Cambridge Ancient Hi.. - Index of

486 17. armies and society in the later roman world
military. Troop movements inevitably generated friction and complaints,
which are attested in the surviving evidence, but the problem is to establish
what was the normal state of affairs. Narrative histories focus on exceptional
cases, while papyri record particular disputes, almost invariably from
one prejudiced side, but these may not illustrate the less acrimonious relationship
of the longer term: a British colonel who drove a regiment of
tanks across a north German field of asparagus generated a storm of local
protest that belied the overall nature of links between occupying army and
natives. These caveats need to be remembered while reviewing the negative
evidence. Soldiers did bring some benefits to the places where they served,
and the local civilians may not have been above attempting to exploit the
military for their own ends. Soldiers had possessions which might be stolen
by the hosts on whom they were billeted, while it was the economic vulnerability
of soldiers as a captive market that had underlain the promulgation
of Diocletian’s Prices Edict. 63
The Roman world had always been a violent society with a tradition of
permitting a considerable element of self-help, sometimes physical, in the
resolution of disputes. 64 Roman law had developed around this foundation
as a means of curtailing its damaging consequences, and the great legal
enterprises of Theodosius II and Justinian represented the culmination of
these attempts; they ensured that the rule of law could be presented as
characteristic of Romans, a feature of civilization and power which
differentiated Rome from the tribal monarchs, who might, though, be
stimulated to imitation. 65 But legal pronouncements could not eliminate
violence, and the various parts of the Roman and post-Roman world
reveal, not surprisingly, its acceptance and exploitation at all levels of
society. Custodians of the law were not above resorting to illegal force
when necessary. The emperors Leo and Zeno both used assassination to
remove the rival families of Aspar and Armatus, Valentinian III was personally
involved in the murder of Aetius, and Theoderic the Amal permitted
the bludgeoning to death of Boethius. If Justinian was more civilized
in treating those accused of plotting against him, his rise to the throne had
been accompanied by a deployment of urban violence against potential
rivals that was difficult to repress at the start of his reign. Brute force was
always an option when dealing with recalcitrant opposition: Belisarius used
threats to remove pope Silverius from Rome and subsequently colluded in
his elimination; shortly before the Fifth Oecumenical Council pope
Vigilius was dragged to a meeting with Justinian from an altar where he had
taken refuge, with such violence that the altar collapsed on top of him;
Monophysites constructed a catalogue of the oppression to which they had
63 Bagnall, Egypt 172–80, 219–25; Frank (1933–40) v.307–421, with Whitakker (1994) 111.
64 Lintott (1968) chs. 1–2.
65 Priscus, fr. 6.2.419–510;cf.ch.10 (Charles-Edwards), pp. 284,7 above.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008