Ask The Expert - Dr. Peter Heather

[Kosmo]

Hello professor,

When do you think that the area between Lower Danube and the Balkan mountains was left out of the roman world? I see some different theories about that.

[Virgil61]

Welcome to the UNRV forum Prof. Heather. I reviewed your book and enjoyed very much the way in which you wove contemporary Roman accounts into your historical narrative and the vivid descriptions of events.

 

I

[Pantagathus]

Thank for taking this time Dr. Heather to answer our questions. I have not read your work and if my question is covered there there then please forgive me.

 

My question is:

 

Considering that modern genetic studies are indicating that an overwhelming majority of the modern Spanish population have a genetic profile that has been in place in Iberia since the paleolithic; is it safe to assume that the Visigoth Kingdom was not in fact a representation of a large poulation of Goths 'taking over' Aquitania and Levantine Iberia but a very small group of Gothic elites (specifically Euric) who showed strong enough leadership that the indegenous Iberians would choose this 'alien' leadership over long standing Roman rule?

[Dr.Peter Heather]

There are many questions I would like to ask Dr. Heather, not least of which is Constantine's culpability in the fall of the late Empire, as a result of his placation of the Sumatians, but I think I have to ask this -

 

How dedicated to Christianity was Constantine? Given the fact that he, in all likelyhood, in my opinion, did not have a vision at the Milvian bridge (unless he was prone to hallucinations), and his merciless treatment of Fausta, Crispus, Lechinius, and a host of others. He clearly enjoyed bloodsports, yet in contrast to this he showed mercy to many, especially Christians. He often chastised his court for their immorality, yet, being an Emperor, was himself weighed down by a lifetime of accumulated sins. Given these contradictions, I cannot be sure - was he a "true" Christian (even though the standards of Christianity have changed dramatically over the centuries), or was he more of an an expert propagandist?

 

Thanks Dr. Heather. I very much enjoyed your commentary on the "I, Caesar" series, as I have stated elsewhere.

 

I doubt he had the vision too; he had, in fact, a long track record of having suitable visions at all the right moments (one of Apollo just a few years before), so I think visions were a propaganda device for him. But I do think he probably was a convinced Christian. There were still so few Christians in the Empire in c.310 that any kind of realpolitik reason makes no sense at all; hence it can really only have been conviction. And let's face it, Christian faith has never been a huge bar to unpleasant action.

 

Hello professor,

When do you think that the area between Lower Danube and the Balkan mountains was left out of the roman world? I see some different theories about that.

 

I think it was definitively lost only from c.610. As late as the 590s Maurice's generals were campaigning in the area and reestablishing contact with Roman communities in the area. control had been lost temporarily before that, but always restored. The early seventh century collapse of the Danube frontier in the face of Avar/Slav attacks (early in the reign of Heraclius), with the need to fight off Persians and then Arabs in the East, proved definitive. But, of course, this is administrative/military control. Actual Roman life - villas, towns etc. - in the area had suffered a bit in the third century and then very heavily from 376 onwards.

 

Thank for taking this time Dr. Heather to answer our questions. I have not read your work and if my question is covered there there then please forgive me.

 

My question is:

 

Considering that modern genetic studies are indicating that an overwhelming majority of the modern Spanish population have a genetic profile that has been in place in Iberia since the paleolithic; is it safe to assume that the Visigoth Kingdom was not in fact a representation of a large poulation of Goths 'taking over' Aquitania and Levantine Iberia but a very small group of Gothic elites (specifically Euric) who showed strong enough leadership that the indegenous Iberians would choose this 'alien' leadership over long standing Roman rule?

 

I would estimate the situation to have been somewhere in between the 2 extremes you cite. My best guess as to Gothic numbers would be c.100,000 & the late Roman Iberian population was probably c.5 million if not a few more. So the genetic impact would not be huge, esp. since the Goths were not a genetically stable and distinct entity anyway. But I'm sure that words like 'choose' are wrong. If only 100,000 people, the Gothic army was c.20,000 at least, which was more than big enough to ensure that by the later 5th c. Hispano-Romans had no real choice over whether to accept Gothic domination or not. The sources make clear that the end of the Empire was a much more violent process than some euphemistic modern constructions want to pretend.

 

Welcome to the UNRV forum Prof. Heather. I reviewed your book and enjoyed very much the way in which you wove contemporary Roman accounts into your historical narrative and the vivid descriptions of events.

 

I'd like to ask your opinion on a non-military variable, namely the struggle between Arian and Catholic Christianity the later stages of which roughly parallel the timelines in your book. Although one extreme, the Vandal sacking of Carthage the results contributed to the viciousness of the sack, how did this struggle impact the other events addressed in your book?

 

It's only really in the Vandal kingdom that religious conflict between Arians and Catholics figures very largely as a factor keeping Roman & barbarian apart. I think that's because the Vandal kingdom was the only one created while the Catholic western Roman Empire was still alive and kicking. All the other kingdoms emerged from the process of imperial collapse, so that there was no alternative Catholic Roman state for Catholic Churchmen to look to in opposition to their new Arian barbarian rulers. Hence they had to get on with the process of accommodation and clearly did. They used the Gospel text 'render unto Caesar' to justify this, sayihng that, since God had put the new rulers in power, then it was their job to work with them. And for the most part, Catholic Churchmen and Arian kings then got on together happily enough; Theoderic even solved a Papal succession dispute!

 

Hello Professor Heather, first thank you very much for participating at Unrv.com As princeps above mentioned, i do have many questions as well, but i will of course stick to one!

 

Was was in your opinion the most significant archaeological find of recent times that helped to understand better the period of the late roman empire in the west...

 

regards

viggen

 

The most important thing has not been 1 find, but the important set of findings to emerge from many field surveys. BEtween them, these have made it clear that the fall of the western Empire in the fifth century was not simply the result of massive economic decline in the fourth, which is what had always been assumed. The fourth century was if anything a period of maximum population and agricultural activity. But, for a single find, I love the find from the banks of the Rhine of the booty from some barbarian raiders who were in turn ambushed by a Roman patrol: not a couple of necklaces, but 3/4 of a ton of looted metalwork in a couple of carts: the entire contents of a villa!

 

Hello Dr. Heather and thank you for your participation in our little corner of Romanophilia,

 

We (on this forum) recently engaged in a brief and indefinite discussion of Roman citizenship in the late empire and beyond. As an example of some points of the discussion... Is there a specific point when the citizenship ceased to exist? Did it continue into the post Odaecer Germanic rule of Italy? Did it simply evolve into church/parish/diocese membership?

 

Any thoughts you might have on the subject would be greatly appreciated.

 

(I don't know if you've addressed the issue in your recent book, as I haven't started it yet, but it is resting comfortably in a prominent position on my desk... awaiting my attention)

 

Citizenship still mattered in the late Empire because it meant that you were at least 'free' as opposed to a slave or colonus. I think citizenship as such ceased to matter as the successor states form, because status comes to be measured in a new way. The barbarian law-codes all posit a triple distinction in social status: free, freed (a permanent, heritable category), and slave. This is a non-Roman social categorisation, and former Romans were clearly realigned according to it. I suspect, however, that having Roman citizenship previously gave you a head start in securing the new, crucial free status.

 

Hullo Dr Heather

 

Thanks for joining us here

 

I was wondering I realise that Late Paganism influenced early Christianity to quite an extent but was this actually two way traffic and was late paganism influenced by early Christianity?

 

Thanks

 

It certainly was. We know from Origen's Contra Celsum that some pagan intellectuals were worrying about Christianity from the 3rd c, and you have to wonder whether the Neo-platonists emphasis on a type of monotheism was in some way a response. But certainly by the 4th c, Christian sensibilities influenced pagan ones against blood sacrifice. By the 370s Libanius is advocating a new sacrificeless pagan piety.

 

Hi, Dr. Heather.

 

What modern advances--whether in statistics, economics, population modelling or whatever--have most influenced your examination of the past, and which advances do you think have the greatest unrealized potential for improving our reconstructions of the ancient world?

 

My best,

Cato

 

You'd probably get v. different answers from different historians. For me, studying economics, which I did briefly, has had the greatest external influence on my understanding of historical causation and the operations of human beings. As to the future, its not an area on which I'm at all expert, but I suspect that population modelling will play an increasingly prominent role in the study and understanding of early periods like the first millennium.

 

Although the Roman Empire was declining, was societal structure still firmly intact and were there still technological advances (if at all) ?

 

Who says it was declining? I actually see no evidence of it (see book). social structures were operating as solidly as they had ever done on the eve of the great barbarian invasions, and certainly economic structures, if not technology, were more fully developed than ever before. In my view, the Empire doesn't decline, the world around it changes...

 

Hello Dr. Heather, thank you very much for answering our questions.

 

My question concerns the anti-barbarian rising in Rome that began with Stilicho's death and the death of many Germans and thier families allowing Alaric to pick up 30,000 men he used to sack Rome. My question is, I understand there always was some anti-germanic/barbarian sentiment but what set it off? Was there a particular event or series of events that launched the West to kill thier general and turn on thier army so suddenly, or was this something Stilicho brought on himself and his troops? Was this due to his designs wishing to invade the East, or different? Thanks for any reply you can give me.

 

 

Regards,

 

Phil

 

In part, the pogrom was manipulated by Olympius who was seeking to replace Stilicho as effective ruler in the west. What gave Olympius the opportunity to succeed, I suspect, was the fact that Stilicho had drafted 13,000 former followers of Radagaisus into the Italian army just previously (in 406), and it was hostility and jealousy towards these newcomers from Roman regulars that O could exploit. I think, by the way, that recruits from the pogrom took Alaric's following up from 20,000 to 30,000; ie it added 10,000 - not 30,000 - men (the texts are unfortunately a bit dodgy here).

[Dr.Peter Heather]

Hello Dr Heather, great to have you here.

 

My question relates to Slavery after the sack of Rome and the fall of the West. I am curious to know what the attitude of Italys new masters was concerning people classified as slaves under the Empire. Were germanic slaves freed, or did Odaecer want to appear almost Roman/Emperor like in his attitudes as I have read ? Has any research been done into the evolution of Slavery in the area post Odaecer?

 

Thankyou very much,

 

Germanicus

 

No great research has been done, but we would certainly have heard of any mass manumissions if there were any. And in fact Odovacar wanted the tax revenues to come in, which meant that economic and social structures - i.e. the rural labour force - really had to be left intact, so I wouldn't be expecting him to take any very enlightened view. Remember, too, that Germanic society was a) not united, and had slavery anyway, so its not as though he would have looked at Germani was fellow countrymen who ought to be free.

 

 

My question concerns the legions. It seems that centurions, like modern senior NCO's, were the people who maintained the standards of army life and discipline. They were professional career soldiers some of whom would be serving on the front line even into their eighties. So - given the general decline of the legions toward the end of the west, were centurions of this time also declining in standards and to what extent did they set the pace of decline?

 

Centurions were really a bit more like company commanders, but I take your point (although I've never heard of them serving so late in life: the standard term of service was 25 years after which you got lots of retirement bonuses, as some terrific inscriptions show). The western army was already in serious trouble by c.420, with not enough cash coming in to replace the heavy losses suffered over the last 15 years, and this must have got much worse with the fall of Africa. Unfortuantely, we have no direct evidence as to how this filtered through into basic training regimes, but I have no doubt that it eventually did. I would see all this as effect not cause of western imperial collapse, however.

 

Ave Professor Heather,

 

Thank you so much for answering all our questions. My question also concerns the armies of the late roman empire. The armies were to an extent, barbarised at that point in time. They utilised different tactics and strategies in combatting their opponents. There is also a noticeable change in arms and armour of the period (e.g. spatha and oblong shield). my question is this: Can this change of military technology be attributed to an evolution of tactics and strategy of the late roman armies or to the extensive barbarisation of the army, or for whatever reason(e.g. economic decline)?..

 

Once again thanks...

 

Its mostly due to changing tactics and strategy, and is mirrored in the massive change in unit type and size also evident from c.250 AD. This was all a response to the new demands posed by Persia above all, but also on european frontiers. Remember that the army had always been heavily barbarised: from Augustus onwards one half of it always consisted of barbarians...

 

Hello Dr. Heather,

 

I'm curious to know how you keep up with the latest developments in in your field. Are there any specific publications or journals that you find essential to your continued studies?

 

Thanks

 

Journal of Roman Studies (not least its lengthy pages of reviews) and Early Medieval Europe are both terrifically useful serial publications. Otherwise, I have a network of colleagues and friends who keep me up to the mark.

 

Hello Professor,

like Moonlapse I was wondering about sources of information.However, my question was about museums/artefacts -in Western Europe -which sites or collections would you suggest as most evocative of Roman life/military activity/culture-to you personally (and this doesnt have to be as a scholar!)?

 

The Hadrian's Wall museums in Britain are terrific, I think, and its also tremendous to go down into that excavated area under York Minster, where you're in the middle of the old legionary base, quite possibly within a very few yards of where constantine was raised to the purple. On the continent, Trier as a site/set of remains and Bonn for its museum are both superb, and there are endless possiblities in Italy itself. I haven't been yet, but the site of the end of Varus, near Osnabruck, which is still being explored, also looks tremendously evocative.

 

 

An argument which creeps up repeatedly in these forums, and in which I particular seem to be embroiled, is how to interpret history.

 

In your introduction to Fall of the Roman Empire , you note there has been a marked tendency in the last generation to apply contemporary theories of literary deconstruction to the social sciences. This has brought into question if the traditional sources can ever have a definite veracity outside of alleged prejudices and agendas of the authors

[Primus Pilus]

Dr. Heather... on behalf of our little community, allow me to extend a warm and appreciative thank you for taking the time to visit with and to reflect on our questions.

 

Of course you are most welcome to visit at any time.

[Dr.Peter Heather]

Salve Professor,

My question is this. What did the Roman Forum look like around the year 700? Deserted or transformed?

Thank you.

 

Fundamentally, it was transformed, since none of its public buildings now had the same function as before. Mind you, it was also relatively deserted too, since the population of the city had declined massively. The best general guide I know of is Krautheimer's book on Rome...

[Princeps]

Thanks Dr. Heather! Your time is much appreciated, I'm sure you're very busy.

 

FWIW I totally agree with you in your answer to my question. I think Constantine's death bed Baptism is the clincher for me, but as you say, religious conviction has never been an obstacle to people intent on violence.

 

Edit - also, thanks for that tip on the Journal of Roman Studies. I'll try to check it out some time in the future.

Edited March 29, 2006 by Princeps

[Queen Dido]

Hello Dr. Heather, my only query is the dimensions of the great harbuor of Carthage at the time of the First Punic War. It was a magnificent piece of architecture and my friend and I are interested in digitally recreating it on various programs.

Your ideas will be greatly appreciated,

Thanks, From Alex Knights

[Ursus]

Hello Dr. Heather, my only query is the dimensions of the great harbuor of Carthage at the time of the First Punic War. It was a magnificent piece of architecture and my friend and I are interested in digitally recreating it on various programs.

Your ideas will be greatly appreciated,

Thanks, From Alex Knights

 

 

I'm not sure if the professor is around anymore. In any event, his expertise is the later Roman Empire and this questions falls well outside his domain.

[Viggen]

Thanks Dr. Heather for answering all our questions, it was a pleasure having you here!

 

Dr. Heather found the most interesting question (gets rewarded by Unrv.com with a copy of Dr. Heathers latest book The Fall of the Roman Empire) to be the question about Christianity influencing paganism by sullafelix....

 

Congrats sullafelix, the book is on it`s way...

 

Thanks again to all that participated and of course again a big thank you to Professor Dr. Heather