Ioannes_Ahenobarbus Posted April 7, 2008 Report Share Posted April 7, 2008 Start with a general survey, I've mentioned Warren Treadgold's "A History of Byzantine State and Society" before, and I'll do it again here! If you can obtain a copy of it, John Haldon's "The Byzantine Wars" has a good chapter on the conquest of Italy. Definitely read Procopios! You cannot get more detail than him. Hopefully that helps, and good luck! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antiochus III Posted June 11, 2008 Report Share Posted June 11, 2008 In the Name of Rome by Goldsworthy has an excellent chapter on him. I'm reading that chapter right now!! It's great, too. Good recomendation my fellow Antiochus! Antiochus III Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonic Posted June 11, 2008 Report Share Posted June 11, 2008 In the Name of Rome by Goldsworthy has an excellent chapter on him. I'm reading that chapter right now!! It's great, too. Good recomendation my fellow Antiochus! Antiochus III I hate to do this, but my own take on the story is now available for pre-order on Amazon. Belisarius: the Last Roman General. Although I'm slightly uncomfortable 'blowing my own trumpet' (after all, I am English!) I have tried to give as detailed an account as is possible of his career and conquests. Hopefully the editor/publishers will accept my request to include the large number of maps I have drawn that help to explain his movements, especially in the Italian campaign. Once it is available, I was hoping that some kind soul (emphasis on 'kind'!!) would post a review? No doubt not everybody will agree with my conclusions, but I hope they will understand that I have attempted to omit any preconceptions whilst writing the book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladius Hispaniensis Posted June 12, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 Look forward to reading that one, Sonic. Thanks for your efforts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASCLEPIADES Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 I hate to do this, but my own take on the story is now available for pre-order on Amazon. Belisarius: the Last Roman General. Salve, Sonic Why is Belisarius considered by you (and others, of course) the Last Roman General? I assume it may be because his Triumphus at 534 for the Vandal War against Gelimer was presumably the last one ever (and incidentally, maybe the first one given to any Roman commander different from the incumbent Emperor since Germanicus). Am I right? Is there other reason? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonic Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 (edited) I hate to do this, but my own take on the story is now available for pre-order on Amazon. Belisarius: the Last Roman General. Salve, Sonic Why is Belisarius considered by you (and others, of course) the Last Roman General? I assume it may be because his Triumphus at 534 for the Vandal War against Gelimer was presumably the last one ever (and incidentally, maybe the first one given to any Roman commander different from the incumbent Emperor since Germanicus). Am I right? Is there other reason? That is definitely one reason for the title. The other is the nature of the 'title' holders. Belisarius was born in Thrace and spoke a version of Latin as his native tongue. After him, we have generals such as Narses, an Armenian who spoke - er - Armenian as his native tongue and was an eunuch. When relating this to the Augustan period, I felt that Augustus would have been (relatively) happy having a 'Thracian' as a general, but would have been shocked at the use of an Armenian eunuch: this was contrary to the 'traditions' of Rome. Although I agree that he would have been shocked by the earlier use of Germans in very high positions, I think that this is probably the last time that he would have accepted the appointment without raised eyebrows. Furthermore, there is continued debate as to when the Eastern Emprie became the 'Byzantine Empire'. I accept that this is a modern appelation, but I suggest that the idea of the 'Roman' Empire speaking Greek would have been unacceptable to the earlier emperors. Not long after Belisarius' death, the Empire became 'Greek' and this is a further point of departure: after this, the empire can be viewed as alien to the earlier emperors. I hope that clears up some of the points! (If it doesn't, I'll gladly answer further questions, but please be aware that my time is limited! Even as I type, my son (Who is 3) is asking for attention: got to go!!) Sonic Edited June 12, 2008 by sonic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASCLEPIADES Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 That is definitely one reason for the title. The other is the nature of the 'title' holders. Belisarius was born in Thrace and spoke a version of Latin as his native tongue. After him, we have generals such as Narses, an Armenian who spoke - er - Armenian as his native tongue and was an eunuch. When relating this to the Augustan period, I felt that Augustus would have been (relatively) happy having a 'Thracian' as a general, but would have been shocked at the use of an Armenian eunuch: this was contrary to the 'traditions' of Rome. Although I agree that he would have been shocked by the earlier use of Germans in very high positions, I think that this is probably the last time that he would have accepted the appointment without raised eyebrows. Gratiam habeo for your kind and quick answer, S Sorry, but at least for me, it sounds a lot as if Belisarius was still a Roman because he was too good to be a Byzantine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonic Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 Gratiam habeo for your kind and quick answer, S You're welcome. Sorry, but at least for me, it sounds a lot as if Belisarius was still a Roman because he was too good to be a Byzantine. Not at all. I've slowly come to the conclusion that Narses the Eunuch (sorry, I use the title because there was more than one Narses in the story of Belisarius!) was as good as - if not better - than Belisarius. In my view Narses t. E. is the first true Byzantine general, showing a high level of ability whilst not fitting the tag of 'Roman'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonic Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 (edited) Sorry: wrong thr ead!! Edited January 28, 2009 by sonic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pompieus Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 I imagine that the next great "Roman" generals chronologically are the emperors Maurice and Heraclius. Presumably they were more "Greek or Byzantine" than Belisarius? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonic Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 I imagine that the next great "Roman" generals chronologically are the emperors Maurice and Heraclius. Presumably they were more "Greek or Byzantine" than Belisarius? The main criteria I would use here would be their first language. It was Greek. Belisarius was the last general to attain 'legendary' status who spoke Latin as his first language. I think that the decision to change the language from Latin to Greek was really an acceptance of reality: Latin was no longer the first language of choice - if it ever had been in the East. However the change to Latin is the end of a distinct phase in the history of the empire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tobias Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 I have a great admiration for Belisarius; An amazingly skilled General, and he certainly held true to the maxim "Semper Fidelis". I often wonder what would have happened had Belisarius followed through on his acceptance of the Ostrogoth's offer to make him the Emperor of the West, rather then merely using it to gain entrance to Ravenna. Could have been a clash of the titans between the East and the West, Belisarius vs Justinian! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonic Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 I have a great admiration for Belisarius; An amazingly skilled General, and he certainly held true to the maxim "Semper Fidelis". I often wonder what would have happened had Belisarius followed through on his acceptance of the Ostrogoth's offer to make him the Emperor of the West, rather then merely using it to gain entrance to Ravenna. Could have been a clash of the titans between the East and the West, Belisarius vs Justinian! I offer my opinions on that possibility in the book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.