J. B. Bury - History of the Later Roman Empire; from the Death of Theodosius I to the Death of Justinian, Volume 1 (1923).pdf

(6295 KB) Pobierz
Microsoft Word - History of the Later Roman Empire.doc
16220903.001.png
by
J. B. Bury
Macmillan & Co., Ltd., 1923
16220903.002.png
PREFACE
The first of these two volumes might be entitled the "German Conquest of
Western Europe," and the second the "Age of Justinian." The first covers more
than one hundred and twenty years, the second somewhat less than fifty. This
disparity is a striking illustration of the fact that perspective and proportion are
unavoidably lost in an attempt to tell the story of any considerable period of
ancient or early medieval history as fully as our sources allow. Perspective can
be preserved only in an outline. The fifth century was one of the most critical
periods in the history of Europe. It was crammed with events of great moment,
and the changes which it witnessed transformed Europe more radically than
any set of political events that have happened since. At that time hundreds of
people were writing abundantly on all kinds of subjects, and many of their
writings have survived; but among these there is no history of contemporary
events, and the story has had to be pieced together from fragments, jejune
chronicles, incidental references in poets, rhetoricians, and theologians.
Inscribed stones which supply so much information for the first four centuries
of the Roman Empire are rare. Nowhere, since the time of Alexander the Great,
do we feel so strongly that the meagreness of the sources flouts the magnitude
of the events.
Battles, for instance, were being fought continually, but no full account of a
single battle is extant. We know much more of the Syrian campaigns of
Thothmes III in the fifteenth century B.C. than we know of the campaigns of
Stilicho or Aetius or Theoderic. The Roman emperors, statesmen, and generals
are dim figures, some of them mere names. And as to the barbarian leaders who
were forging the destinies of Europe — Alaric, Athaulf, Wallia, Gaiseric, Attila,
and the rest — we can form little or no idea of their personalities; toi\ de\ skiai\
a)i/ssousin. Historians of the Church are somewhat better off. The personalities
of Augustine and Jerome, for instance, do emerge. Yet here, too, there is much
obscurity. To understand the history of the Ecumenical Councils, we want much
more than the official Acts. We want the background, and of it we can only see
enough to know that these Councils resembled modern political conventions,
that the arts of lobbying were practised, and that intimidation and bribery were
employed to force theological arguments.
Although we know little of the details of the process by which the western
provinces of the Empire became German kingdoms, one fact stands out. The
change of masters was not the result of anything that could be called a
cataclysm. The German peoples, who were much fewer in numbers than is often
imagined, at first settled in the provinces as dependents, and a change which
meant virtually conquest was disguised for a shorter or longer time by their
recognition of the nominal rights of the Emperor. Britain, of which we know
less than of any other part of the Empire at this period, seems to have been the
only exception to this rule. The consequence was that the immense revolution
was accomplished with far less violence and upheaval than might have been
expected. This is the leading fact which it is the chief duty of the historian to
make clear.
When we come to the age of Justinian we know better how and why things
happened, because we have the guidance of a gifted contemporary historian
whose works we possess in their entirety, and we have a large collection of the
Emperor's laws. The story of Justinian's Italian wars was fully related by my
friend the late Mr. Hodgkin in his attractive volume on the Imperial Restoration;
and, more recently, Justinian and the Byzantine Civilisation of the Sixth
Century have been the subject of a richly illustrated book by my friend
M. Charles Diehl. I do not compete with them; but I believe that in my second
volume the reader will find a fuller account of the events of the reign than in
any other single work. I have endeavoured to supply the material which will
enable him to form his own judgment on Justinian, and to have an opinion on
the "question" of Theodora, of whom perhaps the utmost that we can safely say
is that she was, in the words used by Swinburne of Mary Stuart, "something
better than innocent."
The present work does not cover quite half the period which was the subject of
my Later Roman Empire, published in 1889 and long out of print, as it is written
on a much larger scale. Western affairs have been treated as fully as Eastern,
and the exciting story of Justinian's reconquest of Italy has been told at length.
I have to thank my wife for help of various kinds; Mr. Ashby, the Director of the
British School at Rome, for reading the proof-sheets of Vol. I; and Mr. Norman
Baynes for reading those of some chapters of Vol. II. I must also record my
obligations, not for the first time, to the readers of Messrs. R. and R. Clark,
whose care and learning have sensibly facilitated the progress of the book
through the press.
J. B. BURY
CHAPTER I
THE CONSTITUTION OF THE MONARCHY
The continuity of history, which means the control of the present and future by
the past, has become a commonplace, and chronological limits, which used to
be considered important, are now recognised to have little significance except
as convenient landmarks in a historical survey. Yet there are what we may call
culminating epochs, in which the accumulating tendencies of the past, reaching
a certain point, suddenly effect a visible transformation which seems to turn the
world in a new direction. Such a culminating epoch occurred in the history of
the Roman Empire at the beginning of the fourth century. The reign of
Constantine the Great inaugurated a new age in a much fuller sense than the
reign of Augustus, the founder of the Empire. The anarchy of the third century,
when it almost seemed that the days of the Roman Empire were numbered, had
displayed the defects of the irregular and heterogeneous system of government
which Augustus had established to administer his immense dominion. His
successors had introduced modifications and improvements here and there, but
events made it clearer and clearer that a new system, more centralised and more
uniform, was required, if the Empire was to be held together. To Diocletian, who
rescued the Roman world at the brink of the abyss, belongs the credit of having
framed a new system of administrative machinery. Constantine developed and
completed the work of Diocletian by measures which were more radical and
more far-reaching. The foundation of Constantinople as a second Rome
inaugurated a permanent division between the Eastern and Western, the Greek
and the Latin, halves of the Empire — a division to which events had already
pointed — and p2affected decisively the whole subsequent history of Europe.
Still more evidently and notoriously did Constantine mould the future by
accepting Christianity as the State religion.
In the present work the history of the Roman Empire is taken up at a point
about sixty years after Constantine's death, when the fundamental changes
which he introduced have been firmly established and their consequences have
emerged into full evidence. The new system of government has been elaborated
in detail, and the Christian Church has become so strong that no enemies could
prevail against it. Constantinople, created in the likeness of Rome, has become
her peer and will soon be fully equipped for the great rôle which she is to play in
Europe and Hither Asia for more than a thousand years. She definitely assumes
now her historical position. For after the death of Theodosius the Great, who
had ruled alone for a short time over a dominion extending from Scotland to
Mesopotamia, the division of the Empire into two geographical portions, an
Zgłoś jeśli naruszono regulamin