Written by Ben Clarke
With the deposition of Romulus Augustulus in 476, and the imperial insignia being sent to the Eastern Roman Empire, the Western Empire became dominated by various ‘barbarian kingdoms’, each governing alike to Roman fashion, but to differing extents. Given many of these so called ‘Barbarian’ peoples would have, prior to occupation, experienced Roman rule and government themselves within the Roman army, it is not surprising that their government was starkly ‘Roman’ in nature. This article will focus upon the various ‘barbarian kingdoms’ separately, given, as would be expected, they differ in how far they maintained elements of culture. However, the article will focus predominantly upon the kingdoms under the Ostrogoths, the Vandals, and the ‘barbarians’ in Britain, as they offer insight into the differing extents to which these new ‘kingdoms’ governed and lived as the Romans did.
The Ostrogothic kingdom, under Theoderic, is acknowledged to have been the ‘most Roman’ of the post-Roman kingdoms. Throughout our evidence-base, including the propaganda of Theoderic himself, it is blatantly apparent that he sought to emulate the Roman way of life and government in almost every facet. This reported Roman-ness is most explicit in a passage from Anonymous Valesianus, which states that he gave games in the circus and the amphitheatre “so that even by the Romans he was called a Trajan or Valentinian, whose times he took as a model”. Although we know little about the author, the source, written in Ravenna under Byzantine government, is open about their opposition to Ostrogothic rule. This makes this extract doubly significant in its flattery of Theoderic, highlighting, even among his opposition, he was regarded as an astute governor through his taking up of Roman tradition. Throughout the evidence this taking up of Roman custom is consistent. Cassiodorus, Theoderic’s private secretary and, later, magister officiorum, wrote that he wore purple dress and held lavish Roman-esque banquettes within his Palace at Ravenna. Cassiodorus also records Theoderic’s openness about this emulation of the Roman tradition when recording, in a letter to Anastasius in 508, that “our royalty is an imitation of yours, modelled on your good purpose, a copy of the only empire”.
Theoderic’s emulation of Roman government can be understood through his material culture. Most notably, his ‘Senigallia medallion’, which within the Roman context would have been minted only by the emperor, mirrors how emperors would have presented themselves, differing only through his moustache (there is not a Latin word for moustache, serving to highlight how ‘un-Roman’ this was) and the referral to himself as ‘rex’ as opposed to emperor. Given coinage, during this period, were the easiest way to spread a message within the populace, evidence such as this highlights that he was emphasising to both the Goths and the Romans under his rule that under the Ostrogoths there was continuity with the Roman empire. The reverse of the coin reads “King Theoderic victor over foreign peoples”, which stresses that he considered the Ostrogoths to be the most Roman of all the Germanic kingdoms. Theoderic, throughout his letters to neighbouring kingdoms, outlines that he considered the Roman culture to be civilised, and that of the ‘barbarians’ to be savage. Regardless of whether this was his real attitude or was said merely to appease the Roman aristocracy, this is encapsulated well in his letter to his new subjects after occupying territory in southern Gaul. Here, he writes that “you, who have been restored it after many years should gladly obey Roman custom […] cast off barbarism, throw aside savagery of mind”. As is stressed here, it is clear that, regardless of motive, Theoderic encouraged continuity with Roman custom throughout his reign.
Image 1: Theoderic, Senigallia medallion.
Discussing Vandal-Africa, Possidius narrates that, after the death of Saint Augustine, “poured savage enemies” who had “no limit to their atrocities and cruelties”, further stating that, “everything they could reach they laid waste”. Along with figures such as Victor of Vita, many Romano-Catholic authors at the time viewed the Vandal conquest and their persecution and expulsion of Catholics to be the end of Africa’s literary legacy. While the Vandals brought their own Arian beliefs to Africa, as is exhibited by Huneric’s adaptation of Honorius’ law of 412 against the Donatists of Africa (a Catholic piece of legislation against the Arians which the Vandals then used against the Catholics), these sources exaggerate the savagery of the Vandal conquest. From archaeological evidence alone we would have little knowledge of the Vandal invasion of North Africa. Many native landowners still operated in cooperation with the new Vandal administration. The Albertini tablets, which outline the record of sale between 493 and 496, demonstrate that contrary to Possidius’ account of “murders, tortures of all kinds, [and] burning”, the Vandals followed late-Roman landowning practices.
The most significant evidence for continuity under the Vandal kingdom is the Anthologia Latina. Contrary to depictions of the Vandals bringing about a decline of the golden age of literary output in Africa, the Anthologia Latina, which is a collection of poems and epigrams, compiled shortly prior to the Byzantine reconquest, highlights that under the various Vandal kings, artistry and penmanship was praised and encouraged. This is expressly highlighted by poem number 371 of the Anthologia Latina, which, in hexameter, was written for Thrasamund’s accession, stressing that the arts were praised under Vandal leadership; patronage and flattery such as this is shamelessly draped in Roman cultural expression.
In contrast, to the barbaric depiction of the Vandals from the Catholic sources, Procopius, a prominent Byzantine author who accompanied Belisarius in his reconquest of Italy, gives us an account of Vandal culture that stresses continuity of Roman-ness. He records use of the baths, the theatres, hippodromes, entertainment and banqueting; all pass-times of the late-Roman elite. While it would be an overstatement to suggest that nothing had changed under the new administration, a relatively impartial, external figure stressing continuity is convincing evidence to discredit the assertions of Catholic sixth-century sources suggesting only savagery and a loss of late-antique Roman literary output.
Post-Roman Britain was the most affected by the collapse of centralised Roman Government during the fifth century. We know that in the fourth and fifth centuries a great deal of villas were abandoned, and that people reoccupied iron-age hillforts. Cadbury Congresbury is one example. The archaeological discoveries there highlight that this community was Romano-British, but the material culture discovered was worn and reused compared to the fourth century material culture of neighbouring settlements. As a consequence of the loss of centralised Roman government, the effects of this are highlighted through the recycling of material culture.
This economic decline is further highlighted through the Wroxeter site, which was once an affluent town under Roman administration. By the 450s, after a period of upkeep within the town of the Roman baths, the building seems to have been repurposed, with the roof being torn off. It is thought that it was then used as an open market highlighting that, while during the fifth century Britain was still using urban spaces as they had done under the Romans, Roman traditional culture faded away either out of choice, or because of economic collapse. This is further evidenced by the artefacts found at Baldock. Found here was an example of an individual trying to imitate Roman pottery but being unable to do so without the technology of the pottering wheel. Clearly, with many of the coins found in this period being clipped for their silver, there was an economic and technological downfall within post-Roman Britain. Their abandonment of Roman villas in favour of Iron Age hillforts suggests a rejection of Roman culture after the loss of centralised administration, and the clinging to Roman material culture can be explained not by choice, but through necessity due to an inability to emulate and reproduce Roman pottery.
In conclusion, within the various kingdoms, the extent to which they upheld traditional Roman culture and administration differed drastically based on their proximity to Rome. Ostrogothic Italy was actively modelled upon Roman government to ensure success under the new government. On the other side of the spectrum, however, within Britain there seems to have been a more complicated picture in how far it upheld Roman ways of life. The economic effects after the collapse of central administration are most immediately visible and while there is evidence for a return to pre-Roman iron-age hillforts, and a turning away from villa-based living, there is evidence to suggest a clinging to Roman culture. Of course, all the post-Roman kingdoms sustained Roman ways of life, to an extent, because the various Germanic peoples had serviced under the Roman army. Therefore, while the western half of the Roman empire was no longer governed under an administrative centre in Rome, through the use of existing Roman aristocracy and having experienced life under Roman government, the post-Roman kingdoms were still very much Roman.
Bibliography
Buchberger, E. (2017). Shifting Ethnic Identities in Spain and Gaul, 500-700: From Romans to Goths and Franks. Amsterdam.
Fleming, R. (2010). Britain after Romae: The Fall and Rise, 400 to 1070. London.
Halsall, G. (2007). Barbarian Migrations and the Roman West, 376-568. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Halsall, G. (2008). ‘The barbarian invasions’. THe New Cambridge Medieval History. Volume I: c.500-c.700, 35-55.
Heather, P. (2005). The Fall of the Roman Empire. London: Pan Books.
Hen, Y. (2007). Roman Barbarians The Royal Court and Culture in the Early Medieval West. Houndsmills: Palgrave Macmillan London.
James, E. (2009). Europe’s Barbarians AD 200-600. London: Routledge.
von-Rummel, P. (2002). ‘Habitus vandalorum? Zur Frage nach einer nach einer gruppen-spezifischen Kleidung der Vandalen in Nordafrika’. An. Tard. 10, 131-141.
Ward-Perkins, B. (2005). The Fall of Rome and the End of Civilization. Oxford: OUP Oxford.
Wickham, C. (2009). The Inheritance of Rome: A History of Europe from 400 to 1000. London: Penguin.
Wlater Pohl, C. G.-M. (2018). Transformations of Romanness: Early Medieval Regions and Identities. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Retrospect Journal 