[gothic-l] Re: Rome Turning Into a Sewer

[faltin2001]

--- In gothic-l at y..., "Bertil Haggman" <mvk575b at t...> wrote:
> For introduction of law and order of the Vandals
> at the sack of Rome see Salvianus VII, 20-2 and
> Dill, _Roman Society in the Last Century of the Western
> Empire_, p. 305.



If I remember correctly Salvianus's describtion of the Vandals
introduction of law and order refered to Carthage rather than Rome.
More importantly his writings must be interpreted with great care and
in the context of the current theological debate. Using the epitome
of the 'pure and simple barbarian' to emphasise the wrongs in Roman
society had a long tradition as can be seen from Tacitus. The view of
major catholic theologians of the time that Rome could be
reinvigorated through the influence of barbarians is of course of
great significance for Roms policy at the time.







>
> A contemporary of Salvianus, Sidonius, born in Lyons
> around 430 AD and later Bishop of Clermont has provided
> a description of his visit to the court of Theodoric II, a Visi-
> gothic ruler 453 - 466 AD.



I think it was also Sidonius who complained in another piece that
Burgundians are always drunk and un-clean (I think he said they stink
unbearably). Once again picking and choosing from these authors does
not help in the enlightenment of the circumstances of the time.




>
> Theoderic, so Sidonius, attended religious service
> daily befor dawn, the dinner was that of an ordinary
> private household, and food was good but neither
> ostentatious nor costly. The goblets were refilled infrequently.
> Roman entertainers and lavish luxuries did not exist at
> the court of Theoderic II but the king enjoyed string
> music which comforted the soul with virtue just as it
> soothed the ear with melody.
>
> There were indeed Romans, according to Salvianus,
> who preferred life among the Goths to the unremitting
> greed and avarice that characterized the civilization of
> Rome.
>
> The military commentator Vegetius also disclosed
> the lack of fortitude of Roman citizens. Roman infantry
> refused to wear helmets or breastplates, because they
> were too heavy
>
> "when, because of negligence and laziness, parade
> ground drills were abandoned, the customary armor began
> to seem heavy, since the soldiers rarely ever wore it. There-
> fore they first asked the emperor to set aside the brestplates and
> mail, and then the helmets. So our soldiers fought the Goths
> without any protection for chest and head, and were often
> beaten by archers. Although there were many disasters,
> which led to the loss of great cities, noone tried to restore
> breastplates and helmets to the infantry. Thus it happens
> that troops in battle, exposed to wounds because they
> have no armour, think about running and not about
> fighting."
>
> There was of course also the advantage of not having
> breastplates, mail and helmet when running away from the
> Goths.


Funny thing is only that by the 4th and 5th century many, perhaps
even most of these soldiers in the Roman army would have been Goths,
Franks, Vandals, Burgundians and Alamanns. More often than not it was
German fighting against German. Even during Alaric's march on Rome,
the Visigoths were opposed by Vandals who stood in Roman service and
Wolfram suggested that Alaric, at one stage may have tried to buy
himself the status of a Roman senator.


Dirk









------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Tiny Wireless Camera under $80!
Order Now! FREE VCR Commander!
Click Here - Only 1 Day Left!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/WoOlbB/7.PDAA/ySSFAA/wWMplB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

You are a member of the Gothic-L list.  To unsubscribe, send a blank email to <gothic-l-unsubscribe at egroups.com>.

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/