December 9: #OTD in 536, Belisarius and the Roman army entered Rome. It was a remarkable moment. As the historian Procopius wrote, "after a space of sixty years Rome again became subject to the Romans." Some thoughts in this 🧵 #BelisariusAndAntonina#Byzantine#History
First, a brief reminder of the context: Belisarius had landed in Sicily in summer 535. The island and all of Italy were part of the Kingdom of the Ostrogoths. The emperor Justinian charged Belisarius with restoring Roman authority to these lands.
After occupying Sicily in 535, Belisarius crossed the Strait of Messina into the toe of Italy in 536. Most of southern Italy submitted immediately to the Roman army, but Naples held out until it was captured, probably in late November 536.
The Ostrogothic King Theodahad had initially considered submitting his entire kingdom to Justinian and the Romans, and does not seem to have really had a plan for resisting the Roman army. Irritated, the Ostrogoths overthrew Theodahad, probably in November.
The new king, Vittigis, decided to withdraw the Ostrogothic army to the north to regroup at the capital, Ravenna. He left 4,000 soldiers in Rome as a garrison.
Rome was a large city, and its walls, the Aurelian Walls, were a circuit of some 12 miles. 4,000 men could not defend a city of this size without the support of the citizens, which they clearly did not have.
The citizens of Rome were eager to submit to Belisarius, and in fact sent a representative to invite the general to the city as soon as he could come. As I tweeted earlier this month, Belisarius and the Roman army probably started the march on December 1:
On December 9, Belisarius and the Roman army arrived. The Romans marched into the city through the Asinarian Gate, on the southeastern side. At the same time, the Gothic garrison left through the Flaminian Gate on the northwestern side. No blood was shed.
What a moment it must have been! Belisarius, and the bulk of his soldiers, were Roman, but the vast majority of them had never seen the Eternal City. Surely they must have felt the poignancy of entering the city of their ancestors. Rome was not just any other city.
What kind of reception did Belisarius and his army receive from the citizens of Rome? The sources do not record their reaction, but given that they had invited Belisarius to their city, we can imagine that most were at the least cordial, and some possibly even quite excited.
The western campaigns of Belisarius are frequently described as "reconquests," but Belisarius' peaceful entry into Rome in 536 (and a similar entry into Carthage in 533) casts some doubt on that label. This was a restoration rather than a reconquest.
To celebrate my book's first birthday (released July 4 last year), I offer up a meditation on a curious little episode: the Vandal King Gelimer quoting the great refrain of Ecclesiastes: "Vanity of vanities, all is vanity." #Roman #Byzantine 🧵
Some background: At the command of Justinian (r. 527-565), the general Belisarius led a Roman army to crush the Vandals and restore North Africa and most of its surrounding islands to Roman control in a lightning campaign that lasted just six months (September 533-March 534).
(This is probably underselling the shocking rapidity of this victory, because all major combat operations were complete by December 533 [3 months], and everything after that was claiming far-flung outposts and forcing the besieged Vandal King Gelimer into submission.)
The Count of the Stable (Comes Stabuli, from which we derive "constable") was a late antique officer of the Roman imperial court responsible for levying horses and pack animals for government use. Although it sounds like a humble post, it was held by a number of famous Romans. 🧵
I have been writing on the Comes Stabuli recently and was astonished to learn that occupants of the office included the future emperor Valens (r. 364-378) and the famous generals Stilicho (d. 408) and Aetius (d. 454).
This is of particular interest to me since in the sixth century Belisarius held the title of ἄρχον τῶν βασιλικῶν ἱπποκόμων (Commander of the Imperial Grooms), which was presumably a variant form of the same office.
Over the past few months I engaged in a variety of media (podcasts, blogs, book sites, etc) to get word out about my new book. This thread summarizes all that activity, both to keep it in one place and to give ideas to other academics with new books!
I started with places that would let me write a few words about my book to catch the interest of other bibliophiles. The first was on a humble blog called "The Page 99 Test":
Just how large was the Roman army during the reign of Justinian in the sixth century? Direct contemporary evidence is scarce. Modern estimates range from 150,000 to 326,000. Let's dive into the controversy. 🧵 #Roman #Byzantine #History
Let's start with the number all modern historians must reckon with. The Roman historian Agathias complains about the army during Justinian's reign: "there should have been a total effective fighting force of 645,000 men, but the number dropped to barely 150,000."
First thing to note is that this total (150,000) is meant to make Justinian's army look small. In other words, it is offered in a polemical spirit, not simply as a factual report. Nevertheless, it's the evidence we have, so we try to do something with it.
I recently listened to @byzantiumcast's interview with Adrian Goldsworthy (episode 273). In the discussion, Dr. Goldsworthy repeats the old canard that Justinian's armies in the West were "tiny." This is not accurate. 🧵 #Roman #Byzantine #History
First, let's establish a baseline for typical campaign army sizes in the reign of Justinian in the East. For the Battle of Dara in 530, Belisarius commanded 25,000 soldiers. At Satala in 530, Sittas had 15,000. At Callinicum in 531, Belisarius had 20,000.
We don't have firm numbers of soldiers for the eastern campaign of Belisarius in 541, or the defense of the East against the great invasion of Khusro in 540. But the earlier data points we have suggest a typical campaign army averaged around 20,000.
Yesterday we looked at evidence that Belisarius loved Antonina. Today, the reverse side of the coin. Do we have evidence that Antonina loved Belisarius? It’s less substantial and obvious than the evidence for Belisarius’ love, but yes, we have some! 🧵 #Roman #Byzantine #History
While in the Secret History Procopius is very direct about Belisarius’ infatuation with Antonina, he is more reticent about her feelings toward him. Instead, he focuses on Antonina’s supposed power to control Belisarius with spells, suggesting she ensorcelled him into loving her.
In the History of the Wars, however, Procopius lets slip an anecdote that might demonstrate the care Antonina had for Belisarius. After a long and dangerous day for the general during the siege of Rome, his wife came to him and compelled him to “taste a little bread.”