‘Theoderic the Great’ by Hans-Ulrich Wiemer review

 In Theoderic the Great: King of the Goths, Ruler of the Romans, Hans-Ulrich Weimer fully reinforces his view of Theoderic as a man grappling with the challenges that still face us today.

When Theoderic the Great died on 30 August 526 his fame spread throughout the Mediterranean world. The Ostrogothic king ruled Italy, southern France, and most of Spain. He was the most powerful Germanic empire to emerge after the fall of the Western Roman Empire, and his name demanded respect from the Eastern emperor who still reigned in Constantinople. Theoderic was a key figure in an important transitional period in European history, and in this excellent book Hans-Ulrich Weimer has achieved an outstanding achievement in bringing Theoderic, his kingdom, and his wider world to life. The book was originally published in German in 2018 and has been expertly revised for English translation by John Noel Dillon.

Weimer begins by setting the scene, from the challenges posed by our sources and the difficulty of names (who were the Ostrogoths?) to the complexity of early Gothic history, the influence of Attila the Hun and the much-debated 'Decline and Fall'. Roman Empire in the West. All of these elements are the essential background for Theoderic, who in 493 led 100,000 men, women, and children from the Balkans to Italy, where he overthrew Odoacer, who in turn deposed Romulus Augustulus, the last Western Roman emperor. For the next 30 years, Theoderic successfully ruled both Goths and Romans, pursuing a policy that Weimar accurately describes as 'unification through isolation'. Theoderic's subjects were divided on the basis of culture, language and religion; The king did not try to force assimilation. Instead, he tried to balance the differing concerns of Gothic warriors, Roman senators, and Catholic bishops, who considered Theoderic and his Goths to be 'Arian' heretics. Weimer is careful to warn against exaggerated assessments of Theoderic's achievements, as not all levels of society benefited equally and we should recognize such limitations before declaring his reign a 'Golden Age'. Yet it is impossible not to be impressed as Weimar presents wonderfully the administrative structures that Theoderic preserved, the expansion of Ostrogothic power as he pushed back the Franks to the north and absorbed Visigothic Spain, and The remarkable diplomacy with which Theoderic respected the papacy while propagating the 'Arian' Christianity to which he and his followers remained devoted. Over the course of three decades, Theoderic provided a degree of peace and stability that Italy would not experience again for centuries, only for his kingdom to disintegrate shortly after his death as the forces of the eastern emperor, Justinian, in 535. Invaded and started 20 years. The war that devastated Italian society.

To what extent should we hold Theoderic responsible for the rapid collapse of the kingdom he had worked so hard to build? This is a question that has attracted many scholars, but for Weimer it is not a topic requiring detailed debate. His exploration of the tensions that dominated Theoderic's last few years is brief and the final verdict succinct: 'The causes of the rapid decline of his kingdom must be sought in places that were largely beyond his influence.' Theoderic's inability to produce a son forced him into a succession plan that failed when his son-in-law Eutheric died, leaving Theoderic's daughter Amalasuintha and her young son Athalaric to claim his authority after Theoderic's death. Had to struggle for. That period of weakness coincided with the rise of Justinian in the East, and left Ostrogothic Italy highly vulnerable to imperial interference. Weimer is undoubtedly right to emphasize these factors, but more could and should have been said. Theoderic's essential policy of 'unification through separation' may have worked as a short-term measure, but in the long run it was fundamentally flawed. The ongoing division between Goths and Romans left cleavage lines that opened up in times of crisis. These became increasingly evident in Theoderic's last years with the execution of the Roman senator (and, later, Christian martyr) Boethius and the unjust imprisonment of Pope John. So we might ask whether Theoderic might have done more to close those rifts, even to the extent of joining Catholicism, as did the Frankish king Clovis and later the Visigothic king Reccared in Spain. Was. Weimer highlights the greater social unity achieved in those other states, yet he does not elaborate on his belief that such a measure would have been unthinkable for Theoderic.

In the Western consciousness, Theoderic's memory has made a far deeper impact than that of his fallen empire. Here, too, Weimer has valuable ideas to share, although one reader may wish for more. Theoderic's contradictory legacy as persecutor of heresy and Germanic champion is given only scant attention in the final chapter. The Ostrogothic king's recasting of the medieval hero Dietrich von Bern, who figures prominently in the epic poem Nibelungenlied (c.1200), will be familiar to German audiences, but requires more detailed treatment in this English translation. The title of the book itself provides an epithet to Theoderic, which, as Weimer believes, is well established in German writing, but has never been regularly adopted elsewhere. It is true that Theoderic's historical influence is overshadowed by figures such as Constantine, Justinian, and Charlemagne. Nevertheless, Weimer's meticulously researched and brilliantly presented argument fully reinforces his view of Theoderic as a man grappling with challenges that still face us today: migration and integration, social inequality and cultural diversity. This is a book that offers much to inspire any reader and gives Theoderic the foundation he certainly deserves.