THE DISMEMBERMENT OF THE EMPIRE.
§ 1. _The Later Geography of the Empire._
The Roman dominion, as we have seen, grew up by the successive
annexation of endless kingdoms, districts, and cities, each of which,
after its annexation, still retained, whether as an allied province
or a subject state, much of the separate being which it had while it
was independent. The allies and subjects of Rome remained in a variety
of different relations to the ruling city, and the old names and the
old geographical boundaries were largely preserved. ♦Wiping out of old
divisions under the Empire.♦ But, as the old ideas of the commonwealth
gradually died out, and as the power of the Emperors gradually grew
into an avowed monarchy, the political change naturally led to a
geographical change. The Roman dominion ceased to be a collection
of allied and subject states under a single ruling city; it changed
into a single Empire, all whose parts, all whose inhabitants, were
equally subject to its Imperial head. The old distinctions of Latins,
Italians, and provincials died out when all free inhabitants of the
Empire became alike Romans. Italy had no longer any privilege; it
was simply part of the Empire, like any other part. The geographical
divisions which had been, first independent, then dependent states,
sank into purely administrative divisions, which might be mapped out
afresh at any time when it was found convenient to do so. Italy itself,
in the extended sense which the word Italy had then come to bear, was
mapped out afresh into _regions_ as early as the time of Augustus. ♦New
division of Italy under Augustus.♦ These divisions, eleven in number,
mark an epoch in the process by which the detached elements out of
which the Roman Empire had grown were fused together into one whole. As
long as Italy was a collection of separate commonwealths, standing in
various relations to the ruling city, there could not be any systematic
division of the country for administrative purposes. Now that the whole
of Italy stood on one level of citizenship or of subjection, the land
might be mapped out in whatever way was most convenient. ♦The eleven
Regions.♦ But the eleven regions of Augustus did not work any violent
change. Old names and old boundaries largely remained. The famous names
of _Etruria_, _Latium_, _Samnium_, _Umbria_, _Picenum_, and _Lucania_
still lived on, though not always with their ancient boundaries. And,
though all the land as far as the Alps was now Italy, two of the
divisions of Italy kept their ancient names of _Gaul on this side the
Po_ and _Gaul beyond the Po_. _Liguria_ and _Venetia_, now Italian
lands, make up the remainder of Northern Italy.
♦Divisions under Constantine.♦
Italy had thus been mapped out afresh; what was done with Italy in
the time of Augustus was done with the whole Empire in the time of
Constantine. What Italy was in the earlier time the whole Empire was
in the later; the old distinctions had been wiped out, and the whole
of the Roman world stood ready to be parted out into fresh divisions.
Under Diocletian, the Empire was divided into four parts, forming the
realms of the four Imperial colleagues of his system, the two Augusti
and their subordinate Cæsars. ♦Division of the Empire under Diocletian.
A.D. 292.♦ Diocletian’s system of government involved a practical
degradation of Rome from the headship of the Empire. Augusti and Cæsars
now dwelled at points where their presence was more needed to ward off
Persian and German attacks from the frontiers; Rome was forsaken for
Nikomêdeia and Milan, for Antioch, York, and Trier. ♦Reunion under
Constantine. A.D. 323. | Division between the sons of Theodosius. A.D.
395.♦ The division between the four Imperial colleagues lasted under
another form after the Empire was re-united under Constantine, and it
formed the groundwork of the more lasting division of the Empire into
East and West, between the sons of Theodosius. The whole Empire was
now mapped out according to a scheme in which ancient geographical
names were largely preserved, but in which they were for the most
part used in new or, at least, extended meanings. ♦The Four Prætorian
Prefectures.♦ The Empire was divided into four great divisions called
Prætorian _Prefectures_. These were divided into _Dioceses_—a name used
in this nomenclature without regard to the ecclesiastical sense which
was borrowed from it—and the dioceses again into _Provinces_. The four
great prefectures of the _East_, _Illyricum_, _Italy_, and _Gaul_,
answer nearly to the fourfold division under Diocletian; while we may
say that, in the final division, Illyricum and the East formed the
Eastern Empire, and Italy and Gaul formed the Western. But it is only
roughly that either the prefectures or their smaller divisions answer
to any of the great national or geographical landmarks of earlier times.
♦Prefecture of the East.♦
The Prefecture of the _East_ is that one among the four which least
answers to anything in earlier geography, natural or historical. Its
boundaries do not answer to those of any earlier dominion, nor yet to
any great division of race or language. It stretched into all the three
continents of the old world, and took in all those parts of the Empire
which were never fully brought under either Greek or Roman influences.
But it also took in large tracts which we have learned to look on as
part of the Hellenic world—not only lands which had been, to a great
extent, Hellenized in later times, but even some of the earliest Greek
colonies. The four dioceses into which the Prefecture was divided
formed far more natural divisions than the Prefecture itself.
♦Dioceses of the East,♦
Three of these were Asiatic. The first, specially called the _East_,
took in all the possessions of Rome beyond Mount Tauros, together with
Isauria, Kilikia, and the island of Cyprus. Its eastern boundaries
naturally fluctuated according as Rome or Persia prevailed on the
Euphrates and the Tigris, fluctuations of which we shall have again to
speak more specially. ♦Egypt,♦ The diocese of _Egypt_, besides Egypt in
the elder sense, took in, under the name of _Libya_, the old Greek land
of the Kyrenaic Pentapolis. ♦Asia.♦ The diocese of _Asia_, a reminder
of the elder province of that name and of the kingdom of Pergamos out
of which it grew, took in the Asiatic coasts of the Ægæan, together
with Pamphylia, Lykia, and the Ægæan Islands. The diocese of _Pontos_,
preserving the name of the kingdom of Mithridates, took in the lands on
the Euxine, with the fluctuating Armenian possessions of Rome.
♦Diocese of Thrace.♦
Besides these Asiatic lands, the Eastern Prefecture contained
one European diocese, that of _Thrace_, which took in the lands
stretching from the Propontis to the Lower Danube. The names of two
of its provinces are remarkable. Rome now boasts of a province of
_Scythia_. But, among the varied uses of that name, it has now shrunk
up to mean the land immediately south of the mouths of the Danube.
♦Province of _Europa_.♦ The other name is _Europa_, a name which, as
a Roman province, means the district immediately round the New Rome.
Constantine had now fixed his capital on the site of the old Byzantion,
the site from which the city on the Bosporos might seem to bear rule
over two worlds. With whatever motive, the name of Europe was specially
given to that corner of the Western continent where it comes nearest
to the Eastern. Nor was the name ill-chosen for the district round the
city which was so long to be the bulwark of Europe against invading
Asia. ♦Great cities of the Eastern Prefecture.♦ And, besides the New
Rome, this Prefecture, as containing those parts of the Empire which
had belonged to the great Macedonian kingdoms, contained an unusual
proportion of the great cities of the world. Besides a crowd of less
famous places, it took in the two great Eastern seats of Grecian
culture, the most renowned Alexandria and the most renowned Antioch,
themselves only the chief among many others cities bearing the same
names. All these, it should be remarked, were comparatively recent
creations, bearing the names of individual men. That cities thus
artificially called into being should have kept the position which
still belonged to the great Macedonian capitals is one of the most
speaking signs of the effect which the dominion of Alexander and his
successors had on the history of the world.
♦Prefecture of Illyricum.♦
The nomenclature of the second Prefecture marks how utterly Greece, as
a country and nation, had died out of all reckoning. The Prefecture
of the Eastern _Illyricum_ answered roughly to European Greece and
its immediate neighbours. It took in the lands stretching from the
Danube to the southern point of Peloponnêsos. Greece, as part of the
Roman Empire, was included under the name of the barbarian land through
which Rome was first brought into contact with Greek affairs. She was
further included under the name of the half-barbarian neighbour who
had become Greek through the process of conquering Greece. In the
system of Prefectures, Greece formed part of Macedonia, and Macedonia
formed part of Illyricum. So low had Greece, as a land, fallen at
the very moment when her tongue was making the greatest of all its
conquests, when a Greek city was raised to the rank of another Rome.
♦Dioceses of Macedonia and Dacia.♦ The Illyrian Prefecture contained
the two dioceses of _Macedonia_ and _Dacia_. This last name, it will
be remembered, had, since the days of Aurelian, withdrawn to the
south of the Danube. The Macedonian diocese contained six provinces,
among which, besides the familiar and venerable names of Macedonia
and Epeiros, we find the names, still more venerable and familiar, of
_Thessaly_ and _Crete_. And one yet greater name lives on with them.
_Hellas_ and _Græcia_ have alike vanished from the map; but the most
abiding name in Grecian history, the theme of Homer and the theme of
Polybios, has not perished. ♦Province of Achaia.♦ Among all changes,
_Achaia_ is there still.
♦Prefecture of Italy.♦
In the new system Italy and Rome herself were in no way privileged over
the rest of the Empire. The _Italian_ Prefecture took in Italy itself
and the lands which might be looked on as necessary for the defence
and maintenance of Italy. It took in the defensive conquests of the
early Empire on the Upper Danube, and it took in the granary of Italy,
Africa. Its three dioceses were _Italy_, _Illyricum_, and _Africa_.
Here Illyricum strangely gave its name both to a distinct Prefecture
and to one diocese of the Prefecture of Italy. ♦Dioceses of Italy,♦ The
Italian diocese contained seventeen provinces. The Gaulish name has now
wholly vanished from the lands south of the Alps. The lands between the
older and the newer boundaries of Italy are now divided into _Liguria_
and _Venetia_—the former name being used in a widely extended sense—and
the new names of _Æmilia_ and _Flaminia_, provinces named after the
great Roman roads, as the roads themselves were named after Roman
magistrates. But the new Italy has spread beyond the Alps, and reaches
to the Danube. Two Rætian provinces form part of it. Three other
provinces are formed by the three great islands, Sicily, Sardinia, and
Corsica. ♦Illyricum,♦ The diocese of the _Western Illyricum_ took in
_Pannonia_, _Dalmatia_, and _Noricum_. ♦Africa.♦ The third diocese,
that of _Africa_, took in the old _Africa_, _Numidia_, and western
_Mauritania_. ♦Greatness of Carthage.♦ The union of these lands with
Italy may seem less strange when we remember that the colony of the
first Cæsar, the restored Carthage, was the greatest of Latin-speaking
cities after Rome herself.
♦Prefecture of Gaul.♦
The fourth Prefecture took in the Roman dominions in Western Europe,
the great Latin-speaking provinces beyond the Alps. ♦Diocese of
Spain; its African territory.♦ Among the seven provinces of _Spain_
are reckoned, not only the Balearic islands, a natural appendage to
the Spanish peninsula, but a small part of the African continent, the
province of _Tingitana_, stretching from the now Italian Africa to the
Ocean. This was according to the general law by which, in almost all
periods of history, either the masters of Spain have borne rule in
Africa or the masters of Africa have borne rule in Spain. ♦Diocese of
Gaul;♦ The diocese of _Gaul_, with its seventeen provinces, keeps, at
least in name, the boundaries of the old Transalpine land. It still
numbers the two Germanies west of the Rhine among its provinces. ♦of
Britain.♦ The five provinces of the diocese of _Britain_ took in, at
the moment when the Empire was beginning to fall asunder, a greater
territory than Rome had held in the island in the days of her greatest
power. ♦Province of Valentia. A.D. 367.♦ The exploits of the elder
Theodosius, who drove back the Pict by land and the Saxon by sea, for
a moment added to the Empire a province beyond the wall of Antoninus,
which, in honour of the reigning Emperors Valentinian and Valens,
received the name of _Valentia_.
§ 2. _The Division of the Empire._
♦Change in the position of Rome.♦
The mapping out of the Empire into Prefectures, and its division
between two or more Imperial colleagues, led naturally to its more
lasting division into what were practically two Empires. The old
state of things had altogether passed away. Rome was no longer the
city ruling over subject states. From the Ocean to the Euphrates all
was alike, if not Rome, at least _Romania_; all its inhabitants were
equally Romans. But to be a Roman now meant, no longer to be a citizen
of a commonwealth, but to be the subject of an Emperor. The unity
of the Empire was not broken by the division of its administration
between several Imperial colleagues; but Rome ceased to be the only
Imperial dwelling-place, and, from the latter years of the third
century, it ceased to be an Imperial dwelling-place at all. As long
as Rome held her old place, no lasting division, nothing more than an
administrative partition among colleagues, could be thought of. There
could be no division to mark on the map. But, when the new system
had fully taken root at the end of the fourth century, we come to a
division which was comparatively lasting, one which fills an important
place in history, and which is capable of being marked on the map.
♦Division of the Empire between the sons of Theodosius. | A.D. 395.♦
On the death of Theodosius the Great, the Empire was divided between
his two sons, Arcadius taking the Eastern provinces, answering nearly
to the Prefectures of the East and of Illyricum, while Honorius took
the Western provinces, the Prefectures of Italy and Gaul. Through the
greater part of the fifth century, the successors of Arcadius and of
Honorius formed two distinct lines of Emperors, of whom the Eastern
reigned at Constantinople, the Western most commonly at Ravenna. But as
the dominions of each prince were alike Roman, the Eastern and Western
Emperors were still looked on in theory as Imperial colleagues charged
with the administration of a common Roman dominion. ♦Practically two
Empires.♦ Practically however the dominions of the two Emperors may
be looked on as two distinct Empires, the Eastern having its seat at
the New Rome or Constantinople, while the Western had its seat more
commonly at Ravenna than at the Old Rome.
This division of the Empire is the great political feature of the
fifth century; but the fate of the two Empires was widely different.
♦Enemies of Rome.♦ From the very beginning of the Empire, Rome had had
to struggle with two chief enemies, in the East and in the West, in
Europe and in Asia, the nature of whose warfare was widely different.
♦Rivalry with Parthia and Persia.♦ In the East she had, first the
Parthian and then the regenerate Persian, as strictly a rival power on
equal terms. This rivalry went on from the moment when Rome stepped
into the place of the Seleukids till the time when Rome was cut short,
and Persia overthrown, by the Saracenic invasions. But, except during
the momentary conquests of Trajan and during the equally momentary
alternate conquests of Rome and Persia in the seventh century, the
whole strife was a mere border warfare which did not threaten the
serious dismemberment of either power. This and that fortress was taken
and retaken; this and that province was ceded and ceded back again;
but except under Trajan and again under Chosroes and Heraclius, the
existence and dominion of neither power was ever seriously threatened.
♦Rivalry with Persia passes on to the Eastern Empire.♦ The Eastern
Empire naturally inherited this part of the calling of the undivided
Empire, the long strife with Persia.
At the other end of the Empire, the enemy was of quite another kind.
♦Teutonic incursions in the Western Empire.♦ The danger there was
through the incursions of the various Teutonic nations. There was no
one Teutonic power which could be a rival to Rome in the same sense
in which Persia was in the East; but a crowd of independent Teutonic
tribes were pressing into the Empire from all quarters, and were
striving to make settlements within its borders. The task of resisting
these incursions fell of course to the Western Empire. ♦No Teutonic
settlements in the Eastern Empire.♦ The Eastern Empire indeed was often
traversed by wandering Teutonic nations; but no permanent settlements
were made within its borders, no dismemberment of its provinces capable
of being marked on the map was made till a much later time. But the
Western Empire was altogether dismembered and broken in pieces by
the settlement of the Teutonic nations within it. The geographical
aspects of the two Empires during the fifth century are thus strikingly
unlike one another; but each continues one side of the history of
the undivided Empire. It will therefore be well to trace those two
characteristic aspects of the two Empires separately. We will first
speak of the Teutonic incursions, through which in the end the Western
Empire was split up and the states of modern Europe were founded. We
will then trace the geographical aspect of the long rivalry between
Rome and Persia in the East.
§ 3. _The Teutonic Settlements within the Empire._
Our subject is historical geography, and neither ethnology nor
political history, except so far as either national migrations or
political changes produce a directly geographical effect. ♦The
Wandering of the Nations.♦ The great movement called the Wandering of
the Nations, and its results in the settlement of various Teutonic
nations within the bounds of the Roman Empire, concern us now only so
far as they wrought a visible change on the map. The exact relations
of the different tribes to one another, the exact course of the
migrations which led to the final settlement of each, belong rather
to another branch of inquiry. But there are certain marked stages in
the relations of the Empire to the nations beyond its borders, certain
marked stages in the growth and mutual relations of those nations,
which must be borne in mind in order to explain their settlements
within the Empire. ♦Changes in the nomenclature of the Teutonic
nations.♦ It will be at once seen that the geography and nomenclature
of the German nations in the third century is for the most part quite
different from their geography and nomenclature as we find it in Cæsar
and Tacitus. New names have come to the front, names all of which
play a part in history, many of which remain to this day; and, with
one or two exceptions, the older names sink into the background. It
is therefore hardly needful to go through the ethnology and geography
of Tacitus, or to deal with any of the controverted points which are
suggested thereby. We have to look at the German nations purely in
their relations to Rome.
♦Warfare on the Rhine and the Danube.♦
We have seen that the history of Rome in her western provinces was,
from an early stage of the Empire, a struggle with the Teutonic nations
on the Rhine and the Danube. We have seen that all attempts at serious
conquest beyond those boundaries came to nothing. ♦Roman possessions
beyond those rivers.♦ The Roman possessions beyond the two great
rivers were mere outposts for the better security of the land within
the rivers. The district beyond them, fenced in by a wall and known
as the _Agri Decumates_, was hardly more than such an outlying post
on a great scale. The struggle along the border was, almost from the
beginning, a defensive struggle on the part of Rome. We hear of Roman
conquests from the second century to the fifth; but they are strictly
defensive conquests, the mere recovery of lost possessions, or at most
the establishment of fresh outposts. ♦Formation of confederacies
among the Germans.♦ From the moment of the first appearance of Rome
on the two rivers, the Teutonic nations were really threatening to
Rome, and the warfare of Rome was really defensive; and from the very
beginning too a process seems to have been at work among the German
nations themselves which greatly strengthened their power as enemies
of Rome. New nations or confederacies, bearing, for the most part,
names unknown to earlier times, begin to be far more dangerous than the
smaller and more scattered tribes of the earlier times had been. These
movements among the German nations themselves, hastened by pressure
of other nations to the east of them, caused the Teutonic attacks on
the Empire to become more and more formidable, and at last to grow into
Teutonic settlements within the Empire. But, in the course of this
process, several stages may be noticed. ♦Marcomanni and Quadi.♦ Thus
the _Marcomanni_ and the _Quadi_ play a part in this history from the
very beginning. The Marcomanni appear in Cæsar, and, from their name of
_Markmen_, we may be sure that they were a confederacy of the same kind
as the later confederacies of the Franks and Alemanni. In the first and
second centuries the Marcomanni are dangerous neighbours, threatening
the Empire and often penetrating beyond its borders, and their name
appears in history as late as the fifth century. But they play no part
in the Teutonic settlements within the Empire. They do not affect the
later map; they had no share in bringing about the changes out of which
modern Europe arose. Their importance ceases just at the time when a
second stage begins, when, in the course of the third century, we begin
to hear of those nations or confederacies whose movements really did
affect later history and geography.
♦Beginning of modern European history.♦
In the third and fourth centuries the history of modern Europe begins.
♦The new confederacies.♦ We now begin to hear names which have been
heard ever since, _Franks_, _Alemans_, _Saxons_, all of them great
confederacies of German tribes. ♦Defensive warfare of Rome.♦ Defence
against German inroads now becomes the chief business of the rulers of
Rome. The invaders were constantly driven back; but new invaders were
as constantly found to renew their incursions. Men of Teutonic race
pressed into the Empire in every conceivable character. ♦Germans within
the Empire.♦ Besides open enemies, who came with the hope either of
plunder or settlement, crowds of Germans served in the Roman armies
and obtained lands held by military tenure as the reward of their
services. Their chiefs were promoted to every rank and honour, military
and civil, short of the Imperial dignity itself. These were changes
of the utmost importance in other points of view; still they do not
directly affect the map of the Empire. Lands and cities were won and
lost over and over again; but such changes were merely momentary; the
acknowledged boundaries of the Roman dominion were not yet altered;
it is not till the next stage that geography begins to be directly
concerned.
♦Beginning of national kingdoms.♦
This last stage begins with the early years of the fifth century, and
thus nearly coincides with the division of the Empire into East and
West. Gothic and other Teutonic kings could now march at pleasure at
the head of their armies through every corner of the Empire, sometimes
bearing the titles of Roman officers, sometimes dictating the choice
of Roman Emperors, sometimes sacking the Old Rome or threatening the
New. It was when these armies under their kings settled down and formed
national kingdoms within the limits of the Empire, that the change
comes to have an effect on the map. In the course of the fifth century
the Western provinces of Rome were rent away from her. In most cases
the loss was cloaked by some Imperial commission, some empty title
bestowed on the victorious invader; but the Empire was none the less
practically dismembered. Out of these dismemberments the modern states
of Europe gradually grew. It will now be our business to give some
account of those nations, Teutonic and otherwise, who had an immediate
share in this work, passing lightly by all questions, and indeed all
nations, which cannot be said to have had such an immediate share in it.
* * * * *
♦Teutonic Settlements in the West.♦
The nations which in the fourth and fifth centuries made settlements
in the Western provinces of Rome fall under two chief heads; those
who made their settlements by land, and those who made them by sea.
This last class is pretty well coextensive with the settlement of
our own forefathers in Britain, which must be spoken of separately.
♦Settlements within the Empire.♦ Among the others, the nations who play
an important part in the fourth and fifth centuries are the _Goths_,
the _Vandals_, the _Burgundians_, the _Suevi_, and the _Franks_. And
their settlements again fall into two classes, those which passed away
within a century or two, and those which have had a lasting effect on
European history. ♦Franks, Burgundians, Suevi,♦ Thus it is plain at the
first glance that the Franks and the Burgundians have left their names
on the modern map. The Suevi have left their name also: but it is now
found only in their older German land; it has vanished for ages from
their western settlement. ♦Goths,♦ The name of the Goths has passed
away from the kingdoms which they founded, but their presence has
affected the history of both the Spanish and the Italian peninsulas.
♦Vandals.♦ The Vandals alone, as a nation and kingdom, have left no
traces whatever, though it may be that they have left their name to a
part of one of the lands of their sojourn. ♦Their kingdoms.♦ All these
nations founded kingdoms within the Western Empire, kingdoms which at
first admitted a nominal superiority in the Empire, but which were
practically independent from the beginning. ♦Various circumstances
of their history.♦ But the history of the several kingdoms is very
different. Some of them soon passed away altogether, while others
became the beginnings of the great nations of modern Europe. Gaul and
Spain fell off very gradually from the Empire. But, in the course of
the fifth century, all the nations of which we have been speaking
formed more or less lasting settlements within those provinces.
Pre-eminent among them are the great settlements of the Goths and the
Franks. Out of the settlement of the Franks arose the modern kingdoms
of Germany and France, and out of the settlement of the Goths arose
the various kingdoms of Spain. Those of the Burgundians, Vandals, and
Suevi were either smaller or less lasting. All of them however must be
mentioned in their order.
♦Migrations of the West-Goths.♦
First and greatest come the _Goths_. It is not needful for our purpose
to examine all that history or legend has to tell us as to the origin
of the Goths, or all the theories which ingenious men have formed on
the subject. ♦Defeat of the Goths by Claudius. A.D. 269.♦ It is enough
for our purpose that the Goths began to show themselves as dangerous
enemies of the Empire in the second half of the third century; but
their continuous history does not begin till the second half of the
fourth. ♦Gothic kingdom on the Danube.♦ We then find them forming a
great kingdom in the lands north of the Danube. ♦Goths driven onwards
by the Huns.♦ Presently a large body of them were driven to seek
shelter within the bounds of the Eastern Empire from the pressure of
the invading _Huns_. These last were a Turanian people who had been
driven from their own older settlements by movements in the further
East which do not concern us, but who become an important element in
the history of the fifth century. They affected the Empire, partly by
actual invasions, partly by driving other nations before them but they
made no lasting settlements within it. Nor did the Goths themselves
make any lasting settlement in the Eastern Empire. ♦They cross the
Danube. A.D. 377.♦ While one part of the Gothic nation became subject
to the Huns, another part crossed the Danube; but they crossed it by
Imperial licence, and if they took to arms, it was only to punish
the treachery of the Roman officers. Presently we find Gothic chiefs
marching at pleasure through the dominions of the Eastern Cæsar; but
they simply march and ravage; it is not till they have got within the
boundary of the West that they found any lasting kingdoms. In fact,
the Goths, and the Teutonic tribes generally, had no real mission in
the East; to them the East was a mere highway to the West. ♦Career of
Alaric. A.D. 394-410.♦ The movements of Alaric in Greece, Illyricum,
and Italy, his sieges and his capture of Rome, are of the highest
historical importance, but they do not touch geography. The Goths first
win for themselves a local habitation and a place on the map when they
left Italy to establish themselves in the further West.
♦Beginning of the West-Gothic kingdom under Athaulf. A.D. 412.♦
Under Alaric’s successor, Athaulf, the first foundations were laid of
that great West-Gothic kingdom which we are apt to look on as specially
Spanish, but which in truth had its first beginning in Gaul, and which
kept some Gaulish territory as long as it lasted. But the Goths passed
into those lands, not in the character of avowed conquerors, not as
founders of an avowed Gothic state, but as soldiers of the Empire,
sent to win back its lost provinces. ♦Condition of Gaul and Spain.♦
Those provinces were now occupied or torn in pieces by a crowd of
invaders, _Suevi_, _Vandals_, and _Alans_. ♦The Alans.♦ These last
are a puzzling race, our accounts of whom are somewhat contradictory,
but who may perhaps be most safely set down as a non-Aryan, or, at
any rate, a non-Teutonic people, who had been largely brought under
Gothic influences. But early in the fifth century they possessed a
dominion in central Spain which stretched from sea to sea. ♦The Suevi
in Spain.♦ Their dominion passed for a few years into the hands of the
Suevi, who had already formed a settlement in north-western Spain, and
who still kept a dominion in that corner long after the greater part
of the peninsula had become Gothic. ♦The Vandals in Africa. A.D. 425.♦
The Vandals occupied Bætica; but they presently passed into Africa,
and there founded the one Teutonic kingdom in that continent, with
Carthage to its capital, a kingdom which took in also the great islands
of the western Mediterranean, including Sicily itself. ♦Independence
of the Basques.♦ Through all these changes the unconquerable people
of the Basque and Cantabrian mountains seem never to have fully
submitted to any conquerors; but the rest of Spain and south-western
Gaul was, before half of the fifth century had passed, formed into the
great West-Gothic kingdom. ♦Gothic kingdom of Toulouse.♦ That kingdom
stretched from the pillars of Hêraklês to the Loire and the Rhone,
and its capital was placed, not on Spanish but on Gaulish ground, at
the Gaulish Tolosa or _Toulouse_. The Gothic dominion in Gaul was
doomed not to be lasting; the Gothic dominion in Spain lasted down to
the Saracen conquest, and all the later Christian kingdoms of Spain
may be looked on as fragments or revivals of it. Spain however never
changed her name for that of her conquerors. ♦Gothia.♦ The only parts
of the Gothic kingdom which ever bore the Gothic name were those small
parts both of Spain and Gaul which kept the name of _Gothia_ through
later causes. ♦Andalusia.♦ The Vandals, on the other hand, though they
passed altogether out of Spain, have left their name to this day in its
southern part under the form of _Andalusia_, a name which, under the
Saracen conquerors, spread itself over the whole peninsula.
♦The Franks.♦
The other great Teutonic nations or confederacies of which we have to
speak have had a far more lasting effect on the nomenclature of Europe.
We have now to trace the steps by which the _Franks_ gradually became
the ruling people both of Germany and of Gaul. They have stamped their
name on both countries. ♦Uses of the word _Francia_.♦ The dominions
of the Franks got the name of _Francia_, a name whose meaning has
constantly varied according to the extent of the Frankish dominion at
different times. In modern use it still cleaves to two parts of their
dominions, to that part of Germany which is still called _Franken_ or
_Franconia_, and to that part of Gaul which is still called _France_.
♦The Alemanni.♦ And their history is closely mixed up with that of
another nation or confederacy, that of the _Alemanni_, who again have,
in the French tongue, given their name to the whole of Germany. ♦A.D.
275.♦ Franks and Alemanni alike begin to be heard of in the third
century, and the Alemanni even attempted an actual invasion of Italy;
but the geographical importance of both confederacies does not begin
till the fifth. All through the fourth century it is the chief business
of the Emperors who ruled in Gaul to defend the frontier of the Rhine
against their incursions, against the Alemanni along the upper part of
its course, and against the Franks along its lower part. ♦Thuringians.
| The Low-Dutch tribes.♦ To the east of the Franks and Alemanni lay
the _Thuringians_; to the north, along the coasts of the German Ocean,
the Low-Dutch tribes, _Saxons_ and _Frisians_. In the course of the
fifth century their movements also began to affect the geography of the
Empire.
During the whole of that century the Franks were pressing into Gaul.
The Imperial city of Trier was more than once taken, and the seat of
the provincial government was removed to Arles. ♦Reign of Chlodwig.
A.D. 481-511.♦ The union of the two chief divisions of the Frankish
confederacy, and the overthrow of the Alemanni, made the Franks, under
their first Christian king, Chlodwig or Clovis, the ruling people of
northern Gaul and central Germany. Their territory thus took in both
lands which had been part of the Empire, and lands which had never
been such. ♦Character and divisions of the Frankish kingdom.♦ This is
a special characteristic of the Frankish settlement, and one which
influences the whole of their later history. There was, from the very
beginning, long before any such distinction was consciously drawn, a
_Teutonic_ and a _Latin Francia_. There were Frankish lands to the
East which never had been Roman. There were lands in northern Gaul
which remained practically Roman under the Frankish dominion. ♦Roman
Germany Teutonized afresh.♦ And between them lay, on the left bank
of the Rhine, the Teutonic lands which had formed part of the Roman
province of Gaul, but which now became Teutonic again. _Moguntiacum_,
_Augusta Treverorum_, and _Colonia Agrippina_, cities founded on
Teutonic soil, now again became German, ready to be in due time, by the
names of _Mainz_, _Trier_, and _Köln_, the metropolitan and electoral
cities of Germany. ♦Eastern and Western _Francia_.♦ These lands, with
the original German lands, formed the _Eastern_ or _Teutonic Francia_,
where the Franks, or their German allies and subjects, formed the real
population of the country. In the _Western Francia_, between the Loire
and the Channel, though the Franks largely settled and influenced
the country in many ways, the mass of the population remained Roman.
♦Armorica or Britanny.♦ Over the western peninsula of _Armorica_ the
dominion of the Franks was always precarious and, at most, external.
Here the ante-Roman population still kept its Celtic language, and it
was further strengthened by colonies from Britain, from which the land
took its later name of the _Lesser Britain_ or _Britanny_. ♦Extent
of the Frankish dominion. A.D. 500.♦ Thus, at the end of the fifth
century, the Frankish dominion was firmly established over the whole of
central Germany and Northern Gaul. Their dominion was fated to be the
most lasting of the Teutonic kingdoms formed on the Roman mainland. The
reason is obvious; while the Goths in Spain and the Vandals in Africa
were isolated Teutonic settlers in a Roman land, the Franks in Gaul
were strengthened by the unbroken Teutonic mainland at their back.
♦The Burgundians.♦
The greater part of Gaul was thus, at the end of the fifth century,
divided between the Franks in the north and the West-Goths in the
south. But, early in the fifth century, a third Teutonic power grew up
in south-eastern Gaul. ♦Their kingdom.♦ The _Burgundians_, a people
who, in the course of the Wandering of the Nations, seem to have made
their way from the shores of the Baltic, established themselves in
the lands between the Rhone and the Alps, where they formed a kingdom
which bore their name. Their dominion in Gaul may be said to have
been more lasting than that of the Goths, less lasting than that of
the Franks. ♦Meaning of the word _Burgundy_.♦ _Burgundy_ is still a
recognized name; but no name in geography has so often shifted its
place and meaning, and it has for some centuries settled itself on a
very small part of the ancient kingdom of the Burgundians. ♦Provence
Burgundian. A.D. 500-510. | 510-536.♦ At the end of the fifth century
the Rhone was a Burgundian river; _Autun_, _Besançon_, _Lyons_, and
_Vienne_ were Burgundian cities; but the sea coast, the original Roman
_Province_, the land which has so steadily kept that name, though it
fell for a moment under the Burgundian power, followed at this time,
as became the first Roman land beyond the Alps, the fortunes of Italy
rather than those of Gaul.
♦Invasion of the Huns.♦
Among these various conquests and shiftings of dominion, all of which
affected the map at the time, some of which have affected history and
geography ever since, it may be well to mention, if only by way of
contrast, an inroad which fills a great place in the history of the
fifth century, but which had no direct effect on geography. ♦Battle
of Châlons. A.D. 451.♦ This was the invasion of Italy and Gaul by
the _Huns_ under Attila, and their defeat at Châlons by the combined
forces of Romans, West-Goths, and Franks. This battle is one of the
events which is remarkable, not for working change, but for hindering
it. Had Attila succeeded, the greatest of all changes would have
taken place throughout all Western Europe. As it was, the map of Gaul
was not affected by his inroad. ♦Destruction of Aquileia, and origin
of Venice.♦ On the map of Italy it did have an indirect effect; he
destroyed the city of Aquileia, and its inhabitants, fleeing to the
Venetian islands, laid the foundation of one of the later powers of
Europe in the form of the commonwealth of _Venice_.
While Spain and Gaul were thus rent away from the Empire, Italy and
Rome itself were practically rent away also, though the form which
the event took was different. ♦Reunion of the Empire. | Rule of
Odoacer. A.D. 476-493.♦ A vote of the Senate reunited the Western
Empire to the Eastern; the Eastern Emperor Zeno became sole Emperor,
and the government of the diocese of Italy—that is, it will be
remembered, of a large territory besides the Italian peninsula—was
entrusted by his commission to Odoacer, a general of barbarian
mercenaries, with the rank of Patrician. No doubt Odoacer was
practically independent of the Empire; but the union of the Empire was
preserved in form, and no separate kingdom of Italy was set up. ♦The
East-Goths in Italy.♦ Presently Odoacer was overthrown by Theodoric
king of the East-Goths, who, though king of his own people, reigned
in Italy by an Imperial commission as Patrician. ♦Rule of Theodoric.
A.D. 493-526.♦ Practically, he founded an East-Gothic kingdom, taking
in Italy and the other lands which formed the dioceses of Italy and
Western Illyricum. ♦Extent of his dominion.♦ His dominion also took in
the coast of what we may now call _Provence_, and his influence was
extended in various ways over most of the kingdoms of the West. The
seat of the Gothic dominion, like that of the later Western Empire, was
at Ravenna. Practically Theodoric and his successors were independent
kings, and, as chiefs of their own people, they bore the kingly title.
♦Theory of the Empire.♦ Hence, as Rome formed part of their dominions,
it is true to say that under them Rome ceased to be part of the Roman
Empire. Still in theory the Imperial supremacy went on, and in this
way it became much easier for Italy to be won back to the Empire at a
somewhat later time.
§ 4. _Settlement of the English in Britain._
Meanwhile, in another part of Europe, a Teutonic settlement of quite
another character from those on the mainland was going on. ♦The Romans
withdrawn from Britain. A.D. 411.♦ Spain and Gaul fell away from
the Empire by slow degrees; but the Roman dominion in Britain came
to an end by a definite act at a definite moment. The Roman armies
were withdrawn from the province, and its inhabitants were left to
themselves. Presently, a new settlement took place in the island which
was thus left undefended. ♦Difference between the conquest of Britain
and other Teutonic conquests.♦ It is specially important to mark
the difference between the Teutonic settlements in Britain and the
Teutonic conquests on the mainland. The Teutonic conquests in Gaul and
Spain were made by Teutonic neighbours who had already learned to know
and respect the Roman civilization, who were either Christians already
or became Christians soon after they entered the Empire. They pressed
in gradually by land; they left the Roman inhabitants to live after the
Roman law, and they themselves gradually adopted the speech and much of
the manners of Rome. The only exception to this rule on the continent
is to be found in the lands immediately on the Rhine and the Danube,
where the Teutonic settlement was complete, and where the Roman tongue
and civilization were pretty well wiped out. This same process happened
yet more completely in the Teutonic conquest of Britain. ♦Character of
the English settlement; | long struggle with the Britons.♦ The great
island possession of Rome had been virtually abandoned by Rome before
the Teutonic settlements in it began. The invaders had therefore to
struggle rather with native Britons than with Romans. Moreover, they
were invaders who came by sea, and who came from lands where little or
nothing was known of the Roman law or religion. They therefore made
a settlement of quite another kind from the settlement of the Goths
or even from that of the Franks. They met with a degree of strictly
national resistance such as no other Teutonic conquerors met with;
therefore in the end they swept away all traces of the earlier state
of things in a way which took place nowhere else. ♦The English remain
Teutonic.♦ As far as such a process is possible, they slew or drove out
the older inhabitants; they kept their heathen religion and Teutonic
language, and were thus able to grow up as a new Teutonic nation in
their new home without any important intermixture with the earlier
inhabitants, Roman or British.
♦The Low-Dutch settlements in Britain.♦
The conquerors who wrought this change were our own forefathers, the
Low-Dutch inhabitants of the border lands of Germany and Denmark,
quite away from the Roman frontier; and among them three tribes, the
_Angles_, the _Saxons_, and the _Jutes_, had the chief share in the
conquest of Britain. ♦Saxons.♦ The Saxons had, as has already been
said, attempted a settlement in the fourth century. They were therefore
the tribe who were first known to the Roman and Celtic inhabitants of
the island; the Celts of Britain and Ireland have therefore called
all the Teutonic settlers _Saxons_ to this day. ♦Origin of the name
_English_.♦ But, as the Angles or _English_ occupied in the end much
the greater part of the land, it was they who, when the Teutonic tribes
in Britain began to form one nation, gave their name to that nation and
its land. That nation was the _English_, and their land was _England_.
While _Britain_ therefore remains the proper geographical name of the
whole island, _England_ is the name of that part of Britain which was
step by step conquered by the English. Before the end of the fifth
century several Teutonic kingdoms had begun in Britain. ♦Jutes in Kent.
A.D. 449.♦ The Jutes began the conquest by their settlement in _Kent_,
and presently the _Saxons_ began to settle on the South coast and on
a small part of the East coast, in _Sussex_, _Wessex_, and _Essex_.
♦Saxon and Anglian settlements.♦ And along a great part of the eastern
coast various _Anglian_ settlements were made, which gradually grew
into the kingdoms of _East-Anglia_, _Deira_, and _Bernicia_, which two
last formed by their union the great kingdom of _Northumberland_. But,
at the end of the sixth century, the English had not got very far from
the southern and eastern coasts. ♦The Welsh and Scots.♦ The Britons,
whom the English called _Welsh_ or strangers, held out in the West, and
the Picts and Scots in the North. The _Scots_ were properly the people
of Ireland; but a colony of them had settled on the western coast of
northern Britain, and, in the end, they gave the name of Scotland to
the whole North of the island.
§ 5. _The Eastern Empire._
♦Contrast between the Eastern and Western Empires.♦
We have already seen the differences between the position of the
Eastern and Western Empires during this period. While in the West the
provinces were gradually lopped away by the Teutonic settlements, the
provinces of the East, though often traversed by Teutonic armies,
or rather nations, did not become the seats of lasting Teutonic
settlements. ♦The Tetraxite Goths.♦ We can hardly count as an exception
the settlement of the _Tetraxite Goths_ in the Tauric Chersonêsos, a
land which was rather in alliance with the Empire than actually part
of it. ♦Rivalry with Persia.♦ The distinctive history of the Eastern
Empire consists, as has been already said, in the long struggle between
East and West, in which Rome had succeeded to the mission of Alexander
and the Seleukids as the representative of Western civilization. To
this mission was afterwards added the championship of Christianity,
first against the Fire-worshipper and then against the Moslem. In
Eastern history no event is more important and more remarkable than
the uprising of the regenerate _Persian_ nation against its Parthian
masters. ♦Revival of the Persian kingdom. A.D. 226.♦ But, as far as
either the history or the geography of Rome is concerned, the Persian
simply steps into the place of the Parthian as the representative of
the East against the West. From our point of view, the long wars
on the Eastern frontier of Rome, and the frequent shiftings of that
frontier, form one unbroken story, whether the enemy that was striven
against is the successor of Arsakes or the successor of Artaxerxes.
♦Position of Armenia.♦ And besides the natural rivalry of two great
powers in such a position, the border kingdom of _Armenia_, a name
which has changed its meaning and its frontiers almost as often as
Burgundy or Austria, supplied constant ground for dispute between Rome
and her eastern rival, whether Parthian or Persian.
In the geographical aspect of this long struggle three special
periods need to be pointed out. ♦Conquests of Trajan. A.D. 114-117.♦
The first is that of the momentary conquests of Trajan. Under him
_Armenia_, hitherto a vassal kingdom of Rome, was incorporated as a
Roman province. _Albania_ and _Iberia_ took its place as the frontier
vassal states. Beyond the Euphrates, even beyond the Tigris, the Roman
dominion took in _Mesopotamia_, _Atropatênê_, and _Babylonia_. The
Parthian capital of Ktesiphôn and the outlying Greek free city of
Seleukeia were included within the boundaries of an Empire which for a
moment touched the Caspian and the Persian Gulf. Rome, as the champion
of the West, seemed to have triumphed for ever over her Eastern rival,
when the Parthian kingdom was thus shorn of the border lands of the
two worlds, and when its king was forced to become a Roman vassal
for the dominions that were left to him. But this vast extension of
the Roman power was strictly only for a moment. ♦Conquests of Trajan
surrendered by Hadrian. A.D. 117.♦ What Trajan had conquered Hadrian
at once gave back; the Empire was again bounded by the Euphrates, and
Armenia was again left to form matter of dispute between its Eastern
and its Western claimant. ♦Conquests of Marcus. A.D. 162-166.♦ The
second stage begins when, under Marcus, the Roman frontier again began
to advance. ♦Of Severus. A.D. 197-202.♦ Between the Euphrates and the
Tigris _Osrhoênê_ became a Roman dependency: under the house of Severus
it became a Roman province; and the fortress of _Nisibis_, so famous
in later wars, was planted as the Eastern outpost of Rome against
the Parthian. Ten years later the Parthian power was no more; but,
as seen with Western eyes, the revived monarchy of Persia had simply
stepped into its place. The wars of Alexander Severus, the captivity
of Valerian, the wasting march of Sapor through the Roman provinces,
left no trace on the map. ♦Conquests under Diocletian. A.D. 297.♦ But
under the mighty rule of Diocletian the glories of Trajan were renewed.
Mesopotamia again became Roman; five provinces beyond the Tigris were
added to the Empire; Armenia, again the vassal of Rome, was enlarged
at the expense of Persia, and Iberia was once more a Roman dependency.
In the third stage the Roman frontier again went back. The wars of
the second Sapor did little but deprive Rome of two Mesopotamian
fortresses. ♦Surrender of provinces by Jovian. A.D. 363.♦ But after the
fall of Julian the lands beyond the Tigris were given back to Persia;
even Nisibis was yielded, and the Persian frontier again reached the
Euphrates. ♦Division of Armenia. 387. | The Hundred Years’ Peace. 421.♦
Armenia was now tossed to and fro, conquered and reconquered, till the
kingdom was divided between the vassals of the two Empires, a division
which was again confirmed by the hundred years’ peace between Rome and
Persia. This was the state of the Eastern frontier of Rome at the time
when the West-Goths were laying the foundation of their dominion in
Spain and Aquitaine, when Goth and Roman joined together to overthrow
the mingled host of Attila at Châlons, and when the first English keels
were on their way to the shores of Britain.
This then is the picture of the civilized world at the end of the
fifth century. The whole of the Western dominions of Rome, including
Italy and Rome herself, have practically, if not everywhere formally,
fallen away from the Roman Empire. The whole West is under the rule of
Teutonic kings. The Frank has become supreme in northern Gaul, without
losing his ancient hold on western and central Germany. The West-Goth
reigns in Spain and Aquitaine; the Burgundian reigns in the lands
between the Rhone and the Alps. Italy and the lands to the north of the
Alps and the Hadriatic have become, in substance though not in name, an
East-Gothic kingdom. But the countries of the European mainland, though
cut off from Roman political dominion, are far from being cut off
from Roman influences. The Teutonic settlers, if conquerors, are also
disciples. Their rulers are everywhere Christian; in Northern Gaul they
are even Orthodox. Africa, under the Arian Vandal, is far more utterly
cut off from the traditions of Rome than the lands ruled either by the
Catholic Frank or by the Arian Goth. To the north of the Franks lie the
independent tribes of Germany, still untouched by any Roman influence.
They are beginning to find themselves new homes in Britain, and, as
the natural consequence of a purely barbarian and heathen conquest, to
sever from the Empire all that they conquered yet more thoroughly than
Africa itself was severed. Such is the state of the West. In the East
the Roman power lives on in the New Rome, with a dominion constantly
threatened and insulted by various enemies, but with a frontier which
has varied but little since the time of Aurelian. No lasting Teutonic
settlement has been made within its borders. In its endless wars with
Persia, its frontier sometimes advances and sometimes retreats. In our
next chapter we shall see how much of life still clung to the majesty
of the Roman name, and how large a part of the ancient dominion of Rome
could still be won back again.