The Late Roman Frontiers

?
  • Created by: Lauriie
  • Created on: 11-04-18 13:12
View mindmap
  • Late Roman Frontiers
    • Theory
      • Cold war historians
        • Andrew Alfoldi- hungarian scholar who wrote in 1952, moved to the US. ‘Moral frontier’ which separated Romans and Barbarians. He writes about an iron curtain, physical frontier is a manifestation of moral transgression
        • Edward Luttwak-- a defense strategist in the US, not a trained historian. Focussed on  to what extent was there an integrated defense strategy throughout the Roman empire. convinced that you could see the development of a centralised defense strategy over time.
          • Initially, the frontiers were undemarcated areas of expansion, characterised by troop movements, in the 2nd century these turned into clearly demarcated borders (rivers, hadrian's wall) in the 3rd century onwards, there was defense ‘in depth’ (Term used by NATO)
            • How would this defense strategy have actually been communicated to the frontiers?
      • Whittaker (1994)- drew on Febvre, who pointed out what might be thought of as ‘natural borders’ (eg rivers)might not really be practical boundaries, but may actually be hubs for communication/ growth
    • Main borders- riverine frontiers of the Rhine and the Danube in the west, the Euphrates in the east-- and the North african deserts in the south.
    • Roman conceptions of borders/ space
      • Putinger table- based on much earlier Roman Map
        • a map of connections (eg a tube map) rather than of shape/geography
      • Barberini diptych (6th century East Roman)
        • emperor with victory over his shoulder, under her foot is a globe. At the bottom of the dyptich is vanquished barbarians carrying Ivory (africans, parthians?)
          • Global perspective- Rome has global dominion and has no end, an extend as far as it wishes.
    • The role of rivers
      • Trajans column- Romans crossing the danube to conquer the Dacians. Rivers can help the romans. The personification of the Danube looks on, neutral.
        • Further on in time:coin from the time of constantine depicting danube. The danube is integrated into the image- he has been bridged ( a symbol of dominion over the natural world and the barbarians)
          • Trajan and constantine- both symbolically bridged the Danube.
    • 'Romanisation'
      • Danube frontier- roman fort at Eining
        • Combination of military forts and civilian settlements- what later turned into towns and urbanisation.  These forts were important for trade and local construction.
        • IN the mouth of the river an altar dedicated to Neptune and all the other river gods- part of their fort fell into the river. This might have been a disturbing thought for Romans- the idea that Danuvius was not on their side, and they set up an alter to try to get him back on side
        • Roman regionality- life in forts and civilian settlements- typological variations in crossbow brooches, which were not uniformly produced across the entire empire but had a lot of regional variation.
      • Danube area- Bratislava
        • Iron age fortified settlement evidence for settlement during the Roman period eg Samian ware and augustan coins. As we go on in time, there are some proper roman remains of houses and cemeteries
        • Kostolna- cremation urns/ cemeteries: Grave 10: Roman bronze vessels, Roman pottery. Bronze Vessels found in 26 graves, wine sets, pottery-  high end roman material
          • Terra Sigilata/ Samian Ware found beyond the Danube- and extensive trade network was in operation taking Roman style material culture beyond demarcated frontiers. - But historical (non archaeological) sources tell us there is a clear frontier line.
      • Danube area- Musov
        • caracteristics of a roman villa and a princely settlement. Roman brick stacks, indicating specific legions. Hypocaust (remains of baths) but also enormous earthworks enclosing a 40-50 ha area and a large rectilinear house built in a roman style
        • 2nd century artefacts, and finds which denote roman military eg helmet and armour fragments.
        • The king’s grave
          • a suspended bronze cauldron, the manufacture of which can be tied to roman bronzes, but depicting a man with a suebian knot hairstyle (identified from bog bodies) and it clearly depicts a barbarian. Was this commissioned, was it a gift?
          • Iron age firedog, silverware of augustan date and heirloom items
          • several bronze vessels, a number of iron bronze and glass objects, animal remains- a piglet, a goose, a hen, a sheep, a goat
          • Was this the location of a client kingdom cultivated by the Roman army? Did he ‘sell his people out’ or an advocate, or are we just imposing recent colonial concepts inappropriately?
      • Case study: Allemania
        • Direct control of this region was ceded to the Allemani after about 260, due to attacks and the 3rd century crisis.  In 294 a new frontier was created.
        • hilltop settlements with stay finds, late roman fortifications, High status sword finds. The hill forts are heterogeneous but they have a focus on high status and elite goods
          • Runder Berg- hilltop settlement with an enclosure, a house and evidence for other structures. Material culture- metalworking, weapons, belts, female jewellery, samian ware, glass vessels, byzantine scales and weights, scabbard mounts.
        • High status burial eg in Praunheimn which has roman metalwork but burial with weapons in the barbarian style.
        • Links with central germany in Allemania- fourth century pottery and similarities in ceramics- metalwork. As we go into the 5th century, Allemani look both towards what remains of the roman empire, and in the other direction to areas way outside this frontier zone.
    • Conclusions
      • Simply based on the material evidence it is very hard to know where the frontier was.
        • Relationships of people along and beyond riverine frontiers was complex- cannot just speak about roman vs barbarian, especially since the Army was mostly drawn from outside provinces.
          • Elites have a particular role in mediating relationships- with imperial power, centralised power- legitimising themselves with reference to military status

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Archaeology resources:

See all Archaeology resources »See all Europe in Late Antiquity resources »