A. A. Vasiliev, "Justin, the First: An Introduction to the Epoch of Justinian the Great"

A. A. VASILIEV. Justin the First. An Introduction to the Epoch of Justinian the Great. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1950. Pp. viii + 439. (Dumbarton Oaks Studies, I.)

To the many works of fundamental importance which he has produced in nearly sixty years of devoted scholarship, A. A. Vasiliev, the eminent and revered dean of Byzantinists, has now added a definitive study of the reign of Justin I (518-527). Careful interpretation of a wide range of sources, searching critical analysis of complicated problems, some of which are treated with almost monographic thoroughness, and convincing conclusions whenever they are possible, these are the merits of a book which should be a source of gratification and pride to a great scholar. Occasionally the machinery of investigation intrudes into the text and interrupts the smooth flow of the narrative, but the author's lively interest in his subject and his lucid exposition are assurance that the reader's attention will be stimulated and maintained. Aside from Ernest Stein's long article, "Justinus," R.-E., X (1919), cols. 1314-29, no special study until now has been devoted to the elderly emperor Justin, who has been overshadowed by his brilliant nephew and successor, Justinian. Vasiliev gives a portrayal of Justin against a background so broad that the book is also a reconstruction of the whole period. He shows how Justin was dominated by Justinian, whose rule from behind the throne began from the moment of Justin's elevation. When, in 527, Justinian became emperor, he continued policies unquestionably inaugurated under his influence during the nine years of his uncle's reign. Justinian's principal ideas, his ambitious plans for the reconquest of the west, his religious orientation as one of the foundations for his future western campaigns, his conception of a great legislative work, his building activities, all these were definitely formulated during Justin's reign. Professor Vasiliev's book, is, therefore, as the subtitle indicates, an introduction to the epoch of Justinian, and as such it will be a necessary point of departure for any new study of that period. The book consists of a brief sketch of the historical background; eight chapters devoted respectively to Justin's rise from swineherd to emperor, his domestic rule, religious policy, foreign policy (in two chapters), economic conditions, and legislation; an epilogue describing his death and burial; an excursus on the Archangel Ivory in the British Museum and the coins of Justin; and an excellent index of names and subjects, including sources and modern writers. Scholars will be grateful for the extensive notes which provide full bibliographical data. The longest, and in many respects the most interesting, chapter considers Justin's religious policy. Justinian's influence on the development of that policy is demonstrated, and the imperial efforts to enforce the Chalcedonian creed and to restore normal relations with the Pope, after the breach of 482, are very carefully analyzed. The chapter includes a translation of contemporary documents of observers at the Synod of Constantinople in 518. The records, probably by eyewitnesses of the stormy popular response to Justin's restoration of orthodoxy, have never before been translated into English. Together with other documents which are summarized, they bring out vividly the importance of Christological questions in Byzantium, not only for religion, but also for politics, ecclesiastical as well as secular, if indeed the distinction can be made in Byzantine history. Vasiliev's book was written before the appearance of Ernest Stein, Histoire du Bas-Empire, II. De la disparition de l'Empire d'Occident a la mort de Justinien (476-565) (Brussels, 1949; Vol. II of his Geschichte des spatromischen Reiches [Vienna, 1928]). Stein's chapter on Justin I (pp. 219-273) in no way diminishes the value and the importance of Vasiliev's study which is much more detailed and more fully documented. There are naturally some differences of opinion, but on minor points rather than on larger problems. Some examples may be given. Stein, p. 221, following his article in R.-E., X, col. 1315, states that Justin was a patricius at his accession to the throne, whereas Vasiliev, p. 68, n. 50 end, is unable to find the evidence for this. Vasiliev, p. 251, n. 1, accepts, but Stein, p. 795, Excursus F, rejects, Duchesne, L'eglise an sixieme siecle, p. 74, n. 2, on the date of Pope John's voyage to Constantinople. Vasiliev, p. 272, does not know how to account for the abrupt retirement of a Byzantine army after an invasion of Mesopotamia in 527, while Stein, p. 272, attributes the retreat to the summer heat which caused great hardship among the troops. In this connection it may be noted that Stein, p. 272, n. 2, not only provides a convincing reconstruction of the event, but establishes the correct sequence of Byzantine commanders. Finally, Vasiliev, p. 414, following contemporary sources, attributes Justin's death to an old reopened wound in the foot, whereas Stein, p. 273, accepts the opinion of a Brussels physician that the cause of death was "en realite de gangrene senile ou syphilitique." One or two additional suggestions may be made. Vasiliev used (p. 10, n. 5 et passim) the first edition of K. Krumbacher, Geschichte der byzantinischen Literatur (Munich, 1891), instead of the extensively revised second edition of 1897. Vasiliev's chapter on economic conditions has little material on Byzantine Egypt; A. C. Johnson and L. C. West, Byzantine Egypt: Economic Studies (Princeton, 1949) now provides some additional data. Vasiliev, p. 375, accepts Procopius' statement (Anecdota, XIX, 4-8) that Justin spent the reserve of 320,000 pounds of gold left him by his predecessor, Anastasius. Vasiliev argues cogently that the expenditure of this vast sum was necessary and denies Procopius' accusation of prodigality. There is, however, some question that Justin actually spent the whole amount, for according to John of Ephesus, Hist. Eccles., Pars III, v. 20 (C. S. C. 0., Scriptores Syri, 3rd Series, III, 205), the treasure of Anastasius was not completely exhausted half a century later in the reign of Tiberius II (578-582) (cf. Stein, op. cit., p. 244, n. 2). Finally, in connection with Vasiliev's discussion of the Decree on Prescription (pp. 404-6) it should be noted that the question of possessio receives special attention in Ernst Levy's recent book, West Roman Vulgar Law (Memoirs of the American Philosophical Society, XXIX [Philadelphia, 1951]), chap. III B (pp. 176-94). If there is today a larger interest in Byzantine history, a greater appreciation of its importance, much of the credit belongs to the great Byzantinists, Krumbacher, Bury, Baynes, Diehl, Schlumberger, Gregoire, Stein, and, as his latest book so clearly demonstrates, Yasiliev - primus inter pares.

Solomon Katz. University of Washington.

Source: The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 73, No. 1 (1952), pp. 105-107