Did Rome Really Fall in AD 476 ?

Reading these posts places me in much more danger of becoming a collector of ancients.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Please, do

Q

 

Dirk, Thanks for your succinctly written post . Modern day educators seem to look for easy answers to difficult & complex questions & end up "missing the boat". The events you point out, especially the dramatic defeat of of the Roman army at the battle of Adrianople, in their totality caused the fall of the Western Roman Empire. Watts may not have "hit the nail on the head" in his article but deserves credit for at least pointing out how absurd the notion of Rome falling in AD 476 is. You have made a serious study of the Migration Period & flow of barbarian tribes coming from the East, & your previous posts along with your impressive collection of barbarian coinage testify to this . Your photo of the Theodahat follis is indeed the most iconic example of barbarian coinage. It leaves a footprint on barbarian coinage that is unmatched stylistically by any other examples.

 

I just want to thank the contributing members for an extremely interesting thread. Wonderful overview that will fuel my curiosity to search for more info on this time period. Well done to all.

(Like I don't already have enough projects to complete and books to read)

 

Here is an interesting Solidus of Theodosius II.

Theodosius II, 402-450.

Obv.: D N THEODOZ(inverted) VS P F AVG
Rev.: IMP XXXXII COS – XVII P P --- CONOB in exergue.

Solidi from the exact same dies have come repeatedly in auction. They are sometimes regarded as official issues from Constantinople. Sometimes, the erroneous legend and the strange (but fine) style has led catalogers to attribute this coin to barbarians, usually Goths (cf. link below).

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=499408

The special thing about my coin is that I know the find spot. It was found in western Ukraine, i.e. hundreds of kilometers beyond the Roman border. We may never know, but the find spot could indicate the activity of an unofficial mint in the Barbaricum.




Here is an official piece (also from my collection):

 

Hm, there was no Ostrogothic kingdom in "Eastern Rome". I guess you mean the western Roman Empire? However, the western Roman Empire had seized to exist when the Ostrogoths took control of Italy in around 490. It had been reduced to Italy and a few adjacent regions in the previous decades and there had been no western Emperor for over a decade.

Also the Ostrogothic kingdom did not last 40 years, but it lasted about 60 years, from around 490 to around 552. Theoderic the Great ruled for over 30 years alone and after him came another 7 kings, most of whom were ineffective and short-lived, however.

Finally, the Gothic kingdom was not governed by Theoderic, when it fell. Theoderic the Great died in AD 526. The last effective Gothic ruler was Totila (Baduela on his coins) and the last king was Thea or Tejas, who ruled only for a few months before being killed in the final battle against the East Romans at mount Vesuvius.

 

After a series of victories over the Romans in Dacia, and severe losses under the Huns who were fierce Mongolian invaders about 370 AD, the Goths were divided into 2 groups : The Visigoths who lived South of of the Dniester River, crossed to the Roman province of Lower Moesia and defeated the Roman legions at the battle of Adrianople where Emperor Valens was killed in 378. Under their new leader leader Alaric, the Visigoths later penetrated into Italy and Rome was sacked after fierce fighting in 410. They established a kingdom in what is now Southern France and Spain.
For their part, The Ostrogoths lived East of the Dniester River where they became subjects to the Huns until the dissolution of the Hunnic Empire in 454 AD. Moving into the Balkans, the Ostrogoths became Roman allies. In 489, under their Great leader THEODORIC they were sent into Italy to attack Odoacer, a Germanic usurper. Theodoric entered the stronghold city of Ravenna, murdered Odoacer and proclaimed The Ostrogoth Kingdom of Italy. After his success, Theodoric was recognized as ruler of Italy, subordinate of the eastern Emperor. He received the Royal insignia from the Byzantine Emperor Anastasius I in 497. He reigned from 493 to 526 AD.
With the accession of Justinian at Constantinople in 527, The Ostrogothic Kingdom in Italy collapsed. Italy became again a Roman Province.

Theodoric was an Arian Christian. He followed a policy of tolerance and peaceful coexistence. Patron of art and learning, he built a royal palace and notable churches in his capital Ravenna. He also supported literary figures and centers of learning throughout his kingdom.

 

Interesting thread. I thought I'd weigh in with a bit of fiction: Lest Darkness Fall by L. Sprague de Camp. It is an alternative history of Rome at the time of the Gothic Wars, 5th century A.D. - it was first published in 1939 and I think still in print.

Wikipedia has an article on it with a rundown of the plot. The author sees the final "fall" as happening later than 476 A.D. -

Plot summary
American archaeologist Martin Padway is visiting the Pantheon in Rome in 1938. A thunderstorm arrives, lightning cracks, and he finds himself transported to Rome in the year 535 AD. At this time, the Italian Peninsula is under the rule of the Kingdom of the Ostrogoths. The novel depicts their rule as a relatively benevolent despotism, allowing freedom of religion and maintaining the urban Roman society they had conquered, though slavery is common and torture is the normal method of interrogation by what passes for law-enforcement agencies.

In the real timeline, the Byzantine or Eastern Roman Empire temporarily expanded westwards, embarking on what came to be known as the Gothic War (535–554). They overthrew the Ostrogoths and the Vandals in North Africa, but this war devastated the Italian urbanized society that required the support of intensive agriculture and by the end of the conflict Italy was severely depopulated: its population is estimated to have decreased from 7 million to 2.5 million people. The great cities of Roman times were abandoned and the Byzantines never fully consolidated their rule over Italy, which faced further invasions by the Lombards; Italy fell into a long period of decline. Some historians consider this the true beginning of the Dark Ages in Italy. The city of Rome was besieged three times and many of its inhabitants did not survive to the end of the war. Thus Padway, finding himself in this Rome and knowing what the near future holds in store, must act not only to preserve the future of civilization, but to improve his personal chances of survival.

Padway initially wonders whether he is dreaming or delusional, but he quickly accepts his fate and sets out to survive. As an archaeologist, he has enough understanding of various devices used before his time but after the sixth century to be able to reproduce them by the means available. He can speak both modern Italian and Classical Latin, and quickly learns enough Vulgar Latin (which was spoken at that time) to communicate effectively. Most crucially, Padway has read with great attention the book of the historian Procopius, who described the very war at whose outset Padway finds himself. Though not in possession of a physical copy of Procopius when hurled back in time, Padway has memorized his book in great detail, down to the precise details of the time and route of the various armies' moves and their tactical and strategic considerations, as well as the convoluted and violent power struggles of the various contenders for the Gothic Kingship. Thus Padway, in effect, knows the direct, immediate future of the country where he lives and often of individual people whom he meets (at least, until he acts in a way that changes that future). In addition to this specialized and uniquely useful knowledge of the current war, Padway has taken a general interest in military history, which he is eventually able to put to very practical purposes.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lest_Darkness_Fall

 

Dirk, Your solidus is a fascinating coin . It looks too good to be barbarian & not good enough to be imperial . Personally I'd lean towards barbarian .

 

Tbh i don't like "in the name of coins". If a coin was minted by Theoderic, i want to see his name or portrait on it.

 

Well the next time you see Theoderic, why don't you tell him that...

 

Sorry, I don't want to come across as know-it-all, however, this is my favourite period in late antique history.

The Goths were divided in several groups and two large and powerful kingdoms before the Hunnic onslaught. In the east ruled Ermaneric over a large kingdom that reportedly included many peoples and streched from the Black Sea to the Baltic Sea. Ermaneric died in 376, when he committed suicide after repeated defeats by the Huns and Alans.

He is still remembered as a great Germanic hero in German legends (as Ermenrich). Ermaneric's Goths are called Greuthungi (and possibly Taifali) and at a different layer may be refered to as Ostrogothae. In the Germanic-Gothic world Ermaneric's "title" was likely that of a "thiudans", who ruled over many "kunja"= clans, who in turn were governed by "reiks".

West of Ermaneric's kingdom was the large realm of Athanaric, who is decribed as Iudex, in Roman sources, and to his own people was likely a "kindins". Athanaric ruled over the Tervingian Goths, which, in some ways that we don't exactly understand, are also refered to as Vesi or Visi. This term gave much later, i.e. in the 6th century rise to the term Vesigoths or Visigoths to mach the older term Ostrogoths.

The term Greuthungi means steppe dwellers and Tervingi means forest dwellers in Germanic. After the fall of Ermaneric's kingdom and the shift to the west these terms lost significance and the people converged towards new names like Vesi or reverted to older names like Ostrogothae or simply Gothae for the Romans.

The battle of Adrianople was won by mostly Tervingian Goths under Fridigern, who had been a reiks under the kindins Athanaric. These Tervingian Goths were much later renamed as Visigoths, but who have no direct connection to the Visigoths of later decades and centuries, as well as Greuthungian, Taifalian and Alanic units which joined the battle at a crucial stage.

 

I think its fair to say Justinian is the man that dealt the roman west its fatal blow. his wars de-populated italy and destroyed important infrastructure. I heard the year 476 wasn't even significant until justinian needed a way a justify his invasion. Definitely torn on the guy.

Don't really have any related coinage, this is probably the closest. Solidus of Justin II.

 

It was the emperor's prerogative that only his name and his portrait should appear on gold coins. Theoderic largely observed this imperial prerogative, especially after the imperial recognition of AD 497. The titles and insignia, which the emperor bestowed on him were significant, but had no practical purpose. Hence, Theoderic ruled entirely independently from the East Roman emperor and also issued his coins indepently, but in the name of the emperor.

Btw, Theoderic and Gundobad partially infringed on the imperial prerogative when temporarily adding their monograms to gold coins. A further break with the imperial prerogative came with Totila-Baduila, who replaced the name of the ruling emperor Justinian with that of Anastasius. However, a complete break with the imperial prerogative came only with the Frankish-Merovingian king Theoderbert, who issued Solidi and Tremisses in his own name. He also wrote a letter to Justinianian, claiming that he regarded himself of equal rank to the emperor.

 

Justinian did not justify the attack on the Gothic kingdom in Italy with the events of AD 476. In 535, when the (first) Gothic war began that was already ancient history. Instead, the pretext for war was the murder of Amalasuntha, the daughter of Theoderic the Great, by her cousin Theodahad.

 

Okay.. when did 476 start getting considered the 'end of the empire?' afaik it was right before the invasions by byzantines. but I don't claim to be an expert!

 

The western empire disintegrated in stages over the course of around 100 years (as I wrote earlier). In AD 535 nobody would have regarded the year 476 as the year when it all came to an end. All that happened was that one usurper repaced another usurper. The significance, however, of that usurpation was that, for the first time, a non-Roman, i.e. a German chieftain decided that he would rule in his own name, rather than through a Roman puppet emperor, as Ricimer, Stilicho and many others had done before.
Odovacer - despite his competent and beneficial rule - was never recognized by the East Roman emperor, however, his successor Theoderic was. Nominally, the western part had returned to Roman control in 497 when Anastasius accepted Theoderic as legitimate king of Italy. Theoderic was careful not to give Anastasius and Justin I reason for war. After Theoderic's death the Roman emperor was content that Amalasuntha would rule in place of Athalaric. Amalasuntha had offered to return Italy to the Eastern Emperor. Hence, when Theodahad had here murdered, this was a welcome casus belli.

 

@Tejas there is some question about the barbarian solidus’ authenticity. A coin from the same dies was published in IBSCC Bulletin on Counterfeits BOCS Vol 1 No.2 Page 35 RO.9.
http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=rZsM/9E0YxM=

I won an example from a Nomos auction but returned it for a refund on the strength of the above information. So if it is genuine I will be glad for your sake, but regret returning my purchase.

 

Thanks lot for the info and the link. Somehow I can't see the picture though, but found it on Forum Ancient Coins.

I'm quite certain that my coin is genuine. Sometimes people condemn a coin because of an unusual style if they are not familiar with barbaric imitations. The same happened with Gothic aurei imitations at some point.

However, I like to research this further. Do you have a link to the Nomos coin or a picture?

 

Yes. This is the Nomos catalogue picture.
Theodosius II, 402-450. Solidus (Gold, 20 mm, 4.41 g, 6 h), Constantinople, 441-450. D N THEODOSIVS P F AVG Helmeted, diademed and cuirassed bust of Theodosius facing, his head turned slightly to right, holding a spear over his right shoulder and with a shield, ornamented with a horseman spearing a fallen foe, over his left. Rev. IMP XXXXII COS XVII P P / CONOB Constantinopolis enthroned left, with left foot on prow, holding globus cruciger and scepter; behind throne, shield; in field to left, star. Depeyrot 84/1. RIC 321. Well-centered and attractive, but of a rather unusual and fine style. very fine.


From the Trausnitz Collection, acquired prior to 2007.


The unusual style of this coin suggests that it is probably a very well-made contemporary imitation struck by the Germanic invaders - perhaps the Ostrogoths? - as opposed to an official mint issue.


purchased from Nomos AG > obolos 18

Auction date: 21 February 2021

Lot number: 778


Price realized: 700 CHF (Approx. 780 USD / 646 EUR) Note: Prices do not include buyer's fees
This is the pic from the forgery network site.