The last fall of Rome, the calling of the Vandals. Cross-sectional analysis of four ancient sources of information about one event

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

Geyserich's invasion of Rome. Sketch by K. Bryullov. OK. 1834

Good day, dear users! In this session, we will look at an illustrative example (the final fall of Rome, its loss of royal power) to consider how historical events are shaped to reflect them in the minds of society. How historians and other near-historical figures (like Edward Radzinsky), etc. How they "stuff" an event with fine detail, compiling an "exe" file, for installation into our operating systems, into our consciousness, to form a picture of the past in it.

So, you will carefully read all four sources, and you will probably notice the difference in the narratives.. Some where the events are finer detailed, somewhere more author's interpretation, somewhere unknown details emerge - in general, you can work with the material.. Let's start, praying..

SO LOT NUMBER ONE - our beloved L. L. S. (16th century), "..the source of all knowledge.." (quote by G. Sterligov)

(Obverse Chronicle of John the Terrible, Byzantium, volume 2)

============================================

OKAY, LET'S GO FURTHER:

LOT NUMBER TWO - PROSPER AQUITAN (390-460 years)

CHRONICLE OF PROSPER OF AQUITAN

To the consulate of Aetius and the Studio

1373. Between Augustus Valentinian and the patrician Aetius, after mutual oaths of loyalty, after the agreement on the marriage of [their] children, evil hostility began to grow, and from where the grace of [mutual] love was supposed to grow, a fire of hatred flared up, despite the fact that the instigator [to her], it was believed, was the eunuch Heraclius, who so tied the emperor's soul to himself with insincere service that he easily inspired him [whatever] he wanted. So, when Heraclius instilled in the emperor everything bad about Aetius, it began to seem that the only useful [means] for saving the princeps was if he himself prevented the enemy's conspiracy. Therefore, Aetius was cruelly killed by the hand of the emperor and by the swords of those around him in the inner chambers of the palace; the praetorian prefect Boethius, who had great friendship with [Aetius], was also killed.

1374.

To the consulate of Valentinian VIII and Anthemia.

1375. The death of Aetius was soon followed by the death of Valentinian, completely inevitable, since the murderer of Aetius brought his friends and squires closer to him.

Those, having secretly agreed on a convenient time for the assassination, expected the princeps to leave the City, and during the time when he was busy with military competitions, struck him with unexpected blows; at the same time, Heraclius was also killed, since he was nearby, and none of the crowd [close] of the king fired up revenge for the crime.

Immediately after this murder took place, [on the 16th day before the April calendars] the imperial power was seized by Maxim, the husband of the patrician dignity, who was twice honored with the consulate. Then it seemed that he would be useful in everything for the dying state, [however] he soon revealed what he [actually] had in his soul: after all, not only did he not punish Valentinian's murderers, but even accepted [them] into [his] friendship, and, besides, he forced Augusta, his wife, not allowing her to mourn the loss of her husband, only a few days later forced him to marry him.

But this impudence could not last long. Indeed, two months later, when it became known about the approach of King Gizirik from Africa, and many of the noble and ordinary people began to flee from the City, and he himself, having given everyone permission to leave [Rome], also decided to leave during the [general] confusion, [on the seventy-seventh day after receiving power] was torn to pieces by the king's servants and thrown into the Tiber, and was deprived [thus] of the grave [before the July calendars].

After this death of Maximus, the captivity of Rome, worthy of many tears, followed, [when] the city, devoid of any protection, took possession of Gizirik. The holy Bishop Leo came out of the gate to meet him, whose expression of obedience (the Lord led him!) So softened [Gizirik] that he, when everything submitted to his power, refrained from fire, carnage and executions. So, during the next fourteen days, in the course of an unhindered and free search, Rome was deprived of all its riches, and also, together with the queen and her children, many thousands of captives were taken to Carthage, who were valued either because of [their] age, or because of for [their] skills (ars).

=========================================

Mdyaaaa.. The information is decently different, well, let's go further!

LOT NUMBER THREE - WIKIPEDIA (where can we go without it, infection..) based on the work of John of Antioch (7th century) For acquaintance, not blind belief, for.

Troubles in Rome

The most detailed description of the coup in Rome, which entailed the raid of the Vandals, the political instability of the empire and ultimately its disappearance, was told by the author of the 7th century, John of Antioch, according to the essay of Priscus, a Byzantine diplomat and historian of the middle of the 5th century, which has not come down to us (!!).

The Roman senator Petronius Maximus, marked by two consulates, was humiliated and insulted by Emperor Valentinian III. The emperor won his ring in a game of dice from Maxim and sent this ring with a confidant to Maxim's wife, ordering on his behalf to appear at the palace to her husband. At the palace, Valentinian raped an unsuspecting woman. Maxim did not show his anger in any way, but secretly began to prepare revenge.

The first step towards revenge, as described by John of Antioch, was the assassination in September 454 of the famous commander Aetius, who defeated the hordes of Attila in 451. The influence of Aetius increased so much that he began to pose a threat to the suspicious Valentinian, which Maxim tried to convince him of. The emperor summoned the commander to the palace, where he unexpectedly attacked him with a sword in his hands. After Valentinian, with the help of the trusted eunuch Heraclius, hacked Aetius to death, he asked one man: "Isn't it true that Aetius's death is beautifully fulfilled?" He replied: “Fine or not, I do not know. But I know that you chopped off your right hand with your left hand."

The next step in revenge was the assassination of the emperor himself. Although John of Antioch accuses Maxim of organizing a conspiracy, a direct witness to the events, Prosper of Aquitaine, notes in his chronicle only that Maxim subsequently gave Valentinian's killers a friendly welcome. Goth Optila, who served under the command of Aetius and devoted to him, hacked to death the emperor Valentinian III. The emperor did not have sons or recognized heirs; after the death of Aetius, there was no commander of all the armies, which Maxim took advantage of. Through bribery, he secured his proclamation as emperor on March 17, 455.

Calling vandals

The legitimacy of Maximus' power was in question, so he married Licinia Eudoxia, the widow of Valentinian III, just a few days after being proclaimed emperor. According to Prosper, he forced Eudoxia to marry. John of Antioch writes that Maxim even threatened her with death. She turned to the Vandal King Geyserich for help. Procopius rendered this story as follows:

“And somehow, being with Eudoxia on the bed, he told her that he had done all this because of his love for her. Eudoxia, who had been angry with Maxim before, wishing to avenge his crime against Valentinian, now boiled at him with anger even more from his words, and Maxim's words that because of her this misfortune happened to her husband prompted her to a conspiracy.

As soon as day came, she sent a message to Carthage, asking Gizerich to avenge Valentinian, who had been killed by a godless man, unworthy of himself or his royal title, and to free her, suffering dishonor from the tyrant. She insistently insisted that for him, as a friend and ally, since such a great crime had been committed against the royal house, it would be unworthy and ungodly not to be an avenger. She believed that from Byzantium she had nothing to expect help and revenge, since Theodosius [Eudoxia's father] had already finished his days and the kingdom was taken over by Marcian. "

Versions about the calling of barbarians in different parts of the empire were popular among historians of the 5th century. The invasion of the Vandals into Gaul in 406 was explained by their vocation there by the Roman commander Stilicho, the invasion of the Vandals in 429 into northern Africa - by their vocation by the Roman governor Boniface, the campaign of the Huns against the Western Roman Empire - by the vocation of Attila as the sister of the emperor Honoria. Apparently, Priscus voiced the version about the calling of Vandals by Eudoxia to Rome, and later later Byzantine historians picked it up from his words. Prosper of Aquitaine, a witness to the events, does not mention this, but his contemporary, the Spanish bishop Idatius, already knew about the version, calling it "bad rumors."

Modern historians admit the possibility of such a development of events, based on the message of Idatius that Maxim wished to marry his son Palladius to the daughter of Valentinian. Since one of his daughters Placidia was already married to the noble Roman Olybrius, we can talk about another daughter, Eudokia, who, at the suggestion of Aetius, was engaged to the son of Geiserich. T Thus, Geyserich was personally interested in the overthrow of the usurper Maxim.

Procopius expressed the opinion that Geyserich set out on a raid on Rome only for the purpose of plunder.

Capture and sack of Rome

Rome learned about Geiserich's expedition in advance. Panic arose in the city, during which Emperor Maximus, who had reigned for less than 3 months, was killed. Prosper of Aquitaine briefly and apparently most accurately described the death of Maximus:

“The approach of King Geiserich from Africa was announced, and when crowds rushed out of the city in panic, when he [Maxim] also wanted to flee in fear, allowing everyone else to flee, he was stabbed to death by imperial slaves on his 77th day of reign. His body, torn to pieces, was thrown into the Tiber, and he was left without a grave."

The 77th day of the reign corresponds to May 31 or June 1, 455, the first date is generally accepted. The Gaul poet Sidonius Apollinarius, thanks to family ties, was well aware of the situation in Rome. In one of the letters, he outlined the situation in which the emperor Maximus found himself: "He found himself the powerless ruler of an unreliable retinue, surrounded by the revolts of legionaries, the anxiety of the population, unrest among the barbarian allies …" Sidonius also hinted that the unrest among the people was caused by a certain military leader- Burgundy, and Jordan named the name of the Roman soldier Ursus, who killed Maximus.

Chronicler of the 6th century Victor Tunnunsky reported that Geyserich occupied Rome on the 3rd day after the death of Maxim, robbed him for 14 days and took thousands of captives to Carthage.

Pope Leo I met the Vandal king at the gates of the city and persuaded him to spare the city from arson, and the inhabitants from torture and murder. Prosper of Aquitaine, a direct witness to the fall of Rome, noted in his chronicle: “when everything submitted to his power, [Geyserich] refrained from fire, massacre and execution. So, during the next fourteen days, in the course of an unhindered and free search, Rome was deprived of all its riches, and many thousands of captives were taken to Carthage together with the queen [Eudoxia] and her children. " The devastation of Rome differed from the earlier plunder by the Gothic leader Alaric in 410 in its planned and methodical nature.

Heinrich Leutemann, Plünderung Roms durch die Vandalen (c.1860-1880)

Procopius listed the booty of the vandals:

“Gizerich captured Eudoxia with her daughters from Valentinian, Eudoxia and Placidia, and loading the ships with a huge amount of gold and other royal treasures, sailed to Carthage, taking copper from the palace and everything else. He robbed and Temple of Jupiter Capitoline and removed half of the roof from it. This roof was made of the finest copper and covered with a thick layer of gold, presenting a magnificent and astonishing sight.

Of the ships that Gizerich had, one who was carrying the statues, they say, died, with all the rest the vandals entered safely into the harbor of Carthage.”[13]

Procopius also mentioned the Jewish treasures from the Roman palace, captured by the Roman emperor Titus Vespasian in Jerusalem in the 1st century.

Consequences

Geyserich divided the captives from Rome between the Vandals and the Moors, the participants in the raid. The prisoners, among whom there were many noble people, were ransomed for money. Bishop Victor Vitensky spoke about the participation of the Catholic Church in their release.

Eudoxia's daughter Evdokia was married to Gunerich, the son of Geiserich. Hunerich in 477 inherited the kingdom of the Vandals and Alans, and in 523 his son from Evdokia Hilderich became the king of the Vandals. Eudoxia herself and her other daughter Placidia were released to Constantinople after 2 years.

Rome, after a raid of vandals, plunged into anarchy for a month. In July 455, Mark Avit, a comrade-in-arms of Aetius and a friend of the Gothic king Theodoric II, was proclaimed the new emperor.

The treasures plundered by the vandals in Rome were captured by the Byzantine army in 534 after the defeat of the barbarian kingdom and transported to Constantinople.

The Vandal raid was the 2nd sack of Rome in the 5th century, in 410 it was subjected to a 3-day robbery by the Visigoths of Alaric, as a result of which part of the city was burned. However, it was the Vandal raid that made a deep impression on contemporaries and left a noticeable mark on Catholic historiography. Although there is no information about the murders of the townspeople by vandals, unlike the capture in 410, Geiserich did not, like Alaric, take church temples under protection. During the Great French Revolution, the term "vandalism" arose in relation to the destruction of historical monuments. The term, despite its obvious unreliability, took root, began to denote the senseless destruction of spiritual and material cultural values and entered many languages of the world.

=============================================

LOT FOUR - Prisk Panniskiy (died 475g) "BYZANTINE CHRONICLES" (analysis of the historiographer A. S. Kozlov)

Elements of pragmatic analysis can also be found in passages about Rome.

sco-vandal relations. Notable in this respect and information

mation about the death of Aetius and Emperor Valentinian III, as well as about

circumstances of the capture of Rome by Geyserich (fr. 30; Priscus, exc. 71; cp.: [Ioannis

Antiocheni, fr. 224.1]). Although R. Blockley and P. Carolla expressed some

doubt that this whole story belongs to Priscu, but W. Roberto

convincingly proved that for John of Antioch in this case

the nature of the story and the interpretation of what happened are very similar to those

soots of John, which clearly go back to the "Byzantine history".

First of all, Geiserich's politics is portrayed in the same categories as

and the politics of Attila. The historian is fundamentally focused on

on the motivations of leading political figures. The death of Aetius (who is

called τεῖχος τῆς … ἀρχῆς) he considers a critical moment in history

Western Roman Empire..

This tragedy entailed a chain of events

tii, which culminated in the capture of Rome by the Vandals in 455 (fr. 30.1; Priscus, exc. 69), and consequently - the establishment of Vandal hegemony in the

diesel sea. In other words, the death of such a significant state

her husband, like Aetius, leads to the impotence of Rome and the strengthening of the king

vandals (fr. 30.1; Priscus, exc. 71). Characterization of Aetius as obstacles

to the implementation of the plans of the enemies of Rome takes place already in the message

about Attila's preparations for an attack on the Western Empire (fr. 17; Priscus, exc. 62; cp.: [Ioannis Antiocheni, fr. 224]). This thought is repeated in the story.

about the aggressive actions of Geiserich [Roberto, p. 133-134]. King of the Wanda

Lov sees the death of Aetius as a favorable turn of events (fr. 30.1;

Priscus, exc. 71), that is, it behaves absolutely pragmatically: since

Aetius and Valentinian III, signers of the 442 peace treaty, are dead, then the contract is no longer valid. However, they decide here

Geniuses are purely utilitarian: the new emperor of the West is weak and does not have

noteworthy military forces (fr. 30.1; Priscus, exc. 69).

True, at that time there was also a rumor that the imperial widow Eudoxia, forced to marry Petronius Maximus, encouraged Geiserich to

attack on Italy. However, the phrase οἱ δὲ φασι says that the historian

distanced himself from this version of events [Blockley, 1983, p. 393; Roberto, p. 140]. Thus, all the nuances of this fragment of the "Byzantine

stories fully imply the fact that Geiserich took advantage of

a case for an attack on Rome just for the sake of prey [Henning, S. 22].

Like Attila, the Vandal king does not hesitate to use

the weakness of the empire (cf. fr. 31.1; Priscus, exc. 24). Geyserich feels

so strong that it does not feel any fear even in the face

wars with the Eastern Roman Empire (Ibid.). D. Brodka believes that, describing Geiserich, who is aware of his power and his uncompromising character, Priscus could mentally refer to Thucydides' image of rigidity

Athenians during negotiations on the eve of the Peloponnesian War [Brodka, 2009, S. 22, Anm. 28]. It turns out that Geyserich, like Pericles, on the eve of the

fighting, was ready to carry out his plans with the help

war.

===================================