1

The Role of the Barbarian Invasions in the Fall of the Roman Empire and
the Demise of the Roman World in the West

The collapse and eventual dissolution of the Roman Empire has been described
as ‘the end of civilisation’1. While certainly it did indicate the end of the most vast
and complex institution in the ancient world, the notion that it also marked the
end of civilisation in the west for a thousand years is to me a claim that does not
stand true in the face of evidence. Of course the period surrounding the demise
of the Roman Empire was characterised in part by violence as well as social and
political upheavals and it appears evident that in the years following there was a
decline in the overall quality of life of the people that still inhabited what was
once the Roman Empire. Despite this, there is also clear evidence to suggest that
even after the occupation of the Empire by the barbarian peoples, the systems
implemented by the Romans were still in place, and that both the administrative
and day to day status quo remained largely unchanged in the two hundred years
after 410 and the sack of Rome.
In order to address the role and the effects that the invasions of the Goths
and Germanic peoples had on the ‘fall’ of the Western Roman Empire, it is
important that ‘fall’ itself is defined. The issue with this term is its ambiguity, not
only in terms of defining a solid date or period to pin as being the moment the
Roman Empire ceased to be but also defining what the term ‘fall’ actually
constitutes. Some scholars opt to define the fall of the Roman Empire as the
point at which Rome itself was sacked by Alaric’s Goths in 410 others elect to use
476 and the deposal of the last Roman emperor as the relevant moment, still
others suggest that 1453 and the fall of the Byzantine Empire mark the final
demise of the Roman Empire. There is also a school of thought maintaining that
the Roman Empire never truly fell, but instead simply shifted culturally into the
Dark Age and medieval Europe we are familiar with2. For the purpose of this
examination of the role of the barbarian invasions, I will adopt the position that
formally the institution that had been the Western Roman Empire did indeed
come to an end in 476 with the deposal of Romulus Augustulus. By this point,
the Empire had all but ceased to exist; it was bankrupt, had little or no control

1 Ward-Perkins (2006)
2 Brown (2006)
 2

over its former provinces, had almost no military power and no longer operated
based on a centralised administrative system. This constitutes the
disappearance of a formal government that had had control over all of the
former Western Roman Empire’s territory, including Britain, Gaul, Iberia, Italy
and parts of North Africa and Germany. The Eastern Empire, organised and
administered out of Constantinople almost unarguably continued to operate as
the Byzantine Empire, a direct continuance of the Roman Empire.
As a formal superstructure, the Roman Empire in the west does appear to have
been extinguished at this point, however the term ‘fall’ suggests a more dramatic
change than this. The year 476 certainly did not mark a sudden plunge from the
Roman world of sophistication and civilisation into the early Dark Ages, when it
has often been believed that this sophistication disappeared completely. As shall
be demonstrated further on, social and cultural changes gradually mark the
disappearance of the Roman world but these appear to have persisted far
beyond the year 476. Evidence both archaeological and literary, suggests that
even after this date individual provinces and communities continued to carry out
daily life in much the same way that they had done in the later days of the
Empire (albeit with a much more localised focus) until the early seventh century.
The existence of these kinds of communities lends itself to the question: how
much of an impact did the occupation of the former Roman Empire by barbarian
peoples actually have on the inhabitants of the regions? The answer to this
question is part of a larger picture that will help to understand the role that these
peoples had in the collapse of an ancient superpower. The year 476AD appears
to have ended a ‘phase’ of the Roman Empire: thereafter, the Roman emperors
ceased to be regarded as monarchs over the west and were instead replaced by
barbarian kings such as those of the Goths in Italy and the Vandals in Africa. A
more appropriate phrase in this case then is the ‘disappearance of the Roman
world’ as opposed to simply ‘the fall of the Roman Empire’. This phrase refers to
the disappearance of Roman culture and lifestyle as well as the centralised
government of the Empire.
A somewhat out-dated view of the barbarians such as the Goths, Alans,
Vandals and Alemanni that gradually made their way into the Roman Empire in
the 4th and 5th Centuries is that the brought death, devastation and violence and
 3

the loss of all civilisation3. It has also previously been argued that the period of
Germanic dominance that followed the ending of the Roman period ushered in a
period of social, economic and technological regression4. While the literary
record of the so-called ‘Dark Ages’ may not be quite as complete and through as
it had been under Roman rule, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that society
did not backtrack too severely, even if now the former Empire had been
irreversibly divided into smaller independently ruled states and was no longer
controlled by a centralised government. Authors from across the former
Western Roman Empire in the two centuries following 476 such as Cassiodorus,
Sidonius Apollinaris and even Gregory the Great provide us with literary
evidence that the sophistication of the Roman world had not been extinguished.
The image we are instead presented with is one of a somewhat less connected
world, particularly in Western Europe5, but not one that had suffered from total
annihilation and collapse, both culturally and socially, in the previous centuries.
Peter Brown summarises this well, saying: ‘In western Europe, the fifth century
was a time of narrowing horizons, of strengthening local roots, and the
consolidating of old loyalties.’6
One idea does remain constant regardless of opinion as to how it happened:
in Late Antiquity the Roman Empire ceased to be and was replaced by the
foundations of medieval Europe7. My aim is to analyse the role that the
barbarian invasions played in this transition. In order to do this I will need to
examine both literary and archaeological evidence ranging from the first wave of
incursions in the fourth century through to the early seventh century to assess
the consequences of those incursions for the Roman Empire.
It is my view that the Roman Empire as a formal centralised institution came
to its end, in the west at least, with the deposal of Romulus Augustulus in 476.
Despite this, it would appear that the vestiges of the Empire continued on
independently without a great degree of change for a considerable amount of

3 Robertson (1796)
4 Gibbon (1788:ch. 37, para. 619), Ward-Perkins (2006:87)
5 Brown (2006:126)
6 Brown (2006:126)
7 Musset (1965:29)
 4

time afterwards, in spite of the lack of central government and the barbarian
settlement that had occurred across the Empire.
The barbarian invasions certainly had an impact on the Roman Empire, but
to say they were exclusively responsible for its collapse is a claim that I believe
does not hold up in the face of other evidence. The role that I believe they played
in the ‘fall’ of the Roman Empire was one of a catalyst to a system that was
already on its last legs. The military pressure they exerted and the mass-
settlement that occurred within the Empire simply sped up a process of
dissolution of the central government and loss of control over its provinces,
leading not to an end in fire and flames and murder, but rather to a change in
societal structure and administration that facilitated a widespread shift from
what had once been the Roman Empire to a series of smaller independent
nation-states that shaped medieval Europe.

Chapter One
The Germanic Invasions and Their Effects

The Fourth and Fifth Century, A Summary

The Roman Empire from its inception had been beset on virtually all fronts by
hostilities from neighbouring peoples. In the east, the Persians were almost
always present and to the north the Picts of Britain and the various Germanic
tribes of the continent continually threatened the borders of the Empire. Despite
this near constant friction, the Roman Empire had largely (with the exception of
some minor losses of territory) managed to repel the threats. It did this through
a combination of manpower, an expertly trained and maintained army, effective
administration and a certain amount of financial power, which for the best part
of three centuries resulted in imperial expansion and a successful defence of the
frontiers. However in the summer of 376AD this equilibrium between Rome and
its neighbouring peoples was shattered when a group of Goths crossed the
Danube and forced their way into the Empire, seeking asylum. This incursion set
 5

into motion a chain of events that would irrevocably change the Roman world
leading up to the sacking of Rome in 410 at the hands of Alaric’s Goths and the
eventual deposal of Augustulus, the last Roman Emperor in 476. The crossing of
the Danube however was only one of two significant events leading to the
disappearance of the Roman Empire. In 406, a separate group of barbarians
crossed the River Rhine and proceeded to make their way through Gaul and
Spain before finally settling in North Africa. This group of Vandals, Suevi and
Alans added to the pre-existing problem of barbarian migration and invasion in
the Empire and certainly stretched the Empire to its absolute limit since it now
had to confront the issue on two fronts. This particular incursion was also
arguably more damaging overall to the structure and stability of the Roman
Empire in the west. While the Goths who had crossed the Danube in 376 had
dealt the Roman military a crippling defeat at Hadrianople and proceeded
onwards to roam the Balkans almost without contention, the overall effect of this
on Roman life in the region was relatively minor. It was in Gaul and Spain, the
heartlands of the Empire, where the Vandals plundered their way down to Africa
that the most lasting effects of the barbarian plundering and resettlement could
be seen, from a Roman point of view at least. As has been touched upon
previously, the devastation that the groups of barbarians dealt to Iberia and Gaul
arguably were far less important than the cultural change that they began to
stimulate in these provinces.
The situation the Western Roman Empire found itself in by 411 was one of
severely decreased stability. Rome itself, the immortal city, had been sacked.
Throughout the Empire, societal change had occurred to begin to integrate the
Gothic peoples into Roman populations, especially in Italy. In Gaul and Spain,
widespread looting and conflict with the Rhine-crossers was occurring, perhaps
not damaging in itself in the long term, but the sudden decrease in security
experienced by the inhabitants of these provinces arguably proved detrimental
for the Roman lifestyle there. Over the course of the next half of a century the
Roman Empire remained eminent, although the capital was moved from Rome to
Ravenna and gradually regions of it were beginning to revert to autonomy. Most
notable of these was the emergence of a Vandal kingdom in North Africa by 439.
This was the most significant loss of territory since the loss of Britain in 409, and
 6

had the potential to strain the Roman economy to breaking point with such a
significant decrease of grain producing land.
After several years of conflict across what remained of the Western Roman
Empire in 476 Odoacer, an officer in the Roman army at the head of a barbarian
detachment, marched on Ravenna and deposed Romulus Augustulus and was
declared emperor himself. With this, the Roman Empire came to an end as
formal governmental institution. Despite this, the Roman Empire and all things
associated with it did not suddenly disappear at the deposal of Augustulus.
What we are left to examine is a functioning empire that, having existed for
the previous three centuries, was brought to its knees and arguably
extinguished. Regardless of whether it fell entirely or changed into a different
system, within the hundred and fifty or so years of the arrival of the first
invaders the Roman Empire and much of the culture associated with it had all
but disappeared. A correlation certainly arises here, however whether there is a
direct link between the two remains a matter for debate.

Barbarians Against Rome

While the chronological link between the disappearance of the Roman Empire
and the arrival of the Germanic peoples is very easy to discern and
consequentially a causation and cause relationship is frequently suggested
between the two, it is important to note that a plethora of different arguments
and theories have been postulated as to why such a powerful institution
disappeared in such a relatively short span of time. While it is my opinion that
the barbarian invasions were to some degree responsible for the disappearance
of the Roman Empire, I also believe that it is narrow-minded to attribute the
collapse of an institution as complex and vast as the Roman Empire to one cause.
Key amongst the arguments surrounding the fall of Rome are those that have
an economic or social basis. The two that strike me as most plausible and
supportive of the theory of barbarian invasion causing the fall of the Roman
Empire are issues of shortage of manpower8 and shortage of money9.

8 Finley (1958)
9 Galtung, Heiestad, Rudeng, (1980)
 7

Both of these problems can be seen to contribute to the relative ease with
which the Germanic peoples were able to overcome the Romans. It therefore
appears logical to me that they must have played at least some role in the fall of
the Empire and the subsequent loss of Roman culture and society that followed.
Arthur Boak argued that largely the Roman Empire, especially in the West,
was suffering from a manpower shortage at the time of the first invasions10.
While Moses Finley thoroughly disputes this claim in his review of the book in
question, stating that figures on population levels do not provide adequate
evidence in favour of a shortage of manpower11, I believe that the inverse could
in fact be true. While Roman manpower in the military may have remained
constant (at around 400,000-500,000 overall in the Western Empire12) the
number of their opponents may have increased. I am not suggesting a sudden
and unprecedented boom in population occurred in amongst the Germanic tribes
across the Danube in the fourth century. However what I do believe could be
suggested is that forced unification of various tribal groups led to an overall
increased concentration of hostile opposition to the Roman Empire.
Additionally, the distribution of available troops for the defence of the Balkans
may have been unbalanced, with frontiers in Gaul and even Persia perhaps being
seen as higher priority. As Peter Heather notes, one of the most prominent
causes for the mass migrations of both the Goths and Vandals (along with a
mixture of a multitude of other Germanic tribes) appears to have been the rise in
Hunnic power on the plains of central Europe13. Heather does note importantly
that the primary literature available to us does not suggest that the Huns caused
the invasions of 405/614. This rise in Hunnic power forced the movement of
massive numbers of tribal peoples not only to migrate away from this threat but
also to agglomerate into much larger groups than had previously existed,
presumably for safety in numbers. We see a prime example of this kind of unity
of separate groups after the first crossings of the Danube. Two different groups,
the Tervingi and the Greuthungi, arrived in 376. The tribes however had merged

10 Boak (1958)
11 Finley (1958:156-64)
12 Cameron and Whitby (1995:83)
13 Heather (2005:433)
14 Heather (1996:103)
 8

together into one amalgamated unit. They moved across the border together
and eventually met the Romans in combat in a unified manner. Gradually the
names used to separate and define these two groups fell out of use and the two
combined tribes began to be collectively known as the Goths15. What we see
here is the coming together of these different barbarian groups in the face of
adversity. The Greuthungi and Tervingi crossed the Danube as a collective and
remained so against the difficulties that were thrust upon them. It is therefore
not too far a stretch to suppose that a similar reaction might have happened in
the face of a sudden and dramatic invasion into their homelands by the Huns.
The effect this unification of separate tribes had was not a sudden baby
boom on the plains of northern Europe, but instead meant that the concentration
of unified adult male warriors that could cause difficulty for the Roman army
stationed there grew very quickly. The best indications we have of this
accumulation of barbarian warriors are from the battle of Hadrianople.
Unfortunately Ammianus (our key source for the period) does not list any
numbers of the belligerents; however other modern historians have made
measured estimates. Low estimates from 12,000-15,00016 and high estimates of
20,000-25,00017 have both been suggested. Even the low end of the estimates
presented a problem for the Roman military stationed in the area, as seen from
the outcome of the battle, with an approximate 10,000-15,000 Romans killed18.
The impact of this therefore was not a manpower shortage on the part of the
Romans, as Finley correctly establishes, but instead was an unbalancing of the
ratio of Roman soldiers to barbarian soldiers. This would have had a similar
effect to a reduction in the number of soldiers available to the Romans, but in
this instance they had no control over the outcome. It is because of this relative
increase in numbers of barbarians compared to Romans, that I believe the Goths
were so easily able to begin migrating into the Empire. Initially at least, it
appears as though the Goths did in fact outnumber the force assembled by
Valens at Hadrianople19. Whether or not the Goths assembled in the Balkans

15 Wolfram (1988:25)
16 Delbrück (1980:267)
17 Friell and Williams (1994:177)
18 Heather (1996:135)
19 Heather (1996:134)
 9

could maintain their numerical advantage is up for debate, however the Gothic
groups that arrived there do appear to have eventually been drawn into the
Roman army. The commonly held view is that they were then used in
subsequent battles to take a disproportionate amount of casualties presumably
to help thin the numbers of warriors available to invaders20. It can clearly be
interpreted from this view that the Romans saw the number of Gothic soldiers as
a threat that needed to be dealt with. It also lends weight to the idea that
perhaps the Roman army was not as complete as figures might suggest and may
have had to be replenished with these barbarian auxiliaries, as shall be discussed
further on. Admittedly this does not completely validate the idea that
agglomerated tribal groups in the face of Hunnic invasions lead to greater
disparity between the numbers of Roman and barbarian soldiers. It does
however strengthen the idea that the Romans were concerned over the numbers
of barbarians settled within their territory.
We can use this idea to begin to speculate over the role of the barbarians in
the fall of the Empire as whole. While the various tribal groups were divided and
content, the Romans generally had little problem maintaining their borders.
Once the Germanic peoples had actually formed a force capable of tackling the
Romans, we can see that it caused the Romans significant problems. For
centuries the Empire had generally managed to hold its territory, however in the
fourth century it appears as though much of the frontier was given up without a
fight21. Walter Goffart has presented a case for this, arguing that the barbarians
were to begin with allowed into the Empire without contention in order to extort
new tax money from them while managing them in a contained environment22.
Musset however continues to state that the garrison troops were never
replenished fully23. Whether it was intentional or not, the Gothic groups being
enabled to move into the Empire certainly contributed towards the violent
military problems that the Empire suffered from, as well as the social and
cultural changes that it experienced over the course of the next century. Even if
we assume the numbers of barbarians to be comparatively low the fact that the

20 Wolfram (2005:92)
21 Musset (1965:22-3)
22 Goffart (1980)
23 Musset (1965:22-3)
 10

Goths were able to cross the border, raid across the Balkans and defeat an
imperial army at Hadrianople is inescapable. Whether this is the outcome of
barbarian strength or Roman weakness depends on the reception of the
evidence available. While raw data does suggest a still gigantic figure of around
400,00024 soldiers available to the Western Roman Empire, the history of the
period causes reasonable doubt of the validity of this figure, since Goths were
being drafted into the army. Regardless of the total manpower, the Romans in
the Balkans were unable to defeat the Goth army that had infiltrated the Empire
in 376. Perhaps the bulk of the army was simply not distributed in the Balkans.
However, the Goths rampaged virtually uncontested across Roman territory,
cumulating in their sack of Rome in 410. The fact that the Empire was unable to
prevent this with what we are told was still a large army suggests that that there
may have been military and economic issues prior to the invasions. The conflict
with the invaders likely only exacerbated these problems.

The Invasions and Their Relationship with Roman Economics

A similar connective argument can be established from the idea that the Roman
Empire was suffering from economic problems at the beginning of the fourth
century largely due to debasement of the currency25. The lack of money was
detrimental for all aspects of the Roman Empire, as one might expect, but also
had a key role in the ease with which the Germanic peoples were able to
infiltrate and damage the Empire physically and culturally. The lack of funds
available to the Roman emperors in the fourth and fifth centuries caused by an
inability of the Roman superstructure to continue to support itself financially26
meant that their means of dealing with the barbarians would have been limited,
particularly their ability to rely on reactionary tactics to defend their interests.
The severe lack of income meant that the Empire was forced to rely upon its
existing military resources, rather than being able to muster up large contingents
of soldiers to deal with threats that appeared relatively quickly. Part of the

24 Cameron and Whitby (1995:83)

25 Heather (2005:65)
26 Galtung, Heiestad, Rudeng (1980:101-103)
 11

significance of the invasions appears to have been the rapidity of them,

especially at the outset. Because the hordes of Vandals and Goths were able to
move so quickly across the territory of the Empire existing armies were at a
constant disadvantage and with the significant loss of the army at Hadrianople in
378 the Romans were consistently on the back foot when campaigning against
the various groups that had managed to work their way into the heart of the
Empire. While Theodosius had an army in the field after this conflict, the loss of
Valens and his army at Hadrianople cannot be discounted as unimportant. It
signified yet another loss that the financially depleted Western Empire could not
afford. The inability to field new armies quickly or even to repair the damage
caused in battle put them in a terrible position that not only opened up their
territory to conquest but also shook their own citizens’ faith in the solidarity and
protection of the Empire itself.

The factors facilitating the invasions of the Germanic peoples also reflect some of
the other issues that the Roman Empire was confronted with. While certainly I
believe that these invasions were key in the eventual disappearance of the
Roman Empire, we can also see evidence of the role of these other factors. Chief
amongst them is the lack of money available to the Empire. The Roman Empire
was an incredibly vast and complex system that required huge amounts of
money to be brought into its central administrative system. This flow of wealth
by nature had to be steady in order to support the Empire. Evidence does
suggest an economic crisis in the third century, Heather discusses at length the
debasement of the coinage for the centuries prior to the eventual fall 27 and it is
logical for any society struggling for money to be in trouble in a variety of areas.
The Roman Empire was beginning to feel the effects of this difficulty along with
other less significant issues by 376. The Germanic invasions appear to have
acted as a catalyst alongside these pre-existing problems while additionally
introducing their own problems through their violence and introduction of
Germanic culture.
From the first crossing of the Danube in 376 the Roman Empire appears to
have been put onto the back foot economically. Initially this was because rather

27 Heather (2005:65)
 12

than having access to plunder, a vital part of the Roman economy28, they were
now defending their own territory from barbarians. As time went by into the
later half of the fifth century the Empire began to lose territory to the barbarians,
costing it its most important source of revenue: taxation. Even if the barbarians
did not actually take the territory for themselves, there has been suggestion that
the territories on the periphery had to resort to self-sufficiency29, turning away
from the Roman institution that had governed them for centuries. The cost of
this for the Roman state was a dramatic decrease in capital available for them to
reinvest back into the state. While the actual raiding and destruction caused by
various barbarian migrations across the Western Empire may have not had
particularly lasting effects, the damage caused by this loss of revenue was
certainly felt acutely by the Roman government. Not only did it inhibit the ability
of the Empire to rebuild and recover, the loss of territory and the income that
came with it meant that the Empire was yet again on the back foot when trying
to defend itself against further invasion and loss. The effects of economic
difficulty and the barbarian invasions go hand in hand. The invasions meant that
any remnants of Rome’s ‘semi plunder-based’ economy30 were halted and more
significantly as were the subsequent losses of territory detracted from their main
source of income through taxation. This loss of economic manoeuvrability can
be seen to show that holding on to remaining territory became harder and
harder until it simply could not be managed any longer. We see this from the
gradual separation of provinces across the Western Empire, whether at the
hands of the barbarians or autonomously, as seen from the formation of
successor kingdoms such as Ostrogothic Italy and the kingdom of Toulouse31.

Damage in the Short-Term

The effects of the incursions of both the Goths and the Vandals, along with their
contingents of other peoples, were felt both in the short and the long term. If we
take the invasions at face value, we can see that both groups dealt out their own

28 Galtung, Heiestad, Rudeng (1980:98)

29 Galtung, Heiestad, Rudeng (1980:103)
30 Galtung, Heiestad, Rudeng (1980:98)
31 Musset (1965:40)
 13

fair share of cosmetic damage to the Roman Empire. The Goths’ destruction of
Valens’ army at Hadrianople was extremely detrimental to the Eastern Empire,
but arguably far more dangerous was the general pillaging of the Balkans for the
two years prior to the battle. The Gothic war that had broken out continued after
this point, and again the groups of Goths were able to cause a fairly significant
amount of damage (six years of pillaging and raiding on the part of the
barbarians in order to simply survive saw to this) to the Balkans and Dacia.
Only when peace was restored in 382 do we see an end to the raiding in this
area. Likewise, the Vandal-Alan-Suevi conglomerate that began roving across
Gaul and Spain in 406 caused significant short-term damage to both regions from
plundering and raiding. The initial loss of income from these provinces and the
cost of repairs was a terrible burden for an already somewhat straining Roman
Empire, however the long-term damage caused might have proved to be even
more threatening.
After the peace had been brokered with them in 382, the Goths remained a
consistent threat, even if they were not formally at war with the Empire any
longer. The Goths’ presence in the Balkans, where they had largely been settled,
meant that there was still the potential for resistance on a large scale within the
Empire. Twenty-eight years after this peace however, the Goths had reached
Rome, laid siege to the city, and sacked it. The sack of Rome in 410 after two
unsuccessful attempts previously is often utilised by some commentators to
mark the beginning of the very end for the Roman Empire. While Rome at this
point was no longer the capital, the sack of it in the short term was certainly
detrimental for the Empire, again incurring cost for repairs (which it seems as
though it could not fully afford) as well as the deaths of its citizens who if nothing
else were helpful for stimulating the economy. However, as with the ravaging of
Gaul and Spain, the immediate economic effects of this were arguably less
harmful overall than the lasting impact the two groups of Germanic invaders left
on the regions they invaded and eventually came to inhabit.
 14

Barbarians Within the Empire: Society and Culture

As we have seen, initially, the repercussions of the invasions by the Goths and
Vandals appear generally to have been superficial and tended to cause economic
damage by destroying outlets for industry such as farmland and the loss of
citizens either through capture or violence. Evidence for this can be seen in
terms of the trail of destruction the Vandals left across Gaul, from the sack of
Mainz all the way to Toulouse and into Spain32. The words of a Gallic poet: ‘All
Gaul was filled with the smoke of a single funeral pyre’33 testify to the violence
experienced there. Despite the sound of this, the economic damage caused by
marauding barbarians was arguably less important when examining their role in
the fall of Rome overall. The legacy that the barbarian peoples left behind, or
brought with them when they had settled within the territory of the Empire
appears to have had a much more profound impact on the shaping of the
medieval world. As I have established already, I do not fully align with the view
that the Roman Empire was extinguished suddenly and brutally by the military
might of the Germanic invaders, such as the view of Piganiol, who suggested that:
‘Roman civilization did not pass peacefully. It was assassinated’34. The view that
seems far more coherent appears to be that settlement and repopulation of
Roman territory by the barbarians in combination with a newfound military
authority forced upon the Roman people a change away from what had
previously been described as the Roman Empire. This was the key impact of the
Germanic invasions. The resettlement of their soldiers and families in amongst
the existing Roman population triggered in certain areas a change in culture.
The period following 476 according to Ward-Perkins experienced a pronounced
economic regression and a disappearance in specialisation and quality of
tradable goods, two hallmarks of Roman economic prosperity35. However the
deposal of Augustulus appears to have made comparatively little difference to
the existing political procedures. Odoacer continued to govern in much the same

32 Heather (2006:206-7)
33 Commonitorium 2. 184.
34 Piganiol (1947:422)
35 Ward-Perkins (2005:104)
 15

way as the emperors in the past had and still utilised the Roman senate36. The
difference appears to have been a bottom up change, with local populations
adapting to the ways of the new Germanic population, albeit at different rates
depending on the region.
This was the lasting impact of the Germanic peoples on their Roman
neighbours. The process might be argued to have been sped up by the increasing
isolation of communities that had once had easy access and communications to
the rest of the Empire, again caused by the insecurity the invaders brought with
them. Brown notes that generally communication had a radical decline in his
work on Late Antiquity. While previously the Empire had been an incredibly
complex and interconnected superstructure, famed for at least in part for its
advanced road networks, by the fifth century it appears as though travel had
been severely reduced37. The letters of a fifth century bishop writing from
Asturia indicate to us that he hardly even knew what was happening outside of
his own province38. Areas such as Noricum are excellent case studies in
interpreting the localised effects of the invasions on a long-term basis on such
isolated regions. Because the lasting effects of these extended well beyond 476
and the formal ending of the Roman Empire as an institution, it is important to
look at those effects after that date to evaluate their role in the disappearance of
the Roman Empire and more importantly the decline of Roman culture in various
provinces. As we have already visited, the idea of the loss of the Roman
government does not necessarily go hand in hand with the loss of Romanness,
particularly if Roman culture still remains prevalent.
Peter Heather picks Noricum as a specific case study when looking at the
aftereffects of the invasions and settlement of Gaul. He describes vividly how,
despite the loss of a centralised government in 476, the region remained Roman
in nearly every sense of the word39 in the following years. It was only through
gradual attrition, whether it was violent or simply through mass resettlement of
Germanic populations, that the region finally ceased to stop identifying itself as

36 Mussett (1965:28)
37 Brown (2006:126)
38 Brown (2006:126)
39 Heather (2005:413)
 16

‘Roman’40. He also goes on to mention that a large group of landowners all

across Gaul and Spain were continuing to try and operate from 468 to 476 as
part of a functioning Empire, in spite of the fact that by this point it had already
all but stopped operating as an efficient and powerful administrative centre41. It
seems completely illogical to me to determine that this immediately came to an
end in 476. Presumably this population of landowners continued to cling to the
concept of an overarching Empire that would protect them from the violent
Germanic world that was gradually permeating their isolated pockets of
Romanness, such as happened gradually in Noricum and more rapidly in North
Africa. I think that this mentality is likely to have been prevalent across the
Empire, and perhaps is one of the reasons that we see the shift from Roman to
Germanic culture happening relatively slowly in certain areas. For those born
and bred in the sphere of influence of the Empire it acted as a pillar of solidarity
that was unchanging, offered protection and providing prosperity for its
inhabitants. It is only natural that where they were able to (in areas such as
Noricum for example), the Roman population clung for as long as possible to the
notion of the Empire.
It is from this that I believe we see the most pervasive and important effect of
the barbarian invasions on the disappearance of localised Romanness, which was
all that remained to be extinguished after the fall of the government. It was one
thing for the Goths and their associates to sack Rome and eventually usurp the
emperor but it was quite another for the fragmented groups to eradicate all
traces of Romanness from existence. Indeed, I think it is highly unlikely that this
was their intention at all. Bryan Ward-Perkins suggests that the barbarians had
no wish to install their own ideology when they invaded, and found it highly
advantageous to simply work within the social structures of the Romans
instead42. This was presumably because the existing infrastructure was already
far more advanced than anything they were able to replicate themselves and was
already conveniently in place. Similarly, Hodges argues that the barbarians

40 Heather (2005:414)
41 Heather (2005:418)
42 Ward-Perkins (2005:67)
 17

actively sought to integrate themselves with the existing Romans. By doing this
they looked to gain from the existing rich web of Roman society43.

Historical Conclusions: Invasion and Destruction or Migration and

Resettling?

Because of this lack of forced change, coupled with the fact that the Romans
appear largely to have resisted any suggestion of change at a local level, the shift
from Roman to Germanic-medieval culture was slow, as shall be expanded upon
later. This however is the very essence of what I believe to be the largest role
that the barbarian invaders had in the fall of the Roman Empire.
Along with the settlement of Germanic peoples throughout the territory of
the Empire we see a dramatic reduction in the complexity of the Roman
economy, a fact very well attested by Ward-Perkins who demonstrates
thoroughly how standards of pottery and housing declined in the period directly
before and after 47644. Key in his argument is the relation between the arrival of
the Germanic peoples and this decline, providing a conclusion that the two were
not simply separate occurrences but were almost certainly related45. Not only
can it be argued that these invasions eventually lead to the loss of the
sophisticated economy, it also appears that gradually over time the previously
Roman populations had reverted to a much more ‘barbaric’ economy with a lack
of newly circulated currency46 in various parts of the former Roman West,
particularly central Gaul and Spain. Standards of living generally appear to have
declined too. Where once there had been buildings and homes of stone and
marble in the Roman heyday, now there were simple structures made of wood 47,
although the complexity of such structures in debated. Even if we assume the

43 Hodges (1989:2)
44 Ward-Perkins (2005:104-37)
45 Ward-Perkins (2005:118)
46 Ward-Perkins (2005:110)
47 Ward-Perkins (2005:109-10)
 18

existence of incredibly sophisticated wooden houses, this can certainly still a

sign of a clear change of habit, if not of culture altogether.
The Gothic and Vandal invasions brought with them a degree of violence that
shook the Roman Empire and its populace to its core. The uncertainty and
unrest that this triggered, in my view, certainly contributed heavily to the
gradual disappearance of the Roman Empire. The decline in communication
experienced across the Empire in the years between 410 and 476, due the
rampaging barbarians and the disappearance of guaranteed safety within the
Empire’s heartlands, can only have been seen to quicken the conversion to
Germanic culture or at least have lessened the influence that Roman culture had
on isolated regions. This is because the ratio of exposure to each culture had
been dramatically altered by resettlement of barbarian groups and simply
through not being able to interact with fellow Romans to the same degree as
before the invasions. Edward James also mentions that there was increased
interaction between barbarian mercenary groups and Roman citizens inside
Roman territory, to add to this forced resettlement of barbarian populations48
Over time we must concede that the Roman world shifted to the one we
identify as medieval. The barbarian invasions in my opinion did not simply
speed up a process that was destined to happen anyway, but in fact introduced
the Roman Empire to their culture and through their colonisation of parts of the
empire, exposed groups of Romans to it. Whether it was violent and sudden or
gradual, this transition from a Roman culture to a Germanic one was not a
natural process.

48 James (1988)
 19

Chapter Two

The Aftermath and The Disappearance of the Roman World

Introducing Archaeology and the Use of Post-Roman Literary Sources

Much has been made of the date AD476 and the end of the Roman Empire as an
institution. While this date acts as formal point at which the centralised
government system of the Roman Empire shut down, the legacy of the institution
did not die out so quickly. What the archaeological record and various accounts
of contemporary historians tell us is that the Roman Empire and particularly the
culture associated with it remained for centuries after its passing.
The Germanic peoples in the wake of the falling Empire did not seek out to
completely eradicate all traces of the Romanness. As we have seen already, it
appears that generally they looked to profit themselves from the existing social
and economic network. This probably goes some way to initially explaining why
Roman culture and customs seem to have persevered. From the archaeology of
the period (400-800AD) and the accounts of historians and bishops, we can
begin to illustrate a picture of what the world of post-Roman Europe was like.
Once the nature of Europe is understood, a more definite idea can be formed
regarding the accuracy of the term ‘fall’. From this, we can in turn assess the role
that the barbarian invasions had in creating a new Europe and thus their role in
the fall of the Roman Empire.

The Post-Roman Economy

Economic growth and prosperity is used frequently by academics in many fields

in order to assess development, and this is the case with the post-Roman period
as well. Economic activity in the ancient world however can be difficult to gauge
due to the lack of records and documents available. In order to investigate,
historians must turn to the archaeological record and use the figures there to
come to their own conclusions about what the finds across the Mediterranean
 20

can tell us. While this can be a helpful way to identify economic activity, it is
worth noting that the figures offered by the archaeological record can be
interpreted in different ways. This can result in wildly different conclusions over
the same pieces of evidence.

Thus, the Late Antique economy can be viewed in different ways, depending
upon individual interpretation. These can generally be divided into ideas that
promote continuity with the Roman economic model and those that suggest a
divergence from it. For many years at the head of the discussion arguing for
continuity has been Henri Pirenne and his ‘thesis’. In this, he establishes that
the world of AD600 was no different to that of AD400 based on his interpretation
of Mediterranean trade and its perceived continuity49. He also takes the stance
that the Germanic invasions did not destroy the unity that the ancient
Mediterranean world had enjoyed 50 , drawing from his conclusions about
continuation of trade. This perception of continuity has been the topic of much
debate, especially since it appears that Pirenne’s thesis is structured heavily only
upon written evidence51. Looking at the archaeology along with the written
sources is key to truly understanding and comprehending the post-Roman
economy and through that the role the barbarian invasions had on the fall of the
Empire and disappearance of the Roman world in the centuries following.

Individual case studies are important in helping to understand the archaeology

of the post-Roman period. Larger settlements such as Marseille and areas such
as Noricum in addition to individual smaller communities provide an excellent
archaeological record and enable us to attempt to develop a rounded view of the
local post-Roman economy there. With the variation that is available through
archaeological evidence, the overwhelming conclusion that we must come to is
that regarding the role of the barbarians in the disappearance of the Roman
world, there is no overarching answer. The question must be approached by look
at case studies and evidence individually, rather than as a whole.

49 Hodges (1983:22)
50 Pirenne (1939:284)
51 Hodges (1983:22)
 21

Marseille and Southern Gaul

Marseille has been extensively excavated and had an abundance of material

available to analyse from the post-Roman period. Loseby has written a detailed
account of Late Antique Marseille; in this he presents the idea that Marseille had
been a thriving economic centre throughout the period, noting that:

‘in the late sixth century Marseille may have been particularly well-placed to
ride, even to turn back, a tide of events which elsewhere in the western
Mediterranean was pushing ahead the process of urban and economic decline.52’

He comes to this conclusion by examining both written and archaeological

evidence, pinpointing the fact that Marseille appears to have continued as a
trading centre throughout the centuries after 476 through examination of the
ceramic material available there. It seems that Marseille continued to be a part
of a pan-Mediterranean trading network until at least the end of the sixth
century53. Loseby also makes much of the fact that the city is known to have had
its own mint capable of producing copper and later gold coinage54, suggesting
that this indicates that Marseille had an economic hegemony on the surrounding
area55. The image constructed by the archaeological evidence suggests not
simply a city that endured throughout the difficulties of the fifth and sixth
centuries, but one that was able to advance and grow during this time. This view
is emphasised in the written sources too, Loseby describes the impression we
get from Gregory of Tours as being one of a thriving cosmopolitan city,
constantly stimulated by the perpetual flow of merchants, diplomats and
churchmen56. Agathias also attests to the ability of Marseille to persist after the

52 Loseby (1992:183)
53 Loseby (1992:171)
54 Loseby (1992:175)
55 Loseby (1992:177)
56 Loseby (1992:177)
 22

fall of the Empire, grieving its loss to the barbarians but also commenting that it
did not lose much of its ancient prowess either57.
Loseby compares and contrasts Marseille with the nearby town of Arles,
which, while it did not thrive perhaps to the same extent as its neighbour, allows
some context in understanding Marseille58. The Visigoths took Marseille in the
late fifth century and yet it appears to have enjoyed a huge amount of prosperity
in the successive centuries. It did not go into economic decline under the rule of
the barbarians and nor does the Roman way of life appear to vanish in the city or
in that of nearby Arles either.
It is important to note at this point that Marseille is an isolated case study.
In this instance the barbarians appear to have had a very small role in the end of
the Roman world. However Marseille is not wholly representative of the
situation many populations found themselves in after the barbarian invasions.
What it does show specifically through its archaeology and history however was
that the invasions were not universally detrimental to the cities that they
affected.

Economic Decline in the Late Antiquity and the post-Roman World

Marseille is an excellent case study in developing an understanding for what

could happen to a city under the perfect conditions during the rule of the
Germanic invaders. Other areas have been argued to have been relatively
unaffected by the barbarians too. Von Rummel goes as far as to comment that
from archaeological evidence, we would have no idea that the Vandals had
invaded North Africa59. Similarly, Courtois has suggested that farmers in the
Vandal’s new kingdom appear to have not experienced much change60. This
view of a lack of change is reinforced too by contemporary authors. Victor
Vitensis comments that former Roman citizens were still able to profit, stating
that Victorianus of Hadrumentum was ‘as wealth as any man in Africa61’. Despite

57 Histories. I. 2. 1-3
58 Loseby (1992:179-81)
59 Von Rummel (2003:13-19)
60 Courtois et al (1952), Ward-Perkins (2005:68)
61 Vandal Persecution, III, 27
 23

these claims, the evidence does not seem holistic enough to demonstrate that
North Africa as a whole was relatively unaffected by the Vandal invasion. While
some portions of the population may have profited, it seems unlikely that the
majority went unaffected by the Vandal invasions.
Halsall and others beside however have also responded, stating that the
economic decline in North Africa very strongly relate to the fall of the Roman
Empire and the Vandal takeover62. Again it is evident that some regions or areas
of society were certainly able to remain economically stable and relatively
secure in the wake of the barbarian invasions. Others however appear to decline
severely in the centuries after 476.

While Marseille and some regions in North Africa appear to have thrived in the
post-Roman period, other areas and cities did not experience the same kind of
stability and prosperity. Again, individuality is crucial in examining areas that
went into decline. Some were able to manage and others, as we shall see, simply
were not and this is the crux of the argument surrounding the role the barbarian
invasions had in the disappearance of the Roman world.
Chris Wickham demonstrates that in general the early middle ages were a
time of much simpler fiscal structures than had existed previously63. While some
areas escaped decline, in general it appears that across Gaul and Italy,
communities had struggled to continue at the same level of economic
productivity. This further illustrates the case made by Noricum. Areas such as
Marseille and North Africa appear to have largely escaped the violence that
characterised much of the post-Roman period, however other parts of the former
Roman Empire were not so fortunate. The impression that Severinus gives us is
one of a near constant threat of violence and very restricted trade 64, in stark
contrast with the experience that Marseille had.
Across the former Empire, evidence overall seems to suggest a general
decline in standards of living. Ward-Perkins actively pursues the idea that the
period following 476 was one of a ’dramatic move away from sophistication

62 Halsall (2007:327)
63 Wickham (2005:827)
64 Life of Severinus Ch. 22
 24

toward much greater simplicity65’. He reinforces this stance by demonstrating

what he believes to be an overall economic decline. This is largely achieved
through an examination of pottery and coinage, adhering to the characterisation
of the Roman economy laid out by Greene, that is the existence of luxury
alongside a substantial middle and lower market of high quality goods 66. The
pattern that Ward-Perkins establishes is one of reduced production, of pottery
and coinage, across the former Empire in the centuries following 476 until the
fourteenth century67. The difference between this conclusion and the story of
post-Roman Marseille and Vandal North Africa is striking. It firmly establishes
not only that the archaeological record is open for interpretation, but also that it
is far more prudent to study Late Antiquity and the place of the Germanic
peoples within it through smaller individual examples, rather than as a single
large one.

Post-Roman Society and Culture

As we have established, the post-Roman world cannot really be thought of as a

single entity as with the Roman Empire. Situations for its inhabitants appear to
have varied significantly from region to region. The economy is an excellent
indicator for levels of activity and development in these regions, but in order to
understand the period fully the society and culture must be examined alongside
it.
We have seen from Marseille that some groups were able to prosper in the
Late Antique period and other examples of this perseverance do exist. The
evidence we see from the society and cultures of such examples generally offer
up the same consensus as we have seen previously. Some areas of society
remained relatively unaffected by the barbarian invasions, others however were.

65 Ward-Perkins (2005:179)
66 Greene (1986), Ward-Perkins (2005:88)
67 Ward-Perkins (2005:88)
 25

Isolated Communities: Monasteries and Villas

Henri Pirenne characterised monasteries as centres of economic self-

sufficiency68, they also serve as an insight into isolated communities of Late
Antiquity. Monasteries such San Vincenzo al Volturno are useful because they
acted as intellectual and cultural nodes for the early medieval period. Hodges
demonstrates that this can be used to determine the social situation of the
time69. The monastery here appears to have continued through the fall of the
Roman Empire and well into Late Antiquity, with the inhabitants presumably
being fairly unaffected by the new rule of the Ostrogoths. The sanctuary here
was defensible however70, and at several other comparatively isolated sites we
see the same kind of precaution. At San Giovanni di Ruoti, a collection of Roman
villas, one can clearly see that people in abject poverty did not build them. Halsall
describes them as being used as kind of status symbol, however they too are
defensible71. Two conclusions can be drawn from this: firstly, the ability of the
aristocracy and the church to build large sophisticated structures had not
diminished in Italy. Secondly, there are signs of defence against what we can
only assume was unrest. The presence of defensible structures with a monastery
and a collection of villas indicate that there was need of them. It may also point
to the evolution of far more localised and isolated communities, unable to band
together with their neighbours in times of violence at a central defensive location
they are forced to utilise smaller individual defensive structures.
Even within a similar setting (Italy) the villas and monasteries there show the
same case of individuality and increased localisation that has been explored
throughout this chapter. There is no complete holistic way of defining the
situation that individual populations found themselves in in the wake of the
barbarian invasions.

68 Hodges (1997:10)
69 Hodges (1997:10)
70 Halsall (2007:328)
71 Halsall (2007:328)
 26

Towns and Cities in Late Antiquity

While some towns and cities such as London, Rome72 and Marseille appear to
have withstood and in some cases profited from the collapse of Roman imperial
power in 476, others were not so lucky. Procopius for example describes the fate
of the towns of Pesaro and Fano in Italy, which had their walls destroyed and
internal structures burnt to the ground by the Goths73. Milan too, we are told
suffered a similar fate with the Goths enslaving the women and children there
and killing all of the males74. This kind of devastation we would presume to have
been lethal to the towns, however Milan in particular appears to have recovered
slowly75. In other areas too, particularly in post-Roman Britain, society appears
to have rebounded after abandonment and threat of invasion. In Chester,
London, and Leicester Christie describes examples of people continuing to utilise
or redevelop the Roman infrastructure that had been left behind76. The Late
Roman period settlement pattern appears to have been maintained for a century
after the abandonment of Britain, too77.
As we can see, there is an incredible variety in the fates of the towns and
cities of antiquity. Even in these limited examples, the breadth of the spectrum
can be seen. Further cases can be made for cities in Northern Gaul that were
allegedly destroyed by the Vandal invasions in 406. St Jerome notes the
destruction of Mainz, Worms, Reims, Amiens, Arras, Théroanne, Tournai, Speyer
and Strasbourg78 at the hands of the barbarians. While the barbarians may have
been somewhat less clinical in their approach to ‘destroying’ cities than the
Romans, Jerome is likely to have been a fairly reliable source, given his penchant
for detail in his letters79. This suggests that while they may have not have razed
these cities to the ground, enough damage was presumably done to be worth

72 Christie and Augenti (2012:13) for Rome, Christie and Augenti (2012:22) for
London
73 Gothic Wars, III, 25
74 Gothic Wars, II, 21.39-42
75 Christie and Augenti(2012:13)
76 Christie and Augenti (2012:22)
77 Alcock (1979), Pearce (1979:53-7)
78 Epistiles 123.15
79 Kulikowski (2000:331)
 27

noting. Aquileia for example is supposed to have been ‘destroyed’ by the Huns in
452 but much of the infrastructure and buildings there appear to have remained
intact80. These towns were less fortunate than those to the south (again,
Marseille and Arles are key examples) that managed to escape such a fate.
Yet again the broad distribution of the physical and immediate damage caused
by the invaders across the post-Roman world is evident.

Culture and Social Construction

It is easy to imagine Odoacer and his successors as brutish barbarians and the
embodiment of the antithesis of Roman virtues. However, in Ostrogothic Italy we
see surprisingly little divergence from Roman culture and administration. Both
Musset and Halsall conclude that his reign is generally characterised by stability
and a continuation of Roman administration81. Continuing onward in time, we
have the incredibly helpful letters of Cassiodorus. Cassiodorus was employed as
a writer by Gothic kings Theoderic and Athalaric. From him we have an excellent
array of letters written from these kings to various people in their employ.
These letters, although edited by Cassiodorus, give an impression of extreme
sophistication and eloquence from the successive Gothic kings. Letters to the
praetorian prefect for example demonstrate how well versed Theoderic is in
classical culture82. Odoacer also appears also to have run and administered in
the same way as the previous emperors, even continuing to use the senate83. In
fact in Italy and in other parts of the newly divided Empire, new rulers remained
reliant on existing Roman systems and Roman staff in order to govern
adequately and in some examples (particularly Ostrogothic Italy) extreme pride
was taken in upholding traditional Roman ways84. Additionally Roman elements
appear to have persisted in the lives of the Roman landowning elite. Heather
comments that landowners south of the Loire managed to accommodate
themselves into the new rhythm of things following the loss of the Roman

80 Christie and Augenti (2012:12)

81 Halsall (2007:285), Musset (1965:28)
82 Variae III.31
83 Musset (1965:28)
84 Ward-Perkins (2005:68-9)
 28

government85. He also notes that in Spain and Italy too, the rich were able to
adapt to the change in the post Roman world86. This indicates that the Roman
way of life may have persisted well into the post-Roman period purely through
habit. Additionally Brown argues that despite the fall of the Empire, the general
populace continued to strive to exist and look after themselves as they had done
before87. We see here a firm continuation of Roman ideals and customs even
around a century after the end of the Empire.
While some aspects of Roman culture appear to have persisted in Italy, in
other regions yet again it seems that society diverges away from the
disappearing Roman structure. Overall evidence suggests that the peasantries
became far more autonomous88 and that the aristocracy changed substantially,
with ancestry becoming far less important and military identities becoming
more prevalent89. This may be a reflection of the influx of, or gradual shift
towards, Germanic warrior culture on the part of the citizens of the former
Empire. Wickham also states that people began to use a combination of both old
and new social strategies90. The old Roman world and the culture attached to it
could not be completely extinguished without a trace in the course of a century
or two. However, alongside this perseverance with the old Roman ways, people
appear to have been adapting to the new Germanic culture that was beginning to
permeate their society, forcefully or not. Musset uses the phrase: ‘a synthesis of
Germanic and Roman elements’ to describe the newly developed culture that
emerged after the invasions in the west91.

Socio-Economic Conclusions in Late Antiquity

As has been argued throughout this chapter, the post-Roman world simply
cannot be examined and understood as one singular model. It must instead be

85 Heather (2005:438)
86 Heather (2005:438)
87 Brown (2006:135)
88 Wickham (2005:828)
89 Wickham (2005:829)
90 Wickham (2005:831)
91 Musset (1965:35)
 29

regarded as a collection of individual cases that all have their own history
following the end of formalised Roman administration in AD476.
Some places, such as Marseille, Arles and Rome itself appear to have
experienced far more continuity with the Roman model. They also appear to
have suffered far less in terms of their economic activity and their sophisticated
culture, however it does appear that these successor communities matched
neither the scale nor standards of their classical predecessors 92 . When
examining places like this, the role of the barbarian invasions in the demise of
the Roman world appears to have been a thoroughly accidental and gradual one.
In other cases, the end of the Roman world brought with it a definite decline
in sophistication, economic activity and overall connectivity. In these cases the
role that the barbarian invasions played appears far more direct and
pronounced. Hodges claimed that ‘the economy of Post-Roman north-west
Europe quite simply had to adapt to new socio-economic forces93’ and that
appears to have been exactly why some areas were able to thrive while others
simply could not.

92 Christie and Augenti (2012:34)

93 Hodges (1989:6)
 30

Chapter Three
Conclusions

The Roman Empire without a doubt in my mind fell as a formal institution in

AD476. The Goth and Vandal groups that infiltrated the Empire appear to have
had a reasonably significant role its eventual demise. The damage done by these
groups appears to have been significant enough to begin to limit the Roman
economy at first by hindering any kind of cross-border plunder-based
exploitation and subsequently by costing the Empire chunks of taxation revenue
by triggering independence or otherwise conquering Roman territory. After
Alaric sacked Rome in 410, the Empire appears to have been in very sudden
regression. It could no longer prevent the hordes of invaders and migrants from
not only moving across, but also actually claiming parts of it as their own (see the
case of North Africa). Slowly but inexorably parts of the Roman Empire were
divided and lost until Odoacer supplanted Romulus Augustulus and inherited
what, as a whole, had frankly become a motley collection of bankrupt cities and
territories in Italy.

The role the barbarian invasions played in the fall of the Roman Empire as a
formal institution appears to have been a reasonably violent one, forcefully
shocking the Roman populace and limiting the economy with their campaigning.
However, the legacy of the Roman world lived on and it was in centuries
following 476 that I believe the barbarians had the most pronounced role in the
demise of the Roman world.
To begin with, it is important to understand how to approach Europe in Late
Antiquity. We cannot hope to view it as one large conglomerate as can be done
with the Western Roman Empire. Instead it has to be dealt with in smaller sub
communities and regions that all have a different experience in the world that
developed after the barbarian invasions.
We must then look at the motives of the Germanic peoples. In general, they
appear not to have had death wish for the Roman Empire at all. As explored in
chapter one, it appears that they had in fact sought to integrate themselves into
 31

Roman society in order to profit from the obvious benefits that it brought them.
Of course there are exceptions to this rule, the destruction of various cities in
Italy such as Milan and Pesaro for example. However, the success stories of
Marseille, Arles and parts of North Africa, as well as the presence of continued
large scale luxury building in Italy at sites such as San Vincenzo al Volturno and
San Giovanno di Ruoti run contrary to this.
The most significant role that the barbarians played in the demise was not a
violent one, but rather a cultural one. Regardless of economic success, as we
have seen society gradually shifted over the course of centuries away from that
of the Roman Empire and towards that of the Germanic peoples. The resettling
that occurred after the initial migrations likely brought this about through
extended exposure to a new culture.
Without the existence of the Empire as an overarching superstructure to
influence and encourage Roman culture to the newer generations born into the
post-476 world, and in an environment surrounded by the Germanic peoples, it
seems natural to suggest that Roman culture over the course of the centuries
was eroded and replaced. This is the exact phenomenon we see occurring all
across the former Empire in the centuries following 476. By around AD650 the
last vestiges of Roman culture appear to be restricted to Rome and the Papal
States.

The Roman World in the west after the loss of the formal system of governance
and administration due to economic and social collapse triggered by the
barbarian invasions could only exist so long as the Roman economy, society and
culture persisted. Through the resettling and constant presence in the former
empire after 476, the barbarian invasions seem to have had a largely accidental
role in the demise of the Roman world. There appears to be no clearly indicating
evidence that the invaders actively looked to dismantle the Roman culture and
infrastructure, to the contrary, the richness of the Roman Empire has been
argued to have attracted the immigrants as they sought to share in it. Over time
their continual presence appears to have gradually caused a cultural shift that
ultimately guided the remnants of Roman society in the west away from the
 32

classical Roman culture and towards the more Germanic culture that
characterised the early Middle Ages in Europe.

Word Count: 10907

 33

Bibliography

Primary Literature

Agathias, The Histories, Translation by J. D. Frendo, 1975, de Gruyter, Berlin; New

York

Cassiodorus, Variae, Translation by S. J. B Barnish, 1992, Cassiodorus: Variae,

Liverpool Univeristy Press, Liverpool

Eugippius. The Life of Saint Severinus, Translation by G. W. Robinson, 1915,

Oxford University Press et al, London, available at:
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/pearse/morefathers/files/severinus_01_intro.htm
last accessed: 26.04.2014 at 17.11

Gregory of Tours, The History of the Franks, Translation by L. Thorpe, 1974,

Penguin Classics, London

Hydatius, Chronical, Translation by R. W. Burgess, 1993, The Chronicle of

Hydatius and the Consularia Constantinopolitana: Two Contemporary Accounts of
the Final Years of the Roman Empire, Oxford University Press, USA

Saint Jerome, Episitles, Translation available at:

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3001123.htm, last accessed: 26.04.2014 at
16:25

Procopius, Gothic Wars, Translation by H. B. Dewing, 1919, Harvard University

Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Available at
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/20298/20298-h/20298-h.htm last accessed:
26.04.2014 at 16:36
 34

Sidonius Apollinaris, Letters, Translation by O. M. Dalton, 1915, available at

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/pearse/morefathers/files/sidonius_letters_01book1.h
tm last accessed: 26:04:2014 at 17:01

Victor Vitensis, History of the Vandal Persecution, Translation by J. Moorhead,

1992, Liverpool University Press, Liverpool

Secondary Literature

Augenti, A. and Christie, N., (2012), Urbes Extinctae: Archaeologies of Abandoned

Classical Towns, Ashgate Publishing Ltd, Farnham

Alcock, L., (1971), Arthur’s Britain, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth

Brown, P., (2006), The World of Late Antiquity, Thames and Hudson Ltd, London

Cameron, A. (ed), Whitby, M., (1995), The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East.
States, Resources and Armies. The Darwin Press, Princeton

Courtois, C. et al, (1952), Tablettes Albertini: Actes privés de l’époque Vandale,

Analecta, Versailles

Delbrück, H., (1980), The Barbarian Invasions Renfroe Translation, University of

Nebraska Press, USA

Finley, M. I., (1958), Manpower Shortage and the Fall of the Roman Empire in the
West by Arthur E. R. Boak, a Review by Moses I. Finley, The Journal of Roman
Studies, Vol.48, No. 1/ 2, pp.156-164.

Friell, G. and Williams, S., (1994), Theodosius-Empire at Bay, University of Yale

Press, London
 35

Galtung, J., Heiestad, T., Rudent, E., (1980), On the Decline and Fall of Empires: The
Roman Empire and Western Imperialism, Revie (Fernand Braudel Center), Vol. 4,
No. 1, pp. 91-153

Goffart, W., (1980), Barbarians and the Romans AD 418-584: The Techniques of
Accommodation, Princeton University Press, USA

Greene, K., (1986), The Archaeology of the Roman Economy, University of

California Press, London

Halsall, G., (2007), Barbaian Migrations and the Roman West 376-568, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.

Heather, P., (1996), The Goths, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford

Heather, P., (2005), The Fall of the Roman Empire A New History, Macmillan,
Oxford

Hodges, R., Whitehouse, D., (1983), Mohammed, Charlemagne and the Origins of
Europe. Archaeology and the Pirenne thesis, Gerald Duckworth and co. Ltd,
London

Hodges, R. (1989), Dark Age Economics: The Origins of Towns and Trade AD600-
1000, Gerald Duckworth and co. Ltd, London

Hodges, R., (1997), Light in the Dark Ages The Rise of San Vincenzo al Volturno,
Gerald Duckworth and co. Ltd, London

Hodges, R., (1998), The Sixth Century: Production, Distribution and Demand, Brill,
New York.

James, E., (1988), The Franks, Basil Blackwell, Oxford

 36

Kulikowski, M., (2000) Barbarians in Gaul, Usurpers in Britain, Britannia, Vol. 31,
pp. 325-345

Loseby, S. T., (1992) Marseille: A Late Antique Success Story?, The Journal of
Roman Studies, Vol. 82, pp. 165-185

Musset, L., (1965), The Germanic Invasions The Making of Europe 400-600AD,
Barnes and Noble, USA

Pearce, S. M., (1979), The Kingdom of Dumnonia: Studies in History and Tradition
in South Western Britain AD350-1150, Lodenek Press, Padstow

Piganiol, A., (1947), L’Empire Chrétien, Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore

Pirenne, H., (1939), Mohammed and Charlemagne, W.W Norton, New York

Robertson, W., (1796), The History of the Reign of Charles V: With a View of the
Progress of Society in Europe, for the Subversion of the Roman Empire to the
Beginning of the Sixteenth Century, London

Ruscu, L. C., (2007), On Nicopolis ad Istrum and Her Territory, Historia: Zeitschrift
für Alte Geschichte, pp. 214-229

Von Rummel, P., (2003). Zum Stand der afrikanischen Vandalenforschung nach
den Kolloquien in Tunis und Paris, An. Tard,. No. 2, pp. 13-19

Ward-Perkins, B., (2005), The Fall of Rome and the End of Civilisation, Oxford
University Press, New York

Wickham, C., (2005), Framing the early Middle Ages: Europe and the
Mediterranean 400-800, Oxford University Press, Oxford

Wolfram, H., (1988), History of the Goths, University of California Press, USA
 37

Wolfram, H., (2005), The Roman Empire and Its Germanic Peoples, University of
California, London