Jesus Christ and the first sack of Rome 410

Again we return to this momentous historic event that changed the world and brought the thousand years old Classical era to an end in the West.

What did Jesus Christ do when the unstoppable Visigoths had set their eyes to the once invincible city?

For the conquest of a city, the breaking of walls built to defend people from people and the events when an aggressive bunch of enemies spreads to the streets among defenceless civilian population, is quite a thing. Many words starting with R and other letters come to mind.

Rome had been sacked only once in human memory. On July 18, 387 BC the Gaul  Senone tribe led by chief Brennon led had broken a Roman army of 24.000 men in the Battle of the river Allia near Rome and entered the city. Artist Paul Jamin imagined in his painting how victorious Brennon would smile while entering one of the rich houses and seeing the treasures and captive naked women waiting for their fate there. Voe victis

Le Brenn et sa part de butin

Paul Jamin 1893 (wikimedia)

It was not all that different in 410 AD as we learn from Saint Augustine in De Civitate Dei. The bishop of Hippos had met many refugees from the Rome sacked by Alaric and his people and discusses at length the matter of a chaste Christian women who have been raped by the cruel enemy.

In more recent memory we have the entry of Russian soldiers to Berlin after the collapse of the Third Reich when enemies were hunting German soldiers trying to hide from their wrath in the forests and we have heard stories about what was done to the women and children in Hitler's capital. And other cities in other places and in other times. homo homini lupus.

Christian Goths
Well - as for Jesus Christ, he had already conquered many hearts of the mighty Visigoths who had converted to His faith. There was therefore a certain trembling in their hearts when they entered the capital of Christian Rome on August 24, 410.

Alaric was on the verge of an agreement with Honorius when his forces were attacked by Sarus, a fellow Gothic commander who was allied to Honorius and who had a blood feud with Ataulf. In response, Alaric returned to Rome and laid siege to it a third time. On August 24, 410, slaves opened Rome's Salarian Gate and the Visigoths poured in and looted for three days. Many of the city's great buildings were ransacked, including the mausoleums of Augustus and Hadrian, in which many Roman Emperors of the past were buried; the ashes of the urns in both tombs were scattered. This was the first time the city had been sacked in 800 years, and its citizens were devastated. Many Romans were taken captive, including the Emperor's sister, Galla Placidia, who subsequently married Ataulf. Tens of thousands of Romans subsequently fled the economically ruined city into the countryside, with many of them seeking refuge in Africa.


The historian Procopius recorded the following satire: the feeble-minded Emperor Honorius was informed by a eunuch that "Rome was destroyed" and, thinking the reference was to his favorite hen named "Roma", cried out in great consternation: "How could it be? She just ate out of my hand." Upon being informed of his mistake, the hapless emperor was greatly relieved.
wikipedia

Trembling
The Visigoths entered, ransacked ... and left with their spoils of war, people and things, aiming at the riches of Africa. But very soon after the sack of Rome a mighty storm destroyed their ships and God thus drowned many of their soldiers in the sea and the heroic king Alaric himself died in a fever.

Alaric, having penetrated the city, marched southwards into Calabria. He desired to invade Africa, which, thanks to its grain, had become the key to holding Italy. But a storm battered his ships into pieces and many of his soldiers drowned. Alaric died soon after in Cosenza, probably of fever, at the age of about forty (assuming again, a birth around 370 AD), and his body was, according to legend, buried under the riverbed of the Busento. The stream was temporarily turned aside from its course while the grave was dug wherein the Gothic chief and some of his most precious spoils were interred. When the work was finished, the river was turned back into its usual channel and the captives by whose hands the labor had been accomplished were put to death that none might learn their secret.

Alaric was succeeded in the command of the Gothic army by his brother-in-law, Ataulf, who married Honorius' sister Galla Placidia three years later .
wikipedia

The Gothic mind surely connected the two things - the conquest of a sacred city and the horrible curses that fell on their people thereafter. Rome was not just another city.

Gothic Cross

Ostrogoth coin with a cross. Byzantine imitation c. 550 AD

(Ebay)

Today the term Gothic cross is often used for a dagger like design with numerous variations popularly sold as pendants or even used as a tattoo. These cross designs are often associated with Gothic subculture with murderous Nazi, bloody vampire or other such dark associations. These crosses have little or nothing to do with the historical Goths.

Do we have real Gothic crosses that would have survived in structures, gravestones or archaeological discoveries from the times of Wulfila and the Arian Christians from late 4th to the end of 6th century? The problem is that with the victory of Nicene Christians there apparently was a heavy onslaught on heretic Arian places of worship and mosaics and objects of art where destroyed.

For this reason alone it may not be easy to find crosses among the surviving evidence of historic Goths.

But it is also possible that cross itself was not a central symbol among Gothic Christians. These were warriors who venerated heroic deeds and loved bloody battles.  The shameful death of our Savior as a defenseless victim on a cross might not have been easy to accept. In other words, Gothic Christianity may have emphasized other things than the suffering and slaughter of the Lamb of God.

We may note that also in the 3rd and 4th centuries when Christ reached the hearts of the Goths through the missionary work of Wulfila and others cross was not a common symbol in the Church. The memory of its cruelty was still alive and it was something like a gas chamber or electric chair would be for today's Christians. Only later, after Constantine the Great forbade crucifixion in Rome and after the reality of it was forgotten did the cross become a prominent symbol of Christianity.

Here is some evidence that I have been able to find and it all is from the later periods in 6th and even 7th centuries when the Gothic Arian Christianity was nearing its end.


Ostrogoths

The beautiful mosaics in Sant'Apollinare Nuovo,,Ravenna, made during the rule of king Theodoric (496-526) were largely destroyed with the suppression of Arianism. The mosaic depicting bearded Christ seated on throne has survived but the cruciform halo surrounding His head is later Byzantine addition (see in here more pictures of the Ostrogoth and Justinian mosaics in this Basilica which is listed by UNESCO as part of world cultural heritage).

Coin of Athalaric, Ravenna 526-540 AD

(ref)

There is numismatic evidence of crosses, like in this decanummi of king Athalaric. But this cross does not represent any Gothic cross as it is an imitation of the standard designs in Byzantine coins.

Coin of Baduila 541-549 AD 

(ref)

The nummi of king Baduila has a small cross that clearly shows Christian identity. It is, of course, too tiny to indicate any specific type of cross.

The coins are imitations of Byzantine coins and may therefore not be good evidence about Ostrogoth Christians attitude towards the symbol of a cross.



Visigoths It is difficult to find crosses among the scant material remains of Arian Goths from the Visigothic period of Spain 409-711. Nicene Catholics may have efficiently destroyed the places of worship and heretic religious art objects after the Third Council of Toledo 581 AD in the same manner the Byzantines destroyed Arian art after victory over the Ostrogoths.

There are several outstanding jewelry crosses in the Treasure of Guarrazar found in tombs after heavy storms in August 1858 in an orchard in Guadamar near Toledo. Most of the treasure has since been stolen; surviving objects are on display in the Royal Palace of Madrid, in the National Archaeological Museum of Madrid and in the Museum of Middle Ages, Paris. 

However, these very skilfully made precious objects are dated quite late in Visigoth history, to the seventh century AD when the Visigoths had already converted from Arianism to the Catholic faith. Indeed, the inclusion of crosses may have been a deliberate act to emphasize the newly found orthodoxy of the Goths of Spain.

The Treasure of Guarrazar is an archeological find composed of twenty-six votive crowns and gold crosses that had originally been offered to the Roman Catholic Church by the Kings of the Visigoths in the seventh century in Hispania, as a gesture of the orthodoxy of their faith and their submission to the ecclesiastical hierarchy.

The most valuable of all is the votive crown of king Reccesuinth with its blue sapphires from the former Ceylon, now Sri Lanka, and spectacular pendilia (hanging jewels and ornaments).

Though the treasure is now divided and much has disappeared, it represents the best surviving group of Early Medieval Christian votive offerings, and was probably comparable to groups deposited in other major European shrines that have now disappeared.
(wikipedia)

19th century lithograph of objects in the Guarrazar treasure

(wikimedia)

The shape of the crosses found in the beautiful Visigoth treasure does resemble the shape of the cross seen minted on the simple Ostrogoth coin shown above.

Goths and Eusebius of Nicomedia

 Ostrogoth jewellery at Metropolitan Museum of Art

Sailko wikimedia

Christ reached the Goths at the borders of Roman empire while they were living in paganism that is not very well known to us from historical sources. The pious captives, especially Roman and Anatolian women, brought Him in their hearts and words and example of life to the new husbands and lords. Apparently Goths treated these civilized captives, wives and slaves, with dignity and wanted to learn from them.

At the time of the early conversion of the Goths the Kingdom of Christ was in the midst of very serious process of defining in a binding way the fundamental statements of faith - what is faith in God after what happened in Jesus Christ? Who is this Christ and what is His relation to His Father that He talks so much about?

There were no easy solutions and there is an amazing spectre of theological opinions, all based in the Scriptures in one way or other, emphasizing this or that. Groups of believers were stamped with theological names usually according to their leading theologian and the fight between the groups was not limited to writing pamphlets and learned books stretching the versatile Greek language to the limit.

The first Ecumenical Councils at Nicea 325 and Constantinople 381 were dealing with the most essential theological questions. There Christianity formulated the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. Major concern in these discussions was the rational teaching of Arius and his disciples who insisted that Son is not equal to Father. This seemingly innocent battle that in reality is of the deepest significance to Christian faith reached the highest political levels in the courts of the Roman emperors.

Christianity was now quickly becoming the state religion instead of Greco-Roman paganism forcefully demanded from all citizens. It was now imperative that the new religion would be internally united and thus function as the glue that keeps the enormous Empire internally together. Heretics were now the threat to unity but what was Orthodoxy?

The Credo of Nice-Constantinople had a crucial role in defining orthodox Christianity and the major camps during the 4th century were the Niceans and the Arians who rejected the Creed of Nicea.


Eusebius of Nicomedia
We do not know the birthday of Bishop Eusebius of Nicomedia. He died in Constantinople Anno Domini 341.

This is the man who baptised Constantine the Great resting at his death bead and so brought the emperor to the Kingdom of Christ on May 22, 337.

Eusebius of Nicomedia was also the bishop who ordained Wulfila as the bishop and apostle of the Goths and thus was the key persion in directing these people towards Arian Christianity.

Monk Rufinus of Aquileia (340/345 – 410) has recorded important sources also about Eusebius of Nicomedia. Wikipedia article uses hi through Philip R. Amidon, The Church History of Rufinus of Aquileia: Books 10 and 11. New York: Oxford University Press (1997) when describing the crucial events 325 and the years immediately after the Council. 


After being the Bishop of Berytus (Beirut) and then of Nicomedia Eusebius finally came to Constantinople in 338 staying there near the hubs of political and ecclesiastical power until his death in 341.

Distantly related to the imperial family of Constantine, he owed his progression from a less significant Levantine bishopric to the most important episcopal see to his influence at court, and the great power he wielded in the Church was derived from that source. In fact, during his time in the Imperial court, the Eastern court and the major positions in the Eastern Church were held by Arians or Arian sympathizers.

With the exception of a short period of eclipse, he enjoyed the complete confidence both of Constantine and Constantius II and was the tutor of the later Emperor Julian the Apostate; and it was he who baptized Constantine the Great on May 22, 337. Also during his time in the Imperial court, Arianism became more popular with the Royal family.

It can be logically surmised that Eusebius had a huge hand in the acceptance of Arianism in the Constantinian household. The Arian influence grew so strong during his tenure in the Imperial court that it wasn't until the end of the Constantinian dynasty and the appointment of Theodosius I that Arianism lost its influence in the Empire.

Like Arius, he was a pupil of Lucian of Antioch, and it is probable that he held the same views as Arius from the very beginning; he was also one of Arius' most fervent supporters who encouraged Arius. It was also because of this relationship that he was the first person whom Arius contacted after the latter was excommunicated from Alexandria by Alexander. Apparently, Arius and Eusebius were close enough and Eusebius powerful enough that Arius was able to put his theology down in writing. He afterward modified his ideas somewhat, or perhaps he only yielded to the pressure of circumstances; but he was, if not the teacher, at all events the leader and organizer, of the Arian party.
(wikipedia)

However, despite of his strong leaning towards the teachings of deacon Arius Eusebius signed the Nicene Creed. This act, the signing of such a significant confession against his inner beliefs tells us much about the character of the man.

At the First Council of Nicaea, 325, he signed the Confession, but only after a long and desperate opposition in which he "subscribe with hand only, not heart" according to ancient sources. It was a huge blow to the Arian party since it was surmised that the participants in the First Council of Nicaea were evenly split between non-Arians and Arians. His defense of Arius angered the emperor, and a few months after the council he was sent into exile due to his continual contacts with Arius and the exiles.

After the lapse of three years, he succeeded in regaining the imperial favor by convincing Constantine that Arius and his views do not conflict with the Nicene Creed. After his return in 329 he brought the whole machinery of the state government into action in order to impose his views upon the Church. 
(wikipedia)

Character of Eusebius
Such was the man who was so crucial to the Christian faith of the Goths - their Arianism - through his choice of the bishop and his powerful support to him.

Eusebius was more of a politician than anything else, and a skilled one. Upon his return, he regained the lost ground resulted from the First Council of Nicaea, established alliances with other groups such as the Meletians and expelled many opponents.
He was described by modern historians as an "ambitious intriguer" and a "consummate political player". He was also described by ancient sources as a high-handed person who was also aggressive in his dealings; he also used his allies to spy on his opponents.
(wikipedia)

The Kingdom of God
Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:
But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.
But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.
So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?
He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?
 But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.
 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.
Matthew 13:24-30 KJV


Evaluation of Eusebius of Nicomedia
The writer(s) of the wikipedia describe the impact of Eusebius of Nicomedia in rather solemn colors:

He died at the height of his power in the year 342.

He was so influential that even after his death, Constantius II heeded his and Eudoxus of Constantinople's advice to attempt to convert the Roman Empire to Arianism by creating Arian Councils and official Arian Doctrines.
It was because of Eusebius that "On the whole, Constantine and his successors made life pretty miserable for Church leaders committed to the Nicene decision and its Trinitarian formula." (wikipedia)

As for the Goths...

Mausoleum of Theodoric the Ostrogoth 520 AD (Ravenna)
Its roof is a single 300–ton Istrian stone, 10 meters in diameter. 

because of Wulfila they became Christians and got their own language in writing. The Goths formed powerful states, Visigoths in Hispania and Ostrogoths in northern Italy (Ravenna).

Arian teaching survived among these people for about two hundred years:

Visigoths of Spain accepted Nicene Creed in the Third Council of Toledo in 589.

Ostrogoths were conquered by the famous general Belisarius (500-565) during the time of Justinian the Great and their kingdom was destroyed. Their last king was called Theia and he ruled only for a year 552-553. The remaining people moved to Austria and their nation - and church - was dissolved.

Christ and Goths before Wulfila - Procopius of Caesarea

Byzantine sources about the early history of Christ and the Goths (Geta, Gothorum) are rare. These three historians are mentioned as the best witnesses

Procopius of Cæsarea (Historia, IV.-VIII., de Bello Italico adversus Gothos gesto)
Jornandes (de Getarum [Gothorum] origine et rebus gestis)
Isidore Hispalensis (Historia Gothorum)


Procopius of Caesarea

Procopius of Caesarea wrote extensively about Goths - but he concentrated on the events during the reign of Justinian.

Procopius was born in Caesarea in Palestine late in the fifth century and died not earlier than AD 562. He is known as one of the greatest later Greek historians. He became a lawyer, and in AD 527 he was made legal adviser and secretary of Belisarius, commander against the Persians , and went with Belisarius again in AD 533 against the Vandals, and in AD 535 against the Ostrogoths. After AD 541, or AD 540, Procopius returned to Constantinople. He might have attended Belisarius again when Belisarius and then Narses campaigned against Tutila in Italy.


His History Of The Wars in 8 books recounts the Persian Wars of emperors Justinus and Justinian down to AD 550 (2 books); the Vandalic War and after events in Africa AD532-546 (2 books); the Gothic War against the Ostrogoths in Sicily and Italy AD 536-552 (3 books); and a sketch of events to AD 554 (1book). The whole consists mostly of military history, with a lot of information about people and places also, and about special events. Procopius was a diligent, careful, judicious narrator of the facts and developments and shows good powers of description. He is just to the Empire's enemies and boldly criticizes Justinian. Procopius's education included all the greatest of the Greek historians and geographers, as well as the poets and the orators. An interesting aspect of Procopius is his personal as well as his official familiarity with the people, the places, and the events of which he writes. His account of "Justinian's Buildings" (peri ktismaton) was completed in A.D. 558 or 559. He is thought to have written it either by Imperial command or to deflect suspicions of disaffection.
(procopius.net)

Procopius writes about the early history of Goths in his History of Wars that consists of eight books. They are introduced in Book III in the following way:

Now while Honorius was holding the imperial power in the West, barbarians took possession of his land; and I shall tell who they were and in what manner they did so. There were many Gothic nations in earlier times, just as also at the present, but the greatest and most important of all are the Goths, Vandals, Visigoths, and Gepaedes. In ancient times, however, they were named Sauromatae and Melanchlaeni and there were some too who called these nations Getic.

All these, while they are distinguished from one another by their names, as has been said, do not differ in anything else at all. For they all have white bodies and fair hair, and are tall and handsome to look upon, and they use the same laws and practise a common religion. For they are all of the Arian faith, and have one language called Gothic; and, as it seems to me, they all came originally from one tribe, and were distinguished later by the names of those who led each group.


This people used to dwell above the Ister River from of old. Later on the Gepaedes got possession of the country about Singidunum and Sirmium, on both sides of the Ister River, where they have remained settled even down to my time.

Procopius of Caesarea then goes on to describe the Visigoths. The events he describes in more detail  take place over hundred years later than the early history of Goths we are hunting: Flavius Honorius Augustus was Emperor of Western Rome from 395 to 423 A.D.

But the Visigoths, separating from the others, removed from there and at first entered into an alliance with the Emperor Arcadius, but at a later time (for faith with the Romans cannot dwell in barbarians), under the leadership of Alaric, they became hostile to both emperors, and, beginning with Thrace, treated all Europe as an enemy's land.

Now the Emperor Honorius had before this time been sitting in Rome, with never a thought of war in his mind, but glad, I think, if men allowed him to remain quiet in his palace. But when word was brought that the barbarians with a great army were not far off, but somewhere among the Taulantii, he abandoned the palace and fled in disorderly fashion to Ravenna, a strong city lying just about at the end of the Ionian Gulf, while some say that he brought in the barbarians himself, because an uprising had been started against him among his subjects; but this does not seem to me trustworthy, as far, at least, as one can judge of the character of the man.

And the barbarians, finding that they had no hostile force to encounter them, became the most cruel of all men. For they destroyed all the cities which they captured, especially those south of the Ionian Gulf, so completely that nothing has been left to my time to know them by, unless, indeed, it might be one tower or one gate or some such thing which chanced to remain. And they killed all the people, as many as came in their way, both old and young alike, sparing neither women nor children. Wherefore even up to the present time Italy is sparsely populated. They also gathered as plunder all the money out of all Europe, and, most important of all, they left in Rome nothing whatever of public or private wealth when they moved on to Gaul. But I shall now tell how Alaric captured Rome.
Procopius History of the Wars Book III.ii