Habilitationsschrift--Würzburg. / Bibliography: p. [254]-274.

Habilitationsschrift--Würzburg. / Includes bibliographical references (p. [254]-274).

Inaug.-Diss.--Dorpat.

This thesis examines the evidence surrounding the Battle of Nedao, an engagement between Ardaric, leader of the Gepids and other rebelling tribes, and Ellac, the eldest son of Attila. It argues against the claim that, after Attila’s death, it was the sons of Attila who ruined the Hunnic empire through civil war. Instead, the political crisis which inevitably led to the battle was brought about by Attila’s murdering of his brother and co-king, Bleda, in 445 and his intestate death in 453. If there was civil war between Attila’s sons, it did not occur until after Nedao. Furthermore, Ardaric was not of Royal Hunnic status fighting for succession at Nedao. He was, instead, one of the leaders of a rebellion that was not limited to Germanic tribes. The thesis focuses primarily on one source, Jordanes, since his Getica is the only known account of the battle which is not mentioned by any other contemporary source. The paper analyzes both Jordanes as an author and the language in his Getica, finding him not to be the semiliterate copyist of Cassiodorus, but instead underlines his own agency in the organizing of the work. From this broader understanding of Jordanes and Getica, it furthermore determines that he may, in fact, harbor an anti-Gepid sentiment towards the Gepid kingdom of his own day in the sixth century. Jordanes may, therefore, be anachronistically ascribing strength and importance to the Gepids’ role at Nedao, as Gepid-Constantinopolitan tension reached its zenith at the time he composed his work, thereby critically affecting our interpretation of the Battle of Nedao narrative.

No description available.

No description available.

The basic aim of the thesis is to investigate whether the Romans of the East (Byzantines) during the 6th to the 8th centuries were interested in the Latin west and the imperial rule over it. In the first part of the work, the various discourses concerning the origins of the Justinianic conquest or reconquest of Africa and Italy articulated in the contemporary sources are identified and evaluated; the only one which cannot be shown or supposed to have been officially articulated is the discourse of a source of Pseudo-Zachariah Scholasticus which makes African and maybe also Italian exulants complaining in the imperial court about the local rulers responsible for the Vandal and Gothic wars. After some other preliminary studies (e.g. concerning the so-called problem of Theodericʼs constitutional position), it is concluded that the emperor Justinian was not interested in an ideologically founded restoration of the empire, but made the western wars because of his contacts with western aristocrats. In the second part of the thesis, the presentation of the Justinianic western wars and western events or realities in the works of the Byzantine historians from Marcellinus Comes and Procopius to Theophylactus Simocatta (the 6th to the early 7th centuries) is investigated and an attempt is made to explore...