Cambridge Ancient Hi.. - Index of

anastasius 57
the second time after Anastasius’ original promises of 513 had proven
empty, is strong evidence for this being his genuine motivation. When
Anastasius once more failed to fulfil his side of the bargain, Vitalian
advanced a third time (515), but on this occasion suffered a military defeat
sufficiently serious for him to have to abandon any further attempts to
capture the capital, and it was only after Anastasius’ death and the accession
of the Illyrian Justin that a resolution of the issue acceptable to
Vitalian became possible. Anastasius survived this crisis, but his reign
showed that the Henotikon was not a satisfactory basis for attaining an
enduring settlement of the east’s ecclesiastical difficulties. In acknowledging
Anastasius’ failure in this area, however, it is worth remembering that
his Chalcedonian successors were not to find it any easier to achieve a solution
to this intractable problem.
3. Foreign relations
Anastasius’ priorities in foreign relations proved to be rather different from
those of his predecessors. Although the failure of Leo’s expedition in 468
had left the eastern Mediterranean vulnerable to further Vandal depredations,
141 the death of the long-lived Geiseric in 477 and growing domestic
problems with Moorish tribesmen led to a less confrontational stance on
the part of Geiseric’s successors and much more stable relations between
Constantinople and the Vandals over the next half-century142 – a stability
reflected in the archaeological and numismatic evidence for a substantial
increase in trade between the eastern Mediterranean and Carthage during
the last quarter of the fifth and first quarter of the sixth century. 143 The
Danube frontier was rather more problematic, in part because of the way
the empire’s defensive infrastructure in that region had suffered extended
neglect during Zeno’s reign. So long as the various Gothic groups were
active in Illyricum and Thrace, they effectively cushioned the empire from
the consequences of this neglect, but soon after Theoderic’s departure for
Italy, the empire began to feel the effects in the form of invasions by
peoples referred to in contemporary sources as Bulgars, generally taken to
be descendants of the Huns who survived north of the Danube after the
break-up of Attila’s empire. Between 493 and 502, they are known to have
made three significant thrusts into the Balkans. 144 Anastasius took various
steps to try to remedy the deficiencies of fortifications in the region,
141 Of which there were some in the early 470s: Courtois (1955) 197.
142 Stein, Bas-Empire ii.59–60. 143 Fulford (1980).
144 Marcell. Chron. s.a. 493, 499, 502 with Croke (1995) 108, 110, 111. The first record of involvement
with the empire is Zeno’s attempt to use them against Strabo in 480 (John Ant. fr. 211 (4) (�FHG
iv.619)). The observations in CJ x.27.2.10 (491/505) on the debilitated economic state of Thrace
perhaps reflect the impact of the Bulgars in addition to that of the Goths.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008