Aetius Attila’s Nemesis Page 22
One of these is the outbreak of a ‘pestilence’ in 442, which struck the empire.58 If, as is likely, the disease first struck imperial cities, then it is certain that the Huns, who up to that time had been totally victorious, would be dubious about the wisdom of continuing the war. Attacking infected cities would increase their chances of catching the disease. It is likely that the decision divided the two brothers. Bleda, in control of the Huns facing the East, was the one who would be most at risk from a plague already apparent in the Balkans. Although the two joint rulers most likely usually ruled by consensus, on this occasion they may have been in complete disagreement. It is possible that Bleda forced Attila to accept the Eastern peace treaty in 442 simply by ordering his own forces to withdraw, despite Attila’s desire to continue the campaign in order to extract more concessions. As is so often the case, certainty is impossible.
It should also be noted that, although they won the battles, the Huns are still likely to have suffered casualties. The manpower reserves of the East, unlike the West, were vast and in a war of attrition the Huns would simply run out of men. Moreover, the Huns needed to maintain a strong military base in order to maintain their grip on their ‘empire’. They could not afford to go on fighting indefinitely. Their victories and the payment of tribute ensured that the Huns clearly emerged triumphant from the war and their high morale and aura of invincibility was maintained. This made certain that there would be no rebellions against their rule at home.
In Constantinople, Theodosius was unhappy with this state of affairs and set in motion a series of reforms in the Balkans. By September 443 the defences along the Danube were being strengthened until finally Theodosius felt that they had been improved to the point where there was no longer any serious threat from the Huns.59 Either in the late 443 or in 444, and possibly reflecting Roman awareness of the increased division and tensions between Attila and Bleda, the payments to the Huns stopped.60
The outbreak of pestilence in 442 is an event that is sometimes overlooked, although it is extremely important. The fact that Hydatius, who usually focused on events in Spain, took time out to mention it demonstrates its severity. Although it is unknown which of the various diseases – cholera, diphtheria, smallpox etc. – it was, it is likely that a large percentage of the population, and of the army, died as a result. For the barbarians who doubtless also suffered it was a setback. For Aetius, who was already short of manpower in the army, it was a calamity.
Gaul
In Gaul peace with the Goths and Franks, and the earlier destruction of the Burgundians by the Huns, meant that only the bacaudae remained as a threat to the peace. Aetius probably realized that the easiest way to discourage yet another bacaudic rebellion was to station troops permanently in the area. Unfortunately, his Roman troops were needed for regular campaigns, yet there remained one alternative. The Alans under Goa had first entered the empire in the invasion of 406, when, in ‘alliance’ with the Vandals and the Sueves, they had crossed the Rhine into Gaul. However, unlike the other tribes, the Alans under Goa had quickly found employment with the empire and had continued to serve it for the ensuing twentyfive years. Since the majority of his men were nearing or beyond retirement age, Goa was undoubtedly asking Aetius for land upon which they could settle. Solving two problems with one stroke, Aetius decided to give them lands in ‘Farther Gaul’, which belonged to people associated with the bacaudic rebellions.61 In this way the Alans received the lands they deserved for their faithful service, and at the same time their presence inhibited the activities of the bacaudae, lessening the likelihood of any rebellion within their specific area.
Learning of the decision, the Armoricans asked (Saint) Germanus of Auxerre to intervene on their behalf. As Goa was advancing towards Armorica fully expecting a fight with the natives he was met and stopped by Germanus. Allegedly Goa agreed to wait until Aetius had been informed of events and made a decision in the matter.62 The reprieve was short lived. Unfortunately for the natives, Aetius confirmed his decision and the Alans and the natives fought for the land, the Alans emerging victorious.63 From now on the bacaudae would operate in the knowledge that there was a veteran fighting force in the immediate vicinity willing to oppose them. Affairs in Africa and Gaul now appeared to be settled, although not necessarily to the complete satisfaction of Aetius.
Britain
Affairs in Britain at this late stage are extremely vague and the references given in the sources are of dubious accuracy and open to debate. However, the government’s focus on Africa and, to a lesser extent, Gaul resulted in Britain continuing its slide away from the empire. However one event, dated to 441–442, is worth recording: ‘The British provinces, which up to this time had endured a variety of disasters and misfortunes, were subjected to the authority of the Saxons.’64 The exact meaning of this statement has been the cause of considerable debate, which it is not necessary to consider, but one factor seems clear: at some time in these years the rule of the south-eastern areas of Britain facing Gaul passed from ‘Roman’ into ‘Saxon’ hands.65 From the early 440s onwards the south east of Britain no longer looked to the empire for guidance, instead looking across the North Sea to the Saxon and Jutish homelands, and turning its energies to the extension of ‘Saxon’ rule ever further west. The Romanized aristocracy in Britain began to be dispossessed and as a result in place of the rule of Roman law the rule of ‘English’ law began to emerge. Naturally, many of the islanders began to long for the security of belonging to the empire.
1. Possible diptych of Aetius. However, the attribution is uncertain, especially as the individual may be older than Aetius at his death.
2. The Sarcophagus of Stilicho. Despite its title, the identity of the burial is actually unknown and it has been suggested that it may be Aetius, although this is doubtful.
3. The Mausoleum of Galla Placidia in Ravenna, which contains three sarcophagi. The largest is attested as being Galla Placidia’s. That on the left is attested as being Constantius III, whilst that on the right is either Valentinian III or Honorius. It is now a UNESCO World Heritage site.
4. The interior of Placidia’s Mausoleum in Ravenna.
5. Painting of Galla Placidia from her Mausoleum in Ravenna.
6. Medallions of Honorius and Galla Placidia.
7. Unpublished solidus showing the wedding of Valentinian III and Licinia Eudoxia. Theodosius II stands in the centre with his hands on the shoulders of the couple. The imperial couple spent the winter of 437438 in Thessalonica, at which time this coin was struck. (© CNG coins)
8. Honorius on the Consular diptych of Probus (406).
9. Diptych of Flavius Felix. Valentinian’s first magister militum, he was killed by order of Aetius. (By kind permission of Antiquité Tardive)
10. An inscription from Altava. The inscription refers to ‘barbarians’ and may be the earliest evidence for the Vandals in Africa.
11. Inscription to Merobaudes recognizing his abilities as an orator.
12. The inscription to Aetius described in Chapter 13. (Courtesy CIL)
13. Close-up of the inscription to Aetius. The length and details of inscriptions can sometimes add to our knowledge of important individuals. (Courtesy CIL)
14. Diptych celebrating the consulship of Astyrius, Merobaudes’ father-in-law, in 449, preserved in Liège. (Courtesy ILS)
15. Silver disc: ‘Aspar at the Games’, made to commemorate Aspar’s consulship in 434, probably a reward for his long and successful service in Africa.
16. The Roman amphitheatre at Arles. In the fifth century Arles became the ‘capital’ of Gaul, and the splendour of its buildings attest to the importance and wealth of the city. (© Stefan Bauer)
17. A coin allegedly produced for Aetius. Although its provenance is insecure, some have taken this coin as being proof that he was intending to seize the throne before he was executed. (beastcoins.com)
18. Coin minted by Boniface in Africa. It is possible to use this coin as proof of Boniface’s treacherous
intentions, yet as with many such artefacts the purpose is open to interpretation. (beastcoins.com)
19. A Siliqua (small silver coin) produced in Africa by Gaiseric. The use of such coins demonstrated the independence of the Germanic ruler, as well as being evidence that the Vandals (and other ‘Germans’) adopted Roman customs after settling within the empire. (beastcoins.com)
20. A coin minted by the usurper John. The advantage of studying coins is that these are sometimes the only representations that remain of short-lived usurpers, since their monuments were immediately demolished and defaced. (beastcoins.com)
21 and 22. Two coins minted during the reign of Valentinian III. Both emphasise the youth of the emperor, a factor that helped Aetius to dominate the west for so long. (beastcoins.com)
23 and 24. Coins minted for Aelia Pulcheria (left) and Aelia Eudocia (right). These may show two of the few remaining likenesses of these women and demonstrate the high standards of dress and comportment still expected of the imperial family despite the west’s increasing bankruptcy. (beastcoins.com)
25. A bronze medal showing Attila. The ‘demonic’ wispy beard and the pointed ears emphasise his later reputation as the ‘Scourge of God’.
26. ‘Attila’s Throne’ in Venice. Although anachronistic (Venice wasn’t founded until after Attila’s invasion and death), this item demonstrates the exceptional hold that Attila has had on the western psyche.
27. ‘The Feast of Attila’ by Mór Than (1870). A stereotypical view of the court of Attila, all of which are based on Priscus, the only description we have of him and his court. (Hungarian National Gallery, Budapest)
28. Raphael’s ‘The Meeting between Leo the Great and Attila’. Based largely upon anachronistic descriptions of the meeting, this image is now widely accepted as a true picture of events.
29. De Neuville’s depiction of ‘The Huns at the Battle of Chalons’. This picture demonstrates that the image of ‘eastern hordes’ attacking Europe still strikes fear into the hearts of the west. It is interesting to note that there weren’t too many women and babies at the Battle of Chalons.
30. The countryside around Troyes. This photo shows some of the typical countryside in the region where the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains took place. The manner in which the ground rises to a crest shows the importance for both sides in seizing such a dominant feature. (© Sean Pruitt)
31. Briullov’s painting ‘Genseric Sacking Rome 455’. The barbarism of the Vandals is emphasised by the impotence of the Pope, and although the historical accuracy is minimal, the treasures taken by the Romans during the sack of Jerusalem are now being taken by the Vandals.
32. Maindron Hippolyte’s ‘Sainte Geneviève et Attila’ in the Musée Beaux-Arts, Angers. Although a meeting between the two individuals is almost certainly imaginary, the production of such fine works of art emphasises both the longevity of Attila’s reputation as well as the need in the Middle Ages to promote local heroes as saints. (Didier Ryknerdes)
Chapter 11
After Africa
Although the treaty of 442 was not the desired outcome, and the aftereffects would be severe, it gave Aetius the breathing space necessary to continue his reclamation of other areas in the West. As an example, Astyrius, father-in-law of Merobaudes, remained on campaign in Spain suppressing the bacaudae of Tarraconensis.
Yet the troubles of the empire were not over. Even before the treaty had been signed a new disaster was overtaking the West: as noted in the previous chapter, in 442 a pestilence, the nature of which is unknown, began ‘which spread over almost the entire world’.1 The blow to an empire already suffering manpower and economic shortages was catastrophic. Fortunately for the empire, the barbarians both inside and outside it were also infected with the disease, so maintaining the balance of power.
On the other hand, it is possibly partly as a result of the disease – or at least the empire’s failure to help those suffering – that in 442 there was yet another revolt of the bacaudae in the north of Gaul. In response, Aetius sent one of his personal staff, Majorian, with a small force of troops to deal with the rebellion.2 No doubt Aetius expected the Alans of Goa, who had settled in the north, to join the imperial forces in their new conflict.
Majorian was the son of a magister militum, also named Majorian, who had served in the late-fourth century.3 Also serving under Aetius at about this time was Ricimer, whose father was a Sueve and whose mother was the daughter of the Gothic king Wallia.4 Both of these men would have a huge impact on the destiny of the West after Aetius’ death, and it is interesting to note that they served alongside each other at this formative time in their lives.
443
The treasury, which had already been weakened by the loss of Africa, was now forced to take a humanitarian role in the treatment of the exiles from Africa. Thanks to the loss of income from their estates in Africa, the refugees were struggling to pay their taxes. In response, Valentinian issued a law giving tax relief and financial aid to the exiles.5 Although it was hoped that this would be a temporary measure, it added to the drain on the imperial coffers. Furthermore, the loss of their income had forced the exiles to take loans in order to cover their expenses during their temporary stay in exile. When Valentinian and Aetius became aware of this, a law was passed that forbade the collection of interest on loans to ‘Africans’, and also stated that they should not have to repay any of their loans until their fortunes were restored.6 It would appear that extended discussions were ongoing with Gaiseric to repatriate the refugees to their estates in Africa, with some of the refugees eventually being allowed to return.7
Aetius
After the disappointments of the previous year, and with the fighting in the north of Gaul continuing, in 443 Aetius continued with his attempts to settle affairs in those parts of the West that he still controlled in a manner that would hopefully reduce the tendency of parts of Gaul to rebel. Despite the level of recruiting almost certainly being low, there was yet another attempt to levy recruits in the West.8 Towards the end of the year a law was passed that reminded the limitanei of their obligation to work the lands assigned to them in order to reduce the liability of the taxpayer to feed them, as well as ensuring that the lands remained inviolate and free from purchase by other landowners.9
Map 12. Barbarian Settlements
Faced with low levels of manpower, and willing to use any available source, Aetius now gave parts of Sapaudia (Savoy) to the remnants of the Burgundians to be divided with the native inhabitants.10 By doing this he may have hoped to use the Burgundians as a garrison force facing the Alamanni, so allowing him to withdraw the regular garrison units to reinforce the field army. Moreover, the agreement doubtless contained a clause making the Burgundian troops liable to be called to serve in the Western army, along similar lines to agreements with the other barbarian settlers in the West.
This was to be the last deliberate settlement of barbarians on Roman soil: afterwards, such settlements were ‘little more than official recognition of barbarian expansion and conquest’.11 Furthermore, Aetius continued to rotate commanders, using the men he thought best fit to command in each theatre. Accordingly, Astyrius, who was a Spaniard, was recalled and replaced in Spain by his son-in-law Merobaudes. Unfortunately, the exact reason for Astyrius’ withdrawal is unclear. Aetius may have been deliberately rotating his subordinates: he would not want a situation such has had occurred earlier in Africa, where Boniface had made the region his own personal power base, and there is no evidence to show whether he trusted his followers completely.
Following a brief period in command in which he ‘smashed the arrogance of the Bacaudae of Aracelli’, Merobaudes was also recalled to Rome by an imperial order ‘at the urging of some jealous people’.12 It would appear that factional issues had resurfaced and that at this point there was a political conflict between Aetius’ supporters and their opponents in the Senate.
At roughly the same time Valentinian issued a novel that changed the rules for the rank
ing of senators.13 When coupled with the political conflict the novel is usually interpreted as an attempt to weaken Aetius by undermining his main supporter, since it is to the disadvantage of Sigisvult.14 The novel was largely to the advantage of a man who was rising to oppose Aetius’ influence with the emperor: Petronius Maximus. Maximus had enjoyed a long and distinguished career in the higher echelons of power. This had culminated in his consulships in 433 and 443. It is the second consulship with which the law is concerned, and it gave Maximus with his second consulship precedence over Sigisvult, even though Sigisvult had the title patricius, since the latter had only one consulship. Although the issuing of the novel may indeed have been an attack on Aetius, it is possible that this was also simply a measure to reward Maximus for his service, rather than an attempt to weaken Sigisvult. Unfortunately, the sparse evidence means that a firm conclusion cannot be drawn.
In tandem with the perception that Valentinian was attempting to weaken Sigisvult’s position, the suggestion by Hydatius that Merobaudes was recalled due to jealousy has often been echoed in modern works, in which the order is seen as another attempt to weaken Aetius.15 It is certainly possible that in part the novel and the recall were against Aetius’ wishes, and that Aetius found himself facing new opposition within the imperial court. The influence of the Senate on the allocation of military and civilian posts was always a restricting influence on the men in power, and the new law and the recall may simply signal a temporary swing towards a group of senators led by Maximus.