Cambridge Ancient Hi.. - Index of

50 2. the eastern empire: theodosius to anastasius
regime who raised a revolt against him in Isauria itself during 484–8). 106
Those of Basiliscus and Marcian were inspired partly by resentment on the
part of some of Leo’s relatives at their displacement by Zeno’s rise –
Basiliscus was Leo’s brother-in-law, Marcian his son-in-law – and partly by
public prejudice against uncouth Isaurians. Even before Zeno’s accession,
this prejudice had manifested itself against the Isaurians increasingly resident
in Constantinople, many of whom were killed in a hippodrome riot
in 473. 107 Antagonism was heightened by Zeno’s promotion of fellow
countrymen to positions of importance in the state, and when Basiliscus
seized the throne in 475, large numbers of them were massacred in the
capital. 108 Zeno’s struggle with his fellow countrymen Illus and Leontius,
on the other hand, was much more of a power struggle between rival
Isaurian chieftains, on this occasion played out on a far larger stage and for
much higher stakes than usual. 109
Zeno’s domestic political difficulties were compounded by the situation
in the Balkans which he inherited from Leo, where there were now two rival
groups of Goths in close proximity to the imperial capital, one of which
(that of Theoderic Strabo) was hostile towards the new emperor, who had
been no friend of their patron Aspar and was the chief beneficiary of his
fall. This hostility soon found opportunity for expression, with the Thracian
Goths lending their support to Basiliscus’ usurpation in 475. 110 It was not
sufficient, however, to prevent Basiliscus’ downfall the following year, and
upon Zeno’s return, the Thracian Goths found themselves displaced from
their position of favour by the Pannonian Goths, with whom Zeno had
established links during his enforced absence from Constantinople. The
annual payments were now to go to the latter, and their leader, Theoderic
the Amal, was given the generalship formerly held by Theoderic Strabo. In
return for these favours, Zeno expected the Pannonian Goths to act against
the Thracian Goths, but Theoderic the Amal soon came to believe (no
doubt with some justice) that Zeno was actually trying to engineer the
mutual destruction of the rival groups and he in turn revolted, leaving Zeno
to patch up a fresh agreement with Strabo in 478. 111
106 For narrative of these complex events, see Brooks (1893); Stein (1959) i.363–4; Stein, Bas-Empire
ii.15–20, 28–31. The part played in these events by Leo’s widow Verina is noteworthy in the context of
influential imperial women. 107 Marcell. Chron. s.a. 473 with Croke (1995) 100.
108 Joshua Styl. Chron. 12; Candidus fr. 1.57.
109 There appears also to have been a religious dimension to this struggle. Although Illus was a
Christian, one of his leading supporters was the pagan Pamprepius and it is apparent that Illus’ revolt
inspired hopes of a pagan revival among sections of the urban élite of the eastern empire (PLRE ii,
s.v. Pamprepius; Zacharias Rhetor, V. Severus (PO ii (1907)) 40). However, the attempt to place certain
anti-pagan measures in this context (Trombley, Hellenic Religion i.81–3 on CJ i.11.9–10) overlooks P.Oxy.
1814 (line 16) which shows that the first of these laws is from Anastasius’ reign, in turn making it probable
that the second is also later than Zeno.
110 Malchus fr. 15.20–2; V. Dan. Styl. 75; Heather, Goths and Romans 273–5.
111 Heather, Goths and Romans 275–93.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008