Pazdernik_Procopius Thucidydes Belisarius_Brasidas.pdf

8/14/2019 Pazdernik_Procopius Thucidydes Belisarius_Brasidas.pdf

1/40

American Philological Association

Procopius and Thucydides on the Labors of War: Belisarius and Brasidas in the FieldAuthor(s): Charles F. PazdernikSource: Transactions of the American Philological Association (1974-), Vol. 130 (2000), pp. 149-187Published by: The Johns Hopkins University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/284309.

Accessed: 03/11/2013 21:15

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

American Philological Associationand The Johns Hopkins University Pressare collaborating with JSTOR to

digitize, preserve and extend access to Transactions of the American Philological Association (1974-).

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.100 on Sun, 3 Nov 2013 21:15:42 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhuphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/284309?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/284309?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhup


2/40

Transactionsf heAmericanhilological ssociation 30 2000) 149-187

Procopius and Thucydideson the Labors ofWar: Belisariusand Brasidas inthe Field*Charles . PazdemikEmoryUniversity

Despite henotorietyttractedyhis portraitfthe ntics f the mperial ourtinhis so-called ecretHistory,I hehistoriographicalethods nd motives fProcopius f Caesarea,our mainnarrativeourcefor hereign fJustinian(527-565 C.E.), remain elatively nderstudied.his s particularlyrue f thestate fresearchntoProcopius'majorwork,heWars, monumental ilitaryand politicalhistoryonceivedon theglobal scale demanded y Justinian'scampaigns gainst assanidPersia,VandalNorthAfrica,ndOstrogothictaly.Although rocopius'debtto his classical predecessors,nd to Thucydidesnparticular,as longbeenrecognized,2deas aboutthe nature f Thucydides'*I owe a specialdebt f thanks o Peter rown,MichaelMaas, and Josh berfor heircommentsn previous ersionsf thispaper, s formuch lse.Marilyn kinnerndtheanonymous eferees or TAPAofferedonstructivedvice for which am grateful.Portions f thismaterial,ome of which s drawn rom he econd nd thirdhaptersfmyPrincetonissertationPazdemik1997),werepresentedt the session on GreekHistoriographyt the129thAnnualMeeting f theAmericanhilologicalAssociation

inChicago,where received aluablefeedback.MiriamAukermanas been a constantsource fsupportndperceptiveuggestions.II usethefollowingonventionso refero theworks fProcopius:Wars1-8 ( BellaI-IV, V-VIII, vols. 1-2 in theTeubner dition yHaury ndWirth)s used npreferencetoPersianWarsi.e., Wars1-2), VandalWarsWars3-4), andGothicWarsWars5-8);AnecdotaHistoria rcana, vol.3 in Haury ndWirth; A inreferences)s preferredoSecretHistory; uildings efers o De Aedificiisvol. 4 in Haury nd Wirth; ed inreferences).ome controversyemains egardinghechronologyfProcopius'works;see, most ecently, reatrex994; Evans1996:2-5.2Procopius' elationshipoThucydides,entering holly ponverbal orrespondencesbetweenheirworks,wasthe ubject f a dissertationyBraun 1885),who ater reatedHerodotus s well (idem1894; see also Franke 1914] concerning gathias).Bloom-field's ranslationfThucydidesntoEnglish1829) included mong ts very opiousannotations itations f parallel assages nancientuthorsncludingrocopius,many

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.100 on Sun, 3 Nov 2013 21:15:42 PMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/40

150 Charles . Pazdemikinfluence ponProcopius avebeen ubject o reconsiderationndrevisionvertime.3We no longer ingle rocopius ut s a bastion f classical nlightenmentin an age of monkish uperstition,utneither an we dismissProcopius'investmentn the classicalhistoriographicalraditions a transparentiterarypose.The challenge sto discover Procopiuswho s recognizablyheproductofhis own age,shapedby thepressuresnd preoccupationsf the ixth enturyC.E., and to understandow a historywritten nder heradically ifferentconditionsfthefifthentury.C.E. cameto haverelevance or im ndhelpedhim oformulateesponseso contemporaryroblems.

The issue s an importantne because, ike Thucydides imself,rocopiusis ourkey witness o a periodof great ransitionnd upheaval, orwhichhesupplies continuous istorical arrative onditionedy his own distinctivepointof view.4 Considerationf his allusionsto Thucydideseads one toexamineProcopius'broader olitical nd cultural llegiances nd the livelyengagement e demonstratesn all of his works withquestions boutthelegitimatesesof power ndtheir ole n nfluencingistoricalhange. y call-ingattentiono theposition f esserpartiesmplicatedn conflictnddrawingstrikingarallels etweenheir lightndcomparableituationsnThucydides,Procopiuspresents imself s a powerfulnd nuancedcriticof Justinian'sexpansionistolicies.5 hework fProcopius' reat redecessorupplied richconceptual ackdropgainstwhich hemotivationsndobjectivesfProcopius'ownhistoricalharacters ighte comparedndevaluated.

Indeed, heres independentvidence hat rocopius' udience espondedto his work in this fashion.An anonymous ommentatorn the textofofwhich nticipate raun.Thucydideannfluence pon Procopius nd its mplicationsfor he atter's istoricaleracity eredebated yBruckner1896) andHaury1896),while lassicalallusionsn theprefaceso Procopius'works s wellas inthoseofotherByzantine istoriansere he ubject f a study yLieberich1900); see alsoCesa 1981:397-98. More recentlyhework fKatherine dshead1983; 1990; 1993)has reopenedthe studyof Thucydides' nfluenceupon late antique historiography;articularcorrespondencesetween rocopius ndThucydides ave beenthe ubject fworkbyqnvtter onmmannnesa 19R2- ameron 1985: 37-43. and Cresci.

W - I3See Cameron 985: 33-46,225-41; eadem1986;on earlier cholarship,articularlythat fRubin 1954; 1960: 173-226), ee Cameron 966.On classicizing istoriographyin lateantiquitymoregenerally,ee eadem 1964; Cameron ndCameron;CrokeandEmmett983a.4Cf.Cameron 985:3-4: as Thucydides oesfor hePeloponnesianWar, rTacitusfor heearly mpire,o Procopius rovides hefilterhrough hichwe mustviewthereign fJustinian.5For wider-rangingurveyf dissidenteactionso the egime,eePazdernik 994.



4/40

Procopius ndThucydidesn theLabors f War 151Thucydides, pparently ritingn thesixth entury, as movedto make thefollowingbservationpropos f Thuc. 4.81.2 (Scholia in Thuc.4.83.3 Hude268, with owell83]):6

...Z TV ITPOUXOVTCAVapETT) EV TE ITOXECI Kal EV OTpaTTlytaisKai TaVTaXOu ... KaOiCTaTat TO U1TT1KOOV Kal TCAV EVaVTICAViTOlEl pT' KaTaqppOVElV. ?V PEV TOIS 'EXXTiaOV BpaaibavKalT11V auTou OTpaTla'V, EV TO&S lETEpOIS EE BEXtoaplovISTapaOTaOIVTOU TapOVTOSoyou -TapaPaXXouIEVos....The &PET'] of leaderswins subjectswithin hostile]citiesandarmies...everywhere,ndmakesthem espect heir pponents.Wemay omparewith his ayinghe xample f Brasidas ndhisarmy,for heGreeks,ndfor urselveshe xample fBelisarius..7

This parallelhas much o recommendt. Like Brasidas he Spartan n hisThracian ampaign 424-422 B.C.E., Thuc. 4.78-88, 102-35; 5.1-11), Justin-ian's general elisarius,mostnotably nhis mission gainst andalAfrica533C.E., Wars3.12-25;4.1-9), stood tthehead of a small,heterogeneousxpe-6Thuc. 4.81.2- TO TE yap irapauTiKa EaUTOV irapaoxcA'v &KalOV Kai PETPIOV ESTaI Tr6XI alTEOTlCiE Ta IroXXa, Ta bE ITpOSoOi ,TXE TCV XCOPi&)V.. E TE TOV

Xp VCo UJTEpOV ?ETa Ta ?K l Ia; ITOXE1OV q TOTE BpaoiSou apETi Kal(UVEO1S, TCAV PEV iTEipa ai6opEVCOV, TCOV 8E aKOT1 VO.IOaVTCV, IClOTaiTOupiav 'EVE?TUIE Te1S 'A6qvakxv guppa1axotS ES TOUS AaKE&azwovious( Presentingimself or he moment s justandmoderate oward hecities,he causedmany orevolt, nd others e seizedby treachery...ater n inthewar, fter heeventsinSicily, he&pET' andgv?aVESof Brasidas tthat ime, nown y experienceosomeand byhearsayoothers, aswhatmainlynstilledn the lliesofAthens nenthusiasmfor heSpartans ). nBrasidas' pET'l, see Homblower 996:56-57.7We shall return o thispassage below, p. 165. CompareWars 7.1.16-18, onBelisarius: 6cyovpv OU'vXpOVOV OU. Pc,pa1Cv GTpaTOU ?V TE AlU Kal ITaXi'aTrpOU(OTT,VIKC.)VTE IETE?XEI al Ta EV 1TOOiVaEl KTCAPEVOS. ETEl 6? ?S BuJ&VTIOV[ITa' ETO; XOV, ?Tl aXXOV 1 1pOTEpOV alJTOU Tj apETT E?TI IXOTOVEyVc.OOT. aUTOS TE yap TaTCn apET1 ITpou'v.O..o@ poS, CS TO EiKoS, apXouCiTE TacTl a'l CTpaTICOTatS EyEVETO ( So long s he led theRoman rmy nLibya andItaly,he was victorious nd always cquiringwhateveraybefore im.Whenhe wasrecalled o the apitalhisaPET' wasfully ecognized venmore han n thepast.For ashe was eminentnevery ategoryfexcellence...he wasunderstandablyormidableo allofthe ommandersnd soldiers like ). n my ranslationsfProcopius have consultedDewing.This passage forms artof Procopius' ulogyof BelisariusCameron1985:138-39, 204), which s suffused ith valedictoryir,heightenedy cues alluding oThucydides' bituaryf Pericles: ompare huc. 2.65.5; also Wars 7.1.22 and Thuc.2.65.8; Wars .1.23 andThuc.2.65.10.See furtherresci;Braun 885: 17-21.



5/40

152 Charles . Pazdernikditionaryorceoperatingn enemy erritory.n order o maintain heir wnpositions nd to advancetheir argerobjectives,both generalsturned odiplomacy,olsteredy the hreatf force,nan attempto winthe upportflocalities, husdetachinghemfrom heir llegiance o theenemy.The taskrequired particularort f charismaticeadership,necapableofmaintainingdiscipline ver troops ervingn unfamiliaronditions,n the one hand, ndinspiringonfidencend trust n thepart of the inhabitants,n the other.Appearing n thescene as invaders,heynonethelessought o constructcommunityf nterestetweenhemselvesnd the ubjected opulations hoseloyaltieshey oped o sway.

Ourscholiastffersowerfulndependentestimonyo a particularabit fmind pparentn thesixth entury,newhich ought o relate ontemporaryevents nd figuresomonumentsf the past. Althoughhe passagehas beenexploited s evidence fProcopius' ssociationwith school of Thucydideanstudies in sixth-centuryaza,8 its implications or the interpretationfProcopius' ortraitfBelisarius,owhom hehistorian ad been ttacheds hisassessor and aide-de-camp, ave scarcelybeen explored.Procopius'Wars,which omecontemporaryeaders escribedimplys a bookaboutBelisarius,9is one such attemptt imaginativelyeinscribinghepast uponthepresent.Procopius nviteshis reader, s it were,to re-imagine elisarius s a con-temporaryrasidas-the latter beguiling igure,mild and uprightn hisdealings,mplacableowardhefoe;forwhom, owever,hucydides'dmirationwas tempered y his recognitionf a cannyopportunism,temmingromBrasidas'failureomatch isrhetoricoprevailingontingenciesfpower.BothBrasidas ndBelisarius roclaim campaignf iberation,ndertakenon behalf f thepopulationswhosecooperationheyhopeto secure, gainsttheir pponents, hoserule hey haracterizes illegitimatenddespotic. ach

meetswithsuccess,the one in enrollinghe Greekcitiesof Thrace in apanhellenicrusade gainstAthens,heothernwinninghecooperationfthe80n theproposedixth-centuryatefor he cholions well s itsprovenancenGaza,see Luschnat 9;on the choliaproducedhere,Wilson 0-36. Thequestion fwhetherProcopius tudied t Gaza has no bearing n theargumentsresented ere;I shareCameron'sscepticism1985: 6-7) as to the persuasivenessf thehypothesis. heaffirmativease has recentlyeensupportedyGreatrex1996,esp. 129-30),revisiting

Haury 1896: 4-19). Balazs 39-41, drawing ponBraun 1885: 20-21), grasped hepersuasivenessftheBelisarius-Brasidasarallel.On theGaza schoolsee alsoDowney1958, sp.314; idem1963:102-13, sp. 112-13;Evans1972:31-32; Litsas, sp.63-66.9Evagrius,Historiaecclesiastica4.12 (Bidez-Parmentier62). For referencesocomparableescriptionsn ateruthors,eeCameron 985:134 n.3.



6/40

ProcopiusndThucydidesntheLabors fWar 153inhabitantsf NorthAfricagainst heir andaloverlordsnthe trengthfanappeal to a sharedRoman dentity.n depictinghesebattles orhearts ndminds, owever,othThucydidesndProcopiusxpose he oldcalculations fMachtpolitikhat ie at theheart fsuch ppeals.Theinhabitantsf the nvadedterritoriesrepersuadedo be liberated, ettheirwelfare s not theforemostconcern fthe nvader. herespectiveates ftheThracianities fMende ndSkione t the lose ofthefirsthaseofthePeloponnesian ar Thuc.4.120-24,129-33,5.18,32) andNaplesattheoutset f theOstrogothic ar Wars 5.8-10) demonstrateheambivalencefbothfigures. orare thewould-beiber-ators hemselves ree romntanglementsith heir espectiveovernments.ntheend theprioritiesf the rulers t home,and notthose of thecrusadinggeneralshemselves,eterminehe bjectivesfthe onflict.The comparisonsrocopius stablishes etweenBelisarius nd Brasidasprovide thematic enter or rangeof issues mplicatednJustinian'swnclaimsto haverestoredibertyo theRoman nhabitantsf theWest.TheseLibyansand Italians, s Procopiusdesignates hem,were claimedby theinvadingasternrmy s Romans fold whohadbeensubjected o an aliensway following he barbarian onquests nd, havingbeen rescuedby theimperial orces,eturnedo theiregitimateovereign.rocopius'nvestmentnThucydides,ccordingly, aspolitical s wellas artisticndscholarlynchar-acter. His allusionsto Thucydides nd to the historiographicalraditionrepresentedy Thucydidesuthorizedrocopius' ffortso problematizeheretrospectiveustificationsffered or hereconquestfthe Westand to drawattentiono theplight fthird arties nmeshedngreat-poweronflict. othhistorians ppraisedgeopoliticalrelationshipsn termsof strategies faccommodationhatwere nfluenced otmerely ydifferencesfstrengthutalso bythenature ftheaffirmationsnd allegiances ne partywas seekingfromheother.nthework fbothhistorians,articularnterestttaches othetermsEAEUOEpIaand 8ouXEia- freedom nd slavery n Greek-whichfunctions thecoin ofparticularransactionsfpower, xpressingherelativeadvantage f one party veranother,hecongruityftheirnterests,nd thebasisuponwhich ooperationsobtained.TheJustinianic ontextThe clash of allegiances et in motionby Justinian'sssertion f imperialauthorityver heWest xposed larger ulturalndpolitical eorientation,neinwhich ormerategories fbelonging ndstandardsf nclusionwerebeingopportunisticallyediscoverednd ideologically ecast.JustinianrumpetedBelisarius' urprisinglyasyvictory ver heVandals ate ntheyear533 bothas a holywardirectedgainstArianpersecutorsf theindigenous rthodox



7/40

154 Charles . Pazdemikpopulationnd as a campaign f liberationedicated o restoringherights fRoman citizens ubjected o an alien despotism.10he opening fJustinian'sfirstNovel, dated 1 January 3511-some fifteen earsbeforeProcopiuscompletedooksonethroughevenof the Wars-linkstogetherhethemes fimperialriumphnd providentialavor hat adcrownedhe mperor's oreignpolicywith uccessNov.1pr. Scholl-Kroll]):

EvTIoXoXTIpE'vot;SlIIV 1TEpl TaS arraOT&S TnS rrOAITEiaspOVTlcX;aS, Kac [ oKpOVoC?v aipoUvvolS ?vvo?lv,&XK 6rcSav TElpoai [EV 1PE[P0IEV, BavbRoil aVv MaUpoUoiolslTraKOJOlEV,KapX8'vioi E TiV TraXa av &TrOXacO4VTESEXOlEV AExUeEpiav, T(aVOI TE VUV TrPC,TOV VTUOTTiV PcSaIC5.VyEVO6EVOI rrOX1TElaV ?v tiTrlK6OlS TEXOiEV (TOUTO OlTEp OvJ1TcA)KaI VUV lTrXiv ETrlTiS T?IETE?paS paOalEIas 8E8CA)KE PCA)aiots 6eE6S), ETUlppE'OlJO Kal iblCTlKai ppoVTiES -Trapa TCA)V IPETEPC)V

rrTr)KO&v Ql TrpoaaYyEXXO'IEVal, I)V EKaOT1 [?V1bOI?V TOV1TPOO11KOVTaTTUOV.

10Nov.78.4.1 (18 Jan.539; Scholl-Kroll 387): Kal yap ' TauTr)S EVEKa TT)STierOuvaS KaQlEr'l Aif3urSKal ETl TfiS EoirEpaS TT)XlKOUTOVS 1PapEea TrOVEIIOtS

VJTEPTE TT1S6Per)S TrPS OEEOVNS vTUEpTE TT)S TCAV TrnK`C)V EXEUVEpiaS ( For twas outof enthusiasmor his i.e., the mancipationfslaves]thatwe undertookuchgreatwars nLibya nd ntheWest, or he akeof both rue eliefn God andthe ibertyofoursubjects ). efense forthodoxyas an initialmotive or heVandalexpedition,accordingoProcopiusWars3.10.19).Eastern ommercialnterestseportedlyadaninterest s well (3.20.4-6). The chronicler achariahof Mitylene reditscertaininfluentialAfrican andowners n exile at the capital with stirring ustinian'sdeterminationo nterveneHamilton-Brooks62-63).CompareCJ 1.27.1.8 534 C.E.; Kruger1954: 77): ...cognoscant ius habitatores,quama durissimaaptivitatet ugobarbaricoiberatinquanta ibertateubfelicissimonostromperio egeremeruerunt... let he nhabitantsofAfrica]earn romwhatmostsevere aptivityndbarbaric oketheyhavebeenfreed ndwhatgreat reedomheyhavegainedunder urhappy ule ). f, s Honore oncludes nthebasisofstylometricanalysis1975; idem1978:25),this onstitutionascomposed yJustinianimself,heliberationhetorics tobe attributedllthemore oJustinian'swn nitiative,atherhanthat fhis ministers-all fwhom, rocopius laims, adopposed heexpeditionWars3.10.2-21;see also Lydus, e mag.3.43-55 [Wuinsch32-45]).Thedaring f Johnhe

Cappadocian,whoalone venturedoopposehimselfpenly othewillofhismonarch,callstomind he nterventionfthewiseadvisorArtabanosnbookseven fHerodotus,who similarly arned gainstXerxes'proposal or he nvasion fGreece Hdt.7.8-18;Braun1894:46).1 Onthe alue f uch refacesor econstructingustinianicdeology,eeMaas 1986.



8/40

ProcopiusandThucydideson theLabors of War 155

Eventhoughwe have been occupiedwith heconcernsf theentiregovernmentnd can take houghtfnothingf esser mportance,etinasmuchs thePersians requiescentndtheVandals, ogether iththe Mauri,offer ubmission,12he nhabitantsf NorthAfrica reenjoyinghe ncient reedomhey ave received,nd theTzani,nowfor hefirst imeunder hepower f theRomanpeople, re countedas subjects-a thingGod had not granted he Romans until ourreign-private oncernsddressednceasinglyyour ubjects re alsoreachings, oeachofwhichwe aregivingn ppropriateesponse.

The progression f thought s clear: underJustinian, ersia, an old foe,hadbeen neutralized, he alien occupierof Roman North Africa iquidated,and thenomadic peoples beyondthe reachofcivilization here ubdued; the conquestofa formerly ndependent eople'3 had, moreover, xpanded the authority f theRoman people in a wholly new direction, supplying furtherproofs of

12Compare ov. 30.11.2 18 March 36; Scholl-Kroll34), invokinghewars,&1' AW)ECA)KEV # lVO OEO6Srp0 TEfpoaS TE ayElV Eip1qV11V av8iXouS TE Ka'l AXavousKQI Maupouoiou& xElpcoacOal, Ka' A(ppIK#qV XiV Ka' TrPOE KQ1 I1KEX1QVKaTaKToaaOal.... ( throughwhichGod has allowedus to keep peace withthePersians, osubdue heVandals ndtheAlans ndtheMauri, ndto takepossession fallof Africa ndSicilybesides.... ). Promulgatedollowing elsarius'occupationf Sic-ily, tmakes xplicit ustinian'smbitionsor eestablishingirect ule ver hewholeofthewesternmpire. ee also C. Imperatoriam(21Nov.533, nnouncinghe ompletionof Justinian'snstitutes;ruger 963:xxiii);C. Tantapr. 16 Dec. 533, announcinghecompletionftheDigest;Mommsen ndKruger 3-14).13See also Nov.28 pr. 16 July 35; Scholl-Kroll13). Ambiguitiesegardinghejuridical tatus f such subjected eoplesare discussedby Goria309-13; Gaudemet1984, esp. 18-26; idem 1958. On the Tzani,a non-Romanizedeople dwelling nlandfrom heBlack Sea in themountainseyond rebizond,ee Braund 88-92;Adontz 9-53; Bury : 322 n.5; idem : 79; Rubin1960: 180,433n.432. Procopius escribes heirsubmissionin the520s) as a passagefrom arbarismo civilizationWars1.15.19-25;cf. 2.3.39): formerlyITo6vopoland subjects f no one, OtJBEVOSKaT'KOO1, theywere nduced o supply roops ndtoconverto Christianity,hus changingheirmannerof life to one of a gentler ort T1'V TE yap bialTaV ETrl TO r)[EpCOTEpOVPETaQaX6OVTES, 1.15.25; f.Aed. 3.6.7). ntheBuildings rocopiusaysgreatertress ntheir rimitivism,lassing hemnot only s aiITOvopolbutalso as avapXoi, peoplelackinggovernment3.6.1-2). Justinianstablished n infrastructurentended o keepthem n check 3.6.8), butto no avail; in the late 550s theyrebelled ndhad to besubdued nce again Agathias .1.2-2.5 [Keydell164-66]). On Procopius'use of suchethnographicaterial,ee Cesa 1982; Maasforthcoming;mory 65-95.



9/40

156 Charles . Pazdemikthe auspiciousnessf the reign.14 hese featsnot only vindicatedhe libertyostensiblyostbytheRoman itizensn Africa ollowingheVandal nvasion-an effect apable of being assimilatedwitha Roman captive's rightofpostliminium,hus ssociating ith heemperorheprestigef an emancipatorand redemptoraptivorum15-butlso supplied he nternationaltabilityndsecurityhat ermittedhe mperoroturn is attentionwayfrom is victoriousarms ndtoward hebusiness frespondingothepetitionsf hissubjects. hisgesture escribes continuousrcseamlessly nitingustinian'soreignnd do-mesticpolicy,making rma andleges equivalentnstrumentsf externalndinternalranquillity.

In other egislativeontexts ustinianrewupon he mancipationnalogyanddeclared heexpansion ffreedomo be an overridingurpose f hisruleandanobject f pecial oncern.6Twogreat ctsofreclamation,he ecoveryf14Compare J 1.27.1.6 Kruger 954: 77): quod beneficiumei antecessores ostrinonmeruerunt...ourpredecessorsidnotdeserve his avor f God [i.e.,the iberationofAfrica] ). n Justinian'sriticismsfhis mperialredecessors,eeHonore1978:22.15CJ .27.1.1: ..utAfricaer nostambrevi empore eciperetibertatem,nte entumet quinque nnosa Vandalis aptivata.... ( ...as Africa through ur efforts as receivedfreedom ithin shortime,fter aving or ne hundredndfiveyears reviouslyeenheld in captivityy theVandals.... ); forthechronology,ee Clover 1989: 57. CJ1.27.1.5: uo ergo ermoneutquibus peribus ignas eo gratias gerevaleamus, uodperme,ultimumervumuum, cclesiae uae iniurias indicareignatusstettantarumprovinciarumopulos iugo ervitutisripere? Withwhatwords ndwithwhat ffortscouldwe giveproperhanksoGod,who rendered e, hemosthumble f hisservants,worthyo avengethewrongs f his church, nd to rescuethepeople of so manyprovinces romheyokeof servitude? ). onorepoints ut 1978: 18n. 169) that helegalbasisofthe laimwas unrigorous.Onpostliminium,ee nst.1.12.5 Krueger 963:5) = Gaius, nst.1.129: i ab hostibuscaptus ueritarens, uamviservus ostiumiat, amen endetus iberorumropteruspostliminii:uia hi,qui ab hostibus apti sunt, i reversiuerint,mniapristina urarecipiunt Iftheheadofthefamilys captured y enemies, lthough e becomes heslaveofthe nemy,he tatus fthe hildrens insuspense ecauseofhis uspostliminii.This s true ecause hosewhohavebeencapturedythe nemyndcomebackrecoverall their ormerights ). s Wirszubski-7 emphasizes,ibertas epresentedboveallthe civil protectionsonferredy Roman law. On the statusof the redemptus,significantlyodified yJustinian,eeErnst evy, sp. 171-74.16E.g.,CJ7.24.1pr. 531-534C.E.; Kriiger 954:305): cum nnostrisemporibus,nquibus multos abores pro libertate ubiectorumustinuimus,atis esse impiumcredidimusuasdammulieresibertateuafraudari t, uodab hostiumerocitateontranaturalemibertatemnductum st, hoc a libidinenequissimorumominumnferri,ClaudianumC... conquiescerenposterumolumus.... Because nour imes,nwhich



10/40

ProcopiusndThucydidesn theLabors fWar 157Roman erritoryntheWestbymeansof hisvictoriousrms ndtherecoveryof Romanlaw throughhe compilationf the Corpus iuriscivilis and anongoingprogramf legal reform,eralded herestorationf libertas o theRomanpeople. In Justinian'sands, onsequently,reedom erved s a par-ticularly ersatileadgeofpoliticalndculturalnclusion,apableofunitingheputativeeneficiariesf nitiativess diverse s thereconquestfNorthAfricaand the formal brogation f the senatus consultum laudianum17n arecognitionfmutualdentityndshared articipationn egitimateovernment.Atthe ametime, owever,heemperor's eadiness, s evidencedmost tarklyin the openingsentenceof Novel 1 cited above, to refer hroughout islegislationo bothconquered arbariansnd Romancitizens ndifferentlyshis subjects Lat. subiectilGr.TiTlKOOI)18 suggests owtenuous uch theo-reticaluridical ndconstitutionalistinctionsf tatus adbecome.

Retrospectively,he motives nd objectives f Justinian's fricanwarachieved crystallineurity,nalloyed yanyequivocationver he egitimacyofVandalrule,19 r thewillingnessf thenotionallyaptive opulationo rallywe have sustainedmany aborsfor hesake ofthe freedomfour subjects,we havebelieved t tobe quite mpious hat ertainwomen houldbe deprived ftheir reedomand that hat atewhichhas been mposed y theferocityfan enemy gainstnaturallibertye likewise nflicted y the ustofthe vilest fmen,we wishthat hesenatusconsultum laudianum...houldhenceforthe in abeyance... );Nov.78.4.1 (supra,n.10);89 nr. I Sent. 39: Schoill-Kroll29).17CJ7.24.1 (preceding ote); nst. 3.12.1 (Kruiger 963: 35). Comparable hetoricadvanced he laim hat heoffspringfa colonus dscripticiusnda freewoman houldfollow he ondition fthemotherCJ 11.48.24 Kruger 954:443 andn. 1];cf.Nov.54pr.,1 [1 Sept.537; Scholl-Kroll06-07], 162.2 [9 June 39; Scholl-Kroll48],Nov.Appendix1 [7 April540; Scholl-Kroll 96]). See furtherollinet;Jones1958; idem1964:800-801; Eibach162-91;Bianchini;chmitz.18Justinianppears to have been the first mperor o refer onsistentlyn hislegislationoRoman itizens s hissubjects; eeThurman,ut f.Dupont, sp.326-28,whodiscovers omeinstancesn theprefaces nd epilogues f somepost-TheodosianNovels.See also Orestano 75-76; Goria296-302 and n. 74. In thecase ofcapitulatedaliens uch s theTzani, heir egenerationfstatus romCJTO6VOPOl oUJT1T1KOOtsupra,n. 13) wouldappear ohavemany f thesameconnotationsotedbyOstwaldfor heclassical period: the oppositionbetweenUlTrjKOOt and aC'TO6VOPOl is practicallyidenticalwith hat etween trTovojiia which enotesnotpolitical ndependenceutratherelf-determinationhich s predicated pon, ndto someextentolerated y,asuperior ower] nd iving nder he apXTofanotherower 13). See alsoBickerman328-35; Edmond evy, sp.256-70;Bosworth992, sp. 129.19Relations etweenheVandalkingdomndConstantinopleereregularized yatreatyetweenheVandalkingGeiseric nd theemperor alentinianII (imp.425-455



11/40

158 Charles . Pazdernikbehind the imperial tandards.20 he imperative f liberating he enslavedRomans f theformer esternmpire upplied nunimpeachable otive orpolicyof militaryggression,ne which esonatedarticularlyith hosewhofelt deep nvestmentn the pecifically oman haracterfthe tate, orwhomthe conquest of the West recoveredforRome what was Rome's.21 TheEAuEOEpia ustinianeserved or uchpersons istinguishedhemfrom therpeoplesbrought ithinhereach f mperialuthority22ndadvanced special,C.E.) in 442, subsequentlyeaffirmedyZeno (imp. 474-491): Clover 1982: 667-69,with efs. ee also n. 36 infra.

20Therealityf he aptivityxperiencedytheLibyans nder andalrulehad beenvariedmatter,nvolving ifferingegreesof dispossession nd inconvenience,sProcopius nderstoodWars3.4.1-3,5.11-17; cf.VictorVitensis .12-14 Halm4]); ontheVandal ettlementee Courtois 76-83;Clover1989.21 Rome ecame ubject otheRomans gain UlrrOPcopaioiS yEyoVEv),after spanof sixtyyears, rocopiuswrites f therecovery fthecityby BelisariusnDecember536 (Wars5.14.14;cf.EvagriusHE 4.19 [Bidez-Parmentier69]).John ydus oo canwrite hatJustinianrestoredo Romewhatwas Rome's (Tfi 8 'Pc PT T& 'P SaTrEOcWO)EV,e mag. 3.55 [Wiunsch 45]). LikewiseAgathias tatesthatProcopiusrecountedn theWars howSicily,Rome nd taly astoff heir arbarianccupiersndwere estoredotheirncient ayof ife '6ECt iTaTpiol0, pr., 0 [Keydell ]). See alsoCesa 1981,esp. 395-99.The inscriptionecordingowNarses, ibertaterbisRomaeactotius taliaerestituta,estoredhebridge verthe Anio on theVia Salariaoutside fRome CIL 6.1199a,565C.E.), testifiesothepotencyfsuchrhetoricvenat theveryendofthereign.22ElsewhereJustinians explicit n describinghe conquestof NorthAfricaasresultingn the nslavementftheVandals.Nov. 8.10.2 15 April 35; Scholl-Kroll4):...8' ' P63v a'tpoup'co -Tpoa Tn'V czpaitc,vyqv 'XaTTcW06tYav, &XXaaVUE TljIC) ai .EVCA.)VTrEpIopav T1I C4aC)VEaTjOOV X~Ailriv TE TracYaVvaKTT10apEVC)V Kat BavEiRouS KaTabovAXc aTc(V..... ..norarewe contento overlook hediminutionfRoman erritory,uthave recoveredhewholeof Libyaandreduced he Vandalsto servitudeinservitutemedegimus,ntheLatinversion fthe ext]....). The mosaic eiling ftheKhalkeGateoftheGreat alacelikewisedepicted hedefeated ingsof theVandals and the Goths approachingheimperialouple as prisonersf warto be deliveredntobondage : aTa 8E TO PEiCO0VECYTalIV O TE 3aOlXEVS Kal rj 3aati?s EEo8&)pa, EOIKOTEs ap)co yEyTiOl6aTE KalVIKrT'pIa EOpTaCOUcIV in' TE Ty Bav&iXcv Kal rFTCAV 3aOatEd, opuaXCTotSTE Kai a6ycAyfpoi5 Trap' aUTOVS TIKOVOt (Aed. 1.10.17); see Mango 30-35.;MacCormack 73. Compare Agathias' precis of Procopius' Wars pr., 24 [Keydell 8]):. .rE iEpa' TE TOV BavbRoV Kali KapXTIOva TiV TortV KaWTTV gutpraaavXC'pCV TCAqV Appcv...'IOUcYTl1VtavCp ouXvXcOF.cYaVat -rr6akvTTS 'PcopakvETrtKpaTEias gEpOS yEyEVTPEVTlv ( [One can learnfromProcopius'accountthat]Gelimer heVandaland thecityof Carthagend the wholeterritoryf Africaweresubjugated yJustinianndonceagainbecamepart f theRoman mpire ). o toothe



12/40

Procopius ndThucydidesntheLabors fWar 159andpotentiallyouble-edged,laimupontheiroyaltyndobedience.Theof-fensivegainstheOstrogothsn taly,wagedwithbjectivesomparableothoseof theVandalWar,wouldframe he ssue tarkly:o what xtent idtheRomancaptive's ntitlemento iXEAuEpiaentail positive uty o oin inthework fhisown iberation?Belisarius n theField,Part : Procopius'Vandal WarAlthough ustinianicropaganda uggestedfter hefact hat he Africanwareffectedn Anschluss hat ad healed he evered arts fan indivisibleealm,Procopius nhis narrativeftheVandalconflicts at pains to emphasize heextent o whichdisarray nd political-culturalifferencesithin heimperialexpeditionary orces themselvescompromisedBelisarius' mission andthreatenedo foreclosenypossibilityfcooperation ith heLibyans gainsttheir andaloccupiers. elisarius' ffectivenessnrisingbovethese imitationsrested ponthe force f hispersonal xample ndhisappealsto thepracticalbenefitsf olidarity,rocopiusuggests,ndnotupon he xtraordinaryowersdelegated o himby Justinianr anyparticularegard or he egitimacyndauthorityf imperial laimsoverNorthAfrica. hough heaccountvalorizesBelisarius' ssential ole n achieving ictory vertheVandals, hegeneral sinstrumentalhiefly orholdingncheck hecentrifugalorces hreateninghecohesiveness f his troops,whereas hemilitary ituation e confrontedsconditionedrimarilyy theVandals' ownmistakesndshortcomings.23hegeneral's wnconvictionsemainnaccessible;nstead hereader s left o drawconclusions rom hepublicpronouncementsrocopius ttributesoBelisarius,in which he atters depicted arefullyakinghemeasure fhisaudience ndrepresentinghenaturefthe mperor's ower ndthemotives fthe xpeditionaccordingly. he resultingccount aptures ot onlytheimprovisationalndcontingentharacterfanymilitaryxpedition,ut lso theelementsf expe-diency, pportunism,ndbrinkmanshiphat ontributedo theformationf afar-from-self-evidentmperativef mperialeunification.Thearmyssembledotakeon theVandalswas a small ndheterogeneousforce.24 he variety f its composition ould proveto be as significantTzani, ccording oProcopius n theBuildingsAed.3.6.6),wereupon heirapitulationaccepting orthemselves servitude ree from are, in exchangefor a dangerousliberty : .. TrpoTfl- UrtKlV&vO) AEuOEpiaq TTIV a6rovov BOUXEIav A\uEVOt aGiIC.23E.g., Wars3.19.25; see Pringle 1: 16-22.24Wars3.11.2-21. It numberedomefifteenhousand; f thesetenthousandwereinfantry,ith hebalance omprisedmainly fheavy avalry. goodproportionf thelatter ereBelisarius' wnretainers.heexpedition as supportedya fleet onsisting



13/40


14/40

ProcopiusndThucydidesn theLabors fWar 161rigor,heHunsobjected hat elisarius' ssertion fauthorityas illegitimate:as allies the disciplineof theirtroopswas theirown concern.28 uchinsubordination,hichdramatizedhecomposite haracterfthe entire orce,demonstratedow little he extensive owersconferredpon BelisariusbyJustinian29ould avail him nrespondingotheambiguous onditions n thegroundn NorthAfrica.30 ssembling hearmy nresponse o thiscomplaint,Belisarius ccordinglyet aside finer istinctionsf prerogativen order oemphasizeheplaceofustice, O 8lKalov, as a supersedingtandardfconduct(Wars3.12.11-21).Thecase athandmust tand s a lesson o theentirermy,he avowed: I will notregard nyone of you as a fellow-soldierf mine(auaTpaT1cOTTlv Euov), nomatter owterriblee is reputed obe against hefoe,who is notable to use cleanhandsagainst heenemy Wars 3.12.20).Belisariushus ppealed o the ssembledwarriorss a single orce, nited y acommonnterestgainst heenemy nd a shared ate.His authorityroceededabove all from is ownexample fmoral ectitudendself-restraint.Onthedayfollowinghe andingfthe xpeditionaryorces ntheAfricancoast, tCaputVada sometwo hundred ilometersromheVandal capital t

28Wars 3.12.10: ... EaCKOV OVUK ETrl Tt[ tapi, otis ETrt TWO UTEJOUIVOt ElvalPcwpaicov vo6[olts S gu[v axiav i KEtV (Ta yap BT1 oqCnv vopltua o0 TOMaOBE TCOVcpOvCOVrotEiOOat aS TiUEIS) Theydeclared hat hey adnot nterednto lliance norder o be punished, ortobe accountable o the aws of theRomans-fortheir wnlaws didnotprescribeuchpunishmentsormurder ).29HistitlewasOTpaTTlY0& aIJTOKpaTCOp. Procopiusemarkshat ustinian'srittenorders oncededwide-rangingowersofdiscretionndprovided hatBelisarius' ctswould be authoritative,as if the emperor imselfhad carried hemout. For theinstructionsonferred pon himthe powerof an emperor : pa6[paTa TE avlTC2aCaOlEuS EypacpE, bpav EKaCTa OTTl av auTc( 8OK1 aplOTa EXEtV, TaUTa TEKupta Elval aTE aJTOl PaotXEcoS avJTa btaETrUpay[IEvou. PaatXEoc0s yap aUTcp

pOlTfV Ta ypa'4paTa ETrroiE (Wars 3.11.20). On problems associated with militarydisciplinentheperiod, eeKaegi 1981:41-63.301ntheperiodof maneuveringetween he initialdefeat f theVandals at AdDecimum13 September33) andBelisarius' ecisive ictorytTricamarumome hreemonthsater, heVandalkingGelimer n. 36 infra) ttemptedo exploit hedivisionswithin elisarius'forces nd tounderminehebasis ofcooperation ewas establishingbetween imselfndthenatives. he ist fhisoverturesovarious actionsWars4.1.4-6), whichmetwith omesuccess, eads ikea catalogue fthedisparate roups roughttogethernder elisarius: hecitizens fCarthage,oldiers ftheArian aithervingntheRoman rmy, ndfinallyheHuns, till hafingnder he erms ftheirlliance.



15/40

162 Charles . PazdemikCarthage,31notherapse n disciplinebligedBelisarius o assemble he rmysecond time. A groupof soldiershad gone out of the camp and begunplunderinghe fields hereabout.n the speechhe addressedo his soldiers nthisoccasion,Belisarius ecalledhis earlier mphasis n theplace of ustice nthe conduct of operations:under any circumstances, e states, themisappropriationf goods would in itselfbe TO 6a8Kov. In the presentcircumstances,oreover,he njustice f theact was of less moment han hesheer eril o which hefolly fthe ctexposed he rmyWars3.16.3-4):

Eycoyap EKEiVCp iOVCp O OapptEv EXCXV Ei T'V yfv t4IaS-TUEp3ipaaa TaUTTlV, OTt TI&S Bav8tXot5 i A(PUES, P&4Laiol TO

aVEKaJEV OVTES, aiTltOTO' TE Eltl Kal XaXETUS EXOJOt, Kat OtaTOUTO CD[PIV CS OUT av Tt TCA)VaVayKait)V flp[aS ETltXEiTUOCUTE TI Et ETlBpO[irS KaKOV EpyaOOVTal Ci Ol E[UCI.a'Xa' vUv auJTTl u[IcAW Jp a'Kpa'TEta TauTa EiS TouvaVTiOV -lltV[ETaI3EI3XTIKE. TOUJSy'ap A/iI3uaS BlTTrOu KaTl\\agcTE TOISBav8itXot, Ei& u[&s a1JTOU'S Il8I T'V TOfTWV TrEptayayov-TES JUOcE'VEtlav.ForI havedisembarked ouon this andtaking onfidencenthisfact alone,that heLibyans, s Romansof old, are disloyal ndbitterlypposed otheVandals, ndcountingn this reasonedhatwewouldnotbe leftwithoutecessities,orwould he nemy o usinjuryunexpectedly.But now your lack of discipline has upset oursituation ntirely.oryouhaveundoubtedlyeconciled heLibyansto theVandals, irectingheir ostilityponyourselves.

With hese emarkselisariusnlargedhe ircle f shared nterestndself-identificationvenfurther.ust s previouslye hadurged hemembers fhisarmy oview their ortuness providentiallynterlinked,erehe attemptedoconvince themto view the Libyans as potentialcollaboratorsratherthan asopponents.heLibyanswere na positiono offerotentiallyecisive upport,if indeedthey ouldbe persuaded o feel somestirringf allegiance owardConstantinoplen thestrengthf an appealto a sharedRoman dentity.heirsympathiesouldnotbetaken or ranted.Belisariusnitiallyirected is forces gainst hecity fSullectum, hichstoodon theroad to Carthage. crupling gainst direct onfrontation,he

31TheVandalshadmeanwhileeendistractedyfortuitousevoltsnTripolitaniandonthe sland fSardinia; naware f theRoman hreat, elimer adrespondedtronglytothe econd risis y sendingroops nda fleet, ignificantlyiminishingheforces thisdisposal.



16/40

Procopius ndThucydidesntheLabors fWar 163general ispatched smallforce f infiltrators-hiswnbucellarii, nown yhimto be trustworthy-withrders o attempto enterndtakepossession fthecity y stealth.32s Procopius eports,heirnstructions,fthey ucceeded,wereWars3.16.9):

...KaKOV ILEvprlTEvEvuTfi bpacat, ETrayyEiRXaaOale ayaO6,uupia,Katc)S ETrH fI aUTCA)V EXEUOEpi'a TKOIEV, CA)CTE EIOlTfTTaTC) COTpaTCZ ES acTUV yEVEYO6al.

...todonoharmn t, ut oproclaimthousandood hingsnd hattheyhadcome ndefense fthepeople'sfreedom,o that n entryinto he itymight e affordedothe rmy.Theofficialst Sullectum, ho nanyevent acked hemeansofofferingdeterminedesistance,33eferredotheRomangeneral's ppealandadmittedhis forces.34espitethishappy utcome, owever,ne cannot ail to see thedisingenuousnessnBelisarius' rders35-theirstnstancenwhich heAfricanexpeditions describeds having iberations itsgoal-which, as Procopiusparaphraseshem,makehis invocation f 'EXEuOEpiahyperbolic nd coldlycalculating.36orshouldwe take his miss:generalsoutinelymployed eceit

32Theplanhadsomethingn commonwith he ttemptyThebes o wresthecity fPlataia nBoiotiafromheAthenianlliance nthe urprisehrust hich urreptitiouslyopenedthePeloponnesianWar Thuc.2.2-6; Hornblower991:236-37). Thucydides'account ftheresultingiege s a classicofthegenre: ee Cameron 985:39; Hunger26-27. Parallel itations fsiegenarrativesnProcopiuswere ollected y Braun1885:207-18); onProcopius' reatmentf ieges ee Adshead1990.33Vandalpolicywas to deprive hecitiesof Libya,exceptforCarthagetself, ffortificationsnorder odeny ninvader stronghold-incidentallyhepolicy dvocatedbySparta t theendofthePersianWars as a wayofforestallinghe fortificationfAthensThuc. 1.89.3-93.2).As a measure fprotectiongainstMauriraids,however,Sullectum aderected arrierso entrynto hetown nd was thus apable ofofferingsome light esistance:Wars .5.8-9,15.9;Aed.6.5.2-5.34Wars3.16.10-11: minglingwithsome rustics nteringhe cityat dawn,theinfiltratorsquietlyndwithoutrouble, tc,xrlfiKaI OU?EVl rrovco, ookpossession fthecity.Callingtogetherhecity lders,whichnotablyncluded he ocal priest,heyconferredhegeneral'smessage ndreceivedhekeys othegates fromwilling ands,irap EKOVTCA)V.35Cf.Rubin1954:138ad loc.36Equally ynical s the astofthreeetters,rotestinghedepositionftheVandalkingHilderic yhiskinsman elimer,aid tohave beendraftedyJustinianosupplypretext or heRoman ncursionWars3.9.10-13, 15-19, 16.12-14).Procopius laimsthat his hirdetter asmishandlednd never eenbyanyone fconsequence. rging



17/40

164 Charles . Pazdemikamong their echniques oravoiding he delay and expenseof a siege. Thebloodless ccupationf the ityhelped o ensurehat heRomanforces id notalienate heLibyans ntheirmarch o Carthage. he speedy apitulationf Sul-lectum paredBelisarius he necessity f puttingxpediencyefore rinciple.The nhabitantsfSullectumad hown ood ense ndecliningoresistheirwnliberation,ith llofthegrislyonsequencesuch betrayal ightave ntailed.Belisarius ndBrasidasBelisariuswas notobliged, herefore,o destroy ullectumn order o carryforward is workof liberation.o thecontrary,rocopius eportshatwhenBelisarius rrivedn the ityhe succeedednholding isforcesn check; s forthegeneral imself,hehistorianontinuesWars3.17.6):

... aUTOS TE TrpOTTTa37 Kai piXavOpc)irtav OXXfvEVBEtKVUVIEVOSUTCA TOUS A'tUas 1rPOG0ETroWIaaTO CACTE TOUXOtTrOU KaOalTEp EV XCA)Pq OIKE?i TTV TrOpEiaV TrOIGOdl, OVUTEUlTOXCOPOUVTCOVCOVTaV1Tl C,?KT?EVCV OVTE Tt a1TOKpU1T?cOaPOVXOuXoVCivV,xa\ Ka' ayopav iTaPEXoIIEVCAV Kat Ta a6XaTOIS GTpaTC&)Tats i, f3OUXOIVTOU1TrTpETOUVTCV.....making display fgreat ffabilityndbenevolence,e so wontheLibyansoverthatfrom hatpointonwardhe made his way as if n

theVandalsto abandon he usurper, ustinianpheld he treatyf Zeno andGeiseric(supra,n. 19) and intimatedhat t was the Vandals themselves ho werein thrall(3.16.14): Rally ogetherith s, therefore,nd oininthework f iberatingourselvesfrom o base a tyranny,o thatyoumaybe able to recover othpeace and freedom(OUVXXa6fEGE TOiVVV 1ThIV Kat GUVVEXEUOEpOUTE uiaS avUTOUS OIJTC)OXeTpa5T1JpaVVi'os, o`Tro5 V B&VfGOE TiS TE EipIVT)S Ka' Tf)S EXEUOEpiaS 6irrvaOai).The subtextsunsubtle:nyVandalresistanceoBelisarius' ampaignf iberationouldbeconstrueds collaborationith he oe, ndconsequentlys anabdicationfthe reatywithGeiseric.Opposition o the emperorwas thusopportunisticallyeinscribedsoppositionothe mperativef iberation.

CVvEXEVJOEpOUTE ere, heonly ppearance ftheverb nProcopius,orrelatesptlywith hewarningssued othe itizens fPlataiabytheSpartan ingArkhidamos,'VToiTE aUTOVOP1CCYOEKal TO1JS XXOUS UVVEXEUOEpOUTEThuc.2.72.1, he oleappearanceof theverb n the mperative;ee also 3.13.1,62.5,6.56.3), inkinghePlataian laim oself-determinationith concomitantbligationoparticipatengrudginglyntheworkof iberation,ndsuggestinghat lataia's lignmentith tyrannicalthensmountsoa renunciationf ndependence;ikeJustinian,rkhidamosoints oEXEVUOpcoEalss anethical nd political mperativehatentitleshe liberatoro construendifferencerresistances hostility.37See n. 39 infra.



18/40

Procopius ndThucydidesn theLabors f War 165his own and;forneither id the nhabitantsfthe rea withdrawordidtheywishto concealanything,utthey urnishedmarketndcompliedwith he oldiers n whatever ay hey esired.

The invadinggeneral's conduct, nd the cooperation e receivedinresponse, orm he basis of the comparison etweenBelisarius nd Brasidaswhich s preservedn the scholion n thetextofThucydidesitedabove (p.151). Brasidas, t theheadof smallforce peratingn Thrace rom24B.C.E.,succeededndetaching number fcitiesfrom heAthenianlliance, hemostnotable fwhichwasAmphipolis.38eflectingackupon hat eriod-inwhichhe himself, f course, played a conspicuousrole-Thucydides wrote thefollowingThuc.4.108.1-3):

Kai TOVS (VppaXOUS EcpO3OUVTO1T' a'oTrOTc3aV. o yapBpaaisaS EV TE TOeS 'XXOIS IETPIOV EaVTOV iTaPEIXE, Kai EVTOeSXoyoislTaVTaXOU1XOU CS EXEUVEp.)GCOZV 'V 'EXXabaEKITEWPOEIT.Kal ai ITOXEIS1Tuvvavo6lEvali TCOV 'ATvaivVUJT'KOOI TiS TE AlWppTOXEC)STIV aXCOGIV Kai a iTaPEXETai,T'V TE EKEIVOU 1TpaOTInTa,39 IaXIGTa &' 'inTpTIaav 'S TO~I,8 Ka .Tpos aVO Kp(p ,VECOTEpIEV, KI EITEKTIpUKEUOVTOpOS aUTOV KpUcp,EiTiTapiEVal TE KEXEUOVTES ai IOUXOIIEVOi aUTOI EKa(TOITUpC3TOIalTOOTfiVat.[The Athenians] lso fearedthat theirallies would revolt.ForBrasidas howed reatmoderationn hisdealingswithhem, nd wasconstantly eclaring n his speechesthat he had been sent toaccomplishhe iberationf Hellas. The cities ubject o the Athe-nians,whenthey earnedof the capture f Amphipolis nd thesettlement hichhad been offered hem, nd of the affabilityfBrasidashimself, ecameprimed or evolutionnd appealed o himdiscreetly, ntreating im to approach and contending mongthemselveso be thefirsto revolt.

Thucydides portraysBrasidas as a most un-Spartan Spartan, an almostPericleancombination f energetic nitiative, loquence and shrewdness.40

380n Brasidas'objectivesnThrace,eeKnight,sp. 154-57.39Hornblower1996: 342-43 ad loc., see also pp. 43-49) observes hat hisword,rrpaoTflTa, which escribes hemildness fbothBelisariusndBrasidas, ccurs nlyhere nThucydides.Thevocabulary euses about, rputs nto hemouth f,Brasidas,seems obedistinctive342).40He is described s avbpa Ev TE TTn 5TrapTIT 8OKOJVTa bpaCT'pIOV ETVai ES Ta1TaVTa (Thuc.4.81.1),recalling he uality ericles scribes otheAthenians est uited



19/40

166 Charles . PazdemikBrasidas' uccess npryinghe ities f Thrace wayfromhegrip f Athensaypreciselynhiscapacity opresent imselfs 8iKatoS KalatploS, a justandeven-handedellow.41 usticendmoderation,s we have seen,were also thewatchwordsfBelisarius.

In fact, hetactical bjectives f thetwogenerals,ach at the headof asmall expeditionaryorcefar from hemainarmies,were strikinglyimilar.Though heVandalsbroughtheAfrican arto a precipitouslosebychoosingto face the imperial orces n two pitchedbattles,42nd Brasidas'deathatAmphipolisemovedhe ast mpedimento thePeace of Nicias in 421 B.C.E.,both generals nderstoodhat he strugglewas ultimatelyorthe hearts ndminds f that ertiumuidamong hepartiesn theconflict,he nhabitantsfthe ocalities rom hich he ontendingarmachines erivedheir ustenance,who through timelyhange fallegiancemight avethrown he decision oone sideor theother. orbothBrasidas nd Belisarius hekeyto winninghisallegianceay nsubstantiatingheir romisesf iberationyrestoringformerdispensation.n either ase, an appealto a pastunity f interestnd identitybecame hebasisof demand or ollaborationndsupport.Belisarius ppealedto the legacyof RomanruleoverLibyaand to thelingeringelf-identificationmong heLibyans hemselvess Romans-whoseduty it was, therefore,o recognizethe authority f the emperor nConstantinoplendto participaten thereassertionf imperial ule. Brasidas,forhis part, ouldappealtothe egacy fpanhellenicooperationn thePersianWars.BywayofdefendingheGreek chievementgainst resurgencefdes-potism n thepartofAthens, e putforwardis own leadershipnd that fSpartaat thehead of a crusade n vindication f a shared nvestmentnEXEVOEpIca. In Brasidas'handsthetoposof liberation,erisivelynvokedbytheir lliestorouse heSpartanso thedefense f their ntrenchedeopoliticalinterests,43cquiredgenuine ransformativeower.As Thucydides otes,heto lead an empire 2.63.3; cf. 2.64.4). Thucydides lso testifies o his un-Laconiceloauence:n'v&E CE &8U'vaToS, Cc; AaKEbalp0vlOS, EITrETV4.84.2).4EaUTov Trapaaxcbv&Kalov Kal [ETp1OV E Ta iOXErS, Thuc. 4.81.2 (supra,n.6); cf.4.105.2. The moderationfBrasidas s a recurringheme; ee Babut431-33.Hornblower1996: 56) emphasizes owThucydidesndicates hat hiswas his ownjudgmentboutBrasidas.On the hematicalancebetweenhe wo sections4.81/108),seen. 48 infra.42Supra, .30.43See esp. Thuc. 1.18.1-2,69.1 (skillfullylluded o byProcopius t Wars2.3.34),84.1,2.8.4, attestingoSparta's raditionalostilityotyrannyndtheprestigehecityderivedfromt at thecommencementf thePeloponnesianWar;the importancef



20/40

ProcopiusndThucydidesn theLabors fWar 167was to make it his constant heme.44 ollaboration ithAthenswas to beresisted ot imply or ne's ownsake,but o as towithholdrom heAtheniansthemeans fadvancingheir lansfor omination.45ecauseneutralitybettedAthens, rasidas ouldnot uffernyoneo remain on-aligned.LikeBelisarius, rasidas ommanded small ndrather otley orce.46 etoo facedthechallenge fwelding n unruly oalition nto n effectivermyunitedby a communityf interestsnd objectives.The initial esponsehereceived mong hecities fThracehad,moreover, een a wary ne.His at-tempt o explainhis position o thecitizens f the first ityhe encountered,Akanthos-who responded o his arrivalby closingtheirgates to him-combined hepromisef iberationith hebarelyoncealed hreatfforce.Hissense ofmission ersuaded im hat isobjectivesustifiedmethodshatwerescarcelydistinguishablerom hoseof the imperialist,s he acknowledges(Thuc.4.87.4-5):

ou yap on EiKOTCOSy aV TaoE TrpaasoopEv, OUOE OpE'AO[EV olAaKE8apO'v1oI Wi KOIVOU TIVO& ayaOoi aiTi,a TOU'S POXOuApEVOUS EXEUOEpOUV-oUOa a &apXfiS EpIEPEOa, Tra0kai OE,ua22ov ETEPOuS OTUE1JO0VTES otS ITUEEiOuS axV aOlKOitEV, Elv4TUracOIv auTOVO[uav ETrtpEPOVTES upaS TOCJS EVaVTtOUpEVOUSTrEptiOIPEV.

Thucydides' wntestimonynpropriapersona to thisfact s rightlymphasized yHomblower1991: 113 ad 1.69.1; ee also idem1987: 181).Otherncient eferencesrecitedbyTuplin353 n. 20; see also Bemhardt, hoexploreshowSparta xploitedtsreputationo ustifytspower.Raaflaub 48-57. traces parta'sgradual bandonmentfits liberationropagandanthe courseofthePeloponnesianWar.On theappreciablevalue ofpublicperceptionndtheconcern fpoleis tomanage uchperceptions,eeCrane 18-19: thesurfaces f things,whetherhey re deceptive r not, have realimpact 19).44Most ullyrticulatednhisspeech efore kanthostobediscussed resently),utrecapitulatedtToroneThuc.4.114.3)and ater tSkione4.120.3).45See esp.Thuc.5.9.9:Brasidas'men tAmphipolisre toprove hemselves orthyallies of Sparta; healternative,partfrom eathor outrightervitude,s to becomesubjects fAthensand mpedimentso the iberationftherest ftheHellenes, oi18E XoiTroiS 'EAArCaICAuTa tSyEVEaOai E'AUvepCoaEWS.46Brasidas' orcewasbuilt round ninitial oreof1,700hoplites,fwhich 00 werefreedHelots ndtheremaindereloponnesian ercenaries,upplementedycontingentsofallies fromhe itieshebroughtver ohis side Thuc.4.78.1,80.5). See Connor128n. 46. ForBrasidas' forces t Amphipolis,ee Thuc.5.6.4-5. AtAmphipolis rasidaswas skeptical bout hequality fhismenagainstAthenian oplites5.8.2-3). On theepisode, eeBoegehold,sp. 150.



21/40

168 Charles . PazdemikWe Spartans ouldnotbe acting ightly,orwouldwe be obligedto liberate eopleagainst heirwill,werewe not motivatedor he

sakeof the ommon ood.We do not ongfor mpire;n factwe arekeen to puta stopto it; and we shouldbe slightinghemajorityif while offeringndependenceo everyonewe shouldoverlookyour pposition.Like the itizens f Sullectum,heAkanthiansltimatelyeceived rasidasandhisarmy, paringhemselveshe xperiencef being iberatedgainst heirwill.47As withBelisarius t Sullectum,ne nonethelessotes n theclaimsofBrasidas n uneasy ension etween rinciplendexpediency,ndwonders o

what engthsithereneralmight avegonehadhis demands eenmetwithesscompliance. hucydides imself s farfrom nequivocal bout thevalue ofBrasidas' promises.He pointsout thatmuch of whatthe citiesof ThracediscoverednBrasidas roved o be illusory.he Thracians ere o captivatedbythe Spartan's tyle nd dashthat hey nderestimatedhepowerofAthensandtheir wnchances.48NordidBrasidas'fierce esistanceo theAtheniansind ealresonance iththeSpartanst arge,whoatthat articularointn thewar ought ot o much

the liberationf Greeceas merely n armisticend timeto recover heirequilibrium.49rasidas'brilliance nd successhad made him an object ofsuspicionnd ealousy t home.50 espitehis success n iquidatingheVandal

47For he xpression,ee Raaflaub 52.48Thuc.4.108.3-6. At SkioneBrasidaswas voteda goldcrown s the iberatorfGreece ndfetedn themannerf a victoriousthleteThuc.4.121.1). On therelationbetweenThuc. 4.108 and Thucydides'earlier and, as some have thought,essambivalent)ssessmentf Brasidas 4.81), see Connor 33-35: having eardBrasidasatAkanthosndseenhim naction, hereaders nowpreparedor more xplicit ndmore riticalnalysis f Brasidas' laims 134). Thucydidesidnot egard im s beingaboveoutright isrepresentation4.108.5,cf.4.85.7).On Brasidas' naccuraciesnthesepassages, ee Gomme : 553-54,583;alsoHunter19-75, sp. 162.49Sparta'sambivalence oregroundshucydides' ccountof Brasidas' expedition(4.80.1,81.1). On Brasidas'relationshipith heSpartan overnment,ee Homblower(1996: 268-69,also 50-61) who argues hatBrasidas'claim hat partawillrespect heautonomyfthe placeshe winsover Thuc.4.86.1, cf. 88.1) implies hathis policyobjectives adreceived etailed onfirmationt home.Aboveall, therecoveryftheSpartiatesapturedn the sland fSphakteriaasof criticaloncern4.108.7 forwhichseethe ollowingote]; .15.1, 8.7).50Thuc. .108.7: the partansid nothingosupport im, artlyecause heireadingmenwereealous ofhim q)0ovco Trr6 CWVTpCXTC,V &v8pcbv), partly ecausewhat



22/40

ProcopiusndThucydidesn theLabors f War 169regime,Belisariuslikewiseremained n ambivalent igure, xposed likeBrasidasbeyond hehomefrontnd removed rom hewelter f homepolitics,effectivelyursuingn independentoreign olicywhich t somepointhad tobe reintegratednto he arger icture. ike Brasidas,Belisarius' onspicuoussuccess had made him an object of suspicion t home. The generalwasdenounced o the emperor s plottingo establishforhimself kingdominLibya.51The larger ftermathf theVandalWar,moreover,inted t someof thecomplexities hich emainedo be resolved ntheneworder nauguratedyJustiniannthe West. The durabilityf the settlementelisarius chieved nLibya withhis calls for iberationnd his Brasideanmelding f usticeandmoderation as placed in eopardybythe mperial dministratorsho cameafter im and by Justinian'snsensitivityo thediverse nterestso be foundthere. hucydidesemarksf Brasidas hat e wonsuch n excellenteputation,as a Spartan,hat e left ehind im he onvictionhat ll theotherswereustlike him Thuc. 4.81.3)-a hope soon disappointed.ossibly heLibyanswerebetternformedboutwhat ay nstore or hem,ut o ittlevail.52

Procopius mphasizes hefragilityf the situation. ven in the flush fvictorycarcely hreemonthsfter he xpedition epartedrom onstantinople,following is nitial out ftheVandal rmytAdDecimum,he enthmilepostout from arthage, elisariushad not abandoned is doubts bout either hediscipline f his armyr the oyalty f theCarthaginians,hose ympathiesortheVandalshad yet o be gauged.Havingmarched o the ityunopposed, iththeyreallywantedwas to recover heprisoners aptured n the islandand to endthe war-5ICharges which wereundoubtedlyuoyed by reports hatBelisariushad seatedhimselfn Gelimer's hronenCarthage nd dined this table Wars 3.20.21,21.1-6).Such an offerwouldactually e tendered ythe Goths n Italy 6.29.18-20, 26-28,30.25-26); on thenegotiations,ee Wolfram49-50 andn. 670.520ppressivemeasures nforced y imperial reasury fficials nd persecutionfmembersftheArian aith,omprisinggoodproportionfthe mperial orces n NorthAfrica, recited s contributoryactors o the violentmutinyhat ruptednCarthagewhile Belisariuswas engagedon the Vandal campaign:Wars 4.8.25, 14.8-15; onArianismnAfrica ee Kaegi 1965.Procopius ommentsn the cale of thedestructioncaused byJustinian's esternampaignsn boththe Wars nd theAnecdota. ee inparticularWars .28.52,the oncludingentencefhishistoryftheVandal War: andso itcame topass that hose f theLibyanswhosurvived, ew s theywere nnumberand exceedingly oor,at last found omepeace ; cf.8.17.22; HA 6.25, 18.3-12. Hisjudgment ppears o have beenexcessively arsh: ee Pringle : 114; Cameron1989:176-78;Moderan.



23/40


24/40

ProcopiusndThucydidesn theLabors f War 171generosityhatmadehim focus f attractionndtheruthlessnessf whichhewascapable.Had such a mixofprinciplendpragmatismeen morewidely racticed,Procopius eems to conclude, hereconquestf NorthAfricamight othaveproved hehollow riumpheultimatelyudgesit to havebeen.Thehistoriancredits elisariuswith avingchieved glory ever efore ttainedythemenofhistime nor venbyanyone f the ncients Wars3.21.8),notonaccountofhisgeneralship,ut n ight f the ranquilntryf histroopsntoCarthage,whorefrainedromhe ustomaryxcessespracticedyvictoriousoldiers.Noinsultwas offered, o interruptionn theflowof daily ife and commerce;rather,na capturedity, ne whichhadexperienced change fgovernmentand a shift f allegiance (Ev &XoUOCFoTOrXEI aclTToXITEiav PETacaXoUO1G KaiIaOIXEIcaV XXcaaxEviq), itcame aboutthatno one's householdwas excludedfromheprivilegesf themarketplace3.21.10). Such a seamless ransitionfpower, ad tendured, ight averealized or he iberatednhabitantsfNorthAfricallthebenefitsfwhich heirovereign adboasted nhis egislation.

Belisarius ntheField,Part I: NaplesBesiegedDespite heprominencerocopius ssigns oLibyan ollaborationnsupportingthe mperial ictory ver heVandals,we see theLibyans nly nthemass andonly t a distantemove.On one level this s a vindicationoth fBelisarius'strategy, hichwas to insulate he nativesas muchas possiblefrom hedepredationsfwar, ndoftheLibyans' wncanninessnsensinghe urningfthe ide nfavor fthe mperialorces. ut heresconsequentlyittle osuggesthow the Libyansthemselvesmighthave viewedthe issues at stake in theconflict.With heGothicWar it is otherwise:n a conflictharacterizedystalemate, yviolentwings fmomentum,nd byextended iegesoffortifiedcities, henativepopulation ad a moreconspicuous artto playand theirloyaltiesssumed fargreaterrominence.nparticular,rocopius' ccount fBelisarius' eluctantiege ofNaplesfurnisheshehistorian ith nopportunitytorevisit he hemes fpolitical llegiancendculturaldentityetreatednhisaccount ftheVandalWar.HeretooBelisarius'Brasidean uplicitousnessndambivalenceakes na sharperdge, s thedistinctionsetween he mperativesof iberationndconquest ecome ncreasinglyifficultomaintain.The initial,scendanthase of the talian ampaign,marked yBelisarius'capture nd successful efense fRome54 nd theeventual urrenderf theGothic apital tRavenna othe mperialorces nMay of540,waswagedwith

540n theThucydideanoloringfthis pisode, eeAdshead 990.



25/40

172 Charles . Pazderniktheself-assurancend clarityf purpose indicatedy theAfricanwar.55Butthe ituationnItalywas complicatedy thegreateregree f cooperationndconcord hat istinguishedstrogothicelations ith heir ubjects romhoseoftheVandals, ndalso bythepresencefthe enate ndthepapacy t Romeasinstitutionalnd deological ounterweightso the mperialeatat Constantino-ple.Procopius imselfxpresseddmirationor heGothic chievementn taly.He eulogizesTheodericheGreat s inname tyrantTvrpavvos), ut n factan emperoraO3IXEVES)o less trulyhan nyof thosewhohavedistinguishedthemselvesn that ffice romhebeginningWars5.1.29).56na waythat asnoparalleln theVandalWar,hisaccount ftheGothicWar s suffused ithconsciousness f the road not taken, sense of loss stemmingrom heunexploredossibilityf a lasting asisof accommodationetweenhe talians,the Romans of the eastern mpire, nd the Goths. Underthe polarizingconditionsfgreat-poweronflict,ncontrast,talian oyaltieswouldprove obe surprisinglyupple ndcalculating.After he diplomatic retexts oraggression ad been set in place,57Justiniannstructedelisarius o invade talyand to treat he Gothsas theenemy,cbS TTOXEpI'01 (Wars 5.7.26). Belisarius crossed the straitof Messinaand landed n Italywithoutncident.58he first ityhe encountered hose

55Thus he uthorf thefirst ortion??1-5 inDuchesne's dition) f thebiographyof popeSilverius536-537C.E.) in theLiberPontificalis,ritingnthe540s,canrelatehowJustinian isitVilisariumsic]patriciumum xercitumt iberaretmnemtaliama captivitatemothorumSilverius 2, Duchesne1: 290). On thedateofthismaterial,see Hildebrand 16-17; Duchesne1: xxxix-xli.For LP's accountof the siege ofNaples, een.77 infra.56On Ostrogothicoliticaldeology,eeAmory 0-59,esp. 55-57 on the nvocationof libertas n Cassiodorus'Variae;also Moorhead1987.On theGothic ettlementnItaly, ee thesummaryf scholarshipivenby Amory 7 n. 12. Bornmann 40-47discussesProcopius'udgmentfTheodericndadduces everalThucydideanarallelsinhis text, otablyrom hucydides'bituaryfPericles. rocopius, owever,elies nmanyof thesesame elementsn his eulogy of Belisariusfollowing is returnoConstantinoplen 540 Wars7.1.1-24);supra, .7.57See the summaryf the historyf the conflictuppliedby Amory -12. Thesituationn talywasstabilized nly n554,whenJustinianssued hePragmaticanctionestablishingheform fgovernanceor heprovinceNov. Appendix , Scholl-Kroll799-802). See Jones 964:291-92. The offices fthewesternourt,which heGothshadpreserved, ereabolished; hus nydoubt hat herewas to be butone center fempirewasremoved. nthe onsequencesor hewesternristocracyeeBrown,sp. 1-60; Barnish;lsoStein 17-18.58Onforces eployed or heGothicWar, ee Hannestad;lsoLiebeschuetz 996.



26/40

ProcopiusndThucydidesn theLabors f War 173positionwasdefensiblendwhich ontained considerableothic arrison asNaples.Encampingeforehewalls, hegeneral eceived delegationromhecity, eadedbya certaintephanos, trainedratornd, twould merge,uiteas capable as Belisariusnmanipulatinghepolitics fRoman dentityohisownadvantage.59he speechhe delivered oBelisarius rging im opassbythecityseized therhetoricalnitiativey appropriatinghevery ermswithwhichBelisariushad ustifiedhe Vandalcampaign.n Libyathegeneralhadunderscoredoth heprincipledndthepracticaldvantagesfobservingusticeandencouragingheLibyans oembrace he mperialorces s fellowRomans,andthus oexposethemselvesotherisk fVandalreprisals.heNeapolitans,in contrast,ppeal to a sharedRomanidentityn a plea to be spared theconsequences fshiftingheirllegianceWars5.8.7):

OU biKala ToiE&s,C) OTpaTTIyE, Er' a6vpaS 'PcopaiouS TE KaiOUJEV alKOUJVTaS CTpaTEVUCV, di rOr6XV E PlKpaV OIKOJIEV Kal3ap,a3pcov 8ECTrOT6.)V ppoupav ExoPEv, COOTE OU8'aVT1lTpatai, TIV E6 E CO)[EV, E T'lV EIVai.You do notpracticeustice,general,ntaking hefield gainstmenwhoareRomans nd havedonenowrong,who nhabit smallcity

andhavea garrisonfbarbarianss masters,o that t snotfor s toact nopposition,ven fwe shouldwish o do so.Procopius adfocused ponthedifficulty,ntheVandalWar,ofshapingthe Roman expeditionaryorces nto a bodyunitedby a commonalityfinterestsndoutlook,apableofrecognizingheLibyan nhabitants,ndbeingrecognized nturn, s alliesandfellow-countrymenatherhan s aliens.TheNeapolitanttemptotrade pon nacknowledgedomandentityn a bidto bespared he onsequencesfshiftingheirllegiance-lessoutofenthusiasmor

Gothic ule,perhaps,han npursuinghecourse fleastresistance,nview ofthegarrisonwithinheirwalls60-deftlyurnedhetablesbackon Belisarius.The generalwas free o construeheNeapolitans' nwillingnesso undertake59Bornmann47-50 compares hisexchangewith thatbetweenArkhidamosndthePlataiansnThucydides.nparticular,f.Thuc.2.71.1-2 andWars .8.7 cited nthemain ext); lsoThuc.2.72.2andWars .8.8-9.See alsosupra, .36.601n contrast,he cities of Bruttiumnd Lucania, whichwere unwalledand

undefended,went over to Belisarius readily (Wars 5.8.2): KaTa EXOOSTO FOTO&.V[aXlCTa T1i lTapoC'cY 'pXi cbS TO EiKOS, flXOOVTO ( they were, owing to theirhostility ortheGoths,understandablyll-disposedoward hepresent egime ). n asubsequentiege heGothic ingTotilawouldhailtheNeapolitans orhavingmanifestedthegreatestoyaltyE1uvoIa)otheGoths mong llthe talians7.7.12).



27/40


28/40

ProcopiusndThucydidesn theLabors f War 175against heirwill,butBrasidas'cavalier reatmentf thedilemma acedbyanydependencynmeshedngreat-poweronflictemonstratedis indifferenceotheir light.Theexperiencesftwo such cities n thePeloponnesianWar,Mende andSkione, ointed o theunsavory utcomeswaitingminor owerswhosereachexceeded heir rasp.62 ponBrasidas'refusal ohand ver he ities nder heterms f an armistice,63he Athenians owedto counterattackorthwithndvoted,on themotion f Kleon,to destroykione and putits inhabitantsodeath.64 espitehis consciousnessfthe mpending thenianeprisal,rasidaswas able to leaveonly light overing orce s protection,hilehe with hebulkof his forcesoined an expedition ithhisallyPerdikkas f Macedon.65Duringhis absence, heAtheniansecaptured ende by storm; hecitywassacked,and a massacreof its inhabitantsnlynarrowlyverted.66kionewas investedndheld outthroughheconclusion fthePeace of Nicias,theterms fwhichgave the Athenians freehand to deal with hecity s theywished.Upon thefallofSkione hemenwereput odeath,nd thewomen ndchildrennslaved.67

620n theirfates Thuc. 4.120-24, 129-33; 5.2.2, 18.7-8, 32.1), see thedetaileddiscussionnConnor 34-40. As hepoints ut 136 andn. 71),theultimateestructionofSkionewasone ofthemost otoriousventsnthewar.63Thucydideseportshat tSkioneBrasidas ongratulatedhe nhabitants,ince theyhad come forwardo claimtheirfreedom,nd had notdisgracefullywaitedsomepressureo be broughto bearuponthem egarding matter o obviously oncerningtheir wngood Thuc.4.120.3). As Homblower1996: 379 ad loc.) points ut, this snotvery olite boutAkanthos ndtheother itieswhichhadcapitulatedoBrasidas.Mendewasencouragedn tsrevolt y he xample fSkione4.123.2).64Thuc. .122.6.Onthedecision,eeBosworth993:37n. 37.65Thuc.4.123.4f.Bosworth 993: 37 n. 39 and Gomme3: 612 ad 4.124.1 drawattentionoBrasidas'poorudgment.66Thuc. 4.130.6: Kal pO'I6 0i OTpaTTIYO'l KaTEOXOV C OTE P[ Kal TOUsavOpc'rouS laqO6EipEaGal.Thecityhadbecomedivided yfactionaltrife,nepartyfavoringAthensand the otherBrasidas; see Connor 137 n. 76. The Atheniansaccordingly eturnedheir artisans,resumablyemocratsHornblower996:406 ad4.130.7), to power.Factionaldivisions imilarly layeda part n theconduct f theNeapolitans towardBelisarius. On the problems of reconstructinghe politicalcomplexionf suchdivisions,ee Moorhead 983:576and n.5; cf.Amory 45n. 194,165-94. ee alsoThompson8-100; iebeschuetz996: 33.67Thuc. .32.1.



29/40

176 Charles . PazdemikLike BrasidasbeforeAkanthos, elisarius eplied o theprotestationsfpowerlessnesse received romNapleswith call to freedomndthebarelyconcealed hreatf forceWars5.8.13):

8E'a0OE TOIVuV TI) rroTEI TOV DalECS OTpaTOV ETl TI)E2.EUOEpiQ J[LCpA)VE KaWTCA)V %XCA,)VITaXicoTCA)VIKOVTa,68 Kal)TI a TraVTCOVavlapoTaTa ip' i,uiv scE%J1E.Receivethereforentoyour ity he army f theemperor, hichhas comefor he ake of your reedomnd that f theother talians,and do not choose to bring he mostgrievousof all outcomesuponyourselves.

Inasmuch s either apitulationr resistance ould nvolve heNeapolitansin conflictnd exposethe ity orisk, hedecisionwas theirs:hould hey idewith he nvadernd affirmreedom,rkeepfaithwith heGoths nd confirmtheirervitude?husBelisarius ut hemattero StephanosWars5.8.14-15):0001 [1EVyap BOuVE'iavT) C'XO Ti a'vavOpEVOI TcoV ai0Xpc&VE r6EpOV XCOPOUOlV, OUTOl BT EVYE TCp ay&)Vl ETJPLEpOUVTESEUTUXr1paTa Biirka EXOvJl, UV TI) ViKI) Kai TTIV TC.V KaKC.V'E2EVuEpiaV KTTlOa[EVOl, Kai qlOOCA[EVOl qEPOVTal Ti aUTOISrrapaplXUOIOV,TO P[11EKOVTES Ti XEpOVI ETrE0Oal TVJXTI. IS 8Tarpov a[La>XI)Ti E%AEuOEpoISElVai, oi be oTrcA)ST1V BOukEiav3 ,arov 'Eouviv Es ayCzva KaOiOT&.VTai,69 OUTOI B KaiVEVIKTIKOTES, aV OVTC& TVXOI, EV TOls aVayKalOTaTOiSEoaqxaXIlaV, Kali KaTa TI)V PaXTIV E'Xa6O0vco TI E'3OVAOVTOaTTaUagaVTES gUV TI) a'XXT KaKo&laPOVi'l Kal T-%VaTrO TflSI1a0T1S (uvioppav 'E'UoviThosewhogo towarattemptingo divest hemselvesromlavery

oranyother isgracefulhing njoy twofold oodfortuneftheyprospernthe truggle,ecause ogether ith heir ictoryhey avewonfreedomromheir ffliction;ven f defeatedhey raw omeconsolationor hemselves,nsofars they ubmit o an adverse ate68Anecho of thepronouncementelisarius nstructedis lieutenanto deliver tSullectumWars 3.16.9,cited upra, . 163); cf.Brasidas, tAkanthos:UK Er'I KaKc,' EVOEUOEp&OE1 E TC.V 'E2N2vwv rapE2XuvOa Thuc. 4.86.1); and thePlataianreproachothe partans:TrlhOuXEi T1 TETEp(, IlKETE (2.71.3).69A comparablemage ftheperversityftoiling o secure ne's ownenslavementsevokedbytheCorinthianstthe econd lliedcongresstSpartaThuc.1.121.5): howappalling o imagine hat,whiletheir llies neverstop bringingn contributionsomaintaintheirown slavery 'rrI BOVAEia, TI aT)V Ep'VTES 0UK aTrEpOlOIV), we,whose ims revengeancendsurvival,hould esitateo ncurxpense....



30/40

Procopius ndThucydidesn theLabors f War 177against heirwill. But thosewho have theopportunityo be freewithoutighting,etenter nto strugglen order o establishheirslavery n a stillfirmeroundation,ail n the most rucialrespecteven fthey revail; nd ifthey are nthebattle ess happily hantheywished, ogether ith heir ther lls theywill experienceheconsequencesfdefeat.

Bycasting apitulationo the mperors a bid for reedomhatmightvenbewonwithout trial farms,nd cooperation ith heGoths s anembrace fslavery,70elisariusmerely ignaled is ndifference,ike hat fBrasidas t thepredicamentf MendeandSkione, o theplight ftheNeapolitans, hohad tocontendwith ither hepossibility f reprisal ytheGoths ftheywentoverto the general r thedanger fmaking imtheir nemy. n theabsenceof apositive ffirmationromhe talians is callsfor iberationellflat. hould heGothic arrison emainnthe ity ndattempt ith he upport fthepopulaceto oppose hisentry,elisariuswas adamanthatno quarter ouldbe granted.Like BrasidasbeforeAkanthos,71e would leave thedecision n thelap ofdivinityWars5.8.17):

CDS, fV TOUTC,)V a1TraVTCv aUTOI TE Kal UIEls aAEArj0aVTESo0Trra1?IiV aVTaIpElV TO24rJGTIiTE, aVayKTj KaI Tas, IV 6EOsOEXT, T(2) TPOOTUXOVTI C' 1TO2EgIUCprlOOal.Know that if both you [Goths] and they [the Neapolitans],disregardingll theseconsiderations,are to raisearms gainst s,we shall find tnecessary,f God so wills, to treatwhomever eencounters anenemy.

By affirmingelisarius'willingnesso regard oncompliances hostilityand to treat othGoths ndItalians ndiscriminatelys theenemy, rocopiusvergesupona potentiallytunningransformationfBelisarius'positionwithrespect o his Thucydideanounterpart.he moment nvites he reader to

70Atthe endof his speech,Belisariusmakes ertain uaranteesiftheNeapolitansshouldresolveto choose thecause of theemperor nd thusto be ridof so cruel aslavery, Ta TE PaaiXE'c, iaO6al Ka'lBOVAEiaS OUTcS XaNE-r11&S6aTrX Oa' (Wars5.8.18); cf.BrasidasThuc.4.87.3)BOVAEktaSrarcxaayfivai.71LikeBrasidas s well Thuc.4.86.1),Belisarius ivespersonal ledges nbehalf fthe oaths worn or heobjectives f theexpedition; ressed orfurtherssurances, epoints Wars5.8.27) tothe xperience fthe icilians,towhose ot thad ately allen oexchange arbarianyrantsor he egitimateule 3aoalXEiav) fJustiniannd to be freemen undisturbedy any difficultyE'XEVEpOpl TE E?ival KaW &rraEatO UGKO62COVaTraVTCOV).



31/40

178 Charles . Pazdemikreconsider ll that has transpirednd to ponder the consequencesofnoncomplianceor oth heNeapolitans ndBelisarius imself.o play heroleof thebeguilingiberators to wager hat ne's promises,ndespecially ne'sthreats, illnever e put othe est. n the ndBrasidas'objectivesweremerelynegative,nd destructive:n order o succeed he neededmerely o denytheAthenianshe resourcesheydrewfrom heir mpire n Thrace.72 implybyobligingAthensogo to the roublend the xpense f reassertingts authorityover ts ubjects, hich requentlyntailedheir estructionndthe oss of theirtribute,e advancedhispurposes. elisariuswas instead he champion f animperial rder,mployingactics hatwerenot ess coercive r potentiallysbrutal s those owhichBrasidaswas also preparedo resort,utweredirectedtoward differentbjective.The imperialistmeans to shear the sheep,not to slaughterhem, ndattemptso calibrate isviolence n a mannerhatwillcompel bediencewhileminimizingoss. As therepresentativef an imperial ower reassertingtsdominionverformerependencies,elisariuswasobliged,n view of Naples'failure oreturnoallegiance,o construehat ct as a gesturefrebellion,nd,like theAthenianstMende and Skione, o punish hecity ccordingly.heproblem,s Thucydidesapturedtfor ll time n theMytileneebate,73showto gauge the instrumentalalue of an atrocity. avingfailed s a Brasidas,might elisariusucceed s a Kleon?

WithinNaples itself,Procopiusreports, pinionabout Belisariuswasdivided.The pro-Gothicpposition enouncedhe mminenturrenderf thecity s an act of treason ndwarned hat nthe farfrom ertain) ventof aRomanvictorynItaly uchdisloyalty ouldcause Justiniano dominatehemandset a garrisonver hem oless than heGothshaddone.74 inding owayto escape theconsequences f betrayal, bid to openthecityto Belisariusfaltered;hegeneral ommencedhe iege,butto no effect. he stalemate as

72Apointdriven omebyBrasidas tAkanthosThuc.4.87.3). See furtherallet-Marx172.73See esp.Thuc.3.39.8 Kleon)and3.46.3 Diodotos).74TheoppositionnNaples was headedby two figures, astor ndAsklepiodotos,whomProcopiusdescribes s oratorsp 'TOpES), and notables Moyipoi), nd whofavoredheGoths Wars5.8.22).Their udiencesncludeGoths 29). TheJews nthecity,forwhomJustinian'sheocraticbsolutism ould hold scantappeal, likewisesupportedheGoths 41). Thepro-Romanactionwasheadedbytheenvoy tephanos,himselfXoyipoS 6-7), and a SyrianmerchantamedAntiokhos20-21), who wasperhapsa representativef the same Easterncommercialnterests hichstronglyencouragedheLibyan ampaignsupra, . 10).



32/40

ProcopiusndThucydidesn theLabors f War 179broken nlywith hediscoveryf a secretpassageinto thecityby way ofanaqueduct.Belisarius efused,owever, oexploit isadvantage eforemaking finalappeal oStephanosobringbout capitulation.vokinghedire pecterftheurbs apta, city ubjectedostormndsack,75 elisarius' lea pointed eyondhisreluctancetsheddingnnocentloodto a sharedwayof ife nd a commonculturehreatenedith estruction.ictoryt such cost, he ndof civilorderand of civilizationtself, hreatenedo repudiateheprinciples alidatedbyBelisariusnhistranquilccupationfCarthagesupra, . 170). Such a spec-tacleofundeservedufferingvoked ity,76 hich shareddentity ade llthemore cute Wars5.9.27):'r6Xtv ' papXaiav Ka'l oiK1TopaS XploTlavouS TE Kal. Pcogaious a'cVOEv ExO1cJaV S TOVTO TUX1S OVK av Euvaiipqv,

a'XXS TE Kal Unr' ioOT Pcopaicov OTpaT1yOJVTOS, E'ElV....I praythat n ancient ity,whichhas of old been inhabited yChristiansndRomans,maynotmeetwith uch fortune,speciallyatmyhands s a commanderfRoman roops....

But theNeapolitans ereunpersuaded.For, Procopiusoncludes,itwasnot fatedthat theNeapolitans should become subjects of the emperorwithoutchastisement, oiE& yap fiv NEaTroM;TaS aOcpouvS f3aatXrXKaTrKoouSyEvE'aOat (Wars 5.9.30). He wouldtherebyppearto be washinghis handsofthem.Belisariusntroducedroops nto he ity hroughhe queductndsoonhaditat themercy fhisarmy.A great laughternsued, rocopius eports;77ut

750nthe opos, eePaul.76 *? OlKTOV 1KC) (Wars5.9.26);compareheThebans emarkingponthefate fPlataia Thuc.3.67.4): oIKTOV TE alICOTEpOI TJYXaVEIV oi a1TPETrES I TraCXOVTESTC2)V av6pcOrrTOv, oi 8E &lKaiC.s), G)O?TEp O6ZE, Ta EvaVTia ETriXapT01 E?Vai ( theyare moreworthy fpitywho sufferndeservedly,ut hosewhosufferightly,s thesepersons o, are on thecontrary sourceof satisfaction ).n thesubject fpity, eeMacleod, sp.236-37.77Wars5.10.29. Procopiusreports hat all of Belisarius'forces ookpart n themayhemOuvpC 'ap EXO'?EVOI a&TaVTES, loc. cit.),attributingheveryworst utrages othe lliedcontingents.elisarius' inal ppeal oStephanos5.9.27)had ikewisewarnedof depredationso followonce thebarbariansn his armyhad beenunleashed.Thecontemporaryccount in the Liber Pontificalis Silverius?3, Duchesne 1: 290)corroboratesrocopius' tatementsbout he ndiscriminatelaughterhat nsued ndtheviolation fthe anctityfthechurches.ncontrastoProcopius,heferocityfthe s-



33/40

180 Charles . PazdemikBelisarius,ike heAthenianommanderst Mende, ucceedednreestablishingorder.His effortso calmhis troops haracteristicallyppealed o the needtopracticeusticeandto show themselves orthy f the victory estowed ponthem ytheAlmighty.he timeforhatrednd retributionadpassed.Furtherdestructionas immoral,nd also inexpedient:bykillinghese eopleyouwillnotbe ridding ourselvesf futurenemies, utpunishingourselveshroughthe deathofyour ubjects, 'XXa OavaTCp (q1ItCO1O'EGOE TW2V VJTfT1KOCAV(Wars5.10.32). nitiallyailed s fellowRomans,hreatenedike heGothswithdestructions enemies,heNeapolitans erereduced ystormndsackto thestatus f conqueredubjects.78aving efused otake nhand hework ftheirown liberation,heyhad left hemselvest themercy f the nvader,whobyrightf conquestmight ispose f hems he wished.By his intervention,owever, elisarius epudiatedhe nstrumentalalueofvengeancen the conduct f imperial olicy.His speech, s quoted bove,cunninglyeappropriatesheverywordswithwhichKleon, ater heauthor fthe resolutionwhichdoomedSkione, urgedtheAthenian ssembly n theMytilene ebatetomakean example f a rebelliousubjectbroughto heel.Kleon had urgedtheAthenianso standfast n their esolutiono destroyMytilene,[toshow hat] hosewho revolthallbepunished ydeath, S avaqMpOTflTal, ava6TCO flpl&.1OP EVOV Thuc. 3.40.7). Though hastised,heNeapolitanswerenotdestroyed:hosewho survived ere llowedto returnotheir omes,whileBelisarius' roopswere omewhatmollifiedybeing llowedto retainheir lunder.

Procopiuss moved o observe: thus n that ery ay t came topassthatthe Neapolitansbecame captives of war and regainedtheir liberty...aiXIaXAwTOtS TE yEVEPCOat Kat TT)V 'AEtEOEpiavavaacpxoaaOat (Wars5.10.35).79 This paradox expresses perfectlyheequivocal natureofBelisarius'sault is credited olely to Belisariushimself, uctus uroreat the refusalof theNeapolitans o open the cityto him.Amory172-173 and nn. 102-3 characterizesProcopius s an apologist ttemptingo foist he blameforsuchatrocitiesponthebarbarians; ettheversion f thestoryn theLP (characterizedy Amory s pro-Byzantine ) uggests hat he assaulthad beenbrazenlyustified s an unavoidableconsequencefNeapolitanntransigence.sAmory cknowledges,rocopiusllowshisreadersto nerceivethe dilemmas that onstrain ll sides.

78Compareheclosing fBelisarius' peech: lettheconqueredVEV1K11p'vol) learnfrom heseeventswhatkindoffriendsheyhaveforfeitedhanks o foolish ounsel(Wars 5.10.33).79Perhapsn order o minimize heimpliedharmdoneto theNeapolitans y theplunderingf the oldiers, e goesontoadd: andthey ecoveredhemostprecious f



34/40

Procopius ndThucydidesn theLabors f War 181achievement. he general ad indeedbeenobliged o liberate heNeapolitansagainstheirwill.Naplesprovedo be true o theGoths, owevereluctantlyndambivalently.ike Belisarius imself,heNeapolitans ademployedhepoliticsof Roman dentitypportunistically,osupplynideological over orwhatwasat roota calculation f relativedvantagewithinheslimspace ofmaneuverafforded o a dependencyaughtwithin he clash of greatpowers.To theircredit, erhaps, heNeapolitans ad failed o be takennbyBelisarius,s theThracian itieswerebyBrasidas nd hisultimatelyllusory isionfor whollydifferentnternationalrder.80By right f conquest,Belisariushad indeed made the Neapolitanshiscaptives, nd thereforeuite iterally is slaves.However, y eschewing hetactics f Kleonandgiving heNeapolitans acktotheir ity,heg

Pazdernik_Procopius Thucidydes Belisarius_Brasidas.pdf

Documents

Transcript of Pazdernik_Procopius Thucidydes Belisarius_Brasidas.pdf