08-23-2015, 06:54 PM
Can’t really add much to your chapter on the Roman army except to say that Alemany in his book ‘Sources on the Alans’ surmises that Sambida (in 440 at least) was recognised by the Romans as a chief and not a king like other prominent Alans like Goar/Goachar/Echocar, Respendial and the unknown Alan king at the siege of Bazas.
I have not seen an update on the section of your paper covering the actual battle of Catalaunian Fields but Ulf Tackholm has an interesting take on Jordanes version of the battle and the period following the battle in his paper “Aetius and the Battle of the Catalaunian Fields”.
He wrote that Jordanes and to a lesser extent Gregory of Tours have attempted to rob Aetius of his rightful place as the victor of the battle. He mentions the possibility that after the allies’ victory over Attila that rather than Aetius suggesting to Thorismund that he takes his army and leaves the field to return home to ensure his succession against his brothers on the death of Theodoric that Thorismund, who was not a fan of the Romans and an unwilling participant in the battle decided to take his army back to Aquitaine to weaken and prevent Aetius from destroying Attila totally. According to Jordanes the battle was won by the Visigoths and the contribution of the Romans, Alans and other assorted allies were quietly put aside.
Attila himself by his actions in setting up a pyre of saddles to prevent himself being captured left no doubt about how he expected to be treated by a victorious Aetius. But with the withdrawal of the Visigoth troops as well as the Frankish allies that Aetius remaining army had little choice but to watch as the remainder of Attila’s army withdrew from Gaul unmolested from the battlefield and as was proven the following year still able to invade Italy.
He feels Jordanes basically wrote Aetius out of the battle and although they didn’t play a prominent role in the battle except possibly killing Theodoric, he couldn’t help himself by writing that the Ostrogoth kings, Valamir, Theodemir and Videmor were more noble than Attila himself even though they didn’t seem to play a prominent part in the battle except in the battlefield death of Theodoric. Tackholm also thought that it was very unusual for a leader like Attila to have a speech in the middle of a battle and that maybe the previous day’s battle was merely a skirmish with opposing forces feeling each other out with no real idea of enemy dispositions. Tackholm thinks that Jordanes didn’t have much knowledge of military tactics and it showed in his description of the battle.
Both Jordanes and Gregory write that at the end of the battle Aetius talked the Visigoths and the Franks out of finishing off the Huns as he feared that the Visigoths would grow too powerful and according to Gregory he wanted to keep all the Huns’ loot for himself. Tackholm asks though who did he fear most once Attila was defeated? The Visigoths or the Vandals who controlled Africa. So was Aetius a victim of Gothic propaganda. Not only Gothic propaganda but also the works of Sidonius where his father-in-law Avitus talked the Visigoths into joining Aetius against the Huns and not Aetius himself.
He covers a lot on the various sources of the battle and finds a lot of variations on Aetius' role in the battle and I think he is quite the admirer of Aetius and his role in stitching up the coalition to defeat his old enemy Attila but he does mention that without other sources we must take Jordanes account at face value. It is something to think about anyway.
I have not seen an update on the section of your paper covering the actual battle of Catalaunian Fields but Ulf Tackholm has an interesting take on Jordanes version of the battle and the period following the battle in his paper “Aetius and the Battle of the Catalaunian Fields”.
He wrote that Jordanes and to a lesser extent Gregory of Tours have attempted to rob Aetius of his rightful place as the victor of the battle. He mentions the possibility that after the allies’ victory over Attila that rather than Aetius suggesting to Thorismund that he takes his army and leaves the field to return home to ensure his succession against his brothers on the death of Theodoric that Thorismund, who was not a fan of the Romans and an unwilling participant in the battle decided to take his army back to Aquitaine to weaken and prevent Aetius from destroying Attila totally. According to Jordanes the battle was won by the Visigoths and the contribution of the Romans, Alans and other assorted allies were quietly put aside.
Attila himself by his actions in setting up a pyre of saddles to prevent himself being captured left no doubt about how he expected to be treated by a victorious Aetius. But with the withdrawal of the Visigoth troops as well as the Frankish allies that Aetius remaining army had little choice but to watch as the remainder of Attila’s army withdrew from Gaul unmolested from the battlefield and as was proven the following year still able to invade Italy.
He feels Jordanes basically wrote Aetius out of the battle and although they didn’t play a prominent role in the battle except possibly killing Theodoric, he couldn’t help himself by writing that the Ostrogoth kings, Valamir, Theodemir and Videmor were more noble than Attila himself even though they didn’t seem to play a prominent part in the battle except in the battlefield death of Theodoric. Tackholm also thought that it was very unusual for a leader like Attila to have a speech in the middle of a battle and that maybe the previous day’s battle was merely a skirmish with opposing forces feeling each other out with no real idea of enemy dispositions. Tackholm thinks that Jordanes didn’t have much knowledge of military tactics and it showed in his description of the battle.
Both Jordanes and Gregory write that at the end of the battle Aetius talked the Visigoths and the Franks out of finishing off the Huns as he feared that the Visigoths would grow too powerful and according to Gregory he wanted to keep all the Huns’ loot for himself. Tackholm asks though who did he fear most once Attila was defeated? The Visigoths or the Vandals who controlled Africa. So was Aetius a victim of Gothic propaganda. Not only Gothic propaganda but also the works of Sidonius where his father-in-law Avitus talked the Visigoths into joining Aetius against the Huns and not Aetius himself.
He covers a lot on the various sources of the battle and finds a lot of variations on Aetius' role in the battle and I think he is quite the admirer of Aetius and his role in stitching up the coalition to defeat his old enemy Attila but he does mention that without other sources we must take Jordanes account at face value. It is something to think about anyway.
Regards
Michael Kerr
Michael Kerr
Michael Kerr
"You can conquer an empire from the back of a horse but you can't rule it from one"
"You can conquer an empire from the back of a horse but you can't rule it from one"
