The Historians of Late Antiquity by David Rohrbacher Read Free Book Online Page A

driven from the city (28.4.32). These complaints come together in Ammianus’ account of the expulsion of foreigners from the cities during a time of food shortages (14.6.19–20). Ammianus says that “not so long ago” foreigners who were students of the liberal arts were driven from the city, while scandalously unmarried dancing girls and their attendants remained behind. This expulsion is usually dated to 383 (Symm. ep . 2.7). Since Ammianus may well have been affected by this expulsion, and since we would certainly expect him to have experienced Roman hospitality and to include himself among the learned foreign visitors to the city, it may be that we see in these digressions a reflection of Ammianus’ personal pique.
    The digressions may also be examined for what they tell us about the composition and expectations of Ammianus’ audience. His exaggerated lampooning of the senatorial aristocracy suggests that senators did not dominate his audience. Instead, we can best understand the satirical digressions as pitched toward an audience of bureaucrats and soldiers like Ammianus himself, perhaps some of those who were associated with the visit of Theodosius to Rome in 387 and who would transmit news of the history to Libanius on the return to the east (Matthews 1989: 8–9). They would have shared his difficulties with the hospitality of local aristocrats, and may have shared the Greek contempt for their hosts’ lack of learning. It is noteworthy that Ammianus in several places parodies the Romans as soldiers manqués . He jokes that the Romans who must travel a bit to reach their summer homes believe that they have thereby rivaled the conquests of Alexander the Great (28.4.18), and he says that they arrange their household slaves and staffs – eunuchs, cooks, weavers – as if they are an army on the march (14.6.17, 28.4.8). In another passage, it appears (the text is uncertain) that Ammianuspresents a retired soldier who cleverly deceives his gullible Roman audience (28.4.20). These sorts of criticisms might be judged particularly amusing by an audience familiar with soldiering.
    Despite Ammianus’ claim to be speaking about only “a few” of the Romans, and his obvious use of satiric exaggeration, readers of the Roman digressions have sometimes taken at full value Ammianus’ portrait of Roman life. The passages fit particularly well into interpretations of the fall of Rome which blame the collapse on the decadence of a once-great people. But this passage, like the rest of the Res Gestae , must be approached with a more sophisticated eye. Despite Ammianus’ portrait, fourth-century Rome was still a vibrant and intellectually exciting city, as numerous other sources reveal. While Ammianus has a reputation for balance and accuracy, these passages reveal his willingness to use exaggeration and outright slander to make a point. Traditional respect for Ammianus’ reliability has been eroded in certain areas by modern studies which focus on the ways in which his work is marred by tendentiousness and partisanship.
    Several features of the Res Gestae encourage the reader to trust in Ammianus’ good faith and honesty. His prefaces declare his careful historical method and his devotion to the truth, although such declarations are conventional and employed by many of the historians of the period. After all, he also declares that he “will never depart intentionally from the truth” as he begins his outrageous Roman digression (14.6.2). Ammianus’ comments on the emperor Julian more effectively support his claim of an even-handed approach. The emperor is, on the one hand, clearly the hero of the work, and when Ammianus begins to describe Julian’s campaigns in Gaul he warns that, although he will always tell the truth, the account will seem almost like a panegyric (16.1.3). Julian is favorably compared with the great emperors of the past, such as Titus, Vespasian, Trajan, and Marcus Aurelius (16.1.4). Digressions