements of the Sarmatians, describing the wars of Rome with Mithridates Eupator. These people were not only brave warriors, unsurpassed masters of equestrian combat, who had no equal, but also quite skilled metal carvers. Some works of the “animal style” have reached us, distinguished by their beauty and skill in execution. Among the Sarmatians, like among the ancient Iranians, the cult of the sun and fire reigned - the sacred elements of the Iranian-speaking peoples, glorified in the Avesta. Diodorus Siculus also wrote about the Sarmatians’ worship of fire. Their altars with fire were depicted on funerary objects, silver dishes and stone steles. The women of this people were not inferior in courage and bravery to men, going with them to war, they wore the same clothes, dressed like warriors - in heavy armor, fought on horses, using long lances and two-handed swords. They are deeply respected by all the people and took an active part in government. Skipak even claimed that “the Sarmatian people are ruled by women” (IV century BC).
The battle with the Germanic tribes was of exceptional importance for Rome. The homeland of the Germans (or “tribal workshop”) was Southern Scandinavia and the Jutland Peninsula. In the 4th century. BC e. the bulk of the Germans will rush south and deep into the European continent. They began to disturb the Roman Empire long before the start of the so-called great migrations (Cimbri, Teutons, Suevi). An example of the “loving attitude” of the Germans towards the Romans was the famous battle in the Teutoburg Forest. The rebel tribes of the Germans (Cherusci, Marsi and Chatti, Bructeri), led by their commander Arminius, completely destroyed the three Roman legions of Varus (9 AD). This is how the historian describes this event:
“And as soon as the cohorts retreated one step, German hundreds immediately rushed down from everywhere, from all heights, and finally drove the Roman army to his camp. All hope of salvation was lost. The cavalry galloped away, hoping to cross the mountains somewhere else. Var and some of the senior commanders committed suicide. The standard-bearer rushed with his eagle into the swamp to prevent the enemies from seizing the legion's shrine into their hands, if there was no way to save it. Finally, the rest of the army, led by the prefect Ceionius, surrendered to the mercy of the winner." While negotiations on surrender were underway, the faithful servants of the Roman commander tried to burn the body and, in order to save it from desecration, buried it. But the conqueror of the Romans, Arminius, ordered the body of Varus to be dug up and, having cut off his head, sent it to Marbod, king of the Marcomanni, his rival. Rome was so hated by them. This was the most severe of all the defeats of Rome of that era. Upon learning the tragic news, Augustus said: “Var, Var, give me back my legions!” The Romans were shocked. It was a sign of future troubles.
The battle of the Romans with the barbarians
One of them, Velleius Paterculus, expressed the shock that gripped everyone with the words: “And this entire army was defeated and completely destroyed by that enemy, whom until that time the Romans had killed like cattle...” The fate of the prisoners was terrible. Many were crucified or burned alive. Others were sacrificed to the dark gods of the Germanic forests. As a result of this battle, the Romans lost three legions (17th, 18th and 19th legions), 20,000 people. Emperor Augustus suffered not only military, but also political and moral defeat. He, proud of having returned the banners lost by Crassus in the battle of Carrhae, himself lost 3 legionary eagles. He even had a nervous breakdown. There were rumors that he stopped cutting his hair and kept repeating the previously mentioned phrase addressed to Var. Roman rules were harsh towards prisoners of war. Therefore, although someone was subsequently ransomed by loved ones, the imperial government allowed this act of mercy only on the condition that all these people (who had been captured) would never appear in Italy again.
Headstone over the grave of a fallen warrior from the Legion of Varus
From now on, the Romans actually lived in constant fear that a dark and terrible avalanche of tribes would fall on them, much more formidable than the warriors of Hannibal. Already by the beginning of the new era, previously unusual signs of weakness and internal breakdown appeared in Rome. Cassius Dio wrote about the time after the tragedy in the Teutoburg Forest. And then the following happened... Augustus, having learned about what happened to Varus, as some say, tore his clothes. He was overcome by deep sorrow for the dead, as well as fear for the future of Germany and Gaul. What was especially frightening was that the enemies, as he suggested, could then move towards Italy and Rome. In addition, he did not have any troops left from citizens of the required age (in a noteworthy quantity), and the allied troops, which could be useful to Rome in the future, then suffered great losses.
Kneeling German. Bronze. Paris
Still, he began to prepare a new army from his available forces, and since none of those who were of military age wanted to be drafted, he drew lots and took away property and civil rights from every fifth of those who had reached 35 years of age and every tenth of those over elders on whom the lot fell. Finally, since even in this situation many did not obey, he executed some. Having selected by lot from those who had already served their term and from the freedmen as many people as he could, he completed the recruitment and immediately sent them hastily to Germany with Tiberius at their head. Since there were many Gauls and Celts in Rome, either simply living there or serving as guards, he was afraid that they might be planning something bad. Augustus sent them all to different islands, and ordered the unarmed to leave the city. It was terror.
Our men should read and remember these amazing words of Cassius Dio very carefully. Speaking of the harsh measures immediately taken by Augustus after the defeat of Varus' legions in the Teutoburg Forest, Cassius Dio said: Rome had to “draw lots” among young people from wealthy families. And those who did not want to serve were deprived of their civil rights, all their wealth and property (as well as their fathers and mothers, since they raised them like that)! Will Russia (in the conditions of an all-out war of saboteurs and murderers unleashed against it by international and domestic bandits, and the “democratic” counter-revolution) face the need to put 35-year-olds “under arms”, just like the Romans? History may also force us to do this if, God forbid, its course goes in the same tragically insane direction. At the same time, it is characteristic that after the defeat of the legions of Varus, Tiberius began to behave much more cautiously and wisely. He did not demand tribute from the Germans, he was ready to pay them for grain and livestock to supply the legions, he did not force them to serve in auxiliary units, and if they themselves agreed to this, he paid them a lot of money. All this contributed to the fact that the Germans (Cherusci and others) began to settle in Italy and actively cooperate with Rome. But this happened under Theodosius I, who allowed Germanic tribes to settle in the Empire as separate, autonomous, allied, or federal subjects, subject to service in the Roman army (382 AD). Immigrant settlers in the 5th century. (West Goths and Burgundians) received a third and then two-thirds of the arable land from the Roman owners, including ownership of real estate (the hospitality system). At the same time, all forest areas that belonged to Rome were divided in half.
Reconstruction of the rampart built by Caesar
The Battle of the Teutoburg Forest ended Roman rule in this part of Germany. It was sung by Klopstock (“Battles of Hermann”, 1769), Kleist (1809) and Grabbe (1836). The irony of Engels also seems inappropriate, who, speaking about the collapse of Rome, emphasized that the Germans “as a reward for liberating the Romans from their own state, took away two-thirds of their entire land and divided it among themselves.” These actions are fair. After all, Rome did exactly the same towards the vanquished. So what could he expect from them!
Or how could the Britons, Irish or Scots treat the Romans?! Since the time of Caesar, the “tin islands” have been a constant thorn in the side of the empire. True, at the beginning of the new era, under Emperor Claudius, the Romans managed to defeat the army of the Britons and capture their leader. Thus Britain was conquered for the second time. But the Britons themselves did not consider themselves a conquered country. The Romans had to send their troops there again. In addition, the commander Suetonius had the stupidity to attack the main shrine of the Britons - the city of the Druids on the island of Anglesey. This is equivalent to someone destroying the Temple of Jupiter or Rome itself! Queen Boudicca of Britain was flogged by Roman commanders. Immediately all the Britons rose up in rebellion. The enraged Britons expelled the Romans to Gaul, and those who did not manage to leave the land were crucified, hanged, and chopped down by the thousands. In a few days, seventy thousand Romans were destroyed. Island of Blood...
Massacre of the innocents
And, finally, the constantly rebellious, always dissatisfied Judea, which set the Jews of Libya, Cyrenaica, Egypt, Cyprus and Palestine and Mesopotamia against Rome. The Jews in Rome lived well; they had a synagogue where they could pray to their god. Judas the Galilean rebelled in the name of “God’s truth” in 16 AD. e., and in 115, when all of Trajan’s thoughts were directed to the East, where he conquered more and more lands, the Jews again rebelled against Rome. The scale of the uprising was impressive. Vast territories were devastated, and the Egyptian land, even 30 years later, would bear traces of terrible devastation. In all likelihood, the motivation for the war was the messianic aspirations of the Jews, as well as the desire to overthrow the yoke of the hated empire (regnum caesaris turned in the eyes of the Jews enslaved by Rome into regnum diaboli) and expel foreign conquerors not only from the Jewish homeland, but also from neighboring countries. Historians of Israel note that the consequences of the uprising had a heavy impact on the fate of the Jews. The Jewish population of Cyprus was completely exterminated as a result of the 2nd Jewish War. The Jewish diaspora in Alexandria suffered a terrible defeat. She was dealt such a powerful blow from which she was never able to recover: “...at that time Israel lost its power.”
F. Gayes. Fall of the Jerusalem Temple
In many areas all Jews died. The experienced Roman commander, Sextus Julius Severus, had to make enormous efforts to conquer the courageous Jews at the cost of massacres. It is said that he destroyed 580 thousand people, 985 villages and 50 fortresses. About what feelings the Jews experienced in a just struggle against the oppressors, says Elazar’s appeal to the hero-defenders and residents of the Masad fortress (to the Sicarii): “Long ago, brave men, we decided not to be slaves of the Romans or anyone else, but only of God (for He is the true and just Master of people). Right now the time has come that obliges us to prove in practice the fidelity to our decision. Let us not disgrace ourselves in this, and if we did not tolerate slavery before, when it did not threaten us in any way, then even more so now, when with it the most terrible vengeance awaits us if we fall into the hands of the Romans alive. For we were the first to rebel, and we are the last to continue to fight. I believe that by the grace of God we, who are still free, have been given the opportunity to die with dignity, something that was not possible for others who were caught by surprise. It is clear to us in advance that tomorrow we will be captured, but we are free to choose a glorious death for ourselves along with the people we love most. For the enemies cannot prevent us from doing this, no matter how much they want to take us alive. Besides, we can no longer defeat them in battle. For even at the very beginning, when everything was difficult for us and our compatriots who wanted to fight for freedom and more favorable for our enemies, we should have guessed God’s plan in this and understood that He doomed the Jewish people, once dear to Him, to destruction. After all, if He had remained merciful to us, or at least not been so angry with us, He would not have allowed the death of so many people and would not have handed over His sacred people to the enemies for burning and destruction... It is clear that God is depriving us of hope for salvation... And let us ourselves bear punishment, but not before the Romans, our worst enemies, but before God. His punishment is not as terrible as the punishment of his enemies. Let our wives die undisgraced, and let our children never experience slavery.” This manifesto of the doomed, dying Jews is impressive.
N. Poussin. Titus' destruction of the temple in Jerusalem
The Romans showed severity towards the Jews, however, it was common for those times. Titus, who was nicknamed “the merciful,” nevertheless crucified 500 Jews during the siege of Jerusalem. If you allow, we will make just one remark... In the enmity that engulfed the Romans and the Jews, the Jews were also “guilty” to some extent... In the scene in G. Fast (“Agrippa’s Daughter”), the leading men of Jewish politics (the king of the Jews in Galilee, the ruler of Israel, the prince of Judea, the main officials of the Sanhedrin) talk about how the Jews behaved towards the Romans. One of them, looking towards Jerusalem, noticed that this city was literally “imbued with hatred of Rome.” And he continued: “Hatred of Rome is a state of consciousness...” After all, we must not forget about the 1,200 Roman legionnaires who were killed by Jews in Jerusalem. When someone objected to him that the murderers were not Jews, but Sicarii, he rightly remarked: “What difference does it make... the population here approves of the actions of the Sicarii and gives them shelter not at all out of fear of them. As for the death of Roman soldiers, it was not only the Sicarii who were to blame. The entire population had a hand in this. I have personally observed women, gentle, beautiful Jewish women who would not harm a mosquito. So, it was precisely these women who brought down a barrage of stones on the legionnaires.” This picture will become clearer to you if you superimpose the scheme of Rome on Chechnya, where part of the population belonging to bandit clans still secretly helps their half-blooded degenerates who kill innocent children. The patriotic Chechens and Russians must deal with this creature according to the laws of war, “eradicating their race”! The same should be done with the bureaucracy that is alien to our people, eradicating it.
Wailing Wall in Jerusalem
On the site of the destruction of ancient Jerusalem, a new city, founded by Hadrian, grew up - Colonia Aelia Capitolia. The city consisted of quarters built up with beautiful palaces and pagan temples. In the place where, according to Christian tradition, the Holy Sepulcher was located, the temple of Aphrodite stood. But the Jews were forbidden to settle there... They could only look at their capital from afar, since death awaited any Jew who was captured within its borders. The Romans behaved Jesuitically towards them. Once a year, on the day of the destruction of Jerusalem, exiles could come here and cry over the ruins of the destroyed temple. “These poorly dressed men and women looked pathetic, their sobs at the Western Wall were full of sorrow,” Christian authors wrote at the beginning of the new era. These were the tragic results of the 3rd Jewish War. The uprising contributed to the destruction of the great empire. “The consequences of the Jewish rebellion under Trajan,” writes the Jewish historian Sh. Safray, “left a deep imprint on the entire Roman Empire. This rebellion, together with the uprisings of other defeated peoples of the East, forced Trajan to begin a retreat and abandon his last conquests. Adrian finally abandoned the idea of a campaign of conquest. Roman troops left all occupied areas. Roman expansion to the East was delayed, and the Parthian kingdom grew stronger again. Thus, its borders became the limit of the spread of Christianity. Located within the borders of this kingdom, Babylonia became a refuge and stronghold for Jewry and its culture during subsequent centuries, when Christian rulers and the church brutally oppressed the Jews ... "
The Roman state in the late period of history turned into a soulless military machine, the purpose of which was murder for the purpose of robbery. Z. Mayani correctly noted that the Romans robbed everyone they could. They dreamed of someday robbing India, trying to repeat the “feat” of Alexander. They, however, failed to do this. But they succeeded in another “feat”: they destroyed one after another the civilizations of the Mediterranean. The consequences of this monstrous action are felt to this day. Professor L. Omo, apparently, rightly noted that the Romans organized the exploitation of the lands they conquered as a huge profitable enterprise in which all segments of the Roman population were supposed to benefit. As a result of the 3rd Macedonian War, the Senate of Rome, in order to “thank” the victorious army, gave the city of Epirus to be plundered.
Ribchester ceremonial helmet
On the appointed day, commanders everywhere simultaneously give the signal for the start of plunder: the troops began to rob and take away everything valuable. Within an hour, 70 cities were destroyed, 150 thousand inhabitants were sold into slavery. Each horseman received a share - 400 denarii, and each infantryman - 200. The walls of the plundered cities were demolished, all the loot was sold, and the soldiers were paid off their debts from the proceeds. At the same time, the Roman commander Paul saw that, contrary to his calculations, he still failed to satiate the soldiers: “They were indignant - they didn’t get anything from the Macedonian booty, as if they had never fought in Macedonia.” The Romans gathered ambassadors from all over the world to Amphiopolis to show off their spoils to Europe and Asia. The historian Titus Livius speaks about this even with a certain pride: “No less than the stage shows, competitions and competitions, the crowd of those gathered was occupied with the Macedonian booty, put on display: statues, paintings, fabrics, vases made of gold and silver, copper and ivory, crafted by palace craftsmen with great care, and not only for instant pleasure of the eye (the palace in Alexandria was full of such products), but for everyday use. This wealth was loaded onto ships so that Gnaeus Octavius could deliver it to Rome.” Having defeated Macedonia (167 BC), Aemilius Paulus, the triumphant, plundered the country almost completely and took 120 million sesterces from there! Then so much gold arrived in Rome that the state was able to give citizens unimaginable privileges: they were exempt from taxes. But we must remember: the wealth of some often had its source in the poverty of others.
Gold buckle for horse harness
How can one not remember the barbaric acts of the Romans against not even their enemies, but their allies, almost relatives. The censor Quintus Fulvius Flaccus, who was building the temple of Fortune - the patroness of horsemen, promised to him when he was still praetor in Spain, tried to outdo everyone - so that in Rome there would not be a more luxurious and extensive temple than the one he was erecting. The censor did not find anything better than to go to Bruttium and half remove the roof from the temple of Juno (Hera) of Lacinia... The famous temple was located in the south of Italy, on Cape Lacinia. In fact, right before the eyes of the allies, their shrine was brazenly robbed! The slabs were placed on a ship, taken to Rome, and began to be carried to the Temple of Fortune. This blatant sacrilege was further aggravated by the fact that the censor is precisely intended to oversee the “purity of morals.” According to the custom of their ancestors, they were entrusted with guarding and repairing temples. Instead of security, there was an act of vandalism. True, there was a murmur in the Senate. Flaccus was scolded, pointing out that it was impossible to decorate the temples of some gods with things looted from other temples. The slabs were sent back, but they could not be put back in their original place.
Proud Macedonia was torn into four small countries, just as NATO predators tore apart the defeated and humiliated Yugoslavia... Rome not only disbanded the Macedonian army, but also limited trade relations between the republics, banned the exploitation of gold and silver mines, and even suppressed marriage ties between its individual parts . Rome did the same with all its opponents whom it managed to crush. “Ancient Carthage was wiped off the face of the earth, and we know almost nothing about the treasures of its science, art and literature, they all turned to ashes. Another crime was to attack Hellas, the source of science, art, democracy, the inspirer of Rome in all areas of spiritual life. The Romans occupied Corinth, killed the men, sold the women and children, and destroyed a huge amount of art treasures. Polybius witnessed how the Romans barbarously turned valuable paintings into dice boards. Then it was Jerusalem's turn. The Romans violently attacked a country whose prophets called for the brotherhood of nations, where, in the same century in which Rome was founded, the shepherd prophet Amos proclaimed the equality of all nations, reminding Israel that the pagans (Philistines, Arameans and Ethiopians) had the same rights , as he does,” writes Z. Mayani. Rome appeared in the eyes of the people as some kind of all-consuming Moloch, a triumphant beast from the Apocalypse, whose death many longed for.
Knabe Georgy Stepanovich
Creative work in the Roman Empire The Roman state had many positive sides. Rome developed an empire, beautified cities, and built roads. Construction was going on everywhere. It is no coincidence that Rome is called a “world city.” Athenaeus even called the inhabitants of Rome “a people
From the book of Tatars [The history of the emergence of a great people] author Parker EdwardChapter 3. Collapse and fall of the Roman Empire Like Cato the Censor, Tiberius also condemned the growing luxury of the nobility, which promoted depravity, vices and effeminacy and exported precious metals to India and China in exchange for silk and precious stones.
From the book The Civilization of Classical China author Eliseeff Vadim From the book Ancient Egypt author Zgurskaya Maria Pavlovna From the book Middle Ages and Money. Essay on Historical Anthropology by Le Goff JacquesBarbarians: rejection or assimilation Of course, the policy of the First Emperor, which gave rise to many upheavals, finally directed the development of China along a new path. However, Qin Shi Huang did not have enough time to solve the really important problems, the
From the book “The Crash of Idols,” or Overcoming Temptations author Kantor Vladimir KarlovichSinicized barbarians and Chinese in exile It would be inaccurate to see in the capture of Chinese cities by barbarians a complete resemblance to Alaric’s campaign against Rome, if only this campaign had not become a hackneyed cliche. The problem of barbarians in China was too acute both in time and in
From the book Civilization of Ancient Rome by Grimal Pierre From the book Anti-Semitism as a Law of Nature author Brushtein Mikhail From the book Scythians: the rise and fall of a great kingdom author Gulyaev Valery Ivanovich2. The future destroyer of the Roman Empire The biography itself outlined the peculiarities of the view of the world of the Russian rebel thinker. Alexander Ivanovich Herzen was born on March 25 (April 6, new style) 1812 in Moscow to the wealthy landowner Ivan Alekseevich Yakovlev. It was a moment
From the book Sumer. Babylon. Assyria: 5000 years of history author Gulyaev Valery IvanovichChapter 2 FROM REPUBLIC TO EMPIRE Punic Wars. - Expansion of the Roman state. - The end of the Republic. - The reign of Augustus and his successors. Vespasian. - Antonina. - The Agony of the Empire During the last years of the 6th century BC. e., as the legend says, Rome was freed from
From the book Encyclopedia of Slavic culture, writing and mythology author Kononenko Alexey AnatolievichBarbarians During the first millennium of the new era, the Jews did not leave any special traces. Except for the Khazar Khaganate and the royal Bagration dynasty in Georgia. How this influenced the development of civilization is unknown, and therefore let’s move on. The credit goes to the development of financial and
From the book Austria-Hungary: the fate of the empire author Shary Andrey VasilievichGreeks and barbarians Culturally, the Northern Black Sea region was a unique and distinctive part of the ancient world. This originality was determined by the thousand-year (from the 6th century BC to the 4th century AD) interaction of two worlds - Hellenic and barbarian. Greeks
Guests of the Eternal City are in a hurry to first see the ruins of the great Roman empire. During excursions, the question is often asked about the reasons for the decline of the Roman Empire: tourists cannot imagine that such a gigantic colossus, which had experience, unlimited material and human resources, which conquered the most rebellious, could collapse without a good reason.
Indeed, the detailed answer to this reasonable question is interesting, but not so simple. And it is unlikely that during a city tour the guide will be able to deviate from the given topic for more than 5 minutes. We would like to help everyone who is curious, so we are publishing material from the famous columnist of the magazine “Knowledge is Power” Alexandra Volkova.
210 shades of the fall of Rome
Fifteen centuries ago, Rome died, felled by the barbarians like a withered tree. In his cemetery, among his crumbling monuments, another city grew up long ago, which bears the same name. And for centuries now, historians have continued to argue about what destroyed Rome, which seemed to be the “eternal city.” Rome, whose “images of civil power” awed the greatest kingdoms of the ancient ecumene. Rome, whose defenseless remains were so busily robbed by vandal thieves.
So why did Rome perish? Why did the torch of all countries go out? Why was the head of the greatest power of antiquity so easily cut off? Why was the city that had previously conquered the world conquered?
The very date of the death of Rome is controversial. “The death of one city entailed the collapse of the whole world,” this is how Saint Jerome, a philosopher and rhetorician who moved from Rome to the East, responded to the death of Rome. There he learned about the capture of Rome by the Goths of Alaric. There the city mourned forever lost.
The horror of the rumors about the three days of August 410 echoed like the roar of an avalanche. Modern historians are calmer about the short stay of the barbarians on the hills of Rome. Like a camp of gypsies through a provincial town, they walked, noisily, through Rome.
It was “one of the most civilized sackings in the history of the city,” writes British historian Peter Heather in his book The Fall of the Roman Empire. “The Goths of Alaric professed Christianity and treated many of the shrines of Rome with the greatest respect... Even after three days, the vast majority of the city’s monuments and buildings remained untouched, except that what was valuable was removed from them that could be carried away.”
Or did Rome perish in 476, when the barbarian Odoacer deposed the last ruler of the Western Roman Empire - its “fifteen-year-old captain” Romulus Augustulus? But in Constantinople, the “emperors of the Romans” continued to rule for many centuries, holding at least an inch of imperial land under the pressure of the barbarians.
Or, as British historian Edward Gibbon believed, the Roman Empire finally died in 1453, when its last fragment, a reflection of its former glory, faded and Constantinople was occupied by the Turks? Or when Napoleon abolished the Holy Roman Empire in August 1806? Or was the Empire doomed already on the day of its Transfiguration, its rebirth, when in 313 Emperor Constantine issued the Edict of Milan, ending the persecution of Christians and equating their faith with paganism? Or did the true, spiritual death of ancient Rome come at the end of the 4th century under Emperor Theodosius the Great, when the desecration of pagan temples began? “Monks armed with clubs emptied sanctuaries and destroyed works of art. They were followed by a crowd thirsty for booty, which robbed villages suspected of wickedness,” - this is how the Russian philologist and historian I. N. Golenishchev-Kutuzov described the self-mortification of Rome, the death of its very flesh. Rome died, and the barbarians only populated its cemetery, dotted with church crosses? Or did it all happen later, when by the end of the 7th century the Arabs settled in most of the Roman lands and there were no more free lands left to weld them into an exact copy of the sovereign Rome with fire and sword? Or…
The reason for the death of Rome is even more incomprehensible because historians cannot even confirm the date of his death. To say: “Rome was still here, Rome was no longer here.”
But before that, Rome stood tall like a Lebanese cedar. Where did foulbrood come from in its powerful wood? Why did the tree of power sway, fall, and break? Why did it so clearly resemble the image that, according to the Book of the Prophet Daniel, King Nebuchadnezzar dreamed of?
Healthy :
Already Orosius, having completed “History in seven books against the pagans” in 417, showed how the history of the world inevitably unfolds. How one world kingdom is replaced by another, another, more and more powerful: Babylonian - Macedonian, Carthaginian, Roman.
For a millennium, the pattern of this change in state formations was justified by a philosophical conclusion, the logic of which was unthinkable to shake. In Dante’s treatise “Monarchy” it is formulated as follows: “If the Roman Empire did not exist by right, Christ, having been born, would have committed injustice.”
But the Roman kingdom will also perish, crowning the change of earthly kingdoms and the triumph of the Kingdom of Heaven. And it’s true that Alaric had already taken Rome, and his Goths marched through the “eternal city”, like the shadows of the future armies of the Human Enemy.
During the Enlightenment, it seemed that an encyclopedic complete answer to this question was given: the monumental epic of the British historian Edward Gibbon, “The History of the Decline and Collapse of the Roman Empire” (1776−1787), was published.
In principle, the conclusions he made were not entirely new. Almost three centuries before him, the outstanding Italian thinker Niccolo Machiavelli in his book “The History of Florence” described the fall of Rome in such terms. “The peoples living north of the Rhine and Danube, in fertile areas and with a healthy climate, often multiply so quickly that the surplus population has to leave their native places and look for new habitats... It was these tribes that destroyed the Roman Empire, which was made easier for them by the emperors themselves , who abandoned Rome, their ancient capital, and moved to Constantinople, thereby weakening the western part of the empire: they now paid less attention to it and thereby left it to be plundered by both their subordinates and their enemies. And truly, in order to destroy such a great empire, based on the blood of such valiant people, considerable baseness of the rulers, considerable treachery of the subordinates, considerable strength and tenacity of the external invaders were required; Thus, it was not just any one nation that destroyed it, but the combined forces of several nations.”
Enemies standing at the gate. Weak emperors who sat on the throne. Their erroneous decisions entailed a heavy chain of irreparable consequences. Corruption (in that era the list of states was too short for Rome to take its proper place in the second hundred most corrupt).
Finally, which is very bold for that time, the caustic historian called one of the main vices that destroyed Rome the general passion for Christianity: “But of all these changes, the most important was the change in religion, for the miracles of the new faith are opposed by the habit of the old, and from their collision arose there is confusion and destructive discord among people. If the Christian religion represented unity, then there would be less disorder; but the enmity between the Greek, Roman, Ravenna churches, as well as between heretical sects and Catholics, depressed the world in many different ways.”
This verdict of Machiavelli instilled in modern Europeans the habit of looking at Late Rome as a state that had fallen into complete decline. Rome reached its limits of growth, weakened, became decrepit and was doomed to die. A sketchy outline of the history of Rome, reduced to theses, turned under the pen of Edward Gibbon into a multi-volume work, on which he worked for almost a quarter of a century (according to him, the first time the idea of writing a history of the fall and destruction of Rome flashed through him on October 15, 1764, when, “ sitting on the ruins of the Capitol, I deepened in dreams of the greatness of ancient Rome, and at the same time at my feet barefoot Catholic monks sang vespers on the ruins of the Temple of Jupiter"). The idea that Christianity destroyed Rome permeated his books.
“Pure and humble religion crept quietly into the human soul,” wrote Edward Gibbon, “grew in silence and obscurity, drew fresh strength from the opposition it met, and at last planted the victorious sign of the cross on the ruins of the Capitol.” Even before the complete triumph of Christianity, Roman pagans often asked the question: “What would be the fate of the empire, attacked on all sides by barbarians, if the entire human race began to adhere to the cowardly feelings of the new (Christian - A.V.) sect?” To this question, writes Gibbon, the defenders of Christianity gave unclear and ambiguous answers, because in the depths of their souls they expected “that before the conversion of the entire human race to Christianity was accomplished, wars, and governments, and the Roman Empire, and the world itself would cease to exist.” .
The world survived. Rome died. However, presented in brilliant literary language, seasoned like spice with irony, Gibbon's epic gradually fell into decline in the 19th century. Its author was an excellent storyteller. His majestic work, as on ancient columns, rests on the works of ancient and modern writers.
But the more diligently the historians of the 19th century examined archaeological finds, as well as the inscriptions and texts preserved on papyri that have come down to us, the more carefully they engaged in a critical analysis of the sources, in a word, the deeper they dug, the more the pillars on which Edward’s legacy rested were shaken Gibbon. It gradually became clear that the decline and collapse of the Roman Empire could not be reduced to a single cause.
With each new historian who stepped onto the scientific field, these reasons became more and more numerous. In his lectures on imperial Rome (they were published only recently), the famous German historian Theodor Mommsen drew a line under the theories of the death of Rome that the 19th century left to descendants.
Orientalization. Barbarization. Imperialism. Pacifism. And, most importantly, the loss of military discipline.
Mommsen himself, being a liberal nationalist, willingly talked about how “our Germans” contributed to the fall of Rome. By 1900, ancient history was gradually turning into a tournament of propagandists, honing their murderous ideas on familiar examples from the distant past.
For example, for the founders of Marxism-Leninism, some events in Roman history (especially the uprising of Spartacus) were the clearest example of class struggle, and the actions of the popular leaders of the uprising were an object lesson in how revolution should not be carried out. In Soviet times, any work devoted to the history of Rome certainly included quotes like these:
“/Spartacus is/ a great commander... noble character, a true representative of the ancient proletariat” (K. Marx). - “Spartacus was one of the most outstanding heroes of one of the largest slave uprisings... These civil wars run through the entire history of class society” (V. Lenin).
But Rome avoided the triumphant march of the proletarian revolution. Rome was depopulated. Rome at the end of its history was like a tree that had shed its leaves. The easier it was for the barbarians to fill this void, as Oswald Spengler, the herald of the “decline of Europe,” said after analyzing the “decline of Rome”:
“The well-known “decline of antiquity,” which ended long before the attack of the German nomadic peoples, serves as the best proof that causality has nothing in common with history. The Empire enjoys complete peace; it is rich, it is highly educated: it is well organized: from Nerva to Marcus Aurelius it produces such a brilliant cohort of rulers that it is impossible to point out a second such in any other Caesarism at the stage of civilization. And yet the population is rapidly and massively declining - despite the desperate laws on marriage and children issued by Augustus... despite the mass adoptions and the ongoing settlement of depopulated lands by soldiers of barbarian origin and the colossal charitable foundations founded by Nerva and Trajan for the benefit of the children of poor parents. Italy, then North Africa and Gaul, and finally Spain, which were more densely populated under the first emperors than all other parts of the empire, become deserted and deserted.”
In 1984, the German historian Alexander Demandt, in his monograph “The Fall of Rome,” summed up the two-century search for the causes of the disaster. In the works of philosophers and economists, sociologists and historians, he counted no less than 210 factors that explained the ill-fated history of Rome.
We have already named some reasons, citing detailed arguments from their supporters. Here are a few more.
Superstitions. Soil depletion, causing massive crop failures. The spread of homosexuality. Cultural neurosis. Aging of Roman society, increasing number of elderly people. Humility and indifference that gripped many Romans. Paralysis of the will to everything - to life, to decisive actions, political actions. The triumph of the plebeians, these “boors” who broke through to power and are not able to wisely rule Rome/the World. A war on two fronts.
It seems that historians who undertake to explain the deplorable fate of the Roman Empire do not need to strain their imagination and invent a new theory. All possible reasons have already been mentioned. They can only analyze them in order to choose the one that was the “supporting structure”, the one on which the entire edifice of Roman statehood rested. There are so many reasons and they seem to explain what happened so well that maybe it’s only because the fall itself didn’t happen at all?
In fact, on the surface of the same 5th century there are many fatal, turbulent events. Alaric enters Rome. The Huns rush to Europe. "Battle of the Nations" on the Catalaunian fields. Vandals robbing the “mother of European cities.” Deposed boy Romulus Augustulus.
A storm is raging on the surface of the century. In the depths it is quiet, calm. In the same way, the sower goes out to sow seeds. Sermons in churches still sound the same. There are endless christenings and funerals. Cattle are grazing. Bread is being baked. The grass is being cut. The harvest is being harvested.
In 1919, watching how at the turning point of the era, having passed the abyss of war. having been shattered by several states in a row, Europe still continues to live - dancing, cinema, cafes, christenings and funerals, bread and food, cattle and the eternal wheel of politics - the Austrian historian Alfons Dopsch put forward a polemical thesis. There is no clearly defined boundary between Antiquity and the Middle Ages. The early Middle Ages is only late Antiquity and vice versa. Night flowing into day - day merging with night, we will change it, easily recalling Escher's engravings.
If there is a clear line, a dividing line, after which it is no longer possible to say: “We are still on the ancient land,” but must be: “Antiquity is left behind,” then this line is the 8th century, the Belgian historian Henri clarified in the early 1920s Pirenne.
Eighth century. The unprecedented advancement of Islam, which was already ready to convert even Gaul-France, as happened with most of the lands of Ancient Rome. The Roman world was the world of the Mediterranean. In the chaos of the ecumene, the Roman power suddenly froze on a frame from the Mediterranean Sea, like a dress put on a mannequin freezes. Now the peaceful sea, once cleared of pirates by the decisive onslaught of the emperors, becoming a smooth road connecting all parts of the Empire with each other, has turned into a field of war. Wars between Muslims and Christians. The first moved north, restoring the Roman Empire in their own heterodox way. The latter retreated to the north, dropping one area of earth after another from their hands. In the end, the onslaught weakened and the offensive stopped. But there was nothing left to recreate the Empire from. There is nothing to attach to, nothing to connect the individual parts with.
In recent decades, having gone through all 210 (and even more) shades of the death of Rome, historians increasingly agree with the idea of Dopsch and Pirenne. Rome died, but none of the people living then noticed that this happened. The whirlwind of political events blinded me and did not allow me to see how one era was degenerated into another. The unhurried progress of everyday affairs reassured me, deceptively assuring me that nothing around me was changing, that we were all living as before, and there could be no other way. So in the old days, a lost sailing ship could move from the Atlantic Ocean to the Indian Ocean, and none of the crew noticed it for a long time.
In 1971, the British scientist Peter Brown, in his, as experts note, still relevant today book “The World of Late Antiquity,” proposed once and for all to abandon the expression “decline of Rome,” since it is burdened with negative meanings, and instead use the more neutral formula “religious and cultural revolution." Is the problem formulated by Edward Gibbon irrelevant?
Little of! Instead of decline and collapse, we should talk about change and renewal, advocates of this school urged. And now, in the traditions of political correctness that prevailed by the end of the 20th century, the sack of Rome by vandals began to be sadly called “annoying omissions in the integration process”...
But then the pendulum of opinions swung in the opposite direction again. Peter Heather's 2005 book, The Fall of the Roman Empire, as sharply as it scrupulously challenges the benign picture of the degeneration of the Roman Empire, its quiet transformation into barbarian kingdoms.
He is not alone in this. Oxford archaeologist Brian Ward-Perkins came to equally categorical conclusions. He writes about the “deep military and political crisis” that the Roman Empire experienced in the 5th century, about the “dramatic decline in economic development and well-being.” The people of the Roman Empire suffered "terrible shocks, and I can honestly only hope that we will never experience anything like it."
It is hardly a coincidence that scientists began to express such opinions after September 11, 2001, when it became obvious that the “end of history” was again being postponed, and we may have to experience another conflict of civilizations. Again the horrors of wars, the nightmares of fears? Decline and collapse again... But what?
“The Romans, on the eve of the catastrophes that awaited them, were just like we are today, confident that nothing threatened their familiar world. The world in which they live may change only slightly, but on the whole it will always remain the same,” writes Ward-Perkins, introducing into the worldview of the Romans meanings that we, also accustomed to our little world, would not like to put there. After all, even the Roman Tacitus taught all adherents of the muse of history Clio to speak about the past sine ira ei studio, “without anger or partiality.” But Tacitus was also sure that Rome, in which he lives, the world in which he lives, is eternal and unchanging.
So why did Rome die after all?..
The world wants to know. The World Tree is also open to all winds of disaster.
“The city to which the earth was subjugated has been conquered!” - a contemporary of the events will exclaim, as a result of which the Eternal City will be captured by barbarian tribes, and the powerful empire will cease to exist. Why did the mighty Roman Empire fall, and what state became its successor? You will learn about this in our lesson today.
Background
In the 3rd century. Germanic tribes regularly raided the Roman Empire. In the 4th century. The Great Migration of Peoples began (see lesson), the Huns invaded the empire. The situation was further complicated by the fact that the Roman Empire by this time was already significantly weakened from within.
Events
395- the Roman Empire is divided into Western (with its capital in Rome) and Eastern (capital - Constantinople).
410 g.- The Goths, led by Alaric, entered Rome and plundered it.
451- battle on the Catalaunian fields with the Huns led by Attila. The Huns were stopped.
455- Rome was captured and sacked by Vandals.
476- the last Roman emperor - Romulus - was deprived of power. The Western Roman Empire ceased to exist.
Participants
In 395, the final political division of the previously unified Mediterranean Empire into two states took place: the Western Roman Empire and the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantium) (Fig. 1). Although both were headed by the brothers and sons of Emperor Theodosius, in fact they were two independent states with their own capitals (Ravenna and Constantinople).
Rice. 1. Division of the Roman Empire ()
In the 3rd century. A serious danger loomed over Rome. Germanic tribes carried out devastating raids into Italian territory. The Romans ceded some provinces, but continued to resist. The situation will change at the end of the 4th century, when the so-called great migration of peoples begins, caused by the movement of tribes led by the Huns from the Caspian steppes in a westerly direction.
During the great migration of peoples at the end of the 4th-5th centuries. movements of numerous peoples, tribal unions and tribes of Eastern and Central Europe occurred on an unprecedented scale. By the middle of the 4th century. From the unification of the Gothic tribes, the alliances of the Western and Eastern Goths (otherwise known as the West and Ostrogoths) emerged, occupying, respectively, the lands between the Danube and the Dnieper and between the Dnieper and the Don, including the Crimea. The alliances included not only Germanic, but also Thracian, Sarmatian, and possibly Slavic tribes. In 375, the Ostrogothic union was defeated by the Huns, nomads of Turkic origin who came from Central Asia. Now this fate befell the Ostrogoths.
Fleeing from the Hun invasion, the Visigoths in 376 turned to the government of the Eastern Roman Empire with a request for refuge. They were settled on the right bank of the lower Danube in Moesia, as allies with the obligation to guard the Danube border in exchange for food supplies. Literally a year later, the interference of Roman officials in the internal affairs of the Visigoths (who were promised self-government) and abuses of supplies caused a Visigoth uprising; They were joined by separate detachments from other barbarian tribes and many slaves from the estates and mines of Moesia and Thrace. In the decisive battle of Adrianople in 378, the Roman army was completely defeated, and Emperor Valens was killed.
In 382, the new emperor Theodosius I managed to suppress the uprising, but now the Visigoths were given not only Moesia, but also Thrace and Macedonia for settlement. In 395 they rebelled again, devastating Greece and forcing the Romans to give them a new province - Illyria, from where, starting in 401, they raided Italy. The army of the Western Roman Empire by this time consisted mostly of barbarians, led by the Vandal Stilicho. For several years, he quite successfully repelled the attacks of the Visigoths and other Germans. A good commander, Stilicho at the same time understood that the forces of the empire were exhausted, and sought, if possible, to pay off the barbarians. In 408, accused of conniving with his fellow tribesmen, who were meanwhile ravaging Gaul, and in general of excessive compliance with the barbarians, he was deposed and soon executed. After the death of Stilicho, the Germans had no worthy opponents. The Visigoths invaded Italy again and again, demanding Roman treasures, slaves and new lands. Finally, in 410, Alaric (Fig. 2), after a long siege, took Rome, plundered it and moved to the south of Italy, intending to cross to Sicily, but suddenly died along the way. A legend has been preserved about his unprecedented funeral: the Goths forced the captives to divert the bed of one of the rivers, and Alaric was buried at its bottom with untold riches. Then the waters of the river were returned to their channel, and the captives were killed so that no one would know where the great leader of the Goths was buried.
Rome could no longer resist the barbarians. In May 455, a fleet of Vandals (a Germanic tribe) suddenly appeared at the mouth of the Tiber; Panic broke out in Rome; Emperor Petronius Maximus failed to organize resistance and died. Vandals easily captured the city and subjected it to a 14-day defeat, destroying many cultural monuments (Fig. 3). This is where the term “vandalism” comes from, which refers to the deliberate, senseless destruction of cultural property.
Rice. 3. Capture of Rome by Vandals in 455 ()
Rome encountered the Huns back in 379, when they, following on the heels of the Visigoths, invaded Moesia. Since then, they repeatedly attacked the Balkan provinces of the Eastern Roman Empire, sometimes they were defeated, but more often they left only after receiving a ransom. In 436, the Huns, led by Attila (nicknamed the Scourge of God by Christian writers for his violence), defeated the kingdom of the Burgundians; this event formed the basis of the plot of the "Song of the Nibelungs". As a result, part of the Burgundians joined the Hunnic union, the other was resettled by the Romans to Lake Geneva, where later, in 457, the so-called Kingdom of Burgundy arose with its center in Lyon. At the end of the 40s the situation changed. Attila began to interfere in the internal affairs of the Western Roman Empire and lay claim to part of its territory. In 451, the Huns, in alliance with Germanic tribes, invaded Gaul. In the decisive battle on the Catalaunian fields, the Roman commander Aetius, with the help of the Visigoths, Franks and Burgundians, defeated Attila's army. This battle is rightfully considered one of the most important in world history, since the fate of not only Roman rule in Gaul, but also the entire Western civilization was to a certain extent decided on the Catalaunian fields. However, the strength of the Huns was by no means exhausted. The next year, Attila undertook a campaign in Italy, taking Milan and a number of other cities. Deprived of the support of its German allies, the Roman army was unable to resist him, but Attila, fearing the epidemic that had struck Italy, himself went beyond the Alps. In 453 he died, and strife began among the Huns. Two years later, the Germanic tribes under their control rebelled. The power of the Huns collapsed.
In 476, the barbarians demanded lands in Italy for settlement; The Romans' refusal to satisfy this demand led to a coup d'etat: the leader of the German mercenaries, Odoacer, removed the last Western Roman emperor, Romulus Augustulus, and was proclaimed king of Italy by the soldiers. Odoacer sent signs of imperial dignity to Constantinople. The Eastern Roman basileus Zeno, forced to acknowledge the current state of affairs, granted him the title of patrician, thereby legitimizing his power over the Italians. Thus the Western Roman Empire ceased to exist.
Bibliography
- A.A. Vigasin, G.I. Goder, I.S. Sventsitskaya. Ancient world history. 5th grade. - M.: Education, 2006.
- Nemirovsky A.I. A book to read on the history of the ancient world. - M.: Education, 1991.
- Ancient Rome. Book for reading /Ed. D.P. Kallistova, S.L. Utchenko. - M.: Uchpedgiz, 1953.
- Istmira.com ().
- Bibliotekar.ru ().
- Ischezli.ru ().
Homework
- What states were formed on the territory of the Roman Empire?
- Which tribes took part in the Great Migration?
- How did the popular words “vandals” and “vandalism” come about? What do they mean?