ItOstrg

From Seshat Data Browser
Revision as of 18:42, 13 December 2021 by Admin (talk | contribs) (1 revision imported)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Phase I Variables (polity-based)

General variables

♠ RA ♣ Edward A L Turner ♥

♠ Original name ♣ Ostrogothic Kingdom ♥


♠ Alternative names ♣ Amal Dynasty; Amalian Dynasty; Kingdom of Italy; Greuthingi ♥ Amal Dynasty after Theodoric's take-over.[1] Kingdom of Italy. [2] "by the end of the third century, the Greuthingi, the earliest grouping of those people destined to constitute the Ostrogoths, were identifiable to Roman authors as a discrete assemblage of Germanic peoples." [3] Amalian Dynasty. [4]

♠ Peak Date ♣ 525 CE ♥ "Altogether we seem justified in asserting that the economic condition of Italy, both as to the producers and the consumers of its food-supplies, was more prosperous under Theodoric than it had been for centuries before, or than it was to be for centuries afterwards."[5] Bishop of Ravenna on Theodoric: "He reigned thirty-three (really thirty-two) years, and during thirty of these years so great was the happiness of Italy that even the wayfarers were at peace. ... He gave presents and rations to the people, yet, though he found the Treasury ruined, he brought it round, by his own hard work, into a flourishing state. ... Thus he so charmed the nations near him that they entered into a league with him, hoping that he would be their King. The merchants, too, from diverse provinces, flocked to his dominions, for so great was the order which he maintained, that if any one wished to leave gold or silver on his land (in his country house) it was as safe as in a walled city. A proof of this was the fact that he never made gates for any-city of Italy, and the gates already existing were not closed. Any one who had business to transact could do it as safely by night as by day." [6] "the great economic symptom of Theodoric's reign--and under the circumstances a most healthy symptom--was that Italy, from a corn-importing became a corn-exporting country." [7]


Temporal bounds

♠ Duration ♣ 489-554 CE ♥ Theodoric's rule officially recognised by Constantinople in 487 CE. [8] Odovacar assassinated by Theodoric 493 CE after Church mediated peace treaty which gave "absolute equality of power" to both leaders.[9] Period ends with Justinian's Pragmatic Sanction after the Gothic War. "By 554 the Ostrogothic Kingdom was gone. A few Gothic garrisons held out in the north for almost seven years. Finally in 561, the garrisons at Verona and Brixia capitulated."[10]

"Theoderic, who had emerged successfully from a power struggle between various competing groups of Goths and their leaders in the Balkans in the course of the 470s and 480s, had recently plundered Thrace and was at the time threatening Constantinope. For Zeno, dispatching Theoderic to fight Odovacer in Italy provided a way to deal with two problems at once. Theoderic entered Italy in 489 and prevailed over Odovacer after a period of intense warfare In 493, following a protacted siege of the capital Ravenna whence Odovacer had retreated, the two general agreed to share rule over Italy. Theoderic, however, murdered Odovacer shortly after entering the city (allegedly with his own hands) and had many of his followers killed. Thereafter, Theoderic's army, the exercitus Gothorum, proclaimed him king. Theoderic had been king of the Goths already since 474, and the renewed proclamation in 493 was probably meant to underline his claim to power over Italy and all of its inhabitants."[11]

After Byzantines under Justinian ended Ostrogothic rule he "ostentatiously reclaimed imperial prerogatives and the traditional markers of civilitas such as coinage, taxes, care for the annona, public buildings, and most importantly, legislative authority."[12]

♠ Degree of centralization ♣ loose; unitary state ♥

Loose

"Governing Ostrogoths was a constant struggle to pull the forces of villages and kindreds, nobles and their followers, farae and allied peoples into line behind the will of the monarch. Tradition strengthens the hands of the nobility, prolonged crisis those of the royalty. Under such circumstances, Rome usually held the initiative and the Goths reacted as best they could. Consistent and long-term policy was virtually impossible. Even on campaigns, the king was rarely able to control his own people except in extremis ... even Theodoric himself at Marcianopolis... Ermanaric created the Ostrogothic confederacy as a military structure to establish a broad regional control over the numerous groups in the area and then led it against the Huns. And in this way he endeared himself to generation after generation. ... The Hunnic episode raised an elite far above the masses. The Amalian line profited from Hunnic favor, but the basic problems of leadership remained."[13]

Unitary state

"Once the Ostrogoths took over Italy from Odovacar ... In terms of government there was, of course, but one alternative - the late Roman imperial system. As a king of an allied people and as magister militum praesentalis, consul for 484, patrician, and Flavius, Theodoric saw his task as essentially the establishment of an adequate system of government over the Goths to refocus gradually their personal loyalty from him onto his agents and officers. Insofar as possible, he allowed the Roman bureaucratic state and its many departments to function as usual."[14]
"The Anonymous Valesianus reports that Theoderic 'made peace with the emperor Anastasius with regard to the presumption of the rule (presumptio regni) and Anastasius sent back to him all the ornaments of the palace, which Odovacer had transferred to Constantinople [in 476]'. This symbolic act of returning the ornamenta palatii in 498 signalled the acceptance of Theoderic's independent rule in the Italian provinces."[15]

♠ Supra-polity relations ♣ nominal allegiance; alliance ♥

Nominal allegiance to the Emperor in Constantinople

"Thus then it came to pass that a formal interview was arranged between Emperor and King (perhaps at Constantinople, though it seems doubtful whether Theodoric could have safely trusted himself within its walls), and at this interview the terms of the joint enterprise were arranged, an enterprise to which Theodoric was to contribute all the effective strength and Zeno the glamour of Imperial legitimacy... If the Emperor would send Theodoric thither with his people, he would be at once relieved from the heavy charges of their stipendia which he was now bound to furnish, while Theodoric would hold the land as of the free gift of the Emperor, and would reign there as king, only till Zeno himself should arrive to claim the supremacy."[16]

Alliances with the Visigoths and others:

"In the year 490 Gundobad, king of the Burgundians, crossed the Alps and descended into Italy to mingle in the fray as an antagonist of Theodoric. In the same year, probably at the same time, Alaric II., king of the Visigoths, entered Italy as his ally. A great battle was fought on the river Adda, ten miles east of Milan, in which Odovacar, who had emerged from the shelter of Ravenna, was again completely defeated. He fled once more to Ravenna, which he never again quitted."[17]
According to the Bishop of Ravenna, Theodoric: "He gave one of his daughters in marriage to the King of the Visigoths in Gaul, another to the son of the Burgundian King; his sister to the King of the Vandals, and his niece to the King of the Thuringians. Thus he pleased all the nations round him..."[18]

Supra-cultural relations

♠ preceding (quasi)polity ♣ Rome - Late Antiquity ♥ Roman Empire-Foederati
♠ relationship to preceding (quasi)polity ♣ elite migration; continuity ♥ According to the Bishop of Ravenna, Theodoric "ordained that the civil administration should remain for the Romans as it had been under their Emperors."[19]
♠ succeeding (quasi)polity ♣ East Roman Empire ♥
♠ Supracultural entity ♣ ♥
♠ scale of supra-cultural interaction ♣ ♥ km squared.

♠ Capital ♣ Ravenna ♥ [20].

♠ Language ♣ Latin; Germanic ♥ "The Ostrogoths used their traditional language until the downfall of the Italian kingdom." [21] "Latin was still the language of command, but German or a barbarous blend of Latin or Germanic dialect was more familiar in camp". [22]

General Description

Beginning with the Emperor Honorius (r. 393-423 CE), the Western Empire experienced a continuous decline and a series of invasions at the hands of Germanic, Vandal, Alan, and Hun forces throughout the 5th century. In 476 CE, a Roman military officer of likely Germanic decent (though his exact ancestry is not certain) named Odoacer led a revolt against the western emperor Romulus Augustus (r. 475-476 CE), a child whose rule was overseen by his father, a high-ranking general named Orestes. Odoacer and his fellow soldiers killed Orestes and effectively deposed Romulus Augustus, and Odoacer's authority was recognized by the Eastern Roman emperor at the time, Zeno, although he was not proclaimed Emperor in the West. In 480 CE, after the death of Julius Nepos, whom Zeno recognized as the legitimate Western Emperor, Zeno abolished the co-emperorship, claiming to rule over both halves of the Empire, although much of the Western Empire had already been lost and Italy itself remained under the control of Odoacer, who ruled as king.[23][24]
In 488 CE, the Eastern Roman Emperor Zeno convinced Theodoric, King of the Ostrogoths (r. 475-526), to invade Italy and remove Odoacer from power.[25] Theodoric and his Ostrogoths were successful, expelling Odoacer from Italy and establishing an Ostrogothic Kingdom over most of Italy, which lasted from 489 to 554 CE. Theodoric's agreement with Zeno, which may have been written down but no longer exists,[26] led Theodoric's rule to be officially recognized by the Eastern Empire in Constantinople.[27]
The period ends with Ostrogothic Italy's defeat at the hands of the Byzantine/Eastern Roman Emperor Justinian I in 455 CE. Justinian managed to reassert Roman rule and institutions over much of Italy, though this quickly evaporated in the face of invasions by Salvic, Turkic, and Germanic tribes. Only central and some parts of southern Italy remained under Byzantine authority into the later half of the 5th century CE.[28]

Population and political organization

The Ostrogothic Kingdom was essentially split between three separate power centres: Constantinople, Ravenna and Rome. The Ostrogothic king, traditionally elected by a Gothic military elite,[29] but made hereditary after Theodoric, made high-level administrative appointments to a court based in Ravenna and to the northern Italian cities of Pavia and Verona.[30] The Ostrogothic King was, however, in principle under the authority of the Byzantine/Eastern Roman Empire in Constantinople, on whose invitation Theodoric had invaded Odoacer's Italy. The emperors in Constantinople retained the right to name senators, consuls, and other high-ranking officials for the West,[31] while Rome remained an influential symbolic, economic, and ecclesiastical centre.[32] The Roman Senate at Rome functioned as a local governing centre;[33] many wealthy Romans found traditional positions of authority and prestige in the administration at Ravenna.[34][35] Ostrogothic kings kept the existing late Roman governmental structure relatively unchanged,[36] but reduced in size[37] and more tightly centred on the royal court.[38]
The king's administrative and advisory council was made up of both Gothic and Roman officials.[39][40] This period also saw a 'blurring of the boundaries between civil and military functions'.[41] The praetorian prefect was the most powerful individual in the kingdom below the king; he was responsible for enforcing the king's laws, had some power to issue his own edicts and set taxation rates, received the taxes from all provinces, paid military and administrative salaries, made personnel recommendations to the king and had the right of dismissal.[42] He also commanded the largest branches of the bureaucracy, was responsible for the public food supply, and was the final judge of appeal.[43]
The Ostrogothic Kingdom reached a population of approximately 5.5 million people and witnessed a revival in economic fortunes for the region of Italy. Apart from the many Roman institutions, the Roman aristocracy and their privileges that were maintained, tax receipts were spent on public services[44] and Theodoric commanded that money be set aside for the restoration of walls and monuments in several Roman cities.[45] Theodoric also oversaw the construction of baths and an amphitheatre, and restored aqueducts from Ravenna to Rome - the latter had seen its population fall to around 100,000-200,000 inhabitants - and built churches such as the Arian Saint Theodor, the palatial San Apollinare Nuovo, and the San Andrea dei Gothi.[46]

Social Complexity variables

♠ RA ♣ Edward A L Turner ♥

Social Scale

♠ Polity territory ♣ 635,000 ♥ 635,016 km².

From 511-549 CE Visigothic Spain was effectively an autonomous sub-kingdom of the Ostrogothic realm and Ravenna received annual tribute.

Amalaric was the last of the Visigothic royal line descended from Alaric I (who sacked Rome). "The new king, Teudis (531-548), was that Ostrogothic general appointed to command the military of the peninsular by Theodoric and the former guardian of Amalaric. The former's accession was probably accompanied by some distribution of royal fisc lands to both the Visigothic nobility and the Ostrogothic warriors who had bolstered the Iberian garrisons during the latter's minority. Teudis also had previously taken a wife from the family of the Hispano-Roman nobility and that faction of the kingdom too likely shared in the distribution of fisc lands. If the royal authority suffered from all of this, at the same time it advanced the cohesion and mutual interest of the political classes of the new realm."[47]
Teudis had been the bodyguard of Amalaric and was effectively leader during Amalaric during his regency. Ostrogoth Theodoric the Great was Amalaric's grandfather. 511 CE onwards Ostrogothic military helped Visigoths counterattack against the Frankish invasion. Theudis was effectively completely independent in Spain and even ignored an invitation to Theodoric in Ravenna (must have been pre-531, before Theodoric's death) but he kept paying the annual tributum. Amalaric's assassination by his own men in 531 CE was "perhaps urged on by Theudis".[48]

♠ Polity Population ♣ 5,500,000: 500 CE ♥ Inhabitants. Estimated from McEvedy and Jones [49], c500 CE from Italy (4) and Yugoslavia (1.5)

Ostrogothic Italy saw "demographic decline".[50]


Ostrogoth people at time of the invasion of Italy 488 CE:

"As in the Macedonian campaign, so now, he was accompanied by all the members of his nation, old men and children, mothers and maidens, and doubtless by a long train of waggons. We have no accurate information whatever as to the number of his army, but various indications, both in earlier and later history, seem to justify us in assuming that the soldiers must have numbered fully 40,000; and if this was the case, the whole nation cannot have been less than 200,000. The difficulty of finding food for so great a multitude in the often desolated plains of Pannonia and Noricum must have been enormous, and was no doubt the reason of the slowness of Theodoric's progress." [51]
Unknown source says the kingdom has a population of 225,000 [52]. This number must refer to the number of Ostrogoths rather than the total number of individuals within the territory of the Ostrogoth Kingdom in Italy.
"Cities along the route either closed their gates or could not provide a market capable of sustaining perhaps 40,000 hungry people."[53]

♠ Population of the largest settlement ♣ [100,000-200,000] ♥ Inhabitants. Rome.

Mid-sixth century Rome: "Despite centuries of gradual erosion of her monuments and a declining population, Rome still held more people than her environs could hope to support. Since the granaries in North Africa had long ago opened their doors to others, first Vandals and more recently Belisarius, Ostrogothic Rome depended upon Sicily for food and shippers to transport it to Portus. Gradual silting had closed Ostia to traffic."[54]

Peak settlement of Rome generally thought to be c150 CE. By 300 CE about 800,000 which had decreased to roughly 500,000 by 400 CE, and 200,000 by 500 CE. [55]

100,000 [56]

Demographic decline of Rome. c500,000 in 400 CE, less than 50,000 after the Gothic war (535-554 CE).[57]

Rome’s population "might have been down to 300,000 in the late 4th century and down to 100,000 by 500, but it was still by far the largest city in Italy."[58]

Under Theoderic the population of Ravenna "perhaps as large as 10,000. Naples, too, may have had a population as large as 10,000 at this time."[59]

Hierarchical Complexity

♠ Settlement hierarchy ♣ 6 ♥

1. Capital, Ravenna.

2. Provincial capitals
"The principal city in Dalmatia was Salona, where the comes and Gothic garrison resided."[60]
3. Municipia
4. Tributary communities, not necessarily urbanized
5. Village/vici
6. pagi (rural settlements).

The Gothic language "reveals a world of kindreds, villages (weihs), and small regions (garvi). Towns (baurg) were probably the remains of Roman cities and fortlets. ... Garvi was the equivalent of the Latin pagus and within it ties between neighbors (garazna) and kin-organized life."[61]

♠ Administrative levels ♣ [5-7] ♥

Where do these fit?

"there were three Praetorian Prefects, one for the Gauls, one for Italy, and one for the City of Rome" [62]
a gothic scribe was called a bokareis[63]

"In terms of administrative strategy, the Amal court seems to have preferred a style of governance in which an administrative nucleus (referred to in the Variae as comitatus noster and officium nostrum), including the staffs of such senior officials as the praetorian prefect, attended the itinerant ambit of the Gothic ruler."[64]

1. King

"Because of his inevitable insecurity, Theodoric, like Alaric and a host of other kings of his era, searched for greater authority over his own people by invoking the conceptual hierarchy of Christian Rome with its titular elevations and ranks delineated in dress and court ceremonial. He was quick to perceive the potential for dynastic continuity in associating himself with Roman tradition and the special role of the monarchy in Christendom. In part that explains Theodoric's desire for such Roman denotations of power as the praenomen Flavius, the title Patrician, the consulship, the rank of magister militum praesentalis, and his efforts to have his regal position in Italy recognized in Constantinople."[65] "It is quite clear that Theodoric never claimed to be Emperor of the West, the successor of Honorius and Augustulus. But there are grave reasons for doubting whether he called himself, as has been often stated, "King of Italy". In the fifth century territorial titles of this kind were, if not absolutely unknown, at least very uncommon. The various Teutonic rulers generally took their titles from the nations whom they led to battle, Gaiseric being "King of the Vandals and Alans", Gundobad, "King of the Burgundians", Clovis, "King of the Franks", and so forth. Upon the whole, it seems most probable that Theodoric's full title was "King of the Goths and Romans in Italy" ..."[66] Title of first ruler: Flavius Theodericus rex [67]. Under the constitution Theodoric was the only Ostrogoth Roman citizen.[68].
2. quaestor
"present as secretary to the monarch under the Ostrogoths."[69] "the official whose business it was to put the thoughts of the sovereign into fitting and eloquent words, either when he was replying to the ambassadors of foreign powers, or when he was issuing laws and proclamations to his own subjects. As his duties and qualifications were of a more personal kind than those of his two brother-ministers already described, he had not like them a large official staff waiting upon his orders."[70]
2. saiones
"The institution, if the saiones can be so classified, existed as early as 508, when Theorodric instructed saio Nandus to assemble troops for the invasion of Gaul. Saiones or similar royal servants existed among many Germanic peoples throughout the Middle Ages and seem to have emerged out of the royal band in response to basic needs for personal and trusted contact with the royalty. None of the Ostrogothic saiones ever achieved comital or ducal status, which suggests that they were of lowly origin."[71]


_Central government_

2. Princeps cardinalis of the comitatus (aka Cabinet of Illustre, or council of the ministers of state)

"Nearly every one of these great ministers of state had under him a large, ambitious, and often highly-paid staff of subordinates, who were called his Officium." [72] The comitatus "was the heart of the government of Italy. Under Theodoric, as under the emperors, the comitatus represented all aspects of government and was attached to the ruler. ... The head of the comitiaci at court was the princeps cardinalis, and there was a vicarate at Rome with its own staff. In its civilian aspects, the comitatus remained intact. The formal household, sacrum cubiculum with its praepositus and eunuch chamberlains (cubicularii), stood watch over the palace ... The two great heads of the bureaucracy were present as ever: the praetorian prefect and the magister offiorum. ... The comes sacrarum largitionun was responsible for mines and mints (gold and probably silder) and certain taxes and payments, including donatives. ... The comes rei privatae was a member of the comitatus and managed the estates of the imperial fisc, then in Theodoric's hands. The consistory was another important imperial legacy present in the comitatus. By this time, membership in the consistory was restricted to counts of the first order of the three ranks of counts. The comes primi ordinis, and, in fact, under Theodoric only those actually serving in the provinces, and the counselors of the praetorian prefect were automatically members. ... The various Roman offices represented in the comitatus were themselves complex bureaus with numerous subalterns and clerks. The consistory had an independent staff of secretaries. ... Theodoric maintained a personal treasury, the patrimonium, under the comes patrimonii. ..."[73] The comitatus "was essentially a court of final jurisdiction in cases involving the nobilities."[74] praetorian prefect was the "highest-ranking minister attendant in the comitatus"[75]


2. Praetorian Prefect, the vicegerent of the sovereign
"a man who held towards Emperor or King nearly the same position which a Grand Vizier holds towards a Turkish Sultan. Like his sovereign he wore a purple robe (which reached however only to his knees, not to his feet), and he drove through the streets in a lofty official chariot. It was for him to promulgate the Imperial laws, sometimes to put forth edicts of his own. He proclaimed what taxes were to be imposed each year, and their produce came into his "Praetorian chest". He suggested to his sovereign the names of the governors of the provinces, paid them their salaries, and exercised a general superintendence over them, having even power to depose them from their offices. And lastly, he was the highest Judge of Appeal in the land, even the Emperor himself having generally no power to reverse his sentences." [76] "Cassiodorus accorded the office of praefectus praetorio a dignity above all other offices."[77] "Having authority over both legal and financial personnel of the administration, the prefect commanded the most numerous branches of the bureaucracy (exceptores and scrinarii)."[78] Praetorian prefect responsible for "collection of taxes in all provinces, the local officials involved in its collection, the distribution of taxes as payment to military and administrative personnel, the maintenance of the public food supply, oversight in local finances, and rendering final judgement in legal disputes".[79]
3. vices agenti (deputy assistant)
In Cassiodorus' "Variae 11.5, the prefect directs his deputy assistant (vices agenti) to administer the annona in Rome, without mention of the authority that the praefectus annonae would have had in the matter."[80]
3. canonicarius
agent the praetorian prefect could use "to requisition provisions for the Gothic court" without having to go through the comes patrimonii.[81]
3. ? exceptores (branch of the bureaucracy)
4.
"The various Roman offices represented in the comitatus were themselves complex bureaus with numerous subalterns and clerks."[82]
5.
"A large number of singularii, rationalii, clavicularii, and the like (whom we should call policemen, subordinate clerks, and gaolers) formed the "Unlettered Staff" (Militia Illiterata), who stood on the lowest stage of the bureaucratic pyramid."[83]
3. ? scrinarii (branch of the bureaucracy)
4.
"The various Roman offices represented in the comitatus were themselves complex bureaus with numerous subalterns and clerks."[84]
5.
"A large number of singularii, rationalii, clavicularii, and the like (whom we should call policemen, subordinate clerks, and gaolers) formed the "Unlettered Staff" (Militia Illiterata), who stood on the lowest stage of the bureaucratic pyramid."[85]

2. comes siliquatariorum (minister)

2. comes patrimonii nostri (minister)

"authority extended to the management and collection of rents from properties owned by the Amal family (and the supply of the court with provisions from those properties)"[86] Note 1. This official often given many other roles on ad hoc basis including those of the praetorian prefect e.g. tax collection from a province.[87]
3.

2. comes privatarum (minister)

official responsible for "laws pertaining to slaves, sexual morality, the protection of the dead, intestate land, and the discovery of abandoned treasure."[88] Note 1. This official often given many other roles on ad hoc basis including those "more regularly undertaken by the praetorian prefect."[89] Note 2. many of this own official duties could be delegated to other ministers on ad hoc basis.[90]
3.

2. comes sacrarum largitionum (minister)

In 4th and 5th centuries had "authority over the mint (and thereby over the distribution of donatives to the military and benefactions of the ruler to civilians), mines (linked to coin production at mints), the production of royal vestments, and customs and taxes from foreign trade."[91] Note: many of these duties could be delegated to other ministers on ad hoc basis such as comes siliquatariorum, comes patrimonii nostri, comes privatarum or the praefectus praetorio.[92]
3. Manager of a mint works
4.
3. Manager of a mine works
4.
3. Manager of a royal vestments works
4.
3. Foreign trade official
4.
2. magister officorum
"formally held authority over the cursus publicus, regularly found that role assumed by the praetorian prefect and saiones."[93]
3.
4.
2. praefectus annonae
"The praefectus annonae was in charge of having the grain from the annona baked into bread by the bakers (and was also in charge of the pork-butchers)."[94]
3.
4.
2. comes archiatrorum
"an official known as the comes archiatrorum who oversaw doctors"[95]
3.
4.

_Provincial government_

2. Provincial governor (praeses)
There were also provincial governors [96] and prefectures [97]
"In Dalmatia, the comes was superior to the principes and the Roman governor (praeses), who was increasingly a fiscal officer having some responsibility for tax collection. The principes of Dalmatia maintained the Roman legal structure alongside the Gothic command embodied in the comes."[98]
2. Provincial comes
Provence. Possibly: Istria, Noricum Mediterranean, Switzerland.[99]
"Perhaps the rank of comes secundi ordinis was accorded to the urban comites, whereas the provincial became comes primi."[100]
3. priores
"At least in some areas, lesser officials called priores assited the provincial comites"[101]
2. praefectus praetorio Galliarum
Gaul same as before. [102]
3. Civitas - prefect
"Prefect of the City": "A nobleman of the very highest rank, Consul, Patrician, and Prefect of the City, Cæcina Maurus Basilius Decius, successfully accomplished this work under the orders of his sovereign..." [103]
4. Member of curiale
curiales in towns [104]
5.
Scribes?
3. defensor civitatis
"In Italy the Ostrogoths continued the office as a local "protector." Defensors were supposed to protect the community from oppression, just as Valentinian had planned, but their protection included the seasonal fixing of prices and often the forced requisition of military supplies. In small towns, the defensors and the curia were the government: the defensor represented the central government; the curia, of course, was drawn from the locality."[105]
3. Urban comes
"A princeps may have been assigned to each major city, since the office of princeps was held by several men at one time. They were under the comes. The provincial governor (praeses) retained some civil authority and shared some responsibility for tax collection."[106]
"The Goths established garrisons in important cities throughout their rule. Such special cities as Naples Pavia, and Syracuse had their own comes, as did Massilia, Arelate, the Insulae Curicta, and Celsina. These comites Gothorum were legal officers, as were the provincial comites, and they also commanded whatever garrisons were stationed there."[107]
4. Vici
village
5. Pagi
rural settlements


_Gothic lands_

2. Gothic lord (Saio?)
"At least in the north, probably around Pavia in particular, where the Po Valley allowed more effective use of the land in small units, the Goths apparently subdivided their shares into family farming units called condamae."[108]
2. comes Gothorum
"The cases of appeal from the general settlement areas in which there were large numbers of Gothic communities required the regionalized comes Gothorum, i.e., one of provincial scope, comites provinciarum. "[109]
3. Condamae
"The φνλαί as described by Eunapius were basic organizations among the Goths. The Greek term φνλαί usually referred to a group united by blood and living in the same area. Each φνλαή had its own cult objects and holy men to care for and carry them. The φνλαί formed temporary confederations for specific purposes. Their leaders conducted affairs in councils, but the exact makeup of these varied. In some assemblies, the optimates, probably consisting of the dux and principal members of the nobility, made the decisions and enforced them. In other areas, the council of elders decided action and dominated the younger men. The apparent distinction between optimates and elders was in reality blurred, since many nobles were themselves elders of important families. Nonetheless, the great ducal families, it would seem, were not everywhere able to control the φνλαί in their area. In such cases the elders probably represented the various villages within the φνλαή. The φνλαί were not territorially but religiously defined. Their political unity became more cohesive during the fourth century. The Gothic word garvi does not seem to have described areas as large as those inhabited by the φνλαί but rather was a term used to denote the Latin pagus, the rural area around towns and villages. Even in a φνλαή where one family clearly controlled the actions of optimates and villages alike, there ere ways to manifest the traditional independence of the village as a unit within the regional federation."[110] According to the Greeks, head of a Gothic φνλαή was a άρχων or ήγεμών; in Latin regulus, ducator, or dux; in Gothic texts reiks.[111] The leaders of φνλαί were independent until an outside threat brought them together.[112] "There is no question that the continued as the basic political and military units long after their settlements in the empire. The same can be said for similar groups among the Ostrogoths..." The fara of the Lombards "was structurally and functionally the same as the φνλαή among the Goths. There are three, perhaps four, Ostrogothic farae known from various sources. ... The Ostrogothic farae and their heads may well have played a role similar to that of their Burgundian and Lombard counterparts." [113]


♠ Religious levels ♣ 5 ♥

Theodoric was an Arian Christian but the people remained Roman Catholic. Bishop Epiphanius moderated Theodoric's view of Romans [114] The Arian church had "bishops, priests, even a few scholars commenting on the scriptures" [115] However, Burns argues, due to retention of pagan belief system among nobility and commoners, "it is necessary to understand their Arianism as a tribal religion and not as some lingering form of Alexandrian heresy."[116]


_Catholic Church_

1. Emperor in Constantinople

"The first seven "ecumenical" ... councils were gathered by the Roman (or, later, Byzantine) emperors."[117]

1. Bishop of a patriarchate

"The churches organized themselves along the lines laid down by the geography and political order of the empire. A city (civitas), along with its surrounding rural perimeter, the foundation of imperial organization, also formed the basic unit of ecclesiastical structure. Virtually every Roman city, many of them quite small, had its own bishop. He exercised his authority over a "diocese" that ordinarily coincided with the boundaries of the civitas. These dioceses were then grouped into provinces, over which a metropolitan, the bishop of a province's principal city, held sway. Eventually, provinces themselves were organized into large "patriarchates," each lead by one of the five preeminent bishops of the church: those in Rome, Constantinople (called "New Rome," second in prestige to the Old), Antioch, Alexandria, and Jerusalem."[118]
2. Metropolitan, with authority over a province
3. Bishop in civitas, with authority over a diocese
4. Presbyters or priests (elders)
"Evidence from the second century suggests that a wide variety of models for local clergy existed throughout the Roman Empire. Yet the one to prevail was a three-tiered, hierarchical. In this model, the bishop served as leader of the local community and was assisted by presbyters or priests (elders) and deacons. Again, this model was established in the Antioch of Ignatius, as he underscores emphatically the necessity of gathering for learning, ritual, and teaching around a single bishop. By the end of the century this three-tiered form of ministry had spread to most early Catholic communities throughout the empire, and it would soon become the sole authoritative manner of organizing local ecclesial communities." [119]
5. Deacons

♠ Military levels ♣ 5 ♥

"The population of Italy was divided into two societies with distinct public functions: the Goths served the state as its soldiers; the Romans, as taxpayers. In essence, in Theodoric's Italy the Roman regular army had been completely replaced by a Gothic federate force. The Goths, moreover, was not 'professional' soldiers in the sense that Roman legionaries had been. Most Goths were farmers who fought when called upon to do so." [120]

"The strengths and weaknesses of barbarian armies were well known already to Tacitus and had become common fare in Byzantine military manuals by A.D. 600. In essence, the barbarians were seen to lack cohesive command, technological elements such as effective siege craft, and the patience required for utilizing a tactical reserve. The German "plan of attack" usually consisted of a human-wave assault with much yelling and throwing of stones, spears, and arrows. ... After all, since manliness was synonymous with military prowess as proven on the battlefield, who wanted to wait in reserve and perhaps miss priceless opportunities? Obviously, no one. Nor did any leader have the power so to order another free man, even in his warband. Thus it is hardly surprising that Germanic tactics varied so little regardless of the particular tribe or location."[121]

"The Ostrogothic military achieved a reputation of strength against other barbarians primarily though building upon their own traditions, but they also accepted certain Roman organizational and support systems. The Gothic offices of comes and dux were tied more closely to the central authority, which at least under Theodoric appointed them, and evolved in conjunction with the surviving aspects of Roman government."[122]


1. King

"Theoderic, like earlier generalissimos (e.g. Aetius or Ricimer), independently controlled his army, comprised mainly of non-Roman troops personally loyal to him, and delegated significant non-military administrative posts to local Roman elites."[123]
2. Duces
Gothic Generals [124]
"The duces were the highest military leaders in Ostrogothic society, and their very presence in a frontier zone attested to the gravity of the situation. Their functions were primarily but not exclusively military." "The duces' power over their men was virtually unchallengeable and the subject of abuse."[125]
2. comes Gothorum
"The cases of appeal from the general settlement areas in which there were large numbers of Gothic communities required the regionalized comes Gothorum, i.e., one of provincial scope, comites provinciarum. Along the frontiers and outlying provinces they also commanded the Gothic troops. The government at Ravenna extended this structure to include the frontier areas as well. Everywhere the provincial comites were the supreme governmental officials whenever present. In the frontier areas, the comes had legal jurisdiction and probably held overall command unless, as was sometimes the case, a dux was present specifically as commander."[126]
3. Count of the Goths
Goths of each province had a military chief "Count of the Goths" [127]
"Gothic nobility with their loyal bands of warriors" [128]
4.
"Garrisons were probably comprised largely of warrior groups personally tied to their commanders."[129]
5. Gothic soldier
No soldiers except Goths - native Italians not allowed into army. [130]

Professions

♠ Professional military officers ♣ absent ♥ Noblemen. [131]

How was the Gothic army paid? "the limited evidence that we have ... suggests a combination of tax-based salaries and the redistribution of land, both of which would have resulted in a process of administrative decentralization. This matter is of obvious importance for how we imagine the distribution of power and wealth between the Roman landowners and the Gothic military elite."[132]

♠ Professional soldiers ♣ inferred present ♥

"The Gothic nobleman could exercise many options concerning the fate of the laborers, but he probably kept most of them himself, since he personally, and also the specialized warriors in his following, had no desire to revert to being plowmen but demanded productive sources of revenue."[133]

A garrison commander at Syracuse "was instructed to look after his garrison's regular provisioning so that they would be less likely to plunder the neighboring farms."[134]

"The various comites Gothorum and other high Gothic officials may have employed their traditional associations of warriors as buccellarii, as was common in the East. ... Unfortunately, the sources are inadequate to prove their widespread existence among the Ostrogoths, although the actions of the nobility and the official holders are more understandable if we accept that the coercive power of the followers was close at hand. Oppas, who was executed following his personal rebellion against Theodoric, was perhaps a buccellarius of the monarch. The use of buccellarii would have been an acceptable redirection of the energies of the warbands into more defined government under the primary direction of the monarchy."[135]

How was the Gothic army paid? "the limited evidence that we have ... suggests a combination of tax-based salaries and the redistribution of land, both of which would have resulted in a process of administrative decentralization. This matter is of obvious importance for how we imagine the distribution of power and wealth between the Roman landowners and the Gothic military elite."[136]

♠ Professional priesthood ♣ present ♥

Bureaucracy characteristics

♠ Full-time bureaucrats ♣ present ♥

"For the eastern empire of the 6th century Procopius reports that the court at Constantinople employed 5500 scholares, in addition to the domestici and protectores. And Procopius does not mention the exceptores and srinarii that filled the officium of the praetorian prefect in Constantinople. Several considerations, however, mitigate against assuming such robust figures for Ostrogothic administrative centres. ... That a downsizing of state personnel followed Theoderic's arrival in Italy can be inferred from Procopius, who notes that Theoderic allowed the previous corps of silentiarii, domestici, and scholares present at Rome to retain a subsistence-level stipend for the sake of tradition, implying that they had ceased to hold anything beyond an honorary function."[137] the Gothic court's annual income of 45,000 solidi may have supported 3000-5000 administrators.[138]

♠ Examination system ♣ inferred absent ♥

♠ Merit promotion ♣ inferred absent ♥

♠ Specialized government buildings ♣ present ♥

Law

♠ Formal legal code ♣ present ♥ The Edictum Theoderici was a modernization of imperial Roman law. [139] The Goths had their own law code, promulgated for them by Theodoric.[140] "law of the Codex Theodosiani and its Novellae."[141] "Now that recent research has cast doubt on the tradition attribution of the famous Edictum to Theodoric the Great and has sough to bestow it on Theodoric II at Toulouse, Ostrogothic legal proceedings are even less securely defined."[142] "The Romans followed the Theodosian Code and the Novellae. The Goths adhered to their customs and whatever instructions were contained in the lost royal enactments."[143] "A few people still claimed to live under "Gothic law" as late as 769, but they were only one small and perculiar group."[144]

"As the small Republic gradually extended its dominance over its neighbours, it was forced to find ways of conducting legal dealings with people who were not Romans, but whose laws could have something in common with Roman law. The imperial jurists distinguished the ius civile, the law of the civitas from the ius gentium, law of the peoples, and the ius naturale, the law of nature. The ius gentium did not refer to anything approximating to international law, but rather to the things that the Roman ius civile had in common with the usages of other peoples."[145]

Writing c200 CE "Papinian, perhaps the authority on law most respected in late antiquity, listed the sources of the ius civile as statutes (leges), popular resolutions (plebiscita), senatorial enactments (senatusconsulta), decrees of emperors (decreta principum) and the authoritative pronouncements of men learned in law, the jurists (auctoritas prudentium). To these was added the ius honorarium, the law contained in the Edict of the praetor, who, under the Republic and Early Empire administered law in Rome; this form of law derived its name from the praetor's magistracy (honos) and was held to 'assist, supplement or amend' the ius civile.".[146]

♠ Judges ♣ present ♥ Judicial positions. [147] Judges.[148]

Praetorian prefect had "final judgement in legal disputes".[149]

♠ Courts ♣ present ♥ "The traditional Roman courts rendered justice within their respective jurisdictions. The provincial courts and governors toiled in Gaul, Pannonia, Dalmatia, indeed wherever Ostrogothic rule had peacefully supplanted the Roman emperors." [150] "provincial iudices heard Gothic cases and decided them on the basis of custom and the edicta of Theodoric and his successors."[151] Members of Senate appointed to act as judges in courts [152] In cases involving Goths and Romans, there were two judges, one Count of the Goth and one Roman judge [153]

♠ Professional Lawyers ♣ present ♥ A story is told in which Theodoric, in response to a petition, demanded lawyers in two days to decide a lawsuit that had dragged on for thirty years. A settlement was promptly reached and then Theodoric executed the lawyers. [154]

Specialized Buildings: polity owned

♠ irrigation systems ♣ present ♥
♠ drinking water supply systems ♣ present ♥ According to the Bishop of Ravenna, Theodoric: "He restored the aqueduct of Ravenna, which Trajan had built; and again, after a long interval, brought water into the city." [155] "At Rome also the officer who was specially charged with the maintenance of these noble works, the "Count of the Aqueducts", was exhorted to show his zeal by rooting up hurtful trees, and by at once repairing any part of the masonry that seemed to be falling into decay through age."[156] Water channels used for fresh water in Early Medieval Italy. However, not necessarily built by state. "From the fourth century onward, in fact, water evergetism in the peninsular survived by assuming new forms. Much as was the case in ninth-century Le Mans, in late antique Italy bishops replaced secular builders of aqueducts. Indeed, by Aldric's day, Italy had developed a distinguished tradition of episcopal involvement in urban water supply. [157]
♠ markets ♣ present ♥ Gothic market: "The village market was a center for the exchange of merchandise and a public forum for the discussion of daily events and matters of community concern: market (mapl) meant discourse in public (mapleins), profit or gain (gawaurki)." [158]
♠ food storage sites ♣ present ♥ "Theodoric sought to secure and regularize the distribution of public grain"[159] Famine relief.[160] His Praetorian prefect was responsible for "the maintenance of the public food supply".[161]

Transport infrastructure

♠ Roads ♣ present ♥ "Theodoric and his successors in Italy repaired roads and kept the Tiber open to barge traffic." [162]
♠ Bridges ♣ inferred present ♥ "The daily operation of the government, the maintenance of the post, road repair, and the like, primarily remained the..." - cannot read more than this, suggests these practices continued in the Ostrogothic Kingdom, presumably operated by Romans. [163]
♠ Canals ♣ inferred present ♥ "The daily operation of the government, the maintenance of the post, road repair, and the like, primarily remained the..." - cannot read more than this, suggests these practices continued in the Ostrogothic Kingdom, presumably operated by Romans. [164]
♠ Ports ♣ inferred present ♥ "Theodoric and his successors in Italy repaired roads and kept the Tiber open to barge traffic." [165]


Special purpose sites

♠ Mines or quarries ♣ present ♥

Information

Writing System

♠ Mnemonic devices ♣ ♥
♠ Nonwritten records ♣ present ♥
♠ Written records ♣ present ♥ Codex Argenteus, Ulfilas's Gothic translation of the Bible. 188 of 336 pages preserved, most comprehensive Gothic language text known. [166]
♠ Script ♣ present ♥
♠ Non-phonetic writing ♣ absent ♥
♠ Phonetic alphabetic writing ♣ present ♥

Kinds of Written Documents

♠ Lists, tables, and classifications ♣ present ♥
♠ Calendar ♣ present ♥
♠ Sacred Texts ♣ present ♥
♠ Religious literature ♣ present ♥ [167] The Arian church had "bishops, priests, even a few scholars commenting on the scriptures" [168]
♠ Practical literature ♣ present ♥ Cassiodorus, movement for the preservation of manuscripts and learning.
♠ History ♣ present ♥ Symmachus, Roman history. Jordanes, sixth century bureaucrat and historian.
♠ Philosophy ♣ present ♥ Boethius (c480-525 CE), The Consolation of Philosophy. "Before he became consul in 510, Boethius translated into Latin many Greek works, including writings from Pythagorus, Ptolmey, Nicomachus, Euclid, Plato, and Aristotle."[169] Cassiodorus and Boethius considered "two 'giants' of Ostrogothic intellectual and literary history".[170]
♠ Scientific literature ♣ present ♥ Medical treatises. Gothic geographers [171] "Before he became consul in 510, Boethius translated into Latin many Greek works, including writings from Pythagorus, Ptolmey, Nicomachus, Euclid, Plato, and Aristotle."[172]
♠ Fiction ♣ inferred present ♥ Not mentioned in the coding, but can we assumed from the breadth of other types of literature.


Money

♠ Articles ♣ present ♥ "The village market was a center for the exchange of merchandise" [173] "the Ostrogothic kingdom in Italy provides the most detailed insights, with evidence for the continuing collection of traditional taxes in kind and in gold."[174]
♠ Tokens ♣ ♥ Possibility of tokens under the Romans which may have continued under the Ostrogoths.
♠ Precious metals ♣ inferred present ♥
♠ Foreign coins ♣ present ♥
♠ Indigenous coins ♣ present ♥ "the Ostrogothic kings, like Odovacar before them, never questioned the basic structure of the Roman monetary system. ... They took for granted the imperial perogative to control the striking of gold, for which Goth and Roman alike secured and guaranteed the psychological acceptance of the entire coinage. Silver and bronze coins were subspecies used for regular exchange, and their symbolism varied substantially, especially on the Ostrogothic bronze issues, without ever affecting the monetary structure as a whole." Theodoric also introduced "several new series in bronze" and fixed the rate of exchange between the metals.[175]
♠ Paper currency ♣ absent ♥

Postal System

♠ Couriers ♣ present ♥
♠ Postal stations ♣ present ♥
♠ General postal service ♣ present ♥ Cursus Publicus. Roman post system continued under the Ostrogoths. [176]

Warfare variables

♠ RA ♣ Edward A L Turner ♥

Military Technologies

Military use of Metals

♠ Copper ♣ inferred present ♥ Inferred from presence of bronze.
♠ Bronze ♣ present ♥
♠ Iron ♣ present ♥
♠ Steel ♣ present ♥

Projectiles

♠ Javelins ♣ present ♥ [177]
♠ Atlatl ♣ absent ♥
♠ Slings ♣ absent ♥
♠ Self bow ♣ unknown ♥
♠ Composite bow ♣ present ♥ [178] Goths only had archers on foot. [179]
♠ Crossbow ♣ absent ♥
♠ Tension siege engines ♣ inferred present ♥ No siege specialists [180]
♠ Sling siege engines ♣ inferred present ♥
♠ Gunpowder siege artillery ♣ absent ♥
♠ Handheld firearms ♣ absent ♥

Handheld weapons

♠ War clubs ♣ unknown ♥
♠ Battle axes ♣ unknown ♥
♠ Daggers ♣ inferred present ♥ Coded present for previous Roman polity.
♠ Swords ♣ present ♥ Gothic horseman "carried a sword and buckler as secondary weapons for close combat on horse or on foot." [181]
♠ Spears ♣ present ♥ Gothic horseman "wielded with both hands the extra-long thrusting lance, the contus, to which a pennant was afixed" [182]
♠ Polearms ♣ absent ♥

Animals used in warfare

♠ Dogs ♣ absent ♥
♠ Donkeys ♣ absent ♥
♠ Horses ♣ present ♥ The Italian Ostrogoths were primarily horsemen. [183] "The warriors sat on armored horses and galloped toward the enemy 'with long lances held in close formation'" [184]
♠ Camels ♣ absent ♥
♠ Elephants ♣ absent ♥

Armor

♠ Wood, bark, etc ♣ present ♥ Shields made of wood and covered in leather.[185] Wicker shields. [186]
♠ Leather, cloth ♣ present ♥ Shields made of wood and covered in leather.[187]
♠ Shields ♣ present ♥ Ostrogoths carried a shield, called buckler which was convex and round or elliptical.[188]
♠ Helmets ♣ present ♥ Breastplate and helmet worn only by the Ostrogothic nobility.[189] Gothic horseman "ideally wore a helmet with protection for his neck and cheeks" [190] Iron helmets or skullcaps and body armour often worn by chieftains.[191] Spangenhelments made in Italy.[192]
♠ Breastplates ♣ present ♥ Breastplate and helmet worn only by the Ostrogothic nobility.[193]
♠ Limb protection ♣ present ♥ Battle tunic reached below knees which served as protection from long-range weapons. [194]
♠ Chainmail ♣ present ♥ Gothic horseman "ideally ... was dressed in a flexible suit of armor, not necessarily of metal, which reached down at least to his knees." [195]
♠ Scaled armor ♣ present ♥ Mail (like Roman lorica hamata) or scale armour[196] worn by Ostrogothic nobility. "Some members of the nobility wore armor of gold and silver"[197]
♠ Laminar armor ♣ absent ♥
♠ Plate armor ♣ absent ♥

Naval technology

♠ Small vessels (canoes, etc) ♣ present ♥ "Shortly before his death, Theodoric instructed his praetorian prefect, Abundantius, to initiate the building of a fleet of 1,000 light ships and gave orders for levying sailors."[198] "Theoderic's initiative to build a fleet had tapped resources drawn from his personal estates."[199]
♠ Merchant ships pressed into service ♣ unknown ♥
♠ Specialized military vessels ♣ present ♥ Theodoric c492 CE: "after taking Rimini, he brought a fleet of swift vessels thence to a harbour about six miles from Ravenna, and thus completed its investment by sea."[200] 551 CE fleet of 300 Ostrogothic ships sailed Adriatic, plundered Corfu and ravaged three cities on Greek mainland. [201]

Fortifications

♠ Settlements in a defensive position ♣ present ♥
♠ Wooden palisades ♣ present ♥
♠ Earth ramparts ♣ present ♥ Earthworks [202]
♠ Ditch ♣ present ♥
♠ Moat ♣ present ♥
♠ Stone walls (non-mortared) ♣ absent ♥
♠ Stone walls (mortared) ♣ present ♥ According to the Bishop of Ravenna, Theodoric built walls around Verona and Pavia. [203] On Rome, from the Anonymous Valesianus text: "for the restoration of the Palace and the rebuilding of the walls of the city he ordered two hundred pounds to be given each year from the chest that contained the tax on wine."[204]
♠ Fortified camps ♣ present ♥ During siege of Ravenna 490-493 CE: "Theodoric, from his entrenched camp in the great pine-wood of Ravenna"[205]
♠ Complex fortifications ♣ unknown ♥ "The fortifications on the peninsular, some of which were excellent, derived from Theodoric's efforts to preserve and, if possible, improve the existing system of defences. The main fortress, Ravenna, was also the most important residence; but the Amal also spent considerable sums on maintaining Rome's city walls. Moreover, Theodoric probably took over and expanded the organisation of the tractus Italiae per Alpes, the fortresses at the southern exits of the Alpine passes. At any rate, we know of several measures by the Gothic king to construct fortifications and supply camps at the Gallic Durance, in the Cottian Alps, in the Val d'Aosta, and near Como and Trent. The conglomerate hill Doss Trento ... was crownded by the fortress with the telling name "Wart." This Verruca and the Ligurian fortresses of Dertona are the best known new constructions of Theodoric's time." [206]
♠ Long walls ♣ 85 ♥ KM. "A reasonable hypothesis is that the earthen wall running between modern Brăhăsesti on the Seret river and Stoicani on the Prut, a distance of 85 km, was erected under Athanaric."[207] (This refers to late 400s).
♠ Modern fortifications ♣ absent ♥

Phase II Variables (polity-based)

Institutional Variables

♠ RA ♣ Edward Alan Lawrence Turner; Jill Levine ♥

Limits on Power of the Chief Executive

Power distributed

♠ Constraint on executive by government ♣ present ♥ Possible that the agreement with the emperor in Constantinople over Theoderic's independent rule was written down but no record has survived to instruct us on the Ostrogothic king's formal position in relation to the Roman East.[208] Rome "seems to have been a hub of official communications second only to Ravenna."[209] "The Anonymous Valesianus reports that Theoderic 'made peace with the emperor Anastasius with regard to the presumption of the rule (presumptio regni) and Anastasius sent back to him all the ornaments of the palace, which Odovacer had transferred to Constantinople [in 476]'. This symbolic act of returning the ornamenta palatii in 498 signalled the acceptance of Theoderic's independent rule in the Italian provinces."[210] king was elected by Gothic military elite, and military "gave their consent to military expeditions."[211] "Rome, as the capital of the major aristocrats, could have a marked influence on politics. Officials of the central ministries, and saiones and comitiaci of the royal officium, were stationed there (Var., IV.47, VII.31); indeed it seems to have been a hub of official communications second only to Ravenna."[212] "For (I suppose) a combination of strategic and political reasons, the Ostrogothic kings had never resided in Rome; although deeply concerned for its beauty and order, they could do little to control political intrigues there, and Rome's influence reached out to Ravenna and the provinces."[213] King made high-level appointments but Constantinople retained right to name senators, patricii, and Western Consuls[214] "Saiones were experienced soldiers ... frequently used in the provision of royal protection (tuitio) to individuals. They were also attached to the Praetorian Prefecture, being used as law and tax enforces by the Prefect's cancellarii when the latter operated in the provinces; they were required to be feared rather than popular... The king, the Prefect, and the Master of the Offices might station them in Rome and other centres of communications to supervise the cursus publicus ... They were (probably) often paired in administrative tasks with apparently Roman staff, a practice which might also be adopted at higher administrative levels. At least one saio, Wilia, achieved such administrative expertise or royal favour that he was appointed comes patrimonii ca 525, probably with membership of the Senate. At a higher social level, the palace also mingled Goths and Romans. Roman nobles might be summoned to it as counsellors without office ... The general Tuluin, a Gothic noble, was trained in it as a royal secretary, subsequently becoming a counsellor, and probably maior domus, during his high-flying civil and military career ... the early career of the probably Roman Senarius was similar..."[215]
♠ Constraint on executive by non-government ♣ present ♥ aritocrats and elites in Italy held sway much independent authority over admin and executive activity[216]
♠ Impeachment ♣ absent ♥

Social Mobility

Status

Elite status

♠ elite status is hereditary ♣ present ♥ Many positions in the Roman bureaucracy were hereditary.[217] "Cassiodorus’ steady advancement in palatine service is, in part, explained by the personal nature of his family’s attachment to the Amal court."[218]

Religion and Normative Ideology

♠ RA ♣ Enrico Cioni ♥

Deification of Rulers

♠ Rulers are legitimated by gods ♣ present ♥ "Fritigern, Alaric, Clovis, and Theodoric the Great greatly enhanced their political power by modeling aspects of their rule upon the role of the emperor within Christendom. The Constantinian Compromise may not have satisfied the emperors Zeno and Justinian, but barbarian kings facing limited religious authority like Athanaric’s found it extraordinarily attractive."[219]

♠ Rulers are gods ♣ absent ♥

Normative Ideological Aspects of Equity and Prosociality

♠ Ideological reinforcement of equality ♣ inferred present ♥ inferred from general Christian thought at this time: Christian ethic of equality [220]. Practical social/political differences were tolerated, but was ideological principle of equality.

♠ Ideological thought equates rulers and commoners ♣ inferred present ♥ inferred from general Christian thought at this time: Christian ethic of equality [221]. Practical social/political differences were tolerated, but was ideological principle of equality.
♠ Ideological thought equates elites and commoners ♣ [absent; present] ♥ Christian ethic of equality [222]. In spite of growing importance of Christian beliefs, rulers did much to distance themselves from rest of population through ritual activity for most of this period[223]Imperial Cult still acknowledged, although its religious character changed slightly under Christian emperors[224] Practical social/political differences were tolerated, but was ideological principle of equality.

♠ Ideology reinforces prosociality ♣ present ♥ 'Almsgiving and other forms of charity have played a central role in Muslim and Christian societies, especially in the Mediterranean world. [...] Indeed, one of the early markers of Christian identity was the explicit injunction among members of early Christian communities to provide alms for the poor, function taken up in the third and fourth centuries by large urban basilicas [...] These charitable functions multiplied during the urban economic crises of the fourth and fifth centuries. [...] In addition to the charity provided by basilicas in the Latin west, the Benedictine rule provided a model for monastic charity from the sixth century on in Italy as well as in the rest of Europe, when it prescribed that monks greet weary pilgrims and other travelers, wash their feet, and take them in. Even so, medieval monasteries in Italy, and elsewhere in Europe, made clear that their primary duties involved prayer for the salvation of souls rather than nourishment of the bodies of strangers. Monastic charity was itself liturgical and ritualistic, often restricted to certain feast days with deliberate limits on the types and numbers of poor assisted. " [225]

Moralizing Supernatural Powers

♠ Moral concern is primary ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement is certain ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing norms are broad ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement is targeted ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement of rulers ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing religion adopted by elites ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing religion adopted by commoners ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement in afterlife ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement in this life ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement is agentic ♣ present ♥

These data were reviewed by expert advisors and consultants. For a detailed description of these data, refer to the relevant Analytic Narratives, reference tables, and acknowledgements page. [226] [227] [228]

References

  1. (Hodgkin 1897, Footnote 5)
  2. (Madigan 2015, 38)
  3. (Burns 1991, xiii) Thomas S Burns. 1991. A History of the Ostrogoths. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
  4. (Burns 1991, xiv) Thomas S Burns. 1991. A History of the Ostrogoths. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
  5. (Hodgkin 1897)
  6. (Hodgkin 1897)
  7. (Hodgkin 1897)
  8. (Stearns 2001, 169)
  9. (Hodgkin 1897)
  10. (Burns 1991, 215)
  11. (Heydemann 2016) Heydemann, Gerda. The Ostrogothic Kingdom: Ideologies and Transitions. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  12. (Heydemann 2016, 39) Heydemann, Gerda. The Ostrogothic Kingdom: Ideologies and Transitions. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  13. (Burns 1991, 167-168) Thomas S Burns. 1991. A History of the Ostrogoths. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
  14. (Burns 1991, 168-169) Thomas S Burns. 1991. A History of the Ostrogoths. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
  15. (Heydemann 2016, 20) Heydemann, Gerda. The Ostrogothic Kingdom: Ideologies and Transitions. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  16. (Hodgkin 1897)
  17. (Hodgkin 1897)
  18. (Hodgkin 1897)
  19. (Hodgkin 1897)
  20. (Deliyannis 2009)
  21. (Wolfram 1990, 324)
  22. (Burns 1991, 7)
  23. (Cameron 1993) Averil Cameron. 1993. The Later Roman Empire, A.D. 284-430. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  24. (Burns 1991, 74) Thomas S. Burns. 1991. A History of the Ostrogoths. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
  25. (Heydemann 2016, 21) Gerda Heydemann. 2016. 'The Ostrogothic Kingdom: Ideologies and Transitions', in A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy, edited by Jonathan J. Arnold, Shane M. Bjornlie and Kristina Sessa, 15-46. Leiden: Brill.
  26. (Heydemann 2016, 20) Gerda Heydemann. 2016. 'The Ostrogothic Kingdom: Ideologies and Transitions', in A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy, edited by Jonathan J. Arnold, Shane M. Bjornlie and Kristina Sessa, 15-46. Leiden: Brill.
  27. (Stearns, ed. 2001, 169) Peter N. Stearns, ed. 2001. The Encyclopedia of World History: Ancient, Medieval, and Modern. 6th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
  28. (Burns 1991, 215) Thomas S. Burns. 1991. A History of the Ostrogoths. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
  29. (Heydemann 2016, 21) Gerda Heydemann. 2016. 'The Ostrogothic Kingdom: Ideologies and Transitions', in A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy, edited by Jonathan J. Arnold, Shane M. Bjornlie and Kristina Sessa, 15-46. Leiden: Brill.
  30. (Barnish 2007, 327) Sam J. Barnish. 2007. 'Cuncta Italiae Membra Componere: Political Relations in Ostrogothic Italy', in The Ostrogoths from the Migration Period to the Sixth Century: An Ethnographic Perspective, edited by Sam J. Barnish and Federico Marazzi, 317-37. Woodbridge: Boydell Press.
  31. (Wolfram and Dunlap 1990, 287-88) H. Wolfram and T. J. Dunlap. 1990. History of the Goths. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
  32. (Barnish 2007, 327) Sam J. Barnish. 2007. 'Cuncta Italiae Membra Componere: Political Relations in Ostrogothic Italy', in The Ostrogoths from the Migration Period to the Sixth Century: An Ethnographic Perspective, edited by Sam J. Barnish and Federico Marazzi, 317-37. Woodbridge: Boydell Press.
  33. (Arnold, Bjornlie and Sessa 2016, 8) Jonathan J. Arnold, Shane M. Bjornlie and Kristina Sessa. 2016. 'Introduction', in A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy, edited by Jonathan J. Arnold, Shane M. Bjornlie and Kristina Sessa, 1-13. Leiden: Brill.
  34. (Heydemann 2016, 25) Gerda Heydemann. 2016. 'The Ostrogothic Kingdom: Ideologies and Transitions', in A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy, edited by Jonathan J. Arnold, Shane M. Bjornlie and Kristina Sessa, 15-46. Leiden: Brill.
  35. (Arnold, Bjornlie and Sessa 2016, 8) Jonathan J. Arnold, Shane M. Bjornlie and Kristina Sessa. 2016. 'Introduction', in A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy, edited by Jonathan J. Arnold, Shane M. Bjornlie and Kristina Sessa, 1-13. Leiden: Brill.
  36. (Bjornlie 2016, 59) Shane M Bjornlie. 2016. 'Governmental Administration.' in A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy edited by Jonathan J Arnold, Shane M Bjornlie, Kristina Sessa. Leiden: BRILL.
  37. (Bjornlie 2016, 53) Shane M. Bjornlie. 2016. 'Governmental Administration', in A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy, edited by Jonathan J. Arnold, Shane M. Bjornlie and Kristina Sessa, 47-72. Leiden: Brill.
  38. (Heydemann 2016, 26) Gerda Heydemann. 2016. 'The Ostrogothic Kingdom: Ideologies and Transitions', in A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy, edited by Jonathan J. Arnold, Shane M. Bjornlie and Kristina Sessa, 15-46. Leiden: Brill.
  39. (Bjornlie 2016, 58) Shane M. Bjornlie. 2016. 'Governmental Administration', in A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy, edited by Jonathan J. Arnold, Shane M. Bjornlie and Kristina Sessa, 47-72. Leiden: Brill.
  40. (Barnish 2007, 322) Sam J. Barnish. 2007. 'Cuncta Italiae Membra Componere: Political Relations in Ostrogothic Italy', in The Ostrogoths from the Migration Period to the Sixth Century: An Ethnographic Perspective, edited by Sam J. Barnish and Federico Marazzi, 317-37. Woodbridge: Boydell Press.
  41. (Heydemann 2016, 26) Gerda Heydemann. 2016. 'The Ostrogothic Kingdom: Ideologies and Transitions', in A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy, edited by Jonathan J. Arnold, Shane M. Bjornlie and Kristina Sessa, 15-46. Leiden: Brill.
  42. (Bjornlie 2016, 61) Shane M. Bjornlie. 2016. 'Governmental Administration', in A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy, edited by Jonathan J. Arnold, Shane M. Bjornlie and Kristina Sessa, 47-72. Leiden: Brill.
  43. (Bjornlie 2016, 61) Shane M. Bjornlie. 2016. 'Governmental Administration', in A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy, edited by Jonathan J. Arnold, Shane M. Bjornlie and Kristina Sessa, 47-72. Leiden: Brill.
  44. (Wolfram and Dunlap 1990, 296) H. Wolfram and T. J. Dunlap. 1990. History of the Goths. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
  45. (Purton 2009, 14) Peter Purton. 2009. A History of the Early Medieval Siege, c. 450-1220. Woodbridge: Boydell Press.
  46. (Burns 1991, 129) Thomas S. Burns. 1991. A History of the Ostrogoths. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
  47. Bernard F Reilly. The Medieval Spains. 1993. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
  48. (Burns 1991, 98-99) Burns, T. S. 1991. A History of the Ostrogoths. Indiana University Press
  49. (McEverdy and Jones 1978)
  50. (Arnold, Bjornlie and Sessa 2016, 1) Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  51. (Hodgkin 1897)
  52. (Unknown)
  53. (Burns 1991, 65)
  54. (Burns 1991, 205)
  55. (Twine 1992 http://msaag.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/26_Twine.pdf)
  56. (Modelski 2003, 49)
  57. (Arnold, Bjornlie and Sessa 2016, 9) Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  58. (Deliyannis 2016, 251) Deliyannis, Deborah M. Urban Life and Culture. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  59. (Deliyannis 2016, 251) Deliyannis, Deborah M. Urban Life and Culture. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  60. (Burns 1991, 174)
  61. (Burns 1991, 117)
  62. (Hodgkin 1897)
  63. (Burns 1991, 121)
  64. (Bjornlie 2016, 58) Bjornlie, Shane M. Governmental Administration. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  65. (Burns 1991, 71)
  66. (Hodgkin 1897)
  67. (Wolfram and Dunlap 1990, 286) H Wolfram and T J Dunlap. 1990. History of the Goths. University of California Press.
  68. (Stearns 2001, 169)
  69. (Burns 1991, 170)
  70. (Hodgkin 1897)
  71. (Burns 1991, 178)
  72. (Hodgkin 1897)
  73. (Burns 1991, 169-171)
  74. (Burns 1991, 172)
  75. (Bjornlie 2016, 61) Bjornlie, Shane M. Governmental Administration. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  76. (Hodgkin 1897)
  77. (Bjornlie 2016, 61) Bjornlie, Shane M. Governmental Administration. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  78. (Bjornlie 2016, 61) Bjornlie, Shane M. Governmental Administration. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  79. (Bjornlie 2016, 61) Bjornlie, Shane M. Governmental Administration. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  80. (Bjornlie 2016, 61) Bjornlie, Shane M. Governmental Administration. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  81. (Bjornlie 2016, 63) Bjornlie, Shane M. Governmental Administration. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  82. (Burns 1991, 169-171)
  83. (Hodgkin 1897)
  84. (Burns 1991, 169-171)
  85. (Hodgkin 1897)
  86. (Bjornlie 2016, 62) Bjornlie, Shane M. Governmental Administration. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  87. (Bjornlie 2016, 63) Bjornlie, Shane M. Governmental Administration. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  88. (Bjornlie 2016, 62) Bjornlie, Shane M. Governmental Administration. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  89. (Bjornlie 2016, 62) Bjornlie, Shane M. Governmental Administration. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  90. (Bjornlie 2016, 62) Bjornlie, Shane M. Governmental Administration. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  91. (Bjornlie 2016, 61) Bjornlie, Shane M. Governmental Administration. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  92. (Bjornlie 2016, 62) Bjornlie, Shane M. Governmental Administration. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  93. (Bjornlie 2016, 63) Bjornlie, Shane M. Governmental Administration. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  94. (Deliyannis 2016, 255-256) Deliyannis, Deborah M. Urban Life and Culture. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  95. (Deliyannis 2016, 256) Deliyannis, Deborah M. Urban Life and Culture. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  96. (Burns 1991, 196)
  97. (Wolfram and Dunlap 1990, 293)
  98. (Burns 1991, 174)
  99. (Burns 1991, 175)
  100. (Burns 1991, 176)
  101. (Burns 1991, 176)
  102. (Burns 1991, 176)
  103. (Hodgkin 1897)
  104. (Burns 1991, 131)
  105. (Burns 1991, 177)
  106. (Burns 1991, 174)
  107. (Burns 1991, 176)
  108. (Burns 1991, 82)
  109. (Burns 1991, 174)
  110. (Burns 1991, 164-165)
  111. (Burns 1991, 165)
  112. (Burns 1991, 166)
  113. (Burns 1991, 166-167)
  114. (Bradley 2005, 153)
  115. (Burns 1991, 161)
  116. (Burns 1991, 160-161)
  117. (Madigan 2015, 21)
  118. (Madigan 2015, 21)
  119. (Madigan 2015, 14)
  120. Abels [1]
  121. (Burns 1991, 185-187)
  122. (Burns 1991, 200)
  123. (Arnold, Bjornlie and Sessa 2016, 6-7) Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  124. (Bradley 2005, 158)
  125. (Burns 1991, 199)
  126. (Burns 1991, 174)
  127. (Bradley 2005, 169 )
  128. (Burns 1991, 174)
  129. (Burns 1991, 176)
  130. (Bradley 2005, 169)
  131. [2]
  132. (Heydemann 2016, 26) Heydemann, Gerda. The Ostrogothic Kingdom: Ideologies and Transitions. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  133. (Burns 1991, 81-82)
  134. (Burns 1991, 176)
  135. (Burns 1991, 176)
  136. (Heydemann 2016, 26) Heydemann, Gerda. The Ostrogothic Kingdom: Ideologies and Transitions. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  137. (Bjornlie 2016, 49-50) Bjornlie, Shane M. Governmental Administration. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  138. (Bjornlie 2016, 53) Bjornlie, Shane M. Governmental Administration. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  139. (Wolfram and Dunlap 1990, 289)
  140. (Hodgkin 1897)
  141. (Burns 1991, 172)
  142. (Burns 1991, 172)
  143. (Burns 1991, 173)
  144. (Burns 1991, 215)
  145. (Harries 2001, 10) Harries, Jill. 2001. Law and Empire in Late Antiquity. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
  146. (Harries 2001, 11) Harries, Jill. 2001. Law and Empire in Late Antiquity. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
  147. (Wolfram and Dunlap 1990, 293)
  148. (Burns 1991, 100)
  149. (Bjornlie 2016, 61) Bjornlie, Shane M. Governmental Administration. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  150. (Burns 1991, 171-172)
  151. (Burns 1991, 172)
  152. (Bradley 2005, 157)
  153. (Bradley 2005, 169)
  154. (Burns 1991, 174)
  155. (Hodgkin 1897)
  156. (Hodgkin 1897)
  157. (Squatriti 2002, 13) Paolo Squatriti. 2002. Water and Society in Early Medieval Italy, AD 400-1000. Cambridge University Press.
  158. (Burns 1991, 117)
  159. (Burns 1991, 172)
  160. (Burns 1991, 172)
  161. (Bjornlie 2016, 61) Bjornlie, Shane M. Governmental Administration. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  162. (Burns 1991, 128)
  163. (Burns 1991, 74)
  164. (Burns 1991, 74)
  165. (Burns 1991, 128)
  166. (Wolfram 1990, 325)
  167. (Barnish and Marrazzi 2007, 474)
  168. (Burns 1991, 161)
  169. (Burns 1991, 101)
  170. (Arnold, Bjornlie and Sessa 2016, 11) Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  171. (Barnish and Marrazzi 2007, 474)
  172. (Burns 1991, 101)
  173. (Burns 1991, 117)
  174. (Lee 2013) Lee, A. D. 2013. From Rome to Byzantium AD 363 to 565: The Transformation of Ancient Rome. Edinburgh University Press.
  175. (Burns 1991, 70)
  176. (Burns 1991, 128)
  177. (Burns 1991, 214)
  178. (Barnish and Marrazzi 2007, 472)
  179. (Wolfram 1990, 305)
  180. (Barnish and Marrazzi 2007, 472)
  181. (Wolfram 1990, 302)
  182. (Wolfram 1990, 302)
  183. (Wolfram 1990, 302)
  184. (Wolfram 1990, 302)
  185. (DeVries and Smith 2012)
  186. (Burns 1991, 190)
  187. (DeVries and Smith 2012)
  188. (DeVries and Smith 2012)
  189. (Thompson 2002, 81)
  190. (Wolfram 1990, 302)
  191. (DeVries and Smith 2012)
  192. (Burns 1991, 185)
  193. (Thompson 2002, 81)
  194. (Wolfram 1990, 306)
  195. (Wolfram 1990, 302)
  196. (DeVries and Smith 2012)
  197. (Burns 1991, 213)
  198. (Burns 1991, 105)
  199. (Bjornlie 2016, 54) Bjornlie, Shane M. Governmental Administration. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  200. (Hodgkin 1897)
  201. (Thompson 2002, 86)
  202. (Laing 2000, 43)
  203. (Hodgkin 1897)
  204. (Burns 1991, 90)
  205. (Hodgkin 1897)
  206. (Wolfram 1990, 306)
  207. (Burns 1991, 188)
  208. (Heydemann 2016, 20) Heydemann, Gerda. The Ostrogothic Kingdom: Ideologies and Transitions. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  209. (Barnish 2007, 327) Barnish, Sam. Cuncta Italiae Membra Componere: Political Relations in Ostrogothic Italy. Barnish, Sam J. Marazzi, Federico. eds. 2007. The Ostrogoths from the Migration Period to the Sixth Century: An Ethnographic Perspective. The Boydell Press. Woodbridge.
  210. (Heydemann 2016, 20) Heydemann, Gerda. The Ostrogothic Kingdom: Ideologies and Transitions. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  211. (Heydemann 2016, 21) Heydemann, Gerda. The Ostrogothic Kingdom: Ideologies and Transitions. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  212. (Barnish 2007, 327) Barnish, Sam. Cuncta Italiae Membra Componere: Political Relations in Ostrogothic Italy. Barnish, Sam J. Marazzi, Federico. eds. 2007. The Ostrogoths from the Migration Period to the Sixth Century: An Ethnographic Perspective. The Boydell Press. Woodbridge.
  213. (Barnish 2007, 328) Barnish, Sam. Cuncta Italiae Membra Componere: Political Relations in Ostrogothic Italy. Barnish, Sam J. Marazzi, Federico. eds. 2007. The Ostrogoths from the Migration Period to the Sixth Century: An Ethnographic Perspective. The Boydell Press. Woodbridge.
  214. (Wolfram and Dunlap 1990, 287-8)
  215. (Barnish 2007, 323) Barnish, Sam. Cuncta Italiae Membra Componere: Political Relations in Ostrogothic Italy. Barnish, Sam J. Marazzi, Federico. eds. 2007. The Ostrogoths from the Migration Period to the Sixth Century: An Ethnographic Perspective. The Boydell Press. Woodbridge.
  216. (Bjornlie 2016) Bjornlie, Shane M. Governmental Administration. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  217. (Burns 1991, 169) Burns, T. S. 1991. A History of the Ostrogoths. Indiana University Press.
  218. (Bjornlie 2016, 60) Bjornlie, Shane M. Governmental Administration. in Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden.
  219. (Burns 1991, 149) Burns, T. S. 1991. A History of the Ostrogoths. Indiana University Press.
  220. (Jenn Larson, Oxford workhsop January 2017)
  221. (Jenn Larson, Oxford workhsop January 2017)
  222. (Jenn Larson, Oxford workhsop January 2017)
  223. (Romans : From Village to Empire, 446)
  224. (Lee 2013)
  225. Gavitt, P. 2004. Charitable Institutions. In Kleinhenz, C. (ed) ‘’Medieval Italy: An Encyclopedia’’ pp. 208-210. New York; London: Routledge.
  226. http://seshatdatabank.info/databrowser/moralizing-supernatural-punishment-acknowledgements.html
  227. http://seshatdatabank.info/databrowser/moralizing-supernatural-punishment-narratives.html
  228. http://seshatdatabank.info/databrowser/moralizing-supernatural-punishment-nga_tables.html

http://content.wwu.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/theses/id/551/rec/19

Hodgkin, T. 1897. Theodoric the Goth: The Barbarian Champion of Civilization. G. P. Putnum's Sons. New York. [3]


Barnish, S, Marrazzi, F (2007) The Ostrogoths from the Migration Period to the Sixth Century: An Ethnographic Perspective, Boydell & Brewer Ltd

Basillica of S. Apollinare Nuovo, Justification for the inclusion to the World Heritage List [4]

Bradley, H. 2005. The Goths from the Earliest Times to the End of the Gothic Dominion in Spain. Kessinger Publishing.

Burns, T. S. 1991. A History of the Ostrogoths. Indiana University Press [5]

Deliyannis, D. M. 2009. Ravenna in late antiquity. Cambridge University Press [6]

DeVries, K, Smith, R (2012) Medieval Military Technology, second edition, University of Toronto Press

Kinder, H. Hilgemann, W. 1974. The Anchor Atlas of World History. Volume 1. Anchor Books Doubleday. New York.

Laing, J (2000) Warriors of the dark ages, Sutton

McEvedy, C. Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Allen Lane. London.

Modelski, G. 2003. World Cities -3000 to 2000. FAROS2000. Washington D.C.

Stearns, P. 2001. The Encyclopedia of World History. 6th Edition. James Clarke & Co Ltd. Cambridge.

Thompson, E (2002) Romans and Barbarians: The Decline of the Western Empire, University of Wisconsin Press

Todd, M (2009) The Early Germans, John Wiley & Sons

Unknown. The Fall of Rome: The Ostrogoths. Worcester Polytechnic Institute [7]

Wolfram, H. Dunlap, T. J. 1990. History of the Goths. University of California Press [8]

Wolfram, H (1990) History of the Goths, University of California Press

http://www.historyfiles.co.uk/KingListsEurope/BarbarianOstrogoths.htm[9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostrogoths#Amal_Dynasty [10]


Aldrete, G. 2004. Daily Life in the Roman City. London: Greenport Press.

Arnold, J.J. 2008. Theoderic, the Goths, and the Restoration of the Roman Empire. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Michigan.

Beard, M., J. North and S. Price. 1998. Religions of Rome, vol. 1: A History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Collinge, W.J. 2012. Historical Dictionary of Catholicism. Plymouth: Scarecrow Press, Inc.

Dunbabin, K.M.D 2003. The Roman Banquet: Images of Conviviality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Early Christian Monuments of Ravenna. Available: http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/788. Last accessed 4th April 2015.

Heather, P. 1998. The Goths. Oxford: Wiley.

Raff, K. 2011. The Roman Banquet. In Helibrunn Timeline of Art History. Available: http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/banq/hd_banq.htm. Last accessed 4th April 2015.

Madigan, K. 2015. Medieval Christianity: A New History. Yale University Press. New Haven.