This volume on Procopius presents a number of papers delivered at colloquia at Mainz in December 2014 and Ghent in May 2016 supplemented by invited contributions from younger researchers, especially those who have not yet contributed to such a collection. Of the 20 items, the majority are in English, but three each are in French and German in a deliberate attempt to highlight and defend the multilingual nature of Humanities research that is under threat from the Anglophone steamroller. The volume is divided into four, roughly equal, sections, but the editors worked hard to achieve a reasonable level of coherence within sections and across the volume by circulating drafts for comment.
In the first section, Procopius and Roman Society, Geoffrey Greatrex surveys the information about Procopius’ home town of Caesarea, though lack of evidence means that neighbouring Gaza has to serve as a substitute on occasions. Marion Kruse urges that Procopius applied a sophisticated and coherent economic understanding in his critique of Justinian's policies, but reads too much into the limited evidence. Mark-Anthony Karantabias rightly states that Justinian's power was far from absolute and that Procopius’ attacks rely on distortions and omissions to create the impression of exceptional evil, whereas Justinian was really little different from other rulers. Johann Martin Thesz also points to the flaws in Procopius’ critique of Justinian, with the lens of moral degeneration used to attack social changes which had been proceeding for generations. Maria Conterno considers whether Procopius’ silence on contemporary Christological disputes represents a serious distortion, arguing that it is broadly in line with other contemporary authors and so not significant for Procopius as a writer or historiography as a genre.
The second section, on Past and Present in Procopius’ works, contains four chapters of which the first two, by Jessica Moore and Timo Stickler, deal with Procopius’ views of Rome, Romans and Romanness in the Gothic wars, when complexities were inevitably caused by the East Roman army, with its significant non-Roman elements, campaigning within the historical landscape of the Roman state with severe consequences for the Romans as defined as inhabitants of the city. Procopius appreciates the value of the Roman past but does not regard it as inevitably superior to the present in all respects. The next paper, by Alanna Nobbs, publishes a study of digressions, which has been cited on various occasions over the past generation. It seeks to establish, by reviewing his excursuses on geography, personal information, human interest and military details, whether his practice is closer to Herodotus or Thucydides, concluding in favour of the latter. Finally Giusto Traina briefly reviews Procopius’ presentation of Armenian information and considers its origin.
The third section deals with Procopius and Military History in six chapters. Conor Whately considers the willingness of Roman soldiers to fight as well as the horizontal (unit cohesion) and vertical (loyalty to leader) factors that stimulated them, underlining the importance of attending to ancient evidence as opposed to supposed modern parallels. A short chapter by Sylvain Janniard reflects on the influence of Hunnic cavalry tactics on Roman performance, noting that even if Hunnic approaches had been familiar for a century the involvement of Hun officers contributed to their contemporary effectiveness. Clemens Koehn challenges the common belief that Justinian lacked military experience, to argue that as a powerful general during his uncle's reign he performed a number of important tasks to considerable effect, both in devising strategies to confront the Persians and in reforming the Roman armies. Shih-Cong Fan Chiang surveys the evidence in Procopius for the experiences of women during warfare, reaching the unsurprising conclusions that they were not that pleasant and are described through the eyes of an elite male; of greater interest is the contrast that is identified between Procopius’ presentations of the treatment of women by Totila and Khusro. David Alan Parnell uses Procopius’ accounts, occasionally gory, of Roman and non-Roman battle casualties to argue convincingly that there is no evidence here for prejudice against the non-Romans in Justinian's armies: some of the accounts are judgmental, pointing to the consequences of barbarian recklessness or stupidity, but others are neutral. Finally Guillaume Sartor looks at Laz units in Roman service as an example of federates whose contributions, especially in terms of local knowledge, were crucial for Roman success in Trans-Caucasia; as such, their service seems to have been restricted to the vicinity of their homeland.
The fourth section discusses Procopius and Foreign Peoples. The first two contributions, by Andreas Goltz and Dariusz Brodka concern the Ostrogoths and Italy, Goltz underlining that there is no easy or single key to unlocking Procopius’ presentation of leading Ostrogoths, though unsurprisingly as a military man he prefers those who are capable of providing effective direction, while Brodka considers the unfortunate fate of Roman senators trapped between the Ostrogoths, with whom they had enjoyed good relations, and the imperial armies, which they ought to welcome as representatives of Roman continuity but whose operations eventually extinguished many families. Geoffrey Greatrex reviews Procopius’ presentations of different barbarian groups, which balance stereotypes with relevant information, in an attempt to construct a hierarchy of peoples. Alexander Sarantis focuses on the treatment of northern barbarians, pointing to its diversity and arguing that Procopius saw the Germano-Gothic groups in the northwest as more problematic than the Hunnic-Avaro-Slav groups to the northeast. Lastly, Miranda Williams turns to Africa, reading Procopius’ accounts of the 534/5 and 540 campaigns against Berber tribes in the light of his access to information rather than disillusionment with Justinian's policies and strategy, while recognizing that he did not really understand the latter.
In any such collection inevitably there are stronger and weaker elements. To my mind the second half of the volume, especially the section on military matters, surpasses the first half, but throughout there are useful reminders that Procopius is an author who was flexible in approach and responsive to contemporary realities – a far cry from a slave to generic dictates and classical exemplars.
